Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20080128CITY COUNCIL AGENDA January 28, 2008 5:00 P.M. I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances 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) a) Resolution #8, 2008 -Contract - AACP Existing Conditions b) Minutes -January 14, 2008 VII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #1, 2008 -434 E. Cooper (Bidwell Building) Subdivision P.H. 3/24 VIII. Public Hearings a) Resolution #9, 2008 -South Aspen Street Extension of Vested Rights b) Ordinance #29, 2007 - 634 Hyman (Wienerstube) Subdivision IX. Action Items X. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting February 11, 2008 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. MEMORANDUM vi a TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director' 'IJ~~ FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner ~~u~C~ ~"Y" . RE: AACP Existing Conditions Report -Contract for Professional Services DATE OF MEMO: January 21, 2008 MEETING DATE: January 28, 2008 SUMMARY: Attached is a contract for professional service to compile an Existing Conditions Report for the update of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Julie Ann Woods, of Elk Mountains Planning Group, and Chris Cares, of RRC Associates, will be working with Community Development staff to produce an updated Existing Conditions Report. This report will be used to educate Aspen community members and visitors on current trends and capacity of services in the Aspen Area, and will be used in the public process for the AACP update. A detailed scope of services is included as Exhibit A. The contract is for $75,000, which includes two check-in meetings with City Council. Information on the consultants in included in Exhibit B. REPORT TOPICS: The topics to be included in the Existing Conditions Report are listed below, and outlined in more detail in Exhibit A. The final report will provide information on these individual topics and discuss the interconnectedness of all of the topics. • Growth Management; • Parks and Open Space; • Environmental Quality; • Pedestrian/Bicycle Network; • Economic Sustainability; • Sustaining the Aspen Idea; • Planning for the Lifelong Aspenite; • Philosophy of Governance; • Historic Preservation; and • Affordable Housing. A separate report on Transportation Systems will be undertaken in conjunction with the County. This report will be part of the overall education effort around the Existing Conditions. As part of planning the update to the AACP and the Existing Conditions Report, Staff examined the topics included in the 2000 AACP. All of the topics included in that plan remain important and valid. However, the organization of those topics does not reflect how these topics are discussed today. For instance, the 2000 AACP includes Parks, Open Space, and the Environment in the same section. While these topics are related, staff does not believe that the Environment is any more connected to Parks and Open Space than it is to Affordable Housing or our Economy. Therefore, staff has directed the consultants to include a separate topic in this update called "Environmental Quality" which will examine information on Air Quality, Water Quality, Global Warming, and Stormwater Quality. In addition, the 2000 report did not focus on social services provided in our community. In an effort to fill that gap and reflect current conversations in the community, staff has directed the consultants to provide information on the "continuum of care" which includes child care and early childhood education through senior services. These are included in the topic "Planning for the Lifelong Aspenite." RRC and Elk Mountains Planning are primarily responsible for all of the above topics, with the exception of Growth Management. The Growth Management section of the Existing Conditions Report will include a Build Out Analysis, Scrape and Replace Data, and a Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Database. Staff will work on these aspects with the help of Mitch Haas and Alan Richman (Build Out Analysis) and Gabe Preston of RPI Consulting (Scrape and Replace and GMQS Database). "Design Quality" was a topic included in the 2000 report, but is not included in the topics for this Existing Conditions Report. Instead, staff will conduct a Place Making exercise in Mazch/April 2008. The information from this exercise will be used to inform the discussion on Design Quality in the AACP update. REPORT TIMELINE: The scope of work includes two check-in meetings with City Council. The first is scheduled for March 3, 2008, and [he second is scheduled for May 5, 2008. The first meeting occurs after a majority of information is collected, allowing City Council an opportunity to ask detailed questions on how the information was collected and how it will work together to form the existing conditions report. The second meeting occurs after much of the report will be formulated, again allowing City Council to ask detailed questions about the data and how it formulates the report. The final product will be delivered no later than May 31, 2008. Because a major goal of the AACP update is to involve a broad range of community members and engage in an extensive public education effort, the report from RRC and Elk Mountains Planning will be formatted into auser- friendly document in both booklet and web formats. Staff will work with RRC and Elk Mountains Planning, and if necessary a sepazate graphic design firm, to ensure the document is user-friendly. Staff is requesting approval of the service contract with RRC Associates and Elk Mountains Planning Group. CITY MANAGER ''~-~j~S RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. ~, Series of 2008, approving a contractual agreement for professional services between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and RRC Associates and Elk Mountains Planning Group for professional consulting services related to AACP Existing Conditions Report." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Agreement for Professional Services EXHIBIT B -Consultant Qualifications RESOLUTION (Series of 2008) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND RRC ASSOCIATES AND ELK MOUNTAINS PLANNING GROUP REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE AACP EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an "Agreement for Professional Services" between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and RRC Associates and Elk Mountains Planning Group, a copy of which agreement is attached hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the "Agreement for Professional Services" between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and RRC Associates and Elk Mountains Planning Group, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Michael 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 January 28, 2008. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk __ AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and RRC Associates and Elk Mountains Planning Group. ("Profession- al"). 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" and Equipment Schedule Exhibit A.l" attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated herein. Completion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement shall be completed no later than May 31, 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. [n consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed $75,000. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incon•ect 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. Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the PSI-971.doc Page I termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that 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 ofthis 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 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 PSI-971.doc Page 2 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 ofFcers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance insufficient 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 M[LLION 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 ($1,00Q00- 0.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision: If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. PSI-971.doc Page3 (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 arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, 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 seg., 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. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. PS1-971.doc Page 4 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 8161 I Professional: Chris Cares RRC Associates 4940 Pearl East Circle, Suite 103 Boulder, CO 80301 Professional: Julie Ann Woods Elk Mountains Planning Group PO Box 11891 Aspen, CO 81612 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 forbearance or indulgence. Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. 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. PS1-971.doc Page 5 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 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. 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. PSI-971.doc Page 6 (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional 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-I7.5-102, 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. PSI-971.doc Pagel (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 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: C[TY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: By: Title: Date: PROFESSIONAL: WITNESSED BY: sy: Title: Date: PROFESSIONAL: WITNESSED BY: By: Tide: Date: PS1-971.doc Page 9 EXHIBIT "A" to Professional Services Agreement Scope of Work, Attached Exhibit "B" to Professional Services Agreement Rates, Attached as part of Scope of Work PSI-971.doc Page 10 Certification and Supplemental Conditions to Contract for Services - Conformance with 68-17.5.101, et sep. Pur ose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bill 06-1343 that added a new article 17.5 to Title 8 of the Colorado Revised Statutes entitled "Illegal Aliens - Public Contracts for Services." This new law prohibits all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly employing or contracting with an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new law also requires that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. This Certification and Supplemental Conditions has been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. Aaolicability. The certification and supplemental conditions set forth herein shall be required to be executed by all persons having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104`h Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108' Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Contractor" means a person having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen. "Public Contract for Services" means any type of agreement, regardless of what the agreement may be called, between the City of Aspen and a Contractor for the procurement of services. It specifically means the contract or agreement referenced below. "Services" means the furnishing 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. PURSUANT TO SECTION 8-17.5-101, C.R.S., et. seq.: By signing this document, Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Contractor does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien; and (ii) Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens. The Public Contract for Services referenced below is hereby amended to include the following terms and conditions: 1. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 2. Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 3. Contractor has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Contractor does not employ any illegal aliens; and if Contractor has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Contractor shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Contractor shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Contractor is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. 4. Contractor shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening ofjob applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. 5. If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien, Contractor shall: (i) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or contracting with an illegal alien; and (ii) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the illegal alien; except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. 6. Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5- 102 (5), C.R.S. 7. If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Contractor's violation of Subsection 8- 17.5-102, C.R.S. Public Contract Tor Services: AACP Existine Conditions Report Contractor: RRC Associates 4940 Pearl East Circle, Suite 103 Boulder, CO 80301 By: Title: Contractor: Elk Mountains Planning Group PO Box 11891 Aspen, CO 81612 sy: Title: JPW-saved: 1/18/2008-867-M:\ciry\ciryatry\contract\forms\certifica[ion•- hb-06-1343.doc RRC A S 9 0 C I A T E S rtesearch • Planning • Design Exhibit ~ Scope of Work City of Aspen Existing Conditions Report January 18, 2008 This exhibit is intended to serve as an agreement for work to be performed for the City of Aspen's "existing conditions" report. RRC Associates, Inc., together with Elk Mountain's Planning Group, have combined to offer integrated services to undertake the study contemplated by the City of Aspen. Together, we will undertake the tasks described in more detail below, to develop information that will serve as a baseline document to inform the community on a number of topics that have been specifically identified by the City. In this work program we have summarized our approach toward obtaining and organizing information to portray existing conditions in Aspen. We understand the value of a current and credible database as a foundation for community planning efforts, and we will obtain and organize available data, and apply information and understanding that we have gained through previous work, to develop the Existing Conditions Report. The Team's Composition RRC Associates (RRC) is a consulting, planning, and research firm based in Boulder, Colorado with a staff of 18, representing a variety of disciplines and advanced degrees. The RRC principal in charge will be Chris Cares, AICP. Chris will be assisted by Nolan Rosall, AICP, David Becher and Julie Arnett of RRC. In addition, RRC will associate with The Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. (EMPG) to complete the work program. Julie Ann Woods, AICP/ASLA is President of the Group and will be the primary member of the EMPG involved in the study. Elements of The Work Program Below is a summary of key aspects of our approach to the Existing Conditions Report, and a description of the tasks that together make up the scope of work. In addition, it builds on information discussed by staff at the work session conducted in December. Develop an understanding of the Objectives of the Existing Conditions Report. As a team we are experienced in obtaining and presenting data on a variety of subjects. Further, we understand the importance that a solid information base can play in grounding effective planning efforts. Specifically, we have had considerable experience with technical analyses involving the topics identified as community issues to be addressed in the Aspen area Community Plan, and we understand that the principal goal of this project is to collect and careful document existing information describing the City of Aspen as a precursor to the Community Plan. 4940 Pearl East Circle, Suite 103 Boulder, Colorado 80301 TES 303/449-6558 rnx 303/449-6587 J. Garrow I/10/OS p. 2 Description of Project Aooroach and Organization. The following provides an overview of our team's approach to the Existing Conditions Report. As noted above, we believe we will be able to efficiently gather information describing Aspen from a variety of sources. We will begin by outlining our overall approach to gathering existing information and reviewing this work program with staff. Then, we will contact individual departments and will either meet with them individually in person, or by phone, to obtain current information on available data as well as recent undertakings by the departments that will be relevant to this study. Written Documentation - a Final Product. We anticipate that the final deliverable product from our efforts will consist of a written document with appropriate text, graphics (including potentially photographs), interesting stories documented, and an executive summary for each topic. The team will produce a final document in Word, with text, graphs, charts, pictures, etc. It is anticipated that this document will then be provided to a graphic designer, by the City of Aspen under separate contract. That contractor will prepare a final product/report for public distribution. The audience for this report is "everyone." The document will be designed to allow use by readers with a variety of different "learning styles." As a team we will work among ourselves, and with staff, to develop a report that is readable and concise. We will attempt to identify various "themes' that will help to integrate the information across the multiple topics that are identified below; preliminarily, we recognize that "limited capacity" in the Valley represents one of the potential unifying messages that we will develop in our report. The final product will be both Web-based and in a booklet format. While we expect the content to be virtually identical in both media, our team will design our written materials to allow presentation in both formats. We anticipate writing the report as a team (RRC/EMPG), and writing the report is included in the budget provided below. However, if desired by the City, we are prepared to work with others to refine the graphics and overall presentation and printing of the report. The costs of additional graphic design services, should they be needed, are not included in this Agreement. MapDIn0. One component of the study will involve mapping. RRC will be responsible for mapping information that will be provided by various City departments. These data will be compiled in a series of G.I.S. "coverages" that will then be transmitted back to the City for final "report quality" mapping. RRC will coordinate team mapping efforts with the City and others, as appropriate, throughout the study. The mapping program will begin with a meeting between RRC and Mary Lackner. Then, the team will remain in communications with City staff as the G.I.S. maps are gradually produced. Data Collection Meetings and Presentation. We have developed a preliminary outline of the types of information that will be collected and addressed, based on an initial meeting with City Staff, and on our team's understanding of local conditions. The collection of data will be organized around a number of topical areas, described in greater detail below. Where appropriate, we have annotated this outline with specific comments or observations to better indicate current work program considerations. We anticipate that this outline will continue to be a "work in progress" that will be edited as we begin to meet with local officials and staff, and have the opportunity to consider information sources that are available. J. Garrow 1/10/OS p. 3 The current work program anticipates two "check-in" meetings with City Council and other local officials and staff, one in March and a second meeting in early May. The potential for additional meetings has been identified and the budget, as presented below, addresses this potential as an "optional" element. Growth Management We will coordinate with Haas/Richman and RPI to ensure that their efforts do not overlap with our team's efforts, and that we are coordinated to the maximum extent possible. We understand that there will need to be an evaluation of growth management activities in the following topical areas: • Commercial • Residential • Public Sector • Urban Growth Boundaries Data: Parcel Baseline for build-out study -Assessor Data for numbers and types of uses on each parcel. We will work with Tommy Isaac to understand the intricacies of the County Assessor's database. We will want to know where all the vacant but developable parcels are - we understand that not all parcels will be developable if less than 6,000 s.f. We will also want to determine free-market vs. Aspen Affordable Housing, duplex vs. single-family, etc. • Historical data on Public Sector development -basic chronology (where public facilities are located, when acquired or built). We will work to obtain and document current information on development, and will also present the available information in a summary format that portrays the gradual acquisition and development of public sector properties in Aspen. • As noted above, we will rely on information developed by the Buildout Study Team - Mitch Haas, Alan Richman. We will also use GMOS Database and Scrape and Replace information to be tabulated by RPI. • We will track and portray available information on the Urban Growth Boundary. • The team will also acquire information on City land ownership and will document this information as part of the overall effort. Parks and Ooen Space We will acquire information on the following parks and recreation lands in and immediately surrounding Aspen: • Urban Parks • Urban-Rural Transitional Area Data: • Fee Impact Background - We will rely on information from the BBC study on Parks • Maps with updated information. • Park and Open space usage - we will rely on data from the Parks Department. • We will categorize the kinds of parks in Aspen, using information to be obtained from the Department, and will present this information in a matrix format. J. Garrow 1/10/08 p. 4 Environmental Quality We will examine what work has been done, and what kinds of policies should be addressed and documented using a variety of local resources. Water Quality • Air Quality (Environmental health maintains air quality station in town; e.g. went from non-attainment area to attainment. We will obtain current information concerning changes and trends.) • Global Warming (We will "paint the big picture' using available information and studies. Sources include SKICO, Canary initiative, REMP, etc. We will not be conducting primary research but attempting to summarize and quantify data that currently exist but have not been systematically compiled or integrated.) Data: • Environmental Health, Canary Initiative • Stormwater Information -Engineering Department • Minimum stream flow information -State resources (for wildlife vs. for health safety) • Capacity Analysis for water and sewer • Jenny Adair Wetlands -Parks Department (benefits and big picture) PedestrianlBicycle Network • Intra-Urban Connections • Urban-Rural Connections Data: • Maps with updated route information (winter vs. summer use) • Recent trail expansions and work (document using a map) • Trail usage -Parks Department information. Develop a method of summarizing existing use patterns such as "heavy, moderate, light;" and also summarize how to get from Core to outward areas using maps. This will result in a mapped depiction of trails. Economic Sustainabilitv We will attempt to better understand and portray what the local serving economy is, using existing data from various sources. We will draw on sales tax and other economic data sources to characterize the economy in terms of: • Tourist-Based Economy (Winter/Summer) • Local-Serving Economy (Spring/Fall) Data: • Focus on off-season months for Local-serving economic activity-sales tax receipts at whatever level of data is available • Carrying capacity analysis for service -what is aggregate demand and what does it and could it support? • Average trips Down-valley for services -regional travel for retail services Tax Base trends -where do revenues come from Retail taxes by month Lodging Occupancy (requested from Planning) Lodge pillow counts (requested from Planning; include Limelight's 110 units) J. Garrow (/10/08 p. 5 • Ongoing Fractional Use Study--RRC • Visitor demographics -SAS • Airport enplanements and deplanements It is understood that the economic sustainability analyses component of this study will draw primarily from existing data sources. In the event that a "demand study" is determined to be required, that study would be authorized under a separate budget with specific objectives and tasks identified. Sustaining the Aspen Idea We will develop a narrative discussion of this topic. We will draw on any available economic and capacity studies. Arts + Culture • Heritage Education • Spiritual Sustenance Data: • Churches, Synagogue, Services, Membership numbers, etc. • Aspen Institute • Aspen Historical Society (facilities, memberships, services) • Non-profit numbers and services provided (may need Staff input) Arts Studies (capacity, economic studies, arts survey) to get centralized information on the importance of the Arts to the community (culturally and monetarily) • Facilities and Capacity -where we are, where are we going? (Wheeler, Music Associates, etc.) Plannino for a Lifelong Aspenite This topic will be addressed by drawing on information that allows human services to be addressed over a "lifetime," drawing upon the available data from a variety of service providers including: • Health Care • Day Care • Schools Emergency Services • Senior Services • Recreation Services Data: Recreation systems/facilities Capacity Analysis • Capacity Analysis and maps for Day Care, Schools, Senior Services, Hospital • Demand trends for all services • Future demographic trends -implications for all services Philosoohv of Governance J. Garrow 1/10/08 p. 6 The team will prepare a narrative on how government works (city and county) including the role of staff, and who does what. The document will address special districts including storm water, historic, etc. Data: • This section will be based on charts and descriptions, no data. It is intended to be a written municipal civics lesson - it will chart how local government operates. Historic Preservation The written overview for this section will address the program history, as well as major milestones that have been met. In addition, as summarized below, recent work by the HP Department, and mapping will be used to portray current and past efforts. Data: • Basic history of program, including recent work (how the program came about and when, including recent work by HP Dept.) • Map of designated parcels (local and national registry) Affordable Housing This topic will be addressed using a summary history of the local programs as well as current data portraying ownership and inventory. We will draw on the efforts of EPS, as appropriate. Data: • Housing Summit Data (identify what has been built since 2000 AACP) • Inventory of City purchases and parcels (what is potential and not approved, approved but unbuilt, etc) (Tom McCabe) • Updated Housing Inventory (APCHA) • EPS -updating 2002 AH figures Additional Topics that are Primarily the Responsibility of the City: Sustainable Transportation Svstem We will gather data and report on local efforts to create a sustainable transportation system. Data: • Bridge Counts, Independence Pass Counts • Capacity Analysis for Transportation systems (BRT projections) • Physical Planning in Brush Creek to Aspen Corridor (Identify upcoming planning efforts/projects) • Maroon Creek Bridge construction, new bus lanes to Buttermilk, BRT, airport expansion, Buttermilk Base Village, new City bus route, AABC Capacity Timeline J. Garrow 1/10/08 p. 7 A timeline for the specific tasks identified in the work program is presented in chart form below. As illustrated, we anticipate that the entire Existing Conditions research and report process will require approximately four to five months. TASK Dec Jan Feb Mar A r Ma PROCESS REFINEMENT & AGREEMENT _~~~ _ staff work session ~ TECHNICAL WORK -DATA COLLECTION _ °` CHECK-IN (#2) -work session with staff, meetin with CC and Plannin Commission REFINEMENT OF CONDITIONS REPORT -~ ,; PREPARATION OF FINAL WORK PRODUCTS CHECK-IN (#3) -work session with staff, meetin with CC and Plannin Commission DRAFT REPORT FINAL REPORT J. Garrow 1/10/08 p. 8 Costs The identified work program will be completed fora "not to exceed" fee of $75,000. This budget includes an estimated $4,000 for reimbursable expenses including printing, travel, mileage, lodging, and meals. In the event that special mapping, printing or additional meeting requirements for the project increase the reimbursable costs substantially above $4,000 these special circumstances will be addressed in advance of incurring charges in excess of $4,000 and the costs will be jointly addressed by the team and the City. In the event that the City desires additional meetings with our team, beyond the meetings contemplated in the schedule above, these meetings will be billed at $3,000 assuming costs of preparation, travel and participation. This anticipates that both Chris Cares and Julie Ann Woods would be involved in any meetings. If only one team member attends a meeting these costs would be cut approximately in half. These meeting(s) will be considered "optional" and will be in addition to the work program described above. They will not be scheduled without specific authorization from the City Rates for Basic and Additional Services HOURLY Chris Cares .................................................................. ..........................................................170.00 Julie Ann Woods .......................................................... ..........................................................170.00 Nolan Rosall ................................................................ ..........................................................170.00 David Becher ............................................................... ............................................................90.00 J I' A tt 70 00 u ie rne ............................................................................................................................... Subconsultants .................................................... Billed directly at subconsultants' regular rates Reimbursable Expenses 1) Air travel, lodging, meals, and related travel/subsistence out-of-pocket expenses are billed at direct cost. 2) All travel time is considered a reimbursable expense and will be billed at one-half the hourly rate from portal to portal. 3) Mileage is billed at 50¢ per mile. 4) Long distance telephone calls and other reimbursable expenses, including postage, supplies, film, photos, etc. are billed at direct cost. 5) Photocopies and printing that are contracted out are billed at cost plus 10 percent. Photocopies that are done in-house are billed at 10¢ per page. 6) Custom report preparation and publication, and special presentations, (models, photographs, renderings, slide shows, etc.), are considered reimbursable expenses and are separately negotiated with the client in accordance with special requirements. ~xY~ib+~~- b C. CHRIS CARES AICP RRC ASSOCIATES • 4940 PEARL EAST CIRCLE • BOULDER, CO 80301 • 303.449.6558 • rnx 303.449.6587 Chris@rtcassoc.com Chris possesses a diverse background in public and private planning, with a specialization in housing issues. A founding partner of RRC Associates, he often focuses on practical applications of research techniques including survey research, and statistical analysis for i problem solving in city planning, housing policy development and a variety of business applications. His research and recommendations have helped to shape both the design e and marketing strategies of affordable housing developments, towns and resorts. He has coordinated the evaluation and planning of numerous housing and mixed-use developments, and research and policy evaluation related to housing needs assessments and market studies are a particular area of specialization. Chris has also drafted comprehensive plans, zoning and housing ordinances, growth management plans, and related regulations for towns and cifies of various sizes. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS 1983 to PRINCIPAL present RRC ASSOCIATES, INC. (ROSALL REMMEN CARES) PROFESSIONAL HISTORY 1981 ASSOCIATE Gage Davis Associates-Boulder, CO Associate 1979 PLANNER Gage Davis Associates-Boulder, CO Project manager 1976 PLANNER City of Boulder-Boulder, CO 1975 PLANNER Lincoln-Uinta Counties PIalu3ing Office Kemmerer, WY 1974 RESEARCH ASSISTANT Harvard University RRC Associates, Inc. Principal-in-charge of.~ A series of County Needs Assessments addressing housing and transportation issues. Studies for Eagle, Grand, Gunnison, Routt, Summit, San Miguel, Pitkin, Garfield (CO), and Blaine (ID) counties; City of Carson City, NV; City of Pueblo, CO; Town of Avon, CO. In addition, participated as a team member on similar studies in: Weld County, Adams County, Elbert County, Lafayette, Longmont, Westminster and Boulder. All studies involved survey research as well as policy analysis. Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment, Draft Ordinance and Guidelines (2001) Eagle County Department of Community Development City of Westminster Housing Needs Assessment City of Westminster Department of Community Development Elbert County Housing Needs Assessment (2002) (continued) '~1 C. CHRIS CARES AICP RRC ASSOCIATES • 4940 PEARL EAST CIRCLE • BOULDER, CO 80301 • 303.449.6558 • Fnx 303.449.6587 - Chris@rzcassoc.com Colorado Indicators Project -Produced "The Colorado Index -Understanding and Tracking Quality of Life' for the Colorado Center for Healthy Communities "Pop-ups and Scrape-offs" Evaluation (a qualitative research study of the impacts of large homes and major renovations on neighborhood scale and character-Boulder, CO Public participation processes for a variety of communities and situations including Broomfield, Avon, Vail, Breckenridge, Pueblo, and Frisco, CO EDUCATION Master of City Planning Harvard University, 1975 Bachelor of Arts, Political Science University of Rochester, 1972 University of Michigan, 1971 PROFESSIONAL/ OTHER ORGAMZATIONS American Planning Association AICP certified Travel and Tourism Research Association Vail Commons (City Market) Public Private Breckenridge Outdoor Education Center- Partnerships, Middle Creek Market Study, Board Member Timber Ridge Market Evaluation (Multiple studies for Vail concerning affordable housing issues and opportunities) Town of Vail/Nail Associates Joint Task Force Facilitation (A community task force effort designed to examine and monitor a variety of issues impacting the Town)-VaiI,CO Girdwood, Alaska Land Use Regulations Update Boulder Economic Base Study (City of Boulder/ Boulder Chamber of Commerce Joint Effort) Telluride Growth Study Telluride Master Plan Upper Blue River Master Plan Breckenridge, CO --~r!! Pueblo Tourism Base Study and Affordable Housing Studies ~o Restune for.li,'i,~~ At iti ~l'C1QD5~, A,I.~.P.~<ASI,,,q P.O. Box 11891 ASPEN, CO 81612 P.O. BOX 2799 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 T/FAX: 970-923-9485 (ASPEN) oR 970349-6236 (CRESTED BUTTE) CELL: 970-948-0802 EMAIL: ELKMTNPLAN @AO L.COM THE ELK MOUNTAINS PLANNING GROUP, INC., ASPEN 8 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 2004 to Present Owner and President Majority Owner and President of atwo-person design and planning firm with another landscape architect. Provide design, planning, community decision-making and historic preservation consulting services to private firms, homeowners, governments, and not-for-profit organizations, primarily in resort and mountain communities. THE CITY OF ASPEN, ASPEN, CO 1998 to 2004 Director of Community Development Managed and directed all land use, growth management, and development in this city of 6000 year-round residents (30,000 high season population). Department included Building, Zoning, Planning, Historic Preservation, and Environmental Health, managing a staff of 18. The department budget was $1.4 million, and averaged almost $200 million in valuation of new construction projects annually. New legislation and projects approved during tenure include the adoption of a new community plan, a new lodge preservation program, revamping of the historic preservation program, leadership in green building practices, completion of a Downtown Enhancement and Pedestrian Plan, an emergency management plan, fractional/timeshare regulations, infill development strategy, a civic center master plan, an economic sustainability strategy, and a retail study. Public projects constructed included over 500 new affordable housing units, a new school and recreation complex complete with a ski lift, pool, ice arena and multiple playing fields, as well as a new public golf and tennis club. THE CITY OF CENTRAL CITY, CENTRAL CITY, CO 1994 to 1998 Director of Community Development Hired originally as Historic Preservation Officer; after six months became the city's first ever Community -a Development Director for this historic gaming resort community of 325 residents. Responsible for planning, zoning, historic preservation, building and development and management of four full-time staff members. Primary projects included casinos, hotels, multi-family residential and parking facilities in this National Historic Landmark District. Worked closely with the State Historic Preservation Office and secured grants through the Historic Fund for reconstruction of historic Cornish walls throughout the City. JEFFERSON COUNTY, GOLDEN, CO 1990 to 1994 Planner 11 Primarily responsible for current planning activities (rezonings, including planned developments, special uses, subdivision plats, site approvals) in one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. The county covers approximately 780 square miles of both mountains and plains environments and had a population of 473,000 at that time. Also served as project manager on the Central Mountains Community Plan, which was completed in 1994. Other special projects included Design Guidelines for Commercial, Industrial, and Mufti-family residential developments, and Scenic Corridor planning. rr RUTLAND REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, RuTLAND, VT i~ 1988 to 1990 Senior Planner Responsible far small town and regional planning programs in this primarily rural county in the heart of Vermont's ski country. Specific duties included the development of subdivision regulations for Sherburne, home of Killington-Pico Ski Areas; zoning regulations for Poultney, VT, and a comprehensive town plan for Wallingford, VT. Former resident of Ludlow, VT, home of Okemo Mtn. Y ~' ~-' FOXFIRE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, Denver, CO 1986-1988 Senior Planner /Landscape Architect • DHM, Inc. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, Denver, CO 1987-1988 Landscape Architect • GENESEE FOUNDATION, Golden, CO 1986-1988 Covenants Coordinator/Landscape Architect • SERACUSE, LAWLER & PARTNERS, ARCHITECTS, Denver, CO 1985-1986 Planner/Landscape Architect • COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY, Denver, CO • 1985-1986 Planner VILLAGE OF WHEELING, Wheeling, IL 1980-1984 Neighborhood Planner Commercial Redevelopment Planner Assistant Planner • ECONOMIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, Chicago, IL 1980 Planning Research Associate • TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, Lansing, MI 1979 Bicycle Transportation Planner EALIGhT1tfN ANIDt TRAINING PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE BROKER (License inactive) Jones Real Estate College September 1996 MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE University of Colorado at Denver December 1987 STUDY ABROAD-JAPAN Summer 1986 MAIN STREET MANAGER TRAINING PROGRAM National Trust for Historic Preservation Sprang 1981 BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN URBAN PLANNING Michigan State University December 1979 14tEM1'I>IERSIiTPS ANt? CQM1tlIUNITI' SERVICE Crested Butte Academy, Board of Trustees member, 2004 to present Amedcan Institute of Certified Planners-Certificate No. 8594 since 1990 Amedcan Planning Association-- Colorado Chapter, National Chapter, Resort and Tourism Division-Chair National Trust for Historic Preservation Snowmass Villas Homeowners Association Board President 2002 to 2004 Healthy Mountain Communities Board Member 2002 to 2004 Idaho Springs Historical Society Board of Directors, 1994-1995 Idaho Springs Planning Commission-Chair, 1990-1993 AeGORYYL.lS41i41E\TS • 2004 American Planning Association, Featured Speaker, "Sustainable Resort Communities", Washington DC • 2003 Sustainable Mountain Communities, Featured Speaker, "Long Term Growth Management: Lessons and Challenges from Aspen", Banff, AB • 2002 Colorado Historical Society Award for new Historic Preservation Ordinance •i0i 2001 Chair of the Colorado APA State conference-netting over $40,000 for the organization -i~ ~ 2001 Colorado APA Award for new Historic Preservation Contractor Licensing Program • 1987 Assisted in the development of the handbook, Native Plants of Genesee • 1986 Placed Denver's Park and Parkway System on the National Register of Historic Places, the largest urban landscape nomination on the Register ENTERESTS Family, skiing, biking, hiking, tennis, computers, and travel. Daughter Elizabeth Woods was named to the US Ski Team in 2006, specializing in downhill and Super G events. ..!~ -4v MEMORANDUM ~ ~ , TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director~~ FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: Mountain Plaza Building (AKA Bidwell Building - 434 E. Cooper Ave.) - Subdivision Review, First Reading, Ordinance No. ~ ,Series of 2008 MEETING DATE: January 28, 2008 APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Bert Bidwell Investment Corporation, Staff recommends that the City Council approve c/o Mark Bidwell the subdivision review. REPRESENTATIVE: SUMMARY: Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC. The Applicant requests of the City Council approval of the Subdivision Review. LOCATION: Lots Q, R, and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, commonly known as 434 E. Cooper Ave. CURRENT ZONING aS: USE Located in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district containing a two story (above grade) with 12,081 sq. ft. of office/retail Net Leasable Area. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to develop a three story (above grade) mixed-use building containing sub-grade parking, three (3) affordable housing units (containing 2,241 sq. ft. of net Livable Area), three (3) free-mazket housing units (containing 6,000 sq. ft. of Net Livable Area), and commercial/office uses (containing 10,585 sq. ft. of Net Leasable Area). Page 1 of 9 Photo of the subject properCy GENERAL BACKGROUND This application was submitted in March of 2006, prior to the passage of the moratorium and therefore not affected by it or the subsequent code amendments. The existing property is located in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district. It is also located in the Commercial Core Historic District although not deemed contributing to the period of architectural significance of the district. The existing building has been approved for demolition by the Historic Preservation Commission after an application for designation was initiated by the City and subsequently denied. As a proposed building in the Commercial Core Historic District, the Historic Preservation Commission has purview over the design of the building and has granted conceptual approval of the new building. The application was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission in October of 2007. As a result of the hearings conducted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Resolution No. 26 (Series of 2006) was passed by a three to one (3-1) vote. The Planning and Zoning Commission's resolution approved three growth management reviews, and made a recommendation of subdivision approval. 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, Defnitions). 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 demarcate ownership units within a single building. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the City Council to redevelop the site: • Subdivision for the construction of multiple dwelling units pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480 (Cit~Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the following growth management reviews at the October 2, 2007 public hearing: • Growth Management Review for Expansion/New Commercial Develonment in the development of a new mixed-use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.080 (1). • Growth Management Review for New Free-Market Residential Units within aMulti- family or Mixed-Use Project in the development of new free-market residential units within amixed-use project pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.080 (2). • Growth Management Review for Affordable Housine in the development of affordable housing pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.070 (4). Page 2 of 5 PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, Bert Bidwell Investment Corporation, has requested approval to demolish the existing office/retail building located at the corner of Cooper Avenue and Galena Street that is located on a 9,000 square foot lot and redevelop the site with a new mixed-use building containing commercial, affordable housing, and free market residential uses. As proposed, the new four story building (some of which is below grade) contains: • A completely sub-grade parking garage. Vehicular access to the property and the garage will be from the alley right-of--way that is adjacent to the north property line of the subject property. The garage will provide eleven parking spaces. • The at-grade level contains two (2) commercial/office spaces and a Galena Street entry to the second and third story space. • The second level contains three (3) affordable housing units and commercial/office space. • The third level contains three (3) free-mazket units. Table 1 • Comparison of Proposed vs Required Dimensional Requirements. Dimensional Proposed Dimensional Underlying Mi%ed=Use Zone District Requirement Requirements Requirements Minimum Lot 9,000 sq. fr. No requirement Size Minimum Lot 90 Feet No requirement Width Minimum Lot N/A No requirement Area/Dwelling Minimum Front 0 Feet No requirement Yard Setback Minimum 0 Feet No requirement Alternative Front Yard Setback Minimum Side 0 Feet No requirement Yard Setback Minimum Rear 0 Feet No requirement Yard Setback Maximum Height 41 Feet 42 Feet 46 Feet for areas setback 15 or more feet from lot lines adjacent to a street ri ht-of--way Floor Area Ratio 2.61:1 or 1.47:1 or Cumulative Maximttm: Commercial: 1.5:1 or (FAR) 23,503 sq. fr. 13,275 sq. ft. 3:1 or 27,000 sq. ft. 13,500 .31:1 or Affordable Housing: No 2,835 sq. ft. limitation .82:1 or Free-Market: 1:1 or 7,392 sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft. Page 3 of 5 Dimensional Requirement , .Proposed Dimensional :Requirements Underlying Mixed-Use Zane District Requirements Maximum 2,000 sq. ft. 2,000 sq. fr. Residential Unit Size Minimum Off- 11 spaces Residential Multi-Family: No requirement Street Parking Commercial: One space per 1,000 net leasable sq. fr. of commercial space or 10.5 s aces. Table 2: Proposed Affordable Housing Unit l Unit 2 Unit 3 T~ttals Bedroom Count 1 bedroom studio 2 bedroom 4 bedrooms Net Livable tea 701 sq. ft. 530 sq. fr. 1,010 sq. ft. 2,241 sq. fr. Pro' osed I~Ptrt: Net Livable 600 sq. fr. 400 sq. ft. 950 sq. ft. 1,950 sq. ft. Area R uired Category 2 2 4 2@ Category 2 1 Cate or 4 Employees 1.75 1.25 2.25 5.25 Housed Table 3: Proposed Free Market Residential Urtlt 1 r_. Utrlt ~ _ Unit 3 . ,Total. : . NefLivable Area 2,000 sq. fr. 2,000 sq. ft. 2,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. Pro osed Table 4: Pronosed Commercial Net Leasable Area 13asement Floor 'First Flour Second amour Total Net Leasable Area NA 5,631 sq. fr. 4,954 sq. fr. 10,585 sq. fr. Pro osed Existing Net 2,935 sq. fr. 4,583 sq. fr. 4,563sq. ft. 12,081 sq. fr. Leasable Area 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, SJaff believes that the proposal meets the applicable subdivision review standards established in Land Use Code Section 26.480.050, Review Standards. Page 4 of 5 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 building. IMPACT FEES The Applicant is required to pay a Park Development Impact Fee for additional bedrooms added to the site and additional net leasable created, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee. The impact fee for this project shall be calculated at the time of building permit submittal. Staff has included a condition of approval in the proposed resolution requiring that a Park Development Impact Fee be paid at prior to building permit issuance. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: Referral departments have reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is generally consistent with the goals of the AACP as well as the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. This project provides affordable housing and net leasable space downtown. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE~: "I move to approve Ordinance No.~, Series of 2008, approving with conditions, subdivision review of the Mountain Plaza Building to construct amixed-use structure on the property known as 434 E. Cooper Avenue on first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Review Criteria and Staff Findings EXHIBIT B -Historic Preservation Commission minutes dated May 9, 2007 EXHIBIT C - Historic Preservation Resolution No. 20, Series of 2007 ExH~eiT D - Planning and Zoning Commission minutes dated October 2, 2006 EXHIBIT E - Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No.26, Series of 2007 EXHIBIT F-Application Page 5 of 5 Ordinance No. L (SERIES OF 2008) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS SUBDIVISION REVIEW AND VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR THE MOUNTAIN PLAZA (BIDWELL BUILDING) REDEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 434 E. COOPER AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2737-182-16-011 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from all of the Bert Bidwell Investment Corporation requesting three (3) Growth Management Review approvals and a recommendation of approval for Subdivision to develop amixed-use building known as the Mountain Plaza Building located at 434 E. Cooper Avenue; and, WHEREAS, prior to applying for the Growth Management Reviews the Applicant received approvals from the Historic Preservation Commission for Conceptual Design Review, View Plane Review, and Commercial Design Review via Resolution No. 20, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.470.]20, staff reviewed the application and assigned a Community Objectives Score which is based upon developing the project at a Leeds Silver level and providing larger affordable housing units than required; and, WHEREAS, prior to applying for subdivision approval the Applicant received three Growth Management approvals and a recommendation of subdivision approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission for aMixed-Use Building which contains 10,585 sq. ft. of net leasable area, three (3) free-market residential units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .82:1 or 7,392 sq. ft. and individual net livable area of 2,000 sq. ft. each, and three (3) affordable housing units with a total of 2,241 sq. fr. of net livable area via Resolution No.26, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, once the land use approvals and recommendation of approval were granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Applicant requested Subdivision approval of the City Council; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval, with conditions, of the proposed subdivision request; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on March 24, 2008, the City Council opened the hearing, took public testimony, considered pertinent recommendations from the Community Development Director, referral agencies, considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and adopted Ordinance No. Series of 2008, approving with conditions, the Subdivision application; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standazds and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Growth Management Review for Expansion or New Commercial Development; Growth Management Review for New Free-Mazket Residential Units within aMulti-Family or Mixed-Use Project; and,Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, all for the development of a mixed-use building containing three free-market units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .82:1 or 7,392 sq. fr., three affordable housing units containing a minimum of 2,241 sq. fr. of net livable area (two Category 2 units and one Category 4 unit), and a commercial component containing a maximum of 10,585 sq. fr. of net leasable area as shown in the floor plans of Exhibit C of the staff report dated October 2, 2007. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommends approval of the subdivision request for the development of said mixed-use building. Section 2: Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a subdivision plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of approval if City Council provides final approval of the subdivision request. The 180 days shall commence upon the granting of Final Design Review approval by the Historic preservation Commission. The subdivision agreement shall require recordation of a condominium plat prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Section 3: Building The Applicant shall meet adopted building codes and requirements if and when a building permit is submitted. Additionally, as represented in the growth management and subdivision application dated August 15, 2007, the Applicant will attain, at a minimum, a LEED Silver Certification. Section 4: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A Stormwater System development Fee shall be assessed at the time of redevelopment. The construction management plan required as part of building permit application is a critical component of this redevelopment project as it is located adjacent to a pedestrian mall and public impacts shall be minimized. Regrading of the pedestrian mall may be necessary to achieve accessible access. Above ground utilities shall be located on the site and not within the public right-of--way. Section 5: Affordable Housinff A. The affordable housing requirements of the project shall be met with provision of three units. The Applicant shall provide aone-bedroom, Category 2, 701 squaze feet unit; a studio, Category 2, 530 square feet unit; and atwo-bedroom, Category 4, 1,010 squaze feet unit as represented in their application. B. Rental units area allowed with the following conditions: 1) The units will be deed-restricted as Category 2 for the studio and one-bedroom units and Category 4 For the two-bedroom unit. 2) The deed-restriction will allow for the units 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 yeaz. If any of the units aze found to be out of compliance for one yeaz, or the owner elects to sell the units, all of the units would be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in the deed restriction at Category 2 for the studio and one- bedroom units and Category 4 for the two-bedroom unit maximum sales prices, based on the sales price stated in the Guidelines in effect at the time of recordation of the deed restriction, appreciated as stated in the deed restriction (3% or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is less), as of the date of the listing of the units. 3) 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-market 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. 4) The governing documents of the development shall be drafred 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-mazkeVdeed-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. 5) 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`s 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. 6) Language shall be provided in the Protective Covenants covering the units' assessments upon the units becoming "for sale" units. The assessments shall be based on the value of the free-market units compazed to the deed-restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project and allow for the same voting privilege as the free-mazket residential units upon the units becoming "for sale" units. No changes to this restriction aze allowed without APCHA's approval. 7) The deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condominium Plat and prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Section 6: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Section 7: Public Works The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. Section 8: Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Oil and Grease interceptors (not traps) are required for all food processing establishments and shall be identified and specified prior to building permit. Oil and sand separators are required for the parking garage. Driveway entrance drains shall drain to drywells and elevator shaft drains must flow through o/s interceptor. Old service lines must be excavated and properly abandoned, to the extent required by the district. Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. One tap is allowed; however shazed service line agreements may be required. Where additional development produces flows that negatively impact the planned reserve capacity of the existing collection and treatment system, fees will be assessed. Section 9: Environmental Health The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement and pool designs. Section ]0: Exterior Lighting 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 11: School Lands Dedication and Impact Fees The Applicant shall pay the Park Development impact fee and the School Lands Dedication assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. Section 12: Parks A. A formal vegetation protection plan shall be required with building permit application. Tree Removal Permit is required for the removal of the Crabapple street trees. B. Excavation of materials, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic associated with construction is prohibited on Cooper Ave Mall, unless permitted under condition "E" within this section.. C. Utility connections located within the mall shall be coordinated and designed in a manner that does not encroach into the tree protection zones or disturb the surface of the mall. If a utility is located within the mall, it must be direct bore minimizing surface disturbance to the location of abandonment and new taps. Water taps and abandonments will not be approved within designated tree protection zones; no traditional excavation will be allowed in the mall for water or electric connections. D. If temporary construction access to the site is requested on Cooper Avenue Mall, a ROW permit is required for approval. Access will only be granted during the off season; all work within the Mall has to be done and completed during these times: Spring: March 16`" till June ls' /Fall: Sept 15"'till Dec ls'. Damage to mall brick or mall amenities will be the responsibility of the developer, replacement of brick will be done to COA standards and require the developer to use the City's contractor for mall brick replacement. F. New landscaping in the right of way located on Galena Street will be done to the Landscaping in the Right of Way standards. Parks is recommending Summit Ash, a species of Green Ash, planted on 20-foot centers throughout the entire strip. All trees will be planted with irrigation and a planting strip shall be installed using structural soils. The developer shall meet with the Parks Department to design the appropriate planting trench an spacing of the trees. Section 13: 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) years from the date of issuance of the development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following the final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 434 E. Cooper Ave., City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, by Ordinance No. Series of 2008, of the Aspen City Council. Section 14: 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 15: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 16: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, 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 17• A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 24~' day of Mazch, 2008, 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 28~' day of January, 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2008. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor City Attorney Exhibit A 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. Additionally, the building is required to be rated as LEEDS Silver. Specifically, the application is consistent with the following goals of the AACP: • "Contain development with the creation of the Aspen Community Growth Boundary... " The proposed development and subdivision is within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Foster swell-balanced community through integrated design that promotes economic diversity, transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles, and the mixing of people from different backgrounds. " The subdivision and development creates spaces for free-market and deed- restricted residences, and spaces for office and commercial uses. The location of the development fosters lifestyles conducive to transit and pedestrian use, as it is located within the Aspen Infill Area, has access to the bus route, and is within the Commercial Core. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • We should endeavor to bring the middle class back into our community. We should discourage sprawl and recognize its cost to the character of our community, our open spaces and our rural resources as well as the fiscal expenses associated with the physical infrastructure of sprawl. " 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 a mix of Categories 2 and 4 units. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Reduce the adverse impacts of automobiles on the Aspen area. " The development includes underground parking for tenants and residents of the building. The location of the parking reduces the impact these cars would otherwise have on the surrounding community if they were required to park at street level. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "New development should take place only in areas that are, or can be served by transit, and only in compact, mixed-use patterns that are conducive to walking and bicycling. " The proposed development is served by transit and is composed of compact mixed-uses conducive to walking and bicycling. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Encourage development to occur within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and emphasize `good city form'. " The proposed subdivision is within a development located within the Aspen Growth Boundary and within the Aspen infill area. The development also promotes "good city form" through its improvements to the street facing fagades, which make the building more pedestrian friendly, and through its consistency with the Commercial Design Standards and Historic preservation Guidelines. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Retain and encourage an eclectic mix of design styles to maintain and enhance the special character to Aspen. " Again, this section relates more to the overall development rather than the subdivision. The development itself represents a high quality design that will work with and enhance Aspen's unique character. The buildings mass is broken up through fapade fenestration and the use of different materials, which helps it relate to Aspen's historic thirty (30) and sixty (60) foot lot widths. Staff finds the subdivision and development meet the goals and intent of this section of the AACP. 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 offtce uses, retail uses, affordable housing uses and free- market multi family uses within the downtown core. 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. The construction will impact neighbors and visitors and a detailed construction management plan to mitigate those impacts will be required. Staff f nds 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 Commercial Core 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 condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding Staff believes that the property is suitable for subdivision. The site contains no overly steep topography and no known geologic hazards that may harm the health of any of the inhabitants of the proposed development. In addition, Staff believes that there will not be a duplication or premature extension of public facilities because the property to be subdivided is already served by adequate public facilities. Therefore, Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding The Applicant has consented in the application to meet the applicable improvements pursuant to Section 26.580. Staffftnds this criterion to be met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding The Applicant is providing affordable housing units as required by the Land Use Code and meets the affordable housing review standards of the GMQS system. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding The proposed subdivision is required to meet the School Land Dedication Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630. The Applicant has proposed to pay cash-in-lieu of providing land, which will be paid prior to building permit issuance. Thus, staff f nds this criterion to be met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approva- may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments Gave 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) Staff Finding Allotments for the proposed three free-market unit and three affordable housing units have been granted. ~~~~~ ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 9.2007 Brian said the changes in the doors on the sides can be supported. Michael said his concerns at the last meeting were the glass brick, clapboard and fenestration. Michael pointed that there is a lot of balancing of the different criteria. Jeffrey said the improvements are flowing nicely. The fenestration changes are very promising. The horizontal clapboard doesn't bother him because the retractable awnings will add softness to the fagade. The new muted grey tone will compliment the rest of the building. The only concern is the window vs. glass block which is a Building code issue. That will be difficult to detail as far as the fire separation is concerned. Charles said if they can't get the glass maybe they can stay with the rhythm of the fire proof wall but do it in a form that has flagged out windows so you at least have the rhythm of the west fapade turning the corner. MOTION. Michael moved to approve resolution #19 for 308 E. Hopkins Ave., final development, second by Brian. Sarah requested information be added regarding the glass block windows. Amended motion: Michael amended the motion to include approval for the glass windows on the west elevation provided that is acceptable to the Building Department; second by Brian. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Sarah. yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 434 E. Cooper Ave. Conceptual - ConNd from Feb. 14, 2007 - Conceptual, Mountain View Plane and Commercial Design Review Sarah recused herself. Jim informed the applicant that 3 affirmative votes are necessary for approval. Affidavit ofposting -Exhibit I Sara said overall the proposal meets the design guidelines. In terms of the commercial design review it meets all the requirements. View plane: Sara pointed out that story polls have been erected. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 9.2007 When you look at view planes one of the things you want to think about is the potential for surrounding buildings to be developed. We need to determine whether or not there is a negligible impact in the view plan or if there is an impact and HPC is not interested in pulling the building back we will have to discuss a different procedure for this application which would be a PUD. The view plane cuts off diagonally a comer of the building. Mitch Haas, John Rowland Mitch said they have stepped down the building toward the red onion building. They have also stepped back the building to create a two story element next to the historic building. John Rowland said the key points from the last meeting were stepping back the mass with regard to the two historic resources on either side. It is now 15 feet from the property line back to the third story wall. We went from 14 feet to 11 feet in ceiling height on the main level. The other issue was to diminish the verticality. Mitch Haas said the HPC can determine that the proposed development has a minimal effect on the view plane. The Wheeler view plane starts at the corner where Bentley's stairs come down and extends to the other end of the building. From the Bentley's comer you do not see the proposed building at all. We feel the view plane is negligible. John said the building is neoclassical with Victorian. Mitch pointed out that the entire building is lower than the 42 foot height limit and it is at 38 feet on the Cooper side. Michael asked what the impact was on the pedestrian amenity space. Sara said they are paying cash-in-lieu. Mitch said there is less than 10% on site. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the meeting w1s closed. Michael said he is very enthusiastic and supportive of this plan. His only concern is that it is almost too neoclassical for the downtown core. Brian said this will be a great addition to this corner of town. Bringing the building to the corner is a positive thing because it channels energy between ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 9.2007 the Paradise building and the Ruth Chris building. The applicant has done a great job in addressing staff's and the HPC's concerns. This is the core of town and it has to be architecturally interesting. Brian encouraged the HPC and staff to allow some flexibility to the applicant in order to make this building stand out. and define Aspen given the location of this building. Michael said the stepping down of the building to the Red Onion is commendable. The impact of the building on the view plane is minimal. Jeffrey said the real key piece is the inflection onto the Red Onion building. The current proposal is simplified and it also feels more horizontal and less vertical. The design review and mass and scale are consistent with Chapter 13. The mass and scale is properly represented. The view of Aspen Mountain is maintained and therefore the view plane variance is minimal. MOTION: Brian moved to approve Resolution #20 as drafted by staff with an additional condition: The commission found that the impingement on the view plane is minimal. Motion second by Michael. Roll call vote: Michael, yes; Brian, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 332 W. Main Street -Final MOTION.• Michael moved to continue the public hearing and final development on 331 W. Main to May 23'd; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk ~~~iT ~ RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), VIEWPLANE REVIEW, AND COMMERICAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 434 EAST COOPER STREET, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. RESOLUTION N0.20, SERIES OF 2007 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Bidwell Investment Corporation, represented by Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC; Klein, Cote & Edwazds, P.C., and Rowland + Broughton Architecture and Urban Design have requested Major Development (Conceptual), View Plane Review and Commercial Design Review for the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Dosign Guidelines per Section 26.4] 5.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(1) of the Municipal Code, the Community Development Director has approved a combined review to enable HPC review of the applicant's viewplane and commercial design review requests with major development (conceptual) finding that such combination will eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity; and WHEREAS, for View Plane Review the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with Municipal Code Section 26.435.050, Mountain View Plane Review. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. The HPC hereby finds that impact on the viewplane is minimal; and WHEREAS, for approval of Commercial Design Review, HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.412 of the Municipal Code, that the project conforms to the following criteria: RECEPTION#: 640467, 07!3012007 at 11:68:32 AM, 1 OF 3, R E76.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ]. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standazds provides amore-appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the Standazds. 2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to the fagade of the building may be required to comply with this section. 3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located within a Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual Development Plan approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.415. This criterion shall not apply if the development activity does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.575.030(B) of the Municipal Code, since less than ten percent (10%) of the subject property currently exists as pedestrian amenity space, upon redevelopment, the provision of a cash-in-lieu payment shall automatically be permitted with no further review; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated May 9, 2007, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 9, 2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines", found a minimal impact on the Wheeler Opera House viewplane, and approved the application by a vote of 3 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Major Development (Conceptual), View Plane Review, and Commercial Design Review for the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lot Q, R & S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, as proposed with the following conditions; A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and far good cause shown, grant aone-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of May, 2007. Approved as to Form: True, City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION H11GJ1: Kathy Stri and, Chief Deputy Clerk ~x~g~~ Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes -October 02, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING: HIGHLANDS GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW Brian Speck opened the public hearing for the Highlands Growth Management Review. Notice was provided. Jessica Gan•ow said the applicant's representative, Glenn Hom, requested the hearing be continued to October 16'h. The reason for the continuance was that staff requested some additional information of how those spaces were intended to be used regarding the nature of the condominium meeting room spaces within all of Highlands, which would include this space that was under consideration and the other condo meeting space within the PUD. Garrow said that it was requested that the applicant clarify the growth management calculations that were done within this application with relation to how they were calculated in the PUD. MOTION.• LJ Erspamer moved to continue the Highlands Growth Management Review to October 16`x; seconded by Brian Speck. All in favor, APPROVED. PUBLIC HEARING: MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND ASSOCIATED REVIEWS-434 E COOPER Brain Speck opened the public hearing on 434 East Cooper. Jennifer Phelan provided the proof of notice. Phelan stated the application was to demolish the existing commercial office building and replace it with a mixed use building that contains sub-grade parking, commercial on the first and second floors as well as affordable housing on the second floor and free market residential on the third floor. The application was submitted for the initial review in March 2006 so based on that date the application was in the pipeline from Mazch 2006; if the rules change from March 2006 to today the applicant has the ability to stay with the rules that were in place in March 2006. Phelan said that since this time the moratorium was in place and growth management was affected by the way growth management happens. Phelan said that the changes to growth management were on an annual basis for free market and commercial net leaseable space; everyone would submit on a certain date, the first one in was the first one to be review and first up for those allotments. Phelan said that with the moratorium Council said that would not guarantee the best project was the first in line for allotments; there were a limited number of allotments for the different uses. Phelan said the growth management was changed so there was now an annual cap on free market allotments, net leaseable, additional lodging pillows were added and an over all cap for affordable housing but not a yearly cap and the growth management review was now based 3 Aspen Plannine & Zonine Meetine Minutes -October 02 2007 on a scoring system. The new scoring was based on 3 criteria: affordable housing; green building and small lodge development. Phelan said this project scored points because they proposed to be at a Silver LEEDS project and the affordable housing units were bigger than required and 2 were a lower category than required. This was the first project in the queue for growth management allotments. Phelan noted the project was located in the commercial core zone district and the commercial core historic district, which means HPC reviewed the project for the design, pedestrian amenity, view plane issues and received approval through HPC Resolution #26-06. This project was before P&Z for the three growth management reviews; redevelop the commercial component of the building, to build 3 new affordable housing units and 3 new free market units and a recommendation of subdivision approval to City Council. Phelan said the growth management reviews were final at Planning & Zoning. Phelan said the application met all of the dimensional requirements of the commercial core that were in place March 2006; the applicants were at or below the height, setback requirements, unit sizes and floor area ratios. Phelan said that with regard to the growth management reviews staff found there were sufficient allotments available for this project for free market, affordable housing and the net leaseable space. By providing affordable housing within the city and within the urban growth boundary and providing a choice of travel modes since this was in the downtown core, staff finds compliance with the AACP. The building meets the dimensional standards and has received conceptual approval. The mitigation requirements were met for the commercial and residential component (explained in detail in the staff report); the commercial component was working off an existing credit from the current building. The free market was providing the three affordable housing units, which was 30% of the required net livable of the free market components, which exceeded the requirement because they were providing more than the 1800 square feet; they were providing 2241 square feet. Al] of the units were required to be above grade and were above grade; the affordable housing units were required to be mitigated at category 4 and one unit was a category 4 and two units were deed restricted at category 2. On page 18 subsection d of the packet "with regard to affordable housing the code says they shall be for sale units but they may be rentals"; the applicant requested the units be rentals and city staff and housing staff recommended that the units be for sale units. The application meets all the review criteria for growth management and meets the criteria for subdivision because there were utilities available for service with existing infrastructure and was consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and staff recommended approval of the growth management reviews and recommendation of approval for the subdivision. 4 Asaen Plannine & Zonine Meeting Minutes -October 02, 2007 Phelan noted that in the resolution in this packet there were two choices for the affordable housing units; for sale or rental units. The planning commission needed to make the choice, which should stay in the resolution. LJ Erspamer asked if they were under the guidelines of the previous code yet they came to this commission because they were the highest grade; the scoring system was the only new issue that staff judged this by. Jennifer Phelan replied that was correct and with the moratorium ending there was a new growth management system review. Erspamer asked if the points were used for "for sale" or "rental" units. Phelan responded that the units "for sale" or "rental" had nothing to do with the point system. Stan Gibbs asked why staff preferred "for sale" units. Phelan replied the wording said "they shall be for sale units" and does give the option for "rentals" and encourages lodging projects have rentals for employee needs; staff went with the language "shall be for sale units" and there was a referral from housing staff that they prefer that affordable housing units "be for sale versus rental units". Gibbs asked if there was a philosophical statement that "for sale units" do a better job of bringing people into the community on a permanent basis. Phelan responded that for housing "for sale units" were easier to manage and keep track of than the rentals. Phelan stated there was a need for both rentals and for sale units in the community. Mitch Haas, planning representative for the applicant, Burt Bidwell Investment Corporation and Haas introduced John Rowland from Rowland + Broughton Architects. Haas stated they were happy with the staff review and recommendations. Haas said the application was for a project that exceeds every goal the city asks for and should be approved as is. Haas said that they have not used all of the allowable floor area and were under the allowable height limit at about 39 feet; they were at 82% of the free market floor area (7,392 square feet). There were 3 free market units and 3 affordable housing units; the categories were a one bedroom category 2 with 701 net livable square feet, one studio category 2 unit with 530 square feet net livable and the third was a 2 bedroom category 4 unit with 1010 square feet. Haas said that the affordable housing provided a mix of income ranges and unit types; these units were located on the second floor and were integrated with the free market uses in the building; they share the same lobbies, stairs, elevators and directly across from the second floor office space. Haas said that they have committed to be a minimum LEED certification at the Silver level and they know there were a lot of available points in the LEED scoring criteria. Haas said the sub-grade parking level was accessed from the alley off of anauto- lift, which was really the only way on a 9022 square foot lotto get down to the sub-grade with 11 parking spaces; the required parking was actually only 1'/z spaces because there was no parking required in the Commercial Core for a Mixed 5 Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes -October 02.2007 Use building for residential uses and the parking requirement was for 1 space per 1,000 square feet of net leaseable. Haas said there were 10500 square feet of net leaseable square feet but the code allowed a deficit in parking to be carried from the existing location so there were only I''/z parking spaces required but they have provided 1 L Haas said they have proposed the rental of the affordable housing units because they were within a mixed use building, across the hall from office uses. Haas said the housing office and P&Z approved rental units in mixed use buildings for the Slage Three Project, The Ajax Mountain Building and the Jerome Professional Building. Haas said that there should be rental units in this mixed use project and they have done everything properly; if the rental units were out of compliance for a year then all of the units go to ownership through the housing lottery. John Rowland, architect, said that there were two meetings with historical preservation and they listened very carefully and made some minor alternations with success. Rowland said that they looked at their design principals with respect to the historic patterns of Aspen; modern interpretations of architecture within the core; transition from historic neighbors (the Red Onion and Aspen Block Buildings); creating a building that has multiple modules that reduces the mass and scale; contemporary use of materials and detailing and implementing green sustainable building practices as much as possible and plan to exceed what the city asked for. Rowland said they began with the archives from the Historical Society to study photographs of the Tomkins Hardware Store, which was where the Bidwell Building sits and how that building (Tompkins) came out to the comer. Rowland said there were a lot of tampered comers throughout town and they measured those comers and feel that this project was proportionate with this segment. Rowland utilized site plans and floor plans to show how the corner holds the edge of that downtown street in working with the historic patterns of downtown Aspen; the comer of the entry will have a contemporary element above the entry. There were 11 spaces in the garage with one suitable for a handicap van; there were the same number of storage units for the affordable and free market units; there was retail storage and a large mechanical room. The second level had the office space, which would be subdivided, and three affordable housing units. The third level had the three free-market units accessed through a courtyard similar to the Kandycom Building with water efficient landscaping and each unit will have their own entry point. An HPC recommendation was to step back two units, which was very successful. Only one of the free-market units had access to the rooftop, which 6 Aspen Planning & Zoning Meetinn Minutes -October 02.2007 would be a green roof with the LEED consultant working with them for certification. Rowland said the predominant building materials were red brick to work with the historic core, buff sandstone as the base cornice line and some metal that will bring out the contemporary, which will work with the context around it. Haas noted that the final selection of materials had to be worked out with HPC and final review. Haas said there would be a green rooftop and all new street trees. Cliff Weiss asked if the one unit that had access to the rooftop would have deck chairs that would be visible. Haas replied that no because the deck was setback a good distance into the center of the building and from the street and sidewalk you would see the parapet. Weiss asked if the retail space would be large enough for a restaurant or was it strictly dry goods. Haas said they were going to finish the building to enable restaurant use with proper ventilation, flues and grease traps. Weiss complimented the building design and asked if HPC was concerned about public access space. Rowland said HPC was not particularly concerned because it was all on the mall, which was ari enormous pedestrian amenity. Haas explained that on redevelopment if you are under 10% pedestrian amenity then the applicant may provide cash-in-lieu; the existing comes in under 10% because most of it doesn't count with it up a few steps or down in a hole or covered by an arcade. Haas said that the feeling was that the Guido's Building and Paradise Bakery Building had the setback corners and the relationship was with the Independence Square Building and the pedestrian malls. LJ Erspamer asked about the alleyway and anticipated any traffic problems with the access to the garage downstairs. Haas responded that they worked with the design of the garage and the loading area to make sure the turning radius worked. Rowland provided a plan of the garage setback. Erspamer asked what will they do about delivery trucks who park in the alley half of the day. Haas answered the existing building only has 3 parking spaces and not much of a loading area so it has been that way and the city has restrictions on delivery times. Rowland said that inherently it will make delivery trucks pull into the alley and minimize the congestion. Haas said they were careful to put the trash and loading as far in to the west as they could go on the alley and were not pushing out into Galena. Erspamer said with the deluge of rain and asked if they designed something to prevent the basement from being flooded and the sewer from backing up. Haas replied the real reason the sewer has been backed up according to a memo from the Aspen Consolidated San District was that the lines weren't put in deep enough and because of gravity feed on the sewer line, the sewer backs up when there is a lot of rain; when the sewer lines are rebuilt they will be to ACSD specifications and 7 Aspen Plannine & Zoning Meeting Minutes -October OZ 2007 engineered accordingly. Haas stated there would be a lot less run off on this new building with the green roof to help store that storm water before it goes into the drains. Erspamer asked if there was parking for employee housing units. Haas replied there were 11 spaces and they haven't gotten to that detail yet; the free- market units were not specified yet either. Erspamer said even though he has a lot of questions the project should be commended. Erspamer asked where the materials would be staged when the construction takes place. Haas responded that was a difficult question and they haven't completely figured it out yet; they will prepare a construction management plan before a building permit will be issued. Erspamer asked if the request for story poles by this commission was out of their purview because it was established by a previous commission. Phelan replied that P&Z was not under the purview of design review and it would be the HPC. Erspamer asked what the height from floor to ceiling was. Rowland replied that the first go round was at 11 feet and HPC asked for the height so they are now at 14 feet floor to floor with 18 inches of structure. Erspamer asked what the city counts as a pedestrian amenity. Haas said from ground to sky without roof overhangs or arcades and not more than 18 inches below grade. Phelan said that the sunken spaces were not viable as pedestrian amenities so the code was changed to require public amenity space to be at grade; standards were created and the sunken spaces do not count as pedestrian amenities now even though they did at the time they were built. Erspamer asked the height of the Independence Square Building and this building. Phelan replied the Independence Square was 42 feet and this one was 39 feet. Rowland said the comer that was directly opposite was 37 feet; there was a 3 foot grade change. Erspamer said that he had concerns that this building would overshadow the Independence Square and this project was like a box and runs right up to the sidewalk without any public gathering places; he said this would be a wonderful spot to have a little room for the public according to the Aspen Area Community Plan. Haas said that many of the important building in town were on comer locations, which tend to be taller with a big corner presence; the HPC Guidelines talk about corner lots should be prominent buildings so that's what they set out to achieve. Weiss said he also wanted the pedestrian amenity but that was not the P&Z purview. Erspamer asked if the mechanical went above the height of the roof. Haas answered the mechanical was in the basement and the elevator doesn't go up to the roof. Erspamer asked if the lift for the garage would make a lot of noise as far as the tenants and employee housing. Haas replied that li$s were in use all over the world. 8 Asaen Plannine & Zonios Meetine Minutes -October 02, 2007 Chris Bendon stated that this project has been through design review and has to address a lot of these issues; he suggested the commission focus on the criteria provided. Erspamer asked if they would attract community assets into the new building, such as the eye doctor that was located there. Haas replied that the second floor was office space. Stan Gibbs asked if other buildings in town have used this "green roof'. Haas responded that not yet but in Chicago they were everywhere. Haas said the Stage Three will have a partial "green roof'. Brian Speck asked if there was a rooftop elevator. Haas replied there was nothing that went up to the rooftop and there were no ADA requirements. Speck asked if there were any lift garages in the valley. Haas answered that one was being built at Stage Three but he did not know of any others. Public Comments: 1. Toni Kronberg spoke about the perceived view plane of the neighborhood and the moratorium and what the community feels about redevelopment. Kronberg gave the history of this building site and spoke about the corner and open space. 2. Gary Morrie, manager of Helly Hansen, asked what was going on with the retail spaces that were currently in the building. Morrie said that it was usually UPS and Fed Ex park in the alleyway. Phelan replied that the lease issues were private issues. Brian Speck asked if delivery trucks could go down to the garage. Rowland replied that a handicap van can go into the garage. Erspamer said that someone in community informed him that this was the second busiest intersection in the community and he thought the mall would be very busy and eventually expand the mall area. Erspamer said the Information Booth was a permanent structure per Debbie at the Chamber said Erspamer. Erspamer said that the bricks and design were good for the downtown area but at this comer it was to overbearing on the community. Weiss said that the commission was here to look at growth management and not design. 9 Aspen Plannin¢ & Zonine Meetine Minutes -October 02, 2007 Gibbs thanked the applicant and said this was a nice project and glad that it exceeded the guidelines. Gibbs asked if there were numbers from the AACP of rental versus for sale units. Phelan replied that there was target of how many affordable housing units and how many people the city wants to house but there was not a specific on the proportion of rental to for sale units. Phelan said that it was the purview of the commission on rental versus for sale. Speck commended the applicant on the project and understood some of the concerns from LJ. MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to approve Resolution #26 series 2007 approving with conditions the three Growth management Reviews under the purview of the Planning Commission including requiring the affordable housing units to be rental units and deleting Section S.B(1) of the resolution and renumbering Section S.B(2) and recommending that City Council approve the subdivision request of the Mountain Plaza Building to construct amixed-use structure on the property known as 434 E. Cooper Avenue. Seconded by Stan Gibbs. Erspamer, no; Gibbs, yes; Weiss, yes; Speck, yes. APPROVED 3-1. Discussion: Erspamer said the Aspen Area Community Plan was ambiguous at best but it does talk about pedestrian amenities and public gathering places and this application does not provide that. Weiss said that he agreed with LJ about public amenities space but that was not the commission's purpose here today. Speck also had concerns about the open space for the public. PUBLIC HEARING: CODE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 30 Brian Speck opened the public hearing. Sara Adams, historic preservation planner for the city, provided a new Resolution #27, which was an elaboration of what has been changed in the resolution. Public notice was provided. Cliff Weiss stated that he lived at 1280 Snowbunny Lane and his house was built in 1955 but was dramatically renovated two years ago. Jim True said that Cliff was not on the list. Stan Gibbs said that his house was on the historic list already. Saza Adams stated that Ordinance 30 was passed as an emergency ordinance on July 10`h to identify and protect potential historic resources. Basically all buildings in the city limits that were 30 years and older must go through a preliminary review with Com Dev staff to look at the building and if it potentially met the criteria for historic designation. The designation hearing starts at HPC who makes a recommendation to City Council then there were two hearings at City Council 10 Resolution No. 26 (SERIES OF 2007) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING THREE GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW APPROVALS AND RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL GRANT SUBDIVSION APPROVAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED-USE BUILDING CONTAINING THREE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, THREE FREE-MARKET MULTI- FAMILY UNITS, AND COMMERCIAL NET LEASBLE AREA KNOWN AS MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING AND LOCATED AT 434 E. COOPER AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2737-182-16-O1 l WHEREAS, the Community Development Deparunent received an application from all of the Bert Bidwell Investment Corporation requesting three (3) Growth Management Review approvals and a recommendation of approval for Subdivision to develop amixed-use building known as the Mountain Plaza Building located at 434 E. Cooper Avenue; and, WHEREAS, prior to applying for the growth management reviews the Applicant received Conceptual Design Review from the Historic Preservation Commission via Resolution No. 20, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, the growth management reviews aze for approval for aMixed-Use Building which contains 10,585 sq. ft. of net leasable azea, approval for the development of three (3) free-market residential units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .82:1 or 7,392 sq. ft. and individual net livable area of 2,000 sq. ft. each, and approval for the development of three (3) affordable housing units with a total of 2,241 sq. ft. of net livable area; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting a recommendation 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, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the Growth Management Review requests and a recommendation of approval for the Subdivision request; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on October 2, 2007; and, RECEPTION#: 549401, 10123!2007 at 11:37:20 AM, ~ of 6, R 531.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pdkin County, CO WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standazds and that the approval and recommendation of approval of the land use requests is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission grants approval of the three (3) Growth Management Review requests and recommends approval of the Subdivision request for the development of a mixed-use building that contains 10,585 sq. ft. of net leasable area, approval for the development of three (3) free-mazket residential units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .82:1 or 7,392 sq. ft. and individual net livable azea of 2,000 sq. ft. each, and approval for the development of three (3) affordable housing units with a total of 2,24] sq. ft. ofnet livable azea by a vote of three to one (3-1); 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Growth Management Review for Expansion or New Commercial Development; Growth Management Review for New Free-Mazket Residential Units within aMulti-Family or Mixed-Use Project; Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing for the development of a mixed- use building containing three free-market units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .82:1 or 7,392 sq. ft., three affordable housing units containing a minimum of 2,241 sq. ft. of net livable azea (two category 2 units and one Category 4 unit), and a commercial component containing a maximum of 10,585 sq. ft. of net leasable azea as shown in the floor plans of Exhibit C of the staff report dated October 2, 2007. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommends approval of the subdivision request for the development of said mixed-use building. Section 2: Plat and Aereement The Applicant shall record a subdivision plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of approval if City Council provides final approval of the subdivision request. Section 3: Buildine The Applicant shall meet adopted building codes and requirements if and when a building permit is submitted. Additionally, as represented in the growth management and subdivision application dated August 15, 2007, the Applicant will attain, at a minimum, a LEED Silver Certification. Section 4: En2iueerine The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. Sectiou 5: Affordable Housing A. The affordable housing requirements of the project shall be met with provision of three units. The Applicant shall provide aone-bedroom, Category 2, 701 square feet unit; a studio, Category 2, 530 squaze feet unit; and atwo-bedroom, Category 4, 1,010 square feet unit as represented in their application. B. Rental units area allowed with the following conditions: l) The units will be deed-restricted as Category 2 for the studio and one-bedroom units and Category 4 for the two-bedroom unit. 2) The deed-restriction will allow for the units to become ownership units at such time [he 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. If any of the units are found to be out of compliance for one yeaz, or the owner elects to sell the units, all of the units would be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in the deed restriction at Category 2 for the studio and one- bedroom units and Category 4 for the two-bedroom unit maximum sales prices, based on the sales price stated in the Guidelines in effect at the time of recordation of the deed restriction, appreciated as stated in the deed restriction (3% or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is less), as of the date of the listing of the units. 3) Rental of the units shall be open to ALL qualified employees of Aspen and Pitkin County and shall not be tied to employment for the free-market component. 4) The governing documents shall be drafted to reflect the potential for the rental units to become ownership units. 5) APCHA or the applicant shall structure a deed restriction for the units such that 1/10`h of 1 percent of the property is deed restricted in perpetuity to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; or until such time the units become ownership units; or the applicant may propose any other means that the Housing Authority determines acceptable. 6) Language shall be provided in the Protective Covenants covering the units' assessments upon the units becoming "for sale" units. The assessments shall be based on the value of the free-market units compared to the deed-restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project and allow for the same voting privilege as the free-market residential units upon the units becoming "for sale" units. No changes to this restriction would be allowed without APCI-IA's approval. 7) The deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condominium Plat and prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Section 6: Fire Mitieatiao All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Section 7: Public Works The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. Section 8• Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which aze on file at the District office. Oil and Grease interceptors (not traps) are required for all food processing establishments and shall be identified and specified prior to building permit. Oil and sand separators are required for the pazking garage. Old service lines must be excavated and properly abandoned. Section 9: Environmental Health The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regazd to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement and pool designs. Section ]0: Exterior Liebtine 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 11 • School Lands Dedication and Impact Fees The Applicant shall pay the Park Development tmpact fee and the School Lands Dedication assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. Sectiou 12: Parks A. A formal vegetation protection plan shall be required with building permit application. Tree Removal Permit is required for the removal of the Crabapple Trees. B. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site. C. Excavation of materials, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic associated with construction is prohibited on Cooper Ave Mall. D. Utility connections located within the mall shall be coordinated and designed in a manner that does not encroach into the tree protection zones and disturb the surface of the mall. If a utility is located within the mall, it must be direct bore minimizing surface disturbance to the location of abandonment and new taps. Water taps and abandonment's will not be approved within the designated tree protection zone. No traditional excavation will be allowed in the mall water or electric connections. E. ]f temporary access, to the site, is requested on Cooper Ave Mall, a ROW permit is required for approval. Access will only be granted during the off seasons all work within the Mall has to be done and completed during these times. Spring: Late March till June ls' /Fall: Sept 15s' till Dec l ". F. Damage to mall brick or mall amenities will be the responsibility of the developer, replacement of brick will be done to COA standards and require the developer to use the City's contractor for mall brick replacement. G. New landscaping in the right of way located on Galena Street will be done to the Landscaping in the Right of Way standards. Parks is recommending Summit Ash, a species of Green Ash and planted on 20-foot centers throughout the entire strip. Currently, the proposed plan shows an unevenly spaced planting and this should be addressed with evenly spaced trees. All trees will be planted with irrigation and a planting strip shall be installed using structural soils. Parks requests that the developer meet with parks to design the appropriate planting trench. Section l3: 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, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 14; This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 15: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 2"d day of October, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ~f....__--~- ~---r---- I m True, Special Counsel Brian Sp ck, C hair ATTEST: ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ( ~. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~ FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: South Aspen Subdivision/PUD Extension of Vested Rights -Resolution - Series 2008 -Public Hearin>r MEETING DATE: January 28, 2008 APPLICANT /OWNER: PROPOSED LAND USE: Aspen Land Fund II, LLC Currently approved for a free market residential and affordable housing townhome development, REPRESENTATIVE: proposed is lodging development through a Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, LLC master planning process. LOCATION: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND West Side Of South Aspen Street near the STAFF RECOMMENDATION: base of Aspen Mountain. Approval with conditions. CURRENT ZONING aSc APPROVED USE SUMMARY: L and R-15 Zone District with a Lodge The Applicant requests an extension of their and PUD Overlay, approved for fourteen vested rights to July 28, 2009 with regard to the (14) fee-market residential units and existing approval for a free-market and seventeen (17) affordable housing units. affordable housing residential development. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: • Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights to reinstate the vested rights of the approved residential project to July 28, 2009, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.010 C., Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights. (Gifu Council is final review authority who may approve or deny the proposal). PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant has requested an extension of their vested rights for the project approved by Ordinance No. 32, Series 2003, which allows the applicant to develop the site with fourteen (14) free-market residential units and seventeen (17) affordable housing units. The ordinance vested the approval until July 28, 2006. The applicant received an extension of their vested rights to July 28, 2007 via Resolution No. 36, Series of 2006 while an alternative lodging development proposal for the site was under consideration and another year extension to July 28, 2008 via Resolution No. 29, Series of 2007. Since the extension of the vested rights, the application for the lodge project was denied by the City Council and the Applicant has submitted a building permit application for the townhome project. Currently, the Applicant is considering collaborating with several neighboring landowners on a master planning process for the area near Lift lA and S. Aspen Street. The Applicant would like assurances via an extension of the vested rights of the project that the townhome project will not become null and void if the Applicant participates in a master planning process since the outcome of the process is unknown. STAFF COMMENTS: VESTED RIGHTS EXTENSION: The Applicant is requesting an extension of their vested rights until July 28, 2009 pursuant to Section 26.308.010 C. of the City's Land Use Code. The Applicant is requesting the extension of their vested rights because, "the Applicant cannot allow the residential project's vested rights to expire as the property's financing was made in reliance of the existing approvals. "Staff believes that the City would be better served with a hotel at this location rather than a purely residential development. It is in the City's best interest to add to its lodging bedroom base and a master planning process may provide an acceptable community solution with regard to development ai the base of Lift 1A. Therefore, Staff believes that the extension of vested rights would benefit the City by encouraging the Applicant to pursue a master planning process for the property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the requested extension of vested property rights with an expiration date of July 28, 2009 for the South Aspen Subdivision/PUD with the following condition: 1. That the establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the applications or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, and all adopted impact fees. The developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, and impact fees that are in effect at the time of building permit, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. 2. Due to the Applicant's consideration of participating in a master planning process of the subject property and certain neighboring parcels, the existing application(s) for building permit shall be considered dormant by the Chief Building Official and Section 105.3.2., Time limitation of application, of the 2003 International Building Code shall not apply until June 28, 2009. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE: "I move to approve Resolution No.~, Series of 2008, approving a extension of vested property rights for the South Aspen Subdivision/PUD as was originally approved by Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003. The new expiration date will be July 28, 2009." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -Review Criteria and Staff Findings EXHIBIT B -Application RESOLUTION NO. - I (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE VESTED RIGHTS GRANTED BY ORDINANCE N0.32, SERIES OF 2003 FOR THE SOUTH ASPEN STREET SUBDIVISION/PUD APPROVAL, BEING A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS PARCELS 1, 2, AND 3, OF THE SOUTH ASPEN STREET SUBDIVISION/PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No.2735-131-39-001 (Parcel 1) Parcel No. 2735-131-39-002 (Parcel 2) Parcel No. 2735-131-39-003 (Parcel 3) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen Land Fund II, LLC, represented by Sunny Vann, of Vann and Associates, requesting approval of a one (1) year extension of the vested rights granted for the South Aspen Street Subdivision/ PUD pursuant to Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003; and, WHEREAS, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003, which approved a subdivision/PUD and awarded Vested Property Rights status for the development of fourteen (14) free-market residential units and seventeen (17) affordable housing units until July 28, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the applicant submitted the application for extension of vested property rights on March 20, 2006 before the vested rights expired, which was approved via Resolution No. 36, Series of 2006; and, WHEREAS, the applicant submitted the application for extension of vested property rights before the vested rights expired in 2007, which was approved via Resolution No. 29, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.308.010 Vested Property Rights of the Land Use Code, City Council may grant an extension of vested rights after a public hearing is held and a resolution is adopted; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the application and recommended approval of an extension of vested rights for the South Aspen Street Subdivision/ PUD; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the requested of vested rights for the South Aspen Street Subdivision/ PUD under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the extension of vested rights proposal meets or exceeds all applicable land use standards and that the approval of the extension of vested rights, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan and will allow the applicant to participate in a master planning process of the subject property and some surrounding areas; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO,THAT: Section 1: The Aspen City Council does hereby extend the vested rights until July 28, 2009, as approved by Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003 for parcels 1, 2, and 3, of the South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD, City and Townsite of Aspen for the South Aspen Street Subdivsion/PUD with the following conditions: That the establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the applications or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, and all adopted impact fees. The developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, and impact fees that are in effect at the time of building permit, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. 2. Due to the Applicant's consideration of participating in a master planning process of the subject property and certain neighboring parcels, the existing application(s) for building permit shall be considered dormant by the Chief Building Official and Section 105.3.2., Time limitation of application, of the 2003 International Building Code shall not apply until June 28.2009 Section 2• All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A duly noticed public hearing on this Resolution was held on the 28th day of January, 2008 at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved by a Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney to L-~ vote on this _ day of , 2008. Approved as to content: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Exhibit A Legal description of parcels 1, 2, and 3 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1: Block 6, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right of way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast Comer of Section 13, Township 1 D South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., bears N 53°20'28" East 814.56 feet; thence along the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 feet to the Westerly right of way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right of way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet to the Northedy right of way line of Juan Street; thence along said right of way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 330 feet to the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right of way line of Garmisch Slreet N 14°50'49" E 130 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom: The portion described in Book 232 at Page 362 The above parcel is also described as follows Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right-of-way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast corner of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian bears N 53°20'28" E 814.56 feet, more or less; thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly right-of-way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly dght-of-way line of Juan Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 298.20 feet, to the Southeasterly corner of that parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362; thence N 40°21'11" W along the Northeasterly line of said parcel, a distance of 38.73 feet to the Northeasterly right-of-way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 107.90 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS Block 6, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast Comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian., bears N 53°20'28" East 814.56 feet more or less; thence along the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 feet, more or less to the Westerly right of way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right of way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly right of way line of Juan Street; thence along said right of way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 330 feet, more or less to the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right of way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 130 feet, more or less to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom: That parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362 in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. Said Parcel 1 is also described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right-of-way line of Garmisch Street and the Southedy right-of-way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian bears N 53°20'28" E 814.56 feet, more or less; thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly right-of-way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly right-of-way line of Juan Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 298.20 feet, to the Southeastedy comer of that parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362; thence N 40°21'11" W along the Northeasterly line of said parcel, a distance of 38.73 feet to the Northeasterly right-of--way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 107.90 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. PARCEL 2: That portion of the Northeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter (Lot 1) of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P. M., described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Comer of Lot 13, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence N 75°09'11" W t81.25feet thence S 14°50'49" W 78.00 feet; thence S 03°55'43" W 164.99 feet; thence S 75°09'11" E 150.00 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E 240.00 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO KNOWN AS Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, and a tract of land being part of Lot 1 of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at the Northwesterly comer of Lot 13, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence S 14°50'49" W 240.00 feet along the Westerly line of said Block 11 to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 20, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence N 03°55'43" E 164.99 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E 78.00 feet; thence S 75°09'11" E 31.25 feet to the point of beginning. AND Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more fully described as follows Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 7; thence S 75°09'11" E 180.00 feet along the Northerly boundary line of said Block 11; thence S 14°50'49" W 100.00 feet along the Easterly boundary line of said Block 11; thence N 75°09'11" W 180.00 feet along the Southerly boundary line of said Lots 7-12 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 7; thence N 14°50'49" E 100.00 feet along the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 7 to the point of beginning. SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 7, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030, from which a rebar and cap PLS # 2547 bears N 55° E a distance of 0.7 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E along the westerly line of said Lot 7, a distance of 100.00 feet to the Northwest corner of said Lot 7, also being at the Southerly right-of-way of Juan Street in the City of Aspen, a rebar and cap PLS # 2547; thence S 75°09'11" E along the Northerly line of said Block 11, also being the Southerly right-of-way Tine of said Juan Street a distance of 180.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Block 11, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030; thence S 14°50'49" W along the Easterly line of said Black 11, also being the Westerly right-of-way of Aspen Street in the City of Aspen a distance of 100.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 12, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030; thence N 75°09'11" W along the Southerly line of said Lots 7,8,9,10,11 and 12 a distance of 180.00 feet to the point of beginning. AND The vacated alley situated in Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. Exhibit A EXTENSION OR REINSTATEMENT OF VESTED RIGHTS REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.308.O10.C., Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights, of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for an extension of vested rights may be approved in accordance with the following standards and requirements. 1. In reviewing a request for the extension or reinstatement of vested rights the City Council shall consider, but not 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; Staff Finding The Applicant was required to record the final plat, final PUD plan, and Subdivision/PUD agreement which is required as part of Ordinance No. 32, Series 2003. Those documents were recorded on Apri125, 2007. Stafff:nds this criterion to be met. 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; Staff Finding: The Applicant has pursued obtaining permits for the approved residential development. In addition to recording the necessary plat and associated documents, the Applicant has submitted necessary documents to the Commundty Development Department to obtain a building permit. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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; Sta ff Finding The Applicant, thus far, has paid the city approximately $270, 000.00 in fees. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. The needs of the city and the applicant that would be served by the approval of the extension or reinstatement request. Staff Finding: Staff believes that the City would be better served with a hotel at this location rather than a purely residential development. It is in the City's best interest to add to its lodging bedroom base. Therefore, Staff believes that the proposed extension of vested rights would benefit the City by encouraging the applicant to pursue a master planning process with other neighbors in the Lift lA/ S. Aspen Street area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants December 17, 2007 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Chris Bendon, Director Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD Vested Rights Extension Dear Chris: Please consider this letter an application to extend the vested rights for the South. Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD, afree market residential/affordable housing project (the "townhome project") which has been approved for development on three parcels of land located on the west side of South Aspen Street near the base of Aspen Mountain (see Exhibit 1, Pre-Application Conference Summary, attached hereto). The application is submitted pursuant to Section 26.308.O10.C. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by the owner of the property, Aspen Land Fund II, LLC (hereinafter "Applicant"), a Colorado limited liability company (see Exhibit 2, Title Commitment). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC to represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit 3. Aland use application form, application fee agreement, and a list of property owners located within three hundred feet of the property site are attached as Exhibits 4, 5 and 6, respectively. Final PUD approval for the townhome project was granted by the City Council on July 28, 2003 pursuant to Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003 (see Exhibit 7). As a consequence of several extensions granted by City Council, the approval is currently vested until July 28, 2008. The project's final plat, PUD development plan, and subdivision/PUD agreement were recorded on Apri125, 3007. The Applicant is giving consideration to an alternative project for the property, including hotel rooms, affordable housing units, and fractional ownership lodge units. The City, the Applicant, and several neighboring landowners are in discussions regarding the feasibility of collaborating on a master planning process for the lands at the base of Lift 1 A, pursuant to Chapter 26.500 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the "COWOP" process). If a final approval For an alternative project for the Applicant's 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, Colorado 81611 9701925-E9~8 Fax 970/920-9310 Mr. Chris Bendon December 17, 2007 Page 2 property is eventually granted by the City Council, the townhome approval represented by Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003 will be terminated. At the present time, however, it is uncleaz whether the COWOP process will actually be undertaken by the parties, and if it is, how long the COWOP review and approval process will take. In the event the COWOP process is not undertaken by the parties, or if an acceptable final approval for an alternative hotel project for the Applicant's property does not result from the COWOP process, the Applicant will have no choice but to continue with the development of the previously approved townhome project. The Applicant cannot allow the townhome project's vested rights to expire as the property's financing was made in reliance on the existing approvals. Absent approval of the requested extension, the Applicant will have no choice but to proceed with construction of the townhome project in order to maintain the prior approval's vested rights status. Pursuant to Section 26.308.O10.C. of the Regulations, the City Council may by resolution at a public hearing approve an extension of vested rights. The specific review criteria which the Council shall consider, and the Applicant's response thereto, are summarized below. The applicant's compliance with any conditions requiring performance prior to the date of application for extension or reinstatement. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003, requires the Applicant to record a final PUD development plan, a PUD agreement, and a subdivision plat memorializing the South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD's development approval. All of those instruments were in fact recorded on Apri125, 2007. 2. The progress made in pursing the project to date including the effort to obtain any other permits, including a building permit, and the expenditures made by the applicant in pursing the project. The Applicant has been making diligent efforts to obtain the requisite building permits for the townhome project since April of 2007. These efforts have included, inter alia, the preparation and recording of all necessary PUD documentation, the development of final azchitectural and engineering plans and specifications, additional environmental testing and monitoring, the demolition of the Mine Dump Apartments, site preparation work, and the submittal of various building permit applications and related materials to the City Building Department. Aggregate expenditures made by the Applicant to date in pursuing the townhome project are in the range of $3,000,000. 3. 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. Mr. Chris Bendon December 17, 2007 Page 3 Permit and impact fees paid to date by Applicant to the City in connection with the townhome project amount to approximately $270,000. 4. The needs of the city and the applicant that would be served by the approval of the extension or reinstatement request. No community benefit would result by requiring the Applicant to continue with the development of the townhome project when the preferred alternative is a new mutually acceptable hotel/affordable housing/fractional ownership project and the inclusion of Applicant's property in a COWOP process for the base area at Lift lA. Both the City and the Applicant would best be served by the granting of an appropriate extension to allow adequate consideration of the feasibility of entering into the COWOP process, and if the decision is made to pursue the same, to allow the review and approval process to run its course. Applicant, in its discretion, may continue with the townhome building permitting process during the COWOP review and approval process. A one year extension is requested. If approved, the new deadline for the expiration of the townhome project's vested rights would be July 28, 2009. In the event the COWOP process is undertaken by the necessary parties but final City Council approval of an acceptable hotel/affordable housing/fractional ownership project for Applicant's property, coupled with the preparation and recording of the various documents required to memorialize the approval, cannot be achieved by July 28, 2009, a further extension will be needed to complete the process. Please note that the PUD agreement for a COWOP-approved project on Applicant's property, if such approval can be accomplished, will specifically vacate and abandon all prior approvals associated with the townhome project. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Your timely scheduling of this application for consideration by the City Council would be sincerely appreciated. Yours truly, VANN 50CIATES,LLC / ~ unity Vann, AICP SV/cwv Attachments cc: John Sarpa Arthur C. Daily, Esq. 3804039_LDOC EXHIBIT a 9 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATNE: TYPE OF APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: Joyce Allgaier, 429-2754 South Aspen Street PUD Vested Rights Extension Sunny Vann Vested Rights Extension The Applicant would like to extend the vested rights that were granted to the South Aspen Street PUD in Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003. The Applicant has indicated a desire to extend the vested rights by one year to provide additional time for application preparation and City review of the Lodge at Aspen Final PUD that is proposed on the same site as the approved South Aspen Street PUD. DATE: 3/5/07 Land Use Code Section(s) Section 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures Section 26.308.010( C) Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights Review by: Staff for complete application. Community Development Director for recommendation to City Council. City Council for final decision on the vested rights extension. Public Hearing: Yes. Referral Agencies: None. Planning Fees: Deposit of $1,410 for 6 hours of staff time. Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,410 (Additional hours are billed at a rate of $235.00 per hour). To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of [he representative authorized to ac[ on behalf of the applicant. 3. Completed Land Use Application. 4. Signed fee agreement. 5. Pre-application Conference Summary. 6. An S 1/2" x l l" vicinity map locating [he subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 7. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model Form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. 8. Approved Development Plans on which vested rights are to be extended. 9. Copies of prior approvals. 10. 10 Copies of Application (Items 2-] 0). Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in [he future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. EXHIBIT 2 9 U~ ' 1~~ jnsurance porahan a.:x~+xersawxmc 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 Priscilla Prohl-priscilla@sopris.net Joy Higens-joy@sopris.net Brandi Jepson-brandi@sopris.net (Closing & Title Assistance) Issned By 1_auryerslltlejnsurance Crporation Home Office: 101 Gateway Crntre Parkway, Gateway One Richmond, Virginia 23235-5153 1-800-446J086 B 1004-268 COMMITMENT FOR TTTLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: March 6, 2006 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT15438PR2 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Fonn 1992 Proposed Insured: Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Rate: (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Proposedlnsured: (c) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Proposed Insured: Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Rate: Amount$ Premium$ 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: ASPEN LAND FUND II LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" Pn1QN COUNTY 1TTLE, INC. 60] E. HOPHINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 970.925-1766 Phone/ 970-925-6527 Fax 877-217-3158 Toll Free AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: Schedule A-PG.1 This Commitment is invalid unless the Insuring Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 Block 6, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street and the Southedy right of way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast Comer of Section 13, Township 1 D South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., bears N 53°20'28" East 814.56 feet; thence along the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 feet to the Westerly right of way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right of way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet to the Northerly right of way line of Juan Street; thence along said right of way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 330 feet to the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right of way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 130 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom: The portion described in Book 232 at Page 362 The above parcel is also described as follows Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Eastedy right-of-way line of Garmisch Street and the Southedy right-of-way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast corner of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 65 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian bears N 53°20'26" E 814.56 feet, more or less; thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly right-of-way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly right-of-way line of Juan Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 298.20 feet, to the Southeasterly corner of that parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362; thence N 40°21'11" W along the Northeasterly line of said parcel, a distance of 38.73 feet to the Northeasterly right-of-way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 107.90 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS Block 6, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right of way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast Comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian., bears N 53°20'28" East 814.56 feet more or Tess; thence along the Southerly right of way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 feet, more or less to the Westerly right of way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right of way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly right of way Tine of Juan Street; thence along said right of way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 330 feet, more or less to the Eastedy right of way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right of way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 130 feet, more or less to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom: That parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362 in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. Said Parcel 1 is also described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right-of-way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian bears N 53°20'26" E 814.56 feet, more or less; thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly right-of-way line of Aspen Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Northerly right-of-way line of Juan Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 298.20 feet, to the Southeasterly comer of that parcel of land described in Book 232 at Page 362; thence N 40°21'11" W along the Northeasterly line of said parcel, a distance of 38.73 feet to the Northeasterly right-of--way line of Garmisch Street; thence along said right-of-way line of Garmisch Street N 14°50'49" E 107.90 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. PARCEL 2: That portion of the Northeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter (Lot 1) of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Comer of Lot 13, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence N 75°09'11" W 181.25 feet; thence S 14°50'49" W 78.00 feet; thence S 03°55'43" W 164.99 feet; thence S 75°09'11" E 150.00 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E 240.00 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO KNOWN AS Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, and a tract of land being part of Lot 1 of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at the Northwesterly comer of Lot 13, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence S 14°50'49" W 240.00 feet along the Westerly line of said Block 11 to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 20, Block 11, Eames Addition; thence N 03°55'43" E 164.99 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E 78.00 feet; thence S 75°09'11" E 31.25 feet to the point of beginning. AND Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more fully described as follows Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 7; thence S 75°09'11" E 180.00 feet along the Northerly boundary line of said Block 11; thence S 14°50'49" W 100.00 feet along the Easterly boundary line of said Block 11; thence N 75°09'11" W 180.00 feet along the Southerly boundary line of said Lots 7-12 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 7; thence N 14°50'49" E 100.00 feet along the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 7 to the point of beginning. SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 7, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030, from which a rebar and cap PLS # 2547 bears N 55° E a distance of 0.7 feet; thence N 14°50'49" E along the westerly line of said Lot 7, a distance of 100.00 feet to the Northwest corner of said lot 7, also being at the Southerly right-of-way of Juan Street in the City of Aspen, a rebar and cap PLS # 2547; thence S 75°09'11" E along the Northerly line of said Block 11, also being the Southerly right-of-way line of said Juan Street a distance of 180.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Block 11, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030; thence S 14°50'49" W along the Easterly line of said Block 11, also being the Westerly right-of-way of Aspen Street in the City of Aspen a distance of 100.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 12, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030; thence N 75°09'11" W along the Southerly line of said Lots 7,8,9,10,11 and 12 a distance of 180.00 feet to the point of beginning. AND The vacated alley situated in Block 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. EXHIBIT a 9 March 5, 2007 Ms. 7oyce Allgaier Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Ms. Allgaier: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent us in the processing of our application to extend the vested rights period for the South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on our behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, ASPEN LAND FUND, LLC a Colorado limited liability company c: \oldc\bus\city.ltr\Itr45303. ja 1 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: EXHIBIT a 9 Name: ~/liQi~~~f~~~r~ ~~ Location: ~ ~Tr-E CN`~iy/T (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description w ere appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Y.~/,L~i~~'/~`J'E~ UGC Address: 2~ ~, f~~/~S , ~,~~~ Gad c~fl~/~ 4zs-~5s~ ' Phone #: PROJECT: Name: Address: S¢~ - o° 33G TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ^ Conditional Use ^ Conceptual PUD ^ Conceptual Historic Devt. ^ Special Review ^ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ^ Final Historic Development ^ Design Review Appeal ^ Conceptual SPA ^ Minor Historic Devt. ^ GMQS Allotment ^ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ^ Historic Demolition ^ GMQS Exemption ^ Subdivision ^ Historic Designation ^ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ^ Subdivision Exemption (includes ^ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ^ Lot Split ^ Temporary Use ©~ Other: ^ Lot Line Adjustment ^ TexUMap Amendment ~~-~ /T~~Jf~~ EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of PROPOSAL: Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ [Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement y'~ ^ Response to Attaclunent #3, Dimensional Requirements Form [Y]~Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards EXHIBIT 9 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aereement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and /T~~V"l~~r~ ~ "~' ~ ~C (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. v PPLICA~Nfha~~ itte~~ an a p~ lication.for` ~ (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of [he proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of [he parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required fmdings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a e1e urination of applicati completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of ~¢~~ which is for ~ hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recor ed costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building perznits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN Chris Bendon Community Development Director g:\su p po rt\fo rms\a g rpa yas. do c 11/30/04 APPLICAN By: Dat 3 ~ ~ Billing Address and Telephone Number: Required ~~. SgTiiy/~ S~ Y7 L ~~ A~3A11-OEP008-6 uol3~~ui~u!.P wm /~anemnnnn apma; e! za;!nsuml 124 E DURANTAVENUE LLC C/O WOGAN WENDY 533 W FRANCIS ASPEN, CO 81611 APRIL FAMILY TRUST 1/4 INT 3501 S 154TH ST WICHITA, KS 67232-9426 BARGEE MARY K LIV TRUST 625 SKYLINE DR CODY, WY 82414 BIEL ALEXANDER L & LEE M 381 LOVELL AVE MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 BLUE LLOYD JR 279 GRAYTON TRAIL GRAYTON BEACH, FL 32459 BRIGHT GALEN 407 S HUNTER ST #3 ASPEN, CO 81611 BUSH STEVEN S 0046 HEATHER LN ASPEN, CO 81611 CALKINS GEORGE W 105 S CHEROKEE DENVER, CO 80223-1834 CHAPLIN ARLENE 8 WAYNE 54 LAGORCE CIR MIAMI BEACH, FL 33141 CHU FAMILY TRUST 2/3 INT LU NANCY CHAD TRUST 1/3 INT 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ;uawaCuey~apsua5 ®0965®1. EXHIBIT ~ ~ . 710 SOUTH ASPEN LLC 314 S GALENA ST STE 200 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN KABINN LLC C/O NIKE COMM/NINA KAMINER 35 E 21ST ST NEW YORK, NY 10010 BENT FORK LLC C/O FESUS GEORGE PO BOX 9197 ASPEN, CO 81612 BIILINGSLEY FAMILY LP 1206 N WALTON BLVD BENTONVILLE, AR 72712 BOURGAULT MARY JANE 555 E DURANT AVE #4J ASPEN, CO 81611 BRITTON CARI PO BOX 12131 ASPEN, CO 81612 CABELLJOE C/O CHARTHOUSE 1765 ALA MOANA BLVD HONOLULU, HI 96815 GASPER MARY LYNN 124 E DURANT #4 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHIATE PROPERTIES LLC 20628 ROCKCROFT DR MAIIBU, CA 90265-5342 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ALYEMENI MOH 31090AKMONT STATESVILLE,NC 28625 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC PO BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612 BERHORSTJERRY BERHORST CAROLE 7161 LINDENMERE DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 BLACKWELL CLARENCE A 8 ANNE H PO BOX 3180 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21403 BRENNAN JACQUELINE NANCY 31 TRAINORS LANDING ASPEN, CO 81611 BRUMDER PHILIP G & ASMUTH ANTHONY QUARLES 8 BRADY C/O 411 E WISCONSIN AVE STE 2500 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 CAIN DOUGLAS M CAIN CONSTANCE MOFFIT TRUSTEES 1960 HUDSON ST DENVER, CO 80220 CHAPIN ANZLE TRUST 1887 STILLWATER ST ST PAUL, MN 55110-8507 ~~ / CHRISTENSEN CINDY 109 JUAN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 CROW MARGERY K & PETER D 46103 HIGHWAY 6 $ 24 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 T ~ Tarn;eaj laad 6se3 ao; laded paajT p0965 31tl1dW31 ®tienV as0 i ®0965p/l2l~t/ 1`VJ ~ !;aau5 uoi;~n~;sul aa5 a~ ~ ! ~ slaye"1 laad 6se3 A83A°a'°09°008-L wm-/fNanennnnm uol~ru;sul,p aplna; el za;lnsuo~ CYS RICHARD L AND KAREN L 5301 CHAMBERLIN AVE CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815 DOLINSEK JOHN 619 S MONARCH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 EAST JAMES COLLIER TRUSTEE 5800 R ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72207 ELLIS PAUL DAVID 100 E DEAN ST #2F ASPEN, CO 81611 FALL CREEK CONSTRUCTION LLC 809 S ASPEN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 FAULKNER JOHN L 2433 ROCKINGHAM ST ARLINGTON, VA 22207 FREIRICH MARK A PO BOX 774056 STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO 80477 GILBERT DONALD C 2004 TRUST 67 TURTLE BACK RD S NEW CANAAN, CT 06840 GLICKMAN EDWIN C 2322 LAZY 0 RD SNOW MASS, CO 81654 GREINER JERRY M GREINER TERESA U 330 BICKLEY RD GLENSIDE, PA 19038 ;uawa6aey~ ap sua5 ®0915 ®AN3AV;uege6 al zasgl;D ~ salad a saipe; sa~anbg3 CZAJKOWSKI MICHAEL DAVIS CAROL L CZAJKOWSKI SANDRA J 7838 HILLMONT ST 90 LA SALLE ST APT 16G HOUSTON, TX 77040-6108 NEW YORK, NY 10027 DONCERJOYCETRUST DUNN STEVEN G 7641 W 123RD PL 107 JUAN ST PALOS HEIGHTS, IL 60463 ASPEN, CO 81611 ELDER TRUST ELLIS JAMES BYRON ELDER JERRY TRUSTEE 171/2 FLEET ST PO BOX 308 MARINA DEL BEY, CA 90292 LA JOLLA,CA 92038-0308 ETKIN DOUGLAS M & JUDITH G EVANS DAVID COURTNEY 29100 NORTHWESTERN HWY STE 200 PO BOX 952 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 ASPEN, CO 81612 FARING CAROL FARR BRUCE K & GAIL H PO BOX 10421 PO BOX 5142 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 FELDMAN SELMA FLETCHER KAREN K & JAY R 300 S POINTE DR APT 2403 PO BOX 3476 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139-7329 ASPEN, CO 81612 FRIEDKIN THOMAS H GARMISCH LLC PO BOX 4718 C/O MIE PROPERTIES HOUSTON, TX 77210-4718 2560 LORD BALTIMORE DR WINDSOR MILL, MD 21244 GILLESPIE JOHN E REVOCABLE TRUST GINSBURGANNE C & ROBERT B 775 GULFSHORE DR #4219 7933 YORKSHIRE CT DESTIN, FL 32541 ,-$OCA BATON, FL 33496-1323 GOLDSMITH ADAM D PO BOX 9069 ASPEN, CO 81612 GROOS NICHOLAS D 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD HASTINGS, MI 49058 GRANT BROTHERS LLP 436 COFFMAN STE 200 PO BOX 908 LONGMONT, CO 80502-0908 HANG TEN ADVENTURE 809 S ASPEN ST #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 Taan;eaj laad 6se3 ~o} laded paa~~ ®095 31tl1dW31®tia^V asD T oo9LS®A?J3/~ta• ® .n I ~aauc uoivnnsw aac Ia17~1 slageT laad Rse3 ~A83AV-O9-008-t uo~na;sul,p auawa6aeq~ ap sua5 ®0915 ®dN3Atl 3!aege6 ai zas!In(1 wor6aanennnnnn apma; e! za;~nsuo~ ~ salad @ same} sauanbgg HARVEY JEFFREY $ NANCY 711 S DEARBORN ST-#507 CHICAGO, IL 60605 HEIMANN GEORGE R 100 E DEAN ST #2E ASPEN, CO 81611-1967 HILL EUGENE D III $ JOAN L TRUST 3 AVALON AVE P O BOX 129 PRIDES CROSSING, MA 01965 HOTEL DURANT 122 E DURANT ASPEN, CO 81611 IMHOF FAMILY TRUST 2409 GREEN ST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 JAMES FAMILY TRUST 1/41NT 1 CASTLEWOOD CT NASHVILLE, TN 37215-4617 JUAN STREET HOA 119 JUAN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 KAUFMAN STEVEN 0554 ESCALANTE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 KULLGREN NANCY A 205 E DURANT AVE UNIT 2-C ASPEN. CO 81611 LCH LLC C/O TOM DIVENERE 124 ANNAPOLIS LN PONTE VEDRA, FL 32082 HATCHER HUGH S 205 E DURANT AVE APT 2E ASPEN, CO 81611 HENDERSON BROTHERS LLC PO BOX 407 TROY, AL 36081 HINES TOM $ CAROLYN 21 TRAINORS LNDG ASPEN, CO 81611-1652 IAVARONE GIANFRANCO $ RITA 341 ORIENTA AVE MAMORONECK, NY 10543 IMREM SUE GORDON TRUSTEE 219 E LAKE SHORE DR #5D CHICAGO, IL 60611 JOHNSON KERRI $ DEREK 117 JUAN ST #1 ASPEN, CO 81611 KABERT INDUSTRIES INC PO BOX 6270 VILLA PARK, IL 60181 KINGSBURY FAMILY TRUST PO BOX 198 HOLDERNESS, NH 03245 LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 367 WACO, TX 76703-0367 LEONARD-PECK SHEILA KATHRYN RR 1 PO BOX 375-P VINEYARD HAVEN, MA 02568 HEIM WILLIAM D 124 E DURANT AVE APT 1 ASPEN, CO 81611-1769 HENRY WAYNE SCOTT PO BOX 2383 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 HORTON KAREN JANE TRUST 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 KAHN LIBA PO BOX 11137 ASPEN, CO 81612-9627 J$E HANSEN LLC C/O EDWARD HANSEN 204 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 JOHNSTON MARGARET S 9.87% 30 DEXTER ST DENVER, CO 80220 KAPLAN BARBARA 3076 EDGEWOOD RD PEPPER PIKE, OH 44124 KLINDWORTH J TODD $ HEATHER O BOX 25318 ST CROIX, VI 00824 LARKIN THOMAS J $ MARYANN K 1 SHELDRAKE LN PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33418-6820 LEVY HELEN JOAN TRUST 421 WARWICK RD KENILWORTH,IL 60043-1145 aanleaj laad ~Cse3 ao; waded paaJT ®091531V'IdW31®6aanV asD T ®091S~A2l~b 1`VJ ~ Tiaauc uonannsw aac _o ~ ! ~ slags'; laad ~(se3 .A83AV•OD-008-L uo!1~n~;su!,p wor/Lane•nnmm apma} e! za;lnsuo~ LEVY HYMAN & GAIL PO BOX 1365 BOLA RATON, FL 33429-1365 LIFT ONE LLC 72.40% 24 LINDENWOOD LN LITTLETON, CO 80127 MACDONALD KENNETH HUGH REV TRUST . 44 W HANNUM SAGINAW, MI 48602 MAGES LAWRENCE M & MARY K 84% 216 LINDEN AVE WILMETTE, IL 60091 MCCONNELL THOMAS W & KAY L 3814 OAKHILLS BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 MONIGLE ETHEL M 803 S GARFIELD ST DENVER, CO 80209 MULKEY DAVID A DR TRUSTEE 2860 AUGUSTA DR LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 NOREN LARA L & STEPHEN C 10927 BRIGANTINE DR INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46256-9544 OLSON PAUL S 8 DIANE C PO BOX 128 BRECKENRIDGE, CO 80424 PASCO PROP LLC SMITH PATRICK A PO BOX 850 ASPEN, CO 81612 ;uawa6aey~ ap sua5 ®09L5 ®A213Atl;!~ege6 a! zaslp;D ~ salad @ saloe; sa~anbg3 LIBMAN KENNETH J 800 S MONARCH ST #4 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOCHHEAD RAYMOND R 8 EMILIE M 200 SHERWOOD RD PASO ROBLES, CA 93446 MACGREGOR ROBERT DUNCAN 1315 SAGE CT ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCALL CAROLYN E 100 E DEAN ST #1 E ASPEN, CO 81611 MCKENZIE BART B & PAIGE PARAVANO 4840 30TH ST NORTH ARLINGTON, VA 22207-2716 MOORE JOHN W 50% 10426 WHITEBRIDGE LN ST LOUIS, MO 63141 MURRAY DENIS PO BOX 3770 ASPEN, CO 81612 LIFT ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC 131 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 LUNDHOLM KERSTIN M 115 JUAN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MACHUCA YANIRA R FUNES 11 TRAINORS LANDING ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCARTNEY BRENDA DAHL 113 JUAN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MENDEL M MARK MENDEL GRACE A - JT TENANTS 1620 LOCUST ST PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 / MORGAN MICHAEL L 115 JUAN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 NORTH LAUDERDALE PETROLEUM LLC 6318 NW 23RD ST BOCA RATON, FL 33434 ONEAL PROPERTIES LLC 8100 E CAMELBACK RD #31 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251-2773 PIECE OF THE PIE LLC PO BOX 2492 ASPEN, CO 81611 NOBLE GUY T PO BOX 9344 ASPEN, CO 81612 NORTHCUTT BARRY & JENNIFER 1905 MISSION HILLS CIR EDMOND, OK 73003 ONEILL ROGER PO BOX 711 LAKE GENEVA, WI 53147-3579 PINES LODGE CONDO ASSOC 152 E DURANT AVE ASPEN. CO 81611 T ~a~n;eaj laad /Cse3 ~o; waded paajT !~ ~ ®09L5 31tl1dW31®~GenV esD ®09L5®A21~/~tla ~ !1aaU$uoq]n~;sulaaS ~ ! ~' slage-Ilaad~(se3 1Ql3AV-09-008-t uoll~na{sul,p worl~anennnnnn apma; ei za}lnsuo~ PINES LODGE DEVELOPMENT LLC 23531RVINE AVE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 luawa6iey~ ap sua5 ®09L5 ®AN3Atl luege6 al zas!piD ~ salad a salpe; sa~yanbl;3 PLEAS ALEXA RINGSBY GRAY 279 GRAYTON TRAIL PO BOX 1292 GRAYTON BEACH, FL 32459 HAIKU, HI 96708 ROARING FORK MTN LODGE ASPEN LLC ROARING FORK PROPERTIES TWO CREEKS BLDG CIO HOWARD A WILL JR 0021 BURNT MTN CIR 5055 26TH AVE SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ROCKFORD, IL 61109 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ ALVAREZ CRISTINA MONTES URALES 350 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC MEXICO DF MEXICO, 11000 ROSE JON E ROSE RITA L 303 MAGNOLIA LAKE DR LONGWOOD, FL 32779 RYAN ELIZABETH H 1/2 INT COPE G RICHARD & NANCY M 1/2 INT 419 WINNEBAGO DR JANESVILLE, WI 53545 SCHAINUCK LEWIS I & MICHELLE T 2900 OCEAN BLVD CORONA DE MAR, CA 92625 SCHERER ROBERT P III 217 GOLDENROD AVE CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625 SETZLER ALEX 100 E DEAN ST UNIT 2C ASPEN, CO 81611-1957 SHEFFER BARBARA 8 DOUGLAS PO BOX 250 ASPEN, CO 81612 SILVERMAN MARC A & MARILYN L 937 DALE RD MEADOW BROOK, PA 19046 SLOAN SUSAN MARIE 500 S ORANGE AVE SARASOTA, FL 34236 S C JOHNSON AND SON INC TAX DEPT 412 1525 HOWE ST RACINE, WI 53403 SCHAPIRO MARC & PATRICIA 1685 TAMARAC DR GOLDEN, CO 80401 SCHROEDER C M JR SCHROEDER BETTY ANN 3629 ROCKBRIDGE RD COLUMBIA, SC 29206 SEVERY REV TRUST 70.39% 30 DEXTER ST DENVER, CO 80220 SHENK ROBERT D 290 HWY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623-1530 SIMON HERBERT REV TRUST 8765 PINE RIDGE DR INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260-1778 SM-15 SEELBACH WILLIA- C/O 45000 S WOODLAND CHAGRIN FALLS, OH 44022 ROBERT FAMILY TRUST 1/4 INT 771 FERST DR ATLANTA, GA 30332-0245 RUDERMAN ERIC P & MIMI E 1536 OGDEN ST DENVER, CO 80218-1406 SALITERMAN LARRY & NANCY 603 S GRAMISH ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHAYER CHARLES M III 588 S PONTIAC WAY DENVER, CO 80224 SEMRAU TIMOTHY & HEIDI ROBBIN ~` 58 TRAINORS LANDING RD I ASPEN, CO 81611 SHADOW MTN AERIE PTNRSHP LLP C/O ARTHUR J R PAMELA T WASHINGTON 21 BRIARCLIFF RD LARCHMONT. NY 10538 SHINE FAMILY LLC 8677 LOGO 7 COURT INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46219-1430 SKY BLUE LLC 27.60% 5743 CORSA AVE # 101 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362 SMITH RONA K 1742 HILLSIDE RD STEVENSON, MD 21153 wan;eaj laad ~(se3 ao} _ waded paajT ®0915 31tl141N31®tianV as0 T ®o9ts®11213/~tf~ ~ Tiaauc uai~naisui aac ® ! ~ slage'1 laad I(se3 AN3AV-OD-008-1 uot}~ngsu!,p ;uawa6aeya ap suas ®0965 ®J.83AV 31~ege6 al zanl!;D wortianennnnnn apma} e! za~!nsuo7 ~ salad a sane} sa}1anb4~ SOUTH POINT CONDOMINIUM SOLONDZ TAMI S SOUTH POINT CONDO LLC ASSOCIATION PO BOX 2829 150 N MARKET 205 E DURANT AVE #2F ASPEN, CO 81612 WICHITA, KS 67202 ASPEN, CO 81611 SOUTHPOINT-SUMNER CORP SPAULDING RICHARD W STANTON JAMES 4828 FORT SUMNER DR THOMPSON ELEANOR M C/O WORLD-WIDE HOLDINGS CORP BETHESDA, MD 20816 PO BOX 278 150E 58TH ST CONCORD, MA 01742-0278 NEW YORK, NY 10155 STARK RENEE A STEINER DONALD R STEWART SCOTT 205 E DURANT AVE APT 1D BULKHEAD GRAND 4710 PLAINFIELD CT ASPEN, CO 81611-3813 3338 PEACHTREE RD #3307 MIDDLETON, WI 53562 ATLANTA, GA 30326 STRAWBRIDGE GEORGE JR STUART FAMILY TRUST 1/4 INT SZYMANSKI WILLIAM R & LYNNE E 3801 KENNETT PKE BLDG #B-100 1 CASTLEWOOD CT 2220 E SILVER PALM RD WILMINGTON, DE 19807 NASHVILLE, TN 37215-4617 BOLA RATON, FL 33432 TAROCH HOLDINGS LTD TAYLOR HARVEY C TELEMARK APARTMENT 2 LLC C/O PATRICK D MCALLISTER PC W 301 N 9430 HWY E 2422 UNION ST 315 E HYMAN AVE #305 HARTLAND, WI 53029 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 ASPEN, CO 81 61 1-2909 TELEMARK ASPEN LLC THREE REEDS LLC TOLLEFSON JON S & JOANN M 55 SECOND ST 2224 VIA SEVILLE RD NW 38 TRAINORS LANDING COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80906 ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87104-3096 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOWNE PLACE OF ASPEN CONDO TUCKER TIMOTHY H & PATRICIA A ASSOC INC TRAINORS LANDING CONDO ASSOC 809 S ASPEN ST C/O ASPEN LODGING COMPANY COMMON AREA EXEMPT ASPEN, CO 81611 747 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 UHLFELDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS VANDER WALL DEAN ROBERT & TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PTNP RLLP BEVERLY J 1730 IROQUOIS TR 210 AABC STE AA PO BOX 189 HASTINGS, MI 49058 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONE PINE, CA 93545 WHITE JALEH VANTONGEREN HAROLD V & LIDIA M WALDRON GAILYN L TRUSTEE THICKMAN DAVID 2000E 12TH AVE BOX 8 PO BOX 7964 152 E DURANT AVE DENVER, CO 80206 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1737 WOLF FAMILY TRUST 12/23/1986 WOODING MERRITT B WOODSON TATJANA D 1221 MYRTLE AVE PO BOX 339 PO BOX 125 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 HOPE, NJ 07844 TETON VILLAGE, WY 83025 Taan;ead laad Rse3 ao; laded paadT ®0965 3ltildW31®tiany asD T ®o9ts®A?J3At/ ® ~ ~ slage'llaad,Cse3 ;aay5 uol;~na;sul aas ~ td AN3Atl-O~J-008-L uo!y~ngsu!,p ww•/0anennnnnn apma; el za;!nsuo~ WOW LIFT ONE LLC C/O WARSTLER ROBERT T 10 WINDJAMMER LN MT ARLINGTON, NJ 07856 W RIGHT LISA PO BOX 3770 ASPEN, CO 81612 W UGALTER JOEL 3200 N OCEAN BLVD #909 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33308 /I ;uawa6~eq~ ap suaS ®0915 ®A?J3Atl;!~ege6 al zas!!!;~ ~ aa!ad a sa!~e; sauanbp3 T Tarn;eaj iaad 6se3 ao; jaded paajT p09L5 31tl1dW31®,Gany asfl i ®09L5®ArJ3/~d~ ~ !;aauS uoi;~ni;sul aa5 ~ . ! ~ s!age~ !aad dse3 ORDINANCE N0.32 (SERIES OF 2003) EXHIBIT 7 e AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE SOUTH ASPEN STREET SUBDIVISION/PUD AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDING SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQ5) EYEMPTION5 FOR AFFORDABLE IIOUSING ANU RECONSTRUCTION OF A DENIOLISl1ED Mlll;I'I-F:~MII,Y BUILDING, RI~LONING'I'O I.PI'R WI'I'II A I'UD OVI?.RI.AY, ~1NU.ISPEC1:11. REVIEW'1'O ES'1'A131.IS11'1'IIIC AI~I~OIiDABLE MOUSING PARKING REQUIRENIENT'5 FOR"1'FlE 1'RUPER'1'Y'I'O Ii F] DESCRIBEll A5 PARCELS I, 2, AND 3, OF'I'IlE SOUTIi ASPEN STREET SUBDIVISION/PUD, CITY AND 1'OWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-131-13-001 (Parcel 1) Parcel No. 2735-131-14-003 (Parcel l) Parcel No. 2735-131-23-001 (Parcel 3) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received anapplication- from Aspen Land Fund II, LLC, owner, represented by Vann Associates, LLC, requesting approval of a Final Planned Unit Development Plan including requests for Subdivision, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for Affordable Housing and reconstmction of a demolished multi-family building, Rezoning to LITR, and- Special Review to establish the off-street parking requirements for the property described as, Pazcel 1: Block 6 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Parcel 2: Lots 7-12, Block 11, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Pazce13: Lots 13-20, Block 11, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the development property consists of three- (3) pazcels zoned LITR and R-15 with a Lodge and PUD Overlay; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, Map and Text Amendments; Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; Section 26.470, Growth Management Quota System; Section 26.480, Subdivision; the City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the land use requests made by the Applicant during a duly- noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments. from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and recommended approval with conditions; and, ~~~ill ~llli ~II~II IIIIII III ~IIII IIIIIII III ~IIII IIII IIYI 6 $S 64 0 00~ 6.49R WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 3, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No, 14, Series of 2003 by a three to zero (3-0) vote, recommending that City Council approve the proposal with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal. wider [he applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has Izvicwed and considered the recommendation oFthe Planning and Zoning Commission, the Conununily Development Director, the Aspen/Pitlcin County linnsing Authority, the applicable rclcrral agl:ncic:r, and has taken and umsidurcd puhhc cununcnl at a public Iw,u-ing; and, WII EREAS, the City Council linda Lhal the developntcnt proposal meets or uxcuals all appllCal)IC dL'VCInpmL'nt Standards find Ihat the appl'OVaI 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 tlils Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promofion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT ORDAINED BY THE CI'I'1' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, City Council hereby rezones Pazcel 2, and a portion of Parcel 3, of the South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD, City and Townsite of Aspen, to L/TR (Lodge/Tottrist Residential) and rezoned Parcels I, 2, and 3 of the South Aspen Street Subdivision/PUD with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, City Council hereby approves the South Aspen Street Final PUD Plan, which includes application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions (GMQS) for Affordable Housing and for the reconstruction of the multi-family building to be demolished (Mine Dump Apartments), and for Special Review to establish the off- street pazking requirements for the development of fourteen (14) free market town homes and seventeen (17) affordable housing units subject to the following conditions: 1. A Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall be recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.070(C). 4864© ~ Il~~l~~~~~1~~~1I~~~I~I~~~II~~I~~~~~~l~~I~~I~~~~~I~~I~~~I~00s%aa~z9 aoi©49a SILViR DRVIS PI iKIN ..OUtJT 2. A Final PUD Plan and Subdivision Plat shall be recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the fmal approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the Community Development Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvemu)Is, ant) Lhe IOCaIIOn of Llllllly I)IXle9lJ 19. b. An illustrative silo plan of the project shnwiug lltc proposal improvcntcnls, landscupmg (Includutg all plantings, species, numbers, and locations), parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawin re resenting the project's architectural character. d. p revised drainage plan and re rt, including an erosion~crtontrol tan, shall be r a Colorado licensed Civil En eer, in w c wells will only be allowed to handle runoff from foundation drains, pazking gazage ramps, and roof drains. All other runoff shall be directed towards the City's storm water system. e. revised infrastructure plan'tndicating that all road 'mprovements shall b ned: The plan shall also indicate that there s e no super-elevated curves permitted. Juan Street and South Crarntisch Street (to the extent of Parcel 1's street frontage) shall be widened to 27 feet as measured from the outer edges of the curbs. The minimum slope of Juan Street shall be .75%. 3. The following dimensional requirements of the PUD aze approved and shall be printed on the Final Illustrative Plan: Dimensional Re uirement ' Proposed Development Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sf. Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit ' 1,100 sf. per bedroom (81 bedrooms on 89,127 sf. of lot area that applies to density calculations) Minimum Lot Width 60 feet Front Yard Setback 10 ft. per parcel Side Yard Setback 5 ft. per parcel Reaz Yard Setback 10 ft. per parcel Maximum Height 28 feet exc t where deed restricted Percent of Open Space 27% (cumulative over all 3 pazcels) !IIVIIIRIIkIIIIIliNl6l~llldll :=:'°~ •-. Allowable External .83:1 (73,381 sf. cumulative over all three FAR arcels) .aI3Off-Street Parking 30 Parking Spaces (2 spaces for each dwelling unit of 2 or more bedrooms, and 1 space for each one bedroom and studio unit)(cumttlative over all three arcels) Frw Market OIT-5trcet. 28 parking Spaces (2 spaces for each dwelling Parlring nnil oF? or more bedrooms. and I space lin' each one bedroom .utd sludie nnitl(cnnudalivc over all lhrcc t.~cls) 4. The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the Gnal recorded Ordinance. 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 tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Deparhnent and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off- site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. e. A detailed ventilation plan of the pazking garage ventilation system prepared by an engineer that specializes in the design of ventilation and heating systems. £ A fugitive dust control plan which includes proposed construction fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed azeas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads, construction speed limits, and other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line. __. A letter from the primary contractor to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and are understood. h. -All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. i. A State of Colorado Sterm Water Management (Erosion Control) Permit because the land area of the development is over an acre: j. A PM-10 mitigation plan for review and approval by the Environmental Health Department or a cash-in-lieu payment in the amount to be calculated by the City Environmental Health I~ill~ ~~Illv~llll! IIIIII III7~~IILIIIIIII III l~lll ~I~I illl 8864©3 ; e -7a 00. 6 0.00 Director that is to be used entirely to implement PM-10 reduction methods. The Applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p:m. on Monday thru Saturday. (. The Applicant shall agree Ihat there will tic no amstruclion material or dumpstus stored on the public rights-of-wuy uiilcss a temporary encrnachrncnt license is granted 6y the Cily I:nginccr. In addition, the Applicant shall submit a Gill scl ol'conslnaclion management plmis as p:n'l ol'the building permit application, and the management plans shall include a noise, dust control, and construction lrallic and construction parking management plan which addresses, at a minimum, the following issues: a. Defining the construction debris hauling routes and associated impacts on local streets; and, b. Construction parking mitigation, except for essential trade trucks, no other personal trucks are to be pazked in the area around the site. The city encourages that site workers be shuttled in from the airport pazking area. The Applicant shall complete (prior to any of the remodel work, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc.,) the Building Departrraent's asbestos checklist, and if necessary, a person licensed by the State to do asbestos inspections must conduct an inspection. The Building Department cannot sign any building permits until they get this report. If there is no asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove it in accordance with the applicable regulations. 8. The Applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 9. The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standazds, with Title 25, and with applicable standazds of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Depamnent. The Applicant shall enter into a Water Service agreement. 10. The Applicants shall at their sole expense install a new eight (8) inch water line within South Garmisch Street and Juan Street. In addition, the Applicant shall abandon the existing six (6) inch water line that exists in South Garmisch and Juan Sfreet. The point of begimring for the main replacement on South Garmisch Street shall be the existing valve complex (serving the Barbee PUD) north of the intersection of Dean and Garmisch. ~: ~i~IIII ~~III ~~III~ ~I~II~ II~ ~~III I~~I~~~III ~Ilil ~I~I ~~~tl 9 s64Qe3 '-a d'-s This is approximately 80 feet further north of the point ofbeginning shown on the schematic utility plan dated June 21, 2002. 11. The Applicant shall also schedule the abandonment of the existing water taps prior to applying for new water taps. 12. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. If new sewer lines are rcyuired, then Lhe existing survicc must he excavated and disconnected ul the main sewer lim:. Nn clear water connections (root; I'oundalion, perimeter drains) shall be allowed f.o drain to ACSD lines. All improvements below grade shall require dte use of a pumping station. The Applicant shall install an oil and sand separator in the parking garage that meets the Aspen Sanitation District's standards. [n addition, the Applicant shall enter into a shared service agreement ifmore than one unit is served by a single service tine. 13. Elevator shaft drains shall flow thru an oil and sand interceptor. 14. The Applicant shall fund proportionate costs associated with the development for the replacement. of the main sanitary sewer lines located in S. Aspen Street, Dean Street, and neaz the Post Office. 15. The Applicant shall enter into a main line extension and collection system agreement with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to applying for building permits for the development. 16. In the event that snowmelt is installed, the Glycol containment azeas must be approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on any of the units within the development 17. The Applicant shall at their sole expense replace the existing substandard sewer line located in the alley of Block 61 between S. Garmisch and First Street in First Street. 18. The Applicant shall extend the existing storm water sewers south on both S. Aspen Street and S. Garmisch Street as far as Dean Avenue. Additionally, the Applicant shall extend the existing storm sewers to the Dean Avenue/ S. Aspen Street intersection and to the Dean Avenue; S. Gatmisch Street intersection. As required by the City Engineering Department, catch basins shall be installed at these intersections. 19. All landscaping in the public right-of--way shall meet the requirements as set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 2120, Trees and Landscaping on Public Right-of--Way. Any landscaping in the public right-of--way shall be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. The ~I~~III~~~~I~~I~I~II~II~III~~IIII~~IIfIIII~III~~IIII~~I 4~6a~7 ta..,o„ Applicant shall also obtain a revocable encroachment license from the City Engineering Department prior to installation of any landscaping or improvements in the publicright-of--way. All plantings along the edge of the subject properties or within the publicright-of--way shall be of a size and a species that will not require major maintenance (pruning, trimming due to over growth j by the City or the developer. 10. All exterior lighting shall meet the Cily of Aspen Lighting Code reyuircmcnls scl Ibrlh in I and Use Code Section 2(1.575.1511, as may be amaulcd Isom time co time. 21. The Applicant shall pay a proportional amount of the applicable school land dedication fees as determined by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer prior to building permit issuance on each of the units. 22. All affordable housing units to be constructed on Pazce13 of the PUD shall obtain certificate of occupancies prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any of the free market units within the development. In addition, the free market units on Pazce12 shall not be issued Certificates of Occupancy until all of the affordable housing units on Pazee1 2 have received Certificates of Occupancy. The free market units on Parcel 1 shall also not be issued Certificates of Occupancy until the affordable housing units on Parcel l have received Certificates of Occupancy. 23. The Applicant shall convey an undivided fractional interest (one-tenth of one percent) in the ownership of the deed restricted employee housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for the purpose of complying with the Colorado Supreme Court Decision regarding rent control legislation. The deed of conveyance shall contain such terms and conditions that aze mutually acceptable to the City and the Applicant. To satisfy the rent control issue, the Applicant may submit an alternative option acceptable to the City Attorney. 24: The Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and the City of Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or similaz charges related to ownership in the deed restricted affordable housing units. 25. The mix of affordable housing categories shall be as follows: 2-1 Bedroom Category 1 Units 2-I Bedroom Category 2 Units 2-3 Bedroom Category 1 Units 7-3 Bedroom Category 2 Units 4-3 Bedroom Category 3 rJnits ~~~~ !~ ~ ~ ~~III~IIIiI~II~~IIII~EIIIII~IIIII00864~0~010 .gP :I~III~III a~IIII......-,.: i.irv fo R 5 26. The deed restrictions on the affordable housing units on a given parcel shall be filed. in conjunction with an application to condominiumize the free market units but prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on any of the units on said parcel.-. The deed restrictions shall meet the Fallowing: a. The deed reslrictions on the affordable housing i.mifs shall be defined by the rental price terms in the Aspen/Pitkin Counly AlTordablu I lousing Guidelines in affect at the lime of hinal PL1D approval. 27. The Applicant shall record a housing rcplaccmenl agrcemenl which sets forth the terms and conditions by which the replacement housing will be provided prior to demolishing the Mine Dump Apartments. 28. The most recent tenants of the Mine Dump Apartments who meet the Affordable Housing Guidelines for the proposed units shall be granted first priority through an internal lottery at the time of the initial rental of the replacement affordable housing units. 29. The Applicant shall erect signage and install pavement mazking on "uan Street that prohibits on-street parking. 30. The Applicant or their successors or assigns shall maintain the common driveway between Parcels 2 and 3. . 1. The Applicant shall install an adequate fire alarm system throughout the development as determined by the Fire Marshal. The Applicant shall also install fire sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers that meet the requirements of the Fire Mazshal. The Applicant shall meet with the Fire Mazshal prior to building permit issuance to review alarms and sprinkler system plans. 32. Soil nails shall not be allowed within or under the public right-of--way. 33. The Applicant shall submit financial assurance in an amount and form acceptable to the City Engineer for excavation in the public right-of--way. 34. The Applicant shall provide a form of mitigation approved by the City Engineer for increased vehiculaz traffic on South Aspen Street, causing a revocation of the road's 15-year pavement warranty that results from accelerated road deterioration. The Applicant shall be proportionately reimbursed by future developments that cause a substantial increase in vehicle trips on the portion of South Aspen Street that is subject to the 1 ~- yearpavement warranty. ~~~Iil ~ll~ lllll I~~~~ I!~ 91~~I ~~I~~~~ ~! ~~~1~ ~ : I,~~; a ~ ~~c° 9e~° ~,~ 35. The Applicant shall provide a tventy-&ve (25) foot wide improved public access way with drive-on, slanted-face curbs and a stabilized shoulder on Dean Avenue for vehicular access into Parcel 1's affordable housing units. 36. The City Engineering Department recommends that the Applicants obtain flood insurance for the proposed units if available. 37. The Applicant shall install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any (rocs lobe saved. a. The City Forester orhis/her designee must inspect ibis fence before any construction activities commence. b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehictdar traffic shall be allowed within the fenced drip line. 38. A native vegetation protection fence shall be installed on the western property boundary of Pazcels 1, and 2 between Parcels 1 and 2 and the Barbee Family Subdivision Property. The fence shall be installed and inspected by a City of Aspen Parks Department Representative prior to construction. There shall be no storage of construction materials, back fill, tools, or construction traffic beyond this protective fence. There also shall be no excavation or disturbance of the native area beyond this protective fence. 39. The Applicant or their successors or assigns shall maintain the Open Space on the site including the Pazk proposed on Parcel 1. 40. Pet waste stations shall be installed in the Park. Section 3• 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 construed and concluded trader such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 28th day of 7uly, 2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. I~IRI~IIII~iI'~I~I!~IIIIIIIIII~III~I!II~II~I~IIIIII048640 2e1~ a_ INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided bylaw, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 23rd day of June, 2003. Asa-~ _.--- - .~ Fle cn Kau I c e s ,, a A l lcs t: J j ~~ ~, . ~ ~.~~ ~~ Kathryn S. Lf h, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed aad approved by a vote of three to zero (3-0), this 28th day of July 2003. Helen eru ayor Attest: Kathryn S. h, City Clerk Approved as to form: ~~ /~f~~~~~~ John P. Wor~r, City Attorney IIIIIIIVIIII~IIIIillllllllVllllt~IIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIII668 0 DQ 00110?9R SILVIR DRVIS PITKIN COUNT, Go ~1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director(,~~ DATE OF MEMO: January 16, 2008 MEETING DATE: January 28, 2008 (cont. from August 13, 2007, August 27, 2007, October 9, 2007, November 12, 2007, November 26, 2007, and December 3, 2007) RE: 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Subdivision Review Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 APPLICANT /OWNER: 633 Spring II, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc LOCATION: 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman (Wienerstube Property) CURRENT ZONING: C-1 (Commercial) Zone District SUMMARY: The Applicant requests subdivision review to construct a new mixed use building on the property located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman, where the Wienerstube currently exists. The proposal has been amended to reduce the amount of parking and provide acash-in-lieu payment for 2Z5 FTEs in addition to the affordable housing provided in the project. PREVIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted three (3) to zero (0) to approve the project in Resolution 28, Series 2007 and voted five (5) to zero (0) to approve growth management reviews in Resolution 20, Series 2007. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Subdivision request. REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to grant Subdivision approval for the development of multi-family residential units at 307 S. Spring and 625 E. Hyman. The Photo: Existing Wienerstube Restaurant and neighboring parking lot. residential units are part of a mixed-use development. Staff note to Council: The Background section of this memo is the same as was provided in previous packets. A11 other sections have been updated. BACKGROUND: The 18,000 square foot lot is located in the Commercial (C-1) zone district and includes the building which currently houses the Wienerstube and the vacant parking lot adjacent to the Wienerstube building. The Weinerstube Building currently includes 5,595 square feet of net leasable space, and does not include a residential component. The Applicant has received Growth Management and Commercial Design Review approvals to redevelop the parcel with 17,781 square feet of net leasable space, twelve (12) Affordable Housing units in 12,864 square feet of net livable space, and six (6) Free-Market Residential units in 12,758 square feet of net livable space. Of the six (6) Free-Market Units, one (1) is proposed to be a studio unit, and five (5) are proposed to be two-bedroom traits. Of the twelve (12) Affordable Housing units, three (3) of the affordable housing units are proposed to be Category 2, four (4) of the affordable housing units aze proposed to be Category 3 units and five (5) of the affordable housing units aze proposed to be Category 4 units. The owner shall have the right to choose the first purchaser on three (3) of the units for the initial sale only. This unit mix and the Applicant's right to chose the first purchaser of three (3) of the units were agreed to at the February 12`h, 2006 and February 26`h, 2006 City Council meetings. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted growth management allotments for the new commercial space, the new Free-Mazket residential units, and the new Affordable Housing units, and recommended the City Council approve subdivision. Design Approved by Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z): P&Z granted approval of Commercial Design Standazd Review for the redevelopment proposal. ~ Growth Management Reviews Granted by Planning and Zoning Commission (P&ZZ P&Z approved Growth Management Reviews for the commercial space, free-market residential unit, and the affordable housing mitigation as part of the mixed use redevelopment.Z The Applicant originally applied as a multi-year project under the "exceptional project" criteria because there were not enough 2006 Growth Management Allotments for all of the free- market units.3 The Applicant revised the application to request the remaining required free- market residential allotments from the 2007 Growth Management Year, rather than going ~ Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 28, Series 2006, attached as Exhibit B. The minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings to approve this Resolution are attached as Exhibit C. Z The redevelopment includes less commercial space than the existing building, and there already exists one (I ) free-market residential unit, therefore commercial and free-market residential allotments were not required for this proposal. 3 Five (5) of the free-market residential units were granted allotments under Resolution 28, Series 2006. The Commercial space and twelve (12) affordable housing units were also granted allotments under this Resolution. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Staff Memo Page 2 of 6 through the "exceptional project" review. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted this allotment request.4 DISCUSSION: Subdivision: The Applicant is requesting subdivision approval because the development of multi-family dwelling units requires approval of subdivision, pursuant to the definition of a subdivision.5 The creation of multiple dwelling units (or one unit within a mixed use building) is considered an act of subdivision. If the Applicant is interested in creating individual ownership interests in the units, condominiumization must be undertaken in order to demarcate ownership units within a single building.b In reviewing the Subdivision request, Staff finds that the proposal meets the applicable subdivision review standards established in Land Use Code Section 26.480.050, Review Standards, as outlined in Exhibit A. Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the goals established in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan. The project provides affordable housing within the city limits which is consistent with 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. The project promotes the AACP goals with regard to transportation by developing a building that supports the opportunity for choice in travel modes -transit, walking, and bicycling -and that will help create a more friendly pedestrian experience by providing interest at the street level and improved sidewalk and streetscape amenities. The project is consistent with the Economic Sustainability goals of the AACP by providing needed office space which will provide opportunities for Aspen's professional community. The project is consistent with the Parks and Open Space section of the AACP as it will include improvements along sidewalks on East Main and will pay Park Development Impact Fees. The development also meets the AACP with regard to design quality as the architectural design enhances the existing character of the area through its materials and its consistency with the Commercial Design Review standards. (Also see Exhibit A for greater elaboration on these points.) Staff finds the subdivision will not negatively impact the surrounding area and is compatible with surrounding development. The applicant will pay all applicable impact fees, including the School Lands Dedication Impact Fee. The project has received all appropriate Growth Management Reviews and allocations. The land is suitable for development and subdivision, and provides more affordable housing than is required by the Land Use Code. a P&Z Resolution 20, Series 2007 granted one (1)free-market residential allotment for the project. This granted the project all the required allotments. The Resolution is attached as Exhibit D, and the minutes are attached at Exhibit E. 5 Subdivision, pursuant to Land Use Code section 26.104.100, is defined as "The process act or result of dividing land into two or more lots parcels or other units of land or separate leeal interests for the purpose or transfer of ownership leasehold interest building or development..." 6 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. W ienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Staff Memo Page 3 of 6 The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of Subdivision to City Council by a vote of three to zero (3 - 0) in Resolution 28, Series of 2007. Council Ouestions Raised at the December 3, 2007 Public Hearinti: At the last public heazing on this subdivision request a number of questions and suggestions were raised by the Council. These included requesting the Applicant to examine different design options that might decrease the size and mass of the development. The Applicant has submitted a letter, attached as Exhibit B, outlining the process undertaken to respond to these requests. In this letter the Applicant states that a number of design alternatives were examined, but that none were pursued. The Applicant has revised the proposal to include less parking and to provide a cash-in-lieu payment for 2.25 FTEB in addition to the affordable housing mitigation already provided as part of the proposal. Chanties Since December 3, 2007 Public Hearinti: Parkin>?: The Applicant has not changed the above-grade physical design of the building, but has decided to eliminate one level of parking. This changes the number of off-street parking spaces from forty seven (47) to twenty-three (23) or twenty-four (24) spaces. This allows for one space to be dedicated to each of the residences (both affordable and free-market) and for an additional five (5) or six (6) spaces for commercial users. The Applicant has made this change because they believe this will reduce the construction burden on the area. The parking required under the Land Use Code is 23 spaces, so even though the parking proposed by the project is being reduced it meets the code requirement. This change in parking spaces has been incorporated into Section 22 of the Ordinance. Affordable Housing: The Applicant has also proposed providing an additional cash-in-lieu payment for 2.25 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs). The Housing Guidelines require acash-in-lieu payment to be based on the average of Category 2 and Category 3, or $208,775 per FTEB. Payment of this fee for 2.25 FTEB equates to $469,293.75 ($208,775 * 2.25). Affordable Housing Implications: If a mixed-use building is proposed with a commercial and afree-market component, the Land Use Code permits an Applicant to provide affordable housing mitigation for the lazger of the two requirements rather than meeting both requirements.9 In this case, the commercial space generated a higher affordable housing mitigation than the free market residential units, Land Use Code Section 26.510.030, Required number ofoff-street parking spaces, states that 1 space per 1000 sq. ft. of commercial space is required in [he Infill Area, and that no parking is required for residential units in a mixed-use building in [he CC or C-I zone districts. The commercial space provided in the project is 23,254 square feet, resulting in a requirement of 23 parking spaces. "Section 12, Employee Housing Dedication Fee, of the Housing Guidelines states, "When any other payment- in-lieu fee is required and the category is not specified, an average of Category Z and 34 will be used to calculate [he amount owed." The cash-in-lieu fee for Category 2 is $214,633 and the cash-in-lieu fee for Category 3 is $202,517. The average fee used for cash-in-lieu is therefore $208,575. 9 Section 26.470.050.5, On-Site Housing Serves Multiple Ajjordable Housing Requirements, states "Whenever affordable housing is provided on-site (with actual units) in order [o satisfy one requirement, the same on-site affordable housing may also be used to satisfy any other affordable housing project concurrently" Note that this project uses the 2005 Land Use Code, the code the Applicant applied under. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Staff Memo Page 4 of 6 so the Applicant chose to meet that requirement. Land Use Code Section 26.470.050(A)(1), Employee Generation, sets forth that each 1,000 square feet of new net leasable square footage proposed in the C-1 Zone District generates 4.1 full-time equivalents (FTEs) Therefore, the required affordable housing mitigation for the new commercial square footage proposed in this Application is calculated as follows: 10,530 new net leasable square feet divided by ],000 square feet= 10.53 10.53 multiplied by 4.1 FTEs= 43.173 FTEs anticipated to be generated 43.173 FTEs multiplied by 60%= 25.90 FTEs to be mitigated for new commercial space The Applicant chose to provide affordable housing on-site for 27 FTEs, 1.1 FTEs more than is required for the commercial space by code. The addition of the cash-in-lieu payment for 2.25 FTEs brings the affordable housing provided to 29.25 FTEs, or 3.35 FTEs more than is required by code. Ordinance ChanEes: The proposed Ordinance changes discussed at the December 3, 2007 Public Hearing have been incorporated into the attached Ordinance. These include: 1. Changing the language for the Energy Efficiency section (Section 12 in the Ordinance) to require compliance with the Energy Star Target Energy Performance Results rather than LEED as recommended by the Chief Building Official Stephen Kanipe; 2. Updating the Affordable Housing Section (Section 14 in the Ordinance) to include language ensuring the Category 2 units, if rentals, comply with the Telluride requirements; and 3. Adding a section regarding the Wienerstube Lease (Section 24 in the Ordinance) that ensures the representations made by the Applicant stating that the Wienerstube Restaurant will remain in the building are enforceable. Referral A¢ency 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. These comments are attached as Exhibit F. RECOMMENDED ACTION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff finds that the project meets many of the goals of the AACP in that it creates a high quality of design, develops affordable housing within the Urban Growth Boundary, is mixed use development in close proximity to a transit and the commercial core of town, and is visually compatible with the surrounding area. The project also provides more affordable housing than is required under the Land Use Code. Additionally, Staff finds that the land subject to the application is suitable for development in that it already contains a commercial building and is served by the necessary utilities to support the proposed development. Staff recommends approval of this project. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007, approving a Subdivision for the redevelopment project at 307 S. Spring and 625 E. Hyman." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Staff Memo Page 5 of 6 ORDINANCE N0. 29 (SERIES OF 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS A SUBDIVISION REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE BUILDING AT 307 S. SPRING STREET AND 625 E. HYMAN AVE, LOTS D-I, BLOCK 100, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY,COLORADO Parcel No. 2737-182-25-003 Parcel No. 2737-182-25-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 633 Spring II, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc, requesting approval of Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Reviews, Multi-year Development Allotments, Condominiumization, and Subdivision to construct athree- story mixed use building on the properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties contain approximately 18,000 total square feet and are located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the Applicant's request for multi-year development allotments, finding that the current design and massing did not meet the standards for an exceptional project necessary to obtain multi-year development allotments; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission passed Resolution 28, Series 2006 approving Commercial Design Review, 2006 Commercial Growth Management Allotments, twelve (12) 2006 Affordable Housing Growth Management Allotments, one (1) 2006 Free-Market Growth Management Allotment, and recommending City Council approve an "Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment" Growth Management Review for five (5) 2007 Free-Market Growth Management Allotments and a Subdivision Review on November 7, 2007; and, WHEREAS, on December 11~', 2006 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 49, Series 2006, on First Reading by a four to zero (4-0) vote, approving with conditions the Multi-Year Growth Management Review and Subdivision of properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted public heazings on January 22"d, 2007, February 12`h, 2007, and February 26`h, 2007, and took public comment on Ordinance No. 49, Series of 2006, and on February 26`h, 2007 the Aspen City Council did not approve Ordinance No. 49, Series 2006, by a two to one (2 - 1) vote, approving with conditions Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 1 WHEREAS, during a regulaz City Council meeting on February 27a', 2007, the Aspen City Council voted to reconsider the project on April 23rd, 2007 by a two (2) to one (1) vote; and, WHEREAS, on April 11`h, 2007 the Applicant amended their application to "renew" their growth management request to request five (5) Free-Market Residential Allotments under the Growth Management Review "Free-Market Residential Units within aMixed-Use Project" separately from the approvals received in Resolution 28, Series 2006; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director reviewed the amended application and recommended approval of the five (5) Free-Mazket Residential Growth Management Allotments, finding that application met the standards for such a review and recommended approval of the request; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 5, 2007, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 20, Series of 2007, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving with conditions, a Growth Management Review for five (5) Free- Mazket Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, for the development of a three- story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, on July 9`h, 2007 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007, on First Reading by a three to zero (3-0) vote, approving with conditions the Subdivision of properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 28`h, 2008, continued from August 13, 2007, August 27, 2007, October 9, 2007, November 12, 2007, November 26, 2007, and December 3, 2007, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007, by a _ to _ ~-~ vote, approving with conditions a Subdivision for the development of athree-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public heazing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all 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. Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section I: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves a Subdivision for the development of athree-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, subject to the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Plat and Agreement Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of such approval. The Subdivision Agreement shall also include a commitment to satisfy all conditions of Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 28, Series of 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 20, Series of 2007, as well as all conditions of this Ordinance. A Subdivision Plat shall be recorded concurrently with the filing of the Subdivision Agreement. A final Condominium Plat may be approved and signed by the Community Development Director upon substantial completion of construction and prior to transfer of ownership of individual units within the project. Section 3: Building Permit Application The Applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code Section 26.304.075, Building Permit, are fulfilled. The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance, P&Z Resolution 28, Series 2007, and P&Z Resolution 20, Series 2007. a. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. b. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. c. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed civil engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5- year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of this ordinance. Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 3 £ A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. g. An excavation/stabilization plan prepared by a licensed Engineer and approved by the Engineering Department. This should meet all requirements outlined in Section 21.12.140 of the Aspen Municipal Code. h. Proof of energy efficiency requirement being placed on the property. Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The use mix and dimensional requirements shall comply with the C1 zone district, as described in the staff memorandum and included in the chart below. Specific square footage requirements may be amended provided compliance with the below stated requirements of the underlying C1 zone district is maintained. The dimensional requirements approved for this development are as follows: Dimensional Proposed Requirement Dimensional Re uirements Minimum Lot Size 18,000 SF Minimum Lot Width 100 Feet Minimum Lot Area 1 Unit per 1,000 SF of Per Dwellin Unit Lot Area Minimum Front Adjacent to Hyman- 0 Yard Setback Feet Adjacent to Spring St.- 0 Fee[ Minimum Side Yard 0 Feet Setback Minimum Rear Yard 0 Feet Setback Maximum Height 42 Feet Allowable External Total- 2.74:1 FAR Commercial- 1.3:1 FM Multi-famil - .7:1 Minimum Off-Street Total: 47 Spaces Parkin Pro osed On-site Open 10%(1,800 SF) Space/Pedestrian provided by paying Ameni cash-in-lieu Section 5: Ouen Space/Pedestrian Amenity The property is required to either provide open space satisfying the definition open space/pedestrian amenity equal to 10% of the property or pay cash-in-lieu thereof. If providing cash-in-lieu, cash-in-lieu shall be provided in full based on the calculation methodology set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.030, Pedestrian Amenity. Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 4 Section 6: Construction Management A construction management plan shall be submitted with the building permit application that meets the requirements of the current "Construction Management Plan Requirements Plan Manual" available in the City of Aspen Engineering Department. The construction management plan shall include at a minimum, a construction parking plan, a construction staging and phasing plan, a construction worker transportation plan, a plan for accepting major construction-related deliveries with estimated delivery schedule, the designation of haul routes, and an agreement with the City to participate with other neighboring developments under construction to limit the impacts of construction. This agreement shall be prepared by the developer and accepted by the Community Development Director. As par[ of the construction management plan, the developer shall agree to require all dump trucks hauling to and from the site to cover their loads and meet the emission requirements of the Colorado Smoking Vehicle Law. Any regulations regarding construction management that may be adopted by the City of Aspen prior to application for a building permit for this project shall be applicable. The construction management plan shall also include a fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed by the City Engineering Department that includes watering of disturbed areas (including haul routes, where necessazy), perimeter silt fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent right-of--ways, and a representation that the City has the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during construction. A temporary encroachment license is required for use of the City's right-of--way for construction purposes. The Applicant shall also provide phone contact information for on-site project management to address construction impacts to: The City of Aspen, the Victorian Square Condominiums, the owners of the Hannah Dustin Building, the Chateau Aspen Condominiums, and the owners of the Hunter Plaza Building. Section 7: Pre-Construction Meeting The Applicant shall conduct apre-construction meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior to submittal for a building permit application. This meeting shall include the general contractor, the azchitect producing the construction drawings, the Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department, a representative of the City Engineering Department, and the Community Development Department's case planner. Section 8: Fire Mitigation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Marshall. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. Section 9: Water Department Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 5 Department. The Applicant shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Each residential unit shall have an individual water meters. A single water service line penetration into the building shall be allowed. The Applicant shall abandon the existing water service line and excavate it prior to installation of a new water service line. Section 10: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. The Applicant shall fund the replacement of 300 feet the main sewer line located in the alley adjacent to the project. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The driveway entrance drains shall drain to drywells and elevator shaft drains shall drain through an oil and sand separator. One tap to the main sanitary line is allowed. No soil nails shall be allowed in the public right-of--way above ACSD main sewer lines. The Applicant shall enter into a shared service line agreement. Glycol and snowmelt shall have containment areas approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Service lines being abandoned shall be abandoned from the main sewer line and excavated. Section 11: Electrical Department Requirements The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the subject property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. If afer the subdivision plat is recorded and in the event an easement is required, then the Community Development Director shall review and approve the easement on the condominium plat. Section 12: Ener>ry Efficiency The development shall exceed the Energy Star Target Energy Performance Results requirements for energy usage by 50%. An energy audit shall be conducted on the development at the property owner's expense after three (3) years of occupancy. The energy audit shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department. If the audit determines that the development does not meet the target energy performance, then the building shall be upgraded to meet this requirement. Prior to the building's occupation, the building shall be commissioned to determine the energy efficiency prior to use. This shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department and shall be conducted at the expense of the Applicant. Section 13: Growth Manaeement Implications and Employee Housine Miti>ration The Applicant shall provide twelve (12) deed-restricted, two-bedroom affordable housing units, to fully mitigate for the 25.9 full time employees (FTEs) required to be mitigated for. The affordable housing units shall also contain 13,960 square feet of floor area as indicated in the application. Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 6 Section 14: Affordable Housine The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on each of the twelve (12) affordable housing units in conjunction with filing a condominium plat for the property and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the affordable housing units. Three (3) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 2, four (4) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 3 units and five (5) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 4 units. The owner shall have the right to choose the first purchaser on three (3) of the units for the initial sale only. The households chosen shall be qualified through the Housing Office and shall meet all of the following criteria: a. Must have worked at least four years in Pitkin County prior to application, b. Must meet all aspects of the category specified for the unit to be purchased, c. Must meet minimum occupancy requirements, and d. Must show verified proof that at least one person in the household works for a business in the development at the time of the initial sale. All re-sales shall go through the Housing Office in accordance with the APCHA lottery process. All affordable housing units not subject to the right of first purchase as described above shall be "for sale" units and sold through the APCHA lottery process. A separate Homeowner's Association shall be established for the affordable housing units. The affordable housing homeowners' association dues shall be a percentage of the free-market residential development's dues equal to the affordable housing's market value compared to that of the free-market residential component's market value in the complex. If the Category 2 units are not sold within six months of Certificate of Occupancy, the units may be utilized as rental units. At any time said Category 2 units would be found to be out of compliance from the qualifications as specified in the Guidelines, the units shall be marketed for resale through the lottery process. The Applicant shall convey a 1/10 of one (1) percent, undivided interest in the units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any portion of the building for the Category 2 units. Should these units be sold prior to becoming rental units, APCHA shall sell the 1/10 interest to the qualified APCHA owner. Section 15: LandscaAine The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping plan as part of the building permit application. This landscaping plan shall include a plan for right-of--way landscaping and irrigation. The plan shall also include a pazkway landscaping strip adjacent to all abutting public streets of at least five (5) feet in width. Appropriate street tree plantings are required along all streets adjacent to the property and shall be spaced according to the recommendation of the City of Aspen Pazks Department. The Applicant shall meet with the Parks Department and the Community Development Department prior to building permit submittal to determine the best way to screen the first Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 7 floor wall along the alley while meeting the intent of City Council. The Applicant shall provide a number of options for the Parks Deparhnent and the Community Development Department to review. The option chosen shall be indicated in the building permit application. Section 16: Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter adjacent to the project shall be replaced and upgraded to meet the City Engineer's design requirements. The sidewalk locations shall be in substantially the same location as is depicted on the site plan in the subdivision application. If the adjacent sidewalks are to be snowmelted, the Applicant shall also snowmelt the curb and gutter adjacent to the property. Section 17: Park Development Impact Fees Park Development Impact Fees shall be assessed at the time of building permit issuance on both the new residential bedrooms and the commercial/office space to be added to the subject properties pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fees. The Park Development Impact Fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 18: School Land Dedication Fees School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal at the time of building permit issuance pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, because subdivision approval is required for the development of the multi-family residential units per the definition of subdivision in the land use code. The school lands dedication fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 19: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. The Applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan for project that addresses unique lighting installations for the mid-block walkway. This shall be part of the Pre-Construction meeting requirement as outlined in Section 7, above. Section 20: Wildlife Trash Containers The Applicant shall install awildlife-proof trash container that meets the requirements of the Environmental Health Department. Section 21: Food Service Facilities Food service plans meeting the requirements of the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department shall be submitted and approved prior to serving food and prior to obtaining a Colorado Food Service License for any of the commercial space that is to be used as restaurant space. An oil and grease interceptor approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District shall be installed in any space that is to be used as a restaurant. Section 22: Off-Street Parking The Applicant shall provide twenty-three (23) to twenty-four (24) sub-grade pazking spaces to be accessed from the alleyway as approved by City Council. The affordable housing Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 8 units shall each have one (1) dedicated pazking space in the below grade garage. The remaining spaces shall be for use by the free-mazket units, and the commercial/office space. At no time shall the pazking structure or spaces be condominiumized other than to delineate ownership of parking spaces for the owners of the residential units and commerciaUoffice space within the subject building. The parking spaces shall not be used as a Commercial Parking Facility, as defined in the Land Use Code, unless the Applicant is granted land use review approval for a Commercial Pazking Facility in accordance with applicable codes at the time of application. Section 23: Development Timing The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy on all of the affordable housing units prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on any other part of the building. Section 24: Wienerstube Lease At the time of recordation of this Ordinance, the Applicant shall submit a copy of a signed ten (10) year lease for the Wienerstube Restaurant. If at any time the Wienerstube owners decide to terminate the lease for any reason before fulfilling the length of lease, the Applicant shall replace the Wienerstube with a similar restaurant that shall fulfill the remainder of the lease. Section 25: 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, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 26• 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 27: 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 28: Vested Rights The development approvals granted pursuant to Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 28, Series of 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 20, Series of 2007, and herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of the development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following the final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 9 boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properties: 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No. 49, Series of 2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 29: A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 9~' day of July, 2007, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 9th day of July, 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 APPROVED AS TO FORM: John P. Worcester, City Attorney G:\city\Jessica\Cases\Wienerstube\Council\Subdivision\Wienerstube Ordinance1.28.08.doc Ordinance No. 29, Series 2007 Page 10 Exhibit A, Subdivision REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff finds the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Outlined below is the subdivision's consistency with applicable individual goals in the AACP. Managin¢ Grow[h The community goals listed in the AACP for the Managing Growth section include: • "Provide fora `critical mass' of permanent local residents by providing a limited number of affordable housing units within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary. " The proposed subdivision will allow for six (6) free-market units and twelve (12) affordable housing units to be constructed and subdivided. The twelve (12) affordable housing units will be deed restricted and provide housing for twenty seven (27) FTEs within the Aspen Infill Area. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Contain development with the creation of the Aspen Community Growth Boundary... " The proposed development and subdivision is within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Foster awell-balanced community through integrated design that promotes economic diversity, transit and pedestrian friendly lifestyles, and the mixing of people from different backgrounds. " The subdivision and development creates spaces for free-market and deed-restricted residences, and spaces for office and commercial uses. These uses are integrated in two (2) adjacent buildings that are connected through a second and third story passageway, and are mixed within the floors. The location of the development fosters lifestyles conducive to transit and pedestrian use, as it is located within the Aspen Infill Area, has access to the bus route, and is within one block of the Commercial Core. The building will provide additional landscaping along the street facing facades which will provide a pedestrian friendly atmosphere for passersby, tenants, and residents. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "We should endeavor to bring the middle class back into our community. We should discourage sprawl and recognize its cost to the character of our community, our open spaces and our rural resources as well as the fiscal expenses associated with the physical infrastructure of sprawl. " 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 a mix of Categories 2, 3, and 4 units. This mix will allow a more economically diverse population to reside in town than is found in other redevelopment projects that Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page I of 6 meet the minimum code requirements for Category 4 units. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. Transportation The community goals listed in the AACP for the Transportation section include: • "Maintain and improve the appeal of bicycling and walking... by adding sidewalk connections, replacing sidewalks, and requiring sidewalks as part of development approvals, where appropriate... " The subdivision and development will include sidewalk improvements along both Hyman Ave. and Spring St., creating a pedestrian and bike friendly atmosphere. Further, the mid-block walkway adds an additional connection and pedestrian amenity. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "Reduce the adverse impacts of automobiles on the Aspen area. " The development includes underground parking for tenants and residents of the building. The location of the parking reduces the impact these cars would otherwise have on the surrounding community if they were required to park at street level. Each of the affordable housing units will be assigned a parking space that will enable the residents to store their cars sub- grade rather than utilizing limited on-street parking opportunities. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "New development should take place only in areas that are, or can be served by transit, and only in compact, mixed-use patterns that are conducive to walking and bicycling.." The proposed development is served by transit and is composed of compact mixed-uses conducive to walking and bicycling. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. The intent of the Transportation section states: • "The community seeks to provide a balanced, integrated transportation system for residents, visitors, and commuters that reduced congestion and air pollution. Walking, Bicycling and transit use is promoted to help us reach that goal. " The proposed development and subdivision promote the use of transit and a pedestrian friendly lifestyle. The development is located one block away from the Commercial Core zone district, is located approximately four blocks from Ruby Park, and served by close transit stops. The development will increase the overall pedestrian experience, as it will provide landscaping improvements, and will improve the relationship to Hyman Ave. by replacing an underutilized vacant lot with lazge store front windows that supply visual interest and engage the pedestrian. Staff finds the subdivision meets the intent of the Transportation section in the AACP. Housin The community goals listed in the AACP for the Housing section include: • "Encourage development to occur within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and emphasize 'good city form'. " The proposed subdivision, with its twelve (12) affordable housing units, is within a development located within the Aspen Growth Boundazy and within the Aspen infill area. The development also promotes "good city form" through Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page 2 of 6 its improvements to the street facing facades, which make the building more pedestrian friendly, and through its consistency with the Commercial Design Standards. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. • "The public and private sectors should work together to ensure success in providing affordable housing. " And "Encourage greater participation by the private sector in developing affordable housing. " The subdivision includes twelve (12) high-quality affordable housing units, which will be deed-restricted and provide housing for twenty seven (27) FTEs. The private sector is providing these units as part of the development proposal. Staff finds the proposed subdivision meets these two AACP goals. • "New affordable housing projects should reinforce and enhance a healthy social balance for our community and enhance the character and charm of Aspen. " The subdivision will provide twelve (12) above-grade deed-restricted housing units in a number of different categories. These units are in the same building as six (6) free-mazket housing units. Staff finds the subdivision meets this goal of the AACP. Economic Sustainability The intent of the Economic Sustainability section includes: • "Maintain a healthy, vibrant and diversified year-round economy that supports the Aspen area community... " The subdivision will include office and commercial uses that will help promote and maintain Aspen's year-round community. There is a lack of significant office space currently in Aspen, and this development and subdivision will help increase the office base needed in the community. The placement of commercial spaces along the mid-block walkway and the alley are likely to provide opportunities for lower rent commercial uses that enable locally owned and locally serving business a potential incubator space. Further, the owner has agreed to retain the Wienerstube Restaurant which serves tourists and locals alike for a period of at least ten (10) years. The subdivision will also include housing for twenty seven (27) FTEs who will live and work within the community (as required by Housing Authority rules) and who will help support a healthy, vibrant, and diversified year-round economy. Staff finds the subdivision meets the intent of this section of the AACP. • "Enhance the wealth-generating capacity of the local economy while minimizing the rate at which cash jlows through the local economy and limiting the expansion of the physical size of the community. " The subdivision occurs within the Aspen Growth Boundary, which will not increase the physical size of the community. The development will also increase the local economy's wealth-generating capacity by providing commercial and office spaces within the Aspen Infill Area. Staff finds the subdivision meets the intent of this section of the AACP. Parks Open Space, & the Environment • "Seek opportunities to discourage sprawl in order to preserve open spaces between communities. Encourage Infill projects that dntegrate more housing into the existing urban fabric." The development will provide a Park Development Impact Fee, and includes streetscape improvements along Spring St. and Hyman Ave. This project will Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page 3 of 6 integrate housing into the urban fabric by providing twelve (12) affordable housing units and six (6) free-market residential units within the Aspen Infill Area. Staff finds the subdivision meets this section of the AACP. Desi>;n Quality The intent of the Design Quality section includes: • "Ensure the character of the built environment in Aspen is maintained through public outreach and education about design quality, historical context, and the influence of existing built and natural environments. " This AACP section does not relate well to the subdivision itself, as it will divide the internal spaces into separate ownership interests. The development itself meets this AACP section through its compliance with the Commercial Design Standards, its use of fenestration and faFade articulation to break up the building's mass, and the inclusion of a mid-block walkway that helps to break up the development's bulk and creates a unique design solution to a lazge lot. Staff finds the subdivision and development meet the goals and intent of this section of the AACP. The community goals listed in the Design Quality section of the AACP includes: • "Retain and encourage an eclectic mix of design styles to maintain and enhance the special character to Aspen. " Again, this section relates more to the overall development rather than the subdivision. The development itself represents a high quality design that will work with and enhance Aspen's unique character. The buildings mass is broken up through fapade fenestration and the use of different materials, which helps it relate to Aspen's historic thirty (30) and sixty (60) foot lot widths. The fapade is made of different materials and colors that relate to those traditionally used in buildings in the commercial core, while also using materials and colors that relate to neighboring buildings in the C-1 zone district. Staff finds the subdivision and development meet the goals and intent of this section of the AACP. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding Staff finds that the uses proposed in the subdivision are consistent with the chazacter of the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity. The majority of the development in the immediate vicinity consists of mixed-use or commercial/office buildings. The Hannah Dustin building located across Spring Street from the proposed development is currently an office building that has approval for the creation of several additional residential units. The Patio building, which contains commercial and office space is located directly across E. Hyman Avenue from the proposed development and the Victorian Square office building is located directly to the west of the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding The subdivision of the building will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas, as the division of the building into separate ownership units will not impact the development abilities in surrounding areas. The development itself will not pose Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page 4 of 6 an adverse affect on surrounding azeas. The surrounding properties are close to fully developed, and the surrounding road and utility systems have the capacity to support this development. Additionally, the development meets all the requirements of the C-1 zone district. All park development, school land, and other impact fees will be paid at the time of building permit issuance in order to mitigate for any other impacts from the development. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposal will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding properties. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with al[ applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed subdivision meets all requirements of the Land Use Code. 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 condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efftcient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding Staff finds that the properties are suitable for subdivision and development. There are no known geologic hazazds on the site and the Wienerstube property currently contains an existing commercial building. The site contains no overly steep topography and no known geologic hazazds that may harm the health of any of the inhabitants of the proposed development. Staff believes that there will not be a duplication or premature extension of public facilities because the property to be subdivided is already served by adequate public facilities. The Applicant has committed that the cost of any necessazy utility extensions or upgrades will be borne by the Applicant. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page 5 of 6 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding The Applicant has consented in the application to meet the applicable required improvements pursuant to Section 26.580. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program, is not applicable for this subdivision. The development includes new free-mazket residential units and provides more affordable housing than is required by the Land Use Code. The application has been granted the growth management allocations required for the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding The proposed subdivision is required to meet the School Land Dedication Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630. The Applicant has proposed to pay cash-in-lieu instead of providing land. The Applicant has consented to paying the applicable school land dedication fee at the time of building permit issuance for development within the subdivision. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Growth Management ApprovaG Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which a[I 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) Staff Finding The application has requested and received the necessary growth management allocations for the proposed development, pursuant to Planning and Zoning Resolutions 20, Series 2007 and 28, Series 2006. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria, Exhibit A Page 6 of 6 Mayor and Memb(iS of the Asf,x_ n City Ccrmcil ~./o ies<.Ica Gaaaw. ~,na R'n.~ c~ Flarnr;r :.ilY Of Aspen 130 J. Gclena Strt;e,l Aspen, CO 81 fi 1 t Re: G33 Spring Street Subdivision Review--City Council Second Reading Dear Mayor Ireland and Council Members: I am writing on behalf of our c:iieni 633 Sprang Street, LLC. owners of the wienerstube" property. to provide information for fhe Aspen Cify Council re~irew tar condominium subdivision at the continued public hearing scheduled for 28 January 2008. The applicants have worked difigentlywith the City Council, staff. anU ether review bodies over a protracted period of time 1o propose a project which rneeis ^II the requirements of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. It is a project that turrets fhe Ciiy of Aspen requirements for subdivision, which is fhe subject of this final hearing. and has been previously opproved for all required growth management allocations, commercial design review, and affordable housing mitigation. Previous redesign of the building. Of particular note is the Cify of Aspen commercial design review process. This building was initially approved by the Aspen Planning R Zoning Cammission as meeting the requirements for commercial design review in 20016. In subsequem hearings before the Aspen City Council concerns were expressed regarding the design of the building, even though it has been approved by the public body charged with this review. In response to these concerns, the building wos completely redesigned and voluntarily incorporated a number of features of a new set of design guidelines that were being considered for adoption by the Clfy. These features incauded: significantly greater stepboCks for the front facade, • separation of fhe building into two masses which incorporated a raid-block passage io the alleyway, incorporation of an alley pedestrian passageway, and the establishment of retail spores relating to the mid-block passage and alley pedestrian Zink, which would be inherently mare affordable spaces offering new retail opportunities. Commercial design review is completed. This redesigned building proposal was then returned to the Planning & Zoning Commission and was again oppraved for commercial design review- We recognize that certain adjacent neighbors have objected that their views would be affected by fhe proposed building. However y v ~Y ~ \ "r~ i:l: y3 t'f Il~~f' J the proposed building meets all the requirements of the C.-i zone disirici for height and positioning on the site, c:end h<rs twice now meet with approval under the City's commercial design review criteria. Moreover, it is a building which is actually smaller in overall floor area than would be allowed lay the zone district. Viewplanes are not offected. It has been the policy of the City of Aspen that certain specific viewplanes. ter example, from 'he Holei Jerome and the Wheeler Opera House. are to be prot~c.ted through the land ! use code, and require speriai review and consideration. Apart tram these protected viewplanes, by Gty policy abuttina propeHy owners have no special cairn on views that may exist from their properties, e:xcepl as generally protected by 11?e height and other restrictions of the land use code. This proposed building is oat anywhere near any protected viewplane of the City, li is therefore subject fo the parameters of the land use Cade. with which it is in compLpnce in every respect. The C•1 District is fully a commercial zone. .t has been asserted that the Commercial C-1 District in which this building is located is a transitional district between the Commercial Care and abutting residential zone districts. This is not the ease. The adjacent district t0 C-1 is the Mixed Use Zone District formerly known as the Office tone District), which also incorporates commercial opporhmaies. In (act, immediately opposite the proposed Wienerstube building on Spring Street is the Hannah Dustin commercial building with arecently- opproved 9,000 sq. it. three-story commercial addition. Other significant fhree- story siructuresfurther fo Hie east on Hyman Avenue include the Aspen Athletic Club and Benedict Commonz buildings. Within the C-1 zoning district, there are numerous three-story and even four-story sin;ctvres, including the recently permitted Stage Three replacement building. We are providing, under separate cover, some examples or these buildings that are within the immediate zone disirici and neighborhood boundaries. So, it is important to recognize that the proposed Wienerstube building fits confextuaUy with its surroundings, including adjacent zoning districts. Affordable Housing and new commercial opportunities. The Aspen Area Community Plan stresses the need Ta provide affordable housing and new commercial opportunities within the core areas or the Cify. This project provides both substantial affordable housing opportunities and new retail opporiunilies. some of which will be inherently more affordable (or start-up businesses because of locations accessed from the alley passageway. The twelve 2-bedroom affordable units will provide quality housing appc>rtunilies for 77 employees (in accordance with APCHA's Nousing Guidelines). This is tyre most significant increment of affordable housing ever to be proposed for a commercial property in the City's core. locally owned and local-serving businesses. New commercial opportwiities are also part of the benefits of this proposed building. A substantial effort has been made to ensure that the commercial opportunities will be of service to local ,:~..- _ '~ ~~ ( ~y oiA t~~,~ i .,aniu.~ry 2`KiR Fagt: 3 res.dent;. ihe'~Ni<.nr:rstube kestaurant will be accornmoda'ed in tfie re:develaF;ed struc_h~rE With approximately 2.7$0 sq. ft. or commercal area, the ex+stin<~ bu.ycac3 strxe ~s also t r,~t.>os«::.d for r~,locatior In adrlilion !o new ~~gmrnc~ir aI space; alpr~rt the ~rruet fron~s- rt~t~,4x:ing a pnvate narking tot Thal has long been a c.itY goal for n>devel~prn~nY- there will tae inherently more affordable commercial opportunities accessed oft the alley and mid-block passage. this is also something which has been considered t>y the City as a desirable experiment fo foster new start-up businesses that may be local serving in nature. Affordable alley accessed commercial space. Af the last Council hearings. interest was expressed regarding placing a portion of the commercial space in o subgrade IocaSion within the buildu7g. this concept has been carefully reviewed by the owners. who believe that it does not represent a feasible direction *ar a building which is otherwise providing substantial and expensive community benefits. Developing access to subgrade camrrierciat spaces. meeting all ADA requir<>menis and contextually fitting with the necessary subgrade provision of parking, would reyvire a yet another complete redesign of the already appraved building design. Moreover. it would further diminish the quality of the commercial opportunities, whereas the alley accessed <:ommercial is already somewhat experirnonial in nature and ec.onornie viability. Recent focus group meetings where keypad voting hook puce did affirm an interest in exploring locations that would be inherently more affordable for locally owned end local-serving businesses. However, these locational experiments included both alley-accessed and subgrade spaces, ar,d this building advances the Concept considerably by praviding cfley accessed commercial, Reduction in subgrade parking. li is important to emphasize that the subgrade cornme;cial concept has been Carefully considered, but simply will not work in the Context of a buildin<a which is already praviding a number of significant community benefits. It was noted that in discussing the subgrade commercial. Council appeared to feel that the two levels of parking, providing 47 parking spaces, might not be. essential to the building program. ?he second subgrade level of parking may not be in keeping with current thinking regarding traffic demand management and c;onsiructian impacts. Accordingly, the applicants are proposing to reduce the on-site parking by eliminating the second subgrade level altogether. 8iminaling the second sub- grade level would still allow for 23-24 parking spaces, fully providing 18 spaces far all residential units, with remaining spaces available to comrnerciol uses. Alihouc3h reducing the potential maket value of the project, eliminating excess parking would position the building in a better way for the reduction of private vehicle use and greater ; rtilization of the imrneciiately adjacent Spring Street transit route. A} the same fir»e. eliminating one sub-grade level of construction would considerably reduce the construction impact of the project, in keeping ,>, ~- .'cYor : ~ ~~q : ~ .~~ _. ,.i•y of .a>~~ ~~ 2l )anaary ZU(ifj Pa{;e 4 with commur.ily ccncem far amstrvction impacts generally. Ii would paficularly reduce the off-site material hauling associated wish the praject, A green building. The provision of substaniiai energy-efficiency benefits to be incarparated in the new structure has been quite thoroughly discussed. The c~~plrlicant reotfinrs the proj<~r_t commitment to substantially exceed current Cify energy codes and produce: a building that w;ll be a model of energy efficiency and green buildhtg techniques. Additional Affordable Housing offer. At thin same time, while noting that the protect exceeds COde requirements for the provision of affordable housing mitiyofion, the apphr ants ar? prepay ed !o makr~ on addtional offer of a cash-in- lietr payment for affordable housing. $pPG° ca'dy, ihr=, equivalent of an additional two-bedroom affordable housing unit, calculated by the Housing Guidelines as housing 225 employees, would be offered in ti7e faun of a payment of $A6'1. 294 for off-site affordable housing construction. This voluntary payment would be provided prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy far the building. The project meets all requirements of the land use code. Community Development staff has provided a through analysis of the proposed building, showing that it meets all requirements for subdivision os enumerated in the City of Aspen land use code. Contextually, this proposed binding meets all the requirements of the zoning code and has bean appraved by the Planning & Zoning Commission for commercial design review, The zoning code and commercial design review process represent the specific express'on of the Aspen Area Community Plan in a way that can be understood and evaluated by review bodies or;d potential develapers alike. $entin~~ernis such as °preserving small town character," while often cited as valuable, can mean quite different things to different people. Ii is incumbent on our land use codes to incorporate these sentiments and translate them iota specific parameters that can be judged imparfally in a development review process. We beSieve that the land use Cade more than adea.t.rafely does this and, moreover, that it is abundantly clear chat this proposed development meets all the parameters of the land ise codes. The specific question of the suitability of the building for subdivision info condominium units is further supported by the context of numerous condominium subdivisions on adjacent properties. In the attached memorandum to staff, we have shown that some eleven chatting properties consst of condominium subdivisions, in some cases containing over 100 units. ~~ ~~ ~ N~cty~.)i ~~n~t: 'y ` .,_rr~ ??.nnu i.:"'0;; Page .. We hope that tt~~e voluntary aeditional afters included with !hls letter will bring our hearing process to favorable closure, recognizing the many beneSitr being provided by this proposed new ad<9ition fo the com~nunily, and the suiiabi~ity of the project for wbdivssipn as required by the process before us. VEnfJ~ily yp~~s. j' fit.-- ; _ _._.. r Stan Cjlauson. AICP. ASLA STAN QP,USO~J ASSOCIATES, INC. Attachment iw . ~~ ~ 1' STAN CIAUSON ASSOCIATESiNc - landscape archileclure. planning. resort design t* - 4iz North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado Brbu L 97o/gzs-z3z3 f.97o/9zo~r6z8 - info®scaplanning.com wwwscaplanning.com Memo To: Jessica Garrow, City of Aspen from: Stan Clawson, AICP, ASLA Date: 22-Jan-08 Re: Condominiums surrounding 307 S. Spring Street (Wienerstube) Pursuant to your request for any additional information that the Applicant wants to be included in the packet for City Council in connection with the public hearing scheduled for Monday, 28 January 2008, we are providing a map and listing identifying other commercial, residential or mixed-use buildings in the Cl Zone District which have been subdivided and separated into separate condominium interests. This condominium information is from the City of Aspen GIS website and The Pitkin County Assessor's website. The Applicant is providing City Council this information as further evidence that the proposed subdivision of the 307 North Street building would be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the C1 Zone District, which include condominiumized buildings containing lodging, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi- family housing and home-occupation uses on the upper floors and retail and restaurant uses; service uses; office uses; art galleries; and recreational and academic uses on all floors. iw .: 1. Victorian Square Condominiums - 601 E. Hyman Ave. (7 units) 2. Chateau Aspen Condominiums - 630 E. Cooper Ave. (21 units) 3. Aspen Square Condominiums - 617 E. Cooper Ave. (107 units) 4. Bell Mountain Residences Condominiums- 700 E. Cooper Ave. (7 units) 5. Hannah Dustin Condominiums -300 S. Spring Si. (2 units) 6. Benedict Commons Condominiums - 715 E. Hyman Ave. (27 units) 7. Aspen Athletic Club Condominiums - 720 E. Hyman Ave. (23 units) 8. 700 East Hyman Condominiums - 700 E. Hyman Ave. (b units) 9. Brownstone Townhouse Condominiums - 208 S. Spring St. (2 units) 10. Edge of Ajax Condominiums - 715 E. Hopkins Ave. (5 units) 1 1. Silver City Townhomes Condominium - 727 E. Hopkins Ave. (2 units) `Map from City of Aspen GIS website, Condominium information from Pitkin County Assessor website • Page 2 Wienerstube Outdoor Seating t~~~X,od Hyman Avenue Facade WIENERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT PETITION The redevelopment of the Wienerstube site will provide a number of significant benefits including: • 12 new affordable housing units, offering housing for 27 working residents of Aspen • Anew home for the Wienerstube restaurant, ensuring the continuing presence of this local's favorite • Additional affordable commercial opportunities that will support a bike shop and new start-up retail • Revitalization of a commercial block that now has a private parking lot, tired buildings and only two commercial activities. We, the undersigned, support this revitalization project and urge the City Council to approve the application at the next public hearing on Monday, January 28th 2008: Name Address Telephone -SIIC ~. ~ . ~nt~ P~~i ~ ya ~-fig ~. G~~ Wienerstube Petition 5 re,,o~s J ~~ 6. ` 7. 1~~~.~ i~7~c~~ ~._/V~~c~~sha L~. 9. 10. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~~o ~~~Jll`~ ~ il~=S 3~~,~7 ~, i y 5,~~~v ~- ~:~ n G., is ~~ ~ r `~ -- gaS~~ao(~ ~~~-19~t C~ 15 ~ ~ ~~ ~.c~ ~1-~L, C.c~3`~`~ ~ 20 ,1'l~i~{ 21 t IZ~I~b~ Hyman Avenue Facade Wienerstube Outdoor Seating WIENERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT PETITION The redevelopment of the Wienerstube site will provide a number of significant benefits including: 12 new affordable housing units, offering housing for 27 working residents of Aspen • Anew home for the Wienerstube restaurant, ensuring the continuing presence of this local's favorite Additional affordable commercial opportunities that will support new start-up retail • Revitalization of a commercial block that now has a private parking lot, tired buildings and only two commercial activities. We, the undersigned, support this revitalization project and urge the City Council to approve the application at the next public hearing on Monday, January 28th 2008: ~T1.~ ~. ~~:~>.~ ~S~ S. ~ve,~,l~Qe g~~-,v~3 033 3. i ~I/~GiFtn~ L~/ESSl~ /l5 S ~~Qi.J6 9~S-~`~l l ~7 l o. 11. 12. 131 14. 15, 1 b. 17 18 19 20 21 24 ~ ~ ., ~G/ (CG L rY. O l C~ r ;~,,,~r +w- 0 ~ 1`' I~ Q ~~ , ~,~.~ ~ r ~.-. C ago - y~~ , .- ~y0 Z ~ ~ U~ 9ZS. ~~ ~ 6 7/d ~~7G~G~/~ N ~L~ ~~dQ~ `~ S ~ ~ 51 ~,~ ' '~ ~c`3~ Y23 -yL~`~7 Wienerstube Petition ~,~~ f ~y3~ s~ ~~~, ,i ~I;l~e~ yid s~ ~~~~n,,~#7 ~= f ~_'. =.-~-t .z, ~: "7 ~'< <v sz.rani ~ Y~ Cam, t Live ~r-~,4,( ;Gi/ 7. a. 9. 10 11 15 17 19 21 r ,~~~ _ `~ / / ~~ STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATESiNc landscape architecture. planning. resort design `.. . ~ ... qiz North Mill Stree[ Aspen, Colorado Si6u t. 97o/9z 5-z3z3 f. 97o/gzoa6z8 ~. info~scaplanning.com wwwscaplanning.com ,, ; ~' i 28 January 2008 Mayor and Members of the Aspen City Council c/o Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81 bl l Re: 633 Spring Street Subdivision Review-Examples of Similar Buildings in the Zone District and the Neighborhood Dear Mayor Ireland and Council Members: I am writing on behalf of our client 633 Spring Street, LLC, owners of the "Wienerstube" property, to provide additional information for the Aspen City Council review for condominium subdivision at the continued public hearing scheduled for 28 January 2008. There are numerous three-story and even taller structures within the C-1 Zone District and the adjacent MU District that set a context in which the proposed building at 633 Spring Street is entirely compatible. For Council reference, I have attached photographs of some of theses buildings, which include: 1. The Aspen Athletic Club, 720 E. Hyman (MU Zone District) three stories; 2. Benedict Commons, 715 East Hyman Avenue (MU Zone District) three stories; 3. Hannah Dustin Building, 300 South Spring Street (MU District) Note that this building is directly opposite the proposed Wienerstube project, and has recently had two three-story additions, one commercial and one residential, approved for the site); 4. Concept 600 Condominiums, 600 E. Main Sfreet, (C-1 Zone) three stories plus a partially subgrade fourth story; 5. 625 East Main Street, (C-1 Zone) recently approved project replacing the Stage III Cinema, three stories plus a fourth story roof deck access ; 6. Alpine Bank Building, 600 East Hopkins Avenue (C-1 Zone) three stories plus a partially subgrade fourth story; 7. Stewart Title Building, 620 East Hopkins Avenue (C-1 Zone) three stories; 8. Residential structure next to Stewart Title (C-1 Zone) three stories; 9. 605 East Main Street, (C-1 Zone) three stories, plus fourth story element. %/° . , ~ ~ ~ ~~ Mayor and Cify Council City of Aspen ,,\~, 28 January 2008 ~ ,~f ~ ' Page 2 . ~ ~, ~ : Ate', Additionally, but not shown in the attached photographs are the Aspen Square Hotel (C-1 ZoneJ, four stories; and the building directly across the alley from the Wienerstube, Chateau Aspen, 630 East Cooper (C-1 Zone), three stories. We are providing this information as further evidence of the compatibility of the proposed building with other buildings in the zone district and the neighborhood generally. Very truly yours, C Stan Clawson, AICP, ASLA STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Attachments Mixed Use 238417-1 C 1 Zone Main St. C 1 zone N~x~ r~ ~r~~-~ TILE l~ ~~ v,: 238417-1 C 1 Zone 238417-1 23$417-1 625 East Main Street Retail • office ~ Penthouse Residential eyed By; COI1l~?1et10]1 ~OOg ,q project By: ~ ` ~ <~,,,~rfrr,.s Ji, Broker ~_ ~ www.america-d~velopmE C 1 Zone Plans next door from Poss Architects 4 „,~5 ~GZn +3 i . .~, .. - .- 23 8417-1 Benedict Commons f Mixed Usel Aspen Athletic Club [Mixed Use] 238417-1 C 1 zone 600 E. Main St. Page 1 of 2 ~ ~ ((,, Rebecca Hodgson ~ I Z ~~ p From: Scott Coors [scottc@oii-usa.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 4:54 PM To: Rebecca Hodgson Subject: Wienerstube Development Hello Rebecca, I am writing this email on behalf of my mother, Phyllis Coors, an Aspen property owner of 45 years, and myself, W. Scott Coors, current owner of our family townhome in downtown Aspen at 727 East Hopkins. We heard just today from a neighbor about the proposal to build a full block development in the lot currently occupied by the Wienerstube, and that there is no height restriction on this lot. We have not had sufficient time to research the proposal so if we are in error, I apologize, but if this is the case we would like to voice our STRONG opposition to such a project based on the impacts it would have to the town and many of its longtime residents. Views of Aspen Mountain from our property as well as much of our neighborhood would be negatively impacted, significantly affecting the quality of life (not to mention value) in our home. Please help us by sharing this opinion in the hearing this evening. Respectfully, Scott Coors and Phyllis Coors 727 East Hopkins Scott Coors Chief Financial Officer Omnitech International, Inc scottc@oll-usa.com 303-463-2305 (w) 303-489-0832 (c) 303-420-1459 (f) 5050 Osage St, Suite 500 Denver, CO 80221 www.om nitech international. wm 1 /28/2008 t ~o' 0 ~ ~ b ~ ~. m o ^~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^' C -~ y A A ^* O O ~~ O O~ QQ A i M O ~, C ~' 0 B xo B ~ o ~ ~ ~ r c . C R r ~' d 7Q O C M p" ro b I, ~ 0 H a a n .r C `s A C '~' ~e 0 H A a A C A S ... C d '. .T A ... O A `S u. e~P C A C r. r a r. QQ 0 C K S A C K ... O O ,~-- ~~-~ w, a>srol~icALPOLrrics ~~~y~-wwu ~- ~ ~-~~J In the Aapm ~y Gema7 evalauUOn a~ffie projat pmpaaed fur we historic Punt office bmld'm~ bm'L ;a 1962 Ioca11Y lmorvn as the "wteaastuber' burldiog, wLm asloed why this bm"ld'mg has not hem sd~jecmd b ~ histuic ' review, rte were amsaed b find 11~ tLa Coy 1 Prexrvahon ~' Led ieomtiaaallY moved the I dace of consher~m at` Ibis 46 year old lasdmvt b a new `tffeAiae drle of aao>traefiod' year of 1956 of mmoy non- strudaeal dleratioas. Amea~g how 24 yenta of bivlory m this bm'Idmg simply vaoisbad public noticy any formal hisbtieal review a iolegity a®eaaaseo<aoaiaE by APC err (Sly Caaoeil. iJsog fhe `etyxtive' lose, many of the ProP~ ~Y as historic by S1afi; aed ^aaay tithe SOt now m Uea'Yd" fa historical review wen ado "eSee6vdy napytrurtpd" wi~m 1bR poet 29 years. L~ewisa as®a properties ehasdd not lie bisAoric or sobjectod b say revievr_ Obvioas)jy if Staff as d'somodoo7y raeale a °e6xtive data of camlradim" b avoid review of this bis0oric bead'mg, egaaYy, every property owner a also lie obis b pag~vdy geefe fhek never eve date of oomhoaim° aod'S~ivdy", thra property ba reviewed, . d b9 age a def as °iristoric" The lUks 6ml~g was Lame b Taos Haslet fasurile plc ~r beer the Poet 09'iee.s 'Ihe Aspen Pmt Office rrJoealed from Tam's ~ waa oa the gmmd floor of the FJa bad ®b this newly comherc0ed bur'Wrmg in 19tS2. The now Poet Office becsme the prune grtheriag spat for ale imtrra~oes, Aspeaites anti visitors aLty sod m iodispm~de pert of the early orb hslery ad' Aaprm. it was the hob and aoeaads for the orip~oal Aspen ooyaadthemo~iraportaet~iwlba~egfioragfo><siaA~peabe caHeetm$aodeoooect o _ 13m7t m 1962, the isteriar was oaematirally reaaodded b 19415 b Loose Saaao's anti Use abmb>Bdy m iategrd eLaoges b the straooaa afiAspm's historic Pbst aremetic remold was aeoommodele the &loe Shop anti ffie edy ski iodaeky's 1Le novv wdl-keown A~ / 13ava<im Wimersdebe restaurawt, and both was rrmoddedm a memo; so as rot aYrr arUre erigpst>~iral ialegrily ofUee bm7d"mg. The minor dnsges b the boe~ wale dace mteoliawaLLy as an'sadd on." lldoet ~potmdly, tbfre have hem IYO allmatiom b tba mein boat msaaoe, orthe origiwaf pab6c's view a4'the historic Post Office baikGag m Speiog Shat The oosmetie c6ngrs made b the aides ofthe bn7d'wg was onwrpleted a b not dirtaab diet de hhtorictl or atrwend ~7 of Use arig~d Pbat OfBx anti e>B ~y be daladred b es~ the hulark arigeily. Bocasaa of'the stns pr®Ay b the Nast Olboe, tits entire devebped pmportimaDy b matdt tlee ~ soaps sad ere of the as story hegbl of tLe historic Host 0f5oe bar7dio~ Obvromly, say rLaoge in weak Q 1rigLt b this 6arld'eg wadd mxmsDy deshvy the colas nd~gpborhood's historic dvarJr and Asp®wi faravQ kae ~ hs0eric gea66erfm ofEVli Y ha"Idmg io the ~tbodeoo~ Yet, wild tto public &aclamae, or any fornnl review, by eraalieg as arti6eid ~eSemiem date of eonshrsctim" b dis~lity parLwhr historic bs'{~g by age from say eamiattim b! l~C and tYy'~,amed, armor Hetorral Pr®waOan~S~'have devaly distorted ffie historic 19tr"2 dale of ooBakweUan b a yuvgQ yar of 19416, pL'miy far the benefit ~Ure developers. An obvious oawffid of ~ by ~Y ~8 e~ a newly orated goideCmy err a trever used loophole, the same Statl; who ere tyPiallY abmadly obemsive about Aapm's 6atory, ere flow ddkaatdy trying b drta®vent Aspen's true hivtoryR As deogaom nrivenrst betwcen the public and Aspen's dty gaveomeat eaadmes b gmAr, before say rakrdopmmt plan can be coaridered by ~ Comul kr tha historic bm'Idmg tSty Comal ~ deasmd : verifobia lisloricai review of Uvs PmPatY by bold HPC and tStiy Coooesl, wtlh the era review pmcesa tramp.mt and span b the public. I1; the irne age of fl~ historic bm'Idmg can be drsoged by stiff b aewte an "e.ffiedive rite of oomtrnctim" b evade the historical review awl y amatament aoarmg process, Uie aamc '~iva*' staoderds enrol be applied egm0y b all property Laing held haelsge by Shff if the hivtoric Peat Office (Wieaerambe bar7d'iap~ is rot ravievsed and treated the same as mY PAY historic ProP~Y over ~ y'~ old, 11tH every private homy Lotd. office a bm'idiag wAh any mina' mtpovemeats m the past err present cannot be subjecicd b hislorid revew, mr be desigasted 'ffivtoric" under the same City t.,otmia'1, HPC, Aspen Cdiaea Grotrq ProP~Y owners sad ooaoerned publiy PLEASE talcs notice. RevieeWStube Subdivision IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIII~I 53 ;500 01.3~~ RNICE K VOS CPUDILL PITK iN COUNTY CO R 41.00 D 0.00 RESOLUTION N0.28 (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR FREE-MARKET RESH)ENTIAL UNITS IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SUBDIVISION AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR MULTI-YEAR ALLOTMENTS FOR THE 307 S. SPRING STREET SUBDNISION, LOTS D-I, BLOCK 100, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel No. 2737-]82-25-003 Parcel No. 2737-182-25-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 633 Spring II, LLC, represented by Stan Clawson Associates, Inc, requesting approval of Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Reviews, Multi-yeaz Development Allotments, Condominiumization, and Subdivision to construct athree- story mixed use building on the properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties contain approximately 18,000 total square feet and aze located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director reviewed the application and recommended denial of the multi-year development allotments, finding that the current design and massing does not meet the standards for an exceptional project necessary to obtain multi-year development allotments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on September 5, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 28, Series of 2006, by a three to zero (3-0) vote, approving with conditions, a Commercial Design Review, a Growth Management Review for Mixed-Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Free-Mazket Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wienerstube Subdivision Page: 2 of s Exhibit C IIIIIIIIIIIIIII{IIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIII~~I~ 53z 500 el.a~~ RevleW JpNICE K VOS GpWILL 77 TK1N COUNTY CO R 41.00 0 0,00 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is -consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission fords that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a Commercial Design Review, a Growth Management Review for Mixed-Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Free-Market Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve Multi-Yeaz Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, subject to the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Subdivision/PUD Plat and Aereemeot The Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480 within 180 days of approval. Additionally, a final subdivision plat shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within I80 days of the final approval and shall include the following: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing: the proposed building footprint, easements, encroachment agreements and licenses (with the reception numbers) for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. Section 3: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z Resolution. b, The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees aze to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wie hers ube Subdivision IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIInIIIIIIIIN059 ;5000 t.3,1 Review e. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff' plan, prepazed 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- yeazstorm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. f. A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of this resolution. g. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. h. An excavation/stabilizationylan prepared by a licensed Engineer. i. Proof of energy efficiency requirement being placed on the property. Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The dimensional requirements approved for this development aze as follows: ~ , ~:~ alt ~' ~__ Minimum Lot Size 18,000 SF Minimum Lat Width 100 Feet Minimum Lot Atea 1 Unit per 1,000 SF of Per Dwellin Uni[ Lot Area Minimum Front Adjacent to Hyman- 0 Yard Setback Feet Adjacent to Spring St: 0 Feet Minimum Side Yard 0 Feet Setback Mini[num Rear Yard 0 Feet Setback Maximum Height 42 Feet Allowable External Total- 2.58:1 FAR Commercial- 1.2:1 FM Multi-famil - .6:1 Minimum Off-Street Total: 47 Spaces Parkin Pro sed On-site Open 10% (1,800 SF) ` Space/Pedestrian provided by paying '~ Ameni cash-in-Geu H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wienerstube Subdivision Exhibit C IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIII 53 7500 01.37E Review CRUD ILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 41.00 D 0.00 Section 5. Open Space/Pedestrian Ameniri The property is required to either provide open space satisfying the definition open space/pedestrian amenity equal to 10% of the property or pay cash-in-lieu thereof. If providing cash-in-lieu, cash-in-lieu shall be provided in full based on the calculation methodology set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.030, Pedestrian Amenity. Section 6: Construction Management A construction management plan shall be submitted with the building permit application that meets the requirements of the current "Components of a Construction Management Plan" handout that is available in the City of, Aspen Building Department. The construction management plan shall include at a minimum, a construction pazking plan, a construction staging and phasing plan, a construction worker transportation plan, a plan for accepting major construction-related deliveries with estimated delivery schedule, the designation of haul routes, and an agreement with the City to participate with other neighboring developments under construction to limit the impacts of construction. This agreement shall be prepared by the developer and accepted by the Community Development Director. As part of the construction management plan, the developer shall agree to require all dump trucks hauling to and from the site to cover their loads and meet the emission requirements of the Colorado Smoking Vehicle. Law. Any regulations regazding construction management that may be adopted by the City of Aspen prior to application for a building permit for this project shall be applicable. The construction management plan shall also include a fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed by the City Engineering Department that includes watering of disturbed azeas (including haul routes, where necessary), perimeter silt fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent right-of--ways, and a representation that the City has the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during construction. A temporary encroachment license is required for use of the City's right-of--way for construction purposes. The Applicant shall also provide phone contact information for on-site project management to address construction impacts to: The City of Aspen, the Victorian Squaze Condominiums, the owners of the Hannah Dustin Building, the Chateau Aspen Condominiums, and the owners of the Hunter Plaza Building. Section 7: Pre-Construction Meetine The Applicant shall conduct apre-construction meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior to submittal for a building permit application. This meeting shall include the general contractor, the architect producing the construction drawings, the Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department, and the Community Development Department's case planner. H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Exhibit C I f I 'I II I II 531500 Wienerstube Subdivision IIIIII IIII~1~IIIII IIII III 11927/2006 01:37F Review u II ITKIN COUNTY CO R ~1 .00 ~ 0.00 Section 8: Fire Mitieation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Mazshall. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. Section 9• Water Department Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standazds, with Title 25, and with the applicable standazds of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicant shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Each residential unit shall have an individual water meters. A single water service line penetration into the building shall be allowed. The Applicant shall abandon the existing water service line and excavate it prior to installation of a new water service line. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's roles and regulations. The Applicant shall fund the replacement of 300 feet the main sewer line located in the alley adjacent to the project. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The driveway entrance drains shall drain to drywells and elevator shaft drains shall drain through an oil and sand separator. One tap to the main sanitary line is allowed. No soil nails shall be allowed in the public right-of--way above ACSD main sewer lines. The Applicant shall enter into a shazed service line agreement. Glycol and snowmelt shall have containment azeas approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Service lines being abandoned shall be abandoned from the main sewer line and excavated. Section 11 • Electrical Department Requirements The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the subject property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by [he Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. If after the subdivision plat is recorded and in the event an easement is required, then the Community Development Director shall review and approve the easement on the condominium plat. Section 12: Ener¢y EfTiciency The development shall exceed the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) requirements for energy usage by 50%. An energy audit shall be conducted on the development at the property owner's expense after three (3) years of occupancy. The energy audit shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department. If the audit determines that the development does not exceed the H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wienerstube Subdivision v.9.: s er s Exhibit C II IIIIIIIII~IIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 53 7500 Ot.a~~ Review ILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 11.00 D 0.00 2006 IECC requirements for energy usage by 50% or more, then Ure building shall be upgraded to meet this requirement. Prior to the building's occupation, a the building shall be commissioned to determine the energy efficiency prior to use. Tlvs shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department and shall be conducted at the expense of the Applicant. The Applicant shall provide twelve (12) deed-restricted, two-bedroom affordable housing units, to fully mitigate for the 25.9 full time employees (FTEs) required to be mitigated for. The affordable housing units shall also contain 13,960 squaze feet of floor azea as was proposed in the application. Section 14: Affordable Housine The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on each of the twelve (12) affordable housing units in conjunction with filing a condominium plat for the property and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the affordable housing units. Six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 3 units and six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 4 units. All of the affordable housing units shall be "for sale" units and sold through the APCHA lottery process. A sepazate Homeowner's Association shall be established for the affordable housing units. The affordable housing homeowners' association dues shall be a percentage of the flee-mazket residential development's dues equal to the affordable housing's market value compazed to that of the free-mazket residential component's market value in the complex. Section 15: Laodscapint? The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping plan as part of the building permit application. This landscaping plan shall include a plan for right-of--way landscaping and irrigation. The plan shall also include a pazkway landscaping strip adjacent to all abutting public streets of at least five (5) feet in width. Appropriate street tree plantings aze required along all streets adjacent to the property and shall be spaced according to the recommendation of the City of Aspen Parks Department. Section 16: Sidewalk. Curb, and Gutter Existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter adjacent to the project shall be replaced and upgraded to meet the City Engineer's design requirements. The sidewalk locations shall be in substantially the same location as is depicted on the site plan in the subdivision application. If the adjacent sidewalks are to be snowmelted, the Applicant shall also snowmelt the curb and gutter adjacent to the property. Section 17: Park Development Impact Fees Park Development Impact Fees shall be assessed at the time of building permit issuance on both the new residential bedrooms and the commerciaVoffice space to be added to the subject properties pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wie ber tube Subdivision IINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIlIIlilllllile59 5~00at.3~t Review Fees. The Pazk Development Impact Fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 18: School Land Dedication Fees School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal at the time of building permit issuance pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, because subdivision approval is required for the development of the multi-family residential units per the definition of subdivision in the land use code. The school lands dedication fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 19: lmoact Fees All impact fees in effect at the time of building permit, as applicable, shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Section 20: Exterior Liehtinfl All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Dutdoor Lighting. Section 21: Wildlife Trash Containers The Applicant shall install awildlife-proof trash container that meets the requirements of the Environmental Health Department. Section 22: Food Service Facilities Food service plans meeting the requirements of the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department shall be submitted and approved prior to serving food and prior to obtaining a Colorado Food Service License for any of the commercial space that is to be used as restaurant space. An oil and grease interceptor approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District shall be installed in any space that is to be used as a restaurant. Section 23: Off-Street ParltinQ The Applicant shall provide forty-seven (47) sub-grade pazking spaces to be accessed from the alleyway. The affordable housing units shall each have one (1) dedicated pazking space in the below grade garage. The remaining spaces shall be for use by the free-mazket units, and the commereial/office space. At no time shall the pazking structure or spaces be condominiumized other than to delineate ownership of pazking spaces for the owners of the residential units and commercial/office space within the subject building. Section 24: Development Timine The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy on all of the affordable housing units prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on any other part of the building. Section 25: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Wienerstube Subdivision Peg.: a os a Exhibit C 'III~I~IIIIIIIII~~IIIIIIIII~IIIII~I~I 53 750e0s ei.a~v Review RUDILL PSTKIN COUNTY DO R 41.00 D 0.00 hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 26: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 27: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen by a'~ to ~_ (~-~ vote on this 5th day of September, 2006. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Attorney ATTEST: ~ackie Lothia ,Deputy City Cterk ~~,I/t-- RU~I t~ruyertVicE,' -ChGir H:\word\pz06\Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Exhibit D Wienersiube Subdivision Review Asaen Plannin¢ & ZoninE Commission MeetinH Minutes November 7.2006 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (09/19/06; 10/03, 10/17): WEINERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT Ruth Kruger opened the continued public hearing on the Weinerstube Redevelopment. It was made clear to the applicant that in order for a motion to be approved all three votes had to be affirmative. Stan Clauson stated that was understood and wanted to proceed. Jessica Garrow stated at the previous meeting the commission requested some changes to the application and requested staff to clarify how the land use code related to uses in the CC and C1 Zone Districts. Exhibit C outlined the permitted uses. Garrow said the commission asked for clarification regarding Growth Management for an exceptional project and amulti-year allotment; the review criteria were the same for multi-year allotments and an exceptional project (detailed on page 2 of the staff memo). Garrow explained that in any one year there were 18 free market allotments for the entire city; at no point can more than 6 allotments occur in the CC or C1 Zone District. Within the total 18 allotments 6 are allowed to be used for an exceptional project; an exceptional project goes through the criteria. Garrow said 5 of this year's allotments for the CC and C 1 Zone Districts were used by the Stage III project; the Weinerstube is requesting the 1 remaining allotment for this year and is requesting the rest of the allotments form the multi-year, which would draw from next year's allotments for the CC and C 1 Zone District. Kruger still disagreed with the staff interpretation; she asked where it shows that they can dip into the next year. Garrow replied it said that there were only 6 allotments in the CC and C 1 Zone District in a year regardless if it was exceptional so if they use those 6 allotments in that year then an exceptional project can come in but can not go in as an exceptional project in that zone district (part 400 page 112 d). Kruger said that she did not interpret this in that way. Garrow noted on page 119 it began with Planning and Zoning Commission review and d on page 126 was City Council review; part one of that was exceptional project or multi-year development allotment. Kruger said they would continue to disagree. Joyce Allgaier stated that 3 Subdivision Review it was the Community Development Director's interpretation. Stan Clauson stated they accepted the staff interpretation and have tried to meet the criteria for either the exceptional project or the multi-year allotment. Kruger asked what was the point of having an exceptional project if there were no extra allotments. Kruger said that was the way she understood the rule to be written; she did not know how it became diluted into this. Garrow said for regular projects there were a total of 12 allotments available. Clauson said that Stephen Kanipe was present to address the commission's requests regarding the energy component. Garrow noted that 50% was significant and how it would be enforced. Stephen Kanipe stated that this project proposed to exceed the energy code by 50%; that was a significant effort on the applicant's part and on the teams' part to include very technical state of the art designs that were measurable. Kanipe said that Burlingame was at 48% and the new building at the Meadows (Doerhoiser Conference Center) was at 52%, which was considered state of the art. Kanipe explained there were a group of designers, mechanical system and building envelope specialists and detailers and material suppliers that were able to do this. Kanipe stated that he would love to be part of that level of achievement. Kanipe said it will be more common to have a commitment to accomplish that energy efficiency. Clauson said that the other part of the Planning Commission's concern was it measurable. Kanipe responded that energy can be measured but what it discounts is occupant behavior, which was a matter of education. Garrow stated the parking increased to 47 spaces, most underground and staff supported the new parking scheme. The applicant still will provide cash-in-lieu for the pedestrian amenity and was pemutted in the code. Garrow noted the recessed portion has been brought up and staff supported the change but staff also felt that it was struggling for an azehitectural identity and would like to see a better transition between the more modem building on the corner and the more traditional buildings on Hyman. Staff also wanted the building broken up into the 30 and 60 foot module characteristic in that zone district. Stan Clauson said there was an addendum submitted on November 2"a with significant changes in response to Planning & Zoning. Clauson stated there were approximately 47 parking spaces, the current wall and structure has been moved and the square footage remains the same because of the ramping required for the parking from the alley. Clauson explained that the 30 and 60 foot modules were repeated throughout the building format. Andy Weisnowski utilized a model and drawings for the articulation of the building. Weisnowski said that the comer was more unique and addressed the residential neighborhood. John Rowland asked what the dark material in the back was going to be. Weisnowski replied it would 4 Exhibit D 4Nienerstube Subdivision Review Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes November 7, 2006 be a darker metal material and the whole upper level would be darker so the eye perceived it as a recessive nature. Steve Skadron asked if the spaces on the first level were retail spaces with storefront windows. Weisnowski replied that was exactly what it was. Rowland asked if the windows were double hung on the bank. Weisnowski replied that would become a question of the energy efficiency of the systems that were used. Clauson said that since this met the code and was not a PUD it would not be seen by P&Z again. Clauson said there would be planters and ash trees with pavers on the sidewalks; the outdoor dining area was covered by a roof, which would be a more flexible, useful and functional for the restaurant. Weisnowski said the covering done in a more permanent way and would be better than a more contrived way. Skadron asked if the space was conditioned for a restaurant. Kruger replied that restaurants attract people and the code used to say locally serving restaurants but it was not enforceable. Allgaier said that it was also un-interpretable. Skadron asked the uses allowed. Garrow replied that it was in Exhibit C and read the allowed uses. Clauson said that a change in use would be required; there were 6 retail locations and the Weinerstube would be the 7`h commercial location. Skadron asked if that meant 6 doors. Clauson replied they were showing 6 entries and the Weinerstube. Weisnowski said that the Weinerstube was best known for the breakfasts and this was a better side for the dining and outdoor dining. Skadron asked the current building's open space component. Clauson replied zero. Skadron asked how the parking would operate; was it paid parking; was it dedicated to the store operators and residents. Clauson replied that the code does not address any specific requirements for how the parking operates. Kruger said the 47 parking spots were off the street and underground. Skadron said if they would be used. Kruger stated they would be used; the spaces would be a benefit to the tenants and the amentias such as parking would attract tenants. Skadron asked why staff was not satisfied with the 30 and 60 foot modules. Garrow replied even though there was a portion of the building that responded to the next building and the side was 90 feet without any fenestration that would show a 60 and a 30 and did not feel that the transition was enough. Weisnowski said there were materials, height variations, the fenestration, windows and detailing were in this design to create the differentiations in the sections. Weisnowski said they went to great extents to create a building that had more bite sized pieces that were more consistent with the historic nature of town and this block alone had architecture that varied drastically in terms of styles. Clauson said this building meets all the stated commercial design standards in the land use code. 5 Exhibit D Wienerstube Subdivision Review Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meetin¢ Minutes November 7, 2006 Garrow said that staff felt this was an improvement from the previous design; they were happy with the store fronts brought out. Garrow said this was a 180 foot long lot and with the exception of a portion of the Weinerstube at the very front was all one height and staff felt this detracted from the more traditional 30 and 60 foot modules. Skadron asked what was the proposed area for the Weinerstube spot and what was the current Weinerstube. Weisnowski replied 3200 square feet give or take for the proposed and the current was about 3500 square feet. John Rowland asked if staff agreed that all the commercial design standards had been met. Garrow replied that was correct. Kruger said that the requirements for an exceptional project were for all projects and said that she did not know how the exceptional project came about. Kruger asked how the garage circulation went. Weisnowski utilized a map to show the one way alley from Spring Street with a ramping system going down to the garage and loop around and go down another level or come back up on the other ramp; there were two ramps (like a scissor) in opposite directions. Kruger asked what the problem was with the ramps previously. Weisnowski said the code no longer allows 16% and will only allow 12%; so the ramp was fairly deep and it was safe with the alley. Public Comments: Kevin Willson, current owner of the Weinerstube, asked where the Weinerstube would be located in the new building and the number of square feet. Clauson pointed out the location on the mode]. Weisnowski replied that there were about 3200 square feet. Rowland said that this proposed building was good and the energy code compliance was fantastic. Rowland said that he did not have a problem with the 30 and 60 foot modules. Kruger appreciated the applicant adding parking and bringing the retail up to the sidewalk and the restaurant being covered. Kruger said the affordable housing and parking did make it an exceptional project along with the green building. Skadron suggested a condition for the parking allocation of one space per unit for affordable housing units, available for tenants of the building and not condominiumizedand not sold. Clauson stated they would accept that condition of approval. Skadron said the review criteria for an exceptional project "i" promoted sustainability and he realized that the commission cannot dictate what goes into the 6 Exhibit D ~Nienerstube Subdivision Review Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes November 7, 2006 retail spots. Allgaier said the hard zoning would continue to apply to the commercial and office uses of the C1 Zone. Allgaier noted the project exceeded the affordable housing, which keeps people and brings people downtown. Allgaier said that the mixed use was a step in gaining social economic sustainability downtown. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve Resolution #28, Series of 2006 as amended with conditions, commercial design review, growth management exemption for a new mixed use development, growth management for free-market residential units within a mixed use project, growth management review for the development of affordable housing; and recommending City Council approve a subdivision and multi year growth management construction of a mixed use building with 18,000 square feet of commercial/office space, six free-market residential units and twelve affordable housing units. Second by John Rowland. Roll call vote.• Rowland, yes; Skadron, yes; Kruger, yes. APPROVED 3-0. RESOLUTION N0.20 (SERIES OF 2007) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE 307 S. SPRING STREET SUBDIVISION, LOTS D-I, BLOCK 100, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel No. 2737-182-25-003 Parcel No. 2737-182-25-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 633 Spring II, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc, requesting approval of Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Reviews, Multi-year Development Allotments, Condominiumization, and Subdivision to construct athree- story mixed use building on the properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties contain approximately 18,000 total square feet and are located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission passed Resolution 28, Series 2006 approving Commercial Design Review, 2006 Commercial Growth Management Allotments, twelve (12) 2006 Affordable Housing Growth Management Allotments, one (1) 2006 Free-Market Growth Management Allotment, and recommending City Counci] approve an "Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment" Growth Management Review for five (5) 2007 Free-Market Growth Management Allotments and a Subdivision Review on November 7, 2007; and, WHEREAS, on December 11`s, 2006 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 49, Series 2006, on First Reading by a four to zero (4-0) vote, approving with conditions the Multi-Yeaz Growth Management Review, Subdivision and Condominiumization of properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted public hearings on January 22"d, 2007, February 12`", 2007, and Febniary 26~', 2007, and took public comment on Ordinance No. 49, Series of 2006, and on February 26~', 2007 the Aspen City Council did not approve Ordinance No. 49, Series 2006, by a two to one (2 - 1) vote, approving with conditions Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of athree-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, during a regular City Council meeting on February 27`s, 2007, the Aspen City Counci] voted to reconsider the project on April 23rd, 2007 by a two (2) to one (1) vote; and, Exhibit E, Wienerstube Subdivision Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, on April 11`h, 2007 the Applicant amended their application to "renew" their growth management request to request five (5) Free-Market Residential Allotments under the Growth Management Review "Free-Market Residential Units within aMixed-Use Project" separately from the approvals received in Resolution 28, Series 2006; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director reviewed the amended application and recommended approval of the five (5) Free-Market Residential Growth Management Allotments, finding that application meets the standards for such a review; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 5, 2007, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 20, Series of 2007, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving with conditions, a Growth Management Review for five (5) Free- Mazket Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, for the development of a three- story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all 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 Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a Growth Management Review for five (5) Free-Market Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, subject to the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Resolution 28, Series 2006 All conditions of approval, with the exception of the Affordable Housing condition, listed in Resolution 28, Series 2006 shall remain in effect for this project. Section 3• Affordable Housine Conditions of Approval Exhibit E, Wienerstube Subdivision Page 2 of 5 During a public hearing on February 12`h, 2007 and February 26`h, 2007 with City Council, Affordable Housing unit mix was brought up as an issue and the City Council requested changing the Affordable Housing mix from the original P&Z approvals in Resolution 28, 2006. The Applicant agreed to the following condition, which is still in effect: The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on each of the twelve (12) affordable housing units in conjunction with filing a condominium plat for the property and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the affordable housing units. Three (3) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 2, four (4) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 3 units and five (5) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 4 units. The owner shall have the right to choose the first purchaser on three (3) of the units for the initial sale only. The households chosen shall be qualified through the Housing Office and shall meet all of the following criteria: a. Must have worked at least four years in Pitkin County prior to application, b. Must meet all aspects of the category specified for the unit to be purchased, c. Must meet minimum occupancy requirements, and d. Must show verified proof that at least one person in the household works for a business in the development at the time of the initial sale. All re-sales shall go through the Housing Office in accordance with the APCHA lottery process. All affordable housing units not subject to the right of first purchase as described above shall be "for sale" units and sold through the APCHA lottery process. A separate Homeowner's Association shall be established for the affordable housing units. The affordable housing homeowners' association dues shall be a percentage of the free-market residential development's dues equal to the affordable housing's market value compared to that of the free-market residential component's market value in the complex. If the Category 2 units are not sold within six months of Certificate of Occupancy, the units may be utilized as rental units. At any time said Category 2 units would be found to be out of compliance from the qualifications as specified in the Guidelines, the units shall be marketed for resale through the lottery process. Section 4: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z Resolution 20, Series 2007, and P&Z Resolution 28, Series 2006. a. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. b. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Exhibit E, Wienerstube Subdivision Page 3 of 5 c. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed civil engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5- year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of this resolution. £ A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. g. An excavation/stabilization plan prepared by a licensed Engineer. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, 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 6: 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 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen by a five to zero (5-0) vote on this 5th day of June, 200'7. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Exhibit E, Wienerstube Subdivision Page 4 of 5 City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Ruth Kruger, Chair Exhibit E, Wienerstube Subdivision Page 5 of 5 erstube Subdivision Review MINUTES- JUNE 5.2007 PUBLIC HEARING: WIENERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT GMOS Ruth Kruger opened the public hearing on the Wienerstube Redevelopment GMQS. The notice was provided. Jessica Garrow explained that this project was originally approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution #28, 2006 with allotments for lfree-market residential unit, commercial space, 12 affordable housing units and recommended to City Council to approve multi year for 5 free- marketresidential units and subdivision. Garrow said that Council requested a redesign and change in affordable unit categories. Garrow said the approval before Planning & Zoning was for 5 residential growth management allotments; these were the same allotments that were originally requested. Stan Clawson said that they felt that this was an exceptional project but City Council did not feel that this qualified for an exceptional project. Clawson said the affordable housing requirement was more than met. Clawson said this Exhi Subdivision Review NIINUTES- JUNE 5, 2007 redevelopment revitalized this area with retail spaces; the second floor spaces would be smaller. The residential units were set back. Andy Weinsowski, architect with Bill Poss, stated there were significant changes to the parking, which came straight in off the alley and there were 12 affordable housing units with 2 bedrooms facing the South on the 2"d and 3`d floors. Weinsowski utilized power point to go through the building and looking across the street toward this project. Weinsowski said that they have incorporated new roof articulation. David Guthrie asked if there were openings to the building on the west end. Weinsowski replied there were not because it bordered the Garfield Hecht building on that side. Guthrie asked how steep the parking lot ramp was. Weinsowski replied that it was 16% and they have followed the guidelines. Clauson said that moving the ramp helped relate to the Chateau Aspen. LJ Erspamer asked if the building was energy efficient. Clauson said the building. needs to show how it will be energy efficient at the time of building permit application and there would be an energy audit. Ruth Kruger asked the ceiling heights for the retail commercial, affordable housing units and free market residential units. Weinsowski responded the retail commercial ceiling heights were 12'6", affordable housing units were 8' and free market residential were 9'-14'. Kruger asked the height of the parking garage. Weinsowski replied 8'2" but it varies. Public Comments: 1. Janver Derrington said that his office was located across the street and he asked what the purpose of the projecting corner was. Weinsowski responded that comer had a transitional statement. 2. Jim Anasyst, attorney for 3 owners of Chateau Aspen, said that the reconfiguration of the parking was good and voiced concern for the 5 potential loading areas in the alley. Anasyst requested a letter of intent for the monitoring of parking. 3. Charles Macartney, managing agent for Chateau Aspen, stated that they were happy and impressed with the change in the design; he was supportive of the project. 3 Exhibit F Wienerstube Subdivision Review ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - MINUTES- JUNE 5.2007 4. Kevin Willson, Wienerstube, spoke about the change to the entrance of the restaurant. David Guthrie said that the City of Aspen was responsible for enforcement of parking in the alley. LJ Erspamer said that he would like to see the alley work; deliveries and snow issues were to be worked on. Brian Speck said that the project has come a long way. John Rowland said that he appreciated what they have done and there was a lot of movement in the building. Ruth Kruger stated the process benefited this project; the intent of the redesign was successful. Kruger said that there were delivery times and snow removal was done by the City. There was a representation made for both parties (applicant and Chateau Aspen) to work together to mitigate the parking in the alley. Erspamer said that he was not comfortable being involved in third party agreements with Chateau Aspen for delivery trucks to the Wienerstube. MOTION: David Guthrie moved to approve Resolution #20, series 2007, approving five (5) free-market Growth Management Allotments from the 2007 Growth Management Year for the Wienerstube redevelopment project with the criteria being met. John Rowland seconded. Roll call: Speck, yes; Erspamer, yes; Rowland, yes; Guthrie, yes; Kruger, yes. All in favor, APPROVED 5-D. Adjourned at 6:05 p.m. ` ~.~ ~sr~ Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 4