The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-02-20 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 NOTE: Time of items is approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. VAIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1:00 P.M. 1) Auerbach Berry Creek Fifth Presentation. (1 Hour 30 Min.) Tom Moorhead Russell Forrest ITEM/TOPIC: Auerbach Southwest, Ltd., the developers Nina Timm selected by the County and the Town to develop the housing site at Berry Creek 5th filing will be here to present their ideas for the site and to ask for Council input on the direction of the housing design and type. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide Auerbach Southwest, Ltd. with input on the proposed designs. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Through an IGA the County and the Town are equal partners in developing a 16 acre site at the Berry Creek 5th Filing. Last summer Auerbach Southwest, Ltd. was selected as the developer for the housing. Auerbach has been working on preliminary design and costs and is now seeking input from the Town Council and the County Commissioners on those designs so that a final design can be submitted for the County review process. RECOMMENDATION: None as this is a work session. 2) PEC Interviews (4 vacancies). (10 min.) George Ruther 3) ITEMITOPIC: Ordinance #3, Series of 2001, Housing Allison Ochs Zone District Discussion. An ordinance amending the Town Code, Title 12, Chapter 6 to the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations to allow for the addition of Article I. Housing (H) District; amending Chapter 4, Districts established; amending Section 12-15-2: GRFA Requirements by Zone District; amending Title 12 Sign Regulations, Chapter 4, Sign Categories, Section 11-4A-1: Signs Permitted in Zoning Districts and Setting forth details in regard thereto. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide direction on the inclusion or exclusion of free-market dwelling units as a conditional use within the Housing zone district. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: As part of the Town of Vail's objective to encourage affordable employee housing, the Town Council directed staff to create a zone district with the primary purpose of providing sites for employee housing. The development standards of this zone district would be prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of a development plan, similar to the General Use zone district. The Planning and Environmental Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed Housing zone district to the Town Council at their January 22, 2001, meeting. The recommendation of approval carried no conditions. On February 6, 2001, the Town Council reviewed the Housing Zone District. The Council had particular concerns regarding allowing free-market dwelling units as a conditional use in the Housing zone district. As proposed, up to 30% of the constructed GRFA on the site could be within free-market dwelling units. The Town Council requested additional information on how other communities deal with this issue. Please refer to the staff memorandum for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Develop- ment Department recommends that free-market dwelling units remain as a conditional use within the Housing Zone District. 4) ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance #6, Series of 2001: Dave Hilb Timber Vail Subdivision. An ordinance amending the Official Bill Gibson Town of Vail Zoning Map and rezoning of the proposed Lot 1 and 2, Timber Vail Subdivision from Residential Cluster zone district to Single-Family Residential zone district; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with conditions, or deny Ordinance No.6, Series of 2001, on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The property owner, David Hilb, requested a rezoning of the proposed Lots 1 and 2, Timber Vail Subdivision from Residential Cluster Zone District to Single-Family Residential Zone District. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed and recommended approval of this request to the Town Council at their January 22, 2001 meeting. A copy of the Planning and Environmental Commission staff memo has been attached for reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2001, on first reading. 5) Paperless Packets Report. (10 min.) Suzanne Silverthorn Ron Braden ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review research and provide staff direction. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: In October, the Vail Town Council directed staff to research the concept of "paperless packets," an electronic version of agendas, staff reports and other packet materials currently distributed in paper format. Council members pointed to Vail's mission statement in expressing interest in this possibility. The cost to convert to a paperless system is approximately $98,000 (currently unfunded). Of equal importance is the need for support and commitment by those involved: the Council, staff and members of the public. Now that the initial research has been completed, this topic requires additional thought, discussion and direction from the Vail Town Council as it weighs costs, levels of commitment and associated benefits. 6) Next Steps for Mountain Bell. (15 min.) Nina Timm ITEMITOPIC: Council has requested that staff provide possible next steps for moving forward with the Mountain Bell site for employee housing. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide staff with direction on the next steps for the Mountain Bell site. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Mountain Bell site has been looked at as a potential site for employee housing. Previous analysis shows that this site has the capability to hold a financially viable rental housing development. RECOMMENDATION: None as this is a work session. 7) Review Council Critical Strategies. (15 min.) 8) Information Update. (10 min.) 9) Council Reports. (10 min.) 10) Other. (10 min.) 11) Executive Session - Land Negotiations (20 min.) 12) Adjournment. (4:40 P.M.) NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/27/01, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3/6101, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 3/6/01, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. HORSE OPERA (IONS /RODEO • AGREEMENT EXPIRED • "UNSIGNED° EXTENSION EXPIRES MARCH 31, 2001 • RFP FOR HORSE OPERATIONS /RODEO NEEDED • DECISION ON 2001 RODEO NEEDED ASAP MILLL=R RANCH ROAD * SCHOOL DISTRICT OBLIGATED TO CONSTRUCT ROAD * SET ALIGNMENT * SET ROAD STANDARDS * DETERMINE COST (OLD ALIGNMENT $1.24 M, NEW ALIGNMENT $1.44 M) * ESTABLISH COST SHARING * PUD PROCESS RESOLVES ALIGNMENT / STANDARDS ISSUES * EXISTING ECO BIKE i HAIL LOCATION IN CONTEXT OF PLANNED MILLER RANCH ROAD * ADDITIONAL SPUR ROAD ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED FOR HIGH SCHOOL UTILI I IES • OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNDER DEVELOPMENT (DUE FEB. 20) • SHOULD UTILITIES BE SIZED AND LOCATED FOR SHORT TERM OR LONG TERM NEED? (COST IMPLICATION) • UTILITIES NEEDED FORS - RECREATIONAL FACILITIES - HOUSING (TOV /EAGLE COUN i Y and SCHOOL DISTRICT) -SCHOOLS - OTHER MISCELLANEOUS USERS SCHOOL DISTRICT ISSUES • AGREEMENT ON ROAD ALIGNMENT AND STANDARDS • AGREEMENT ON NEED FOR UTILITIES • RESOLUTION OF COST SHARING FOR - PLANNING PROCESS (50 - 50 ORAL AGREEMENT) - INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (BOTH ON-SI ~ t AND Orr SI 10 * INCORPORATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT HOUSING PROJECT IN AUERBACH PROJECT • RESOLUTION OF BOUNDARY LINE CONFLICT * AGREEMENT ON CONVEYANCE TIMING • JOINT USE AGREEMENT FOR RECREATIONAL FIELDS TOWN OF VAIL ISSUES • COUNTY DESIGNATED AS LEAD AGENCY • TOV RESPONSIBLE FOR 50% OF DEVELOPMENT COST • TOV NOT AN OWNER BUT Rt i AINS 50% OF CONTROL • HOUSING PROJECT IS COOPERATIVE EFFORT ON ALL ELEMENTS (FINANCING, CONSTRUCTION, MARKETING, t i C.) • AGREEMENT NEEDED ON -TYPE AND NUMBER OF UNITS - AUERBACH ASSUMPTIONS - DEED RESTRICTIONS • CORPORA i t FORM • POSSIBLE INCLUSION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT HOUSING IN TOV / COUN i Y PROJECT AUCRBACH ISSUES • AGREEMENT TO AGREE EXISTS • NEED TO RESOLVE - NUMBER OF UNITS - TYPE OF UNITS - FOR SALE vs. RENTAL UNITS - LAND SALE vs. LEASE - PARKING REQUIREMENTS - OPEN SPACE /AMENITIES - DESIGN ISSUES 0e. ALLEYS) - DEED RESTRICTIONS • CORPORA i C FORM • AUERBACH TIMETABLE ENVISIONS FALL CONS i RUCTION (REALISTIC?) • POSSIBLE INCLUSION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT HOUSING INTO TOV / COON i Y PROJECT • DISPOSITION OF PROFITS (6% AUERBACH, 3% TOV, 3% EAGLE COUN i Y) PLANNING PROCESS • SKETCH PLAN APPROVED • PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMI i i AL REQUIRES RESOLUTION OF -UNIT TYPES /DENSITY - HOUSING SI ~ t DESIGN - ROAD STANDARDS AND ALIGNMENT - i HAIL LOCATION - UTILITIES • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL (21/2 MONTHS) • SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY INPUT ISSUES • OFF-SITE TRAFFIC ISSUES ARE A MAJOR CONCERN • 1041 APPLICATION NEEDED • FINAL PLAT (APPROXIMATELY 1 MONTH At- i ER APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAN) CAME I ERY ROAD /BRIDGE • FEDERAL BRIDGE GRANT APPROVED FOR 2003 FOR $ 2.8 M • TWO ALTERNATIVE SITES UNDER EVALUATION • RIGHT-OF- WAY DIALOGUE UNDERWAY • SELECTION OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE • WILL BOCC ACCEPT GRANT ? * SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGt i NEEDED • ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY (2001) • SUBMIT PUC APPLICATION FOR RAILROAD CROSSING (2001) • DESIGN BRIDGE ($150 K IN 2001) • CONSTRUCT BRIDGE ($1 M NEEDED) EDWARDS SPUR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS • CDOT'S PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (PETS) COMPLt i ION NEED FOR ANY CDOT FUNDING • PEIS COMPLETION (2003) • NO GUARANTEE THAT PROJECT WILL BE RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING BY CDOT • EDWARDS INTERSECTION 3.2 M) SPUR ROAD DESIGN 750 K) SPUR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ($5 M) • ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO SPUR ROAD AT MILLER RANCH ROAD INCLUDED IN COSTS FOR COUNTY ROAD FOR PHASE 1 • ADDITIONAL ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS O 1 HER MlSCt=LLANt=0US ISSUCS • CIVIC CAMPUS • DAY CARE (AT RECREATION AND AT HOUSING) • HOUSING ON SCHOOL DISTRICT PARCEL • ERWSD INTEREST IN PARTNERING ON HOUSING BUDGET ISSUES • SALE OF PARCEL 6 TO ERWSD NETS $479,500 FOR USE ON BERRY CREEK 5th • TOV RESPONSIBLE FOR 50% OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COSTS • REAFFIRM 50 - 50 COST SHARE ARRANGEMENT FOR PUD PLANNING WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT. ($80 K COUNTY SHARE IS UNBUDGETED) • MILLER RANCH ROAD COST SHARING TO BE FINALIZED. ($800 K BASED ON 50 - 50 SPLIT) • CEME i tRY ROAD and BRIDGE - RIGHT-OF-WAY ($700 K -BRIDGE DESIGN ($150 K) -BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION ($1 M [COUNTY] + ($2.8 M [FEDERAL]) * ROAD IMPACT FEES ($200 K UNBUDGETED) • MATCH GOCO RECREATIONAL GRANT • CDOT FUNDING FOR SPUR ROAD and INTERSECTION ($9 M LEGAL ISSUES • SCHOOL DISTRICT IGA • CORPORA i t FORM (TOWN of VAIL AND EAGLE COUNTY) • AUERBACH AGREEMENT • DECISION ON DEED RESTRICTIONS • FINANCING • TITLE WORK • JOINT USE AGREEMENT OF RECREATION FACILITIES • PUC APPLICATION FOR RAILROAD CROSSING D~V~LOPING COMMUNI I Y PARTNERSHIPS * EDWARDS METRO DISTRICT * BERRY CREEK METRO DISTRICT * ECOGE * WECMRD * OTHER METRO DISTRICTS AND HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS HNANCIAL PAR I NtRS FOR RECREATION and TRANSPORTATION FUNDING - EDWARDS METRO - BERRY CREEK METRO - ARROWHEAD METRO - GOCO RECREA I ZONAL I IELDS • GOCO DECISION FOR $150 K GRANT (FEB. 13) • BOCC ACCEPT GRANT? (COUNTY MATCH UNBUDGETED) • CONSTRUCTION MUST BE COMPLt i t BY 2002 • DAY CARE NEEDED? DISPU I L RCSOLU I ION ~ NON BINDING MEDIATION 4 BERRY CREEK Flf- H / MILLER RANCH FUNCTIONAL ISSUES HORSE OPERATIONS SCHOOL DISTRICT AFFORDABLE MISC. FINANCIAL PARTNERSHIPS CEMETERY ROAD RECREATIONAL AND RODEO INTERFACE HOUSING TRANSPORTATION / HOUSING AND BRIDGE FACILITIES AND RECREATION 2/01 I INFRASTRUCTURE RIGHT - OF - WAY GOCO GRANT 3 RODEO AGREEMENTS ROAD I I UTILITIES ' NEGOTIATIONS POSSIBILITY 30 I HORSE OPERATIONS SCHOOL BOARD COST jl 4/01 and RODEO RFP SHARING AGREEMENT HORSE 5/01 IAWARD and RODEO ER TIONSI I IGA WITH SCHOOL BOARD ( TOV AGREEMENT RIGHT - OF -WAY AGREEMENT AUERBACH AGREEMENT BUDGET REOUEST I BUDGET REOUEST DEVELOP 6/~ FINANCIAL 7/01 BUDGET REOUEST I PARTNERSHIPS 8/01 PRELIMINARY PLAN DEVELOPMENT BRIDGE DESIGN 9/01 10/01 11/01 APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT 12/01 1/02 2/02 3/02 4/O2 CONSTRUCT MILLER CONSTRUCT RANCH ROAD AND AFFORDABLE INSTALL UTILITIES HOUSING 5/02 6/02 7/02 BRIDGE RECREATION FIELDS CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION 8/02 9/02 10/02 11/02 12/02 1/03 2/03 3/03 4/03 5/03 6/03 7/03 8/03 9/03 10/03 11/03 12/03 BERRY CREEK Flr i H / MILLER RANCH FUNCTIONAL ISSUES 10 RODEO COST ESTIMATES (2(20) ROAD UTILITIES YES RrP O SCHOOL BOARD MEETING rKRSE OPERATIONS / RODEO - COST S4WMG AGRF3:MF3Qf ROAD (MILLER RANCH and CEMETERY ROAD) ? 3 TOWN OF VAIL AGREEMENT o3 CEMe r rrtf BRIDGE ? 40 AUERBACH • BRIDGE UTLRIEB - TYPE AND NUMBER OF UNITS SOCC ACCEPT CRAM T . PLANNG rnwcw - NUMBER OF UNITS AS8UMP710NS -TYPE OF lWTS T3 - DEED RESTRICTIONS RENTAL ---ATE FORM LAND SALE SALE - FOR va m LEAS -A PAWING REQUIREMENTS OPEN SPACE / AMENITIES - DESIGN ISSUES - DEED RESTRICTIONS O IGA W/ SCHOOL BOARD 3A R-O-W NEGOTIATION SCHEDULE -00. PROFITS - 50 IMPACT FEES PAN FINALIZE SUBMITTAL%1041 CMC j 3A TOWN OF VAIL IGA I DAY - DAY CAFE 26 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET RECREATION HOUSING 0 BUDGET (R-O-W, DESIGN and CONSTRUCTION) O AUERBACH CONTRACT / CORPORATE FORM O BRIDGE DESIGN / PUC APPLICATION I 5A FINAL PLAT j O IDENTIFY COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS j O BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION O IDENTIFY I COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS O CONSTRUCTION OF I AFFORDABLE HOUSING O CONSTRUCT ROAD and UTILITIES O OBTAIN GOCO GRANT O CONSTRUCT RECREATION FIELDS Town of Vail Meeting (February 13, 2001) 1. Eagle County Sales Tax Revenues 1 cent sales tax 15 % returned to incorporated towns 35 % of gross sales tax revenues must be spent on capital expenditures In 2000 $3.4 Million collected in Vail $508,000 returned to Vail Net to county $2.9 million Trends in collection of 1 cent county sales tax Vail generated 66% of the County's sales tax in 1984 In 2000 Vail generated 33.9% of the total county sales tax (net) In 2000 unincorporated Eagle County generated 37% of the total county sales tax (net) Total 1 percent county sales tax equals $9.4 million 35% or $3.3 M dedicated to capital County net $8.5 million * * Total collected (number before $ returned to towns is used for capital dedication II. Recent Capital Projects: A. Direct benefit to Town of Vail Berry Creek 5fl` purchase and joint housing effort ($2.0 million) Avon Annex purchase in Avon (serves up valley residents) ($1.3 million) Animal Shelter District Attorney office building Justice Center Remodel ECO building ($15.2 million) Y2k generator and upgrades at schools ($168,000) Fair Grandstands ($2.3 million) 800 NM radio system ($388,000) Jail locking system GIS System ($3.6 M total; $20,293 aerial photography to TOV; $106,121 GIS data by 3/2001) Airport passenger terminal, control tower and runway upgrades B. Indirect benefit to Town of Vail New module at landfill ($1 million) E/W Brush Creek open space ($1.5 million) Emergency Management improvements III. County Operations A. Direct Benefit to Town of Vail Sheriff Jail Vail 99 major contributor and volunteer Airport Landfill and recycling District Attorney funded Building provided for Courts Vail Mountain - law enforcement - restaurant inspections - building inspections - liquor licenses ECO buses and trails GIS system Treasurer Assessor Coroner Clerk and Recorder (record deeds, vehicle registration, elections) Mortgage assistance a program (23% are in Town of Vail) County Roads 512 miles (specifically Highland Meadow and Intermountain) Environmental Health - restaurant education, water and air quality Weed and Pest - education and spraying Youth Grants Human Service Grants Social Service programs Nursing Public Assistance Extension and 4-H programs* Rodeo and Fair Master Gardening* Baby-sitter Basics* County Court Avon Annex services Minturn Senior program Emergency Management Coordinator 800 MHZ system Elections 911 Board and coordination Support of Vail Dispatch Drug enforcement efforts Search and Rescue coordination B. Indirect service for Town of Vail Housing Efforts -Lake Creek Village Edwards -Mountain Glen in Gypsum -Riverview Apartments (HUD low income restrictions maintained) -Berry Creek 5" with Town of Vail -Down payment assistance Mortgage Credit Certificate program Latino/Hispanic outreach Consolidated Child Care Pilot program County land provided for recreation fields County land provided for library Wildfire assistance Marketing/ Public Relations - assessor's data on web Contributes to many county-wide projects like -DARE -Project graduation -Art programs -Earth Day -Government Week -Open space acquisition Rail Corridor planning and acquisition Major contributor of CIFGA - I-70 monorail Facilities provided for meetings, events, house boarding *I pulled some of the participant lists - you can see many are from the Town of Vail IV. 2001 Capital Needs Unbudgeted $ 2.9 million Berry Creek 5"' $250,000 Landfill $150,000 Office Space $400,000 Daycare $500,000 Recreational Fields (Edwards) $400,000 Recreational Fields (El Jebel) $4.25 million Airport Terminal Acquisition $1 million plus Employee Housing $150,000 Master Planning $50,000 Web Design $10.05 million plus TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS (as proposed - January 25, 2001) SHERIFF'S OFFICE: 1. Upgrade Microwave $ 100,000 2. Patrol Vehicles $ 169,000 3. Phase V 800Mhz Radio Data System $ 1,746,000 4. Mobile Command Post $ 95,000 5. New Justice Center Complex $15,000,000 6. Plane Hangar $ 150,000 ENGINEERING: 1. Miller Ranch Road & Utilities $ 1,540,000 2. Edwards Intersection $ 3,140,000 3. Cemetery Road Bridge Right-of-way $ 300,000 - $700,000 4. Cemetery Road Bridge Design $ 150,000 5. Cemetery Road Bridge Replacement $ 1,000,000 $2,800,000 Federal Funds) 6. Cemetery Road Reconstruction $ 250,000 7. Tennessee Pass Line Acquisition $ 1,000,000 ROAD & BRIDGE: 1. Upgrade Cooley Mesa Road $ 1,280,000 2. Frying Pan Road Rebuild $ 2,500,000 3. Bellyache Road Rebuild $ 500,000 4. Colorado River Road Rebuild $ 400,000 5. Road Cinder Storage Structure $ 225,000 6. Roaring Fork Road & Bridge Shop $ 400,000 7. Car Wash Upgrade $ 25,000 8. Bruce Creek Road Improvements $ 350,000 9. Upper Cattle Creek Road Upgrade $ 1,900,000 10. Stone Creek Road Upgrade $ 200,000 LANDFILL: I. Landfill Shop Building $ 300,000 2. Module Construction $ 680,000 3. Scrap Tire Recycling $ 40,000 4. Landfill Gas Management $ 1,501,000 5. Wildlife Mitigation $ 85,000 ADMINISTRATION: 1. Mail Room Improvements $ 10,000 AIRPORT: 1. Airport Business Acquisition $ 4,100,000 GIS: 1. Replace GIS Servers $ 70,000 COMNIUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 1. Berry Creek 5`' /Miller Ranch Planning $ 75,000 2. Fairgrounds Planning $ 75,000 3. Open Space Acquisition TBD 4. Trails TBD CLERK & RECORDER: 1. Office Remodel Eagle $ 60,000 ECO TRAILS: 1. Trails (Unincorporated Areas) $ 8,000,000 ECO TRANSIT: 1. Bus Purchases $ 774,000 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: 1. Computer Replacement $ 115,000 2. Replace Servers $ 32,000 HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES: 1. Minturn Senior Center Kitchen $ 37,000 2. Eagle Senior Center $ 100,000 3. R&B Day Care Facility $ 369,000 EXTENSION: 1. Red Barn $ 43,000 FACILI i ihS MANAGEMENT: 1. Tree Farm $ 3,556,000 2. Eagle County Building Improvements $ 180,000 3. Capital Needs Analysis $ 100,000 MISCELLANEOUS: 1. Berry Creek 5' Recreation $ 250,000 2. Tree Farm Soccer Fields $ 397,000 CITIZEN REOUESTS: 1. South Forty Roads $ 150,000 3. Aspen Mesa Estates $ 500,000 TOWN REOUESTS: 1. Vail UNKNOWN TOTAL: $54,419,000 + Historical sales Tax Receipts 10000000 80,00000 - ; E 6000000 i~ r 4000000 i 71 2000000 0 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 °Y TOTAL COLLECTED VAIL Vail's Direct Sales Tax Revenues 500000 400000 300000 - - - - ;l 200000~ i- 100000 4 4 L, Y. i-' + ~ " ; ? ~ fix' a ' ~ `~C ` ' O r.. 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 x Retumed to Vail -15% Vail vs. Unincorporated Proportional Comparison 10000000 8000000 4000000 20000000 - 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 Net County from Vail ~ Unincorporated I I Total County Revenue EAGLE COUNTY HEALTH AND 11CMAN SERVICES Mission: to work in partnership with the community of Eagle County, through education and direct services to promote healthy life styles, assist families in achieving self-sufficiency and protect individuals at risk of abuse, neglect and disease. Public Health Education and Prevention Activities Child and Family Services > Health Services > Protective Services (children & adults) Well Child clinics & parent guidance; Immunizations > Juvenile WRAP project Developmental Screenings; Adult Clinics > Family Mediation Services Early, Periodic, Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment > Intensive Family Services & Therapy > Parenting support and education > Foster care and Residential treatment services Prenatal counseling and case management > Permanency Planning and Adoption Women, Infant and Children's nutrition program > Services to strengthen and stabilize families Children with Special Needs program > Health Information, Resources & Referral Public Assistance Services > Communicable Disease case management > Financial Assistance -families, disabled & seniors > Food Stamps Senior Services > Medicaid Assistance & Medical Transportation > Nutrition program (Eagle, Minturn and El Jebel) > Child Care Assistance - working parents > Transportation services > Low income Energy Assistance Program > Senior health and wellness activity program > Commodities > Senior Information and Advocacy Services Child Support Enforcement Services Vital Statistics - birth and death certificates (328-8840) > Location of absent parents > Establishment of paternity Veteran's Services > Establishment and Collection of Child Support > Information, Referral and Advocacy Services Early Childhood Services - Early Head Start & Healthy Babies Spirit of Eagle Volunteer Services and Families - Comprehensive child and family development > Family Mediation and Mentoring services for low income pregnant women and children 0-3. > Homemaker and Chore Services > Senior Nutrition site assistance Eagle and Administrative Offices 328-8840 > Medical Transportation FAX 328-6227 Avon Office 949-7026 Senior Tax Work Off Program- temporary work for persons FAX 949-8120 60+ who own their homes to help pay property taxes. Basalt Office 927-3947 FAX 927-3963 Retired and Senior Volunteer Program - RSVP- Eagle Senior Center 328-1005 volunteer placements in the community for persons 55+. Basalt Senior Center 927-6430 Minturn Senior Center 827-5611 Senior and Disabled Adult Bus Pass - call 328-8816 Memo To: Jack Ingstad and George Roussos From: John Staight Date: February 12, 2001 Subject: GIS Services Provided to the Town of Vail Eagle County has provided County-generated GIS data free of charge to Russell Forrest, Director of Community Development at the Town of Vail. This data was provided in accordance with the Eagle County GIS Data Distribution Policies, dated January 19, 2000, which states, "Local municipalities will be eligible to receive Eagle County GIS data free of charge, under the condition that those municipalities receiving data agree to provide any GIS or AutoCAD data they create or which they own free of charge to the County." In accordance with this policy, I provided Mr. Forrest with a CD ROM of all the digital aerial photographs covering the town of Vail on June 14, 2000, at Mr. Forrest's request. The contracted costs which the Countv incurred to generate the Vail area aerial nhotof!ranhv data contained on those CDs was $20,293. I noted this cost in a transmittal letter to Mr. Forrest, which accompanied the data. I have kept to the Town of Vail's Community Development Department informed on the GIS Department's progress with converting GIS data, which should be completed in early March 2001. When all data is completed, we will be able to provide the Town of Vail with $106.121 worth of GIS data free of charLye to the Town. We also plan to provide updates of the mapping data joined with the Assessor's data, both of which take County staff time to maintain, on a quarterly basis free of charge. In addition to Vail's Community Development Department, this data can be used by their Public Works Department and E911 dispatch. We also have a license to provide the towns free of charge with the customized GIS software which the County's contractor has developed for us. I have met several time with members Vail's E911 Dispatch staff to educate them on how GIS can improve their dispatching capabilities. They are very interested in obtaining the County's GIS data when they are ready to start using GIS. Finally, we have provided data free of charge to Tom Braun and Associates, and Auerbach Southwest Incorporated, both of the consultants working on the Berry Creek 5th housing project. This data has helped reduced costs of the project and will result in a better project for both the County and the Town of Vail. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any backup documentation. lL FED 1L Vl 14.4J rqu uu3 r.uD Babysitter Basics Britt Kitchell Stefanie Johnson PO Box 2558 PO Box 2351 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Erin Armitage Maureen lrgens Lindsey Dowswell P.O. Box 3787 PO Box 6044 PO Box 1362 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Britney Brown Lani Bruntz Ellie Friedman PO Box 6281 PO Box 2656 PO Box 1110 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Hannah Guida Allie O'Connor Caitlin Rapson PO Box 969 PU Box 1013 2572 Cortina Lane Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81657 Sabrina Ste-Marie PO Box 1151 Vail, CO 81658 i L.. ll iL V 1 1Y YL IYU V VJ I VL Safe Food Handling Classes for Restaurant Associations Vail Mountain Dining Class -12/18/00 Name Pre-T Post-Test 1. Jason Krause 2, Mark Bauerlein I 3. Doug Wooldridge I 4. Chris Irvine b. 5. Jack Joncy 6, Barry Robinson I 7. Michelle Tuerpe 8. Carl Kcnzler 9. Doug Klacik I 10. David Wiehler I I 11. Louise Gardner I 112. Phil Cohen I I I I I I I Average I I I I I 1L • I LL 1L V1 1'"-F 4J I I u VVJ r Ve} Name Pre-T Post-To R. Collins J. Ancell 1. Zarydin V. Stern C. Cruikshank I F. Chatran I N, Radic 1. Hohnjee M. Jaswal C. Irani I P. Condong Stephanio R. Brain I G. Magaleski R. Davis Zubin I Z. Movidec I V. 13hai ja N. Perez M. Walent H. Romeo Average Scores C. Vargas N. McVey I K. Hasting A. Bailey I I How Eagle County Weed & Pest Benefits the Town of Vail -Noxious weed education program targeted towards all citizens of Eagle County Mailings were conducted in January 2001 to: 1. Town of Vail staff in the Code and Public Works Departments 2. Homeowners Associations in the Town of Vail 3. Landscapers/Green Industry representatives that contract in the Town of Vail 4. Weed and Pest will host a Colorado Department of Agriculture, Commercial Applicator Exam at the Eagle County Fairgrounds, Vail Recreation District Employees have RSVP'd 5. Eagle County Weed & Pest has been in contact with the Vail Recreation District "Vail Nature Center" in an effort to help VNC's undesirable plant education Effort -Eagle County Weed & Pest regularly consults (a couple times a month in winter) with Town of Vail Citizens regarding weed and pest issues - Many of the undesirable and noxious weeds rely on the wind to transport seed as a means of propagation, so any weed management efforts, encouraged and required by Eagle County resolution no. 200045, conducted downwind benefits Town of Vail - Eagle County was a participant in a coordinated multi-county effort to move the Colorado Department of Transportation section 2 into a more aggressive noxious weed management program along the I-70 corridor. ( a notable result was an increase of funding from $6000 annually to $24,000 for the 2000, season) - Eagle County Weed & Pest cooperates with the United States Forest Service an entity that is actively involved in Integrated Weed Management in the Gore Creek Watershed. - Eagle County Weed & Pest has taken an active role in introducing Biological Control Agents (the natural enemies of noxious weeds) in our Integrated Pest Management effort. These agents will rarely eliminate the undesirable organism, but they do suppress reproduction and spread. Biological Control agents have moved into the Gore Creek Watershed. - Town of Vail Citizens are eligible to participate in the pesticide re-sale and sprayer rental programs (We can provide a much broader range of products, and offer much more qualified advice than Wal-Mart or Ace Hardware) - Eagle County Weed and Pest manages vegetation on the incorporated Right of Ways in the Gore Creek Watershed AI Master Gardener Mailing - Vail 9 89 Updated 2/12/01 Alpen-Glo Condominium Assn Gerry Arnold 5115 Black Bear Lane #6 P.O. Box 7 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657-0007 0 0 1 Helen Beckwith Laura Chiappetta Ann Constien P.O. Box 2155 P.O. Box 3532 PO Box 3988 Vail, CO 81658-2155 Vail, CO 81658-3532 Vail, Co 81658-3988 1 1 9 Ginny Culp Claudia Dulude Sally Jackle 2960 B Manns Ranch Road 3916 Lupine Drive 1672 Matterhorn Circle Vail, Co 81657 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657 0 0 0 Julie Kiddou Ruthellen Kimmel Kevin Kirchner 2447 Chamonix Lane #C-12 P.O. Box 3902 P.O. Box 5214 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81658-3902 Vail, CO 81657 0 0 9 Bob Mackown Shari Maurer Teri Moen P.O. Box 4631 919 Red Sandstone Road #1213 P.O. Box 142 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658-0142 0 9 9 Constanza Rentic George Rindfleisch Judith Rodriguez 1100 N. Frontage Rd. #2302 Drawer 2160 5135B Black Bear Lane Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81658-2160 Vail, CO 81657 90 0 9 Andi Saden Sandy Story M.J. Von Berg 2437 Chamonix Lane #A1 315 Mill Creek Circle 2830 Aspen Ct. Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657-6555 Vail, CO 81657 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: February 20, 2001 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001, an ordinance adopting the proposed Housing Zone District. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs At the February 6, 2001, Town Council meeting, the Council requested additional information regarding allowing dwelling units (non-deed restricted units) in the proposed Housing zone district. Staff has researched into communities with similar programs. Staff has concluded there are very few examples of communities with similar zone districts, so comparisons are difficult. The Town Council had concerns about free-market dwelling units as a conditional use within the Housing zone district. Generally, meeting the need for affordable The Aspen Model: The AH/PUD District in housing in other communities has been accomplished Aspen allows for 70/30 split of affordable through inclusionary zoning or incentive zoning. housing bedrooms. This can be reduced to Inclusionary zoning is a planning technique which 60/40 if deemed "`exceptional." According to encourages or forces the private sector to provide housing planners, there are currently 2 projects in the which is deemed "affordable". Typically this is done by: (1) process requesting the AH/PUD designation. providing bonuses, often in the form of additional density, These projects are privately owned. One for the construction of affordable housing; (2) pay in lieu entire subdivision (40-50 lots) is zoned fees or; (3) to require a developer to set aside a certain AH/PUD. Other lots are scattered. Projects percentage of the units as affordable housing. The vary in product, as density is based on size Aspen/Pitkin County "Affordable Housing / Planned Unit of units. Development" zone district is attached for reference. The Aspen model requires that 70% of the total bedrooms of F -oject within this zone district meet their Affordable Housing Guidelines. This can be reduced to 6r -Id the project meet the requirements of an "exceptional project." The County VA, has an overlay zone district which requires that a developer replace affordable h adevelopment proposal. An article regarding this district has been attached for referenol~~ The City of B(, ;O, has an inclusionary zoning requirement. The chapter of their land use regulations has been attached for reference. Staff continues to believe that to make the Housing Zone District both successful for the residents, a mix of deed-restricted units and free market units should be allowed as a conditional use. Currently, as proposed, the Housing Zone District allows for 30% of the GRFA constructed on site to be "free-market" GRFA. The original draft did not place a limitation, leaving the mix of deed-restricted and free market units up to the Planning and Environmental Commission. However, the direction received from the Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission was to place a 30% maximum on the GRFA allowed for the free-market units. Other possibilities include: • Reducing the 30% free market GRFA to a lesser percentage. • Using a percentage of the allowable dwelling units instead of GRFA. • Using a combination of GRFA and number of dwelling units to limit the free market units. • Eliminating free-market dwelling units as a conditional use. iclusionary Zoning http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/hshhs/planning/inclusionary.htr'n 0i~ 4-~ n A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO INCLUSIONARY ZONING This paper is intended to provide general, introductory information about the provisions of the inclusionary zoning ordinance which is contained in Chapter 9-6.5 of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981. What is "inclusionary zonino"? Inclusionary zoning requires that most new residential development contribute something toward permanently affordable housing in the city. Generally speaking, Inclusionary Zoning requires that 20% of the total number of units be permanently affordable to low income households. There are a variety of ways to meet the inclusionary requirement, including units on-site, dedicating existing units off-site, land donation and cash-in-lieu contribution. Inclusionary Zoning replaces the affordable housing element that had been part of the Residential Growth Management System (RGMS) since 1995. Which oro iects are sub iect to inclusionarv zonino? All projects with residential units, except the following, are subject to the requirements of inclusionary zoning: 1) Projects with development plan approvals given prior to October 5, 1995 may choose to either meet the requirements of inclusionary zoning or build according to the previously issued development approval as long as those units are completed by December 31, 2001. Any units not completed by December 31, 2001 will be subject to the inclusionary zoning requirements; 2) Projects with Reservation Agreements may develop in accordance with their reservation agreement until December 31, 2001. Any units for which building permits are applied for after December 31, 2001 will be subject to the inclusionary zoning requirements.; 3) Developments with affordable housing requirements in their annexation agreements made prior to February 4, 2000; and 4) Developments which applied for project approval prior to February 4, 2000 may request a variance to the requirements of inclusionary zoning in order to develop according to their development application. General Inclusionarv Zonina Requirement Inclusionary zoning requires that new residential development contribute at least 20% of the total units as permanently affordable housing. The City's preference is for on-site units. However, in most cases there is some flexibility in how the contribution may be met. These options include on-site units, off-site existing units, vacant land or money. For-sale projects must provide at least half of the required permanently affordable units on-site; rental projects may choose to fulfill the inclusionary zoning requirement on- or off-site. For-sale projects must provide permanently affordable for-sale units and rental projects must provide permanently affordable rental units. The permanently affordable units are to be constructed at the some time as or prior to the market rate units. 3f 4 02/15/2001 10:50 AM Inchisionary Zoning http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/hshhs/planning/inclusionary.htm What does "permanently affordable" mean? Permanently affordable means a given unit has an ongoing rent or resale restriction that is designed to keep the unit affordable, in perpetuity, to low income households. The exact terms of the rent or resale restriction are contained in the covenant which is recorded against each property. Permanently affordable units must also be occupied by income eligible households. Affordability and income eligibility are defined in terms of the Area Median Income (AMI). The AMI is a figure set by the Federal government each year, for Boulder, and is given in terms of household size. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) then defines "low income" for the city of Boulder as a percentage of the AMI. For example, the 1999 AMI for a household of three was $61,800, while the HUD low income limit was approximately 70% of the AMI or $43,000 for a three person household. In terms of first quarter prices for the year 2000, the average price for a 1200 square foot attached unit would be approximately $134,000; for a detached unit the price would be approximately $143,000. A rental unit of 1200 square feet would need to rent for an average of $990 per month. Smaller units result in lower prices and rents. Prices will be calculated on a quarterly basis to take into account interest rate changes and coincide with the allocation process for RGMS. Rents will be calculated once per year when HUD publishes the new AMI figures. There is a separate sheet which details the allowable prices and rents for the various sized permanently affordable units. Permanentlv Affordable Unit Minimum Sizes In addition to the requirement that the total number of permanently affordable units be at least 20% of the total number of units in the development, there is a total square footage requirement for the permanently affordable units. The total finished floor area of all the detached permanently affordable units must equal 12% of the total floor area of the market rate units, up to a maximum average of 1,200 square feet for each permanently affordable unit. The total finished floor area for all the attached permanently affordable units must equal 20% of the total floor area of the market rate units, up to a maximum average of 1,200 square feet for each permanently affordable unit. Off-Site Ootions For-Sale developments may provide up to half of the required permanently affordable units off-site; rental projects have the option of providing any or all of the required permanently affordable units off-site. There are three off-site options: Existing Unit Dedication Any existing units proposed to fulfill the inclusionary requirement are subject to inspection and must be generally equivalent to the new units that would have been built on-site. If accepted, a permanently affordable covenant is recorded against the property to secure it's affordability. Land Dedication There are two possible approaches for determining an acceptable land dedication. One is to provide land that is equivalent in value to the calculated cash-in-lieu contribution, plus an additional 50% to cover transaction costs. The other is to provide land that is of equivalent value to the land of the original development and that is appropriately zoned to allow for at least the same number of units that would have otherwise been constructed on-site. Cash-in-Lieu Contribution In certain cases, money may be paid in lieu of providing a permanently affordable unit. For each detached 2 of 4 02/15/2001 10:50 AM ,clusionary Zoning http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/hshhs/planning/inclusionary.htin market rate unit to be built, the cash-in-lieu amount is equal to the lesser of $13,200 or $55 multiplied by 20% of the total floor area of the market rate unit. For each attached market rate unit to be built, the cash-in-lieu amount is equal to the lesser of $12,000 or $50 multiplied by 20% of the total floor area of the market rate unit. What About Small Projects? Projects with four or less units may choose to provide one on- or off-site permanently affordable unit, dedicate land or pay a cash-in-lieu contribution as calculated above. What if I Only Own One Lot? There are three additional alternatives for single lot owners. 1) An owner of a single lot may have their inclusionary zoning obligation waived one time if all of the following conditions are met: * The lot was created prior to October 5, 1995; * The new unit will be the primary residence of the lot owner for at least one year following construction; and * The floor area is limited to 1600 square feet in perpetuity. 2) The newly constructed unit could be dedicated as permanently affordable with subsequent owners meeting the requirements of that permanent affordability. In other words, the original owner of the single lot would not have to be income qualified but any subsequent owners would be and the maximum allowable sale price would be set by the city. 3) The single lot owner could defer payment of the calculated cash-in-lieu contribution until the subsequent transfer of the property. The amount to be paid at that time would be the original cash-in-lieu amount plus an adjustment that reflects the change in the median sale price for housing in the city of Boulder. Variances That Mov Be Aob_ lied For There are several variances to the general inclusionary requirements for which a developer or property owner may apply and which may or may not be granted at the discretion of the city manager. They are as follows: Projects with Pending Application Approvals Projects for which applications were filed prior to February 4, 2000, may make a request to develop in conformity with the application submittal. In return, the applicant must provide affordable housing benefits equivalent to those that would have been provided if the project were to develop according to the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. Finished Floor Area Requirement The floor area requirements set forth in the ordinance refer to finished, habitable floor area. Unfinished floor area may be substituted for finished floor area in a 2:1 ratio, a maximum of 250 square feet of finished floor area may be requested to be substituted in this manner. Total Floor Area Requirement for the Project )f4 02/ 15/2001 10:50 AM j I Inclusionary Zoning http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/hshhs/planning/inclusionary.htm A developer or property owner may request to build a lesser amount of total square footage than that required by the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance if doing so would accomplish additional affordable housing benefits for the city. On-Site Construction Requirement Developers of for-sale projects are required to build at least 50% of the required permanently affordable units on-site. Developers may make a request to provide more than 50% of the required units off-site if doing so would accomplish additional affordable housing benefits for the city or if zoning, environmental or legal restrictions make it impossible to provide 50% of the permanently affordable units on-site. Rental Projects Developers of rental projects may propose to satisfy their inclusionary requirement in ways not listed in the ordinance as long as such a proposal would result in additional affordable housing benefits to the city. Construction Timing Permanently affordable units are required to be constructed such that they are able to be marketed concurrently with the market-rate units. A developer may request an alternative phasing arrangement if doing so would result in additional affordable housing benefits to the city. Other Considerations for Permanentlv Affordable Housinq Permanently affordable units are exempt from the RGMS. In projects with at least 35% of the units as permanently affordable, all the units in the project are exempt from RGMS. Permanently affordable units are exempt from paying the Housing Excise Tax and may be eligible for a waiver from the Development Excise Tax. Projects which wish to provide more than 20% of their units as permanently affordable or wish to make the required inclusionary units affordable to lower income households are eligible to apply for housing subsidy funds. These funds are distributed one time per year through the Housing and Human Services Department. 4 o f 4 02/15/12001 10:50 AM FFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.htmr TITLE 9 LAND USE REGULATION City Of Mulder Chapter 6.5 Inclusionary Zoningi I Adopted by Ordinance No. 7025. Amended by Ordinance ` AV No. 7111. 9-6.5-1 Findings. A diverse housing stock is necessary in this community in order to serve people of all income levels. Based upon the review and consideration of recent housing studies, reports and analysis, it has become clear that the provisions of this chapter are necessary in order to preserve some diversity of housing opportunities for the city's residents and working people. The program defined by this chapter is necessary to provide continuing housing opportunities for very low-, low- and moderate-income and working people. It is necessary to help maintain a diverse housing stock and to allow working people to have better access to jobs and upgrade their economic status. It is necessary in order to decrease social conflict by lessening the degree of separateness and inequality. The increasingly strong employment base in this region, combined with the special attractiveness of Boulder, its increasing University-related population and its environmentally sensitive urban service boundaries, all combine to make the continued provision of decent housing options for very low-, low- and moderate-income and working people in Boulder a difficult but vital objective. The regional trend toward increasing housing prices will, without intervention, result in inadequate supplies of affordable housing here for very low-, low- and moderate-income and working people. This in turn will have a negative effect upon the ability of local employers to maintain an adequate local work force. It is essential that appropriate housing options exist for University students, faculty and staff so that the housing needs of University related populations do not preclude non-University community members from finding affordable housing. A housing shortage for persons of very low-, low- and moderate-income is detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The inability of such persons to reside within the city negatively affects the community's jobs/housing balance and has serious and detrimental transportation and environmental consequences. Because remaining land appropriate for residential development within the city is limited, it is essential that a reasonable proportion of such land be developed into housing units affordable to very low-, low- and moderate-income residents and working people. This is particularly true because of the tendency, in the absence of intervention, for large expensive housing to be developed within the city which both reduces opportunities for more affordable housing and contributes to a general rise in prices for all of the housing in the community, thus exacerbating the scarcity of affordable housing within the city. The primary objective of this chapter is to obtain on-site, privately owned, permanently affordable units. Some provisions of this chapter provide for alternatives to the production of such on-site units. Those provisions recognize the fact that individual site and economic factors can make on-site production less desirable than the alternatives for particular developers. However, the intent and preference of this chapter is that wherever possible, permanently affordable housing units constructed pursuant to these provisions be located on-site and be privately produced, owned and managed. 9-6.5-2 Purpose. i The purposes of this chapter are to: I ~f 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM OFFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY, http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.html (a) Implement the housing goals of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan; (b) Promote the construction of housing that is affordable to the community's workforce; (c) Retain opportunities for people that work in the city to also live in the city; (d) Maintain a balanced community that provides housing for people of all income levels; and (e) Insure that housing options continue to be available for very low-income, low-income, and moderate-income residents, for special needs populations and for a significant proportion of those who both work and wish to live in the city. 9-6.5-3 Definitions. "Affordable housing fund" means a fund to which contributions collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited and from which monies shall be expended, solely to construct, purchase, and maintain permanently affordable housing units and for the costs of administering programs consistent with the purposes of this chapter. "Developer" means any person who seeks a city permit or approval for the construction of a development which includes one or more dwelling, units. "Development" means the entire plan to construct or place one or more dwelling units on a particular parcel or contiguous parcels of land within the city including, without limitation, a planned unit development, site review or subdivision approval. "Floor area" means the total square footage of all levels measured to the outside surface of all buildings or portions thereof, which includes stairways, elevators, storage and mechanical rooms, whether internal or external to the structure, but excluding up to 250 square feet of unfinished floor area in basements and up to 500 square feet of floor area in accessory buildings or attached or detached garages that are primarily used for personal storage or for the parking of automobiles for the occupants of the dwelling unit. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. "HUD low income limit" means the maximum gross household income which allows a household to be considered "low income" for the purposes of HUD financial assistance. These limits are reported annually by HUD and reflect the low income limit for a particular area. "Income eligible household" means an individual or family whose household income does not exceed ten percentage points more than the HUD low income limit for the Boulder Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA), with adjustments for family size, with the average of all eligible households within a development earning no more than the HUD low income limit. This standard applies to rental and ownership units. Income eligible households will be approved by the city manager and placed on a list of approved households eligible to purchase affordable housing. The city manager will provide the list of eligible households to developers upon request. Households will be required to meet the household income requirements of this chapter. "Permanently affordable unit" means a dwelling unit that is pledged to remain affordable forever to households earning no more than the HUD low income limit for the Boulder Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, or, for a development with two or more permanently affordable units, the average cost of such units to be at such low income limit, with no single unit exceeding ten percentage points more than the HUD low income limit, and (1) The unit is owner occupied; (2) Is owned or managed by the Boulder Housing Authority or its agents; or 2 of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM WFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.htn l (3) Is a rental unit in which the city has an interest through the Boulder Housing Authority or a similar agency that is consistent with Section 38-12-301, C.R.S. Permanently affordable units shall be attained and secured through contractual arrangements, restrictive covenants, resale and rental restrictions, subject to reasonable exceptions, including, without limitation, subordination of such arrangements, covenants, and restrictions to a mortgagee, for both owner occupied and rental units. No unit shall be considered a permanently affordable unit until the location, construction methods, and techniques used to ensure that the dwelling unit will remain affordable have been approved by the city manager. "PMSA" means the "Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area," as determined by the United States Department of Commerce. 9-6.5-4 General Inclusionary Housing Requirements. (a) Scope of Chapter: No person shall fail to conform to the provisions of this chapter for any new development which applies for a development approval or building permit for a dwelling unit after the effective date of this chapter. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued, nor any development approval granted, which does not meet the requirements of this chapter. (b) Prohibitions: No person shall sell, rent, purchase, or lease a permanently affordable unit created pursuant to this chapter except to income eligible households and in compliance with the provisions of this chapter. (c) Asset Limitations for Income Eligible Households: Income eligible tenants and purchasers of attordable units shall be subject to reasonable asset limitations set by the city manager. The city manager will establish maximum asset limitation requirements for tenants and purchasers of affordable units in order to accomplish the purposes of this chapter. The standard that the city manager will use to set the asset limitation is that the housing be available to people who, without assistance, would have difficulty marshaling the financial resources to obtain appropriate housing within the city. (d) Permanently Affordable Ownership Units: Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, permanently affordable units that are required for developments that are intended for owner occupancy shall be provided as follows: (1) On-Site: Permanently affordable units that are required to be constructed on-site shall be owner occupied in the same proportion as the dwelling units intended for sale as owner occupancy that are not permanently affordable within the development. (2) Off-Site: Permanently affordable units that the developer may be allowed to provide off-site shall also be owner occupied in the same proportion as the dwelling units intended for sale as owner occupancy that are not permanently affordable within the development. (e) Transition to Inclusionary Zoning Requirements: Developments of the type described in this subsection shall be permitted to develop utilizing no more than one of the following provisions: (1) Developments Approved Prior to 1995: Developments which received development plan approvals prior to October 5, 1995, shall conform to the provisions of this chapter or, in the alternative, may develop in compliance with the conditions of their previously issued development plan approvals so long as the construction of dwelling units are completed by December 31, 2001. (2) City Subsidized Developments: Developments subject to agreements with the city executed prior to the effective date of this chapter in order to receive Community Housing Assistance Program, HOME or Community Development Block Grant funds may either: (A) Develop in compliance with affordable housing and restricted housing agreements executed prior to the effective date of this chapter and provide of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM OFFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.htmi restricted units as required pursuant to ordinances in effect at the time such developments were approved; or (B) Enter into a new agreement with the city manager to allow the development to retain funding pursuant to the earlier agreements, provide permanently affordable units as required pursuant to the earlier agreements and law, be relieved of all obligations to provide restricted units, and provide ten percent additional permanently affordable units as such units are defined by this chapter; or (C) Refund all monies received pursuant to such agreements and agree that contracts providing for the provision of such funding shall be void. The development shall then develop in compliance with the provisions of this chapter. (3) Development with Reservation Agreements: Developments for which reservation agreements have been entered prior to the effective date of this chapter may develop in compliance with the affordable housing and restricted housing conditions contained in those agreements if building permits for the dwelling units are applied for by December 31, 2001. (4) Developments Subject to Annexation Agreements: Developments subject to affordable housing requirements imposed by annexation contracts entered into prior to the effective date of this chapter may develop in conformity with those contract provisions. (5) Developments with Pending Project Approval Applications: Developers of developments for which applications were filed prior to the effective date of this chapter may request that the city manager vary the standards of this chapter to allow for development in conformity with the approvals. The city manager will grant such variance requests by finding that the proposed variance will result in benefits to the city that are equivalent to the benefits that would otherwise have been created by the application of the provisions of this chapter. (f) Reference Information: Whenever this chapter refers to information generated by HUD but no such information is generated by or available from that agency, the city manager shall generate appropriate information which can be utilized in the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter. 9-6.5-5 Inclusionary Obligation Based Upon Size of Project. (a) Developments of Five or More Dwelling Units: Any development containing five or more dwelling units is required to include at least twenty percent of the total number of dwelling units within the development as permanently affordable units. (b) Developments Containing Four Dwelling Units or Less: Any development containing four dwelling units or less may comply with the obligations of this chapter either by including one permanently affordable unit within the project, by dedicating an off-site permanently affordable unit, by dedicating land that meets the requirements set forth in Section 9-6.5-7, "Off-site Inclusionary Zoning Option," B.R.C. 1981, or by providing a cash-in-lieu financial contribution to the city's affordable housing fund established by Section 9-6.5-6, "Cash-in-Lieu Equivalent for a Single Permanently Affordable unit," B.R.C. 1981. (c) Minimum Sizes for Permanently Affordable Units: The minimum size for permanently affordable units shall be as follows: (1) The average floor area of the detached permanently affordable units in a development shall be a minimum of forty-eight percent of the average floor area of all the non-permanently affordable units which are part of the same development up to a maximum average size of 1,200 square feet of floor area. 4 of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM FFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/caoibrc/965.htm1 (2) The average floor area of the attached permanently affordable units in a development shall be a minimum of eighty percent of the average floor area all the non-permanently affordable housing units which are part of the same development up to a maximum average size of 1,200 square feet of floor area. (3) The city manager will permit a decrease in size of the finished floor area, set forth in paragraph (1) above, if the dwelling unit is increased in size by 2 square feet of unfinished and potentially habitable space for each square foot of finished square foot of floor area that is decreased, up to a maximum of 400 unfinished square feet, upon finding that the unfinished space will be designed and configured in such a way as to allow for a simple conversion of the space at some future time. The factors that the city manager will consider to determine whether a simple conversion is possible include, without limitation, an adequate foundation, sound structural components, floor to ceiling heights, weather resistant roofs, appropriate exits, and window placement. (4) The city manager is authorized to enter into agreements allowing permanently affordable units to constitute a smaller percentage of the total floor area contained within non-permanently affordable units at a given project if doing so would accomplish additional benefits for the city consistent with the purposes of this chapter or to prevent an unlawful taking of property without just compensation in accordance with Section 9-6.5-11, "No Taking of Property Without Just Compensation," B.R.C. 1981. 9-6.5-6 Cash-in-Lieu Equivalent for a Single Permanently Affordable Unit. (a) Cash-in-Lieu Equivalent: Whenever this chapter permits a cash-in-lieu contribution as an alternative to the provision of a single permanently affordable unit, the cash-in-lieu contribution shall be as follows: (1) Detached Dwelling Units: For each unrestricted detached dwelling unit, the cash-in-lieu contribution shall be the lesser of $13,200.00 or $55.00 multiplied by twenty percent of the total floor area of the unrestricted unit. (2) Attached Dwelling Units: For each unrestricted attached dwelling unit, the cash-in-lieu contribution shall be the lesser of $12,000.00 or $50.00 multiplied by twenty percent of the total floor area of the unrestricted unit. (b) Contribution-in-Lieu Provisions Affecting Certain Developments Containing a Single Dwelling Unit: A lot owner that intends to construct a single dwelling unit that will be the primary residence of the owner for not less than one year immediately following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall meet the standards set forth in Section 9-6.5-5, "Inclusionary Obligation Based Upon Size of Project," B.R.C. 1981, or meet the following standards: (1) Designation of Home as a Permanently Affordable Unit: The owner shall make the unit a permanently affordable unit, except that such initial owner does not have to meet income or asset qualifications imposed by this chapter. The income and asset limitations shall apply to subsequent owners of the affordable unit. (2) Alternative Method of Paying Cash-in-Lieu Contribution: If the owner of a unit described in this subsection chooses to comply with inclusionary zoning obligations imposed by this chapter by making an in-lieu contribution as set forth in Section 9-6.5-5, "Inclusionary Obligation Based Upon Size of Project," B.R.C. 1981, the owner shall have the option of deferring payment of that contribution until such time as the property is conveyed to a subsequent owner, subject to the following: (A) The amount of the cash-in-lieu contribution shall be increased or decreased to reflect the percentage of change, if any, between the assessed valuation of the property upon which the unit is constructed following completion of such construction and the most recent assessed valuation of the same property at the time of transfer of title to a subsequent owner. I A 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM i OFFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/caoibrc/965.html (B) The owner executes legal documents, the form and content of which are approved by the city manager, to secure the city's interest in receipt of the deferred cash-in-lieu contribution. (3) Alternative Methods of Compliance: If the owner of a unit described in this subsection chooses to comply with the inclusionary zoning obligations imposed by this chapter by utilizing an in-lieu contribution approach, the city manager shall have discretion to accept in-lieu consideration in any form so long as the value of that consideration is equivalent to or greater than the cash-in-lieu contribution required by this chapter and the city manager determines that the acceptance of an alternative form of consideration will result in additional benefits to the city consistent with the purposes of this chapter. (4) Waiver of Inclusionarv Zoning Obligation for Certain Size-Restricted Developments: The owner of a lot who constructs a single dwelling unit upon that lot may elect to be exempted from the inclusionary zoning requirements imposed by this chapter if all of the following conditions are met: (A) Limitation on Eligible Lots: The dwelling unit is a single detached dwelling unit built on a lot created prior to October 5, 1995; (B) Primary Residence of Lot Owner: The dwelling unit is intended to be the primary residence of the owner and, following completion of the unit, the lot owner lives in the unit continuously for no less than one year immediately following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy; (C) Maximum Size: The floor area of the single detached residential unit does not exceed 1,600 square feet; (D) Restriction on Size: Restrictive covenants or other legal documents, the form and content of which are acceptable to the city manager, are executed to ensure that the single detached residential unit remains size restricted in perpetuity to a floor area not exceeding 1,600 square feet; and (E) One-Time Exemption: No person shall be permitted to use the exemption set forth in this subsection more than one time. (c) Annual Escalator: The city manager is authorized to adjust the cash-in-lieu contribution on an annual basis to reflect changes in the median sale price for detached and attached housing, using information provided by Boulder County Assessor records for the City of Boulder. (d) Affordable Housing Fund Established: The city manager shall establish an affordable housing fund for the receipt and management of permanently affordable unit cash-in-lieu financial contributions. Monies received into that fund shall be utilized solely for the construction, purchase, and maintenance of affordable housing and for the costs of administering programs consistent with the purposes of this chapter. 9-6.5-7 Off-Site Inclusionary Zoning Option. (a) On-Site and Off-Site Inclusionary Zoning Requirements: Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, in developments that require more than one permanently affordable ownership unit, the developer must construct a minimum of one-half of the required permanently affordable units on-site. (b) Variance to On-Site Construction Requirement: The city manager is authorized to enter into agreements to allow a greater percentage of the required permanently affordable unit obligation to be satisfied off-site if the city manager finds: (1) Securing such off-site units will accomplish additional benefits for the city consistent 6 of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM >FFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ei.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.html with the purposes of this chapter; or (2) If zoning, environmental, or other legal restrictions make a particular level of on-site compliance unfeasible. (c) Requirements for Fulfilling Obligation Off-Site: To the extent that a developer is authorized to fulfill some portion of the permanently affordable housing obligation off-site, the developer may satisfy that obligation through any combination of the following alternate means: (1) In-Lieu Contribution: To the extent permitted by this chapter, developers may satisfy permanently affordable unit obligations by making contributions to the city's affordable housing fund in an amount that is calculated according to the standards set forth in Subsection 9-6.5-6(a), B.R.C. 1981. (2) Land Dedication: To the extent permitted by this chapter, permanently affordable unit obligations may be satisfied by dedication of land in-lieu of providing affordable housing on-site. Land dedicated to the city or its designee shall be located in the City of Boulder. The value of land to be dedicated in satisfaction of this alternative means of compliance shall be determined, at the cost of the developer, by an independent appraiser, who shall be selected from a list of certified appraisers provided by the city, or by such alternative means of valuation as to which a developer and the city may agree. The land dedication requirement may be satisfied by: (A) Land at Equivalent Value: Conveying land to the city or its designee that is of equivalent value to the cash-in-lieu contribution that would be required under Section 9-6.5-6, "Cash-in-Lieu Equivalent For a Single Permanently Affordable unit," B.R.C. 1981, plus an additional fifty percent, to cover costs associated with holding, developing, improving, or conveying such land; or (B) Land to Construct Equivalent Units: Conveying land to the city or its designee that is of equivalent value (as of the date of the conveyance) to that land upon which required units would otherwise have been constructed (upon completion of construction). Land so deeded must be zoned such as to allow construction of at least that number of units for which the obligation of construction is being satisfied by the dedication of the land. (3) Dedication of Existing Units: To the extent permitted by this chapter, permanently affordable unit obligations may be satisfied by restricting existing dwelling units which are approved by the city as suitable affordable housing dwelling units through covenants, contractual arrangements, or resale restrictions, the form and content of which are acceptable to the city manager. Off-site units shall be located within the City of Boulder. The restriction of such existing units must result in the creation of units that are of equivalent value, quality, and size of the permanently affordable units which would have been constructed on-site if this alternative had not been utilized. Where a proposed development consists of ownership units, units created under this section shall be ownership units. The value of dwelling units created pursuant to this section as a way of meeting the permanently affordable unit requirement shall be determined, at the expense of the developer, by an appraiser who shall be selected by the developer from a list of certified appraisers provided by the city or by such alternative means of valuation as to which a developer and the city may agree. 9-6.5-8 Affordable Housing Requirements Unit For Rental Projects. (a) Manner of Compliance: For developments containing rental units, permanently affordable unit obligations for such units shall be met in the following manner: (1) On-Site or Off-Site Units Permitted: All permanently affordable unit obligations of rental housing projects may be met through on-site units, off-site units, or by any of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM OFFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.html combination of on-site and off-site units, which satisfy such permanently affordable unit obligation. Off-site units shall be equivalent in size and quality of on-site units that otherwise would be required by this chapter. (2) Variance to Permanently Affordable Housing Requirement for Rental Projects: The city manager may enter into agreements with the developers of rental housing projects such that permanently affordable unit obligations are satisfied in ways other than those listed in this chapter upon a finding by the city manager that such alternative means of compliance would result in additional benefits to the city which would further the objectives of this chapter. (b) Determination of Rental Rates for Permanently Affordable Units: If a developer of a rental housing project chooses to meet the permanently affordable unit requirements imposed by this chapter through the provision of on-site or off-site affordable rental housing, affordability of rental units shall be determined as follows: (1) Maximum Rent: Rents charged for permanently affordable units in any one project must, on average, be affordable to households earning ten percentage points less than the HUD low-income limit for the Boulder PMSA, with no unit renting at a rate which exceeds affordability to a household earning ten percentage points more than the HUD low-income limit for the Boulder PMSA. (2) Maximum Income for Tenants: No single household in a permanently affordable unit project shall have an income which exceeds a figure which is ten percentage points greater than the HUD low-income limit for the Boulder PMSA. 9-6.5-9 Affordable Housing Requirements For Ownership Units. (a) Maximum Sales Price for Permanently Affordable units: The maximum sale price for an affordable ownership unit shall be set by the city on a quarterly basis. (b) Average Price within a Development: The prices charged for permanently affordable units in any one project shall average a price affordable to a household earning the HUD low-income limit, with no unit exceeding a price affordable to a household earning ten percentage points more than the HUD low-income limit for the Boulder PMSA. (c) Maximum Income for Ownership Units: An ownership unit shall be sold to, or purchased by an income eligible household that meets the asset limitations established pursuant to this chapter. (d) Approved Purchasers for Permanently Affordable Units: Upon request, the city may provide the developer or owner of a permanently affordable unit with a qualified affordable housing household list. However, a developer or property owner may select a low-income purchaser who is not on a furnished list so long as the city can verify the purchaser's income and asset eligibility and the unit is sold at an affordable price as described in this chapter. (e) Purchasers of Permanently Affordable units Required to Reside in those Units: A purchaser of permanently affordable units shall occupy the purchased unit as a primary residence, except subject to rental restrictions for permanently affordable ownership units. (f) Rental Restrictions for Permanently Affordable Ownership Units: No person shall rent a permanently affordable ownership unit, except as follows: (1) Unit Initially Occupied: The owner shall initially reside in the permanently affordable ownership unit for a period of not less than one year. (2) Notice: The owner shall provide notice to the city prior to renting of the permanently affordable ownership unit of its intent to rent the unit. (3) Limitation on Lease Period: The owner shall not rent or lease the entirety of the 8 of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM )FFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.html affordable unit for one or more periods aggregating not more than one year out-of every seven-year period. (4) Lease Documentation: Any lease or rental agreement for the lease or rental of a permanently affordable ownership unit pursuant to this section shall be in writing. (5) Prior Approval: Before the date upon which it becomes effective, a copy of any lease or rental agreement for a permanently affordable unit shall be provided to the city, along with those documents which the city finds to be reasonably necessary in order to determine compliance with this section. (6) Scope: The provisions of this section shall apply to all rental or lease arrangements under which any person, other than the owner, his or her spouse, his or her domestic partner and dependent children or parents, occupies any part of the property for any valuable consideration, whether that agreement is called a lease, rental agreement, or something else. (7) Rental of a Bedroom Permitted: At all other times, the only part of a permanently affordable unit which an owner may rent or lease is a bedroom, subject to all requirements of city ordinances concerning the renting of residential property. (g) Resale Restrictions Applicable to Permanently Affordable Units: All permanently affordable ownership units developed under this chapter shall be subject to the following resale restrictions: (1) Approved Purchasers for Resale of Affordable Units: Upon request, the city may provide a potential seller of a permanently affordable unit with a list of eligible purchasers. However, a developer or property owner may select a low-income purchaser who is not on a furnished list at any time so long as the city can verify the purchaser's income and asset eligibility and the unit is sold at an affordable price as described in this chapter. All purchasers of permanently affordable units shall be part of income eligible households. (2) Resale Price for Permanently Affordable Units: The resale price of any permanently affordable unit shall not exceed the purchase price paid by the owner of that unit with the following exceptions: (A) Customary closing costs and costs of sale; (B) Costs of real estate commissions paid by the seller if a licensed real estate agent is employed and if that agent charges commissions at a rate customary in Boulder County; (C) Consideration of permanent capital improvements installed by the seller; and (D) The resale price may include an inflationary factor or shared appreciation factor as applied to the original sale price pursuant to rules as may be established by the city manager to provide for such consideration. In developing rules, the city manager shall consider the purposes of this chapter, common private, non-profit, and governmental lending practices, as well as any applicable rules or guidelines issued by federal or state agencies affecting the provision or management of affordable housing. In the event that the city has not adopted rules that contemplate a particular arrangement for the use of an inflationary factor or shared appreciation factor, the city manager is authorized to approve a resale price formula that is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, common private, non-profit, and governmental lending practices, as well as any applicable rules or guidelines issued by federal or state agencies affecting the provision or management of affordable housing. (3) No Special Fees Permitted: The seller of a permanently affordable unit shall not levy or ICI of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM OFFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.html charge any additional fees or any finder's fee nor demand any other monetary consideration other than provided in this chapter. (4) Deed Restriction Required: No person offering a permanently affordable unit for sale shall fail to lawfully reference in the Grant Deed conveying title of any such unit, and record with the county recorder, a covenant or Declaration of Restrictions in a form approved by the city. Such covenant or Declaration of Restrictions shall reference applicable contractual arrangements, restrictive covenants, and resale restrictions as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. 9-6.5-10 Requirements Applicable to all Required Permanently Affordable Units. (a) Construction Timing: The construction of required permanently affordable units in any development shall be timed such that they may be marketed concurrently with or prior to the market-rate units in that development. However, the city manager is authorized to enter into other phasing agreements if doing so would accomplish additional benefits for the city consistent with the purposes of this chapter. (b) Residents Eligible for Permanently Affordable Units: No person shall sell, lease or rent a permanently affordable unit except to income eligible households. (c) Required Agreements: Prior to approval of any development review pursuant to Sections 9-4-9, "Use Review," and 9-4-11, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981, or a subdivision pursuant to Chapter 9-5, "Subdivisions," B.R.C. 1981, applicants for residential development projects shall have entered into permanently affordable housing agreements with the city. Such agreements shall specify the number, type, location, approximate size, and projected level of affordability of permanently affordable units. Prior to application for a building permit for a residential development project, developers shall execute such restrictive covenants and additional agreements, in a form acceptable to the city, as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. No development review application or subdivision application shall be approved in the absence of proof of the execution of required agreements and covenants. No building permit application shall be accepted in the absence of proof of the execution of required agreements and covenants. (d) Good Faith Marketing Required: All sellers or owners of permanently affordable units shall engage in good faith marketing efforts each time a permanently affordable unit is rented or sold such that members of the public who are qualified to rent or purchase such units have a fair chance to become informed of the availability of such units. Every such seller or owner shall submit a public advertising plan targeting the appropriate income range for approval by the city manager. 9-6.5-11 No Taking of Property Without Just Compensation. (a) Purpose: It is the intention of the city that the application of this chapter not result in an unlawful taking of private property without the payment of just compensation. (b) Request for Review: Any applicant for the development of a housing project who feels that the application of this chapter would effect such an unlawful taking may apply to the city manager for an adjustment of the requirements imposed by this chapter. (c) City Manager Review: If the city manager determines that the application of the requirements of this chapter would result in an unlawful taking of private property without just compensation, the city manager may alter, lessen or adjust permanently affordable unit requirements as applied to the particular project under consideration such that there is no unlawful uncompensated taking. (d) Administrative Hearing: If after reviewing such application, the city manager denies the relief sought by an applicant, the applicant may request an administrative hearing within which to seek relief from the provisions of this chapter. Any such hearing shall be conducted pursuant to the procedures prescribed by Chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. At such hearing, the burden of proof will be upon the applicant to establish that the fulfillment of the requirements of this chapter would effect an unconstitutional taking without just compensation pursuant to applicable law of the United States and 10 of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM 1FFICE OF THE BOULDER CITY ATTORNEY http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/cao/brc/965.htmi the State of Colorado. If it is determined at such administrative hearing that the application of the requirements of this chapter would effect an illegal taking without just compensation, the city manager shall alter, lessen or adjust permanently affordable unit requirements as applied to the particular project under consideration such that no illegal uncompensated taking takes place. 9-6.5-12 Administrative Regulations. To the extent the city manager deems necessary, rules and regulations pertaining to this chapter will be developed, maintained and enforced in order to assure that the purposes of this chapter are accomplished. 9-6.5-13 Monitoring. Prior to July 1, 2002, the city manager will present sufficient information to the city council so that it can effectively review the operation of this chapter and determine whether any of the provisions of this chapter should be amended, adjusted or eliminated. Such information should be sufficient to allow the city council to evaluate the following: (a) The effectiveness of this chapter in contributing to the purposes of this chapter; (b) Any demographic trends affecting housing affordability indicate the need for amendments or alterations to the provisions of this chapter; (c) The level of integration of the provisions of this chapter with other tools being utilized by the city as part of a comprehensive approach toward obtaining the goals of this chapter. Back to Title 9 Menu of 11 02/15/2001 11:12 AM Generally, affordable housing should be served by centralized water supply and sewage treatment systems. With a few exceptions, these services are only available at this time in and near the Town of Jackson. A primary reason for launching the joint planning program was the issue of Town expansion in the South Park area, to which water supply and sewage treatment services can be readily extended. As indicated in Table 5.3, the northern areas of South Park (near High School Road) could provide alL.dable housing with densities and products comparable to Cottonwood Park. Regulatory StrategiesRegulatory Strategies Following is a description of regulatory strategies which can address aspects of the affordable housing problem. A more complete list of all of the strategies considered during the planning process may be found in the Affordable Housing Issue Paper. Density bonuses - Density bonuses may be granted to residential or commercial developers willing to restrict the price and/or occupancy of a portion of their development for employees or residents. As an example, housing required to be provided by residential or c.,..,...ercial development (see inclusionary housing and linkage requirements, below) could be made exempt from residential density (dwelling units per acre) and commercial floor area limitations, up to a specified maximum, providing the developer a bonus. Another approach would be to establish a base residential density and c.,......ercial floor area limitation and provide for a percentage or numerical increase in those limitations in return for on-site provision of affordable housing. For the density bonus technique to be effective, it should be coupled with map designation of areas in the community where it is anticipated higher density development will be aYr..,r.*ate. As discussed in Chapter 1, Community Vision, such areas have been identified within the Town of Jackson, principally in West Jackson. Maximum floor area ratio - This strategy would limit the gross living area which could be built on a given lot. Usually such a requirement relates directly to community character objectives. Under certain land market conditions, however, it can tend to slow the upward spiral of land costs by clearly defining the amount of development permitted on a lot-by-lot basis. It is unlikely, however, that such limits will bring new dwelling units within the range that is affordable by residents of the c.,..u..anity. Flexible use of allowable floor area - This technique could replace density as a regulator of residential land use. It would give landowners a floor-area square footage limit for their lots, which could be used in several ways. For example, a 2,400-square-foot limit could be used to build one 2,400-square-foot single-family home, two 1,200-square-foot homes, three 800-square-foot townhouse units or four 600-square-foot apartments. The choice would be the landowner's, subject to all other standards of the character district being met. Accessory units - Also known as caretaker units, granny flats, or garage apartments, accessory units can be integrated with, attached to, or built apart from a principal residence on the same lot or parcel. The size of accessory units should be limited to prevent excessive population densities and other adverse impacts on neighborhoods. Used independently or in conjunction with flexible floor area allowances, experience in other c.,..,...unities indicates this can be a highly effective strategy for Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-10 October 17, 1994 encouraging much needed Type #1 housing. Inclusionary zoning - This strategy requires that with every residential development (provided that a minimum threshold may be set), a certain percentage of lots and/or units be set aside as affordable or resident-occupied housing, to offset the impacts of that development on the need for affordable housing in the community. Lots and units produced through this strategy can be permitted to be smaller than others in the development, but design and quality of construction materials should be similar. Housing replacement - When older affordable housing units in residential districts are demolished and replaced by new projects, or are converted to commercial or other uses, developers could be required to rebuild some percentage of the housing which was lost as affordable housing. This program is intended to maintain some of the community's traditional supply of affordable housing, so the housing program is not continually playing "catch-up". It also helps to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods by retaining a mix of full time residents in areas which may be re-developing for visitor accommodations or commercial uses. Floor area/TDR blend - By blending floor area ratios with the ability to transfer development rights, a landowner could sell his development rights, but retain ownership of the land for agriculture or other purposes. Someone who wanted to only build a modest-sized house would agree to limit its maximum size and to limit occupancy only to a resident, in order to sell the remainder of the property's development rights, which would tend to off-set the cost for land and ii..p uvements. Small single-family units - These units can be used to provide inexpensive alternatives to apartments, and could be as small as 495 square feet. Although unsuitable for a large or growing family, they can meet the needs of single people, the elderly, or young couples. High-density zoning - This would involve designating locations on the character district map where affordable housing could be provided, and can be closely linked to the density bonus strategy. The actual districts could be suburban, auto-urban, or urban, depending upon location and the type(s) and density of housing targeted. This strategy should prove most effective in providing Type #2 housing within a residential district or urban intensity where accessibility, cv....&rcial services, and transit can support higher densities. An alternative to actually designating these areas on the character district maps would be to show them on the community vision maps, but not actually establishing zoning until development F uposals are received and evaluated. This alternative has been followed on the County's vision map. Linkage requirements - Developers of commercial projects could be required to mitigate the W-1,acts of their development on the need for affordable housing in the c....,unity by providing housing for some percentage of the workers the completed project would employ. Linkage requirements typically quantify the number of workers each type of development will generate, based on the square footage of the project. In Aspen, Colorado, for example, a standard formula shows that every 1,000 square feet of office space will generate the equivalent of 3.5 full-time employees. Options could be provided to developers to meet their linkage requirements by building housing, paying a housing authority for the cost of the housing, or dedicating land for housing. Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-11 October 17, 1994 Programmatic StrategiesProgrammatic Strategies Encourage employers to address the problem - Employers could provide economic incentives which would open more of the housing market to their workers. Employers could share in closing costs, offer low-interest loans, or write down the interest rate. To recoup the investment, the employer could get a percentage of the unit's ai,N.r,ciation upon resale. Meanwhile, employees would build equity to use on their next purchase. Employers also could develop new units, or join other employers in a master leasing program, whereby they guarantee to make rental payments to encourage private construction of new rental units. Housing Authority - Typically, a public housing authority maintains an inventory of multi-family and/or single-family housing which is rented or leased at below-market rates to qualified individuals. Housing authorities were widespread throughout the U.S. in the late 1960's to mid 1970's when there was relatively abundant support from the federal government. Today, there is virtually no federal support for "public housing." While Teton County has a housing authority, it has not yet produced housing units. Project start-up costs are high, and the authority would surely face the same land availability and price problems that conflo..t private residential developers. In addition, there is the stigma that public housing automatically equates to ghetto-like conditions. Even if there were never any "public housing" in Teton County, the housing authority still would have an important administrative role in the implementation of many of the regulatory strategies discussed earlier and in maintaining an up-to-date assessment of housing demand, so units which are produced fill a documented need. Any unit created by inclusionary zoning, linkage, replacement, or density bonus app.,,aches should be managed by the authority to make sure that residents are properly qualified, and that the objectives of each program are being met. Housing Trust - The Jackson Hole C.,......unity Housing Trust is active in providing affordable housing for purchase by permanent residents. Units are to be kept affordable over time because the Trust will retain ownership of land. Appreciation will be controlled, and the Trust has first right of refusal for resales. Buyers must be qualified as to income, employment, and Teton County residency. The Trust has broken ground on its initial project during the spring of 1993. Considerable interest has already been shown by potential occupants of these units. Once the first phase is well underway and dependable revenue streams are established, the Trust has the potential to provide significant amounts of permanently affordable housing in the County. Funding - It is unlikely that a wide range of affordable housing opportunities can be achieved without some direct gov,......ental intervention, because some housing types will not be provided by the market. Federal and state housing funds are nearly non-existent. The Town and County could work with the State Legislature to create a dedicated tax-based funding source to buy land and to create affordable housing (this tax could also be authorized for the acquisition of development rights and continued public bus service). Possible funding sources include a real esiate transfer tax and a "bed, board and booze" tax. Another possible funding source might be an exaction system for employee housing whereby developers of residential, commercial and resort projects would mitigate their impacts on the need for aff.-dable Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-12 October 17, 1994 housing by dedicating land and/or pay fees in lieu of building the units required by inclusionary housing and linkage regulations. The Housing Authority or C....,...anity Housing Trust could become the repository for land and funds. Combined with other funding sources secured by the Housing Authority and the Trust, affordable housing might be provided more efficiently than if developers worked independently. With funding in hand, the public sector then has the financial means to cooperate with private developers in the creation of housing. Government can (1) provide land or direct cash subsidies to developers, (2) reduce or waive tap fees, building permit fees and property taxes, and (3) float bonds to secure cheaper financing for housing projects. D. RECOMMENDATIONSD. RECOMMENDATIONS From the overview of the issues presented in this chapter, it is evident that immediate action is needed to produce affordable housing. If recent trends continue, Teton County will continue to lose its socio- economic diversity as surely as have other resort communities. Actions are needed to address the cl...r-..t, unmet need for affordable housing in Teton County and to insure that the future need for housing will be met. Because the housing which is cw..:...tly being built by the "free market" is not affordable to the average family, is increasingly being targeted at non-resident purchasers, and is generally for sale, rather than rental, and because much of the existing housing stock has been bid-up beyond the reach of residents, it will be necessary to insure that the housing needs generated by new development are mitigated. However, just as the c,,..,...unity's housing problems did not arise overnight, neither will they be resolved overnight. A single "big-bang" type of solution to the housing problem is not recommended, because such an aFF..,ach would be out of character with the Town and County and could tend to drive out of the market those private sector individuals who have been providing some of today's supply of affordable units. Instead, a set of complimentary solutions to the problem should be pursued, allowing the c....,...anity to monitor the results of each arp..,ach and to modify them to best suit the unique physical, social and economic needs of Town and County residents. Other resort communities with housing problems have found it ap1,..,t,..ate to initially focus their program on the needs of those segments of the housing market which are least capable of being met through the private market. As the needs of this market segment begin to be addressed, it can be expected that there will be "spin-off' impacts on other sectors of the market. For example, low-end units may no longer attract renters or purchasers, and may become targets for demolition. It is, therefore, imperative, that the market be regularly monitored, to insure that affordable housing which is being produced fills its intended niche, and to continually refine the community's understanding of which types of households have the greatest need for assistance. The combination of a,t,ivaches recommended for implementation include both regulatory and non- regulatory strategies. Included within the regulatory strategies are requirements to insure that residential, commercial and resort developments mitigate the impacts of their projects on the community's need for affordable housing, and incentives for developers to "volunteer" to provide I Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-13 October 17, 1994 I affordable housing. Prior to the adoption of any mitigation standards, it is recommended that the Town and County first conduct a detailed study of how residential, commercial and resort development each contribute to the need for affordable housing, in order to specify the percentage of that need which will be new development's responsibility. The study should also establish the balance point at which new development will still be able to make a profit after providing the required a1I', dable housing, considering the production costs and rental/sales prices for units of varying sizes, types and amenity packages. This analysis will define the role of density bonuses and other incentives in insuring the profitability of future developments. Because this analysis will determine the amount of the subsidy necessary to produce affordable housing, it can also be used to set the value of cash-in-lieu and land-in-lieu of production, which then are options available to developers. The land-in-lieu option should be encouraged, since obtaining land will be a key to the long term success of the housing program. Cash-in-lieu payments should also be permitted, to provide flexibility for small projects to meet their affordable housing requirements, or when the standards cause the need to produce fractions of units. It is recommended, however, that the Town and County proceed with caution in broader applications of the cash-in-lieu option. It has been the experience of other communities that cash-in-lieu can become the option of choice for developers, leaving the public sector as the only actual producer of affordable housing. One outcome of public sector production is that affordable housing will typically be brought onto the market well after the impacts of the private sector development have been experienced. For individuals with limited incomes to be able to afford housing created by these programs in the future, restrictions must be placed on their occupancy or price. Occupancy limits typically restrict rental or sale of the unit to persons who reside in and are employees of the community. Some occupancy limitations set a priority system based on length of residency and include a minimum time of residency before the individual is eligible for affordable housing. Price limitations typically .c,,uict not only the unit's initial cost but also the amount by which it may annually aj p..,ciate. While limiting the rate of increase of rental units is a relatively straightforward matter, limiting the rate of increase of units for purchase is much more complex. Such limits require the homeowner to accept reduced or no appreciation in return for the public or private investments which subsidized the unit's creation. Price limits can be imposed which limit ayl,..,ciation to a flat rate or to a chosen index of wages or cost of living. Care must be taken to select an index which will not allow the unit's price to rise more quickly than does the occupants' ability to pay. The price and occupancy restrictions would typically be established through either a deed restriction or a long term land lease arrangement. It is rec.,.. u.. ended that responsibility for administering and enforcing the ..,61.ictions rest with the Teton County Housing Authority. It is recommended that the Town and County continue to pursue a dedicated, tax-based funding source to allow land to be purchased and affordable housing to be built. Continuing support for the Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust, and the establishment of a monitoring pros..... to identify the need for program adjustments are also recommended. Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-14 October 17, 1994 Regulatory ActionsRegulatory Actions 1. Implement affordable housing linkage requirements which require new residential, c.,iumaercial and resort developments/expansion of existing c.,..,...ercial/resort developments to mitigate their impact on the need for affordable housing in the Town and County. 2. Adopt regulations for the flexible use of floor area allowance. This flexibility should be a permitted option where appropriate, such as urban and auto-urban areas. 3. Allow and encourage accessory units in atywi,..ate areas to produce Type #1 housing stock. 4. Designate on the community vision maps (and character district maps, as appropriate) areas for "high density" housing. Product Types #1 and #2 should be'ta.roied. Designated areas should have good road access via arterial and collector streets and be served by transit, be located close to commercial services, and not be lands which are constrained by resource protection standards. 5. Adopt regulations which allow density bonuses for affordable housing where ap1,.vV,,'ate. Adopt density bonus provisions in conjunction with affordable housing linkage requirements, if determined to be necessary to maintain the piuliitability of new developments. 6. Provide for building permit and tap fee reductions or waivers for affordable housing projects. Evaluate methods of changing the way infrastructure costs are assessed against development (ie., if costs were assessed by the square foot, rather than by the unit, it would make smaller, resident-oriented units more affordable and, coincidentally, address some of the impacts of large second homes on public services). Nonregulatory ActionsNonregulatory Actions 1. The Town and County should work with the State Legislature to create a dedicated tax-based funding source to buy land for, build and otherwise Fw...ote affordable housing. Possible funding sources include a real estate transfer tax and a "bed, board and booze" tax. 2. Staff the Housing Authority to manage affordable units created by regulatory means, and to administer non-regulatory pror4mmss. 3. Conduct a legal analysis of alternatives methods for insuring that units which are produced are p.. Ferly occupied. Methods which should be analyzed include, but are not limited to, deed restrictions and long term land leases. Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-15 October 17, 1994 4. Initiate a program among the Housing Authority, Housing Trust, and Town and County planning dep.L..ents to educate employers on what they can do to F.U]Mote affordable housing. 5. Continue to support the programs of the Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust. 6. Establish a comprehensive monitoring program for housing production, cost, and income data. The program should monitor the effectiveness of all housing efforts County-wide, and should be the basis for any changes or adjustments to those efforts. 7. Continue to analyze strategies aimed at preserving the existing affordable housing inventory, while new inventory is produced. Such strategies could include, but not be limited to, replacement housing requirements, regulatory and economic measures to limit or tax real estate speculation, and techniques, including State legislation, to offset the impact of rising property taxes due on the ability of long term residents to afford to remain in Jackson Hole. Chapter 5 - Housing Page 5-16 October 17, 1994 Z Section 26.710.110 Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development (AH/PUD). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development (AH/PUD) zone district is to provide for the use of land for the production of Category affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component of free market lots/units to off-set the cost of developing affordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan. The AH/PUD zone district is intended for residential use primarily by permanent residents of the community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the AH/PUD zone district should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the AH/PUD zone district can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non-community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the AH/PUD zone district should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the AH/PUD zone district: 1. Residential uses restricted to Category affordable housing guidelines and resident occupied units which comply with the following requirements: a. Minimum Bedroom Mix. A minimum of seventy percent (70%) of the project's total bedrooms shall be deed restricted affordable housing consistent with the Affordable Housing Guidelines. The mix between categories of housing shall be consistent with the Affordable Housing Guidelines. The remaining bedrooms that are not deed restricted to affordable housing may be free market residential units. b. Permissible reduction in bedroom mix for exemplary projects. A project may be eligible for a reduction of the minimum affordable housing bedroom mix requirement to a level of sixty percent (60%) of the project' s total bedrooms if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that the project meets the requirements for an exceptional project as set forth in the Affordable Housing Guidelines. 2. Home occupations; 3. Accessory buildings and uses; and I 4. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520. C. Conditional uses. The followings uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Park and open use recreation site; 2. Child care center; 3. Satellite dish antennae; 4. Dormitory; and 5. Transit facilities. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH/PUD) zone district: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): a. Subdivided lots from a parcel of 27,000 square feet or larger: 3,000 square feet. b. Subdivided lots from a parcel less than 27,000 square feet: 1,500 square feet. 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Subdivided lots from a parcel of 27,000 square feet or larger: Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 square feet. Duplex: 1,500 square feet. b. Subdivided lots from a parcel less than 27,000 square feet: (1) Detached: 1,500 square feet. (2) Duplex: 1,500 square feet. (3) Multi-family dwellings on a lot that was subdivided from a parcel of 27,000 square feet or less or for lots that were subdivided from a parcel of 43,560 square feet or less when approved by the special review pursuant to Chapter 26.430: Studio: 300. 1 bedroom: 400. 2 bedroom: 800. 3 bedroom: 1,200. 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. (4) Multi-family dwellings on a lot that was subdivided from a parcel of more than 27,000 square feet (except when varied by special review): Studio: 1,000. 1 bedroom: 1,250. 2 bedroom: 2,100. 3 bedroom: 3,630. 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 4. Minimum front yard (feet): To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. Multi-family dwellings: To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 7. Maximum height (feet): To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot: To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 9. Percent of open space required for building site: To be determined during PUD review, based upon the criteria in Section 26.445.040 including but not limited to neighborhood compatibility and adjacent zone district regulations. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). The allowable floor area permitted in this zone is determined by the following table and shall be applied to the proposed fathering parcel. Floor area allocations on newly proposed subdivided lots shall be determined as part of the Planned Unit Development review, but in no case shall they cumulatively exceed the provisions of this Section. Sites may be developed up to eighty-five (85) percent of the allowed floor area. Up to one hundred (100) percent of the floor area may be permitted by special review, pursuant to Chapter 26.430. Lot Size (Square Feet) Allowable Square Feet 0--15,000 square feet 1.1:1 15,001--25,000 square feet 1:1 25,001--43,560 square feet .8:1 >1 acre--3 acres .6:1 >3 acres--6 acres .36:1 >6 acres .3:1 PWNING • JURISDICTION Arlington County's Affordable Housing Protection District It was in the spring of 1990 that the Renters at Pollard Gardens decided private development," wrote James Carr, residents of Pollard Gardens decided they would not leave without a fight, vice-president of housing policy research to say, "Enough is enough." They had says Suzanne Perry, one of the residents. at Fannie Mae, in support of the award learned that Tishman Speyer Properties They formed a tenants union and testi- application. "[But] Arlington's use of a of New York had plans to raze their 124 fied before the county board and the special zoning district to require devel- low-cost apartments, located in central planning commission on the negative im- oper replacement of affordable housing, Arlington County, Virginia, and replace pacts of the proposed project. Their testi- in a comparable location is unique." them with over 600 luxury condomini- mony, in part, led the board to adopt a ums in three high-rise buildings and a special affordable housing protection dis- Plans and reality 119,000-square-foot office building. trict later in 1990-and it has won this Arlington County is attractive to devel- That was the last straw-demolitions year's planning implementation award opers for two reasons. It's just across the or condo conversions along the Metro for a large jurisdiction. Potomac River from Washington, D.C., rail corridor had depleted the supply of "There are many examples of extrac- and density has increased greatly in the affordable apartments by some 11,000 tions, levies, and contributions to trust transit corridors as a result of sector plans units all during the 1970s and '80s. funds for housing which are required of adopted by the county board in the early Virtually all 103 units at Clarendon Court /leftl s> were leased within two months of its opening in 1993. The project is located within an affordable y e housing protection district approved b Arlington County in 1990-after neighborhood, people protested that they were gradually being e s I displaced by gentrification. The proposed - redevelopment of the Pollard Gardens site frightl would include luxury high-rise condominiums, offices, and retail space. ~ e rls 1 r - j y Lf M J .4 • ARGE • • • 13 Land Use and Transportation Manual 1980s. Rents in the area increased an HAMME I//GA04 average of 42 percent between 1979 andr ACr~9S rs+=mss 1991, according to the county. After hearing the views of Pollard Gar- ~N j t r r dens tenants, the board asked the county °"`SS'Pwvrs ew- meeer y~/~.n department of community planning, hous- ing, and development for a way to recon- e`~« r5 sMA t «vo/o /A NdF//~ enasvrn~rav /ar c:=r++~o 've,,.....,, .at.ova cile the goals of sector plans with the i 1t-r l _ "F`T"C' rRer~.~+B~~ county s affordable housing policy. ,,l/~ r~rAOVSr. =g~,,zY,ri,s State enabling legislation passed in Jul ""`O"°" "`C&-' ass SrmP ';~,t~ , 1990 made it possible to use the com re-+~_ A, rma -~4A +X hensive plan to designate affordable hous- i- ing areas, paving the way for the staffs TWA Ur.W Amrpss \v \ CaNB/Ne O eWW4 S AMO proposal to create special districts as overlay ! * W s s=re.~~c sAaAca s 70 uM/Y nv~ a.,rACr 4= AWra~s zones. Before high-density redevelopment r~ sne~~ , ,,HOST L ! ` ; OW r & ACCESS can take place in such a district the / ~'1 w~l / ' . f~Fs s@A,vB. N/1LA'R1~S developer must agree to protect the af- ~ , • ~ ~ , fordable housing there or replace it with rs-NII F: S//yB Lg ~/py a0 VNK.$ AWrl'/ CWL.t nwa s ea A-4q-/ Ow"r.7 housing of a comparable type. 1: i , ° s AND Aso~srR/A/V y, s The overlay zone can be applied to six other affordable garden apartment com- plexes along the Rosslyn-Ballston Metrorail corridor, where the density allowed in ~ NT~"A TNNoVe.y the plan is higher than that allowed un-°ro~r ors <e,y.os ~4NNLCrors der the current zoning. B/cycta ANiO Ps OET7- WV T74i/L.4 The overlay zone was first applied to =ar nv6r/ ~va"At nw,t s T man Speyer Properties' site plan for "It takes environmental issues and uses graphics to make planning meaningful,' said C .:radon Court and Pollard Gardens, juror Patricia Comarell of the Land Use, Transportation and Air Quality" manual submitted to the county in 1991. The prepared by 16 San Bernardino jurisdictions in response to mandates from developer's new plan combined 103 units California's South Coast Air Quality Management District. The focus of the manual of replacement housing on the site of the is on how to improve air quality through land- use planning. Above: How to transform Clarendon Court Hotel and Apartments, an auto-oriented subdivision into a pedestrian-oriented neighborhood. For more two blocks south of what was to be a new information, call Julie Hemphill at San Bernardino County; 909-387-3180. Pollard Gardens development. With the density bonus, Pollard Gardens was pro- posed as 669 luxury condominiums in ate a project that would be acceptable to apartment, depending: on the renter's in- three high-rise buildings and 143,000 the existing community. Clarendon Court, come. At Pollard Gardens, rents range square feet of commercial space in an completed last year, offers 56 rehabili- from $575 for a one-bedroom apartment eight-story office building. tated units and 47 new ones, some with to $655 for two bedrooms. two and three bedrooms, and is located Because of a downturn in the real es- Details within walking distance of the Metrorail. tate market, Tishman Speyer has delayed For several years, Andrew Nathan, the To ensure that Clarendon Court would development of the new office and con- Tishman Speyer managing director re- be financially feasible despite high land dominium complex at Pollard Gardens. sponsible for the project, worked closely costs--and to keep the rents low-the county Residents of the old Pollard Gardens were with the county, various civic organiza- agreed to provide Tishman Speyer with a given first dibs on the Clarendon Court tions, and with the mostly elderly and $1.5 million loan for the $11.4 million units, however, and 15 of them have minority Pollard Gardens tenants to cre- project. The developer also obtained fed- moved to the new project. At the mo- eral low-income housing tax credits for ment, 75 residents, mostly elderly, re- about $320,000 annually for 10 years. main at Pollard Gardens and will be ' Court Finally, the county allowed the developer offered relocation assistance when `ar~ir iT1i v5tiiTJrveicj tno- nE:.utl, s~,f : - a six-story density bonus. Units must re- Tishman Speyer decides the market is main affordable for at least 25 years. right to redevelop the property, accord- All but six of the Clarendon-Court ing to a spokeswoman. ~r ~ pia I'lousrr~ P'1.-fur: h~~ F•~ifr~{ " `i w apartments are available only to tenants "Every time I walk by Clarendon Court, ~nt~tr s~ Ioit~ Crt~h~ ttu• sE'it'e ~ 65tl,OQQ'~ with incomes between 50 and 60 percent it's as a source of pride," says Suzanne €<<i ci>.tfie 4t~ttV ,q t~-? of the metropolitan area's median in- Perry, who still lives at Pollard Gardens. come. Sixty percent of median income 'Everybody did things in a humane way.' translates to about $25,500 for an indi- For further information, call housing ~I Fi rs FY i4 t s ~r'tz. « vidual and $36,400 for a family of four. development specialist Laurence Newnam; Rents at Clarendon range from $506 for 703-358-3774. iOW Project Cost $11,400,000 , an efficiency to $ 895 for a three-bedroom Mary Lou Gallagher ,hapter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT http://www.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F...7_37_SENIOR_HOUSiNG_OVEPL/index.html Chapter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT d' PX 17.3 Purpose. 17.37.020 Housina goals. 17.37.030 Policies and implementation. 17.37.040 Establishment. 17.37.050 Development incentives. 17.3 7.060 Development agreement required. 17.37.070 Administrative guidelines. 1 01130/9818:36:04 17.37.010 Purpose. http://www.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F...0USING_OVERUI7_37_010_Purpose= html Title 17 ZONING Chapter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.010 Purpose. A. The senior housing overlay district is a floating district that is used only in conjunction with the PD planned development combining district, requires certain conditions before it can be attached to a specific parcel of land, and as such, is not given a specific location until a developer applies for it. As a special overlay district, it is intended to provide special opportunities and requirements designed to facilitate the development and construction of affordable senior citizen-oriented rental housing. B. It is the purpose of the senior housing overlay district to carry out policies of the city's general plan/housing element with respect toward senior citizens and low- or moderate-income people as discussed in the 1986 Housing Element. (Ord. 327 § 1 (part), 1986) I of 1 01130/98 18:20:56 7.37.020 1 iousing goals. http:]/www.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F...-.OVERL/1 7_37_020_Housing_goals_ htmi Title 17 ZONING Chanter 17 37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.020 Housing goals. A. To provide new housing at the highest feasible densities consistent with environmental constraints, the capacity of municipal services and facilities, and existing development patterns. B. To ensure that new housing includes some units that meet the needs of special population groups identified in this housing element. (Ord. 327 § 1 (part), 1986) 1 01/30/98 18:21:36 17.37.040 Establishment. http://www.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F..._OVERLUI7_37_040_Establishment .html Title 17 ZONING Chanter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.040 Establishment. The senior housing overlay district requires the presence of certain conditions before it can be applied for or attached to a'specific parcel of land: A. Appropriate base district zoning. B. Land uses in the immediate and surrounding area, current and projected, must be compatible with the living environment required by senior citizens and must be free of health, safety or noise problems. C. Area infrastructure must be in place or constructed as part of the project and capable of serving the proposed project including: 1. Streets; 2. Sidewalks; 3. Traffic signals; 4. Pedestrian circulation; 5. Other infrastructure as required by the city. D. The proposed site shall be a reasonable distance from commercial establishments, service providers and other amenities including: 1. Food shopping; 2. Pharmacy; 3. Banks; 4. Public transportation; 5. Open space/recreational facilities; 6. Other services as determined by the city. (This list may he modified at the option of the city.) (Ord. 327 § I (part), 1986) 1 of 1 01/30/98 18:22:53 7.37.050 Development incentives. http:/twww.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F...117_37_050_Development_incentiv.html Title 17 ZONING Chapter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.050 Development incentives. A. In order to reduce development costs associated with the construction of housing oriented toward senior citizens of very low, low and moderate income, the city is prepared to offer a developer some or all of the following incentives, depending upon the quality, size, nature, and scope of the project proposed: 1. Reduction in required off-street parking requirements (design and ratios); 2. Dwelling unit density bonus; 3. Reduced dwelling unit sizes; 4. Fee waivers/reductions; 5. Priority fast track processing. B. All development incentives requested and subsequently offered are subject to negotiation between the city/agency and the project developer, and will be granted based upon that amount of incentive necessary to place per unit monthly rental costs in the range affordable to the target population. (Ord. 327 § 1 (part), 1986) f1 01130/98 18:23:21 17. 7.060 Development agreement required. http://www.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F.../17_37_060_Development_°igreemen.html Title 17 ZONING Chanter 17.37 SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.060 Development agreement required. Development incentives granted by the city/agency to a developer using the senior housing overlay . district are predicated on the long-term availability and affordability of the units for the target population. In order to ensure that the units remain available and affordable to this group, the developer will be required to enter into a development agreement with the city/agency in accordance with California state law. (Ord. 327 § 1 (part), 1986) 1 of 1 01/30/98 18:23:41 '.37.070 AdMinistrative guidelines. http:/A ww.bpcnet.com/codes/foster/F.../17_37_070_Administrative_guide.html Title 17 ZONING Chanter 17.37"SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.37.070 Administrative guidelines. The city shall establish a process and such administrative guidelines as it deems necessary in order to implement the provisions of the senior housing overlay district. (Ord. 327 § 1 (part), 1986) 1 01/30/98 18:24:01 ORDINANCE NO.3 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN CODE, TITLE 12, CHAPTER 6 TO THE TOWN OF VAIL ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF ARTICLE I. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT; AMENDING CHAPTER 4, DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED; AMENDING SECTION 12-15-2: GRFA REQUIREMENTS BY ZONE DISTRICT; AMENDING TITLE 12 SIGN REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 4, SIGN CATEGORIES, SECTION 11-4A-1: SIGNS PERMITTED IN ZONING DISTRICTS AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of the Town of Vail;, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of these amendments at its January 22, 2001 meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the proposed amendments further the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers housing a high priority and recognizes the Town's role in providing quality living conditions for the community's workforce. WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council recognizes the need to provide for adequate sites for employee housing within the Town; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it reasonable, appropriate, and necessary to adopt a new zone district to encourage and facilitate the development of employee housing; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt these amendments to the Zoning Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The purpose of this ordinance is to adopt the Housing Zone District, which is intended to provide for adequate sites for employee housing, which, because of the nature and characteristics of employee housing, cannot be adequately regulated by the development standards of other residential zoning districts. Section 2. Title 12, Chapter 6, adding new Article I. Housing District, to read as follows: ARTICLE I. HOUSING (H) DISTRICT SECTION: 12-61-1: Purpose 12-61-2: Permitted Uses 12-61-3: Conditional Uses 12-61-4: Accessory Uses 12-61-5: Setbacks 12-61-6: Site Coverage 12-61-7: Landscaping and Site Development 12-61-8: Parking and Loading 12-61-9: Location of Business Activity 12-61-10: Other Development Standards 12-61-11: Development Plan Required 12-61-12: Development Plan Contents 12-61-13: Development Standards/Criteria for Evaluation 12-61-1: PURPOSE: The Housing District is intended to provide adequate sites for deed restricted employee housing which, because of the nature and characteristics of employee housing, cannot be adequately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other residential zoning districts. It is necessary in this district to provide development standards specifically prescribed for each development proposal or project to achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 12-1-2 of this Title and to provide for the public welfare. Certain nonresidential uses are allowed as conditional uses, which are intended to be incidental and secondary to the residential uses of the District. The Housing District is intended to ensure that employee housing permitted in the District is appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents of Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the allowed types of uses. 12-61-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the H District: Deed restricted employee housing units. Passive outdoor recreation areas, and open space. Pedestrian and bike paths. 12-61-3: CONDITIONAL USES: Generally: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the H District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Commercial uses which are secondary and incidental (as determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission ) to the use of deed restricted employee housing and specifically serving the needs of the residents, and developed in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing, in which case the following uses may be allowed subject to a conditional use permit: Banks and financial institutions. Eating and drinking establishments. Health clubs. Personal services, including but not limited to, laundromats, beauty and barber shops, tailor shops, and similar services. Retail stores and establishments. Dwelling units (not employee housing units) subject to the following criteria to be evaluated by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Dwelling units are created solely for the purpose of subsidizing employee housing on the property. B. Dwelling units are not the primary use of the property. The GRFA for dwelling units shall not exceed 30% of the total GRFA constructed on the property. C. Dwelling units are only created in conjunction with deed restricted employee housing. D. Dwelling units are compatible with the proposed uses and buildings on the site and are compatible with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. Outdoor Patios Public and private schools and educational institutions Public buildings and grounds. Public parks. Public utilities installations including transmission lines and appurtenant equipment. -2- 12-61-4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the H District: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-14-12 of this Title. Minor Arcades Private greenhouses, tool sheds, playhouses, attached garages or carports, swimming pools, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. 12-61-5: SETBACKS: The setbacks in this district shall be 20' from the perimeter of the zone district. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, variations to the setback standards may be approved during the review of a development plan subject to the applicant demonstrating compliance with the following criteria: A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. B. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. C. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. D. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. Variations to the 20 ft. setback shall not be allowed on property lines adjacent to HR, SFR, R, PS, and RC zoned properties, unless a variance is approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission pursuant to Chapter 17 of this Title. 12-61-6: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty-five percent (55%) of the total site area. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, site coverage may be increased if 75% of the required parking spaces are underground or enclosed; thus reducing the impacts of surface paving provided within a development, and that the minimum landscape area requirement is met. 12-61-7: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15) with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. 12-61-8: PARKING AND LOADING Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 10 of this Title. No parking or loading area shall be located within any required setback area. At the discretion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, variations to the parking standards outlined in Chapter 10 may be approved during the review of a development plan subject to a Parking Management Plan. The Parking Management Plan shall be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission and shall provide for a reduction in the parking requirements based on a demonstrated need for fewer parking spaces than Chapter 10 of this title would require. For example, a demonstrated need for a reduction in the required parking could include: A. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation including, but not limited to, public transit or shuttle services. B. A limitation placed in the deed restrictions limiting the number of cars for each unit. C. A demonstrated permanent program including, but not limited to, rideshare programs, carshare programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts. 12-61-9: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY: A. Limitation; Exception: All conditional uses by 12-61-3 of this Article, shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building, except for permitted loading areas and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. B. Outdoor Display Areas: The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. -3- 12-61-10: OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Prescribed By 'Planning and Environmental Commission: In the H District, development standards in each of the following categories shall be as prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission: A. Lot area and site dimensions. B. Building height. C. Density control (including gross residential floor area). 12-61-11: DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIRED: A. Compatibility With Intent: To ensure the unified development, the protection of the natural environment, the compatibility with the surrounding area and to assure that development in the Housing District will meet the intent of the District, a development plan shall be required. B. Plan Process And Procedures: The proposed development plan shall be in accordance with Section 12-61-12 of this Article and shall be submitted by the developer to the Administrator, who shall refer it to the Planning and Environmental Commission, which shall consider the plan at a regularly scheduled meeting. C. Hearing: The public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission shall be held in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of this Title. The Planning and Environmental Commission 'may approve the application as submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission may be appealed to the Town Council in accordance with Section 12-3-3 of this Title. D. Plan As Guide: The approved development plan shall be used as the principal guide for all development within the Housing District. E. Amendment Process: Amendments to the approved development plan will be considered in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-9A-10 of this Title. F. Design Review Board Approval Required: The development plan and any subsequent amendments thereto shall require the approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 11 of this Title prior to the commencement of site preparation. 12-61-12: DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONTENTS: A. Submit With Application: The following information and materials shall be submitted with an application for a proposed development plan. Certain submittal requirements may be waived or modified by the Administrator if it is demonstrated that the material to be waived or modified is not applicable to the review criteria, or that other practical solutions have been reached. 1. Application form and filing fee. 2. A written statement describing the project including information on the nature of the development proposed, proposed uses, and phasing plans. 3. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing conditions of the property to be included in the development plan, including the location of improvements, existing contours, natural features, existing vegetation, watercourses, and perimeter property lines of the parcel. 4. A title report, including Schedules A and B4. 5. Plans depicting existing conditions of the parcel (site plan, floor plans, elevations, etc.), if applicable. 6. A complete zoning analysis of the existing and proposed development including a square footage analysis of all proposed uses, parking spaces, etc. 7. A site plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'), showing the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, all principal site development features, vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems and proposed contours and drainage plans. 8. Building elevations, sections and floor plans at a scale not smaller than one- eighth inch equals one foot (1/8" = 1'), in sufficient detail to determine floor area, circulation, location of uses and scale and appearance of the proposed development. -4- 9. A vicinity plan showing existing and proposed improvements in relation to all adjacent properties at a scale not smaller than one inch equals fifty feet (1" _ 50'). 10. Photo overlays and/or other acceptable visual techniques for demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed development on public and private property in the vicinity of the proposed development plan. 11. An architectural or massing model at a scale sufficient to depict the proposed development in relationship to existing development on the site and on adjacent parcels. 12. A landscape plan at a scale not smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 201 showing existing landscape features to be retained and removed, proposed landscaping and other site development features such as recreation facilities, paths and trails, plazas, walkways and water features. 13. An environmental impact report in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title unless waived by Section 12-12-3 of this Title. 14. Any additional information or material as deemed necessary by Administrator. B. Copies Required; Model: With the exception of the model, four (4) complete copies of the above information shall be submitted at the time of the application. When a model is required, it shall be submitted a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the first formal review of the Planning and Environmental Commission. At the discretion of the Administrator, reduced copies in eight and one-half inches by eleven inches (8 1/2" x 11") format of all of the above information and additional copies for distribution to the Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board and Town Council may be required. 12-61-13: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS/CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION: The following criteria shall be used as the principal means for evaluating a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed development plan complies with all applicable design criteria: A. Building design with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing and orientation is compatible with the site, adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood. B. Buildings, improvements, uses and activities are designed and located to produce a functional development plan responsive to the site, the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a whole. C. Open space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the public, provide adequate buffering between the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, are integrated with existing open space and recreation areas. D. A pedestrian and vehicular circulation system designed to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development. E. Environmental impacts resulting from the proposal have been identified in the project's environmental impact report, if not waived, and all necessary mitigating measures are implemented as a part of the proposed development plan. F. Compliance with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. Section 3. Title 12, Chapter 4, Section 12-4-1: Designated is hereby amended to add the following zone district: Housing District (H) Section 4. Title 12, Chapter 15, Section 12-15-2: GRFA Requirements by Zone District is hereby amended as follows: -5- Modify by adding the Housing Zone District to table as follows: Section 12-15-2: GRFA Requirements by Zone District Zone District GRFA Ratio/Percentaae GRFA Credits H Housing Per PEC approval none Section 5. Title 11, Chapter 4, Section 11-4A-1: Signs Permitted in Zoning Districts, is hereby amended by adding the Housing Zone District to the first category of signs. Section 6. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 7. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 8. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 9. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 20th day of February, 2001 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 6th day of March, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. -6- Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 6 Series of 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, ZONING MAP; REZONING LOTS 1 AND 2, TIMBER VAIL SUBDIVISION FROM RESIDENTIAL CLUSTER (RC) DISTRICT TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (SFR) DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this zoning designation is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses, is consistent with the Town's Land Use Plan and Zoning Regulations, and is appropriate for the area; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of this zoning map amendment at its January 22, 2001, meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to amend the official Town of Vail Official Zoning Map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as follows: SW 1/4 of Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 / West of the 6th Principle Meridian (Lots 1 and 2, Timber Vail Subdivision) shall be rezoned to Single-Family Residential District. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Ordinance No. 6 of 2001 Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 20th day of February, 2001 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 6th day of March, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 6th day of March, 2001. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 6 of 2001 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: January 22, 2001 SUBJECT: A request for a minor subdivision, to allow for the division of an unplatted tract of land into two lots, and a request for a rezoning from Residential Cluster Zone District to Single-Family Residential Zone District, located at 1552 Matterhorn Circie/SW 1/4 of Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81/ West of the 6"' Principle Meridian. Applicant: David G. Hilb Planner: Bill Gibson 1. DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE REQUEST The owner, David G. Hilb, is requesting a minor subdivision to allow for the subdivision of an unplatted parcel, located at 1552 Matterhorn Circle, into two lots and a rezoning from Residential Cluster to Single-Family Residential. The subdivision is proposed to subdivide the parcel into Lot 1 (0.4689 acres) and Lot 2 (0.3798 acres). The proposed plat has been attached for reference. The Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed a proposed subdivision, rezoning, and variance request for this property at their December 11, 2000 meeting. At that time, Mr. Hilb was proposing a subdivision of this property into two non-conforming lots, a rezoning of the property to Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential, and requesting a variance from the lot area and site dimensions requirements of the Town Code. At the December 11, 2000 meeting, the Commission indicated to Mr. Hilb that they would not support his request as it was presented. Mr. Hilb requested that the item be tabled, so his proposal could be revised to conform with the requirements of the Town Code. This tract is currently zoned Residential Cluster. The purpose of the Residential Zone District is as follows: The Residential Cluster District is intended to provide sites for single-family, two-family, and multiple-family dwellings at a density not exceeding six (6) dwelling units per acre, together with such public facilities as may appropriately be located in the same district. The Residential Cluster District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with residential occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of the District by establishing appropriate site development standards. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property from Residential Cluster to Single-Family Residential. The purpose of Single-Family Residential District is as follows: The Single-Family Residential District is intended to provide sites for low density single- family residential uses, together with such public facilities as may be appropriately located in the same district. The Single-Family Residential District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with single-family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of such sites by establishing appropriate site development standards. TOWN OF VAIL D II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the request to subdivide a tract of land located in the SW 1/4 of Section12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian (also know as 1552 Matterhorn Circle). Staff's recommendation for approval is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum. Specifically, staff's recommendation of approval is subject to the following finding: 1. That the proposed minor subdivision plat does comply with the review criteria and requirements of Title 13 of the Town Code and development standards as outlined in 12-6B (Single-Family Residential District) of the Town Code. 2. That the proposal is consistent with the Town's development objectives, development standards for adjacent properties and the provisions/intent of the Single-Family Residential District regulations. The Community Development Department recommends approval of the request to rezone a tract of land located in the SW 1/4 of Section12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian (also know as 1552 Matterhorn Circle) from Residential Cluster to Single-Family Residential. Staff's recommendation for approval is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VI of this memorandum. If the Planning and Environmental Commission chooses to approve this rezoning, the following finding must be made: That the proposed zone district is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses, consistent with the Town's Land Use Plan and Zoning Regulations, and appropriate for the area. III. ZONING ANALYSIS The purpose of the Zoning Analysis is to provide a written comparison of the existing development rights of the parcel in comparison to the proposed development rights of Lot 1 and Lot 2, Timber Vail Subdivision. Minor Subdivision of an unplatted parcel into Lots 1 and 2, Timber Vail Subdivision EXISTING PROPOSED (both lots) Zoning: Residential Cluster Single-Family Residential Hazards: Slopes of 40% or greater Slopes of 40% or greater Lot Size: 0.8487 acres / 36,970 sq. ft. Lot 1: 0.4689 acres / 20,425 sq. ft. 25,749 sq. ft. buildable area (12,764 sq. ft. buildable area) Lot 2: 0.3798 acres / 16,544 sq. ft. (12,984 sq. ft. buildable area) Permitted Uses: Multi-family residential dwellings, Single-family residential dwellings Single-family residential dwellings, and Two-family residential dwellings Development Minimum lot size: Minimum lot size: Standards: 15,000 sq. ft. and 12,500 sq. ft. buildable area 8,000 sq. ft. buildable area 2 Density: Density: 6 dwelling units per buildable acre 1 dwelling unit per lot (this site max. of 3 units) Maximum Allowable GRFA: Maximum Allowable GRFA: 6,437 + 225 per unit = 7,112 sq. ft. lot 1: 3,917 + 425 = 4,342 sq. ft. (assuming 3 units) lot 2: 3,529 + 425 = 3,954 sq. ft. total: 8,296 sq. ft. Maximum Site Coverage: Maximum Site Coverage: 25% of total site area 20% of total site area Setbacks: Setbacks: Front 20 ft., Side 15 ft., Rear 15 ft. Front 20 ft., Side 15 ft., Rear 15 ft. Maximum Building Height: Maximum Building Height: 30 ft. / 33 ft. for sloping roofs 30 ft. / 33 ft. for sloping roofs Minimum Landscaping: Minimum Landscaping: 60% of site 60% of site V. MINOR SUBDIVISION - CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation of a new lot(s) must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code. A. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is: Lot Area: The minimum lot or site area shall be twelve thousand five hundred (12,500) square feet of buildable area. Frontaae: Each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Dimension: Each site shall be of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area, eighty feet (80') on each side, within its boundaries. Staff Response: The proposed subdivision does meet the minimum lot standards of the Single-Family District as specified by 12-613-5 of the Zoning Ordinance. B. The second set of criteria to be considered with a Minor Subdivision application, as outlined in the subdivision regulations, is: The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. Due consideration shall be given to the recommendations made by public agencies, utility companies and other agencies consulted under subsection 13-3-3C. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. 3 The Specific Purpose of the Subdivision Regulations is as follows: 1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposals will be evaluated, and to provide information as to the type and extent of improvements required. Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the minor subdivision for compliance with the applicable evaluation criteria. Upon the completion of our review, the staff finds that the proposed subdivision does comply with the subdivision criteria. 2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without conflict with development on adjacent land. Staff Response: Adjacent land uses include residential uses and the future Donovan Park. Adjacent zoning includes Residential Cluster, Two-Family Primary/Secondary, General Use, and Agriculture and Open Space Districts. The Vail Land Use Plan identifies this property as "Low Density Residential", which is described as: This category includes single-family detached homes and two-family dwelling units. Density of development within this category would typically not exceed 3 structures per buildable acre. Also within this area would be private recreation facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools and club houses for the use of residents of the area. Institutional/public uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space, related facilities. Staff believes that the Single-Family Residential Zoning District more closely meets the intent of the Land Use Plan's Low-Density Residential designation than the current Residential Cluster zoning of this tract. Staff does not believe that the proposed subdivision will have any negative impacts on the development of adjacent lands. 3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. Staff Response: Staff does not believe that the proposed subdivision will have any negative impacts on the value of land in the Town of Vail. 4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town development objectives. Staff Response: Staff has completed an analysis of the minor subdivision proposal and finds that the application does comply with the Town's ordinances. The current Residential Cluster zoning designation insures that a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship among existing and potential land uses will be achieved. A rezoning of this property to Single-Family Residential would also insure that a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship among existing and potential land uses will be achieved. 4 t 5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision. Staff Response: Staff does not believe that the proposed subdivision will have any negative effect on the provision of public services. 6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and procedures. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision plat has been prepared in accordance with the standards prescribed in the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. 7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the community and the value of the land. Staff Response: Staff believes this minor subdivision request does comply with the above-described criteria. VI. REZONING REQUEST - CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION 1. Is the existing zoning suitable with the existing land use on the site and adjacent land uses? Staff Response: This parcel is currently undeveloped. The adjacent land uses include residential uses and the future Donovan Park. Adjacent zoning includes Residential Cluster, Two-Family Primary/Secondary, General Use, and Agriculture and Open Space Districts. Staff believes that both the Residential Cluster and Single-Family Zoning Districts are suitable with the existing land use on the site and adjacent land uses. 2. Is the amendment presenting a convenient workable relationship with land uses consistent with municipal objectives? Staff Response: This proposal is consistent with the following municipal objectives stated in Chapter II - Land Use Plan Goals/Policies of the Town of Vail Land Use Plan: 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.6 Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Limited development may be permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not highly visible from the Valley floor. New projects should be carefully controlled and developed with sensitivity to the environment. 1.7 New subdivisions should not be permitted in high geologic hazard areas. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 5 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 3. Does the rezoning provide for the growth of an orderly viable community? Staff Response: In accordance with the provisions of the Town of Vail Zoning and Subdivision Regulations and Vail's Master Plan Elements, staff believes this rezoning provides for the growth of an orderly viable community. 4. Is the change consistent with the Land Use Plan? Staff Response: The Vail Land Use Plan identifies this property as "Low Density Residential", which is described as: This category includes single-family detached homes and two-family dwelling units. Density of development within this category would typically not exceed 3 structures per buildable acre. Also within this area would be private recreation facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools and club houses for the use of residents of the area. Institutionay/pubfic uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space related facilities. Staff believes that the Single-Family Zoning District more closely meets the intent of the Land Use Plan's Low-Density Residential designation than the current Residential Cluster zoning of this tract. Therefore, staff believes this rezoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan. 6 a N FINAL FLAT o _ TIMBER VAIL SUBDIVISION o 000 A PART OF THE SW 114 OF SECTION 1r2, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANCE 8f NEST OF TIIR SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ~ TOWN OF VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO to a~- to Mfs.Rltm•r .f a...i. M.. f.swl ~ R•Y.,R-. 1,1Y wnMrRNfp U.l Ib.i iRi viu -RI f•n-W W K It..R CrwYf wTiY M N~N.~ili nn Y41~@. ~W~[~ wMRn~Ow~INw.. ~'UNUt.O .I/MIM.AI aiw t/Ofa~w w wYlwl ~1rV41.K(Y7 WrS EwrR f1•YMIOIitw _r+f nC +c mRa~c uea l.lai tsrrrer. co M.a „'Yw u n R `W r4t\1r• ftYL W[ OYR rwxffr mp .rr.~Q1R,wF.~w~!./~~..M1~. Rr ~.RRIi G~..~wAN~•.~•~~fO41 Y1ISf wY 1.j~f/~ 3>a.Rt~~ ~ NI _ W P W in•w~°fr1~Sa"wl.e a. ~ ergo r ~i'~'a+ i t~r.+f , wrs r I~-Mfyw7~agliCV i•w lrlwM IpvlwrMlN •~.~11~~.v~K r I/f rW tO I..19.ti r MIN ~.f i1ww1R ~w trtt DflNrf®W W~i.JAi 111 M\RYIww..Y.Y. MI 1•Mw KIM wr_ewa ~q N1/R •~•l~ ~Siw~~ 1\r \ lfif•lrl NNi Ni N»i WC11 MM n ~ t~aQ t1NiiNi ti IIRf ill Nr va fril r Rf wYl RYRr M A i wKiwra~iRZ .r. .eoMrwo.w M l11~ ""m. w A Z=. IBM Ill rri Nf xr fi~fW Y~~t / rrrilwr~wu°w ~.iw .~cw~e~ar siw. iw'.Ira .wr.R v~iv wn wt MRii o 1A.fl1 wrier iiil AMNia r Vs/IIa iYwlf tl Mi Rnr/IrweM IDl .f.f'ff i..w lrw qiK RNNI alrT H 4f A K14 i Illllf~ m M IwNf10 V if NIR iiwNM7 .wZ~w` I`1':,".:w 'tt ~+1.Tr°iR, rs roai •t a.m.w wl •i w,wl~ Rc o..lwwa $mum w v w u. a4~ •if..rr • w .i.f... i ailnt w •..e..rl •www all ` • wTi4'1'1!lY~1Cg1P~' ` i w p_ rwb r fialfl If flllrs w / $l`d3ww.'C,N ~ ~ rs.m l+w+ oo~ looo "Opp ~N? 0 wLVI 1 lR /K gvrwl aiwawlr w.N wwosr w i.r.AS r r a , \t rr. +~.Yi°. wu ,l r. Alm r"riiYf`°'a'wimn~ofrwvW~ ..Y. ,y ~ ~IiAlrsflper • ~ i iililC rd 1 Mv11wInO~INN. 1 OYiI~/i '.r 17ve~;:sii oYaltl#Y KIIII?t ' IMF N Itl~iMf ` f.. w.viwn rr.oR .f f..wNN .r Ki...r rwrfwwrwlwrr Ya Ir wr X ly t ~rl~wfnoN/+nt•y.fNwImm.Mlr L„iii:._..w~~ir~`~•,. +w. ~fv Lf RI RMt 1 II~SgIfI.INMwjaiis .will Vi./rNY'A ~~+ow. i i l 'yp ww/ / 1 • 1'~ LLr ae l,4 .ci 1~ .mv c Y ~ 1\ ~ Yt t aN0 AOff 1sM 1M+fPOw OCt 4 IN f 41tr~ Its INI WIfP011 OIO[ mM Il ri ' q K /IT 0alto = 6'38'22' 1 inch fk R= 431.48' c T= 25.03' L= 50.00' o CH= 49.97' CB= N53'02'59"E (SEE NOTE e] 'SETH 6 M7W SET No S REBAR MATH ALUM GAP L.5~No, 3M91 ALUM CAP LS Na 30091 co \5 \ --j 4p- \ o ~c co UNPLATTED cz ~~t7ti, , n (BOOK 129, PAGE 453) GV v n ~ k ~ ~S'30. 4112 LOT 2 5ET No. S REBAR W1H .5 0.3788 ACRES \ ALUM. CAP LS. ho. 30091 !J_ 1552 LATTMORN pRCLE \ r, 2G' ORJUNAGE EA5t7YEHT V\10 46 - LOT 1 0.4"s ACRES 1 \ 1351 NATTERNCRN 07tCiE SET No. S REBAq MiH ALUU. CAP L.S. No. 30091 0 \ \ ~q d+, ,l ty1' \ S UNPLATTEU (BOOS 218, PACE M) FOUND No. 3 REBAR VATH N AWN_ CJP LS No. 5447 r r a MEMORANDUM To: Vail Town Council From: Suzanne Silverthorn, Community Information Office Ron Braden, Information Technology Manager Date: 1-19-01 Re: Paperless Packet Research 1. BACKGROUND On 10-3-00, the Vail Town Council directed staff to research the concept of "paperless packets" in which printed copies of agendas, background information and other packet materials are replaced by an electronic system. Council members pointed to Vail's mission statement which stresses an environmental focus in expressing interest in the possibility. As it stands today, individual Council packets can be quite thick, consuming hundreds of sheets of paper each year. In November, the Town of Vail placed a query in a national government communicator's newsletter asking those familiar with paperless projects to comment on their successes and/or failures. 2. FINDINGS The national query resulted in responses from numerous cities, many in the same state of research as the Town of Vail. However, we did hear examples from 7 cities, which provided the following suggestions and insights: Longview, Washington Tamara Larson, (360) 577-3321 Executive Secretary • " We began offering electronic agendas about 5 years ago. We provide our Council members with portable laptops, with which they can access the Internet from home and download the agenda to their desktop. They bring their laptops to the Council meeting and work from that information on their laptops instead of a paper agenda. The City Manager takes notes on the PDF agenda from his computer using Acrobat Exchange and that is printed out as our follow-up, which notes who needs to do what before the next meeting. The rest of the Council and department heads use Acrobat Reader, allowing anyone to use our agenda. The majority of our department heads also have laptops, which they bring to Council meetings and use in the same way as Council. In our Council meeting room, the bench includes a plug-in for each Council member so the laptops don't have to run on batteries, and includes a network plug- in, in case of computer malfunction during the meeting. To prepare the paperless agenda, I convert word files to PDF, and in that program set bookmarks and links before posting it on the Internet. Our agenda is posted on the Web site 2 or 3 days prior to the council meeting, depending upon how long it takes me to complete the process. Our address is www.ci.lonaview.wa.us and you should be able to navigate to the agendas. We also place the summarized agenda sheets in the back of the room for the public to pick up (these are 2-5 pages and do not include the backup paperwork). We have been very satisfied with our process and occasionally receive comments from the public that indicate that they are also satisfied with this method of accessing our agenda information. I believe our Council appreciates the convenience of this method of distribution much more than the delivery of a paper agenda, and they like having the laptops so they can e-mail each other also." College Station, Texas Linda S. Piwonka, (979) 764-3446 Office of Technology and Information Services • "We have had paperless packets in place on our Web site for approximately 1 year. You asked for pros and cons. Under the cons, because College Station's packets include all the detail Council receives in their packet, including maps and images, the departmental staff had to be trained in preparing this information electronically. This added some time to the process. On the pro side, the public really likes having this information available. We've had several compliments from the citizens. Also on the pro side, this same information is also available on the city's Intranet site, so staff can access this data and even conduct searches for information on past meetings. You can view the packet at our city site www.ci.colleae-station.tx.us. When you get to the site, select City Council and you will be taken to the page where you can click for Council agendas and minutes. From that screen you can select the year, and date that you wish to view. Anywhere the item is highlighted in blue there will be another level of detail if you select the item. This will bring up all of the back up for each item. We generally have an agenda, a cover sheet for each item which is a summary of each item. At the bottom of the cover sheet, if there are attachments you can select the attachment and you will see them also. The next phase of our project will include providing Council with laptops. Council currently receives a paper copy to bring to the meeting. After this year, we will burn the packet onto a CD and they will bring this with their laptop to the Council meeting. We are not suggesting they download this information over the Internet, because our packets are too large." Lenexa,Kansas David Bryant, (913) 477-7500 City Clerk's Office • "The City Council has been conducting its meetings utilizing laptop computers since January 1998. We use Word document files and save them in HTML, then we create a hyperlink to our Web site at www.ci.lenexa.ks.us. In creating an electronic packet, our goal was to utilize state-of-the-art hardware and software to deliver the material to citizens and the governing body. The City Council downloads the packet from our city server on their laptops using DSI. We provided in-house training for our Council so they would feel comfortable with the system. The paperless process is a time saver for our staff, as we no longer need to make multiple copies for distribution. We now provide 4 back-up paper copies during the meeting in case of emergency. We like the results and would recommend it to other municipalities." South Sioux City, Nebraska Lance Hedquist, (402)-494-7517 City Administrator • "We're one of the smaller paperless packet participants with a population of 12,000. However, we've been working on technology improvements since 1993 when we were the first city in the U.S. to require employees to be computer literate. We have a technology mind-set, so it wasn't difficult to make the transition about a year ago. Paperless has worked well for us, eliminating 180,000 paper copies per year. It saves staff time and is good for the environment and helps us get our information out to the public in a timely manner. Now the local school district is following our lead. Our agendas can be found at www.sscdc.net." Galesburg, Illinois Gary Goddard, ggoddard@ci.galesburg.il.us City Manager • "By logging on to www.ci.aalesburo.il.us, residents can access water rates, recreational activities and community development information, as well as one of the most popular areas, complete electronic council agenda packets. The local news media is especially appreciative of the e-packets. The e-packet also works in conjunction with live cable broadcasts of council meetings. Residents can have the same packet as the mayor and council before them while watching the meeting." Windsor, Connecticut Enita Jubrey, (860) 285-1809 Assistant to the Town Manager • "We made a rather feeble attempt at creating paperless packets about a year ago. It is a great idea, but we ran into stumbling blocks with the following: 1) external attachments/back-up materials for the agenda which are not "in-house" documents could not be transmitted electronically; 2) one member of council does not have a computer at home; 3) the agenda is also sent to approximately 20 to 25 other individuals, many of whom do not have computer access." Grand Junction, Colorado Stephanie Nie, (970) 244-1511 City Clerk • "Grand Junction was one of 14 cities across the country to participate in a demonstration project sponsored by the Innovation Groups. We used a product called "soft books" and we encountered many bugs in the system with this technology. At the time, Council members were getting a hard copy of the packet, plus an electronic version. It's hard to wean people off the paper. We've installed new equipment in the Council Chambers so there may be a bigger push for paperless packets in the future. Our advice to Vail is not to invest in the system unless you have total commitment and interest from all involved." Innovation Groups Shawn, (813) 622-8484 Soft Book Demonstration Coordinator • Advice: Use a Web-based format with templates; stay away from soft books as they have limitations; be careful as scanning can get expensive and sometimes doesn't look good; don't convert unless you can get everyone on the same format; be mindful of small monitors; changing the way people read is hard; conversions take time and money; know your Sunshine (open meetings) laws. 3. EQUIPMENT NEEDED TO LAUNCH PAPERLESS SYSTEM IN VAIL • 7 Pentium based Windows 98 SE laptops with 56k modems, 15-inch active matrix screens, applicable software. • 7 Docking stations with network interface cards for laptops. • 1 Lexmark Optra T612N laser printer for council chambers. 0 1 Cisco FastHub 400. S • Cabling, network jacks, surge protectors. Total Equipment Cost = $ 42,000* *This cost does not include the $30,000 estimate to modify the Council Chamber work area to accept the laptops and docking stations, which brings the total estimate to $98,000. Placing the laptops on top of the work area is not advisable (due to exposed cables and obstruction of Council's ability to retain eye contact with the public and the television cameras), so the work area would need to be modified to allow the laptops to be mounted into the workspace. 4. RESOURCES Council agenda packet examples: www.ci.lonaview.wa.us www.ci.colleae-station.tx.us www.ci.lenexa.ks.us www.sscdc.net www.ci.oalesbura.il.us www.colievville.com 5. CONCLUSIONS Moving to a web-based paperless Council packet for the Town of Vail is costly, yet technically feasible with a one-time equipment investment of approximately $42,000; an estimated $6,000 in ongoing annual maintenance; $20,000 in Intranet/Extranet development fees; plus $30,000 in construction costs to modify the Council Chamber work area to accept the new equipment, bringing the total investment to $98,000. Staffs recommendation to implement the system would be similar to what other organizations have used. We would place the Council packet on both the Town of Vail's Intranet and Extranet sites so the public and Council could access the information at any time, as well as download it to their computers in a PDF format. Having the information available on our Intranet site would allow Council members to access the information even if they did not download the file to their laptop. A printer would also be available in the event that a packet (or portion of the packet) needed to be printed, either for Council or public use. Notes would continue to be recorded onto a laptop and would then be posted (in a PDF format) onto our Intranet site for Council review and referral. This system also assumes that Council members already have access to an Internet account. If not, this would need to be provided as well. Staffs confidence is high in providing a near flawless system. The town spends approximately $4,000 per year on copier paper, which could be reduced with a paperless packet scenario. But more importantly, to be completely successful with a move to paperless requires a high level of support and commitment by those involved: the Council, staff and members of the public. Without such commitment, similar efforts across the country have failed. Here too, the research also discovered other communities that are enthusiastically supportive of their new systems. Now that the initial research has been completed, this topic requires additional thought, discussion and direction from the Vail Town Council as it weighs actual costs ($98,000 total) and associated benefits (mission alignment, Council/citizen access and convenience). This project is currently unfunded. Memorandum To: Town Council From: Nina Timm Date: February 20, 2001 Subject: Mountain Bell Next Steps I. Introduction 1 The Mountain Bell site has been looked at as a potential location for employee housing. Previous analysis provided preliminary information that a financially viable rental housing development could be located there. Previous analysis was based on using a building type identical to the Rivers Edge development that Vail Resorts has in Avon. II. Next Steps A decision regarding the goals for the Mountain Bell site is important. Staff suggests this as a next step for Council. The goals may include: - seasonal rental housing - long-term rental housing - maximizing bed count - environmentally friendly design, and operation - a design that allows for phasing of the project - creating a space for the ABC and Learning Tree schools maintaining space for the 2 schools on the site finding a new location for the 2 schools - providing money for new buildings for the 2 schools - retaining space to locate a fire station at Mt Bell Holding a small number of focus groups with potential future residents may be the best way to determine the type of units most desired by employees. This information could help determine unit layout, target rental rates, and the need for seasonal and/or long-term rentals. This information can be used to create a project that most closely meets the needs of the target residents. It may be useful to conduct these focus groups prior to setting goals for the site. The information generated from the focus groups can be used to help Council define their goals. There are two potential alternative approaches to move forward with this project. 1) The first alternative is a two step process. The first step would be to contract with an architect to design the project. It is important to find an architectural firm who is familiar with the type of housing product that would be appropriate and is also able to create a design that is affordable to build and manage. This two-step approach will provide an approved design that is ready to be built. After the design is complete a Request for Proposals (RFP) would be issued to find a contractor to build. One of the potential benefits of this approach is the speed with which the design process could be completed. A drawback of hiring an architect to design the project with out a developer is that a full understanding of financial implications may not be realized. This could potentially be mitigated by also hiring a construction management firm, like ARC, to determine costs as the design develops. 2) The alternative to the process above is to issue an RFP for a design/builder. This would provide Council with a number of creative possibilities for the site design, but could be more time consuming. This approach also potentially limits control over the design of the project. The benefit is that there is a higher degree of confidence that the project is financially viable project. It may also save on the overall time of completing the project. III. Summary of Next Steps/Questions to be Answered The proposed next steps would include: 1. Focus Groups with potential residents 2. Goal Setting meeting 3. Engage designer or design build team 4. Designer develops proposal for site 5. Public review of proposal and authorization from Council to move forward into the development review process 6. Move forward with necessary land use plan changes, rezoning applications and development review applications. 7. Development review approval (Council, PEC & DRB) 8. Authorization from Council to move forward with construction drawings and development of the site. 9. Construction of project. Specific questions of Council: Should housing be built on the Mt Bell site? Should focus groups be conducted with local employees? Should the Town Council have a goal setting meeting after several focus groups? - How would you like to move forward with design and construction? Should a contract be reached with an architect for design? Should a RFP be issued for a design/builder ? Through this decision making process public input will be received. If Council decides to go forward, the opportunity for public input will continue as Council considers its potential goals for the housing development and as a designer or a design/build team present their proposal to the community and the Town Council. F:\cdev\COUNCIL\MEMOS\01 \nextsteps2-20.doc TOWN OF VAIL Town Council Critical Strategies Action Plan September 2000- November 2001 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Community Alignment & Partnerships ¦ Set Council/VRI 14 month Meeting notes and 4/10/01 Suzanne Silverthorn retreat matrix tracking format distributed. Next steps include adding detail to the matrix. ¦ Begin report out to community at "Peer 14 month Additional meetings for 2001 TBD Suzanne Silverthorn Resort" meeting to be scheduled ¦ Redefine TOV/VRI Council/VRI to clarify Task Task Force 14 month Force role as outlined in 4/10/01 Ludwig Kurz Managed Growth Agreement; then develop appointment process. ¦ Define desired By the end of outcomes by Process to be designed as February staff Bob McLaurin creating a vivid 14 month next step in constituent will have a Suzanne Silverthorn description for 2005, partnership efforts. framework for Russell Forest 2010, 2015, 2020 creating a vivid description. Morter Architects working to ¦ Consolidate 14 month identify possible locations. TBD Pam Brandmeyer Information Booths This project is unfunded. • Work w/ Merchants On going to define approval 6 month 2/27/01 Pam Brandmeyer procedures for Another meeting with event special events producers, merchants, vendors set f:dheads.matrix Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee 1-70 Noise Abatement 14 month • Noise map complete and ¦ Identify Options reviewed by Council NA Greg Hall ¦ Identify Funding • Staff identifying short term options 03101 Greg Hall • Staff preparing cost estimate for wall 03101 Greg Hall mitigation • Determine to what extent the TOV is willing to fund TBD Town Council noise mitigation 2 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Maintain natural environment and town Maintenance infrastructure • Water Quality ¦ Foster stewardship • Solid Waste & partnership 6 & 14 On going Everyone months ¦ Noxious Weed ¦ Achieve Disney standards ¦ Clean Pedestrian Areas • Reinstitute "Adopt-a- Path/Street" ¦ Well lit, clean parking structures ¦ Village Parking 14 month Structural engineering Nina Timm Structure (retail) report. states $2-4 million to 02/13 Greg Hall stabilize beam Council to get public feedback on commercial space built by TOV. TBD Town Council ¦ Review Uniform Gary Goodell Building Code and 14 month Presentation to Council on Mike McGee Fire Code 12/12. Staff preparing 03/6 Tom Moorhead appeals procedure. Greg Morrison ¦ Parking Pay in Lieu 6 month Staff is preparing ordinance setting higher fees for 2"d Reading on residential uses and lower (if 02/20 Brent Wilson any) for commercial uses. ¦ Community 6 &14 Concept paper presented to Complete Facilities Hub Site month Council on 12/12. Council Budget in Feb Russ Forrest developed wish list on 12/19 and present to Council on March 6th 3 Council Status Next Council Point of Contactl Action Timeline Date Lead Employee Special Events ¦ Brief Council from a first-time promoter's 6 month & neighbor's 2127/01 Pam Brandmeyer perspective ¦ Solicit input from 6 month on going event organizers ¦ Identify additional 6 month Currently available venues venues identified and occupancy 4/03/01 Mike Vaughan load to be determined for each site by 3/31 Wayfinding Greg Hall ¦ Approve drawings Substantially complete Suzanne Silverthorn ¦ Install upon arrival 6 month Phase-one signs will be 03/01 Greg Hall delivered in March with Suzanne Silverthorn interior parking structure signs first to be installed. All remaining phase-one signs will be installed no later than Memorial Day. ¦ Trail identifiers installed by 4/15/01 04/ 01 • Lionshead Public 6 & 14 Staff is evaluating revenue TBD Russ Forrest Financing month potential and legal issues, Bob McLaurin required improvements and Steve Thompson costs associated with these Tom Moorhead improvements. Also monitoring Broomfield case. 4 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee ¦ Donovan Park 6 & 14 ¦ Pavilion design under February 2001 George Ruther month way (Review architecture) Todd O ¦ Phase l site development NA bid awarded • Execute project Steve Thompson financing ($3 million) TBD ¦ Property owner plans on Nina Timm ¦ Ruins 14 month reapplying for the same February 2001 Tom Moorhead development approval Russ Forrest that expired (1/9101). ¦ Town has expressed intention to purchase property for affordable housing. Will consider re-establishment of Housing Authority to move forward with project. ¦ Berry Creek 14 month Council to meet with Berry Nina Timm Creek Developer and County 02120101 Tom Moorhead Commisioners Russ Forrest ¦ Buy down program Staff will begin looking for 3 When suitable (3 bedroom units 14 month bedroom units immediately. unit is found Nina Timm for families) Tom Moorhead Meet w/ Commissioners Meeting with Commissioners February 13, Russ Forrest ¦ Employee 6 month held on 02/13/00 2001 Nina Timm Generation Timber Ridge 6 month Council to vote on 1St reading 02/20/01 Allison Ochs on 02/20/01 Tom Moorhead ¦ Housing Zone District 6 month Identify impacts of Telluride TBD housing decision Tom Moorhead 5 Council Status Next Council Point of Contact/ Action Timeline Date Lead Employee ¦ Decide on fire Bob and John Gulick to station locations and 6 month prepare memo summarizing 03/06 Bob McLaurin staffing. and framing issues. ¦ Discuss impact fee Discuss possibility of 03/06 proposal to fund hiring Rocky Mtn. Group to Tom Moorhead fire dept. capital conduct impact fee study. John Gulick projects and (Tom researching legal equipment issues) • Preliminary design/cost Todd O ¦ Red Sandstone 14 month estimate complete TBD Tom K Field • Staff met with School Board on 2/14. Staff TBD Bob McLaurin developing agreement Todd O. with District on cost sharing. In-town Transportation • Staff moving forward to ¦ Review alternatives 6 months purchase Next Bus 3/06 Greg Hall to replace in town Technology for In Town Mike Rose shuttle Shuttle. ¦ Explore possible 14 month funding partners • Staff has contacted Mike Rose (demo project) various custom muffler Greg Hall manufacturers and will get proposals on "quiet " muffler technology • GPS implementation Mike Rose underway Greg Hall Summary of Completed Actions ¦ Mission, Vision and Values Statement Posted in Council Chambers ¦ Notification of Town's intent to strengthen partnership with Vail Resorts ¦ Establishment of schedule for monthly Council "walkabouts"; two walkabouts held. ¦ Affordable Housing Zone District drafted; reviewed by PEC & Town Council 6 ¦ Donovan Park Agreement for design services complete. ¦ Donovan Park zone Change 2nd reading for Council approval 12/19 ¦ Vail Center 501(c)(3) formed ¦ 1 at Community meeting held • 2nd Community meeting held • TOV/VRI Retreat held ¦ Completion of special event "shadowing" by Greg Moffet Unfunded Capital Projects ¦ Ruins Housing Project ¦ West Vail Lodge ¦ Information Center • Lionshead Public Improvements ¦ Vail Center Improvements ¦ 1-70 Noise Abatement • Gymnastics Facility • Gore Creek Sediment Clean Up COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2001 _ I 1/15/00 ACCESSORY BUILDING IN FORD RUSSELL/GEORGE/TODD 0.: The VRD needs a Please see attached. PARK building to house athletic equipment/supplies. Although the Ford Park Management Plan calls for no "above DIANA DONOVAN ground" buildings, VRD has noted the construction of the Alpine Garden's "tool shed." What are the parameters for approval and construction of buildings in the park? Maintenance shack by Manor Vail Bridge is an abomination. 1/23/01 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (TO THE GREG H.: The load capacity continues to be an issue; Staff is currently getting an updated engineer's rating. EAST OF THE INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE) is it time to remove the bridge altogether, continue to monitor and control "load", or take steps to buoy up the foundation/support? 1/23/01 VACANT STORES RUSSELL/BOB: As retail spaces become vacant, it is Staff proposes this could be an appropriate mediation by the Vail supremely better to have storefronts with displays from Chamber and Business Association. adjacent stores UNTIL the vacant space is rented, rather than allow them to stay empty. Can the town take a more active role in encouraging landlords to allow this interim practice? EXAMPLE: Covered Bridge Store/Village. 1/23/01 ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIP PATRICK HAMEL: Schedule for evening televised To be rescheduled. WNAIL RESORTS, INC. presentation. COUNCIL F:Imcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowup1022001 du February 13, 2001 • Page 1 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP ,I 1L 2001 1/23/01 NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS RUSSELL/GREG M.: Of the following need of repair- The Club-the corner of the building near the entrance has crumbling plaster. Bob will discuss with property owners. Clark's Market - dried out wreaths on wall. 2/6/01 SIGNS ON POLES GREG HJLARRY: The skier signs on light poles are So noted. great but let's add some additional winter activities, KEVIN FOLEY e.g., ice skating, cross-country skiing, etc. 2/6/01 TRASH CANS LARRY: Trash is accumulating on the pedestrian Complete. Cans placed and bridge overpass cleaned by Town of bridge from Lionshead over to RSES. Please add a Vail personnel 2-8-01. KEVIN FOLEY chained trash can at each end of this bridge. 2/6/01 SKI STORAGE SIGN RUSS: There is a large ski storage sign on the steps to the Kaltenberg Brewery for the lower ski storage. Is KEVIN FOLEY this legal? 2113/01 ACCESSORY BUILDING/FORD BOB/PAM: Has the maintenance building to the left of Bob checked the maintenance building personally Thursday A.M. PARK the east exit of Manor Vail Bridge been cleaned up and (2/15) and it's been cleaned up. repaired? SYBILL NAVAS F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl022001 du February 13, 2001 - Page 2 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC _ QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2001 2/13/01 TAKING TWO SPACES IN PAM: Current signs are being replaced w/:1 SPACE PARKING STRUCTURE PER VEHICLENIOLATORS TICKETED. In further discussions w/Larry Pardee, Council will also see a SYBILL NAVAS future proposal to improve the surface aesthetics w/a clear coat sealer, plastic pucks (round objects, California-style, that better deliniate the lines), and lines "up" the walls. The surface is badly stained and removing a ton or more of dirt per evening does not help w/the lines. Given winter conditions and traffic, re- lining cannot take place until spring following the power wash for both structures. 2/13/01 VVTCB'S 2002 WINTER GUIDE PAM: Left a voicemail for Kelly Layton Wednesday, 2/14, in re: to whether this is a duplication of a SYBILL NAVAS fulfillment piece that could be coordinated w/the Vail Chamber and Business Association's "The Guide." F:lmcasterlbsalterlagendalfollowupl022001 du February 13, 2,001 - Page 3 Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: George Ruther, Chief of Planning Date: February 16, 2001 Re: CFU/Cabin at Betty Ford Alpine Rock Garden On October 1, 1997, the Town of Vail Design Review Board approved the proposed plans for the final phase of the Betty Ford Alpine Rock Garden in Gerald R. Ford Park. The application submitted by the Vail Alpine Garden Foundation (VAGF) proposed the construction of a new alpine rock garden designed to replicate a high Rocky Mountain sub-alpine environment. The improvements were constructed within the defined lease area of the Gardens and are generally located north of the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater and south of the easternmost ball field. Included in the approved plans, was the construction of a 120 square foot "miner's" cabin. The cabin is representative of what one might find tucked away in a high sub-alpine basin in the Rocky Mountains. In addition to the aesthetic value of the cabin, it is used by the VAGF to store gardening tools. The covered front porch was intended to provide visitors with shelter from the elements. The question has been raised as to how this structure was permitted in the park. According to the Gerald R. Ford Park Management Plan, adopted on April 14, 1997, Goal #1 Preserve and Protect Ford Park, Objective 1.1 Limit Future Development, Policy Statement #2, "New or changed facilities or uses will not be permitted to curtail existing public uses of facilities in the Park unless there is either a compelling public interest or adequate alternative facilities are available to its users. All functions in the park shall be maintained and function at a high quality level." In approving the "miner's" cabin, the Town of Vail Design Review Board found that the 120 square foot building was not a "new" building, as prohibited by the Management Plan, that would increase the demand on the limited resources of the park (i.e., parking). Instead, the Board determined that it was customary and incidental to the design and aesthetic quality of the high sub-alpine basin image that was to be created. Staff agreed with the Board's conclusions.