Loading...
05-17-10 Town Council Packets SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA MAY 17, 2010 PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE ITEMS COULD START EARLIER OR LATER THAN THE STATED TIME CALL TO ORDER AT 5:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON AGENDA ITEMS (5- minute time limit) Item No. 3: COUNCIL UPDATES Item No. 4: FINANCIAL UPDATE (Time: 45 Minutes) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review Financial updte and provide comments to staff. -Russ Forrest/Marianne Rakowski ...................Page 1 (TAB A) Item No. 5: SUMMARY OF LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Time: 90 Minutes) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and comment on he list of proposed Land Use Code Amendments. -Chris Conrad ...........................Page 7 (TAB B) Item No. 6: DISCUSSION SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS (Time: 60 Minutes) A MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO THE 2008 FINAL PUD FOR SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDIMINIUMS ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Hear the initial presentation of the proposal by the applicant. Review and consider applicant's proposed revisions to the previous approval in 2008. After evaluation, direct scheduling of an ordinance action for a subsequent meeting if desired. -Jim Wahlstrom ...........................Page 10 (TAB C) Item No. 7: FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. 9 SERIES OF 2010 TIMBERLINE SPA (Time: 60 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE TIMBERLINE S.P.A. BY THE TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC. TO PERMIT A NEW ATHLETIC CLUB FACILITY AND POOL AREA 05-17-10 TC Page 2 of 3 ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 --Chris Conrad ...........................Page 97 (TAB D) Item No. 8: FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO 12, SERIES OF 2010 EXTENSION OF MORITORIUM (Time: 15 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE TEMPORARY MORITUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ANY NEW LAND USE APPLICATION SEEKING DEVELOPMENT APPROCAL FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE WEST VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED AREA AND FARAWAY RANCH NORTH ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance 12, Series of 2010. --John Dresser Page 136 (TAB E) Item No. 9: FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. 11, SERIES OF 2010 ORDINANCE REVIEW (Time: 15 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE CONDUCTING AN ORDINANCE REVIEW AS PRESCRIBED BY THE HOME RULE CHARTER ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance No. 11, 2010. --John Dresser ...........................Page 140 (TAB F) Item No. 10: MANAGER'S REPORT (Time: 10 minutes) --Russell Forrest Page 143 (TAB G) Item No. 11: AGENDA FOR NEXT TOWN COUNCIL MEETING June 7, 2010 Page 146 (TAB H) Item No. 12: APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR: April 19, 2010 May 3, 2010 Page 148 (TAB 1) Item No. 13: COUNCIL COMMENTS/COMMITTEE REPORTS/CALENDARS Page 164 (TAB J) Item No. 14: ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Total time estimated for meeting: Approx 4 hours (excluding items 1-3 and 10 —14) ALL ITEMS AND TIMES ARE TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. PLEASE CALL THE 05 -17 -10 TC Page 3of3 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK AT 923 -3777 ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING FOR ANY AGENDA CHANGES. PLEASE JOIN TOWN COUNCIL FOR A SOCIAL AT TASTER'S AFTER TONIGHT'S MEETING. (If the Meeting ends before 9:00 p.m.) MEMORANDUM TO: Russ Forrest, Town Manager FROM: Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director DATE: May 6, 2010 SUBJECT: Financial Update for the General Fund and the RETT Fund 1. GENERAL FUND Below is a brief summary of changes anticipated for the 2010 budget: General Fund Revenues: Revenues are anticipated to be revised to $11,844,469, which is $363,165 down from budget. The largest decrease in revenues occurs in the Building Department lines of Building Permits, Plan Check Fees, Contractors Licenses and Electrical Permits. These lines were revised down by taking out Building 8, Building 6, Partial Building 7 and the Chapel. There are also a number of accounts that are decreased based on 2009 actual numbers for those accounts: Building Revenues ($203,351) reduced by Buildings 6,7 8 and the Chapel RTA Service Contract 22,214) reduction in fuel prices other line items Specific Ownership 62,697) based on '09 actual Trans /Parking Rev 30,000) decline in guest permits Special Bus Runs 22,500) no X game service /no Labor Day Monday Transfer in RETT 29,171) decrease in subsidy for Rec Ctr Pool /Rec Ctr membrsphip 35,000 due to new rate structure Rec Ctr classes /trainer 30,000 based on '09 actual Rodeo Commissions 10,000) —new lease agreement Other accounts 4� 8,232) most are based on '09 actual ($363,165) No adjustments are being made to sales tax revenues at this time since we are about even with 2009 actual, which is 5% higher than the 2010 budget. General Fund Expenditures: Operating capital expenditures are decreasing by $210,007 as compared to budget. The two largest amounts are in Health Insurance and Retirement. The Town budgeted for a 14% increase in Health insurance costs, but the renewal came in with a I% increase. The Retirement savings is due to the Town applying funds in its "forfeiture" account. The forfeiture account is built up by employees leaving the Town prior to their vesting dates those funds then become the property of the Town and we are using them to offset our current payments to the fund. Health Insurance Savings ($150,000) current estimate Retirement Savings ($114,000) current estimate Other Accounts 30,556 S. waste truck/Rec Ctr. cleaning /microfilm /veh costs /TransPayroll O.T. savings Furlough Days 23,437 Give back days to employees as a Thank -you $210,007 One -time Expenditures (reserved funds in 2009 for these expenditures) Consultant Comp Plan 45,000 to finish the Comp Plan Arts Board 20,000 to apply to Arts project 65,000 General Fund Balance: The Fund Balance in the 2010 revised budget is projected to increase by $436,736 to $5,858,524, which exceeds the Towns goal of having a Fund Balance of $5,000,000. The increase is made up by the following changes from the original budget: 2009 Year -end Carryover $654,894 2010 Revenue decrease ($363,165) 2010 Expenditure decrease $210,007 2010 One -time exp increase ($65,000 $436,736 General Fund Summary: When staff presented the 2009 Year -end report, staff had recommended holding on to the 2009 Year -end carryover to apply to 2010 if needed. Based on the above information, we will be using $218,158 of that carryover. Staff anticipates presenting another update to Council in July as we may have better indicators for the summer season and Building Department revenues. 2. RETT FUND Below is a brief summary of changes anticipated for the 2010 budget: RETT Fund Revenues: This is more of a good news /bad news scenario. The good news is that RETT revenues for resale's is being revised up to $1,000,000 based on y -t -d information. The bad news is that we recommend showing no revenues for Base Village for the Viceroy (a decrease of $526,500) and the FTA grant for Transportation buses has been reduced by $140,122. RETT Revenues $310,887 based on Y -t -d revenues FTA 5309 Grant ($140,122) based on current Federal appropriations Interest Income 12 500 based on current rates $158,265 Base Village Rev's ($526,500) too many unknowns at this time RETT Fund Expenditures: There are only minor changes in expenditures: Transfer out General Fund 29,171 Decrease in Rec Center subsidy Buses Equipment 1,843 Minor bus price adjustment $31,014 CIP Entryway ($10,000) Final expenses for plat, etc RETT Fund Balance: Although the total Fund Balance increases by $506,872, all of this increase is from the 2009 Year -end carryover and also funds the reserve for the bus purchases that are coming in 2011. The 2009 Year -end Carryover was $854,094 of which $820,317 is reserved for the buses. 2009 Year -end Carryover $854,094 2010 Revenue increase $158,265 2010 Expenditure (net) Dec 21,014 2010 Base Village revenue $526 500 $506,873 RETT Fund Summary: There are a couple of reserve accounts that decrease due the overall decrease in revenues. The first one is the Funds Available account, which decreases by $218,445 and the second one is the Capital Equipment Reserve (set aside for buses equipment), which decreases by $95,000 to $445,229. The Capital Equipment Reserve decreases because there is not enough revenues to pay for the buses that have already been ordered. If RETT resale revenues come in higher than anticipated or if Base Village property begins to sell in 2010, the Capital Equipment Reserve will be replenished with the $95,000. 3. OVERALL SUMMARY: Staff believes that the economic recovery is still slow and staff remains financially cautious with the current budget. Staff would like to update this review of Town funds for the July 6th Council meeting and provide further recommendations to the Council at that time. At this time staff is providing an update for Council and would welcome any comments for staff. S 8 88 o o O O rn ici N o ro ,d v a o 8 S n d cv n a a e N V ti v in o o S n v n o0 8S 88i p 000 M M m D o O� Q� N O S N O O N to O O t- d M ao V. S a: O 7 m o c LL'f 8 c� V c d m LQ M N In N C N 2 V} 1 64 V} Vf V} W Vi V} Vi V} W V� V} VT Vt V} V} 413 V} OO 8S 88 o s 000co o o o 0 0 o n 0 o 0 m 0 O M p� M O O O 1 O m m O O N In O In N w N M N O O W O V O ti M m O VI S O In V O n N m o m 2 m .M^.. a v O m n N v `r 8 m v cL ti N O M N In d 1 V} VT V} V} VF 0* U+ VT V} VT Vi V? 'n V} V} V} tlT V} V V} f V} V� VT Vi In N O O N O m d' o O O O O O O O N O O O O 1 O O O O O N M M h In O N m M Q N M o n .p m In O O O In N, M O N ti In O T O m m 0 v o o 0 n m o m rn o d. a m v o 0 0 o T M o0 S D\ M U to O In O m m In Q In N m N M In M 7 N P m M In v m Ilk N Q .p V} V} V) Vf V} V} Vf V} W VT V} V} V+ V} V} VT VJ V! V} V} V3 V3 VT V! V3 V} o 0 o O N m O O O In O O M O In M N O O co M M In J 0 m o M M .p O m O S M 8 N m Q M M O O° LLl N M M L O� N d O. m N S Q M m n N v" v V .Mn M M In N •r n N T V' .Nr In Q N M N In V} Vi VT Vf V} M VF'. V} V}; V3 V} V} V} V} V} V} V} V} d. W a w ul Q N `n a m w z z o z H H ix °S w t w O Lij L y U7 rn n U W N N m 3 w u W w O z Q e N F o N T N O d Oa, W> O w O c i W 4: d N z w D W w L G m d W v a 0 a N J S w x o, W N H W O> lL Ki O j o w o o g aOG N w Q l NZ W w� z m z F w Z Z Z r w a w v) w v j v w Z m w Z d Q N, O O Z T X T Q J o J z F H (A ix d d z u` d o o z Z W o' w U w J z w a LL a w a s a a u w w O m z o W J U v a rn w O a w X m z O Z m H i m z 0 N a O j j N w J H< d' W 0 lD p Q W 2 F+ z h z K O Q z Z a z a w w Ij W w c 3 h 3 z n Z Z of h H z Q-- a z O O a O O a 3 o o v co w v F v a H v w Z Z Z=_ Q V G m Q C z z z J J O W t w w 3 3 3 3 w w m Ia- f" U� Z m 0 0 v F 9 O 0 u W a O O o a'`o S S o o o v cn in p O O O N p O O N N O N O O In a0 N O M a0 O G It ao O .o 10 O G In O co .o 3 In to M N O a O\ N .-r N 0 AF} Ok 4pr 4pr N AF1 iq• cli 0 (11 cm Ln S -i OO O S v O O O S v v 0 GO co 0 S f N O v O N M O N a0 HI N to 10 O O HI Lc) O to O O N v O N N 10 N 41 ix M .-1 v M N Ix 4p, y iF} O 4Fr 4A, 4pr W iA• iF} tl} iR• W M O S 4Fk M go N i!} iFF p� O Ln M o, W 0 w T NO w rl ao o 10 m o a o iri ao M Q Z< a W- v N ix iFF a Apr 4 41- 4Fr ZW� g 8� o o s g N Q w N v CV m It 4 M N O p o v co O (L f— d N M O 00 eh O V) 0 N In M M O N 7 O O O N w m M D\ b u I� co g co Q� 3 W Q v A F N Q u� +w O iR H} iF} JA p O O� pgp O pp O O l O V O co d' O O o O ll IO '7 O V' ao M O O v M CO 0 Go N ••i 10 p O l�j cli 0 M .�i O1 c ti a% to o d to O O a0 In N Q 4F} AP, v 4A- iPr N Q) iR 4F} m C a W N U Z d a v a y a y 'd 7 v w v n o vi a O c a E d a V c w L o c F Q `a O V) i- E C v d 1 d d V o a n N a W tj a 2 w o w e d c Q T w ac a a 3 H Q a o a t d c c o w Q d x z o a a w a Z D V CC W F' f m co Q V H V rL MEMORANDUM TO: Snowmass Village Town Council FROM: Planning Department DATE: May 17, 2010 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Planner: Chris Conrad, Planning Director I. PURPOSE AND ACTIONS REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: On February 22, 2010, Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2010, was approved revising and restating certain portions of the Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 10, Actions and Implementation, summarized the actions and implementations intended to implement goals and policies found in the individual Comprehensive Plan chapters. Discussion on April 19 regarding the various action items within Chapter 10 identified two (2) high priority items and six (6) other items of importance for implementation. The high priority items were: 1. Chapter 7: Built Environment: "Modify development review criteria to require applicants to address carrying capacity at the time of development or land use submittal and require analysis of carrying capacity in staff review of the project." Carrying capacity analysis generally involves determining the impact of the development proposal upon: 1) existing road infrastructure considering vehicle trips and additional road degradation due to both passenger and construction vehicle use; 2) the ability of the Snowmass Water Sanitation District to provide the level of water and sewer service required by the development; 3) the ability of the Town Shuttles and RFTA to handle the anticipated ridership; 4) the ability of other Town departments, including traffic and animal control as well as police, to provide necessary services at the level currently enjoyed within the community. An analysis of the impacts of PUD development applications already occurs. Of course, it could probably be improved. Staff will evaluate the current Fiscal Impact Analysis and Transportation Impact Analysis provisions. We will work with the Water and Sanitation District within the framework of new legislation requirements regarding water capacity and amend the Land Use Code accordingly. The Transportation Department is investigating ways to develop a "Person Trips" model as outlined in Chapter 8 which will be incorporated as part of any Transportation Impact Analysis. The Fiscal Impact Analysis model needs to be updated and further refined. 2. Chapter 7: Built Environment: "Create standards to evaluate the pace and phasing of a development proposal with regard to construction impacts along with possible interruption of construction as it would affect the community as a whole." Every PUD development application identifies a construction management plan with build -out scenario and estimated timetable. As evidenced by the current "interruption of construction" experienced not only in Snowmass Village but virtually everywhere in the country, the affect is real. Staff will investigate methods to better address construction impacts as well as including financial security to provide for restoration of a development site should construction stall or cease. The other items of lesser importance were: 1. Chapter 7: Built Environment: Modify design review process to consider a physical or virtual model that encompasses a significant portion of the surrounding context. It will be a fairly simple matter to require additional computer modeling including more surrounding context. 2. Chapter 7: Built Environment: Create standards and means of measuring compliance for increased energy efficiency and green building practices. Planning staff will work with the Building Department to incorporate stronger energy standards within the Land Use Code. 3. Chapter 7: Built Environment: Reevaluate and update the Buildout Allocation Chart. The buildout allocations applied to parcels in 1998 were done so for the purpose of creating potential buildout trip generation data for the transportation traffic analysis included within that chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. It really does not reflect the results of any planning analysis to identify the appropriate carrying capacity or development potential of the parcel. A reconsideration of the allocations applied should occur but cannot be performed at this time at our current staffing or budgetary level. 4. Chapter 6: Environmental Resources: Prepare Land Use and Development Code amendments to add clarity and achieve consistency among Town policies related to preservation of the natural environment, sustainable development, and energy conservation. Energy conservation will be addressed as part of Item 2 above. Sustainable development will include involvement of the Sustainability Committee. Additional clarity to the current regulations would be helpful. 5. Chapter 6: Environmental Resources: Prepare Land Use and Development Code amendments to strengthen review standards concerning environmental impact analysis and the consideration of carrying capacities. Establishing environmental impact analysis and carrying capacity review standards will require further policy discussion to establish how rigorous the regulations should be. Further discussions will occur at the time implementation of this action item can occur. 6. Chapter 6: Environmental Resources: Prepare Land Use and Development Code amendments requiring new development to demonstrate no negative impact or mitigate any unavoidable impact upon scenic and natural resources within the Town and its influence areas. Staff can return with recommendations for implementing amendments but it will be necessary that the scenic and natural resources be specifically identified and "unavoidable impacts" defined. In addition to the above Comprehensive Plan implementation items from Chapter 10, it was staffs understanding that you would like us to implement the recommended policies of the housing chapter, including a workforce housing mitigation of 70% and amendments to the job generation rates. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 16A -5 -210 of the Municipal Code sets forth the means by which the Town Council may, from time to time, amend, supplement or repeal the text of the Land Use and Development Code. Section 16A- 5- 210(b) states that an amendment to the text may be initiated by resolution of the Town Council, by the Planning Commission, by the Planning Director, by any person who holds a recognized interest in land within the Town or by any citizen or business owner within the Town. Ill. NEXT STEPS: Staff would like to emphasize a desire to proceed with presenting amendments to the PUD and housing sections of the Land Use Code to the Planning Commission. It is felt that previous discussions with Town Council regarding the commercial zone districts indicated a desire that the purpose and uses listed should be reconsidered as well. A work program and schedule will be provided for discussion at the meeting. M1 MEMORANDUM TO: Snowmass Village Town Council FROM: Planning Department Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner REPRESENTATIVES: Paul J. Taddune, Attorney James Ohlson, The Neenan Company LLC SUBJECT: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Minor PUD Amendment DATE: May 17, 2010 meeting I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this initial Town Council meeting would be to: a) Hear a presentation by the Applicant regarding the changes to the project's scope, site layout, architecture, floor plans, access, parking, landscaping, drainage, retaining walls, and other details; b) Begin reviewing the core issues concerning the proposal pursuant to the staff and the Planning Commission's findings and recommendations (see the report below and Attachment 9); and c) Determine if the Development Agreement with the supplemental review procedures for future -phase Building M would be acceptable. See Attachment 1 for a Comparison Table showing the differences from the previous approval in 2008. Town Council should provide directives to Town staff to determine the findings or conditions to be placed in a subsequent ordinance. Staff finds that the core issues for discussion concerning the amendment include: The effects of the proposed amendment upon the Buildout criteria; The 10 -year vesting request, especially pertaining to future Building M; The phasing of the proposal and its impacts upon 30% slopes (see Attachment 2 sketch); Employee housing requirements and mitigation for future Building M; Traffic impacts; Parking changes; Architectural building elevations and floor plans; The proposed landscape plan replacement; Drainage issues (see the Town Engineer comments in Attachment 8); The design aesthetics of the proposed replacement retaining walls; The proposed Development Agreement for the vesting rights request including the `model' or arrangement for the future review and consideration of second phase Building M (see Attachment 6 and its Exhibit 3); Construction management; Parceling of future phase Building M; The outstanding review comments from referral agencies (see Attachment 8); and Does Town Council wish to schedule a site visit? (also reference the enclosed site photos from a previous staff site visit) 1 Page II. APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS: The initial application was submitted on November 23, 2009. The Planning Department has conducted completion reviews of the application together with a few meetings with the Applicant representatives during December 2009 and January 2010. The application was determined complete on January 28, 2010 and deemed ready for at least referral and review purposes, subject to the applicant obtaining three authorization consent letters from adjacent property owners for proposed off -site new or replacement drainage facilities (see Attachment 4). The application was referred on January 29, 2010 to the following Town departments and referral agencies: Planning Department staff, the Town Manager's Office, the Town Attorney, the Town Engineer, Transportation, Public Works, Solid Waste and Recycling, the Housing Department, the Building Department, Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District (SWFPD), and the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District (SWSD). As of the writing of this report, review comments were received from: The Planning Department, the Town Engineer, Transportation, and the SWFPD. See Attachment 8 for the referral agency review comments. Planning Commission reviewed the application on March 3 and 17, 2010 and acted upon Resolution No. 2, Series of 2010, on April 21, 2010 (see Attachment 9 for the specific PC findings and recommendations). The PC's findings and /or recommendations have been summarized in this report under the affected core issues. III. BACKGROUND: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums currently contains a mix of fifty -nine (59) 1, 2 and 3- bedroom units within twelve (12), 2 and 3 -story buildings. There are a total of sixty -two (62) existing on -site parking spaces (some not meeting Code standards): twenty -four (24) covered and thirty -eight (38) uncovered surface stalls. The project was platted in three (3) phases: Parcel A was recorded January 1974; Parcel B, April 1976; and Parcel C, April 1977. The entire site contains approximately 4.99 acres and was re -zoned from (SPA -1) Specially Planned Area to Multi Family ('MF via Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2008, together with an accompanying Final PUD approval via Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2008. IV. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal seeks to amend the previous Final PUD approval granted via Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2008, as generally described in the attached summary comparison table (see Attachment 1) and in more detail in the application notebook and drawings provided with this report. The amendment no longer proposes a decked parking structure, but does propose retaining the previously proposed snowmelting of the surface driveway and parking areas along with the replacement of the existing retaining wall system. No significant additional parking is proposed, unless Building M is constructed in the future. The transportation /emergency turnaround at end of the driveway on Upper Woodbridge Road is still proposed. 21Page The application also retains the exterior cosmetic changes for the existing condominiums (Buildings A -L). The number of free market units in new Building M, now proposed as a future phase, would be reduced from 4 to 3 free market units with no restricted housing units in that building. No interior changes are proposed this time in Building A, and the existing manager's unit that is planned to be retained in the interim, would be converted to a restricted unit if Building M is constructed in the future per the applicant's proposed development agreement. Building A would also retain the conference room and workout room with no conversion of these spaces to affordable units. V. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: The proposal is being processed as Minor PUD Amendment Application in accordance Section 16A -5 -390 of the Municipal Code together with the referenced Table 5 -3 Criteria for Classifying PUDs as Major or Minor, and Division 3 Planned Unit Development of the Municipal Code. Applicable Sections of the Municipal Code that apply to this application include: a. Section 16A- 5- 300(c)(4)c.b. Greater buildout b. Section 16A- 5- 300(c)(7)a. Height c. Section 16A- 4- 310(c) Reduction of Required Parking d. Section 16A- 4- 410(e)(2) Existing employee housing replacement e. Section 16A -5- 500(4) Condominiumization and time share Town Council approved Resolution No. 33, Series 2007, which previously granted waivers of the following Preliminary Plan requirements at the time: A) Section 16A- 5- 340(c)(2)g. Fiscal impact report; B) Section 16A- 5- 340(c)(2)p. Air quality analysis. Note: It was determined during the previous review that a Traffic Impact Report would not be necessary. The `burden of proof' is on the Applicant to demonstrate compliance with the Code criteria for the amendment application being proposed. The Applicant has attempted to do so pursuant to Tab 1 and its sub -tabs of their application notebook and other drawings or plans along with supporting documentation such as supplemental reports, studies and comparison analyses. Town Council must be satisfied that such review criteria have been met and state as such via findings in a subsequent ordinance. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: The core issues for discussion at the meeting are anticipated to include Effects upon the buildout criteria. There are 60 units currently on the site, including a manager's unit. For background purposes, the Comprehensive Plan earlier had a future buildout allocation for the site of 60 units. With the previous PUD review in 2008, and also per the Code, the total available and existing unit amounts were considered as the future buildout unit amount used for determining maximum buildout. In that case, the total unit equivalent for the existing dwellings was or is 33.8 UE and there were 0 future buildout units available per the allocation in the Comprehensive Plan at that time. 31 Page Therefore, the 60 actual units or 33.8 UE was the new maximum buildout at the time of the previous PUD approval of 2008. Building M was previously approved for 5 units in 2008, including an affordable unit, with a height of 39 feet. The three new free market units now proposed in future Building M, with a height of 33 feet, calculate to an additional 2.55 UE, which results in a total of 63 actual units for the site. Therefore, this amendment would result in 3 units over the previous future total of 60 units in the Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Chart, but 2 units lower than the 65 buildout units granted with the previous approval. Together, the existing and proposed unit equivalents would calculate to less than 65% of the maximum /future units shown in the Buildout Chart and the previous approval of 65 buildout units. Therefore, a super- majority vote on the buildout variation or modification thereof would not be required. Per the previous amendment approval via Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2008, Town Council granted a buildout variation for 65 actual units or 40.0 unit equivalents because of the provision of the following Community Purposes: a) the provision of restricted housing, b) encourages better design, and c) develops necessary public facilities. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) It was felt that the following community purposes were still be achieved with the amendment: (a) Provision of restricted housing, subject to Building M being constructed, (b) Encourage better design, and (c) Develop necessary public facilities. Staff Recommendation Town Council would need to be satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated, similarly as per the 2008 proposal, that appropriate Community Purposes have still been achieved with the current amendment proposal. The 10 -year vesting request, in particular for future phase Building M. Building M for 3 free market units, with no affordable units in lieu of the previously approved 5 units with an affordable dwelling unit, is now proposed as a future phase development. The applicant seeks a 10 -year vesting right, especially for this building. If the vesting period is agreeable, then the Town and applicant should execute a Development Agreement, as required by the Code, prior to any permits being issued on the development. It should be noted that the utility plans do not show stub outs for proposed future Building M. If Building M is truly proposed, it would appear that the utility stub outs should be installed at this time to avoid having to remove and re- construct the new snowmelted concrete driveway in the future. The State's typical vesting period is three years, which would likely be adequate for the proposed replacement retaining walls, utilities, driveway and parking areas on the site, as the applicant indicates that these facilities should be replaced soon. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) Accept the future phase new Building "M" containing a maximum of three, (3)- bedroom units and a minimum 4 1Pagc of nine (9) parking spaces pursuant to the development parameters outlined in the modified Final PUD Guide and draft Vested Rights Development Agreement for 10 years as proposed by the Applicant, provided that an acceptable review and approval process be defined to the satisfaction of the Town Council for a refined design of Building M in the future meeting the development parameters. See Exhibit 3 of the agreement for applicant's proposed procedure. Staff Recommendation The vesting request, if granted, would mean that if and when the permit for Building M is issued by 2020, the Town staff would rely on today's land use regulations to implement the mitigation of the future Building M construction. These regulations include the possible development onto 30% slopes, restricted housing requirements, and parking requirements. Per the Code, the 10 -year vesting request may be granted by Town Council at its sole discretion considering both the needs of the Town and the property owner and may include conditions. The phasing of the proposed project and impacts upon 30% slopes. The application did not specifically highlight or indicate how future Building M might impact 30% slopes, whether natural or man -made. The applicant would rather address the 30% slope criteria at the time Building M is anticipated to be constructed by submitting an amendment to the proposal at some time in the future. See attached sketch prepared by the Planning Department illustrating where the 30% slopes might occur around the proposed Building M placement at the current carport location (see Attachment 2). PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) The Planning Commission did not have any specific findings and recommendations to make concerning possible impacts of the future phase Building M construction. The applicant's development agreement makes reference to addressing any impacts upon natural hazards during a supplemental review process prior to the issuance of a permit for future Building M. It is possible that the existing 30% slopes behind the carport structure were manmade, but a geotechnical engineer would need to confirm if such is the case. Staff Recommendations There does appear to be a Municipal Code exception for the development on 30% slopes. Per Section 16A- 4- 50(d)(2), Lots subdivided prior to January 1, 1987 it states: "Development may be allowed on lots and within approved building envelopes (emphasis added) containing areas of s lopes greater than thirty percent (30 if the lot was subdivided prior to January 1, 1987. However, proposed future Building M was not a previously approved building envelope on the original plan, but was approved in recent Ordinance 08 -7 without action upon the effects of development on 30% slopes. Another exception is found in Code Section 16A- 4- 50(d)(3), Man -made slopes It states: 51Page "Development may be permitted on s lopes greater than 30 percent (30 that are the result of minor man -made cutting or filling of otherwise continuous natural slope." It is conceivable that all or portions of the grading around the existing carport structure, where future Building M is proposed, is man -made. However, a geotechnical engineer should verify this information, and staff believes it would be advantageous for the applicant to make these determinations at this time rather than relying on future decision makers' evaluation of the future building construction onto potential natural 30% slopes. This could appear to jeopardize or negate a possible approval of future Building M and whether it could be built at all. If such a scenario happens, then a new location for Building M may need to be considered. In summary, staff recommends that the applicant address the Code standards related to a development proposal onto steep 30% slopes to demonstrate compliance with the review criteria to the satisfaction of the Town Council prior to granting any approval for Building M, now or in the future. The applicant's proposed development agreement makes an attempt to address future impacts upon natural hazards prior to the issuance of a permit for the second phase Building M. Employee housing requirements and mitigation for future Building M. The application appears to have correctly calculated the employee housing requirement for future Building M based upon today's standards. The three additional units based on the `MF -1' definition, would generate 1.56 employees. With the current 45% mitigation rate, this would require 315 square feet of employee housing. If Building M is constructed in the future, the application proposes to convert the existing 2- bedroom manager's unit of 965 square feet in Building A into a restricted housing unit. The additional square footage over and above the mitigation requirement is proposed as a Community Purpose. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) As a prerequisite to the granting of the 10 -year vesting for future phase Building M, the current employee housing requirement of 315 square feet should be met within Building A (clubhouse) by the conversion of an existing, non -deed restricted, 2- bedroom, 965 square foot manager's unit to a restricted unit, as proposed by the Applicant pursuant to the attached Development Agreement and its referenced exhibits, or that a substitute be provided that is deemed satisfactory to the Town Council. The additional 650 square feet beyond that required for mitigation should be deemed a Community Purpose item. Staff Recommendation The modified draft deed restriction housing agreement as Exhibit 2 to the applicant's Development Agreement should be reviewed for acceptability to the satisfaction of the Town Council. However, the draft indicates 750 square feet for the converted unit versus the actual size of 950 or 965 square feet noted elsewhere in the application materials. Traffic impacts. Staff does not believe that the Town could require the applicant to evaluate the traffic impacts including the proposal from Snowmass Center's Single Family (Brush Creek Estates) development 61Page project because it was formally withdrawn last May 2009, and it would have a required a formal re- zoning anyway that was never consummated. Per Code, it appears that the traffic report in the previous application was waived or not addressed because the initial amendment application only proposed 5 free market units at the time (4 in Building M and the converted manager's unit in Building A). A traffic analysis could be waived if development proposes 5 or less units. Also per the Code, the trip generation rate for a multi family dwelling is 5.0 trips or a total of 15.0 trips for Building M as being amended. This would generate over 1.0 trip per hour during the daytime or perhaps around 2.0 to 4.0 trips during the peak hours. Please reference Attachment 3 for the recent traffic counts from 2004 and the total projections (based upon the Base Village Traffic Impact Analysis at its full buildout) and the effects at the intersection of Upper Woodbridge Road and Brush Creek Road. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized There was not significant discussion concerning traffic impacts at the Planning Commission meetings. It was apparently believed that such impacts might be negligible. Planning Commission recommends approval of the access road, Upper Woodbridge, as a 24 -foot wide two -way, traffic lane with a 70 -foot diameter turnaround on the upper parking lot area to provide adequate public transportation and emergency access. The roadway area, increasing from approximately 26,272 square feet in the previous approval in 2008 to 27,272 square feet with the amendment, would be snowmelted to improve vehicular access, safety and parking. An adequate snow storage area for any non snowmelted areas should be identified on the final building construction plans. Staff Recommendation Staff finds that the additional units proposed at Snowmass Mountain Condominiums, modified down from the approval in 2008, would likely have a negligible effect upon the traffic at this intersection and perhaps even along Upper Woodbridge Road. However, the applicant should address the impacts and mitigation that construction truck traffic might have in the area (see the `Construction Management' section below). Parking changes. The previous approval accepted the existing supply of 62 spaces for the 60 units (approximately 38 surface spaces, and 24 garage spaces below the units in Buildings B through G). The 62 existing spaces, which many do not meeting Code dimensional standards, appear to include the existing 6 carport spaces. With the amendment, the applicant would still retain the 62 space count. In the new plans, the parking arrangement would be modified slightly or arranged differently for the existing 60 units with approximately three more parking spaces together with the existing carport in the interim phase. Future Building M proposes three, 3- bedroom units. Per Code, this would require 1 space per bedroom or 9 parking spaces. Future Building M proposes 9 spaces on the lower level of the structure below or beside the units. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) Approve the modified arrangement of 65 off street parking spaces (approximately 30 covered and 71Page 35 surface) in the initial phase meeting the Municipal Code dimensional requirements, including the 6 existing carport spaces, because the proposal maintains and exceeds the existing supply of 62 spaces for 60 units. The proposed Parking Management Plan, to be modified from the 2008 approval to fit the current amendment, should be implemented to ensure the proper usage of the parking supply. Staff Recommendation Staff does not object to the slight increase from the existing number of parking spaces to be provided for the existing and proposed free market units. However, the proposed amendment overall results in 18 spaces less than the 2008 approval for 99 spaces that included a below -grade parking garage. Also, Town Code requires 1.5 spaces per bedroom for restricted housing units. If the 2- bedroom manager's unit is converted in the future, an additional parking space would be required. Staff recommends that the additional spot and assignments be provided and designated at this time for the existing manager's unit and the potential converted future restricted unit; otherwise it may be difficult later trying to accommodate an additional parking space on the site near the unit. Architectural Building Elevations Floor Plans: The proposal calls for the re- siding of the buildings. However, the application seeks the option of repainting the existing siding as well. Also, as the Building M elevations are sketchy, there might be discomfort in granting vested rights for 10 years. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) Approve the proposed exterior renovation in terms of the overall architectural character, building materials and construction details. Staff Recommendations Both options of either re- siding or re- painting the building should be noted on the proposed building elevations prior to submission of construction plans for permits to avoid confusion during the inspection process. The sketched building elevations for Building M should call out the exterior finishes and colors proposed to demonstrate whether they would match Buildings A L. There may be a portion of proposed Building M above the proposed maximum of 33 feet measured from existing grade, however, that standard is still below the 38 foot standard established by the rezoning of the property to `Multi Family' ('MF') via Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2008. There should be discussion as to whether the applicant should be required to submit an amendment to the Final PUD in the future, whether reviewed administratively or by the Planning Commission, in order to evaluate and refine the final design of Building M prior to issuance of a building permit for purposes of demonstrating compliance with any approvals, conditions and development parameters of the amendment application. The applicant's supplemental review process outlined in their proposed Development Agreement (see Exhibit 3 of Attachment 6) should be reviewed to the satisfaction of the Town Council prior to acceptance. The proposed landscape plan replacement. The application calls for the removal of 15 existing evergreen and 40 deciduous trees. A tree mitigation 81Pa e plan is required for the replacement of any trees that are 14" in caliper per the submission requirements of the Municipal Code, which Code also requires the preservation of existing vegetation and trees. Per Tab #10 in the application notebook, it states that the amended landscape plan will comply with the standards of Ordinance 08 -7. However, the amended landscape plans (e.g., interim for the replacement walls and future phase for area around Building M) show less in the way of plant material quantity and sizes when contrasted to the previously approved landscape plan referenced in Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2008. Below for evaluation purposes is a comparison table showing the differences of the plant material quantities and sizes from the original plan in 2008 to the proposed interim plan for the replacement walls to the final plan incorporating the Building M plant materials: Category Original Interim Final Planting Difference Planting Planting Plan with between Plan 2008 Plan 2010 Building M original and landscaping modified final plan Colorado Blue 8 5 7 -1 Spruce q uantity Quaking 69 34 45 -24 Aspen quantity Total tree 77 38 52 -25 quantity Total shrub 129 20 34 -95 q uantit y Colorado Blue 12'— 16' 2" caliper 2" caliper Likely lower Spruce sizes high than 12' in height Quaking 2.5" 4" 2" caliper 2" caliper 0.5 -2.5" Aspen sizes caliper calipers lower Shrub sizes 5 gallon 5 gallon 5 galLon No chap e This does not include the proposed removal or demolition of 15 existing coniferous trees and 40 deciduous trees on the site to make way for the replacement retaining walls and replacement drainage features. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) The applicant represented that the significant reduction in plant material quantities and sizes were proposed mainly because of: a) ownership benefits rather than as buffer treatment, b) plant material location constraints, c) lack of daylight for plants, d) proportion to scaled down redevelopment, e) plant material's close proximity to structures, f) certain trees to be preserved, and g) the applicant's plans to enhance the landscaping on the site overtime. See the attached PC resolution for future details in the findings. Overall PC recommends approval of the Interim Landscape Plan for the replacement retaining wall system and site together with the final Landscape Plan incorporating the plantings around future phase Building M. However, if the tall existing evergreen trees between Buildings A and H beside the pool are planned to be preserved as represented by the Applicant, 91Pa0e then such trees should be noted on the plans as being preserved. Further, if such trees should not survive the redevelopment activities, then they should each be replaced with 12 to 15 -foot tall coniferous trees. Additionally, the landscaping for the initial phase should be installed within one year after completion of the replacement retaining walls, and the landscaping for future phase Building M should be completed or within one year after issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the units and prior to Final issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the units. Staff Recommendations Staff questions why the applicant was comfortable with the original landscape plan under an even more ambitious proposal in 2008. The proposed replacement or interim landscape plan should: a) be considerably enhanced to meet what is currently on the site, b) propose plant material or numbers and sizes thereof that would equally substitute for the removed trees, and /or c) match the plan previously proposed and approved under Ordinance No. 7, Series 2008. Overall, staff recommends a similar quality landscape plan, for both phase 1 and phase 2 areas, representing the same quantity and sizes for an overall site as per the original landscape plan approval in 2008, because the amendment deleting the below -grade parking garage would not materially change the external visual impacts of the replacement retaining walls and Building M. Drainage Issues: The applicant submitted a letter dated March 10, 2010 from their geotechnical engineer. The letter generally describes the potential impacts of Building M upon steep slopes and the affects of drainage, mud and debris flow history or patterns in the area. However, due to the snow coverage, further investigation is needed to fully address all the concerns from the Town Engineer. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) Pursuant to Section 16A -4- 250, Planning Commission finds that the Town Engineer review comments (see Attachment 8) have not yet been fully satisfied. However, PC recommended approval of the Civil Infrastructure /Utility /Drainage Plans of which those necessary plans should be prepared in final form and subject to obtaining final approval from the Town Engineer in accordance with Section 16A -4 -230, Water supply, sewer disposal and 250, Storm drainage prior to commencement of construction. Staff Comments Staff recommended to the applicant earlier that they illustrate the potential amount of impact of the future phase Building M upon the existing grading and 30% slope areas. The applicant did not submit a drawing illustrating as such at this time. Be advised that the resolution of the drainage and Town Engineer comments in 2008 was conditional in the Town Council ordinance and upon compliance with the Code standards. However, a majority of the drainage issues, including fatal flaws, should be resolved prior to final approval. 101PaC, e For reference purposes, below are the Municipal Code standards regarding storm drainage: Sec. 16A4-250. Storm drainage. (a) General Standard. The integrity of existing and natural drainage patterns shall be preserved in order that the aggregate of future public and private development activities will not cause storm drainage and flood water patterns to exceed the capacity of natural or constructed drainage ways, will not subject other areas to increased potential for damage by flood erosion or sedimentation and will not pollute natural streams. New development shall provide for structures and /or detention facilities necessary to ensure that run -off characteristics of a site after development are no more disruptive to natural streams, land uses or drainage systems than are the run -off characteristics calculated for the site's natural state. In cases where storm runoff from an upstream source passes through the subdivision, the drainage plan shall provide adequate means for maintaining the historical drainage system. (b) Drainage Plan Required. A drainage plan shall be submitted as part of the development application, to include anticipated discharge volumes and general technique for conveying storm waters through the site. The drainage plan shall be prepared to meet the specifications of the Town Engineer, and shall be as approved by the Town Council. (c) Reference to Water Quality Standards. Applicants are also referred to Section 16A -4 -30, Brush Creek Impact Area, and Section 16A -4 -40, Floodplain and Wetland Areas, for additional standards that are applicable to managing runoff from development sites. (Ord. 4 -1998 §1; Ord. 7 -2000 §1) Note: In addressing subsection (c) above of the Code, the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums site appears to be just outside of the Brush Creek Impact Zone for the creek itself according to the `Environmentally Sensitivity' map in the Comprehensive Plan as reference in Code Section 16A -4 -30. However, the site is partially within the `Extremely Unstable Multi Family Lodging' Brush Creek Impact Zone 'bubble' area that influences or impacts the creek. In this case, the Town could require, in consultation with the appropriate disciplines, that the applicant prepare a Brush Creek Impact Report to evaluate the relevant hydrologic features, make a site specific determination of the location of riparian habitat and wetlands on the property, analyze how these areas contribute to water quality and wildlife habitat, and describe how the proposed development would comply with the Code's review standards. Such standards appear to apply to new development, and an analysis, if determined mandatory, is required to be prepared by a Natural Resource specialist. However, such determination per the Code should be made during a Sketch or Preliminary Plan review process. Since this is a Minor PUD Amendment process involving some redevelopment and a single new building, and proposed for modification from the 2008 approval, the Town could opt not to require a Brush Creek Impact Report. It is likely that the proposal would not significantly affect the riparian area or wildlife habitats within the Brush Creek Impact Zone. 111Page The design and aesthetics of the proposed replacement retaining walls. The application proposes replacement retaining walls, mainly along the east side of the parking and driveway next to Building A and Buildings H through L. The new walls would be composed of variegated split -face CMU (concrete masonry unit), which treatment appears urban for a mountain resort community. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) The Planning Commission did not offer any specific findings or recommendations concerning the design aesthetics of the replacement retaining wall system. There was some discussion about the retaining walls not being significantly visible from public areas (Melton Ranch trail or Brush Creek Road) since a majority of the structures are to be placed behind the existing buildings. Staff Recommendations Staff recommended that a stone clad or faux stone veneer treatment be considered for the replacement retaining walls. As an alternative, an enhanced landscape plan (especially year -round plant material) would help to buffer or screen the urban style wall treatment. Agreements. Development Agreement The applicant has submitted an update of a draft development agreement as required by Municipal Code for the requested 10 -year vesting period, but the agreement includes other provisions, such as the phased timing for infrastructure and landscaping, similar to a Subdivision Improvements Agreements (SIA), and a supplemental review process for future phase Building M. As would appear in an SIA, the development agreement does not appear address the security of the installation of new or replacement utilities, drainage system, landscaping, trails and the transportation /emergency turnaround. Since the infrastructure and landscaping changes are primarily intended to benefit the owners in the condominium complex versus the general public, with the exception of the transit turnaround, the timing for such installations should be addressed at minimum. Trail Easement Agreement The proposed development agreement also makes reference to an Exhibit 1 for a trails easement, similar to the one approved with the Final PUD in 2008. However, it should also include an exhibit illustrating where the trail easement is located considering this is a new application. Restricted Employee Housing Agreement The development agreement makes reference as an Exhibit 2 for a deed restriction for an affordable housing unit conversion if future -phase Building M is constructed. However, the square footage of 750 square feet for the unit is not consistent with the 950 or 965 square feet represented elsewhere in the application materials. PUD Guide It is recommended that staff finalize the current draft of the modified PUD Guide (see Attachment 5) for an exhibit to the subsequent ordinance regarding the proposed PUD Amendment, if accepted. However, the applicant has prepared earlier versions of the PUD Guide, and staff has been making its comments on the applicant's drafts. The 121Page PUD Guide made need future refinement prior to subsequent ordinance action. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) Planning Commission has considered the concept of supplemental application and administrative process for Building "M" as put forth by the applicant by way of the draft Development Agreement. Planning Commission believes it is the purview of the Town Council to negotiate such an agreement. The Planning Commission did not specifically or critically review the terms and conditions of the agreement. It was thought that, given the existence of the 2008 PUD amendment approval, the concept of supplemental application and administrative process as provided is acceptable, subject to Town Council's acceptance and approval of negotiated terms and conditions in the Development Agreement. Construction Management. With the proposed replacement of the retaining walls on the site together with the parking and driveway areas, there will like be impacts during the construction phase, such as truck traffic, material storage, noise, dust, drainage issues and transit access. PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) A phasing and construction management plan should be included as part of the building construction plans to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. Staff Recommendation Staff has requested in the review comments that the applicant prepare a summary of their construction management plan and explain how the impacts associated with it would be mitigated, unless Town Council would be satisfied that such information be provided for review and approval by staff prior to issuance of permits. This should include a proposal for an alternative route for the trail if it is affected by the construction of the replacement drainage facilities. Parceling of future phase Building M. Staff recently noticed that the site plan makes reference by small notation to a proposed Parcel M, apparently for the future phase Building M. The application text states: "The Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Association desire is to retain the notion of a future Building "M" on a discrete parcel allocated for such purposes as a means of providing collateral to finance the construction of the re- designed retaining structure." PC Findings /Recommendations (summarized) The PC did not specifically discuss any proposed parceling of the site for future phase Building M, such as a subdivision exemption or re -plat for example, as such an application would be required for review and consideration by the Town Council pursuant to the Municipal Code. Staff Comments /Recommendation There was no subdivision exemption or re -plat application and /or drawing included in the application materials. The applicant should more specifically explain the purpose or what is meant by "retaining the notion of a future Building `M' on a discrete parcel," whether this includes a future condominiumization of Building M, a future submittal of a subdivision exemption to create a temporary lot, a re- subdivision plat of the 131Paae zn property and /or some other method. Once such an application is formally submitted, it would require review and consideration by the Town Council via resolution action. VII. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Attachments 1. Comparison Table; 2. 30% slopes sketch prepared by the Planning Department illustrating where the steep slopes might occur around the proposed Building M location; 3. Recent traffic counts from 2004 and total projections from the Base Village Traffic Impact Analysis; 4. Signed consent letters from the three adjacent property owners affected by the proposed off -site drainage replacement facilities; 5. Updated, modified Final PUD Guide dated April 27, 2010 and received May 3, 2010; 6. Updated Development Agreement, with its reference exhibits: Exhibit 1 Trail Easement Agreement Exhibit 2 Deed Restriction Agreement for Affordable Housing Unit Exhibit 3 Procedure for Planning Director Supplemental Review 7. Parking Management Plan from the 2008 approval; 8. Outstanding review comments from Town Departments and outside referral agencies /districts; and 9. Signed Planning Commission Resolution No. 2, Series of 2010, with its referenced exhibits (Note: The exhibits were updated or attached as noted above to avoid duplication See Attachments 5 8). Separate Handouts Enclosures Minor PUD Amendment Application Notebook dated January 6, 2010 and received January 8, 2010 and updated January 26, 2010; and Photos from staff site visit on February 9, 2010, provided for reference and orientation purposes (see the inside front cover of application notebook) VIII. NEXT STEPS: Based upon the discussions, Planning Staff would prepare an Ordinance, as may be directed by the Town Council, which outlines the findings and conditions concerning the proposed Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Minor PUD Amendment application. The Town Council public hearing for this application has been scheduled and published in advance for the meeting on June 7, 2010. At that meeting, an ordinance could be reviewed, considered and acted upon at first reading, unless directed or scheduled otherwise or if more time is needed to review the core issues, outstanding review comments, or any other required follow up matters. 141Page ATTACHMENT 1— TC Mtg: May 17, 2010 Snowmass Condominiums 2009 PUD Amendment Executive Summary Comparison Analysis Category Previous approval via Current 2009 PUD Net change Ordinance 08 -7 Amendment proposal Total Units 60 existing; 60 existing; (Buildings A M) 65 free market units if 63 proposed if Bldg M -2 new free market Building M constructed; constructed; units; 3 deed restricted units (2 in 1 converted mgr's unit in Bldg converted Bldg A and 1 in Bldg A to restricted unit if Bldg M -2 restricted units M) constructed in future Building A re -do 1. Renovate existing mgr's 1. Retain manager's unit; -2 restricted units unit for free market sale; 2. No interior renovation in in the interim w/o 2. Conversion of conf rm initial phase; Bldg M; office into 3 -bed AHU; 3. Only exterior renovation; 3. Conversion of work out 4. If Bldg M constructed in -1 restricted unit if room to studio AHU future, then 2 -bd mgr's unit Bldg M constructed of 965 SF converted to and mgr's unit in restricted unit Bldg A converted to restricted unit New Building M 4 4 -bed units 3 free market units; -1 free market unit 1— 3 -bed employee unit 0 employee units -1 employee unit 10,297 SF 7,500 SF -2,797 SF Buildout 65 free market units or 63 free market units or -2 free market 40.0 U.E. 36.4 U.E. units (or -3.6 U.E.); (5 units over the 60 (3 units over the 60 (the 3 added units max /future units 1 unit max /future units 0 units equal 2.55 U.E. above the 39 U.E. max based above the 39 U.E. max based assuming Bldg M is on 65% of the 60 unit on 65% of the 60 unit constructed in the buildout) buildout) future) Parking layout 62 existing spaces; 62 existing spaces; 99 proposed total spaces 65 total spaces in interim w/o -34 spaces w/o (Previously 62 (36 surface 63 covered or Bldg M; Bldg M spots for 60 1.5 spaces per unit) (35 surface 30 covered or units; 1 space 1.08 space per unit) per unit) 71 total spaces if Bldg M -28 spaces if Bldg constructed in future (39 M constructed in surface 32 covered or 1.12 the future space per unit Building Renovation of existing Bldgs Same NA architecture A -L and new Bldg M Building Height 42' for Bldgs A -L; 42' for Bldgs A -L; 0 change on A -L; 39' for new Bldg M 33' for new Bldg M -6' for Bldg M NA Not applicable UE Unit Equivalents (/(i t/ f F rjr, -cr vw gq Fils J 8566.7 tf 1•C•i ATTACHMENT 2 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 f Bid E; Caney 835893 t .38 Rim E r 83 V 5, v R Oo AM 839 ti t t Pare- f v f ail/ 11 s V :,N v -8.38 d k i. "'Ft'u R" s &4 4 q A,°t .3{N4 '✓ice` T `1` cs "837 a .r �V' i .r✓'t W f 3 X2 1 M 8 Q 35 30% SLOPE SKETCH DRAWING Prepared by TOSV Planning Department. Derived from Applicants Existing Conditions Map June 16, 2008 8 Spr^v� j 1' 14 SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS P AMENDMENT _UD ATTACHMENT 3 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EXCERPTS FROM ANOTHER PROJECT SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT W <OC d n j n G� Q' o y° CL b Da Q L 29(35} 28 {43] o d ��4tr2S fi0(46} 48 {62) a r Rj tyg }8L 68) 8 47((60 45 {57) 110) 7(20} --j I t �y a D Cb q 1013D) 6 25 o ro f 16 5(439) 170(412 o m N 0 1� 7��J crsttsrn f1J' uc d V '�2 \e e a do o�� 19( 7(7) s�9� N �LO� s� k ni }8E �gq�g6 5£ a Horse Ranch Dr: T k o Creaks or SL n n m XXX X X X m o 0 X 25 z o m� ti It C d r-r m m (D a e CD _{.L O s O c '.j`Ln jry�i.,o,WeCh tV.�... CO —h N� s�,7G:sU?t'!. ca N 3 3 fn N v y v n i'' Q trf L 3 M X m�� X x Z E D 0 D C?_ t Co N w w v W C w 11 r r 1 v1 m c Co b to �j s0 e/ 1 c W O �e acov ✓Re y O N 35000) yarn r 1.� X 196 9v a 'A 6, C, �c rn y r rEeks m H rse Ranch Dr. Dr, n X rye. (4 Cl) CD Cf1 Q E CU x� ION W a X r C:x� X G3 ice- O r- m X X m Cri C' }C x Z C 'A C C 0 P C? m y7 D a cn fly m P' o ss 2 1a. CD rn d 0N� m p9p CP A �J t 2 2 f �7 J 0 Q �o cn w Lin O o 191 0 4 0a k w Horse Ranch Dr. 0r O !1T (b �tN R� C CAA 4 CAA 2 LA O TQ �J u o ttO 0. '7'1 c�n' 4flL19pQ5�,ti m 199�41p94� 1pps� N lfl CD m cD :5 -1 CO 1��� 0 ill o 1p kv ATTACHMENT 4 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 CONSENT/ AUTHORIZATION LETTERS FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY OFF -SITE DRAINAGE FACILITY REPLACEMENTS SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT RECEYVED FEB 2 6 2DID munity Oevelopmel t This letter is to grant approval for the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums HOA to proceed with the installation of an interceptor drain. The interceptor drain will be located uphill of the complex and partially on TOSV open space, as generally depicted as Figure 1, CTL Thompson letter dated January 21, 2010. It is our understanding that the new line will be a permanent facility and will run seasonally during normal spring to summer groundwater runoff times. This line is acceptable to the town engineer Dean Gordon. Upon completion of the work, a 20' drainage /utility /maintenance easement will be granted subject to conditions to be determined as part of a License Agreement or similar document. Approval is also granted to the Snowmass Mountain Condominium HOA for installation of storm sewer facilities within the right -of -way of Upper Woodbridge Road as generally depicted on Sheet C1.0 of the PUD Amendment drawings dated November 23, 2009. Upon completion of the work, a License Agreement or similar document will be executed defining future conditions of maintenance, operation, etc. of the facilities. Russell Forrest v Town Manager BRANDT FEIGENBAUM, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW RECEIVET CHARLES T BRANDT (1939-2001) MIDLAND MALL FEB 2 6 2010 132 MIDLAND AVENUE, SUITE 4 GARRET S. BRANDT BASALT, COLOR-ADO 81621 MICHAEL FEIGENBAUM TELEPHONE: 970.925.5196 LUCAS PECK FAx: 970.925.4559 www.brandt-law.com PETER P. DEL ANY, PARALEGAL LUCAS PECK Amy TARRANT, LEGAL ASSISTANT 1peck@brandt-law.com February 26, 2010 By Email (jwahlstromgtosv.com) Mr. Jim Walilstroin Planning Department Town of Snowmass Village Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 Re: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums "SMC") Development Application for the "Interceptor Drain Installation" Dear Jim: I am writing in response to your email of February 4, 2010. You noted that the Woodbridge Board's February 3, 2010 consent letter was insufficient to allow SMC's application to proceed, particularly because it was based upon the wrong drawing. You supplied Drawing C1.0, prepared by Colorado Civil Consultants and dated November 23, 2009, with a heavy ink cloud drawn around the area of interest, which also defines the limits of this letter. Woodbridge does not own the Wildcat property and therefore does not comment on that portion of the project. The Board has discussed SMC's application to the extent of the CLO Drawing and hereby gives its preliminary consent to and support of SMC's drain installation plan as a necessary step in stabilizing the SMC project. The Board's consent is conditional upon the Board and SMC reaching a satisfactory indemnity and maintenance agreement with regard to the drainage plan to the extent the drain is within, affects, or could potentially affect Woodbridge property. In addition, the Board's consent is subject to and conditioned upon the right and ability of the Board to approve any final approval by the Town before any work is commenced on Woodbridge property. SI\4C's counsel is also researching title issues to determine property ownership and the location of any pre-existing easements related to the drainage plan and benefiting SMC, and it is unclear at this point whether an easement for SMC's drainage work and maintenance will be necessary. If necessary, a satisfactory easement would obviously also be a pre-requisite to SMC's drainage project, although this is perhaps outside the scope of the approval process. In supporting the project, please note the Board has not been asked to review SMC's application and offers its support based only on and to the extent of the accuracy of the attached document from Colorado Civil, and expects to later discuss and review details with SMC. The Board assumes the Town will consider the impacts of the additional water from SMC's drain on the storm water collection system, particularly the Jim Wahlstrom 2/26/2010 Page 2 of 2 ditch running through Woodbridge property and into which water may be directed. SMC has represented that there will not be significant additional water added to the ditch and that the capacity and integrity of the ditch is adequate. In addition, SMC has represented that the Town's approval is an endorsement of the sound engineering of the project, and the Board has relied on this representation as well. With this approval we expect and intend that SMC will be able to proceed in its planning process with the Town. Do not hesitate to contact me directly should you have any additional questions or requests. Sincerely, Lucas Peck for BR-1NDT FEIGENBAUM, P.C. cc: Woodbridge Board Hank Hayes y it Vr, Paul Taddune� FEB 2 6 2010 tAtat. VviItds, °41ag 2 s sid 51ed f� 4 qg T sr (EexnF -6q E3 ?3T low }F st_i: Hi 2 a k 4 a R:. •Ir 1 I A; -J at• £A i �dY •1r f i €9 lit F §F Y I, x� .J �rE 1 I II1111� Et �g i I I I I I 3 i SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS F 5; WAIL RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT56 SNOWMASS VUAGE, CO 15 y$Sr y SEASONS Seasons Four Condominiums 35 Lower Woodbridge Road FOUR Snowmass Village, CO 970 -923 -2522 February 25, 2010 Town of Snowmass Village Planning Department, The Seasons 4 Board has considered the plans by the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc. "Snowmass Mountain in connection with its renovation project to install drainage improvements that are partly on Seasons 4 common area. I understand that a meeting with the Snowmass Planning Commission to consider Snowmass Mountain's application is scheduled for this Wednesday, March 3, 2010. Seasons 4 hereby gives its preliminary consent to allowing the Snowmass Mountain application to proceed through the planning process to the extent that work will be performed on the Seasons 4 common area. This preliminary consent is subject to and conditioned upon the right and ability of Seasons 4 to approve and concur in any final approval that may be granted by the Town before any work is commenced on Seasons 4 property, including such assurances by Snowmass Mountain as Seasons 4 may reasonably require. Consent is also conditioned upon Carroll Ditch Owner approval, Season's 4 insurance company lack of issues, and submission to Seasons 4 of a detailed scope of work to be done on Seasons 4 property. A R Pete Hershberger President FEB 2 6 2010 Seasons 4 Condominium Owners Association Onawniass VWage C-'OM nunity Develcpmeni ATTACHMENT 5 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 MODIFIED FINAL PUD GUIDE AND ITS DRAWING EXHIBITS SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT 1 Snowmass Mountain Condominium Renovation and Minor 2 PUD Amendment 3 Med-if4ed -Final Planned Unit Development Guide MAY 0 4 `y €s rib r t 5 This Modified Final PUD Guide "PUD Guide summarizes the final developers par, t €`7 6 land uses, densities, zone district limitations and development regulations for the Expansion and 7 Exterior Renovation of Snowmass Mountain Condominium Project, Snowmass Village, as 8 I approved in Snowmass Village Ordinance No. Series of 2010 (the "Approval 4--- 9 Ordinance Where this PUD Guide does not address a specific development standard or 10 requirement of the Code, the provisions of the Municipal Code shall apply. To the extent 11 provisions of this PUD Guide conflict with or are in any way inconsistent with the Municipal 12 Code, the provisions of this PUD Guide shall apply. References in this PUD Guide to the 13 Municipal Code mean provisions as amended or renumbered from time to time except that if the 14 applicable provision has been amended to be more restrictive or burdensome on the 15 development or use of the Project or a portion thereof than the provision in effect in the version 16 of the Code in effect in 2010, shall apply. 17 18 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS 19 20 1. Zoning. The underlying zoning of the Snowmass Mountain Condominium parcel 21 (Parcels A, B and C, Snowmass Mountain Condominiums) "the Property at the time of the 22 I previous application was "Specially Planned Area (SPA), which has been rezoned to Multifamily 23 (MF) as part of the previous approval Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2008. The property remains 24 zoned `MF' with the Minor PUD Amedment. 25 26 2. Condominium. The original Condominium Declaration for Snowmass Mountain 27 Condominiums was recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado 28 on January 14, 1974, in Book 283 at Page 341 and the initial Condominium Map was recorded 29 on January 15, 1974 in Plat Book 4 at Page 457. The initial Condominium Map reflected the 30 construction of twenty two (22) individual airspace units in five (5) buildings, designated as "A 31 "B "C "D and "E located on land shown on the Condominium Map as Parcel "A A 32 Supplemental Condominium Declaration for Snowmass Mountain Condominiums 33 "Supplemental Declaration was recorded on April 2, 1976 in Book 310 at Page 249, together 34 with a Supplemental Condominium Map recorded in Plat Book 4 at Page 593. The 35 Supplemental Condominium Map reflects the construction of twenty (20) additional airspace 36 units in four (4) buildings, designated as "F "G "H and "I and are located on land shown on 37 the initial Condominium Map and Supplemental Condominium Map as Parcel B. On April 13, 38 1977, a Second Supplement to Condominium Declaration for Snowmass Condominiums was 39 recorded in Book 327 at Page 283 together with a Second Supplemental Condominium Map 40 that was recorded April 11, 1977, in Plat Book 5 at Page 79. The Second Supplemental 41 Condominium Map reflects the construction of eighteen (18) additional individual airspace units 42 in three (3) buildings, designated as "J "K" and "L and are located on land shown on the PUD Guide /Development Summary Table 43 Condominium Map as Parcel C. The Amended Preliminary Condominium Map is attached as 44 Exhibit B and will be recorded in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and a final 45 Amended Condominium Map will be prepared and recorded when construction is completed. 46 47 3. Permitted Uses: Permitted Uses are those uses previously permitted on the 48 Property and construction use, materially as described in the plans and 49 specifications referenced under Development Parameters, below, submitted by 50 the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association and the Owners of units in 51 Snowmass Mountain Condominiums (collectively "Snowmass Mountain HOX) to 52 the Town of Snowmass Village. 53 54 4. Residential Uses: 55 56 a) Actual Units. The Project may contain 'a maximum of sixty three (63) Units, 57 which includes the existing Managers Unit in Building A. 58 b) Restricted Housing. The Project will contain one (1) Restricted Housing dwelling 59 unit, or substitute as to be agreed or approved by the Town, only if and when the 60 Snowmass Mountain HOA should submit an application building permit of 61 Building M. 62 63 5. Phasing: The project will consist of two `phases. 64 65 a) Phase one will address the replacement of the failing retaining wall, exterior 66 renovation, interceptor drain instillation and new drive /parking surface with 67 snowmelt together with replacement landscaping. 68 I b) The second phase of the project will be to construct a new Sbuilding with new 69 landscaping around the building. The new Building M will only be constructed in 70 the event that the members of Snowmass Mountain HOA determine to proceed 71 with this phase of the approval, subject to the companion Vested Rights 72 Development Agreement. 73 74 DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS FOR PARCEL AND THE BUILDINGS 75 76 The Amended Preliminary Condominium Map and the Development Summary Table attached 77 as Exhibits A and B respectively show the unit equivalency and other dimensional changes in 78 the development Parameters which have been approved. 79 80 Building Parameters Buildings on the Property will be built in substantial conformance 81 with the plans and specifications for the Project described in the Application for an Amendment 82 of Minor PUD, submitted to the Town, which shall be referred to herein as the "PUD 83 Amendment Application" which representations are incorporated herein. 84 Page 2 of 6 PUD Guide /Development Summary Table 85 Building Height The maximum permitted height of the existing buildings at Snowmass 86 Mountain Condominiums is f^, -+y eRe feet (4!') f buildings A through L shall not be 87 increased The maximum permitted height of Building M shall be: thirty five (35) from the worst 88 case finished grade according to the building elevation drawings submitted to the Town of 89 Snowmass Village during the approval process. 90 91 Setbacks The setbacks on the Property shall be as depicted on the Existing 92 Conditions Map located in Enclosure 9 of the PUD Amendment Application or the Existing 93 Conditions Map for Buildings A through L. 94 95 Open Space Open Space within the Project shall be as set forth as stated in the PUD 96 Amendment Application. See enclosure 12 as part of the PUD Amendment Application. 97 98 Landscape Plan Upon completion of phase one of the project the property and open 99 spaces on the Property shall be developed and landscaped in substantial conformance with the 100 Interim Landscape Plan on file in the office of the Town's Planning Department. If and when 101 Building M is constructed Snowmass Mountain Condominiums will implement the final 102 landscape plan. See enclosure 16 as part of the PUD Amendment Application, also herein 103 attached. 104 105 I Parking Parking on the Rproperty during the initial phase is as depicted on the PUD 106 Amendment Application and, will contain not less than sixty five (65), spaces detailed in 107 Enclosure 12 of the PUD Amendment Application. If and when Building M is constructed on site 108 there will no less than 71 parking spaces. 109 110 111 List of Exhibits by Reference 112 In the PUD Guide for the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Minor PUD 113 Amendment 114 115 The following materials previously submitted to the Town shall be considered by Town Staff 116 when evaluating the Project's compliance with the terms of this PUD Guide. In the event of 117 conflict between any of the provisions of the materials described below, the provisions of the 118 later- prepared materials shall control. 119 120 A. All documents attached to the Final Approval Resolution 121 122 I B. Design Drawings (see attached) Architectural S+te Plan She A7 n1)� 123 Architectural Plan Sheets Date Preparer Name Snowmass Mountain Architectural Site Plan 1/22/2010 The Neenan Company Condominium Sheet A1.02See Ene Page 3 of 6 PUD Guide /Development Summary Table of PU n�,,.,n,�, -„on+ OR file With TeWR OR file ev z 124 125 126 C. Material and color information: 127 Architectural Plan Sheets Date Preparer Name Snowmass Mountain See Enclosure 17 of PUD 1/22/2010 The Neenan Company Condominium Amendment Application 128 129 D. Landscape Plans (see attachments): 130 Landscape Plan Name Sheets Date Preparer Snowmass Mountain Condominium 1-1.01 Interim 1/06/2010 The Neenan Company Landscape plan Snowmass Mountain Condominium 1-1.01 1/06/2010 The Neenan Company 131 132 E. Civil Engineering Reports: 133 Civil Plan Name Sheets Date Preparer Snowmass Mountain See Enclosure 14 of PUD 1/22/2010 Colorado Civil Condominium Amendment Application. Full Consultants size drawings on file with Town 134 135 136 F. Building M Elevations and Floor Plans (see attachments): 137 Building M Sheets Date Preparer Snowmass Mountain See attachments 1/22/2010 The Neenan Company Condominium 138 139 140 141 SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINUMS 142 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY TABLE 143 144 OVERALL SITE COVERAGE CONDITIONS Site Area 217,757.0 SF Open Space 185,0J4186,942 SF Buildings A— L Coverage with 30,815.0 SF Carport and pool ��o,�ti; (60 1� +pits I, �ecnnenen I I ,i+ Ci �uileing -A) Page 4 of 6 PUD Guide /Development Summary Table Road Parking 27,272.0 SF 145 146 OVERALL FLOOR AREA ON THE SITE 147 148 Condominiums (Buildings A through L): S-F Condominiums (Buildings A thru L: 67,222.0 SF (60 Units, includes Managers Unit in Building A) Building M Units 8000.0 SF (3 Units) 149 150 151 1. Total of sixty three (63) Units sixty two (62) Free Market Units and one (1) Deed Restricted Unit at 152 the time of Building M construction: 153 154 Sixty five (62) Free market units, Buildings A through M 74 257.0 SF floor area 155 156 Building A 157 (1) Association -Owned Manager's Unit 965.0 SF floor area 158 159 Building M (New Building) 160 New condominium SF Building M Q units 8,000 SF floor area 161 162 2. Building Height 163 164 Building Height For Buildings A -L n 0" (max.)Existing (no change) 165 Building Height For Building M 35-0" (max.) 166 167 3. Site Parking 168 169 Total Parking Spaces (Initial phase) 65 (including in carport structure) 170 Covered 30 171 Surface 35 172 Subtotals: 173 Handicap 1 174 Standard 64 175 176 Total Parking Spaces (Final phase with Building M) 71 (including in carport structure) 177 Covered 38 178 Surface 33 179 Subtotals: 180 Handicap 1 181 Standard X 70 182 183 184 4. Approval of the proposed Exterior Renovation in terms of the overall architectural character, building 185 materials, construction details, and landscaping. 186 a) Hardboard Siding 187 b) Timber Details Page 5 of 6 PUD Guide /Development Summary Table 188 c) Cultured Stone Veneer 189 190 5. Building Summary 191 BUILDING OF UNITS OF BEDROOMS A 6 12 B 4 8 C 4 8 D 4 8 E 4 8 F 4 8 G 4 8 H 6 11 I 6 12 J 6 11 K 6 12 L 6" 11 TOTAL 60 117 M 3 9 SUBTOTAL 63 126 DEED RESTRICT EXISTING MANAGERS UNIT IN BUILDING A, AT TIME OF BUILDING M CONSTRUCTION A 1 2 TOTAL 63 126 192 Page 6 of 6 1 mm —Izzwz 0 'E Y�C tJ OM ov,� v-Ig a' CO �mmz�a U) o m� C Or z x z mma0� 4 moc�N t.. 4iaE y m pG Z iOCD "�z z �Lngi C a° r x V O DO C 0 0 a ril Fy P y po M b C y m I iii q i N O N I .ti Zi i m m 0 m y z z m z o C 0 M Ox m p O M 00 Om m i s; m m O @a 0 0 0 D o GEa i i O y Y, m j N E Y Z r M O t§ x a I Oz g to o cn J zx c� EE•� z t ^I 90 0 .I_..: II ARCHITECTURAL I:ca N IN SITE PLAN Snowmass Mountain Condominiums o i Wall Replacement and Renovation aoh�wul N Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 N rk e�, a�s zit N11 4 tse V, ka ffs,ia `ffm d ff 3 4 ZA Q 'I t yc w T Z mom I L t 1 1 0 HR H i �N �&M r zfiv. i Ml5 EL NY r'd d, g i fa lo 10 9 7 I S N SE s IN 05 I e ED cr, LANDSCAPE PLAN Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Wall tzelpiacement and Renovations 55 Upper Woodbridge Road, Snowm,)ss Village CO, 81615 0 a n t O 7mr mm ell 1 TV tp m z s to ty i. t i'! Y z D 4 n z o C �r m o H —i a Ri m m in :t u is ut Ir v '11 '11 '1t 'Tt 'I 'll L (fi H Q rn c a 4 it 7 r c z fIN rz,. R O 'v O c3 u c� 1 ro m to z C7 t p. L rn c m ,t rn h rn E31 7 1 T 5 z -4 —1 z p 73 r- 4 Ur nt sit tit cs Z z ©t- lr h U iu 1st Ct m r q e z H r m I N vt qI f el 7 ns c- r t rte cf; i, tP EP lit W C t5t g a 9 a n I o S s�f Sao a8 S Z 011 e�c ;��.9� cH 7F �U aH jj ;f,,'a nIc t 2fl m Ern- 6 F dp a^ z o k al� a4 s ib I Y l J s o k CCC €t aa P E p f! Fib F 5 W tl a t� IT Zi m n m� FFQ m y s i� SlF Zm� it o E E E E E E a p r,F o" 1 E s ti 4 I :4 l r Yrr y N s Y R• �0' it' LL v R a%i 'f ?aj7 Ott L 3 f'� 6 F i a f= f t LANDSCAPEPLAN Snowmass Mountain Condominiums 0 1 o Wall Replacement and Renovations arch I 55 Upper Woodbridge Road, Snowmass Village CO, 81615 X 3 ct< P 7 O7 H h H t".1 C) Ct rn G r t 17.1 Cl p cs r a rn is r u }t in O to C�1 to c. s z O n z -s i F� O s Fi w t si n in u to �t u ts n n m Cl tt c� r rx itt i T T Z 1, fi r c Z t: n S Cti cT q, 0 r Q 13 Cx m �i Y a 1 z m 0 rn tit S co c} rn rn rn rn rn a, H V Z rn S Xi t' kil 'A Ill to V I H Q r, A C) n C t r 83,5 v A;�, 1= I I j .i- -837 EL 1 1 1 1 it N 31! 1 j lb 0 P/9 'l C CD v� a SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS c SNOWMASS VILLAGE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 81615 i i o r t tj (I pl, z If I i i i 5 L L. L U m C' lv� 1 G 33 =p m k I! Ij; SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS o SNOWMASS VILLAGE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 81615 r i i J i 1 I 6=0" i I N I 1 E I 'o oa Q `4 W o u, oll m I S O a- 7 m li n a lSNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIU S p I 1 f SNOWMASS VILLAGE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 81875 1 i i O 7 o I J 1 g 3 R I i z I i t 1 r% f r 8 3 i E 70 g Z-4 I 1 i a c sv SNC}WMASS MOUNTAIN Q A 1 CQLORADO 81615 r, 3 I ti z TIT s u O r r 7d m w x m I I 7.3 T s A s 31' -0" m a S N MOUNTAIN ..1NDOWN"UMS r 3 (�,rs.;+ *1a VILLAGE a;7 N rr, :7Y, COLORADO 81616 ATTACHMENT 6 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 DRAFT VESTED RIGHTS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH ITS REFERENCED EXHIBITS 1, 2 3 SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT DRAFT APRIL L 27 2010 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO 2010 SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC FOR VESTING OF PROPERTY RIGHT SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN MINOR PUD PLAN THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement dated as of 2010 is between Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation (hereinafter "Snowmass Mountain and the Town of Snowmass Village, a Colorado municipal corporation (hereinafter called the "Town RECITALS WHEREAS, Snowmass Mountain submitted an Application for approval of a Minor PUD Plan dated January 22, 2010' (hereinafter the "Application for the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association project (the "Property WHEREAS, Snowmass Mountain and the Town desire to enter into this agreement as a means of memorializing the terms and conditions of the approval and the assurances of the Town and Snowmass Mountain to each other as set forth in Town Ordinance No. 08 -07 (the "Approval Ordinance and WHEREAS, the Town Municipal Code (the "Code authorizes the execution of "development agreements" by the Town. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows. ARTICLE 1 VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS 1.1 Vested Property Rights (a) The Town and Snowmass Mountain agree that all rights of Snowmass Mountain granted, recognized and confirmed in the Approval Ordinance and this Agreement constitute "Vested Property Rights," as such term is defined in the Code. By way The Application requests an amendment to the approval of a Minor PUD granted Snowmass Mountain by Ordinance 08 -07, which approval was not finalized for the reasons set forth in the Application. of illustration, and not limitation, "Vested Property Rights" include the right to implement the Minor PUD Plan and engage in land uses on the Property in accordance with the provisions of the Approval Ordinance for the period of ten (10) years from the date of the Approval Ordinance as described in Section 1.3. below. (b) The Town shall not enforce against Snowmass Mountain or the Property any amendment to the Code adopted after the date of the Approval Ordinance, or any other zoning, land use or other legal, administrative rule, regulation, ordinance, resolution or requirement that does not apply to the Property as of the date of the Approval Ordinance, or otherwise take any other action that would directly or indirectly have the effect of impairing, preventing, diminishing, imposing a moratorium on improvements and development contemplated by the Application and approval thereof, or otherwise delaying the development or use of the Property in accordance with this Agreement or the Approval Ordinance. Except for those conditions contemplated in the Approval Ordinance or the Code in effect as of the date of the Approval Ordinance, and any other agreements related to the development or use of the Property executed between the Town and Snowmass Mountain contemporaneously with the execution of this Agreement or the Approval Ordinance, the Town shall not subject development or use of the Property to any other exactions, payments, dedication or reservation requirements, obligations for constructing on -site or off -site public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu of any of the foregoing in connection with the development, construction, use or maintenance of the Property as described in the Approval Ordinance or any other exercise of the Vested Property Rights. (c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Vested Property Rights recognized herein shall not exempt Snowmass Mountain from requirements for building permits, other necessary permits or other approvals required subsequent to the approval of the Approval Ordinance (as required by the Code in effect as of the date hereof.) The establishment of the Vested Property Rights shall not preclude the Application of the requirements of the building code, fire code, plumbing code, electrical code, the mechanical code or of any regulations specifically adopted to correct or mitigate natural or man-made hazards on or in the immediate vicinity of the Property, which hazards could not reasonably have been discovered at the time the Approval Ordinance was approved, and which hazards, if uncorrected, would pose a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, all as more particularly described in Section 24 -68 -105 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. 1.2 Conditions Subsequent to Continued Existence of Vested Property Rights. (a) The Application and Approval Ordinance contemplate four components of the 2 approved Minor PUD P1an with the Application: (i) Replacement of an existing retaining wall with a new retaining structure; (ii) New drive, parking and bus turnaround surface on Snowmass Mountain Property; (iii) An exterior renovation of the Snowmass Mountain project; and (iv) Maintaining the right to build a proposed Building "M" and the granting of vested rights for a period of ten (10) years from the date of the Approval Ordinance. (b) With regard to items (i), (ii) and (iii) above, Snowmass Mountain agrees to the following: 1. Snowmass Mountain shall conform to the parameters of the PUD Guide attached to and made part of the Approval Ordinance; and 2. Snowmass Mountain shall grant a trail easement to the Town as shown on the approved Minor PUD Plan and the form of easement attached as Exhibit "1." (c) With regard to the Town's approval of Snowmass Mountain's right to build Building "M," and the extension of vested rights for Building "M," Snowmass Mountain shall provide the following as a condition to the issuance of a building permit: 1. File with the Town for approval a Supplemental Application for Building "M," specifying the development parameters in the PUD Guide. 2. File a deed restriction of the Manager's Unit in Building A, substantially in accordance with the form of which deed restriction is attached as Exhibit "2." The Supplemental Application may be processed in accordance with Procedures for Planning Director Supplemental Plan Review and Approval attached as Exhibit "3." The continued existence and duration of the Vested Property Rights recognized in this 2 The approved Minor PUD Plan includes approval of an Amended Condominium Map for the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums in accordance with the provisions of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (C.R.S. Section 38- 33.3 -101, et seq.). 3 Agreement is subject to the condition that no Material Default by Snowmass Mountain shall occur. If a Material Default shall occur, then, as provided in Section 16A- 5 -90(c) of the Town Code, the Vested Property Rights shall be forfeited. For purposes hereto, "Material Default" shall mean a failure by Snowmass Mountain to perform any of its obligations under any of the Other Agreements or the Approval Ordinance in any material respect that remains uncured upon notice of such default to Snowmass Mountain after the expiration of any reasonable applicable cure period as such default is conclusively determined by a court of competent jurisdiction in a final, non appealable judgment or order. 1.3 Duration. In consideration of Snowmass Mountain's performance of its obligations undertaken in the Other Agreements and in recognition that Snowmass Mountain must undertake fund raising from to complete the development of Building "M" and the effect of varying economic cycles and market conditions, the Town has concluded and agrees that the Vested Property Rights shall be vested and continue for a period commencing on the date of the Approval Ordinance and expiring ten (10) years from the date thereof (the "Vesting Period Unless expressly provided to the contrary therein, the Approval Ordinance and any modifications and amendments to the Approval Ordinance or any other material related to the development of the Property shall become part of the Vested Property Rights recognized hereunder automatically upon approval by the Town and such vesting shall last throughout the term of the vested rights. ARTICLE 11 DEFAULT 2.1 Default by Snowmass Mountain. If Snowmass Mountain shall commit a default under the terms of any of the Other Agreements or fail to perform any of its obligations under the Approval Ordinance, which default or failure to perform extends beyond the expiration of any applicable grace and cure period, Snowmass Mountain shall not be entitled to receive additional building permits for the construction of Building "M" described in the Approval Ordinance until such time as the default or failure to perform is cured or the Town otherwise agrees to issue such a building permit. In addition, (a) the Town shall be entitled to all rights and remedies set forth in such Other Agreements upon such an uncured default, and (b) as noted in Section 1.2(b) above, upon a Material Default, the Vested Property Rights recognized hereunder shall be forfeited as provided in Section 16A -5- 90(c) of the Town Code. 2.2 Default by the Town. If the Town is in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, the Town shall have the right to cure such default within 60 days after written notice by Snowmass Mountain of the default to the Town. If the Town fails to cure such default within 60 days after 4 written notice is given from Snowmass Mountain to the Town specifying the nature of the default, then Snowmass Mountain shall have all rights available to it at law or in equity, specifically including the right to specific performance, injunctive relief and /or damages. Upon a default hereunder by the Town, the Vested Property Rights shall be extended for a period of time equal to the duration of such default by the Town, which extension shall specifically include any applicable cure period enjoyed by the Town under this Section 2.2. ARTICLE III ASSIGNMENT 3.1 Assignment by Snowmass Mountain. (a) Snowmass Mountain may assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement, or any portion thereof with regard to Building "M," without the Town's consent by a written recorded instrument expressly assigning such rights and powers any entity which succeeds to substantially all of Snowmass Mountain remaining development rights with respect to the Property as described in the Approval Ordinance. (b) Upon an assignment by Snowmass Mountain of any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement to another entity, and an assumption of those rights or obligations by such assignee, Snowmass Mountain shall be released of all liabilities arising under this Agreement with respect to such rights or obligations or pertaining to Building "M." ARTICLE IV MISCELLANEOUS 4.1 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and shall inure to the benefit of each party's successors and assigns, as designated by a written assignment recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 4.2 Burden and Benefits. Each of the benefits, burdens, terms, covenants, agreements and conditions of this Agreement shall be construed as covenants running with the land benefitting and burdening the Property or any applicable portion thereof, and it is the intent of the parties that such benefits, burdens, terms, covenants, agreements and conditions touch and concern such property. 4.3 Governing Law. 5 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 4.4 Scope of Agreement. The rights granted to Snowmass Mountain by this Agreement are in addition to any other rights held by Snowmass Mountain under applicable law. 4.5 Exhibits. All of the exhibits to this Agreement are hereby incorporated into this Agreement by reference. In the event of any conflict between a term, condition or provision of this Agreement and a provision of the Town's Code, the terms of this Agreement shall control. 4.6 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of this Agreement or any other provision hereof, and a court shall enforce this Agreement to the maximum extent legally possible to give effect as nearly as possible to the original intent of the Town and Snowmass Mountain as expressed in this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable not in its entirety but as applied to a particular act, thing or circumstance, such provision shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of this Agreement or any provision hereof as applied to any other act, think or circumstance, and a court shall apply such provision and enforce this Agreement to the maximum extent legally possible to give effect as nearly as possible to the original intent of the Town and Snowmass Mountain as expressed in this Agreement. 4.7 Termination; Amendment; Waivers. This Agreement may not be terminated, modified or amended, nor may waivers hereunder be granted, except in writing and only with the consent and approval of Snowmass Mountain and the Town. 4.8 Notices. Notice required pursuant to the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed given on the day that the same is placed in the United States Mails, postage prepaid, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Address for giving notice to Town: Town of Snowmass Village Community Development Department 6 16 Kearns Road Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Address for giving notice to Snowmass Mountain: Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc. P.O. Box 5124 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 4.9 Recording. Snowmass Mountain and the Town each shall have the right to record this Agreement in the records of the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. 4.10 Captions and Titles. All captions and titles of headings of Articles and Sections in this Agreement are for the purpose of reference and convenience and are not to be deemed to limit, modify or otherwise affect any of the provisions hereof or to be used in determining the intent or context thereof. 4.11 Attorney Fees. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, if either party institutes legal proceedings against the other with respect to this Agreement, the non prevailing party shall pay to the prevailing party an amount equal to all attorneys' fees and disbursements and all other costs and expenses incurred by the prevailing party in connection therewith, including, without limitation, the fees and disbursements of any attorneys, accountants, engineers, appraisers or other professionals engaged by the prevailing parry, whether incurred before or at trial, on appeal, in bankruptcy or in post judgment collection. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this day of 2010. THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE By: Bill Boineau, Mayor (Date) ATTEST: Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk 7 SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS ASSOCIATION, INC., A COLORADO NONPROFIT CORPORATION By: (Date) STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN The above and foregoing document was acknowledged before me this day of 2010 by Bill Boineau as Mayor for the Town of Snowmass Village and by Rhonda Coxon as Town Clerk for the Town of Snowmass Village. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires [SEAL] Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN The above and foregoing document was acknowledged before me this day of 2010 by as of the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires [SEAL] Notary Public 8 EXHIBIT "1" (Trail Easement to be attached) 9 DPI —ekFT `122 /2010 TRAIL EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of 2010, between the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc. (hereinafter "Snowmass Mountain and the Town of Snowmass Village, a Colorado Home Rule Municipality (hereinafter "Town RECITALS WHEREAS, Snowmass Mountain has obtained approval from the Town for its Minor PUD by Town Ordinance (Series of 2010). WHEREAS, Snowmass Mountain volunteered during the approval process to grant a trail easement to the Town across the Snowmass Mountain general common elements in an area to the north of a line as shown on the Third Supplemental and Amended Condominium Map of the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums (hereinafter "Amended Condominium Map subject to the terms and provisions hereof. WITNESSETH NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereafter set forth, and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: 1. Grant of Easement Subject to the terms, restrictions and conditions hereof, Snowmass Mountain hereby grants to the Town for use by members of the public a non exclusive trail easement ten feet in width (the "Easement across Snowmass Mountain property in an area agreed upon by Snowmass Mountain and the Town to the north of that line described on Amended Condominium Map. The grant of easement is subject to the condition that a trail shall be constructed over and across the adjacent properties to the east and to the west linking said trail to the easement granted hereby. The Town shall have the right, upon written notice to assign its interests in this Easement Agreement to an organization formed or to be formed to operate trails for public purposes or to a park or recreation district to be organized for purposes of maintaining and operating public trails; provided however, no such assignment as herein permitted shall release the Town from any of its duties or obligations hereunder. The Easement shall be ten (10) feet, (i.e. five (5) feet on either side of the centerline of such trail if, when and as constructed and in place). 2. Use. The Easement shall be used for the purposes specified herein and for no other purpose. No motorized vehicles of any kind shall be permitted on the Easement except for maintenance or repair. Dogs shall be prohibited on the Easement. Nothing herein shall be construed to grant members of the public any right to use or cross other property of Snowmass Mountain in order to gain access to the Easement. Snowmass Mountain reserves the right to use the Easement and the lands below and airspace above for all purposes which do not unreasonably interfere with the use by members of the public or the rights herein granted. Without limited to the foregoing, Snowmass Mountain shall have the right to: (i) grant any underground easements to utility companies within the Easement granted herein, provided that no utility company shall be permitted to exercise any rights under such utility easement that unreasonably interferes with the rights of members of the public hereunder and (ii) construct and maintain. underground drainage or de- watering structures or facilities. No lighted or night time use of the Easement shall be permitted. The Town shall be resposible for the placement of informational trail signs and markers; and keeping the trail free and clear of refuse and trash. 3. Special Restrictions In addition to the restrictions set forth above, use of the Easement shall be subject to the following: A. The Town shall assure that the setting of the trail shall avoid areas of sensitive vegetation and other man -made structures or features on the Snowmass Mountain property. B. Access to the trail shall be via the public trail system. No other lands of Snowmass Mountain may be used to access the easement and nothing herein shall be construed as a grant, express or implied, over any other lands of Snowmass Mountain. C. The specific location of the trail shall be presented by the Town to the Board of Directors of Snowmass Mountain for approval. The location/alignment of the trail may be subject to change by the consent of Snowmass Mountain and the Town. 4. Term Use of the Easement shall commence upon the approval of the actual location of the easement by the Board of Directors of Snowmass Mountain. This Easement shall terminate if the Town shall fail to operate or maintain the trail over the Snowmass Mountain property for three (3) consecutive years. 5. Non Profit Purposes The purpose of this Easement Agreement is to allow use of the easement by members of the public for non profit recreational purposes in accordance with the terms, provisions and conditions hereof. The easement shall not be used for profit or commercial purposes or any other purposes except as expressly allowed herein. 6. Hold Harmless and Insurance The parties expressly acknowledge that Snowmass Mountain is entitled to the benefits, protections and limitations on liability afforded by Colorado law governing recreational easements, Section 33 -41 -101, et seq C.R.S. By granting the easement hereunder, Snowmass Mountain shall have no obligation to repair or otherwise maintain the area within the easement, or to insure or indemnify the Town for any injury, claiin or damage to any person or property, whether alleged to have occurred while using the easement for any purposes or due to the condition of any trail or otherwise. By accepting the easement granted hereunder, the Town agrees: A. To defend and hold harmless Snowmass Mountain, its agents, representatives, employees and successors and assigns, to the fall extent allowed under Colorado law, for any injury, claim or damage to any person or property, whether alleged to have occurred while using the easement due to the condition of any trail or otherwise; B. To carry a policy insuring against such claims or losses and to add Snowmass Mountain as a co- insured on such policy. The Town shall, on or before January 1 of each year and annually thereafter, famish a Certificate of Insurance and a copy of the policy to Snowmass Mountain as verification of the acquisition and maintenance of such insurance, the amount and adequacy of which shall meet with Snowmass Mountain's approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The policy shall provide that, as to Snowmass Mountain, the policy shall not lapse, be canceled; amended or modified in any way unless the insurance company shall have first given each of the parties thirty (30) days written notice thereof at the address of each insured as provided herein. C. To reserve to Snowmass Mountain the right to claim full credit for all of the square footage contained within the easement under the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use Code in any future land use application or approval relating to the property. 7. Construction and Maintenance The trail shall be constructed by the Town at the Town's sole expense. If and when constructed, the Town shall assume all obligations for the operation, maintenance, repair and replacement thereof, including but not limited to, the obligations to keep the trail and areas immediately adjacent thereto clean and free of trash and refuse. 8. As -Built Survey At such time as the construction of the trail is complete, the Town shall cause the centerline of the trail to be surveyed and a precise legal description of the Easement to be prepared, being five (5) feet on either side of the centerline of the trail as built. Upon completion of the survey, the parties shall at the request of Snowmass Mountain enter into a supplement to this Agreement in recordable form providing a precise legal description for the Easement and, if necessary, an amendment to the Amended Condominium Map shall be approved and signed showing the precise as -built location of the Easement. 9. Enforcement The Town shall be responsible for enforcing the terms, provisions and conditions of this Easement Agreement and in particular the use restrictions set forth in Paragraph 2 above. Snowmass Mountain may, but shall not be obligated to, enforce any of the terms, provisions and conditions of this Easement Agreement and in furtherance thereof Snowmass Mountain may post signs or install fencing for such purposes, including notifying the public that private property is being crossed and to stay within the easement. 10. Notices Notices and other communications which may be given, or are required to be given hereunder, shall be in writing and shall be deemed given to a party when delivered personally or when deposited in the United States mail with sufficient postage affixed and addressed to such party at the respective address shown below: Snowmass Mountain: Chairman of the Board of Directors 3 Snowmass Mountain Condominiums P.O. Box Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Town: Town of Snowmass Village c/o Town Manager 130 Kearns Road P.O. Box Snowmass Village, CO 81615 copy to: Town of Snowmass Village Attorney 130 Kearns Road P.O. Box Snowmass Village, CO 81615 12. Miscellaneous A. Either party shall have the right and power to bring suit in its own name for any legal or equitable relief due to the lack of compliance with any provisions of this Easement Agreement. If any court proceedings are instituted in connection with the rights of enforcement and remedies provided in this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reimbursement of its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, in connection therewith. B. The failure of either party to insist upon the strict perforinance of any provisions of this Easement Agreement or to exercise any right or option available to it, or to serve any notice or to institute any action, shall not be a waiver or a relinquishment for the future of any such provision. C. This Easement Agreement and the grant of the easement hereunder is made subject to any existing leases, easements, reservations, restrictions or rights -of -way. D. This Easement Agreement may not be amended, nor may any rights hereunder be waived, except by an instrument in writing executed by the parties hereto and duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County, Colorado. E. The interpretation, enforcement or any other matters relative to this Easement Agreement shall be construed and determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. F. All the provisions of this Easement Agreement, including the benefits and burdens created thereby, shall run with the land. G. In the event any clerical, administrative or other errors are found in this Easement Agreement or any legal descriptions or other exhibits hereto or in the event any exhibit shall be missing, the parties agree to promptly execute, acknowledge, initial and /or deliver as necessary any documentation in order to correct the erroneous document, description, exhibit or to provide any missing exhibit. H. Should any provision of this Agreement be deemed invalid due to a violation of the rule against perpetuities or any other rule or law relative to vesting or the alienation of property, such provision shall nevertheless remain effective for the longest period permitted by law as though such provision had originally been enforceable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Easement Agreement as the day and year first above written. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE: SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION: By: By President STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN The foregoing Trail Easement Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of 2010, by as of the Town of Snowmass Village. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN The foregoing Trail Easement Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of 2010, by as of the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public Snowmass Mtn.Trail Easement.doc 6 EXHIBIT "2" (Affordable Housing Deed Restriction to be attached) DRAFT 3/22/2010 OCCUPANCY DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 2008, by SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Colorado nonprofit corporation, P.O. Box 5124, Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 (hereinafter referred to as "Owner and the TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE (hereinafter "Snowmass Village a Colorado Home Rule Municipality. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner comprises the unit owners of Snowmass Mountain Condominiums as described in the Amended Composite Condominium Map for Snowmass Mountain Condominiums recorded in Book Page at Reception No. in the real property records of Pitkin County, more specifically described as stated in Exhibit "A" (hereinafter referred to as "Real Property which map designates a Unit as the the Manager Unit, comprising seven hundred fifty (750)square feet; and WHEREAS, this Agreement imposes certain covenants which restrict the use and occupancy of the Manager's Unit to employees and their families who are employed in the Town of Snowmass Village and /or Pitkin County and meet the qualification guidelines of an employee established by the Town of Snowmass Village on an annual basis. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, the Owner hereby covenants and agrees as follows: 1. Owner hereby covenants that the Manager's Unit described above shall at all times remain a rental unit. 2. The use and occupancy of the Manager's Unit shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in the Town of Snowmass Village and /or Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "employee" as that term is defined by the guidelines established and by the Town Snowmass Village on an annual basis. Owner shall have the right to lease Manager's Unit to a "qualified employee" of Owner's own selection. Such individuals maybe employees of the Owner. 3. The Manager's Unit shall only be occupied by qualified employees and shall not be used as a guest facility. DP� r T 3/22/2010 4. Approval of a tenant in the Manager's Unit other than an employee of Owner shall be obtained from the Town of Snowlnass Village prior to occupancy by the tenant. 5. Upon vacancy of the Manager's Unit, Owner shall have sixty (60) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner, the Town of Snowlnass Village may select a qualified employee to whom Owner shall rent the Affordable Housing Unit to a qualified employee. 6. This Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the Manager's Unit Em as a burden thereon for the benefit of and shall be specifically enforceable by the Town of Snowlnass Village, Colorado, and its respective successors, as applicable, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non qualified tenants; and this Agreement shall only be released by a written instrument executed by the Town of Snowlnass Village. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the date and year above first written. OWNER: SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. By: George Falk, President STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by George Falk as President of Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc. WITNESS My hand and official seal My commission expires: 2 a �'R FT 3/22/2010 Notary Public ACCEPTANCE BY THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE The foregoing agreement and its terms are accepted by the Town of Snowmass Village. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE By: Mailing Address: The Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box Snowmass Village, CO 81615 STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY PITKIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_ by as of the Town of Snowmass Village. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My corn1l fission expires: Notary Public 3 EXHIBIT "3" PROCEDURE FOR PLANNING DIRECTOR SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL 1. Submission of Supplemental Application The Supplemental Application for the Final Plan for Building "M" shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to the submission of a building permit application. The Planning Director shall review the Final Plan to determine that substantial consistency exists between the Final Plan and the Preliminary Plan for Building "M," the design narratives described in the Development Agreement, the conditions imposed by the Approval Ordinance, and the provisions of the PUD Guide. The Planning Director may request additional information necessary to adequately evaluate the Final Plan as the Planning Director deems reasonably necessary. Snowmass Mountain shall be responsible for payment of Town costs associated with processing the Supplemental Application pursuant to the Town Planning Department Fee Schedule in effect at the time the Supplemental Application is made. After review of the Final Plan, the Planning Director shall cause a public notice to be published that the Town Council will consider the approval of the Final Plan for Building "M" at a regularly scheduled Town Council meeting to occur at least 10 days following the date of publication of the public notice. The Town Council shall consider the recommendation of the Planning Director and will approve the Final Plan by Resolution provided that substantial consistency exists between the Final Plan and the Preliminary Plan for Building "M" and the parameters described in the Development Agreement, the conditions imposed by the Approval Ordinance and the provisions of the PUD guide. 2. Standard of Review for Planning? Director Modification For any modification to Building "M," the Planning Director shall consider whether the proposed modification: 1. is consistent with the original provisions of the Development Agreement, the PUD Guide and the Approval Ordinance; and 2. does not have a substantially adverse effect on the neighborhood surrounding the Building "M" parcel or have a substantially adverse impact on the enjoyment of land abutting upon the Building "M" parcel; and 3. would not change the basic character of the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Project or surrounding areas; and 4. complies with all applicable standards and provisions of the Municipal Code. Upon finding that the proposed modification meets the above criteria, the Planning Director shall grant a Planning Director Modification approval and a written notice of decision will be recorded in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 3. Procedure for Obtaining Planning Director Modification for Building `M (a) Any application for Planning Director modification shall minimally include the following: (i) revised Design Drawings, if necessary; and (ii) specify the exact changes proposed to the previously approved development parameters for the Building; and (iii) specify the effects, if any, such modification would have to the development parameters for the Lot: (iv) written description of how the proposed modification complies with the `Standards for Review' specified in Paragraph 2 above; and (v) signed fee agreement to pay Town costs associated with processing the application. (b) Within 15 days after receiving such submission, the Planning Director shall provide a written decision notice of the Planning Director's determination approving, approving with conditions or denying the application. (c) Within 10 days after the Planning Director's determination, the applicant for the proposed modification may appeal such determination to the Town Council, which has the authority to reverse the determination of the Planning Director by majority vote of its members present and voting. P: \wp\PJT\RE \Snowmass Mtn.Develop.Agim.rev.427.IO.wpd 12 ATTACHMENT 7 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 The re pri acs d Foar�rt rs� �j �i ss iivlii s Fro =iut; on and Acir wof s vami irsol Cdr," e. i_mbrig and add =tl .parldnmot 't "Jilid" Will 113- i,3anaged OWO -Igh °£i�u arlr►tinist�ation. Vii. ti��. ��r�saie pro��`� rt�ean_agenient turn_ r #ae Snav��i �a5s Moi�ntaiia fln o cia'£1€�n agrees fhat noit er n Gxistin6 parking will ever he ccnddfNniuirrizerl or sold, and shall remain in pea pstuic for the SAe' use of the Hortieawflers; Griests arf(i SeI .Vices related to the apar'ailon of file condo comple, Each Condominium Uni and Employee Unit will be provided with orr° designated and appropriately signed covered parking space. The remaining spaces will be used only for the owners, guests aP4 servide of the Snowrmass Mountain Condo complex, and will be monitored on a daily basis by the ort -site managers with any unauthorized vehicles to be tagged and then, if not removed within the Clay, to be booted and towed. The booting and towing process is in keeping with the current management procedures. Because the complex has operated for many years with a severe parking shortage, there are many instances of unauthbrized parkirig which 'occur on a frequent basis. And because of the limited size of the vary constrained site, any unauthorized parking praates serious problems either by blocking access for the authorized assigned un'it's parldng, blocking the access bway for the bus route, impairing the snouu4emova1 process, or generally congesting the movement: of vehicles on the site. So, the property T iegers have institufied very vibilant and rigoroug parking controls, and are wall practiced to t oroughly iranaging the parking on the site. Anil, although the severe �t parking shortage will be slg4ificantly alleviated by the proposed newt parking plan, the property management's existing policies and vigilance tn+tll continue in the ,management of the revised parking arrangement. 1, E ATTACHMENT 8 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 OUTSTANDING TOWN DEPARTMENT AND REFERRAL AGENCY REVIEW COMMENTS SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT BCHMUESER. /GORDON|k4EYER E E I 1 8 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 970.e45.1004 970.945.S948 FAX MEMORANDUM DATE: February 1A,2O1O T[>: Mr. Jim VVahiatnrnn. Town Planner CC: Hunt Walker, Public Works Director FROM Dean Gordon, Town Engineer RE: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Minor Amendment to a PUD This review is based on the following documents: Minor Amendment of a PUD, dated January 06, 2010, submitted by Neenan Archistruction. Final Drainage Report. dated November 23, 2009, by Colorado Civil Consultants, Inc. Attached are my review comments, dated May 22 2008. for the prior submission. Except for those comments related directly to the parking atructuna, and with e couple of exceptions, they are still generally applicable tnthis submission: From e construction perspective, there is not sufficient detail to review the civil portion of the work. Since this is o one step land use naviovv prncaoa a condition of approval would need to be made requiring the Town Engineer to review and approve documents at the building permit stage. However, rather than being deferred to the building permit stage, there are several issues that need to be addressed as part of this review process. The following comments utilize the same numbering sequence as the prior correspondence. These issues should be addressed as port of the Minor Amendment process. Please refer to the attachment as well: 1. Traffic there is no discussion of traffic impacts. VVhi|o the impacts are |ovv for the revised submittal, having no discussion at all is not appropriate. The discussion should include the cumulative impact from the Snuvvnnoaa Center free market units and the intersections with Lower Woodbridge Road and Brush Creek Road. 2. Mud/Debris Flow vvhi|a the proposed portions of this project may not be subject, the existing structures may. Not addressing this issue at all in not appropriate, especially given the recent experience at the Horse Ranch Employee Housing project. �'S~a` s="."=" e�°oJ"°="°" MEEKER /o/ FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT /oa /oo WEST To°/=". AVE. 5ro WEST CRETE CIRCLE azo THIRD STREET 'o Box 2/55 s".,"^ em`"== SUITE zos MEEKER, ooa's^/ ASPEN, ooa/6// n"°°=O°uo GRAND JUNCTION, uo8/5o5 970 80 9ro.925 6r2r 970.64 1 5355 970.245.257 1 970.878.4 1 8 1 ~x 9ru.9c5.4/srFAX 97064/ s358 °u 970.245.287 1 FAX SCMMUESER| GORDON /MEYER Ews/wEsns suevs,ons 3. Water Quality there is one water quo|hv structure ehnvvn on the dnavvngs, two discussed in the drainage report and three locations requiring structures on the site plan. Commitment to treat all runoff from parking area is required. 4. Drainage Analysis The analysis, and conclusions reached, are based onan''hiatorio'' condition ofthe site as currently developed. Additiona||y, the site prior to any development needs to be included in the analysis and conclusions. m The proposed facilities are designed to intercept the 1U-yeerevent. Adiaounaion/ona|yaio of vvhena the overflow goes in e 100-yeor event is required, including the impact on dnvvnatpeano property owners and the ability of downstream facilities to accept and convey this overflow. IDW |:\1991\9M0O4UE\Phase21D@2U100219 Memo Mr. Jim YVahlstromdoc SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER cLE1 .:•ooc SFRINI�s ASPEN C=ESTEG E-UTTE E hl Cr 1 1>! F E F. S t7 l�l F: V !_'i :J R c 8 W. 6TH, SUITE 200 P O. BOX 2 155 P O BOX 3088 v GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8 1 601 ASPEN, CO 81612 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 8 1 224 970- 945 -1004 970-925-5727 970- 349 PX: 970- 945-5948 Ex: 970 -925 -4157 Px: 970- 349-5358 DATE: February 20, 2008 Revised May 22, 2008 TO: Mr. Bob Nevins, Town Planner bnevins(@- tosv.com CC: Hunt Walker, Public Works Director hwalkera- tosv.com FROM Dean Gordon, Town Engineer RE: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums -Minor PUD Amendment issues to be addressed from an engineering standpoint are as follows: In italized format, please find my additional comments with respect to the Submittal dated March 12, 2008. 1. Some discussion is made with respect to increased traffic counts. It does not appear to have addressed potential traffic associated with a conference center. Once the total number of increased vehicle trips per day is generated, it should be added to those which currently exist at both the Lower Wood /Upper Wood Bridge Road intersection and Upper Wood Bridge Road /Brush Creek Road Intersection and verify there is sufficient capacity at these intersections to handle the increase- The fact that there is "a relatively minor amount of increased traffic" is not a sufficient traffic analysis. Dote that the analysis should anticipate that the land improvements associated with the Snowmass Center redevelopment are included. P No additional information found. This item not adequately addressed. 2. Are the existing units, and the proposed units and parking structure subject to either rock fall or debrief flow hazard? No additional information found. This item not adequately addressed. 3. Water quality from the parking structure must be addressed. The Town has consistently required that any run -off from non residential parking surfaces, such as parking lots, vehicle storage area, parking structures, etc. be provided with water quality facilities. The architectural drawings indicate there will be an oil and grease interceptor in the garage area. There is no indication on either the architectural or civil drawings where the discharge from that facility will be, how the facility will be sized, design details, etc, l: \1991 \91004 \E \Phase 21 \M20080220 Ltr Mr. Bob Nevins- Revised 5- 21.doc SCHMUESER I GORDON i MEYER EWC-tNEERS o. sURV EYO ^r,S Pkily recommendation is that the interceptor be tied into the sanitary sewer facilities. If not, the applicant should demonstrate that there is a discharge permit in place for a discharge from that facility to surface waters. This item has not been addressed. There are no water quality features for the surface portion of the parking area. The applicant indicates that the impact to water quality discharge will be minimal this is not an acceptable response. 4. A drainage analysis will need to be prepared at a final plat submission. It should address both the incremental increase in drainage of this project versus what exists, as well as the total drainage impact of the final site development to an undeveloped site. It has been the Town's policy to require that projects that did not provide drainage improvements when they were originally built, to address that condition on any redevelopment. Drainage analysis should provide a basis for sizing of the drainage facilities proposed. It should also demonstrate what the impact on downstream property owners is both currently and in the redeveloped state. My copy of the drainage plan was Xeroxed and assembled out order, it appears that there some pages that may have been missing; I generally could not follow the drainage plan as currently presented. The applicant must either construct water quality detention facilities that will release from this site at the historic rate (as compared to an undeveloped site) or get a letter from downstream property owners that would be subject to the increased run -off from this site indicating that such increase was acceptable to them. Neither is part of the Submittal. Applicant should also demonstrate that downstream facilities are sufficient to convey the increase in water volume to the ultimate receiving stream, in this case, Brush Creek. That has not been done. It would appear to me that the surface facilities on this project are not capable of conveying the 100 -year event without overflow. An analysis, either quantitative or narrative or both should be presented as to what the anticipated flow path of such overflow would be and the consequences on both on -site and downstream properties. It appears to me that the overflow would leave the site at the entrance to the project, cross the road and impact the Wood Bridge Condominiums. p Referencing Item 2 above, it would appear to me that the entire surface of the parking area would be subject to potential mud /debris flow into the northwest corner of the project, thereby rendering most or all of the drainage facilities inoperable during a major storm event. How is this proposed to be handled from a run -off event perspective? I: \1991 \91004 \E \Phase 21 \M20080220 Ltr Mr. Bob Nevins- Revised 5- 21.doc SCHMUESER C GORDON MEYER EH G (HE_E FS o- S RV EY 0P,S There are at least two additional discharge points being proposed off this project to the east, making a total of at least four (4) discharge points. The Carroll ditch is piped throughout much of this area. It would appear these discharges introduce water to the properties to the east where there are not facilities to accommodate them. Also, it appears it will introduce water to areas which currently do not have that situation occurring. Riprap is shown on three (3) of the discharge points, however, the riprap is not carried to the bottom of the steep slopes that the discharge points are terminating on. it would appear there will be significant erosion below the riprap points and a. possibility of destabilization of a steep slope due to a water intrusion. This situation should be addressed from both engineering and geotechnical standpoints. a The existing facilities to the east do not appear to be correctly shown. Are they to be used totally or partially in the new plan? The pedestrian path currently provides a harrier to the east properties. is the carrying capacity for the uphill ditch adequate and does it need to be armored at any other flows? 1: \1991 \91004 \E \Phase 21 \M20080220 Ltr Mr. Bob Nevins- Revised 5- 21.doc TOWN ENGINEER COMMENTS MARCH 14, 2010 RE: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Original Message---- From: Dean Gordon [mailto:DeanG @sgm- inc.com] Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 6:19 PM To: Jim Wahlstrom Cc: Chris Conrad Subject: RE: Snowmass Mountain Condos CTL feels that they can do nothing with specific conclusions without the snow cover gone and a site visit done at that time. Would guess that anytime from about mid April on would allow that. Suggest that we get something from them by May 1 for Town Council consideration. Original Message---- From: Jim Wahlstrom [mailto:jwahlstrom @tosv.com] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 11 :36 AM To: Dean Gordon. Cc: Chris Conrad Subject: FW: Snowmass Mountain Condos Dean, Attached is the supplemental correspondence from the applicant geotechnical engineer regarding impacts upon 30% slopes and drainage /debris flow in and around the Snowmass Mountain Condos site and proposed Building M. I plan to forward this to the PC members for their meeting on March 17th and their site visit planned for 3:30 pm that day. Jim From: James Ohlson mailto:james.ohlson @neenan.com] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Jim Wahlstrom Cc: Paul J. Taddune; VillCarlJoan @aol.com; SylGeo98 @aol.com Subject: Snowmass Mountain Condos Jim, Attached is a letter from CTL Thompson with regards to the mud /debris flows and 30% slope. I believe we are going to have to do more investigation when the snow is going to be able to answer the questions from Dean 100 1 believe that this letter will help the Planning Commission make a decision on Building M maybe with a condition placed on Building M of full reports at the time of the supplemental application. If you have any questions please feel free to give me a call. Best regards, JAMES Ohlson, Assoc. AIA Design THE NEENAN COMPANY i L 1 MEMO To: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner From: David Peckler, Transportation Director Date: February 12, 2010 Re: Snowmass Mountain Condominium Application We have had a number of meetings with the representatives of the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association (SMCA) to discuss our concerns regarding the current conditions and the proposed changes. We feel the proposed changes to the roadway and the creation of the "turnaround area" will be improvements that will help us. We also feel that the addition of one employee studio unit will help with on site management of parking and service vehicles. Parking and management of service vehicles for this project will still be a challenge, particularly to not have vehicles encroaching into the "traffic lane" and "turnaround area." Improvement of the snow removal /storage will help the parking problems we see today. We also want both SMCA and Woodbridge Condominium Association to be aware that we will not be able to provide service to their properties until an adequate turnaround can be established, see comment 4 below.) Specific comments on application are as follows: 1. Enclosure 1, B New Drive Surface and Enclosure 13 A1.02: It references in Enclosure 1 the installation of a snowmelt system "throughout the new driveway as indicated on drawings in enclosure #15." In Enclosure 15, drawing A0.1 has a bubble section referencing SEE ENCLOSURE #1 ITEM B that covers the section of the realigned traffic lane up to the first parking stalls on the East side. Enclosure 13 A1.02 shows the whole driveway as having a snowmelt system. The references should be consistent. Our priority is to see the snowmelt system operating for the traffic lane at the entrance to the property at the grade change, then at the turnaround, and finally the straight and flat section between the two. We hope that this priority sequence will be considered in the design and installation of the snowmelt system. If there is only the snowmelt system at the entrance, then a snow storage plan should be considered. 2. Enclosure 1, G Number of Units H Parking: Parking has long been a problem that the SMCA is trying to address. The first phase improvements suggest that the existing 60 units parking of 62 spaces will be improved to 65, and the future addition of Building M will increase the parking to 71 spaces. This will increase the parking space /unit ratio to 1.12 parking spaces /unit. I believe that a commitment to aggressively manage both residential and commercial (delivery) parking on site is important to protect emergency access and turnaround area. 3. Enclosure 10 B. 5 Road Standards "A portion of the roadway may be snowmelted to improve vehicular access, safety and parking. An adequate snow storage area is identified on the Final Plan." It should be clear what is being proposed. Has the Road Division reviewed the snow storage plan should only one section (Enclosure 15 A0.1) of snowmelt system be installed? 4. Enclosure 15 A1.01: the Site Demolition Plan shows a significant area being worked on that will displace an extreme amount of the parking and traffic lane. It should be clear to the Page 1 residents and guests of the property that we will not be able to provide service to the property until this work is completed and approved. Also, service to Upper Woodbridge Condominiums will be compromised as well because there is not dedicated turnaround there. Woodbridge Condominiums should be aware that we will not be able to get back to their property until this phase of the construction is completed. Designation of a dedicated turnaround at Upper Woodbridge units will be necessary to get bus service to these units. If there is significant compromise of the traffic lane during the exterior remodel phase as well, then we will not be able to provide service to both properties until the construction is completed. 0 Page 2 Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District From: John Mele [mailto:JMele @swfpd.com) Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 8:49 AM To: Jim Wahlstrom Cc: Frank Rudecoff, james.ohison @neenan.com Subject: Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Jim, We have been working with James Ohlson from the Neenan Company on a regular basis and have agreed that we will need to work closely with them on a dynamic emergency access plan that would change as their work was progressing. We have also agreed that new Fire Department Connections for the fire sprinkler system, on both the lower and upper buildings at Snowmass Mountain Condominiums, will be replaced with 2 connections. New horn strobe assemblies for the fire alarm and sprinkler systems will be applied to the new skin renovation on all of the buildings as well. When we review the final submitted plans we will be looking closely for assurance that the new access road will be constructed to meet the designed weight loading of our fire trucks. All other items of concern for this project can be addressed by applying the International Fire Codes adopted by the Town of Snowmass Village. I remain available for any additional questions you may have. John T. Mele Fire Marshal- Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District (970) 923 -2212 jmele @swfpd.com ATTACHMENT 9 TC mtg: May 17, 2010 SIGNED PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2, SERIES OF 2010 (Note: The exhibits were updated or attached to the TC staff report to avoid duplication See Attachments 5 8 of the May 17, 2010 report) SNOMWASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUMS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02 SERIES OF 2010 A RESOLUTION TO THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OF THE SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT APPLICATION TOGETHER WITH A DEFINED SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR FUTURE PHASE BUILDING M. WHEREAS, Town Council acted upon TC Ordinance No. 08 -7 approving the previous Minor Final PUD and acted upon TC Ordinance No. 08 -8 approving the re- zoning of the property to Multi Family ('MF') in July 2008; and WHEREAS, the Snowmass Mountain Condominium Association, Inc. "Applicant submitted a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment application for the Snowmass Mountain Condominiums to the Planning Department on November 23, 2009, and such changes are generally described or illustrated in attached Exhibit 'A" modified Final PUD Guide, incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, following a few completion reviews by the Planning Department, the application was re- submitted on January 8, 2010 and updated on January 26, 2010 at which time the application was deemed complete for referral and review purposes pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16A -5 -50, subject to the applicant obtaining signed consent letters from three affected off -site adjacent property owners; and WHEREAS, the application was referred for review by affected Town Departments and outside referral agencies or districts on January 28, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Applicant provided the three off -site owner consent letters by February 26, 2010; and WHEREAS, Planning Department Staff prepared reports or memorandums outlining the scope of the project, core issues and review process, distributing such reports and memorandums to Planning Commission members for their meetings on March 3, 17 and April 21, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted supplemental drafts of certain agreements with conditions or restrictions together with a modified Final PUD Guide in response to the Planning Commission review on March 3 and 17, 2010; and WHEREAS, Planning Commission reviewed the land use application, considered direction by Town Staff and received comments at public meetings PC Reso 10 -02 Page 2 of 9 scheduled on March 3, 17 and April 21, 2010; and WHEREAS, the amendment application was processed pursuant to Section 16A -5 -390, Amendment of Final PUD of the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: Section One: General Findings Subject to addressing the recommendations in Section Three of this Resolution, the Planning Commission finds that: 1) Submission: Applicant has submitted the Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment application in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 16A -5 -390, Amendment to Final PUD of the Municipal Code. 2) Content: The application contained the Minimum Contents as required by Municipal Code Sections 16A -5 -40 and 16A- 5- 390(2)b and included written and graphic materials of sufficient detail to determine the application complete for review. 3) Supplemental Submissions: Supplemental information and materials were provided, including certain draft agreements, during the review process to comply with application submission requirements and to respond to Planning Commission, Town Staff and referral agency comments, issues and concerns. 4) Public Process: Planning Commission held three public meetings on March 3, 17 and April 21, 2010 to review the land use application and to formulate its recommendations to Town Council in accordance with the responsibilities and procedures prescribed in the Municipal Code. 5) Service and'emergency vehicles: Pursuant to Section 16A- 4- 210(a)(3), the Applicant represented that they had an agreement with the Snowmass- Wildcat Fire Protection District and that no occupancy would occur on the site during the re- construction process. 6) Drainage facilities: Pursuant to Section 16A -4 -250, Planning Commission finds that the Town Engineer review comments in attached Exhibit "D" have not yet been fully satisfied. 7) Trash facilities: Pursuant to Section 16A -4 -230, the provision for solid waste disposal ought to be more specifically addressed for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas of the plan within the Development Agreement. PC Reso 10 -02 Page 3 of 9 8) Parking: Pursuant to Section 16A -4 -310 of the Municipal Code, the proposed amendment reduces or removes the previously approved Final PUD supply of 99 spaces in structured parking. Instead, the amended plan provides 65 spaces in the initial phase that would meet the Municipal Code dimensional standards within generally the same re- arranged parking areas. Such arrangement would appear to acceptably maintain and exceed the existing supply of 62 spaces (approximately 32 existing surface spaces and 30 covered spaces, some of which do not meet current Code standards) for the existing 60 units and the minimum off street parking requirements set forth in Table 4 -3 of the Municipal Code, which states that the existing parking was set by previous plan or subdivided lot prior to the Final PUD approval in 2008. In addition, the proposed future phase Building M would appear to satisfactorily meet the requirement of 9 spaces below and beside the building for its nine (9) planned bedrooms in three (3) units. Overall, the amended application appears adequate as an alternative parking plan on the overall site due to: a) the transit service provided directly on site, and b) that the total of 71 spaces (approximately 38 covered and 33 surface) would increase the parking ratio slightly from approximately 1.08 to 1.12 spaces per unit. 9) Landscaping: Pursuant to Section 16A -4 -320 of the Municipal Code, the applicant represented that the significant reduction in plant material quantities and sizes were proposed for the following reasons which seem acceptable: a. The landscaping is mainly for the benefit of the ownership on the site rather than as a buffer treatment to mitigate public view impacts; b. It was represented by the Applicant that their landscape architect was concerned about the placement of plant material within constrained areas between the buildings and the retaining walls that have limited daylight and room for growth; c. The plant material was scaled down proportionately to the proposed modified redevelopment amendment; Cl. The Applicant represented that their insurance company dictated the removal of certain plant material located in close proximity to structures; e. The tall existing evergreen trees between Buildings A and H beside the pool area are planned to be preserved; and f. The Applicant represented that they plan to enhance the landscaping on the site over time. PC Reso 10 -02 Page 4 of 9 10) Other Municipal Code Requirements: Subject to the recommendations in Section Three of this Resolution, the Planning Commission also found that the land use amendment application was in compliance with the Review Standards established in the following Sections of the Municipal Code: a) 16A -5- 390(3), Review Standards for Minor PUD Amendments in that: i) The proposed amendment seems consistent with the original PUD approval per Ordinance 08 -7, with perhaps the exception of the structure parking for additional spaces that have not been constructed for the benefit of the ownerships' usage, rather than the general public's usage, since the Final PUD approval in 2008; ii) The proposed amendment does not appear to have a substantially adverse effect on the neighborhood surrounding the land where the amendment is proposed, subject to the Applicant addressing the outstanding civil and drainage review comments to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer; and iii) The proposed amendment does not appear to change the basic character of the PUD or surrounding areas; b) Section 16A- 5- 300(c), General Restrictions the amendment application continues to exceed the following restrictions: (c)(4)c. Maximum buildout Fully developed parcels; and (c)(5) Dimensional limitations (a) Maximum allowable height and (e) Minimum setbacks c) Section 16A- 5- 300(c)(6), Community purposes for PUDs a. Provision of restricted housing, subject to Building M being constructed, (d) Encourage better design, and (e) Develop necessary public facilities; d) Section 16A -4 -410, Restricted housing requirements and e) Section 16A -5 -310, Review standards for PUDs. Section Two: Action In accordance with the findings stated in Section One of this Resolution, the Planning Commission recommends that Town Council approve the Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment application for the Snowmass Mountain Condominium's modified renovation project, subject to the recommendations outlined below in Section Three of this Resolution. Section Three: Recommendations Planning Commission makes the following recommendations to Town Council for consideration in their review and action regarding the modified Snowmass Mountain Condominium renovation project: A. Amendment of Final PUD 1. Approval of the overall site plan: proposed building locations, parking layout and circulation system. The project will continue to include a total PC Reso 10 -02 Page 5 of 9 of 60 existing units (59 free market units and 1 manager's unit) within Buildings A through L, that would be modified to a total of 63 units involving 62 free market units and 1 converted manager's unit into an employee unit in Building A provided that future phase Building M is built pursuant to the attached draft Vested Rights Development Agreement for 10 years as proposed by the Applicant (Exhibit "B 2. Approval of the revised parking layout for 65 spaces in the initial phase (approximately 35 surface and 30 covered spaces meeting current Code standards) that would still contain the current count of 62 spaces, which includes the six (6) carport spaces where future phase Building M is proposed. 3. Acceptance of the future phase new Building "M" containing a maximum of three, (3)- bedroom units and a minimum of nine (9) parking spaces pursuant to the development parameters outlined in the modified Final PUD Guide (Exhibit "A and draft Vested Rights Development Agreement for 10 years (Exhibit "B as proposed by the Applicant, provided that an acceptable review and approval process be defined to the satisfaction of the Town Council for a refined design of Building M in the future meeting the development parameters, as proposed by the Applicant in the Development Agreement. 4. Approval of the proposed exterior renovation in terms of the overall architectural character, building materials and construction details. B. General Restrictions 1. Greater Buildout Modified approval of a maximum of 62 free market units plus 1 manager's unit or a total of 36.4 unit equivalents. Such unit equivalency falls within the Municipal Code's maximum based on 65% buildout of the previously approved 65 maximum /future units modified to 63 units that should be revised in the Buildout Chart. The proposed Minor PUD Amendment still achieves one or more Community Purposes as previously proposed (i.e., the increase from 60 units per the 2008 approval), specifically: a) the provision of restricted housing, if future phase Building M is built; b) encourages better design; and c) develops necessary public facilities. Therefore, it is recommended that Town Council adopt an ordinance to modify the future buildout analysis chart pursuant to the amendment PC Reso 10 -02 Page 6 of 9 application. 2. Dimensional Limitations a) Approval of a modified height variation to a 35 -foot maximum height for the proposed Building "M;" and retaining the maximum existing heights for the existing Buildings "A" thru "L" that may not be modified and /or expanded without further approval by the Town; and b) Approval of a setback variation from the platted setbacks to accommodate the future phase Building M. It is recommended that Town Council grant the modified variation requests since the proposed Minor PUD Amendment would continue to achieve one or more Community Purposes, specifically: a) the provision of restricted housing for future phase Building M; b) encourages better design; and c) develops necessary public facilities. 3. Required Parking The proposed future phase Building M adds the following: 9 free market bedrooms requiring 9 spaces due to the requirement of 1 space per bedroom and the conversion of a manager's unit to a restricted unit requiring another space due to the requirement of 1.5 spaces per bedroom. 4. Parking Provisions Approval of the modified arrangement of 65 off street parking spaces (approximately 30 covered and 35 surface) in the initial phase meeting the Municipal Code dimensional requirements, including the 6 existing carport spaces, because the proposal maintains and exceeds the existing supply of 62 spaces for 60 units and the minimum off- street parking requirements set forth in Table 4 -3 of the Municipal Code due to the existing parking being set by previous plan or subdivided lot prior to the Final PUD approval in 2008. The proposed Parking Management Plan (see Exhibit "C to be modified from the 2008 approval to fit the current amendment, should be implemented to ensure the proper usage of the parking supply. 5. Road standards Approval of the access road, Upper Woodbridge, as a 24 -foot wide two -way, traffic lane with a 70 -foot diameter turnaround on the upper parking lot area to provide adequate public transportation and emergency access. The roadway area, increasing from approximately26,272 square feet in the previous approval in 2008 to 27,272 square feet with the amendment, would be snowmelted to improve vehicular access, safety and parking. An adequate snow storage area for any non snowmelted areas should be identified on the final building construction plans. PC Reso 10 -02 Page 7 of 9 C. Review Standards 1. Landscaping Approval of the Interim Landscape Plan forthe replacement retaining wall system and site together with the final Landscape Plan incorporating the plantings around future phase Building M. However, if the tall existing evergreen trees between Buildings A and H beside the pool are planned to be preserved as represented by the Applicant, then such trees should be noted on the plans as being preserved. Further, if such trees should not survive the redevelopment activities, then they should each be replaced with 12 to 15 -foot tall coniferous trees. Additionally, the landscaping for the initial phase should be installed within one year after completion of the replacement retaining walls, and the landscaping forfuture phase Building M should be completed orwithin one year after issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the units and prior to Final issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the units. 2. Restricted Housing As a prerequisite to the granting of the 10 -year vesting for future phase Building M, the current employee housing requirement of 315 square feet should be met within Building A (clubhouse) by the conversion of an existing, non -deed restricted, 2- bedroom, 965 square foot manager's unit to a restricted unit, as proposed by the Applicant pursuant to the attached Development Agreement (Exhibit "B and its referenced exhibits, or that a substitute be provided that is deemed satisfactory to the Town Council. The additional 650 square feet beyond that required for mitigation should be deemed a Community Purpose item. 3. Adequate utility drainage facilities Approval of the Civil Infrastructure /Utility /Drainage Plans of which those necessary plans should be prepared in final form and subject to obtaining final approval from the Town Engineer (see Exhibit "D" for the outstanding review comments) ,in accordance with Section 16A -4 -230, Water supply, sewer disposal and 250, Storm drainage prior to commencement of construction. 4. Solid waste disposal facilities The provision for adequate trash facilities should be more specifically addressed or described for the phase 1 and phase 2 areas of the plan within the Development Agreement, the amended plans, and /or as part of the building construction plans. 5. Spatial Pattern shall be efficient There should be adequate road, utility and /or trails easements provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. PC Reso 10 -02 Page 8 of 9 Any water or sewer line extensions' need to be coordinated and be consistent with the Snowmass Water Sanitation District's service plan. 6. Phasing A phasing and construction management plan should be included as part of the building construction plans to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. 7. Planning Commission has considered the concept of supplemental application and administrative process for Building "M" as put forth by the applicant by way of the draft Development Agreement. Planning Commission believes it is the purview of the Town Council to negotiate such a Development Agreement on behalf of the Town of Snowmass Village and as such, the Planning Commission did not specifically or critically review the terms and conditions of the draft Development Agreement. Generally Planning Commission feels that, given the existence of the 2008 PUD amendment approval, the concept of supplemental application and administrative process as provided in the draft Development Agreement is acceptable subject to Town Council's acceptance and approval of negotiated terms and conditions in the Development Agreement. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED, as amended, by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village on April 21, 2010 upon a motion by Planning Commission Member Crouch, the second of Planning Commission Member Aiken, and a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against. (Commission Members Faurer and Sirkus absent; Commission Member Gustafson recused himself from the review of this application). TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION Z, Bob Purvis, Chairman ATTEST: Krist( Holliday, Plann' g Commission Secretary PC Reso 10 -02 Page 9 of 9 Referenced Exhibits Exhibit A Proposed modified Final PUD Guide with its referenced exhibits, including development parameters and drawings such as, site plans, landscape plans, building elevations and floor plans; Exhibit B Proposed draft Vested Rights Development Agreements with its provisions and referenced exhibits; Exhibit C Parking Management Plan; and Exhibit D Outstanding review comments from Town Departments and Referral Agencies MEMORANDUM TO: Snowmass Village Town Council FROM: Planning Department DATE: May 17, 2010 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 9, SERIES OF 2010 MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM SPA. Applicant: Timberline Condominium Association, Inc. Represented by: Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. (Julie Anne Woods) Planner: Chris Conrad, Planning Director I. PURPOSE AND ACTIONS REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Timberline Condominium Association, Inc. "Applicant is requesting a minor amendment to the Timberline SPA to permit a new athletic club facility, spa and pool area (the "Project as shown and described within their application. An updated application notebook and plans have been placed in your council boxes to replace the documents provided previously. A copy is available in the Planning Department for public viewing. Action Requested: Grant first reading approval, modify or deny Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010. The Public Hearing is scheduled for June 7 prior to second reading. II. SUMMARY OF DESCRIPTION PROJECT: The Applicant proposes to upgrade the facilities around the pool area and the grounds within the complex. The exterior improvements will be located near the existing pool area and will include a new replacement pool with integrated spa and a separate spa with waterfall feature that will be located southeast (toward the ski run) of the existing facility. The existing pool area will be filled in and will be used as a flex space with seating and gardens to hold small weddings and special events. Adjacent to the new pool and spa area and attached by a common wall to the existing 1,390 s.f. meeting area will be a new exercise building with lockers and a steam room addition being approximately 1,137 s.f. in size. The existing mechanical space will remain and a new mechanical room will be incorporated into the new addition. An existing laundry room, being approximately 493 s.f. in size, will be removed and new laundry facilities will be placed in the former exercise area of the existing meeting /conference area /athletic facility. The Applicant also proposes the addition of a hot tub /spa (approximately 16' x 8') in the courtyard adjacent to Building J -3. This spa will be partially submerged into the ground and will be landscaped. Plans for both of these facilities are included under Tabs 10 and 11 of the application notebook. III. BACKGROUND: The Timberline Condominiums "Timberline is currently within the SPA Specially Planned Area zone district. They received approval of a "Precise Plan of a Specially Planned Area" in 1980 as part of discussions with the Town Council relating to the placement of the Timberline Maintenance facility within Town Parking Lot No. 13. In 2000, approval was granted for a minor amendment of the SPA Plan to allow a 1,512 sq. ft. athletic club facility addition, including laundry room, mechanical space and meeting room, adjacent to the Timberline Condominium pool area. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2000 "Ordinance 14 required that the Applicant provide a SPA Land Use Plan specifying the existing zoning parameters for the Timberline Condominium. Ordinance 14 also required that the Applicant deed restrict, as employee housing, the existing studio Units 113, 114 and 213, Timberline Condominiums, or make a cash -in -lieu payment to the Town in the amount of $57,524.00 to satisfy the employee housing mitigation requirement for the 2000 project. Neither condition was satisfied at that time. The current application commits to completing the SPA Land Use Plan and pay cash -in -lieu to satisfy the mitigation requirement. IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: The application is being reviewed as a Minor PUD Amendment pursuant to Section 16A- 5 -390 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code "Municipal Code This process would be consistent with the manner by which the Year 2000 Athletic Club /Meeting Room application was considered. The property is currently zoned SPA -1; however, it was determined that rezoning would not be required due to the scale of the project and that there are no additional uses being considered. V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS: 1. Employee Housing Mitigation (2000). The Applicant is obligated to satisfy the requirement of Condition No. 6 of Ordinance 14 for the employee housing mitigation requirement of the 2000 project. The requirement was to deed restrict, as employee housing, Units 113, 114 and 213, Timberline Condominiums, or to make a cash -in -lieu payment in the amount of $57,524.00 to satisfy the 351.25 s.f. employee housing mitigation requirement for that project. The above amount was determined to be acceptable on May 30, 2000 when the ordinance was adopted. The Mountain View Phase II was used as a comparable to determine the cash -in -lieu amount and it was found to cost approximately $159.00 per square foot of employee housing constructed when the project was completed in 1999. A three percent (3.0 Consumer Price Index "CPI increase was added to establish the $163.77/s.f. cost at the time the ordinance was adopted in 2000. The current proposal of the Applicant is to make a cash -in -lieu payment instead of deed restricting the unit. Condition No. 6 specified that the Applicant could choose whether to deed restrict the units or pay the cash -in -lieu amount. The Planning Commission recommends that it would be appropriate include an increase in the Year 2000 amount based upon the CPI from 2000 to date. The CPI from 2000 (173.2 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 38.47% increase. The current cost including CPI would be $226.77/s.f. or $79,653.96 cash -in -lieu for the 2000 Project. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends increasing the $57,524.00 cash -in -lieu required in 2000 by the CPI to date for a total of $79,653.96 due at this time to satisfy the 2000 requirement. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation. 2. Employee Housing Mitigation (Current Proposal). For the purpose of determining the mitigation employee housing requirement for the current proposal, a 115% redevelopment credit, pursuant to Section 16A- 4- 410(e)(1) of the Municipal Code, could be considered for the meeting room /athletic club constructed in 2000. The 1,512 sq. ft. addition involved: 1) 426 sq. ft. considered as a "Health Club 2) a 500 sq. ft. Meeting Room that should be considered as "Conference Center and 3) 586 sq. ft. that should be classified under "Multi Family" as support facilities to the overall condominium project and which does not require mitigation. The current employee generation rates require that "Conference Center" (the meeting room) be calculated at 0.97 jobs /1,000 sq. ft. and "Health Club" at 0.96 jobs /1,000 sq. ft. (Note: the "Health Club" generation rate in 2000 was 1.47 jobs /1,000 sq. ft.). The redevelopment credit for the 2000 project will be: 426 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.409 jobs generated 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 0.894 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 180.23 s.f. mitigation housing required of the 2000 project under the current code. 180.23 s.f. X 115% 207.26 s.f. Redevelopment Credit The current project involves redevelopment of the 2000 building and includes a new health club addition. 117 s.f of the existing exercise room will be converted to laundry and mechanical room. The meeting room, bathrooms and steam room will remain. The redeveloped and new space requiring mitigation will involve 249 s.f. existing and 1,019 s.f. new "Health Club" space (1,268 s.f. total). The 500 s.f. meeting room will remain as "Conference Center" space. The employee housing mitigation requirement for the project will be: 1,019 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 1.217 jobs generated 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 1.702 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 343.123 s.f. mitigation housing required Including the redevelopment credit, 135.86 s.f. of mitigation housing is required for this project. The Applicant is requesting that cash -in -lieu be accepted to satisfy this requirement. Section 16A- 4- 420(4)(c) of the Municipal Code provides that, at the sole discretion of the Town Council, the Applicant may pay cash -in -lieu for minor developments rather than provide the required amount of mitigation housing. Cash -in -lieu of employee housing is intended to include the net cost (total cost less the amount covered by rental or sale income) of land and all related planning, design, site development, construction and construction management costs of the project, in current dollars, which would be incurred by the Town in order to provide the required amount of restricted housing. The Town Housing Department estimates that the Rodeo Place duplexes (currently constructed) are costing approximately $289/s.f. (excluding land and infrastructure costs). The 1,343 s.f. units are being sold for $264,550.00/unit or approximately $199/s.f. indicating an actual subsidy (total cost w /out land and infrastructure minus sales price) of $90.s.f.. The Town Council finds that cash -in -lieu will be accepted and that the Mountain View Phase II (plus CPI to date) will serve as an appropriate comparable to be used for determining the cash -in -lieu payment. The Project constitutes minor development and the Rodeo Place duplexes are not well suited for use as infrastructure and land costs would be difficult to determine and, if included, would not reflect customary or comparable development costs to construct housing elsewhere. The Mountain View Phase II was determined to cost approximately $159.00/s.f. in 1999. The CPI from 1999 (166.6 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 45.07% increase. The 1999 cost including CPI would be $230.66/s.f. or $31,337.47 cash -in -lieu for the Project. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recognizes that acceptance of cash -in -lieu is at the sole discretion of the Town Council. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends permitting cash -in -lieu in the amount specified above. 3. Landscaping. The landscaping plan identifies three (3) Conifer trees, being 16 caliper inches in size, that are to be removed along with one (1) 13 caliper inch Conifer. The current plan proposes Serviceberry, Crabapple and Aspen as an adequate mitigation replacement. No new evergreens are being proposed. Section 16A -4 -320 (a)(1) of the Municipal Code states that: "existing vegetation and trees that are removed shall be replaced with appropriate, similar size plantings and shall be supplemented with additional plantings that help to screen the development... The planting schedule includes deciduous trees and shrubs that will not contribute substantively to screening the pool area from being visible from the ski slope. The Applicant submitted a letter from their landscape architect (See Tab 9 of application notebook) stating that it would be difficult to relocate trees of the size of the existing Conifers and the Applicant has agreed to amend the landscape plan to incorporate evergreens and include no fruit bearing trees. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended the relocation of the existing Conifers elsewhere within the condominium project, that the plan contain no fruit bearing trees or other vegetation and that the plan be amended to provide additional landscaping slope side to soften the visual appearance of the pool fencing. They further recommended that the Applicant propose and commit to said planting unless specifically not permitted by the Aspen Skiing Company. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission except that relocation of the existing Conifers not be required but that evergreens be incorporated into the landscape plan. 4. SVRA Land Transfer. The Project will be located on land currently owned by the Snowmass Village Resort Association "SVRA Property transfers will occur between SVRA, Laurelwood Condominiums and the Applicant (See Tab 8 in application notebook). It is the position of the Planning Director that Subdivision Exemption approval from the Town will be required prior to any land transfer but that construction of the Project could be permitted provided a construction easement is obtained from SVRA. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends allowing construction provided an easement is obtained. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees. 5. Ski Easement. The Project involves encroachment into the ski easement held by the Aspen Skiing Company (ASC The Applicant should work with ASC to obtain authorization enabling planting on the slope side of the pool fencing to soften the visual appearance and provide a natural buffer between skiers and the fencing wall. The agreement could provide ASC the ability to require removal or relocation of any trees within one (1) ski season of their planting. The Town will permit construction of the Project provided the existing easement is vacated in the area of the Project or an encroachment easement is granted by ASC. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends planting along the ski slope side of the project unless prohibited by ASC and allowing construction provided an easement is obtained. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees. 6. Lighting. Pursuant to Section 18 -273 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission reviews and approves the lighting plan submitted as part of Land Use applications. They have found that the proposed lighting is consistent with the Multi Family lighting standards found in Section 18 -265 of the Municipal Code. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission approved the lighting plan as submitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff found that the plan to be consistent with Section 18 -265 of the Municipal Code. 7. Energy Conservation. The Applicant is aware that the Energy Conservation Plan submitted for review by the Planning Commission should be supplemented with a more detailed energy utilization analysis regarding the snowmelt areas, heating systems, the swimming pool, saunas, Jacuzzis and other significant energy- consuming elements of the project and an estimate of the anticipated energy gain through the planned energy systems. This is not a specific submittal requirement but is felt to be appropriate for this project. The Applicant has agreed to submit it for second reading and could provide more information during the May 17 meeting. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission found that greater energy conservation could be achieved by not snow melting the contemplated courtyard where the existing pool is located. Staff Recommendation: The Applicant has considered the Planning Commission request and will respond at the meeting. Staff recommends that the area of the existing pool not be snow melted, but rather, that the area be wood decked or that the filled pool area be planted. 8. Fencing /Retaining Wall. The application shows a five (5) foot tall stainless steel mesh (1 squares) guardrail screen surrounding the pool area. It is mounted onto the concrete retaining wall that varies in height from 1' 2' above finished grade on the ski slope side. An additional 2'— 6" screen extension may be added on top of the fence to adjust to winter snow piling up along the slope. The extension will be removed in the spring. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended that the retaining wall concrete be colored a natural earth tone and that the fence be powder coated in a natural green shade to lessen the stark stainless steel appearance, provide invisibility of the fence during summer and provide contrast in the winter to provide enhanced visibility of the fence, which should increase safety of ski area users. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission. 9. Ancillary Floor Area. The Applicant has submitted a "Chart of Proposed Existing Land Use" See Page 4 of Tab 1 in the application notebook) intended to address a condition of Ordinance 14 that required in 2000 that a "Site Development and Land Use Plan" be submitted that outlined the zoning parameters for Timberline Condominiums. The Applicant is proposing that an additional 500 square feet be permitted for each existing building. The intent is to provide the potential for small additions /modifications to these building without necessity of processing a Minor PUD Amendment for each instance in the future. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission found that allowing the additional square footage should be favorably considered by the Town Council provided each proposal is reviewed as an Administrative Modification by the Planning Director and that the floor area should not be used for increasing the size of any residential unit or the commercial restaurant. They further recommend that the "Chart" be reformatted as a SPA (PUD) Guide for Town Council review and approval. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends that Town Council grant first reading approval of the ordinance, as may be amended at the meeting. VII. NEXT STEPS: The Public Hearing and second reading is scheduled for June 7. Attachments: 1) Planning Commission Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 2) Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 Handout: Supplemented Application Packet (In council boxes) ATTACHMENT 1 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03 SERIES OF 2010 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING A MINOR. AMENDMENT TO THE TIMBERLINE S.P.A. BY THE TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC. TO PERMIT A NEW ATHLETIC CLUB FACILITY AND POOL AREA. WHEREAS, Timberline Condominium Association Inc. "Applicant has applied for a minor amendment to the Timberline SPA to permit a new athletic club facility and pool area (the "Project as shown and described within Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Timberline Condominiums "Timberline is currently within the SPA Specially Planned Area zone district; and WHEREAS, Timberline received approval of a "Precise Plan of a Specially Planned Area" in 1980 as part of discussions with the Town Council relating to the placement of the Timberline Maintenance facility within Town Parking Lot No. 13; and WHEREAS, Timberline received approval for a minor amendment of the SPA Plan in 2000 for a 1,512 sq. ft. athletic club facility addition, including laundry room, mechanical space and meeting room, adjacent to the Timberline Condominium pool area; and WHEREAS, the current proposal involves a new replacement pool with spas southeast (toward the ski run) of the existing meeting area and a new 1,137 s.f. exercise building with lockers and a steam room; and WHEREAS, it is also proposed locate a new hot tub /spa in the courtyard adjacent to Building J -3; and WHEREAS, this application does not incorporate any new uses within the Timberline Condominium property and it was determined that the Project could be considered as a minor SPA modification pursuant to Section 16A -5 -390 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code "Municipal Code and WHEREAS, it has been determined that an SPA Land Use Plan, specifying the existing zoning parameters for the Timberline Condominium, had not been completed as required by the 2000 approval authorized by Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2000 "Ordinance 14 and WHEREAS, Ordinance 14 also required that the Applicant deed restrict, as employee housing, the existing studio Units 113, 114 and 213, Timberline Condominiums, or make a cash -in -lieu payment to the Town in the amount of $57,524.00 to satisfy the employee housing mitigation requirement for the 2000 project; and WHEREAS, the mitigation requirement was not satisfied and the Applicant now proposes to pay the appropriate cash -in -lieu employee housing mitigation amount for both the 2000 and current development proposals; and PC Reso. 10 -03 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heard a presentation by the applicant and the recommendation by the Town staff regarding the Project application; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One General Findings. The Planning Commission finds as follows: 1. The applicant has submitted sufficient information pursuant to Section 16A- 5- 390(2)(b) of the Municipal Code to permit the Town Staff and the Planning Commission an adequate review of the proposal. 2. All public notification requirements, as specified within Section 16A- 5 -60(b) of the Municipal Code, will be satisfied relating to the Public Hearing scheduled to occur June 7, 2010. 3. The application, subject to satisfying the conditions stated below, is consistent with the applicable review standards specified within Section 16A- 5- 390(3)of the Municipal Code. Section Two Specific Findings /Recommendations. The Planning Commission further finds as follows: 1. Employee Housing Mitigation (2000). The Applicant is obligated to satisfy the requirement of Condition No. 6 of Ordinance 14 for the employee housing mitigation requirement of the 2000 project. The requirement was to deed restrict, as employee housing, Units 113, 114 and 213, Timberline Condominiums, or to make a cash -in -lieu payment in the amount of $57,524.00 to satisfy the 351.25 s.f. employee housing mitigation requirement for that project. The above amount was determined to be acceptable on May 30, 2000 when the ordinance was adopted. The Mountain View Phase 11 was used as a comparable to determine the cash -in -lieu amount and it was found to cost approximately $159.00 per square foot of employee housing constructed when the project was completed in 1999. A three percent (3.0 Consumer Price Index "CPI increase was added to establish the $163.77/s.f. cost at the time the ordinance was adopted in 2000. The current proposal of the Applicant is to make a cash -in -lieu payment instead of deed restricting the unit. Condition No. 6 specified that the Applicant could choose whether to deed restrict the units or pay the cash -in -lieu amount. The Planning Commission recommends that it would be appropriate include an increase in the Year 2000 amount based upon the CPI from 2000 to date. The CPI from 2000 (173.2 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 38.47% increase. The current cost including CPI would be $226.77/s.f. or $79,653.96 cash -in -lieu for the 2000 Project. PC Reso. 10 -03 Page 3 2. Employee Housing Mitigation (Current Proposal). For the purpose of determining the mitigation employee housing requirement for the current proposal, a 115% redevelopment credit, pursuant to Section 16A- 4- 410(e)(1) of the Municipal Code, could be considered for the meeting room /athletic club constructed in 2000. The 1,512 sq. ft. addition involved: 1) 426 sq. ft. considered as a "Health Club 2) a 500 sq. ft. Meeting Room that should be considered as "Conference Center and 3) 586 sq. ft. that should be classified under "Multi- Family" as support facilities to the overall condominium project and which does not require mitigation. The current employee generation rates require that "Conference Center" (the meeting room) be calculated at 0.97 jobs /1,000 sq. ft. and "Health Club" at 0.96 jobs /1,000 sq. ft. (Note: the "Health Club" generation rate in 2000 was 1.47 jobs /1,000 sq. ft.). The redevelopment credit for the 2000 project will be: 426 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.409 jobs generated 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 0.894 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 180.23 s.f. mitigation housing required of the 2000 project under the current code. 180.23 s.f. X 115% 207.26 s.f. Redevelopment Credit The current project involves redevelopment of the 2000 building and includes a new health club addition. 117 s.f of the existing exercise room will be converted to laundry and mechanical room. The meeting room, bathrooms and steam room will remain. The redeveloped and new space requiring mitigation will involve 249 s.f. existing and 1,019 s.f. new "Health Club" space (1,268 s.f. total). The 500 s.f. meeting room will remain as "Conference Center" space. The employee housing mitigation requirement for the project will be: 1,019 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 1.217 jobs generated 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 1.702 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 343.123 s.f. mitigation housing required Including the redevelopment credit, 135.86 s.f. of mitigation housing is required for this project. The Applicant is requesting that cash -in -lieu be accepted to satisfy this requirement. Section 16A- 4- 420(4)(c) of the Municipal Code provides that, at the sole discretion of the Town Council, the Applicant may pay cash -in -lieu for minor developments rather than provide the required amount of mitigation housing. Cash -in -lieu of employee housing is intended to include the net cost (total cost less the amount covered by rental or sale income) of land and all related planning, design, site development, construction and construction management costs of the project, in current dollars, which would be incurred by the Town in order to provide the required amount of restricted housing. The Town Housing Department estimates that the Rodeo Place duplexes (currently constructed) are costing approximately $289/s.f. (excluding land and infrastructure costs). The 1,343 s.f. units are being sold for $264,550.00/unit or approximately PC Reso. 10 -03 Page 4 $199/s.f. indicating an actual subsidy (total cost w /out land and infrastructure minus sales price) of $90.s.f.. The Planning Commission recommends that the Mountain View Phase II (plus CPI to date) comparable be used for determining any cash -in -lieu payment. The Project constitutes minor development and the Rodeo Place duplexes are not well suited for use as infrastructure and land costs would be difficult to determine and, if included, would not reflect customary or comparable development costs to construct housing elsewhere. The Mountain View Phase II was determined to cost approximately $159.00/s.f. in 1999. The CPI from 1999 (166.6 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 45.07% increase. The 1999 cost including CPI would be $230.66/s.f. or $31,337.47 cash -in -lieu for the Project. 3. Landscaping. The landscaping plan identifies three (3) Conifer trees, being 16 caliper inches in size, that are to be removed along with one (1) 13 caliper inch Conifer. The plan proposes Serviceberry, Crabapple and Aspen as an adequate mitigation replacement. No new evergreens are being proposed. Section 16A -4 -320 (a)(1) of the Municipal Code states that: "existing vegetation and trees that are removed shall be replaced with appropriate, similar size plantings and shall be supplemented with additional plantings that help to screen the development... The planting schedule includes deciduous trees and shrubs that will not contribute substantively to screening the pool area from being visible from the ski slope. Consideration should be given to relocating the existing Conifers elsewhere within the condominium project and to provide additional landscaping slope side to soften the visual appearance of the pool fencing. It is recommended that the Applicant propose and commit to said planting unless specifically not permitted by the Aspen Skiing Company. 4. SVRA Land Transfer. The Project will be located on land currently owned by the Snowmass Village Resort Association "SVRA Property transfers will occur between SVRA, Laurelwood Condominiums and the Applicant. The Planning Commission finds that Subdivision Exemption approval from the Town will be required and recognizes that the application will be considered by Town Council only. 5. Ski Easement. The Project involves encroachment into the ski easement held by the Aspen Skiing Company (ASC The Applicant should work with ASC to obtain authorization enabling planting on the slope side of the pool fencing to soften the visual appearance and provide a natural buffer between skiers and the fencing wall. The agreement could provide ASC the ability to require removal or relocation of any trees within one (1) ski season of their planting. 6. Lighting. Pursuant to Section 18 -273 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission has reviewed the lighting plan submitted by the Applicant. The Planning Commission PC Reso. 10 -03 Page 5 finds the proposed lighting to be consistent with the Multi Family lighting standards found in Section 18 -265 and not excessive. 7. Energy Conservation. The Planning Commission finds that greater energy conservation could be achieved by not snow melting the contemplated courtyard where the existing pool is located. 8. Fencing /Retaining Wall. The application shows a five (5) foot tall stainless steel mesh (1 '/2 squares) guardrail screen surrounding the pool area. It is mounted onto the concrete retaining wall that varies in height from V— 2' above finished grade on the ski slope side. An additional 2'— 6" screen extension may be added on top of the fence to adjust to winter snow piling up along the slope. It will be removed in the Spring. It is recommended that the concrete be colored a natural earth tone and that the fence be powder coated in a natural green shade to lessen the stark stainless steel appearance and provide invisibility of the fence during summer while providing contrast in the winter to provide enhanced visibility of the fence, which should increase safety of ski area users. 9. Ancillary Floor Area. The Applicant has submitted a "Chart of Proposed Existing Land Use" intended to address a condition of Ordinance 14 that required in 2000 that a "Site Development and Land Use Plan" be submitted that outlined the zoning parameters for Timberline Condominiums. The Applicant is proposing that an additional 500 square feet be permitted for each existing building. The intent is to provide the potential for small additions /modifications to these building without necessity of processing a Minor PUD Amendment for each instance in the future. The Planning Commission recommends that this be favorably considered by the Town Council provided each proposal be reviewed as an Administrative Modification by the Planning Director and that the floor area may not be used for increasing the size of any residential unit or the commercial restaurant. It is further recommended that the "Chart", attached as Exhibit "B" be reformatted as a SPA (PUD) Guide for final Town Council review and approval. 10. Building Location Adjustment. The Applicant discussed during the May 5 Planning Commission meeting that there was a need to shift the building location, as shown on Exhibit "C so as to avoid undermining existing utilities immediately uphill of the original location. The Planning Commission finds the shift to be minor and that the amendment did not affect their review or recommendations. Section Three Action. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of a minor amendment to the Timberline S.P.A. to permit a pool /athletic club facility addition and spa located in the courtyard adjacent to Building J -3 (the "Project as shown and described within Exhibit A and application documents. Further, any approval should be subject to the conditions stated in Section Four below. PC Reso. 10 -03 Page 6 Section Four Recommended Conditions. It is recommended that approval should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant has provided consents to this application from the ASC for any encroachment onto their ski slope land or easement and the SVRA for any encroachment onto West Village Common Area not currently deeded to the Applicant. No development shall occur within land area not owned or fully controlled by the Applicant unless written authorization or an easement has been obtained from ASC and SVRA. This needs to be provided prior to building permit issuance unless ownership of the land containing the Project can be verified by survey or title examiner's opinion prior to that date. 2. The construction management plan will be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application and may be modified by the Planning Director as necessary to respond to complaints that may occur or matters not apparent at the time of this application review. Said plan will specify that Lot 13 will not be used for construction parking and construction activities will not occur during summer concert nights. Any intended use of the Town parking lots to store material or use as a staging area will need specific approval of the Town Public Works Director or Town Manager. 3. The landscape plan shall be amended such that there will be no fruit bearing trees or vegetation. 4. The Applicant should provide cash -in -lieu or other mitigation as determined by Town Council to satisfy the employee housing mitigation requirements of the 2000 and this approval. 5. All requirements of the Town Renewable Energy Offset Program "REOP shall be satisfied prior to building permit issuance. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on the motion of Planning Commission member Aiken and the second of Planning Commission member Yocum by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against, on this 5th day of May, 2010. Chairman Purvis and Planning Commission member Faurer were absent. Member Gustafson was recused. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSIO Do Crouch, Vice Chairman ATTEST: 1 �rP Z Kristi Holliday, Planning eommission Secretary Exhibit A PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 1 of 8) Tab 1: Application, Including Statements of Consistency and Compliance Part 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION General Description of Proiect The Timberline Condominium Association (TCA), located at 690 Carriage Way, is experiencing many pool failures due to the age of the existing outdoor pool. The Association has decided to fill in the existing pool, demolish and remove the small addition (approximately 24' x 17') to the existing lodge building (J- 5) that contains laundry facilities, and upgrade the facilities around the pool area and the grounds within the complex. The exterior improvements in the vicinity of the existing pool area will include a new pool with integrated spa and a separate spa with waterfall feature that will be located southeast (toward the ski run) of the existing facility. The existing pool area will be filled in and will be used as a flex space with seating and gardens to hold small weddings and special events. Adjacent to the new pool and spa area and attached by a common wall to the existing meeting area (approximately 1,390 s.f.), will be a new exercise building with lockers and a steam room (approximately 1,137 s.f.). The existing mechanical space will remain and a new mechanical room will be incorporated into the new addition. The small addition attached to the lodge building (that contains the existing laundry area approximately 408 s.f.) will be demolished and removed and new laundry facilities will be placed in the former exercise area of the existing meeting /conference area /athletic facility. In approximately the same location where the existing laundry area is, a new bridge is proposed that will link the existing rooftop patio (over the existing athletic facility /meeting room) to the Lodge (J -5) to allow better access to this building for residents and guests. Please see Tab 11 for the location of the proposed bridge. One other improvement proposed as part of this project is the addition of a hot tub /spa (approximately 16'x 8') just west of Building J -3 (see proposed spa (S -2) location on Sheets C3.0 and C3.1 under Tab 10). This spa will be partially submerged into the ground and will be landscaped. Plans for both of these facilities are included under Tab 10 Development Plan and Tab 11 Building Elevations, Floor Plans and Model. Land Transference, Ski Easement and Owners' Permission Similar to other condominiums in the area, TCA does not own the land within its complex. The land is under the ownership of the Snowmass Village Resort Association (SVRA). Recently, SVRA approached the condominium associations about transferring lands, and some survey work has been completed (see Tab 8 for a Boundary Line Adjustment Survey completed by SGM Engineering) to divide up the SVRA land and distribute to the various complexes. SVRA has provided authorization (see Tab 4) for TCA to proceed with this Minor PUD Amendment request while the land is in the process of being conveyed. As requested by Staff, the Exhibit A that follows that letter includes the Boundary Line Adjustment Survey completed by SGM Engineering and the legal description from Steve Ehlers of SGM. In addition to working with SVRA, TCA representatives are working with the Aspen Ski Company (Skico) on adjusting the existing ski easement located on SVRA land. The easement falls within the land area Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 1 Exhibit A PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 2 of 8) proposed for this development. Included under Tab 4 is an e -mail exchange between Mary Harris, Manager of TCA and David Clark, attorney for the Ski Company, indicating that Skico has no objection to allowing the pool /hot tub to encroach into this area. The applicant also met with Skico Mountain Manager Steve Sewell to discuss the project, including the possibility of allowing soil nailing in proximity to the easement, if necessary, and allowing as much flexibility as possible in regards to construction /maintenance of the improvements as the project evolves. Mr. Sewell verbally indicated he had no objection for TCA to proceed with their request for development approval while legal descriptions and details are worked out. Included under Tab 6 Legal Description is an Exhibit provided by Sopris Engineering that indicates the location of the proposed easement. Upon finalization with Skico, a legal description for this easement will be developed and recorded upon project approval by Town Council. The applicant has also been working with the Laurelwood Owners Association regarding an equal land swap as part of the transfer of lands. A letter from Dave Jacobsen from the Laurelwood Board explaining the agreement and providing a draft Boundary Line Adjustment Plat indicating the lands to be swapped is also provided under Tab 4. Land Use History and Specific Request for a Minor PUD Amendment According to Town records, TCA had a "Precise Plan of a Specially Planned Area" approved in 1980 as referenced in Series 2000 Ord. 14 (see Tab 17). However, a copy of the approved plan has not been located in either the Town or TCA records. As a condition of approval for the "athletic club facility" in 2000, TCA was required to record a final development plan within 60 days. According to Town Staff, this condition was not met, although TCA was issued a Certificate of Occupancy for the facilities when they were completed, so the assumption is that a final development plan was provided for recordation. It is both Town Staff and the applicant's desire to rectify this recording oversight and record a final development plan for this proposed project that will reflect both existing conditions and proposed improvements, upon project approval by Town Council. TCA is requesting a Minor PUD Amendment to their previously approved SPA in order to allow the pool and exercise building expansion and new spas. The project qualifies as a Minor PUD Amendment because it meets all of the following criteria as set forth in Table 5 -3 of Sec. 16A -5 -300: A minor PUD is a project that meets all of the following criteria: New Development Contains no more than four (4) dwelling/hotel/ lodge or other residential units. Contains no more than four thousand (4,000) sq. ft. of nonresidential space. This application meets the requirements for a Minor PUD Amendment as set forth under Section 16A -5- 390 Amendment of final PUD. A pre application conference was held with the Town Planner, Chris Conrad, on March 4, 2010. This application is being submitted accordance with Section 16A -5 -390 and this Tab 1 addresses the following required sections: Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 2 Exhibit "A" PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 3 of 8) 16A -5 -40 (b) Minimum Contents; 16A -5 -300 (c) General Restrictions; 16A -5 -310 Review Standards; and Sec. 16A -4 -340. Building design guidelines to preserve community character. In addition, per section 16A -5 -40 (c) Consolidation, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Director allow the consolidation of all submission requirements as part of this single land use application. This may pertain to waivers or other issues that arise as part of this land use review. Chart of Proposed Existing Land Use Table 1 -1 provides a summary of the proposed uses and sizes of the existing and proposed facilities within the TCA complex. Existing conditions information was taken from the recorded condominium plat. It is the intent of this Minor PUD Amendment to seek an approval for all of the existing structures to remain while allowing the expansion for the pool amenities, spas and exercise building. Any variations that may be necessary for these facilities as the project develops are requested as part of this Minor PUD Amendment. Please note, however, that as indicated in Table 1 -1 below, the applicant is also seeking approval for a small amount of additional square footage (500 s.f.) for each building to allow some flexibility in the future should additional enclosed facilities be required without having to go through an additional amendment process, but only administrative review as required. Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 3 Exhibit "All PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 201 (Page 4 of 8) A 1u 0 4 cf) m 0 0 0 0 m co a c/) 1 /r r j� i li II�� z �A z S2 0 w fn TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUMS S OPRIS ENGMURING, LLC. SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO FcWm CONSULTANn 1 1-1 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN- ENLARGED 031 -10 SUBMITTAL Exhibit "A" PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 5 of 8) o, r� f� ZJq i 60 YIY. SAP' m O laa N N O g0 -0 94 A3 4 70 t UM7 r m ,vsve fAV.YRME D ti O l3 7p O N r O m i I I i i L.� 6 r 6b m a 0 z g v Z g o 4 N O q a N O 7 77 1 D ga 9 TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM POOL SPA SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO at PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 i (Page 6 of 8) w A ga o yy p A i 3 f y 3 Y i is r <r u� p Y SAC �'�i• ++w1�'° P` y y F,%Y d' 4 F t}k 4,r F9F q3' IU s L A y y A 1 ft 'O FF 4 Timberline Condominium o g ���o Y s L a Pool Spa x a e a a: o 9 Snowmass Village, Wanda 0 Exhibit "A" PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 7 of 8) l� e a qry jY` Z 4Y 4 a� i�91 X C i ru. J 11 TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM f' POOL SPA �kj� SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO m x o IIII LPN L PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 8 of 8) I il G e m i i ABOV FIN. GRADE I I� L i i Ji I\l L-A I I_i r i I n `fir -5•` I OF' ;OxAL E XT ENT ION FENCE -L -j I a z m 9J: BOLTED ::"OWECT;ON TO BE ADDED TO FERUANENT ENCIfJG FOR LARGE 5110I4 YEARS I L THKIBE POOH. SPA y3 SNOWMA.SS VILLAGE, CO ^m =a Exhibit "B" PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 (Page 1 of 1) Table 1 -1 CHART OF PROPOSED EXISTING LAND USE Use Building Number of Existing Square Proposed Existing Open Space Maximum Floors Footage Square Footage Acreage with proposed Height (approximate- (approximate) with SVRA Band not including proposed balconies or SVRA patios) land /Min. Lot Area Residential 3 17,254 17,754 Approx. 69% (prior to 34' Building) -1 120,901 sf development Residential 3 19,157 19,657 Or 2.775 43.5' Building J -2 acres Residential 3 20,104 20,604 34.5' Building J -3 Residential 3 20,078 20,578 345 Building J -4 Lodge 18,474 18,974 38' Residential BuildingJ -5 Sub -Total 10,819 Residential Sub -Total 3,886 Commercial Sub -Total 3,769 Lodge Existing 1,390; 1,575 sf 1,390 15'- 3" Meeting Space existing pool (J -6) area to remain Sub -Total All 96,457 98,957 Proposed New 1 1,137 68% (after 22' 1" to Exercise development) top of Building (J -7) guardrail Proposed New 1 6,160 sf of pool NA Pool /Spa and patio (S -1) Proposed New 492 sf of pool NA Spa (S -2) and patio Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. March 31, 2010 Page 4 Exhibit "C" a PC Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010 Z (Page 1 of 1) G� A CF. 0 4 rri �I N N EXK'T TBp OO 1 1 0 0 r 'ZIZ TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM` Ewa POOL SPA k7 e SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO "m ,P ATTACHMENT 2 1 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 2 TOWN COUNCIL 3 4 ORDINANCE No. 09 5 SERIES OF 2010 6 7 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE TIMBERLINE S.P.A. 8 BY THE TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC. TO PERMIT A NEW 9 ATHLETIC CLUB FACILITY AND POOL AREA. 10 11 WHEREAS, Timberline Condominium Association Inc. "Applicant has applied 12 for a minor amendment to the Timberline SPA to permit a new athletic club facility and 13 pool area (the "Project as shown and described within Exhibit A; and 14 15 WHEREAS, the Timberline Condominiums "Timberline is currently within the 16 SPA Specially Planned Area zone district; and 17 18 WHEREAS, Timberline received approval of a "Precise Plan of a Specially 19 Planned Area" in 1980 as part of discussions with the Town Council relating to the 20 placement of the Timberline Maintenance facility within Town Parking Lot No. 13; and 21 22 WHEREAS, Timberline received approval for a minor amendment of the SPA 23 Plan in 2000 for a 1,512 sq. ft. athletic club facility addition, including laundry room, 24 mechanical space and meeting room, adjacent to the Timberline Condominium pool 25 area; and 26 27 WHEREAS, the current proposal involves a new replacement pool with spas 28 southeast (toward the ski run) of the existing meeting area and a new 1,137 s.f. exercise 29 building with lockers and a steam room; and 30 31 WHEREAS, it is also proposed to locate a new hot tub /spa in the courtyard 32 adjacent to Building J -3; and 33 34 WHEREAS, this application does not incorporate any new uses within the 35 Timberline Condominium property and it was determined that the Project could be 36 considered as a minor SPA modification pursuant to Section 16A- 5- 390(1)(b) of the 37 Snowmass Village Municipal Code "Municipal Code and 38 39 WHEREAS, it has been determined that an SPA Land Use Plan, specifying the 40 existing zoning parameters for the Timberline Condominium, had not been completed as 41 required by the 2000 approval authorized by Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2000 42 "Ordinance 14 and 43 44 WHEREAS, Ordinance 14 also required that the Applicant deed restrict, as 45 employee housing, the existing studio Units 113, 114 and 213, Timberline 46 Condominiums, or make a cash -in -lieu payment to the Town in the amount of 47 $57,524.00 to satisfy the employee housing mitigation requirement for the 2000 project; 48 and 49 TC Ord 10 -09 Page 2 of 7 50 WHEREAS, the mitigation requirement was not satisfied and the Applicant now 51 proposes to pay the appropriate cash -in -lieu employee housing mitigation amount for 52 both the 2000 and current development proposals; and 53 54 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application on May 5, 2010 55 and passed Resolution No. 3, Series of 2010, making its recommendations to the Town 56 Council; and 57 58 WHEREAS, the Town Council commenced review of the application on May 17, 59 2010 and further discussed the item on June 7, 2010; and 60 61 WHEREAS, the public hearing notice was published in the Snowmass Sun on 62 May 5, 2010 for the Town Council meeting on June 7, 2010 to hear a presentation of the 63 proposal by the Applicant, consider Town staff and Planning Commission 64 recommendations and public comments along with the application review; and 65 66 WHEREAS, the application was reviewed and processed in accordance with the 67 provisions outlined in Sections 16A -5 -390 of the Municipal Code. 68 69 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of 70 Snowmass Village, as follows: 71 72 Section One Findings. The Town Council hereby finds that: 73 74 General Findings 75 76 1. The applicant has submitted sufficient information pursuant to Section 16A -5- 77 390(2)(b) of the Municipal Code to permit the Town Staff and the Planning 78 Commission an adequate review of the proposal. 79 80 2. All public notification requirements, as specified within Section 16A- 5 -60(b) of the 81 Municipal Code, will be satisfied relating to the Public Hearing scheduled to occur 82 June 7, 2010. 83 84 3. The proposed application qualifies as a `Minor Amendment' pursuant to Code 85 Section 16A- 5- 390(1)(b) and the amendment, subject to satisfying the conditions 86 stated below, satisfactorily complies with the review standards outlined below per 87 Section 16A -5- 390(3) as follows: 88 89 a) The proposed amendment is consistent with, or an enhancement of, the 90 original PUD approval; 91 92 b) The proposed amendment does not have a substantially adverse effect on 93 the neighborhood surrounding the land where the amendment is proposed, 94 nor has a substantially adverse impact on the enjoyment of land abutting 95 upon or across the street from the subject property; 96 TC Ord 10 -09 Page 3 of 7 97 c) The proposed amendment would not change the basic character of the PUD 98 or surrounding areas; and 99 100 d) The proposed amendment acceptably complies with the other applicable stan- 101 dards of this Division 3, Planned Unit Development, including but not limited 102 to Section 16A- 5- 300(c), General Restrictions and Section 16A -5 -310, 103 Review Standards 104 105 Specific Findings 106 107 1. Employee Housing Mitigation (2000). The Applicant is obligated to satisfy the 108 requirement of Condition No. 6 of Ordinance 14 for the employee housing 109 mitigation requirement of the 2000 project. The requirement was deed restrict 110 three (3) units withing the project that were used to house employees or to make 111 a cash -in -lieu payment in the amount of $57,524.00 to satisfy the 351.25 s.f. 112 employee housing mitigation requirement for that project. 113 114 The above amount was determined to be acceptable on May 30, 2000 when the 115 ordinance was adopted. The current proposal of the Applicant is to make a cash 116 in -lieu payment instead of deed restricting the units. The Town Council finds 117 that it would be appropriate include an increase in the Year 2000 amount based 118 upon the CPI from 2000 to date. 119 120 The CPI from 2000 (173.2 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 121 38.47% increase. The current cost including CPI would be $226.77/s.f. or 122 $79,653.96 cash -in -lieu for the 2000 Project. 123 124 2. Employee Housing Mitigation (Current Proposal). For the purpose of 125 determining the mitigation employee housing requirement for the current 126 proposal, a 115% redevelopment credit, pursuant to Section 16A- 4- 410(e)(1) of 127 the Municipal Code, could be considered for the meeting room /athletic club 128 constructed in 2000. The 1,512 sq. ft. addition involved: 1) 426 sq. ft. considered 129 as a "Health Club 2) a 500 sq. ft. Meeting Room that should be considered as 130 "Conference Center and 3) 586 sq. ft. that should be classified under "Multi 131 Family" as support facilities to the overall condominium project and which does 132 not require mitigation. The redevelopment credit for the 2000 project will be: 133 134 426 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.409 jobs generated 135 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 136 0.894 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 180.23 s.f. mitigation housing required 137 of the 2000 project under the current code. 138 180.23 s.f. X 115% 207.26 s.f. Redevelopment Credit 139 140 The current project involves redevelopment of the 2000 building and includes a 141 new health club addition. 117 s.f of the existing exercise room will be converted to 142 laundry and mechanical room. The meeting room, bathrooms and steam room will 143 remain. The redeveloped and new space requiring mitigation will involve 249 s.f. 144 existing and 1,019 s.f. new "Health Club" space (1,268 s.f. total). The 500 s.f. TC Ord 10 -09 Page 4 of 7 145 meeting room will remain as "Conference Center" space. The employee housing 146 mitigation requirement for the project will be: 147 148 1,019 s.f. "Health Club" 0.96 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 1.217 jobs generated 149 500 s.f. "Conference Center" 0.97 jobs per 1,000 s.f. 0.485 jobs generated 150 1.702 jobs generated X 448 s.f. X 45% 343.123 s.f. mitigation housing 151 required 152 153 Including the redevelopment credit, 135.86 s.f. of mitigation housing is required 154 for this project. The Applicant is requesting that cash -in -lieu be accepted to 155 satisfy this requirement. Section 16A- 4- 420(4)(c) of the Municipal Code provides 156 that, at the sole discretion of the Town Council, the Applicant may pay cash -in- 157 lieu for minor developments rather than provide the required amount of mitigation 158 housing. 159 160 The Town Council finds that cash -in -lieu will be accepted and that the Mountain 161 View Phase II (plus CPI to date) will serve as an appropriate comparable to be 162 used for determining the cash -in -lieu payment. The Mountain View Phase II was 163 determined to cost approximately $159.00/s.f. in 1999. The CPI from 1999 (166.6 164 CPI) through March, 2010 (211.67 CPI) represents a 45.07% increase. The 1999 165 cost including CPI would be $230.66/s.f. or $31,337.47 cash -in -lieu for the 166 Project. 167 168 3. Landscaping. The landscaping plan identifies three (3) Conifer trees, being 16 169 caliper inches in size, that are to be removed along with one (1) 13 caliper inch 170 Conifer. The Section 16A -4 -320 (a)(1) of the Municipal Code states that: "existing 171 vegetation and trees that are removed shall be replaced with appropriate, similar size 172 plantings and shall be supplemented with additional plantings that help to screen the 173 development... 174 175 The planting schedule includes deciduous trees and shrubs that will not contribute 176 substantively to screening the pool area from being visible from the ski slope. The 177 Town Council finds that it would be difficult to relocate trees of that size but that the 178 landscape plan should be amended to incorporate evergreens. 179 180 The Town Council further finds that the Applicant should provide additional 181 landscaping slope side to soften the visual appearance of the pool fencing and that 182 they propose and commit to said planting unless specifically not permitted by the 183 Aspen Skiing Company. 184 185 4. SVRA Land Transfer. The Project will be located on land currently owned by the 186 Snowmass Village Resort Association "SVRA Property transfers will occur 187 between SVRA, Laurelwood Condominiums and the Applicant. The Town 188 Council finds that Subdivision Exemption approval from the Town will be 189 required prior to land transfer but will permit construction of the Project provided 190 a construction easement is obtained from SVRA. 191 TC Ord 10 -09 Page 5 of 7 192 5. Ski Easement. The Project involves encroachment into the ski easement held by 193 the Aspen Skiing Company (ASC The Applicant should work with ASC to 194 obtain authorization enabling planting on the slope side of the pool fencing to 195 soften the visual appearance and provide a natural buffer between skiers and 196 the fencing wall. The agreement could provide ASC the ability to require removal 197 or relocation of any trees within one (1) ski season of their planting. The Town 198 will permit construction of the Project provided the existing easement is vacated 199 in the area of the Project or an encroachment easement is granted by ASC. 200 201 6. Lighting. Pursuant to Section 18 -273 of the Municipal Code, the Planning 202 Commission reviewed and approved the lighting plan submitted by the Applicant 203 as being consistent with the Multi Family lighting standards found in Section 18- 204 265 of the Municipal Code. 205 206 7. Energy Conservation. The Town Council agrees with the Planning Commission 207 that greater energy conservation could be achieved by not snow melting the 208 contemplated courtyard where the existing pool is located. 209 210 8. Fencing /Retaining Wall. The Town Council finds that the retaining wall concrete 211 should be colored a natural earth tone and that the fence be powder coated in a 212 natural green shade to lessen the stark stainless steel appearance, provide 213 invisibility of the fence during summer and provide contrast in the winter to 214 provide enhanced visibility of the fence, which should increase safety of ski area 215 users. 216 217 9. Ancillary Floor Area. The Applicant is proposing that an additional 500 square 218 feet be permitted for each existing building. The intent is to provide the potential 219 for small additions /modifications to these building without necessity of processing 220 a Minor PUD Amendment for each instance in the future. 221 222 The Town Council finds that this should be favorably considered provided each 223 proposal be reviewed as an Administrative Modification by the Planning Director 224 and that the floor area may not be used for increasing the size of any residential 225 unit or the commercial restaurant. It is further required that the "Chart attached 226 as Exhibit "B be reformatted as a SPA (PUD) Guide for Town Council review 227 and approval. 228 229 Section Two Action. The Town Council hereby grants the approval of a minor 230 amendment to the Timberline SPA to permit a pool /athletic club facility addition and spa 231 located in the courtyard adjacent to Building J -3, as shown and described within Exhibit 232 A and application documents, subject to the compliance with the SPA (PUD) Guide, 233 attached as Exhibit "B and the conditions set forth in Section Three of this ordinance. 234 235 Section Three: Conditions. The Town Council makes the following conditions for the 236 Applicant to comply with or implement: 237 238 1. The Applicant shall provide verification that an easement has been provided from 239 the ASC permitting encroachment onto their ski slope land and that an easement TC Ord 10 -09 Page 6 of 7 240 has been provided from the SVRA for any encroachment onto West Village 241 Common Area not deeded to the Applicant. No development shall occur within 242 land area not owned or fully controlled by the Applicant unless easements have 243 been obtained from ASC and SVRA and copies have been provided to the Town 244 prior to building permit issuance. 245 246 2. The construction management plan will be submitted in conjunction with the 247 building permit application and may be modified by the Planning Director as 248 necessary to respond to complaints that may occur or matters not apparent at the 249 time of this application review. Said plan will specify that Lot 13 will not be used 250 for construction parking and construction activities will not occur during summer 251 concert nights. Any intended use of the Town parking lots to store material or use 252 as a staging area will need specific approval of the Town Public Works Director or 253 Town Manager. 254 255 3. The landscape plan shall be amended such that there will be no fruit bearing 256 trees or vegetation, incorporate evergreens and provide landscaping along the ski 257 slope side of the Project unless specifically not permitted by the Aspen Skiing 258 Company. 259 260 4. The Applicant shall provide cash -in -lieu in the amount of $110,991.43 to satisfy 261 the employee housing mitigation requirements of the 2000 project and this 262 approval. Said amount shall be provided prior to building permit issuance or 263 within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this ordinance, whichever occurs 264 first. 265 266 5. The retaining wall concrete visible from the ski slope and adjacent properties shall 267 be colored a natural earth tone and the fence shall be powder coated in a natural 268 green shade. 269 270 6. The SPA (PUD) Guide, attached as Exhibit "B permits a 500 square foot 271 increase for each of the existing Timberline Condominiums buildings. Any 272 proposal to utilize said floor area in the future shall be reviewed as an 273 Administrative Modification by the Town Planning Director. The floor area may 274 not be used for increasing the size of any residential unit or the commercial 275 restaurant. 276 277 7. All requirements of the Town Renewable Energy Offset Program "REOP shall 278 be satisfied prior to building permit issuance. 279 280 Section Four Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to 281 any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other 282 provision or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid 283 provision or application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 284 285 Section Five Enforcement. Obligations herein this Ordinance shall be binding on the 286 Applicant, its affiliates, successors and assigns. 287 TC Ord 10 -09 Page 7 of 7 288 INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED on First Reading by the Town Council 289 of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on this 17 day of May, 2010, upon a 290 motion made by Council Member and the second by Council 291 Member upon a vote of in favor and opposed 292 293 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading by the Town Council of 294 the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on this 7 th day of June, 2010, upon a motion 295 made by Council Member and the second by Council Member 296 upon a vote of in favor and opposed 297 298 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 299 300 301 302 Bill Boineau, Mayor 303 ATTEST: 304 305 306 307 Rhonda Coxon, Town Clerk 308 309 APPROVED AS TO FORM: 310 311 312 313 John C. Dresser, Jr., Town Attorney Exhibit A TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 1 of 8) I s 1 N x y Y a sl 000 o s a V 0 �1v PIXY. �xKEfl EYE .fW Tw O OO OO i 0 I r ymo a� TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM POOL SPA r �D SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO �m ^N Exhibit "A" TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 2 of 8) Tab 1: Application, Including Statements of Consistency and Compliance Part 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION General Description of Proiect The Timberline Condominium Association (TCA), located at 690 Carriage Way, is experiencing many pool failures due to the age of the existing outdoor pool. The Association has decided to fill in the existing pool, demolish and remove the small addition (approximately 24'x 17') to the existing lodge building (J- 5) that contains laundry facilities, and upgrade the facilities around the pool area and the grounds within the complex. The exterior improvements in the vicinity of the existing pool area will include a new pool with integrated spa and a separate spa with waterfall feature that will be located southeast (toward the ski run) of the existing facility. The existing pool area will be filled in and will be used as a flex space with seating and gardens to hold small weddings and special events. Adjacent to the new pool and spa area and attached by a common wall to the existing meeting area (approximately 1,390 s.f.), will be a new exercise building with lockers and a steam room (approximately 1,137 s.f.). The existing mechanical space will remain and a new mechanical room will be incorporated into the new addition. The small addition attached to the lodge building (that contains the existing laundry area approximately 408 s.f.) will be demolished and removed and new laundry facilities will be placed in the former exercise area of the existing meeting /conference area /athletic facility. In approximately the same location where the existing laundry area is, a new bridge is proposed that will link the existing rooftop patio (over the existing athletic facility /meeting room) to the Lodge (J -5) to allow better access to this building for residents and guests. Please see Tab 11 for the location of the proposed bridge. One other improvement proposed as part of this project is the addition of a hot tub /spa (approximately 16'x 8') just west of Building J -3 (see proposed spa (S -2) location on Sheets C3.0 and C3.1 under Tab 10). This spa will be partially submerged into the ground and will be landscaped. Plans for both of these facilities are included under Tab 10 Development Plan and Tab 11 Building Elevations, Floor Plans and Model. Land Transference, Ski Easement and Owners' Permission Similar to other condominiums in the area, TCA does not own the land within its complex. The land is under the ownership of the Snowmass Village Resort Association (SVRA). Recently, SVRA approached the condominium associations about transferring lands, and some survey work has been completed (see Tab 8 for a Boundary Line Adjustment Survey completed by SGM Engineering) to divide up the SVRA land and distribute to the various complexes. SVRA has provided authorization (see Tab 4) for TCA to proceed with this Minor PUD Amendment request while the land is in the process of being conveyed. As requested by Staff, the Exhibit A that follows that letter includes the Boundary Line Adjustment Survey completed by SGM Engineering and the legal description from Steve Ehlers of SGM. In addition to working with SVRA, TCA representatives are working with the Aspen Ski Company (Skico) on adjusting the existing ski easement located on SVRA land. The easement falls within the land area Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 1 Exhibit A TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 3 of 8) proposed for this development. Included under Tab 4 is an e-mail exchange between Mary Harris, Manager of TCA and David Clark, attorney for the Ski Company, indicating that Skico has no objection to allowing the pool /hot tub to encroach into this area. The applicant also met with Skico Mountain Manager Steve Sewell to discuss the project, including the possibility of allowing soil nailing in proximity to the easement, if necessary, and allowing as much flexibility as possible in regards to construction /maintenance of the improvements as the project evolves. Mr. Sewell verbally indicated he had no objection for TCA to proceed with their request for development approval while legal descriptions and details are worked out. Included under Tab 6 Legal Description is an Exhibit provided by Sopris Engineering that indicates the location of the proposed easement. Upon finalization with Skico, a legal description for this easement will be developed and recorded upon project approval by Town Council. The applicant has also been working with the Laurelwood Owners Association regarding an equal land swap as part of the transfer of lands. A letter from Dave Jacobsen from the Laurelwood Board explaining the agreement and providing a draft Boundary Line Adjustment Plat indicating the lands to be swapped is also provided under Tab 4. Land Use History and Specific Request for a Minor PUD Amendment According to Town records, TCA had a "Precise Plan of a Specially Planned Area" approved in 1980 as referenced in Series 2000 Ord. 14 (see Tab 17). However, a copy of the approved plan has not been located in either the Town or TCA records. As a condition of approval for the "athletic club facility" in 2000, TCA was required to record a final development plan within 60 days. According to Town Staff, this condition was not met, although TCA was issued a Certificate of Occupancy for the facilities when they were completed, so the assumption is that a final development plan was provided for recordation. It is both Town Staff and the applicant's desire to rectify this recording oversight and record a final development plan for this proposed project that will reflect both existing conditions and proposed improvements, upon project approval by Town Council. TCA is requesting a Minor PUD Amendment to their previously approved SPA in order to allow the pool and exercise building expansion and new spas. The project qualifies as a Minor PUD Amendment because it meets all of the following criteria as set forth in Table 5 -3 of Sec. 16A -5 -300: A minor PUD is a project that meets all of the following criteria: New Development Contains no more than four (4) dwelling/hoteU lodge or other residential units. Contains no more than four thousand (4,000) sq. ft. of nonresidential space. This application meets the requirements for a Minor PUD Amendment as set forth under Section 16A -5- 390 Amendment of final PUD. A pre application conference was held with the Town Planner, Chris Conrad, on March 4, 2010. This application is being submitted'in accordance with Section 16A -5 -390 and this Tab 1 addresses the following required sections: Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 2 Exhibit "A" TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 4 of 8) 16A -5 -40 (b) Minimum Contents; 16A -5 -300 (c) General Restrictions; 16A -5 -310 Review Standards; and Sec. 16A -4 -340. Building design guidelines to preserve community character. In addition, per section 16A -5 -40 (c) Consolidation, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Director allow the consolidation of all submission requirements as part of this single land use application. This may pertain to waivers or other issues that arise as part of this land use review. Chart of Proposed Existing Land Use Table 1 -1 provides a summary of the proposed uses and sizes of the existing and proposed facilities within the TCA complex. Existing conditions information was taken from the recorded condominium plat. It is the intent of this Minor PUD Amendment to seek an approval for all of the existing structures to remain while allowing the expansion for the pool amenities, spas and exercise building. Any variations that may be necessary for these facilities as the project develops are requested as part of this Minor PUD Amendment. Please note, however, that as indicated in Table 1 -1 below, the applicant is also seeking approval for a small amount of additional square footage (500 s.f.) for each building to allow some flexibility in the future should additional enclosed facilities be required without having to go through an additional amendment process, but only administrative review as required. Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 3 Exhibit "A TC Ordinance No Series o 2010 !Page,@ m a e m�/ A `ƒ rr i- 4/ j m fil 2 E TI CONDOM |N |UM POOL +SPA SNOWMASS VILLAGE CO 7 io Exhibit "A" Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 6 of 8) 4 t r 4 r s t S K 3 e q 4y rj i sr i Y a: R 3 f r f 14vk•� Pli ii 4 r s c Timberline Condominium 5 p r Pool Spa x n a k Snowmass Village, Colorado =4 a. Exhibit "A" TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 20101 (Page 7 of 8) r {Y 4 7 �i a Y Y t b Ylfr "M z,:2} X� 1 ��I z d is 1 t 'I� �t o `•d Y �A 1<a� eb� TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM POOL -I- SPA SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO vo a u Exhibit "A" TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 8 of 8) I m i I T r m i ABOVE F,'X.GRADc i ,I =D 0 I R-1 is l zp IL ORT;CiNAL E XTEArTrOhr ENG'E i =Y VI BOLTED CONNECTIOA% TO BE ADDED TO PERMANENT FENCING FOR LARGE SPICINFALL YEARS i I io 1 pp POOL SPA SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO TC Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 (Page 1 of 1) NOTE: This "Chart of Proposed Existing Land Use" To Be Replaced with a SPA (PUD) Guide For Second Reading. Table 1 -1 CHART OF PROPOSED EXISTING LAND USE Use /Building Number of Existing Square Proposed Existing Open Space Maximum Floors Footage Square Footage Acreage with proposed Height (approximate- (approximate) with SVRA land not including proposed balconies or SVRA patios) land /Min. Lot Area Residential 3 17,254 17,754 Approx. 69% (prior to 34' Building J -1 120,901 sf development Residential 3 19,157 19,657 Or 2.775 43.5' Building J -2 acres Residential 3 20,104 20,604 34.5' Building J -3 Residential 3 20,078 20,578 34.5' Building J -4 Lodge 18,474 18,974 38' Residential Building J -5 Sub-Total 10,819 Residential Sub -Total 3,886 Commercial Sub -Total 3,769 Lodge Existing 1,390; 1,575 sf 1,390 15'- 3" Meeting Space existing pool (J -6) area to remain Sub -Total All 96,457 98,957 Proposed New 1 1,137 68% (after 22' 1" to Exercise development) top of Building (J -7) guardrail Proposed New 1 NA 6,160 sf of pool NA Pool /Spa and patio (S -1) Proposed New 492 sf of pool NA Spa (S -2) and deck Timberline Condominium Association Minor PUD Amendment Submitted by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. April 8, 2010 Page 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Snowmass Village Town Council FROM: John Dresser DATE: May 17, 2010 SUBJECT: Extension of Development Moratorium I. PURPOSE AND ACTIONS REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: First Reading of an Ordinance extending the moratorium for six months to December 31, 2010. II. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The moratorium expires on June 30, 2010 but it appears that the Code review will not be complete by that date. Council may extend the moratorium by a duly adopted ordinance. III. BACKGROUND A. Ordinance 21 of 2007 enacted the moratorium. B. Ordinance 5 of 2008 extended the moratorium to July 31, 2008. C. Ordinance 10 of 2008 extended the moratorium to December 31, 2008. D. Ordinance 16 of 2008 extended the moratorium to June 30, 2009. E. Ordinance 7 of 2009 extended the moratorium to December 31, 2009. F. Ordinance 21 of 2009 extended the moratorium to June 30, 2010. IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS n/a V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS Should TOSV extend the moratorium to allow time to complete the review of the Land Use Code? VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS Staff recommends that Town Council discuss and determine the course of action of this Ordinance at First Reading May 17, 2010. Staff feels that six months is sufficient time to complete the work ahead on the possible Code revisions. Options include: approve, amend or deny at First Reading. I TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 2 TOWN COUNCIL 3 4 ORDINANCE NO. 12 5 SERIES OF 2010 6 7 8 AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE 9 ACCEPTANCE OF ANY NEW LAND USE APPLICATION SEEKING 10 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 11 WEST VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED AREA AND FARAWAY 12 RANCH NORTH COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED AREA FOR A PERIOD OF 13 SIX MONTHS 14 15 WHEREAS, the Town of Snowmass Village has undertaken and 16 completed a targeted review and update of the Comprehensive Plan; and 17 18 WHEREAS, the review and update of the Comprehensive Plan was 19 targeted in order to comprehensively plan for the remaining commercial areas of 20 the Town and review and update other areas of the Comprehensive Plan as 21 needed; and 22 23 WHEREAS, in conjunction with the review and update of the 24 Comprehensive Plan, the Town Council desires that the Planning Department 25 conduct an analysis and assessment of Chapter 16A of the Snowmass Village 26 Municipal Code in order to provide Town Council with a review of the existing 27 land use code and regulations as they affect land use and development in the 28 Town, specifically in the West Village Comprehensively Planned Area "CPA 29 and the Faraway Ranch North CPA; and 30 31 WHEREAS, the Town Council has received a preliminary report of the 32 Planning Department regarding the existing Chapter 16A of the Snowmass 33 Village Municipal Code in order to now consider amendments to the Chapter 34 16A; and 35 36 WHEREAS, the Town Council has enacted and subsequently extended a 37 moratorium that currently expires on June 30, 2010 for land use applications in 38 the West Village CPA and Faraway Ranch North CPA to enable reasoned 39 discussion and action regarding the targeted review and update of the 40 Comprehensive Plan and allow full and complete discussion of any amendments 41 to the Comprehensive Plan and the Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code; and 42 43 WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it is prudent to review 44 any future land use applications after the completion of the review of Chapter 45 16A of the Municipal Code and the reasonable estimate of the time to complete 46 such actions was six months, however, more time is needed to complete the 1 47 reviews of the Code and another six months seems a reasonable time to 48 complete said reviews; and 49 50 WHEREAS, Ordinance 21, Series of 2007 provides that the moratorium 51 may be extended by a duly adopted ordinance of the Town Council; and 52 53 WHEREAS, Town Council has determined that it is necessary to extend 54 the duration of the moratorium in order to provide the time necessary to: conduct 55 a review and update of the Comprehensive Plan, to prepare an analysis and 56 assessment of all current land use regulations, and to allow time for the Town 57 Council, Town Staff and the citizens of Snowmass Village to consider 58 amendments, if necessary, to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Code of 59 the Town of Snowmass Village. 60 61 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the 62 Town of Snowmass Village as follows: 63 64 1. That the temporary moratorium on land use applications 65 enacted by the Town Council by Ordinance 21, Series of 2007 66 is hereby extended to December 31, 2010. 67 2. That all other terms of Ordinance 21, Series of 2007 shall 68 remain in full force and effect through the period of this 69 extension. 70 3. If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any 71 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not 72 affect any other provision or application of this Ordinance which 73 can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, 74 and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 75 76 INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, on First Reading 77 by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on May 17, 2010 upon a 78 motion by Council Member the second of Council 79 Member and upon a vote of in favor and 80 opposed. 81 82 INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, on Second Reading by 83 the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on June 7, 2010 upon a 84 motion by Council Member the second of Council Member 85 and upon a vote of in favor and opposed. 86 87 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 88 89 90 91 Bill Boineau, Mayor 92 2 93 94 ATTEST: 95 96 97 98 Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk 99 100 101 102 APPROVED AS TO FORM: 103 104 105 106 107 John C. Dresser, Jr., Town Attorney 108 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Snowmass Village Town Council FROM: John Dresser DATE: May 17, 2010 SUBJECT: Periodic Ordinance review and Re- enactment I. PURPOSE AND ACTIONS REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: First Reading of an Ordinance reviewing and re- enacting ordinances of a permanent nature II. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The Home Rule Charter requires the Council to conduct an Ordinance review and Re- enactment every five years. Colorado Code Publishing just completed the most recent supplement to the Municipal Code. III. BACKGROUND This review is conducted every five years IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 4.14 of the Charter V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS Should TOSV complete the review and re -enact previously approved Ordinances of a permanent nature? VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS Staff recommends that Town Council discuss and determine the course of action of this Ordinance at First Reading May 17, 2010. Staff recommends approval. Options include: approve, amend or deny at First Reading. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 11 SERIES OF 2010 AN ORDINANCE CONDUCTING AN ORDINANCE REVIEW AND RE- ENACTING ALL ORDINANCES OF A PERMANENT NATURE AS PRESCRIBED BY THE HOME RULE CHARTER WHEREAS, the provisions of Section 4.14 of the Home Rule Charter provide as follows: All ordinances of a permanent nature shall be reviewed by the Council at least every five (5) years after passage and will expire five (5) years after adoption unless reenacted; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has periodically reviewed the provisions of the Municipal Code and has specifically amended, revised and restated certain provisions of the Municipal Code since the last ordinance review; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the Snowmass Village Municipal Code and finds that the current version as amended by supplement s No. 13 through 15 contains the true and accurate codification of the ordinances of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: 1. Ordinance Review This Ordinance constitutes the review of ordinances within the meaning of Section 4.14 of the Home Rule Charter. 2. Reenact Municipal Code The Town Council hereby ratifies, reaffirms and reenacts the Snowmass Village Municipal Code, as amended by supplements No. 13 through 15, Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2009, and Ordinance Nos. 1,4,6, and 8, Series of 2010. 3. Next Ordinance Review The next ordinance review shall be conducted pursuant to the Home Rule Charter Section 4 -14. 4. Severability If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2010 Page 2 application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on First Reading on May 17, 2010 upon a motion by Council Member the second of Council Member and upon a vote of in favor to 0 opposed. READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on Second Reading on June 7, 2010 upon a motion by Council Member the second of Council Member and upon a vote of in favor to opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE By: Bill Boineau, Mayor ATTEST: Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John C. Dresser, Jr., Town Attorney TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: RUSS FORREST, TOWN MANAGER SUBJECT: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: MAY 17, 2010 SNOWMASS VILLAGE CITIZENSHIP AWARD In the past the Town of Snowmass Village has awarded five individuals the Snowmass Village Citizenship Award. The award has gone to: 1990 Emmy Lou Badger, in 1992 Terry Long, in 1996 Ben Rawlins, in 2000 William Marilyn Getz and in 2006 William Cowan. There has never been a formal process for this award. In the past a Council Member or a citizen would bring to Town Council's attention and the Council would vote on the individual being awarded. We have a plaque that hangs in the Council Chambers and the individual would be invited to a Town Council meeting and presented with a Mayor's proclamation. Would the Town Council be interested in developing a procedure, criteria and nominating process to honor a special citizen of Snowmass Village? Split Rail Fence on Brush Creek Council requested an update on fixing the split rail fence along Brush Creek. Public Works crews have already completed repairs on the Brush Creek fence from the Roundabout up to Snowmass Club Lane. In inspecting the fence from Snowmass Lane Road up Brush Creek (on the golf course side of the road) to just below the Blue Roofs it was found that the fence is deteriorating and requires significant repairs. The cost of the materials to fix the fence is estimated at $10,000 which is not budgeted in the RETT fund. However, if the Town reduced the length of the fence from Snowmass Club Lane up to approximately Wood Road (below the 20 mph curve) we could fix the fence by using materials that are removed above Wood Road. Is the Council comfortable with this reduction of the fence line to avoid purchasing additional fencing materials? Pending Strategic Actions Last Updated April 26, 2010 Staff Action Status Date to Contact follow -up w/ Council Land Use John Dresser Demolition Council asked that an ordinance be prepared to Will follow -up provide a period of time to review demolition with other code permits before demolition of a building changes on occurred. May 17, 2010 Council agreed that staff should develop language for future PUDs to identify critical integral components of a PUD that must continue to exist over time. In addition, John Wilkinson requested that staff bring back a landmark ordinance for discussion in the future. Other Land Use Other Land Use Code Improvements should May 17, 2010 Code Issues also be considered with the completion of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff would recommend having a work session with Council to review potential code changes. Housin Housing Draw Site /Land On February 17 th Council asked that a Land Revisit as part Department Inventory Inventory to done to identify potential housing of 2011 budget sites after the Town completes its budget process process for 2010. On Nov. 2 Council directed staff to take no action on this topic other than to continue identifying sites that should be further investigated. Council asked that this project be revisited in the summer of 2010. Housing Housing Policy The consultant has completed a rational nexus May 17, 2010 Department study and can begin to work with the Town on Will review a new housing policy. The Planning with other land Commission is also reviewing housing goals as use code part of the Comp. Plan review. Staff will amendments. schedule two agenda items based on the input from Council on October 6 (these could be on the same dates) which would be 1) policy discussion to modify the current land use code related to affordable housing; and 2) a review of deed restriction policy. Finance Marianne FAB FAB will be brining requested additional duties complete to Council and Council would like to discuss whether FAB should look at how to fund unfunded Road projects. Marianne GID Mil Levy Discuss option to increase the GID mil levy for Discussion Base Village with the GID Advisory Committee occurred on and return back to the GID with options. April 19, 2010 need to follow- up with options for budgeting in the future Marianne Budget Update Finance provided a budget update in March, May 17, 2010 2010. The next update will occur in May. Other Russ and Negotiate access Direction has been provided to staff to ongoing John easement for negotiate for an easement. Skittles Lesley Investigate Determine the steps for developing a sister city complete process for relationship creating a Sister City Relationshi Mark Kittle Remodels Council asked on 11/16 for the Chief Building June 21, 2010 triggering Official to bring back options for requiring the sprinkling sprinkling of buildings with a remodel. Staff was asked to research options and what other communities have done on this issue. In addition, Council asked on December 7, 2009 to come back with a discussion on banning shake shingles. 4TH Draft SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 7, 2010 PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE ITEMS COULD START EARLIER OR LATER THAN THE STATED TIME CALL TO ORDER AT 5:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-minute time limit) Item No. 3: COUNCIL UPDATES Item No. 4: SUMMARY OF LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Time: 90 Minutes) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and comment on he list of proposed Land Use Code Amendments. --Chris Conrad ...........................Page 28 (TAB G) Item No. 5: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING ORDINANCE NO. 9, SERIES OF 2010 TIMBERLINE SPA (Time: 60 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE TIMBERLINE S.P.A. BY THE TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC. TO PERMIT A NEW ATHLETIC CLUB FACILITY AND POOL AREA ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2010 --Chris Conrad Item No. 6: SECOND READING ORDINANCE NO 11, SERIES OF 2010 EXTENSION OF MORITORIUM (Time: 15 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE TEMPORARY MORITUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ANY NEW LAND USE APPLICATION SEEKING DEVELOPMENT APPROCAL FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE WEST VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED AREA AND FARAWAY RANCH NORTH ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance 11, Series of 2010. --John Dresser 06-07-10 TC Page 2 of 2 Item No. 7: SECOND READING ORDINANCE NO. 12, SERIES OF 2010 ORDINANCE REVIEW (Time: 15 Minutes) AN ORDINANCE CONDUCTING AN ORDINANCE REVIEW AS PRESCRIBED BY THE HOME RULE CHARTER ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify or deny Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2010. --John Dresser Item No. 8: MANAGER'S REPORT (Time: 10 minutes) --Russell Forrest ...........................Page (TAB Item No. 9: AGENDA FOR NEXT TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Page (TAB Item No. 10: APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR: Page (TAB Item No. 11: COUNCIL COMMENTS /COMMITTEE REPORTS/CALENDARS Page (TAB) Item No. 12: ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Total time estimated for meeting: Approx 2 hours (excluding items 1-3 and 9 —10) ALL ITEMS AND TIMES ARE TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. PLEASE CALL THE OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK AT 923-3777 ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING FOR ANY AGENDA CHANGES. PLEASE JOIN TOWN COUNCIL FOR ASOCIAL AT TASTER'S AFTER TONIGHT'S MEETING. (if the Meeting ends before 9:00 p.m.) I SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL 2 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 3 APRIL 19, 2010 4 5 Mayor Boineau called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town 6 Council on Monday April 19, 2010 at 5:45 p.m. 7 8 Item No. 1: ROLL CALL 9 10 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, 11 Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin 12 COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Reed Lewis 13 14 STAFF PRESENT: Russ Forrest, Town Manager; Susan 15 Hamley, Tourism Director; Chris 16 Conrad, Planning Director; John 17 Dresser, Town Attorney; Hunt Walker, 18 Public Works Director; and Donna J. 19 Garcia, Deputy Town Clerk 20 21 PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Mary Harris, 22 Dwayne Romero, Don Schuster and 23 others interested in today's Agenda 24 items. 25 26 Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON AGENDA ITEMS 27 28 Nothing for discussion at this time. 29 30 Item No. 3: COUNCIL UPDATES 31 32 RFTA 33 Council Member Wilkinson reported that the RFTA Board is going through a process 34 to hire a staff attorney and will be deciding on one in the near future. 35 36 Observatory 37 Council Member Butler requested a site visit for Council to review the location of the 38 potential location for the Observatory Lab. She reported that she had a very good 39 conference call meeting with David discussing next steps which will include a business 40 plan for operations, budget and a site visit. 41 42 The Town Manager Russ Forrest acknowledged that after looking at the materials the 43 Applicant provided staff with costs north of $75,000 to $80,000 and his guess is at 44 approximately $175,000 to $200,000 ball park range. 45 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 2 of 10 46 Item No. 4: RESOLUTION 19 SERIES OF 2010- APPOINT EX- OFFICO TO THE 47 MARKETING GROUP SALES AND SPECIAL EVENTS BOARD 48 49 Council Member Butler inquired if Applicant Dwayne Romero is replacing Scott 50 Stenman; in response the Marketing Director Susan Hamley stated that Mr. Romero 51 would be replacing Alicia Goldstein. 52 53 The Town Attorney John Dresser explained that the Ex- Offiicio Member is being 54 appointed to represent the on going develop of business within the Town but shall not 55 have the right to vote and they are allowed to be present at all Executive Session 56 meetings. 57 58 The Town Council and staff continued discussions of the term of this position, details 59 and appropriate activities for the Ex- officio Member. After further discussions, 60 61 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve Mayor Bill Boineau seconded the motion. 62 The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 63 64 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 65 66 Voting Nay: None. 67 68 Item No. 5: SUMMER CONCERT SERIES PLANS FOR ALCOHOL SALES 69 70 The Town Manager reported the purpose and actions for Council consideration 71 surround the issue of crating a policy for how to handle net proceeds from liquor service 72 at the Summer Concert Series and this issue was raised during the Marketing 73 Department Budget approval process for 2010. Forrest explained that the Town Council 74 did approve the 2010 Budget with the assumption that proceeds from liquor service 75 would be used to offset the overall net loss of the event and the issue of whether 76 Council would like to provide any further policy direction for the 2011 Concert Series 77 was still left unanswered. Lastly, Forrest reported that staff recommendation is to 78 maintain current relations and operations of the program. 79 80 After further discussion, the Town Council approved of staff recommendation in that 81 liquor expenses and revenues are realized by the liquor licensee, which is a Colorado 82 not for profit organization; given that the relationship with the MFTM /SAAF through the 83 continued contribution of its net liquor proceeds to the Summer Concert Series will help 84 offset the net loss of the overall event„ therefore the Town may continue to maintain 85 that relationship and continue to provide liquor at the same low prices offered over the 86 past three years and to maintain the level of concert entertainment. 87 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 3 of 10 88 Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO, 20, SERIES OF 2010 WAIVER /DEFERAL 89 REQUEST OF CERTAIN APPLICATION SUBMISSION ITEMS 90 TIMBERLINE CONDOMINIUM MINOR PUD AMENDMENT 91 92 The Planning Director Chris Conrad explained that the Applicant Timberline 93 Condominium Association, Inc. represented by Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. and 94 specifically Julian Anne Woods is proposing to upgrade the facilities around the pool 95 area and the grounds within the complex and will include a new replacement pool with 96 integrated spa and a separate spa with waterfall features that will be located southeast 97 of the existing facility. The existing pool area will be filled in and will be used as a flex 98 space with seating and gardens to hold small weddings and special events. Conrad 99 reported that there are items listed for waiver and two items to be deferred to the 100 building permit. 101 102 The Town Council and staff began the line -by -line review of Resolution No. 20, Series 103 of 2010 making amendments and directing staff to implement those changes to the 104 resolution and requested that staff provide them with more information on the final 105 landscape plan including irrigation, energy conservation plans, REMP calculations, and 106 pool issues before they can make a final decision. Council specifically stated that all 107 three waiver items could be waived per staff recommendations. 108 109 Markey Butler made the motion to approve as amended Arnold Mordkin seconded the 110 motion. 111 112 Voting Aye: None. 113 114 Voting Nay: None. 115 116 Julian Anne Woods from Elk Mountains Planning Group, Inc. stated that they have a 117 preliminary landscaping plan in the application packet, which was intended to provide 118 Council with a flavor of what is going to happen and part of the issue is that they are still 119 working with ASC on the easement for the pool area and the wall and she knows that 120 they need to have input on the landscaping and she is hoping to proceed with what they 121 have and as they know there will be a fence along the top of the wall and ASC is going 122 to want to have an opportunity to have input related to this, which is the main reason 123 they are holding off at this point. 124 125 The Planning Director explained that they can't begin construction until they have the 126 ASC's easement and staff would be reviewing and landscape plan and the location of 127 the facility as it may affect the skiers and the health, safety and welfare of the 128 community. 129 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 4 of 10 130 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve There being no further discussion or 131 amendments, John Wilkinson seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a 132 vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 133 134 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 135 136 Voting Nay: None. 137 138 Item No.7: SUMMARY OF LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE 139 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 140 141 The Planning Director reported that Council requested staff return to them following 142 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan for discussion of action items identified within 143 Chapter 10 of the new Comp Plan. He outlined within the Summary of Description 144 Project those items within the action portion that related to the Planning Department, 145 146 The Town Manager stated that staff recommends that Town Council prioritize the 147 implementation actions or adjust the time frame in which to complete the action items 148 listed and based upon previous Council input, the actions are recommended for 149 implementation as listed on packet page 31. 150 151 The Mayor and Town Council began prioritizing implementation of actions and adjusted 152 the time frame in which to complete the action items listed as one enactment. The Town 153 Attorney John Dresser agreed with Council's decision to handle as one enactment and 154 suggested that Council prioritize this in terms of their schedules it can happen faster. 155 Dresser pointed out that we only have four meetings until June 30th and suggested 156 Council consider this getting done by mid summer or the end of summer to complete 157 the ordinance. 158 159 Council Member Butler directed staff to bring back specific language with a description 160 of how the Code would work initiated by resolution for Council to review and refer to the 161 Planning Commission for recommendations and return to Council in the form of an 162 ordinance. 163 164 Conrad stated that after the Town Council has prioritized the implementation actions, a 165 work program will be developed to complete the items within the time frame given. 166 Outside resources may be required based upon the priority items selected and /or time 167 frame given and it will likely be necessary to return to Council to discuss the work 168 programming, resources required and /or to receive policy direction prior to beginning 169 implementation of the action or implantation items(s). The Town Manager reported that 170 the Town does have a little pot of money to throw towards this need if it becomes 171 necessary. 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 5 of 10 172 173 In addition to Housing Policy, Council Member Mordkin suggested that they get 174 suggestions from the Planning Director as to where to make policy decisions and start 175 chewing on that by piece meal resolution. 176 177 The Town Attorney explained what Councilman Mordkin is proposing actually slow 178 things down and suggested to Council that if they tell the Planning Director to initiate 179 land use code amendments pursuant to the policy guidelines they have given via the 180 Comp. Plan the P.C. is going to work through it; will do the heavy lifting and come up 181 with the recommendations and Council has two meetings to discuss first and second 182 reading, Council can amend it anyway they want and they already have the benefit of 183 the P.C. chewing through it. 184 185 After further discussion, Mayor Boineau stated that he trusts the Planning Director to 186 push in right direction and requested that the Planning Commission return to Council 187 with a working program. Town Council consensus agreed. 188 189 There being no further discussion, Council Member Mordkin made a motion requesting 190 staff that take the enumerated items discussed today and as many issues staff feels 191 Council can handle at one time and bring it back to Council with suggestions of how to 192 proceed moving forward. 193 194 Item No. 8: SCOPE OF WORK FOR URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY 195 196 The Town Manager Russ Forrest provided Council with some background information 197 and stated that on February 22, 2010 staff and Paul Benedetti reviewed the legal 198 process for implementation of an Urban Renewal Authority (URA) at that meeting 199 Council requested that staff bring back to them a specific scope with costs associated 200 for moving forward with an URA. The Town Council also recommended that staff work 201 with a group by the name of Leland and Associates, a planning and real estate 202 consulting group, who specializes in URA and have a proposal from them to present 203 today. Forrest referred Council to packet attachment B, which depicted a flow chart that 204 breaks the process down into four phases and explains what each phase entails. 205 206 The Town Council responded as follows: Wilkinson stated that he does not agree that 207 an URA is an appropriate solution for Snowmass Village to enter into due to lack of 208 blight, this is a tool for potential where you have an area that has been deteriorating and 209 not up kept and there is potential for future development where one could generalize on 210 tax increases; this is not the tool to complete the incomplete building structure. 211 Secondly, Wilkinson stated to spend $52,000.00 of tax payer's money is misuse of 212 public funds and he is against the URA proposal. 213 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 6 of 10 214 Council Member Butler stated concern that she is uncomfortable with the idea because 215 we haven't nailed down the size of the URA district at this point and she has tones of 216 questions before she can make an informed decision. Furthermore, Butler stated that it 217 is not clear to her what the risks involved for Snowmass would be in declaring blight for 218 this community. 219 220 Council Member Mordkin stated his concern that Council does not have the knowledge 221 or training to make the determination that this is or is not appropriate for this area until 222 we go get into Phase I. 223 224 Mayor Boineau stated that he does not believe this is the right tool to correct our 225 problem and in a sense we have shot ourselves in the foot by bringing this into play. He 226 further stated that it is pure speculation around town that the other party has decided to 227 opt out as a seller. Lastly, the Mayor stated concern with what declaring blight might do 228 to Snowmass Village and he is receiving calls from concerned citizens as well; he is not 229 in favor of the URA and spending that kind of money. 230 231 In summary, Council consensus spoke against implementation of an URA scope of 232 work for Snowmass Village. 233 234 Item No. 9: SECOND READING -ORDINANCE NO. 8 SERIES OF 2010- FAB 235 RESPONSIBILITIES 236 The Town Attorney John Dresser stated that Town Council directed staff to amend the 237 duties and responsibilities for the Financial Advisory board (FAB), who has requested 238 increased ability to review financial issues regarding the Town of Snowmass Village. 239 Dresser cited the applicable regulations for the Snowmass Village Municipal Code Book 240 Section 2 -235, Duties and Responsibilities. 241 242 There being no further discussion, Deputy Town Clerk Donna J. Garcia, CMC 243 conducted a roll -call vote for Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2010, with 244 all in favor and 0 opposed. Council Member Lewis was absent. 245 246 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve Markey Butler seconded the motion. The 247 motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 248 249 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 250 251 Voting Nay: None. 252 253 Item No.10: RESOLUTION NO. 22 SERIES OF 2010 254 AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF COUNTRY CLUB TOWNHOMES 255 CONDOMINIUM UNIT #25 AND COUNTRY CLUB TOWNHOMES 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 7 of 10 256 CONDOMINIUM UNIT #26 AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER 257 AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS, DEEDS, 258 RELEASES OF DEED RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS TO 259 EFFECTUATE THE SALE THEREOF 260 261 The Town Attorney John Dresser reported that staff has received the title commitment 262 from the sale that Council had already directed staff to procure and the Town is under 263 contract on the title commitment 264 265 John Wilkinson made the motion to approve Markey Butler seconded the motion. The 266 motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 267 268 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 269 270 Voting Nay: None. 271 272 Item No. 11: MANAGER'S REPORT 273 274 Roarinq Fork Watershed Floating Summit 275 The Town Manager Russ Forrest reported that Council has been invited to participate in 276 the 2010 Roaring Fork Watershed Floating Summit on June 10, 2010. He referred 277 Council to additional information provided in today's packet of information beginning on 278 page 60. 279 280 Town Attorney John Dresser recommended that the Council express their support of the 281 resolution however; the language pertaining to adoption of the resolution would put 282 Council in a negative situation. 283 284 After further discussion, Council directed staff to place this item on the May 3rd Agenda 285 for further discussion. 286 287 Item No. 12: AGENDA FOR NEXT TOWN COUNCIL MEETING 288 289 The Town Manager directed Council's attention to the May 3rd Agenda and stated that 290 Item No. 4: is one of the projects that the Environmental Advisory Committee has been 291 talking to Paul Spencer, who is with Clean Energy Collective and his company provides 292 renewable energy sources at no cost to the community however they do ask for a grant 293 of land in exchange of implementing a solar project by means of people within the 294 community buying solar energy and the individuals who buy in essentially own it, while 295 Mr. Spencer's company continues to operate and maintain the service. The 296 Environmental Advisory Committee would like to bounce the idea off Council, the 297 property owner for consideration. 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 8 of 10 298 299 After further discussion, Council directed staff to go ahead and leave this item on the 300 May 3rd Agenda for further discussion. 301 302 Rodeo Place Lot 23 303 In response to an inquiry by Town Council Forrest explained that this item of discussion 304 concerns a lot that if by May 3rd it has not sold; staff will be asking Council what they 305 would like to do with it, since the interest that was there for this single family home has 306 evaporated. He explained that the Town could either continue to sell it, market it or 307 potentially rent it. 308 309 Sister Cities 310 Council Member Wilkinson reported that he has signed up Snowmass Village to 311 become a member of the sister cities and he would follow -up with the Town Public 312 Relations Representative Lesley Compagnone and report back to Council with updates. 313 314 Item No.13: APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR 315 316 There being no discussion or amendments, Council Member Mordkin made a motion to 317 approve the meeting minutes for March 15, 2010, seconded by Council Member Butler. 318 The vote passed with 4 in favor and 0 opposed. Council Member Lewis was absent. 319 320 John Wilkinson made the motion to approve Markey Butler seconded the motion. The 321 motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 322 323 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 324 325 Voting Nay: None. 326 327 Item No. 14: COUNCIL COMMENTS /COMMITTEE REPORTS /CALENDARS 328 329 Golf Course Fencing 330 In response to an inquiry by Council Member Wilkinson, Forrest reported that he is 331 getting a price for the split -rail fence above Brush Creek Road; it needs a lot of 332 maintenance and will be expensive. 333 334 After further discussion, Mayor Boineau directed staff to investigate whether or not the 335 Local Liquor Authority required ASC to place the current fencing at this location for 336 liquor licensing purposes and if so ASC would be financially responsible for 337 maintenance of the fencing. 338 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 9 of 10 339 Doggie Baggies 340 Council Member Mordkin stated that over the winter there were a lot of problems with 341 dogs on the trails and where the trail meets the driveway for Meadow Ranch there is a 342 place where the doggie baggies for use the replacement has suddenly disappeared and 343 requested that staff investigate what has happened to it, find out if this is happening in 344 other places within the Village and make sure that the doggie baggies locations are 345 maintained. 346 347 Town Manager Review 348 The Mayor reported that once again it is time for discussions regarding the Town 349 Manager review and stated that in the past Council has conducted the review with a 360 350 with the Manager's peers; "How does this Council want to the review 351 352 In response to the Mayor's inquiry, Council Member Butler stated that she is a custom 353 to having an established process done with forms. She further stated that Council 354 should have a process outlined and believes in 360s and the form has to include the 355 goals and objectives established for the Town Manager, with Town Director's input. 356 Lastly, she requested that be kept the same every year. 357 358 After further discussion, Mayor Boineau and Council Member Butler agreed to head up 359 a sub committee to begin the Town Manager review process. 360 361 There being no further discussions at this time, at 8:05 p.m. Council Member Mordkin 362 made a motion to move into Executive Session, seconded by Council Member Butler, 363 with a vote of 4 in favor and 0 opposed. Council Member Lewis was absent. 364 365 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve Markey Butler seconded the motion. The 366 motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 367 368 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 369 370 Voting Nay: None. 371 372 Item No. 15: EXECUTIVE SESSION 373 374 Town Council will now meet in Executive Session pursuant to C.R.S. 24 -6- 402(4) 375 and Snowmass Village Municipal Code Section 2- 45(c), to specifically discuss two 376 items: 377 378 a) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to 379 negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, instructing 380 negotiators pursuant to C.R.S. 24- 6- 402(4)(e) and Snowmass Village 04 -19 -10 Minutes Page 10 of 10 381 Municipal Code Section 2- 45(c)(5); and 382 383 b) Conferences with an attorney for the purposes of receiving 384 legal advice on specific legal questions pursuant to C.R.S. 385 24- 6- 402(4)(c) and Snowmass Village Municipal Code 386 Section 2- 45(c)(2); 387 388 Provided, there is an affirmative vote of two- thirds of the quorum present at this meeting 389 to hold an Executive Session and for the sole purpose of considering items (a) and (b) 390 above. Provided further, that no adoption of any proposed policy, positional resolution, 391 regulation, or formal action shall occur at this Executive Session. 392 393 At 8:28 p.m. Council Member Butler made a motion to reconvene to the Regular Town 394 Council meeting, seconded by Council Member Mordkin, with a vote of 4 in favor and 0 395 opposed. Council Member Lewis was absent. 396 397 Markey Butler made the motion to approve Arnold Mordkin seconded the motion. The 398 motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 399 400 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Arnold Mordkin. 401 402 Voting Nay: None. 403 404 Item No. 15: ADJOURNMENT 405 406 There being no further discussion, Council Member Mordkin made a motion to adjourn 407 the Regular Meeting of April 19, 2010, seconded by Council Member Butler, with a vote 408 of 4 in favor and 0 opposed. Council Member Lewis was absent. The meeting adjourned 409 at 8:42 p.m. 410 411 Respectfully submitted by: 412 413 414 415 Donna J. Garcia, CMC 416 Deputy Town Clerk 417 418 419 1 2 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL 3 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 4 MONDAY MAY 3, 2010 5 6 CALL TO ORDER AT 5:00 P.M. 7 8 Mayor Boineau called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town 9 Council on Monday, May 3, 2010 at 5:02 p.m. 10 11 Item No. 1 ROLL CALL 12 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Arnold Mordkin, and Markey Butler. 13 COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Council Member Reed Lewis was absent. 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Russ Forrest, Town Manager; John Dresser, Town 16 Attorney; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Joe 17 Coffey, Housing Director; Lesley Compagnone, 18 Community Relations Director; Rhonda B. Coxon, 19 Town Clerk 20 PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Fred Kucker, Anita Manchester, 21 George Huggins, Katherine Dart and other members 22 of the public interested in items on today's agenda 23 24 Item No. 2 PUBLIC NON AGENDA ITEMS 25 26 There were no Public -Non Agenda Items 27 28 Item No. 3 COUNCIL UPDATES 29 30 Recreation Center 31 Council Member Wilkinson thanked Alpine Bank for subsidizing the Recreation Center 32 on a Friday night for people to play basketball. 33 34 Town Clean Up Day 35 Mayor Boineau noted that the 29th Annual Town Clean Up Day is May 21, 2010 and he 36 invited everyone to participate. 37 38 Item No. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 23 SERIES OF 2010 ROARING FORK 39 CONSERVANCY 40 05- 03 -10tc Minutes Page 2 of 6 41 Markey Butler made the motion to approve Resolution No. 23, Series of 2010 for the 42 Roaring Fork Conservancy. John Wilkinson seconded the motion. The motion was 43 approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 44 45 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Arnold Mordkin, and Markey Butler. 46 47 Voting Nay: None. 48 Item No. 5 TOSV MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY SOLAR CONCEPT PLAN 49 50 Town Manager Russ Forrest and Community Relations Director Lesley 51 Compagnone on behalf of the Environmental Advisory Board (EAC) provided 52 background and stated that the Town Council is being asked, in their role as a property 53 owner, whether the concept of a solar farm located adjacent to the Mountain View 54 Housing project should be considered further and be allowed to go through the 55 development review process. 56 57 Forrest noted that last year the Town Council approved the Environmental Sustainability 58 Plan. The first goal of the plan is Energy conservation and Climate Protection. With 59 that goal in mind, Town staff and the EAC set out to find actions /solutions around this 60 goal. The EAC has been working with Clean Energy Collective and Paul Spencer for 61 many months on the possibility of a Solar Array /Farm here in TOSV. The upfront, cash 62 cost to the Town is zero. What the Town will have to pay up front is in land, and that is 63 where the logistics, negotiations and specifics will need to be addressed. Paul Spencer 64 will provide a presentation on exactly how the Collective works; the benefits to the 65 Town, its residents and the environment. 66 67 Benefits: 68 This is an innovative public /private partnership through a Collective that is a 69 leader in sustainable energy. 70 The Collective provides an avenue for TOSV to pursue renewable energy without 71 utilizing public dollars. 72 Energy created by the array goes "back into the grid essentially providing 73 energy for Town -owned buildings and residents in Town limits. 74 This is a responsible thing to do for the environment. 75 76 Disadvantages: 77 Visual Impact residents and guests will be able to see the array from the 78 mountain, the Numbered Lots and maybe the Mall. 79 To obtain maximum performance, the array will need to be physically there for 80 approximately 40 years. 81 82 After the presentation and questions, Council consensus was to move forward by 83 having the Financial Advisory Board look and the project first and determine this use is 05- 03 -10tc Minutes Page 3 of 6 84 feasible for Town owned land. Concurrently, the Town Attorney will review the legal 85 documents. Council will review and discuss at a future meeting. It was Council 86 consensus that a decision would not be made in time for the proposed timeline of 87 August of this year for installation. Council advised it would have to wait until next year. 88 89 Item No. 6 SISTER CITIES PROCESS 90 Community Relations Director Lesley Compagnone stated that last year the Town 91 Council requested staff conduct research on the process to become a member of Sister 92 Cities International and the steps needed to acquire our own "City She presented a 93 history of Sister Cities International and explained to Council what the relationship is. 94 After a lengthy discussion, Council consensus was to put together a community 95 committee and not use staff time. Council Member Butler and Council Member 96 Wilkinson will facilitate the community committee. Council will then discuss at a future 97 meeting. 98 99 Town Council took a break at this time. 100 101 Item No. 7 RESOLUTION NO. 24, SERIES OF 2010 -FAB CAPITAL PROJECTS 102 RECOMMENDATION 103 Town Manager Russ Forrest noted that at the March 15, 2010 Council meeting, Fred 104 Kucker, Chairperson of the FAB requested that the attached the recommendations 105 dated July 27, 2009 be endorsed and approved through a resolution. Council requested 106 that a sub committee be formed to review the recommendations on future capital 107 projects that the FAB presented to Council on August 3, 2009. The sub committee 108 consisted of Mayor Bill Boineau, Council Member Markey Butler, Town Manager Russ 109 Forrest, and FAB members Rick Griffin and David Rachofsky. The committee 110 responded to each of the 16 recommendations as directed Council. Council consensus 111 was to incorporate the recommendations and the responses to the from the committee 112 as an attachment to Resolution No. 24, Series of 20210 and use as "Best Management 113 Practices" for all future capital projects. 114 115 Markey Butler made the motion to approve Resolution 24, 2010 FAB 116 Recommendations. John Wilkinson seconded the motion. 117 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve amending Resolution No. 24, Series 2010 118 to include the recommendations and the committees responses to those 119 recommendations as an attachment to this resolution. John Wilkinson seconded the 120 motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 121 122 Voting Aye: Arnold Mordkin, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Mayor Bill Boineau. 123 Voting Nay: None. 05- 03 -10tc Minutes Page 4 of 6 124 Item No. 8 RODEO PLACE LOT 23 DISCUSSION OF OWNER'S OPTIONS 125 126 Town Manager Russ Forrest stated the Council no longer needs to discuss this item. 127 There is an application that has been turned in to the housing department to purchase 128 this Rodeo Place home. 129 130 Item No. 9 MANAGER'S REPORT 131 132 Pitkin County Public Safety Council 133 Town Manager Russ Forrest reminded Council that the Pitkin County Public Safety 134 Council will be providing a presentation regarding the November 2010 Proposition 101 135 (Vehicle Registration fees and taxes) and Amendments 60 and 61 (Amendments to 136 TABOR). He encouraged attendance, Wednesday May 5, at the Viceroy Hotel 137 beginning at 8:30 a.m. 138 139 CML Conference 140 Town Manager Russ Forrest noted that the 89th Annual CML conference will be in 141 Breckenridge and the early registration ends on May 21, 2010. 142 143 Item No. 10 AGENDA FOR NEXT TOWN COUNCIL MEETING May 17, 2010 144 Financial Update 145 Town Manager noted the Financial Update will now be part of the Manager's Report for 146 the May 17, 2010 meeting and there will be another more substantial financial update in 147 July. 148 149 Additions to Agenda 150 Town Attorney John Dresser noted there will be two additional ordinances added to the 151 May 17th agenda, one for the extension of the Moratorium and one for an Ordinance 152 Review. The second readings will be conducted on June 7, 2010. 153 154 Item No. 11 APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR April 5, 2010 155 156 Council Member Wilkinson asked that the time and actual closing of the Public Hearing 157 for Item Number 9 be stated in the minutes. There were no further changes to the 158 minutes for April 5, 2010. 159 160 Markey Butler made the motion to approve the minutes for the Regular Meeting of the 161 Snowmass Village Town Council of April 5, 2010. John Wilkinson seconded the motion. 162 The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 163 164 Voting Aye: Arnold Mordkin, John Wilkinson, Markey Butler, and Mayor Bill Boineau. 165 Voting Nay: None. 05- 03 -10tc Minutes Page 5 of 6 166 Item No. 12 COUNCIL COMMENTS /COMMITTEE REPORTS /CALENDARS 167 168 Council Member Wilkinson inquired about the Town of Snowmass Village Real Estate 169 Transfer Tax budget, and Town Manager Russ Forrest explained better than anticipated 170 but we still being very conservative. 171 172 At 7:16 p.m. 173 174 Mayor Bill Boineau announced at this time the Town Council will now meet in Executive 175 Session pursuant to C.R.S. 24 -6- 402(4) and Snowmass Village Municipal Code Section 176 2- 45(c), to specifically discuss two items: 177 178 a) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, 179 developing strategy for negotiations, instructing negotiators pursuant to 180 C.R.S. 24- 6- 402(4)(e) and Snowmass Village Municipal Code Section 2- 181 45(c)(5); and 182 183 b) Conferences with an attorney for the purposes of receiving legal advice on 184 specific legal questions pursuant to C.R.S. 24- 6- 402(4)(c) and Snowmass 185 Village Municipal Code Section 2- 45(c)(2); 186 187 Provided, there is an affirmative vote of two thirds of the quorum present at this meeting 188 to hold an Executive Session and for the sole purpose of considering items (a) and (b) 189 above. Provided further, that no adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, 190 regulation, or formal action shall occur at this Executive Session. 191 192 John Wilkinson made the motion to enter closed session Markey Butler seconded the 193 motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 194 195 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Arnold Mordkin, and Markey Butler. 196 Voting Nay: None. 197 At 7:48 p.m. 198 199 Arnold Mordkin made the motion to approve reconvening back to the Regular Meeting 200 of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, May 3, 2010. Mayor Bill Boineau 201 seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 202 203 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Arnold Mordkin, and Markey Butler. 204 205 Voting Nay: None. 206 Item No. 13 ADJOURNMENT 05- 03 -10tc Minutes Page 6 of 6 207 At 7:49 p.m. 208 209 John Wilkinson made the motion to adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass 210 Village Town Council on Monday May 3, 2010 Mayor Bill Boineau seconded the 211 motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. 212 213 Voting Aye: Mayor Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Arnold Mordkin, and Markey Butler. 214 215 Voting Nay: None. 216 Submitted By, 217 218 219 Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk 220 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Town Council Meeting 5:00 p.m. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Town Council TOWN Meeting CLEAN 5:00 p.m. UP DAY 0 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Memorial Day o II Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Town Council Meeting 5:00 p.m. 01 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Town CML CML CML CML Council Breckenridge Breckenridge Breckenridge Breckenridge Meeting 5:00 p.m. 27 28 29 30 I I TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: RUSS FORREST, TOWN MANAGER SUBJECT: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: MAY 17, 2010 Country Club Townhome 59 The owners of CCTH #59 Dave and Mary Harris won the lottery for the Casebeer's home located in the Crossings last week. Mary sent me an email asking if the Town was going to purchase her unit or if this unit would go through the typical sales process. Our goal has been to purchase these units and then resell them as free market units to avoid future homeowner assessment problems. We have determined that these deed restricted units will continue to be problematic since they are intermixed with free market units. The Harris's need to know as soon as possible if the Town is going to purchase this unit so they can proceed with the financing on the new Crossings home. The resale price on CCTH 59 is $406,157.78 and this would be the Town's purchase price for this unit. Please note due to the current economic conditions and the large inventory of new recently sold employee housing in Snowmass Village Both CCTH unit #25 and #26 have recently sold as free market units. The total return to the Town Housing Excise Tax Fund for these units is $1,321,219.80. Creekside Villas North Deck Replacement The exterior apartment decks on the Creekside and Villas North apartment buildings are in need of repair and renovating to meet the current building codes. The Creekside decks are 30 years old and the Villas North decks are now 27 years old. At the time these decks were built, the required spacing between pickets and rails was much greater then today's code requirement of a 4" maximum spacing. Some of these decks have a picket and rail spacing of 6" to 8" inches or more and this is not safe for small children. In addition these decks need replacement due to the age of the decks and in some cases the support members. The other major concern about these decks is the deck load capacity and support posts are being added to prevent a possible deck failure. Joe Coffey would like to solicit bids from three or more qualified contractors for the deck renovations and then request Council approval to use the Housing Excise Tax Funds to finance the deck renovations. $5,900,000 is the estimated fund balance at the end of 2010 for the Housing Excise Tax Fund. Joe Coffey recommends that this work be completed this summer to prevent a potential accident from occurring. Once, the Housing Department has received the bids and reviewed the pricing staff will present a specific proposal to the Town Council for their consideration. Staff simply wanted to inform the Town Council that a bid process was to occur and that a proposal would be presented to the Council after that process is completed. Snowmass Village Citizenship Award In the past the Town of Snowmass Village has awarded five individuals the Snowmass Village Citizenship Award. The award has gone to: 1990 Emmy Lou Badger, in 1992 Terry Long, in 1996 Ben Rawlins, in 2000 William Marilyn Getz and in 2006 William Cowan. There has never been a formal process for this award. In the past a Council Member or a citizen would bring to Town Council's attention and the Council would vote on the individual being awarded. We have a plaque that hangs in the Council Chambers and the individual would be invited to a Town Council meeting and presented with a Mayor's proclamation. Would the Town Council be interested in developing a procedure, criteria and nominating process to honor a special citizen of Snowmass Village? Split Rail Fence on Brush Creek Council requested an update on fixing the split rail fence along Brush Creek. Public Works crews have already completed repairs on the Brush Creek fence from the Roundabout up to Snowmass Club Lane. In inspecting the fence from Snowmass Lane Road up Brush Creek (on the golf course side of the road) to just below the Blue Roofs it was found that the fence is deteriorating and requires significant repairs. The cost of the materials to fix the fence is estimated at $10,000 which is not budgeted in the RETT fund. However, if the Town reduced the length of the fence from Snowmass Club Lane up to approximately Wood Road (below the 20 mph curve) we could fix the fence by using materials that are removed above Wood Road. Is the Council comfortable with this reduction of the fence line to avoid purchasing additional fencing materials? Pending Strategic Actions Last Updated May 13, 2010 Staff Action Status Date to Contact follow -up w/ Council Land Use John Dresser Demolition Council asked that an ordinance be prepared to Will follow -up provide a period of time to review demolition with other code permits before demolition of a building changes on occurred. May 17, 2010 Council agreed that staff should develop language for future PUDs to identify critical integral components of a PUD that must continue to exist over time. In addition, John Wilkinson requested that staff bring back a landmark ordinance for discussion in the future. Other Land Use Other Land Use Code Improvements should May 17, 2010 Code Issues also be considered with the completion of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff would recommend having a work session with Council to review potential code changes. Housing Housing Draw Site /Land On February 17 Council asked that a Land Revisit as part Department Inventory Inventory to done to identify potential housing of 2011 budget sites after the Town completes its budget process process for 2010. On Nov. 2 Council directed staff to take no action on this topic other than to continue identifying sites that should be further investigated. Council asked that this project be revisited in the summer of 2010. Housing Housing Policy The consultant has completed a rational nexus May 17, 2010 Department study and can begin to work with the Town on Will review a new housing policy. The Planning with other land Commission is also reviewing housing goals as use code part of the Comp. Plan review. Staff will amendments, schedule two agenda items based on the input from Council on October 6 (these could be on the same dates) which would be 1) policy discussion to modify the current land use code related to affordable housing; and 2) a review of deed restriction policy. Finance Marianne FAB FAB will be brining requested additional duties complete to Council and Council would like to discuss whether FAB should look at how to fund unfunded Road projects. Marianne GID Mil Levy Discuss option to increase the GID mil levy for Discussion Base Village with the GID Advisory Committee occurred on and return back to the GID with options. April 19, 2010 need to follow up with options for budgeting in the future Marianne Budget Update Finance provided a budget update in March, May 17, 2010 2010. The next update will occur in May. Other Russ and Negotiate access Direction has been provided to staff to ongoing John easement for negotiate for an easement. Skittles -esley Investigate Determine the steps for developing a sister city complete process for relationship creating a Sister City Relationshi Mark Kittle Remodels Council asked on 11/16 for the Chief Building June 21, 2010 triggering Official to bring back options for requiring the sprinkling sprinkling of buildings with a remodel. Staff was asked to research options and what other communities have done on this issue. In addition, Council asked on December 7, 2009 to come back with a discussion on banning shake shingles.