Town Council Work Session Tuesday, January 23, 2018, 3:00 PM Council Chambers 150 Ski Hill Road Breckenridge, Colorado
Estimated times: The times indicated are intended only as a guide. They are at the discretion of the Mayor, depending on the length of the discussion, and are subject to change.
I. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS (3:00-3:05pm) Planning Commission Decisions of the January 16, 2018 Meeting
II. LEGISLATIVE REVIEW (3:05-3:45pm) Summit Public Radio Easement Ordinance (Second Reading) Xcel Energy Easement Ordinance (Second Reading) Water Treatment Plant Easement Ordinance (Second Reading) 34 Sheppard Circle Sale Ordinance (Second Reading) Elected Officials Compensation Ordinance (Second Reading) Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC (First Reading) Election Ordinance Amendment (Emergency Ordinance) River Park Naming Resolution (Resolution) Miller Annexation Agreement Amendment (Resolution)
III. MANAGERS REPORT (3:45-4:00pm) Public Projects Update Parking and Transportation Update Housing and Childcare Update Committee Reports Financials
IV. OTHER (4:00-5:00pm) Block 11 Review/Commercial Short Term Rental Regulation Discussion February Banners
V. PLANNING MATTERS (5:00-5:45pm) Renewable Energy MOU 1 Downtown Overlay District & 322A North Main Street Lincoln Park Pricing Formula Upper Blue TDR Price
VI. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Acquisitions and Negotiations (5:45pm)
2 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Peter Grosshuesch, Director of Community Development
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: Planning Commission Decisions of the January 16, 2018 Meeting
DECISIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, January 16, 2018:
CLASS C APPLICATIONS: None.
CLASS B APPLICATIONS: None.
CLASS A APPLICATIONS: Village at Breckenridge Master Plan Amendment and Chateaux Hotel Condominium Meeting Room Conversion to Office, PL-2017-0680, 405 Village Rd. A proposal to amend the 1983 Village at Breckenridge Master Plan to transfer 3.74 SFEs to the Chateaux Condominiums and change the allowed use of the existing common area meeting room in the Chateaux to commercial office for the purpose of an HOA office (The conversion of the existing 284 sq. ft. meeting room, 12 sq. ft. ski closet, and portion of lobby in the Chateaux Building to 402 sq. ft. commercial office). This conversion would include a new storefront window, glass door, and accessible walkway and handrail. The applicant also proposes to transfer 0.2 SFE from Lots 3&4 (Liftside/Peak 9) to Lot 5 (Plaza 1/Antero) in order to provide density for two future 100 sq. ft. vendor carts. Approved.
TOWN PROJECT HEARINGS: None
OTHER: None
3 1 Breckenridge South Breckenridge
J
Logan Dr Logan
Bridge St Bridge
French Gulch Rd Gulch French Wolff Lyon Rd Lyon Wolff
Grey Ln Grey
Stables Dr Stables
Sisler Green Sisler Locals Ln Locals
Use, 405 Village Rd.
Rachel Ln Rachel
Bright Hope Dr Hope Bright Amendment and Chateaux Hotel Ln Brookside Village at Breckenridge Master Plan
Condominium Meeting Room Change of
Campion Tr Campion
Sheppard Cir Sheppard
Reiling Rd Reiling
Boreas Pass Rd Pass Boreas
Sunbeam Dr Sunbeam
Klack Rd Klack
Pine St S St Pine
Hermit Dr Hermit
Pine St N St Pine
Royal Tiger Rd Tiger Royal
Carter Dr Carter
Corkscrew Dr Corkscrew
Riverwood Dr Riverwood
Gold Flake Ter N Ter Flake Gold
High St S St High
High St N St High
Hwy 9 Hwy
Adams Ave E Ave Adams
Harris St S St Harris Red Feather Rd Feather Red Tomahawk Ln Tomahawk
Briar Rose Ln Rose Briar
French St S St French
Lincoln Ave Lincoln
WellingtonRd
Ridge St S St Ridge French St N St French
Snowberry Ln Snowberry
Luisa Dr Luisa Main St S St Main
Main St N St Main
Columbine Rd Columbine
Watson Ave Watson
Broken Lance Dr Lance Broken White Cloud Dr Cloud White
Gold King Way King Gold
Airport Rd Airport
Park Ave S Ave Park
Park Ave N Ave Park
Amber Ct Amber
Village Rd Village
Woods Dr Woods
Kings Crown Rd Crown Kings Sawmill Rd Sawmill
Four Oclock Rd Oclock Four
Bluff Ct Bluff
Peerless Dr Peerless
Lomax Dr Lomax
Peak Nine Rd Nine Peak
Beavers Dr Beavers
Iliff Ct Iliff
Christie Ln Christie Union Tr Union
Windwood Cir Windwood
Grandview Dr Grandview
Ski Hill Rd Hill Ski
Highwood Cir Highwood
Settlers Dr Settlers
Boulder Cir Boulder
SCR 708 SCR
SCR 709 SCR Timber Trail Rd Trail Timber
Rd. Peak Eight Rd Eight Peak Lionheart BGV Peak 8 Hotel (Work Session), 1599 Ski Hill 4 Town of Breckenridge Date 01/016/2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Page 1
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm by Chair Mathews-Leidal.
ROLL CALL
Christie Mathews-Leidal Jim Lamb Ron Schuman Mike Giller Steve Gerard Dan Schroder Gretchen Dudney
APPROVAL OF MINUTES With the below change, the January 2, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes were approved. Mr. Giller’s comment on page 5 should read, “concrete deck is pulled back” not “pulled out.”
APPROVAL OF AGENDA With no changes, the January 16, 2018 Planning Commission Agenda was approved.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION ISSUES: No Comments
WORK SESSIONS: 1. Lionheart BGV Peak 8 Hotel (CK), 1599 Ski Hill Rd. Mr. Kulick presented a work session and fit test for the construction of a wholly-owned for sale condominium project as well as a four-star luxury hotel containing approximately 150 rooms, common area, and associated amenities.
Commissioner Questions / Comments: Ms. Dudney: Does the master plan call for 4 stories or 5 stories? (Mr. Kulick: Recommendations vary between 3.5 to 4.5 stories.) LUD 39 says 5 stories but the Master Plan illustrative documents says 2.5-3.5 stories? (Mr. Kulick: There are varying thresholds in the Master Plan.)
Graham Frank, Breckenridge Grand Vacations, presented: We would like to recognize the effort by Mr. Kulick, Ms. Puester and Mr. Grosshuesch to get us to this point so quickly after numerous editions of the first concept plan. We really appreciate it. I want to highlight that we came into this project knowing our first pass would be edited and changed to fit the Planning Commission needs and adhere to the interests of the community. We made certain to take into account the neighborhood impact and ski area impact. We were able to complete a traffic study over the Christmas holiday and discovered Ski Hill Road will continue to perform at a level of service D, which is the same as today. We are currently working on a study for Sawmill Road access that will compare the current use vs. proposed use. We brought down the building height with the Sawmill neighborhood in mind and to conform to staff comments. We will provide a parking study in the future to support our parking reduction request and we will also provide employee parking spaces on-site.
Commissioner Questions / Comments: Mr. Lamb: How many employees will there be? (Mr. Frank: We don’t have that answer yet.) What is your back-up plan if the 0.85 parking is insufficient? (Mr. Frank: The lower level of the Stables lot is available with 63 spaces. We hope to plan appropriately and not use that lot.) Mr. Lamb: Will the magic carpet be impacted? (Mr. Frank: No. It will stay the same.) Mr. Schuman: The employee spots could be available for guests during the busy season. (Mr. Frank: One Ski Hill Place hasn’t had parking problems yet and we will be using their data in our study.)
Bill Anderson, Owner of 202 Sawmill Run Rd, commented: We have always expected something would be built on this property eventually. Our family’s priority is to access the ski slopes easily from our property. In one day, I counted 50 people accessing the mountain through this property and would 5 Town of Breckenridge Date 01/016/2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Page 2
like you to address that access. We have a great view of the other large buildings and all the lights that shine on us, please take into consideration that we can see right through the trees. (Mr. Frank: We are taking all these considerations into account.) Is the building height above the trees or below? (Ms. Leidal: The north/south ridge will be a 2.5 story building. It is difficult to say without elevations.) (Ms. Dudney: Height is a very complicated relationship and calculation between grade and stories and heights. We couldn’t say without the elevations. What you think of as a 2 story building could be quite a bit more than that depending on where the grade is taken and measured from. We need to see this plan and elevations to determine the height.)
Jane Hamilton, Owner of 172 Sawmill Run Rd, commented: I am concerned about skier access. The access has been available for 30 to 40 years. (Ms. Hamilton pointed out where she thinks the skier access is heaviest.) Both Peak 8 Village and Gold Camp use this access in addition to the neighborhood. I counted 44 homes that could use these access cuts in the 4 O’Clock neighborhood. I think you should enhance those cuts and make it part of the plan. On Four O’Clock Road there is a 10 ft. pedestrian easement platted. You could use that for improved access.
Commissioner Questions / Comments: Ms. Dudney: (Confirmed the changes on the new plans were understood correctly. Addressing Matt Stais, Architect.) What are the little buildings? (Mr. Stais: Probably condos. We don’t know which will be hotel rooms or condos yet.) What will be in the one story podium? (Mr. Stais: We don’t know for certain yet. Two levels of parking on the north, lobby and guest amenities, swimming pools, restaurant, maybe a spa. It really depends on the brand of hotel.) Does the site slope to the east? (Mr. Stais: It slopes up toward the neighbors. There is an opportunity for the podium to tuck under the trees.) Is there a big slope or berm off Ski Hill Road? (Mr. Stais: Yes. We will probably need to have two access points for this size of this project. We are waiting on more detail to help guide those decisions.) Mr. Kulick: In response to how to review view corridors Mr. Kulick read from the Plan Components section of the Master Plan. While it is acknowledged that the Fit Test and View Corridors shown on Sheets 5 and 8 are conceptual in nature and that actual locations, configurations and numbers of buildings have not been established by this plan, it is also acknowledged that a substantial deviation having a significant negative impact on the plaza areas, circulation, or views of lifts and the mountains may require a further amendment to the plan.
Staff asked the Planning Commission answer the following questions:
1. Is the Commission comfortable with the general building locations and proposed connection above grade to each other as well as the site buffering concept? 2. Staff believes the proposed building height can comply with Land Use District 39 and be subordinate in height to the eastern cross gable of One Ski Hill Place. Does the Commission agree? 3. Does the Commission have any input regarding the request for a reduction in parking spaces?
4. Staff finds circulation may be achievable as proposed, minus the secondary access for deliveries and garbage from Sawmill Run Road. Does the Commission agree? 5. Staff finds the commitment to lowering the eastern façade height, by averaging 2.5 stories and breaking-up the buildings, better transitions to the eastern single-family neighborhoods and improves the view corridors as identified by the Sheet 5-Fit Test and Sheet 8 - View Corridor Study. Does the Commission concur? 6. Staff finds the proposal’s density, broken into multiple building modules, could comply with the Development Plan of the Peak 8 Base section of the Master Plan. Does the Commission agree? 7. Does the Commission have any additional comments on the proposed project design and/or scope? 8. Based on the information provided, does the Commission believe there is reasonable possibility the proposal, with up to an additional 60 SFEs of TDRs could pass a point analysis at a future formal review process? 6 Town of Breckenridge Date 01/016/2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Page 1
Commissioner Questions / Comments: Mr. Gerard: The site buffering is good. I think you should maintain the trees to buffer. The concept of three buildings is much better than what we first saw (and was pulled from the agenda). Yes, comfortable with #1. #2, I agree and think it can comply but conceptual here only. #3, parking is a crapshoot right now. We need more information. Comparing the parking at One Ski Hill and the new Marriott will be valuable. #4, I am opposed to using Sawmill Run Road for deliveries and garbage. It is a burden on the private residences. The road cannot handle the traffic. #5, breaking up the buildings preserves an identical view corridor as the Master Plan. I think the view will be preserved. I think we can meet density when breaking up the buildings. I am glad to hear you want to preserve the beginner ski area. #8 Yes, there is a reasonable possibility it can pass a point analysis. Mr. Schroder: #1 yes I am in support of location with broken up masses. #2, This is barely subordinate to One Ski Hill, building height does meet the Master Plan technically and like stepping. #3, looking forward to your parking study. We cannot expect any reduction in cars over the years. #4, I do not support Sawmill Rd. access. #5, the view corridor meets the master plans. Support. #6, I believe the additional density has the possibility of passing. #7, I have seen you work with the neighbors before and it would be nice to continue those efforts on this project. #8, Yes. Mr. Giller: #1, yes, possible but 2 D is so hard to tell. #2, yes. #3, I do not agree with reducing the parking. No room to add any parking here in the future. #4, no. You should stay off Sawmill Rd. #5, massing may work. Need elevations. #6, 84% increase in density is a concern. I do not support this much extra density. Where is the benefit to public for this much? #7 and #8, capable of meeting point analysis. Mr. Schuman: #1, yes. #2, yes. #3, I do not support a reduction. The Marriott had no regulated parking plan and they could dictate their customers travel plans. #4, I do not support. Also, I may not support two curb cuts on Ski Hill Rd. I too think you should get the neighborhood involved on what happens prior to a preliminary hearing. #5, I agree with view corridors at preliminary level. #6, It’s hard to tell at this point. I am not committed to an answer. #7, involve the neighbors #8, It may be able to pass points analysis. Mr. Lamb: #1, yes but very preliminary, hard to tell. #2, yes. #3, I do not support a reduction of parking. There is so little parking here to begin with, stick with 1:1 ratio. #4, No Sawmill Rd access #5, I support lowering, view corridors is an issue here. #6, I agree. #7&8, I do not support this 84% increase in extra density-would support less than 60 SFEs. If you reduce it, I think the extra parking needed would show up. I also would like to see you address the neighborhood concerns. Ms. Dudney: #1, yes. #2, yes. Being subordinate by just one foot is a concern. #3, I support, as long as overflow doesn’t spill into the residential area. #4, no Sawmill Rd. access. #5, I am concerned with 2.5 stories not knowing what the finished grade is. #6, view corridors look good. #7, it would have to be a significant public improvement to add 70% more density to the site. I feel it is up to the Town Council to decide. Mr. Anderson’s points about lights were well taken as well as the easement through the yards. # 8, yes. It is reasonable to think it could pass. Ms. Leidal: #1, no, based on the north/south orientation being 25 feet off the property line. I appreciate the tree buffer but the trees are not guaranteed forever-thinning and some will die. You need a bigger setback. #2, Not enough info. #3, I will defer to the parking study. I do appreciate the idea of providing employee parking. #4, No Sawmill Rd. access. The road cannot support it. #5, not enough info to make an assessment. I need to see elevations. #6, I don’t have enough info. I thank the applicant for their revisions and your promises to adhere to code. Mr. Gerard: One last note. I thought Mr. Anderson was going to complain about skiers walking through his property but he did not. Not all property owners will have the same reaction. I encourage you to talk to the neighbors about skier access and easements that would work for the entire neighborhood and have your conclusion written and recorded.
7 Town of Breckenridge Date 01/016/2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Page 2
Ms. Leidal called for a five minute break at 6:51pm.
TOWN COUNCIL REPORT: Mr. Grosshuesch gave a report on the January 9th Town Council Meeting: • No planning commission call ups. • Easement was endorsed for a new power line up to the Summit Public Radio antenna station through the Lorium open space on Baldy Mountain. • Authorized the town manager to enter into a contract to sell 34 Sheppard Circle in Vista Point as a deed restricted affordable housing unit. • Supported a pay increase for elected officials. • Hyder will be the general contractor for the parking garage. Breaking ground in June. Plans will be presented at the February 20 Planning Commission meeting. Expected to finish 13 months after breaking ground. • Reviewed provision for retirees continuing to live in deed restriction workforce housing units. • Reviewed a concept proposal on Airport Rd, (past CMC, across from the distillery) for an apartment complex with 39% of them being deed restricted units. One half acre of Town owned land would be involved. Council was supportive. • Retail center with grocery store. Staff was directed to do a fiscal study to see what impacts the Town can anticipate from forecasted growth along the Front Range as well as here. One part of that study would be to determine the demand for additional retail space and for a grocery store. • Reviewed PIF calculation for small restaurants. Council agreed to create a new category for food and beverage uses that occupy less than 800 square feet at a 2.0 multiplier and left definitions the same. This change would lower the cost of entry into the market.
COMBINED HEARINGS: 1. Village at Breckenridge Master Plan Amendment and Chateaux Hotel Condominium Meeting Room Conversion to Office (CL) PL-2017-0680, 405 Village Rd. Mr. LaChance presented a proposal to amend the 1983 Village at Breckenridge Master Plan to transfer 3.74 SFEs to the Chateaux Condominiums and change the allowed use of the existing common area meeting room in the Chateaux to commercial office for the purpose of an HOA office (The conversion of the existing 284 sq. ft. meeting room, 12 sq. ft. ski closet, and portion of lobby in the Chateaux Building to 402 sq. ft. commercial office). This conversion would include a new storefront window, glass door, and accessible walkway and handrail. The applicant also proposes to transfer 0.2 SFE from Lots 3&4 (Liftside/Peak 9) to Lot 5 (Plaza 1/Antero) in order to provide density for two future 100 sq. ft. vendor carts.
Commissioner Questions / Comments: No Comments or questions.
No public comment.
Mr. Giller made a motion to approve, seconded by Mr. Gerard. The motion passed unanimously.
OTHER MATTERS: Ms. Puester asked about the Saving Places Conference attendance. It was noted that the Ski Town Forum is at the same place as last year but a different room and time. Will send out information to those attending.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 pm.
8 Town of Breckenridge Date 01/016/2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Page 3
Christie Mathews-Leidal, Chair
9 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Town Attorney Date: 1/16/2018 Subject: Council Bill No. 1 (Ordinance Approving Amendment to Utility Easement Agreement for Summit Public Radio & TV)
The second reading of the ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Utility Easement Agreement between the Town, Summit County government, and Summit Public Radio & TV, Inc. is scheduled for your meeting on January 23rd. There are no changes proposed to either the ordinance or the agreement from first reading.
I will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
10 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/SECOND READING – JAN. 23 2 3 NO CHANGE FROM FIRST READING 4 5 COUNCIL BILL NO. 1 6 7 Series 2018 8 9 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE UTILITY EASEMENT 10 AGREEMENT FOR SUMMIT PUBLIC RADIO & TV, INC. 11 12 WHEREAS, the Town, the Board of County Commissioners of Summit County, 13 Colorado, and Summit Public Radio & TV, Inc. entered into that Utility Easement Agreement 14 for Summit Public Radio & TV, Inc. recorded July 13, 2015 at Reception No. 1086398 of the 15 records of the Clerk and Recorder of Summit County, Colorado; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Utility Easement Agreement for Summit 18 Public Radio & TV, Inc. as described in the First Amendment to Utility Easement Agreement, a 19 copy of which is marked Exhibit “A” and attached to this ordinance; and 20 21 WHEREAS, the Town Attorney has informed the Town Council that, in his opinion, 22 Section 15.3 of the Breckenridge Town Charter requires that the proposed First Amendment to 23 Utility Easement Agreement be approved by ordinance. 24 25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 26 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 27 28 Section 1. The First Amendment to Utility Easement Agreement (Exhibit “A” to this 29 ordinance) is approved, and the Town Manager is authorized, empowered, and directed to 30 execute such agreement for and on behalf of the Town of Breckenridge. The Town Council 31 hereby ratifies and confirms, in advance, all action taken by the Town Manager pursuant to the 32 authority granted by this ordinance. 33 34 Section 2. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that it has the power 35 to adopt this ordinance pursuant to the authority granted to home rule municipalities by Article 36 XX of the Colorado Constitution and the powers contained in the Breckenridge Town Charter. 37 38 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as provided by Section 39 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 40 41 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 42 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of _____, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 43 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 44 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 45 Town. 11 1 2 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 3 municipal corporation 4 5 6 7 By:______8 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 9 10 ATTEST: 11 12 13 14 ______15 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 16 Town Clerk 17 18 APPROVED IN FORM 19 20 21 22 ______23 Town Attorney 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 2000-95\Ordinance Approving First Amendment (01-15-18)(Second Reading) 12 13 14 Summit Public Power Line GPS Points Other Features This map is for data display purposes and should not be used 0 350 700 1,050 for legal conveyance. The data shown on this map is not Proposed Line Existing Line Heritage Cable Post ÎV Fuse Box Aerial Tram survey accurate and was created from the best available data. The surveyed parcels are from Range West, Inc, and Radio óóóóó overlaid on the GIS. GPS points were collected in 2010, Bypass Alternative Abandon êQ Pedestal "/ Box Head # Mines/Cabins Feet 2013, 2014, and 2015 and used to locate the powerline alignment and related assets or conditions. North Line GIS, Carbonite Alternative 1" Conduit Ýò Surveyed Parcels Baldy Mountain Junction Box È) Test Hole LLC, assumes no responsibility for the data shown on this 1 inch = 350 feet North Line GIS, LLC map. Map printed October 2017. Heritage Cable Alternative 2" Conduit !" Other Parcels Breckenridge, Colorado % * Site Old Head End 888.453.4471 www.northlinegis.com *All proposed pedestals and junction boxes are to be located on the uphill side of the associated roadway. [email protected]
Cabin
Box 7 Box 8
Hal Woods Iowa Mill 736.87 Cabin
Box 4 Box 3 6351.31
686.19 Box 5 1076.76 825.07 Little Tommy 298.1
Proposed Line 616.1 18,639 ft.
Box 2 2073.66 640.24 Primary Metering Cabinet Carbonite Mine Box 1
Control Point
547.04
Box 6
Box 9 Baldy Mountain 996.31 Tower Site
588.83
Box 6 Box 1 Box 7
Box 8 1061.38
Remove Line
Box 9
Box 2
Box 5
Box 3
Existing Line (Abandon)
15 Box 4 1
EXHIBIT D
UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT ROAD RESTORATION PLAN for SUMMIT PUBLIC RADIO & TV, INC.
Section 2 of the Utility Easement Agreement for Summit Public Radio & TV, Inc. (recorded July 13, 2015 under Reception No. 1086398) states that the surface of the road containing the utility easement will be restored after initial construction in accordance with the plans approved by Summit County and the United States Forest Service. The Owners and Summit Public desire to specify that plan herein.
1. Travel Restrictions. Summit Public acknowledges that, with the exception of Baldy Road (CR 520), the roads on the western flanks of Baldy Mountain have been decommissioned and are presently closed to motor vehicles, including but not limited to roads on the Laurium Open Space, numerous other Open Space properties, and roads under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service, as set forth in the White River National Forest Travel Management Plan. Summit Public shall abide by these travel restrictions except when a motor vehicle is necessary to accomplish construction and maintenance as authorized in the Original Utility Easement Agreement or for emergency access to the Bald Mt. Electronics Site. During the winter and spring, from approximately November 15 to May 20, or when the snowpack is sufficient, Owners approve Summit Public motor vehicle access via snowmobile on the Laurium Road and Baldy Road (CR 528.2, CR 538, and CR 520). During the summer and fall, motor vehicle access is via a high clearance, 4x4 on Baldy Road (CR 520).
2. Construction. Summit Public agrees to keep all disturbances associated with the underground portion of the replacement power line within the existing roadbed of the Baldy and Laurium Roads (CR 528.2, 538, and 520) to the greatest, practical extent. The activities set forth in the FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT that shall occur outside existing road alignments are specified in Exhibit “B,” SPRTV Powerline Replacement Site/Grading Plan” and Exhibit “C,” the Junction Box and Powerline Location map.
3. Maintenance. Monitoring of the functionality of the replacement power line shall be carried out on foot or remotely through time domain reflectometry (TDR) and other measurements. In the event that a motor vehicle is necessary to access and or repair the facilities in or adjacent to the Laurium Road (CR 528.2 and CR 538), Summit Public shall inform the Owners in writing prior to motorized entry or undertaking earth disturbing activities. The Owners acknowledge that this request may be time sensitive, and Owners agree to promptly review and either approve or deny the request on a timely basis. Any disturbance shall be restored as specified herein.
16
2
4. Road Restoration. Following construction and installation of the power line and pedestals, Summit Public agrees to the following restoration plan for the roads:
a. Laurium Road (CR 528.2 and CR 538). Summit Public shall restore the disturbed area of the road/trail surface to approximately the same condition that it was in prior to construction and installation of the power line. Summit Public will work with County or Town Open Space and Trails Staff to naturalize the surface of the road and construct a single track trail without removing the existing road bed to allow for future maintenance or construction access if necessary. Drainage dips shall be installed (consistent with United States Forest Service 2012 Guidelines for Road Maintenance Levels; or, at the direction of County or Town Open Space and Trails Staff) as necessary to maintain drainage off the road/trail surface and prevent unacceptable erosion or environmental damage.
b. Baldy Road (CR 520). Summit Public shall restore the surface of Baldy Road to approximately the same condition it was in prior to construction and installation of the power line. Drainage dips shall be installed (consistent with United States Forest Service 2012 Guidelines for Road Maintenance Levels; or, at the direction of County or Town Open Space and Trails Staff) as necessary to maintain drainage off the road surface and prevent unacceptable erosion or environmental damage, while maintaining the road open to high-clearance motor vehicles.
17 18 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Town Attorney Date: 1/16/2018 Subject: Council Bill No. 2 (Ordinance Granting Easement to PSCo for benefit of Summit Public Radio & TV)
The second reading of the ordinance granting an easement to Public Service Company over the Town/County’s Laurium open space parcel for the benefit of Summit Public Radio & TV is scheduled for your meeting on January 23rd. There are no changes proposed to ordinance from first reading.
I will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
19 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/SECOND READING – JAN. 23 2 3 NO CHANGE FROM FIRST READING 4 5 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2 6 7 Series 2018 8 9 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF AN EASEMENT TO PUBLIC 10 SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO 11 (Summit Public Radio & TV) 12 13 WHEREAS, Public Service Company of Colorado has requested the granting of an 14 easement over, across, and through certain real property jointly owned by the Town and the 15 Board of County Commissioners of Summit County, Colorado; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge has determined that it 18 should grant the requested easement; and 19 20 WHEREAS, the Town Attorney has informed the Town Council that, in his opinion, 21 Section 15.3 of the Breckenridge Town Charter requires that granting of the easement be 22 authorized by ordinance. 23 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 25 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 26 27 Section 1. The Town Manager is authorized, empowered, and directed to execute, 28 acknowledge, and deliver to Public Service Company of Colorado an easement substantially in 29 the form marked Exhibit “A”, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 30 31 Section 2. The Town Council finds, determines, and declares that it has the power to 32 adopt this ordinance pursuant to the authority granted to home rule municipalities by Article XX 33 of the Colorado Constitution and the powers contained in the Breckenridge Town Charter. 34 35 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as provided by Section 36 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 37 38 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 39 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of _____, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 40 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 41 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 42 Town. 43 44 45 20 1 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 2 municipal corporation 3 4 5 6 By:______7 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 8 9 ATTEST: 10 11 12 13 ______14 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 15 Town Clerk 16 17 APPROVED IN FORM 18 19 20 21 ______22 Town Attorney 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 2000-111\Ordinance (Summit Public Radio & TV) (01-15-18)(Second Reading)
21 DIVISION Mountain ROW AGENT Robert Lerche DOC. NO. 199193 LOCATION SPRTV Site Mt. Baldy DESCRIPTION AUTHOR Norm PLAT/GRID NO. 1857592 03 Simonson AUTHOR ADDRESS 12640 Cedar WO/JO/CREG NO. 12435612-01 Drive, Lakewood, CO 80226
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO EASEMENT
The undersigned Grantor hereby acknowledges receipt of good and valuable consideration from PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO (Company), 1800 Larimer Street, Suite 1100, Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202, in consideration of which Grantor(s) hereby grants unto said Company, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and replace utility lines and all fixtures and devices, used or useful in the operation of said lines, through, over, under, across, and along a course as said lines may be hereafter constructed in the NW1/4 of Section 9, Township 7 South, Range 77 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in the County of Summit, State of Colorado, the easement being described as follows:
See Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
The easement is 17 feet in width. The side boundary lines of the easement shall be lengthened and shortened as necessary to encompass a continuous strip of not less than the above width at all points on Grantor's property crossed by the above described easement and extending to the boundaries of adjacent properties.
Together with the right to enter upon said premises, to survey, construct, maintain, operate, repair, replace, control, and use said utility lines and related fixtures and devices, and to remove objects interfering therewith, including the trimming or felling of trees and bushes, and together with the right to use so much of the adjoining premises of Grantor during surveying, construction, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of said utility lines and related fixtures and devices as may be required to permit the operation of standard utility construction or repair machinery. The Grantor reserves the right to use and occupy the easement for any purpose consistent with the rights and privileges above granted and which will not interfere with or endanger any of the said Company's facilities therein or use thereof. Such reservations by Grantor shall in no event include the right to erect or cause to be erected any buildings or structures upon the easement granted or to locate any mobile home or trailer units thereon. In case of the permanent abandonment of the easement, all right, privilege, and interest granted shall terminate.
The work of installing and maintaining said lines and fixtures shall be done with care; the surface along the easement shall be restored substantially to its original level and condition.
Signed this day of , 2017.
(Type or print name below each signature line with official title if corporation, partnership, etc.):
GRANTOR: Board of County Commissioners of Summit County, Colorado
By: ______Its:______
STATE OF COLORADO, ) )ss. COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by [Grantor name(s) from above]:
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission Expires Notary Public
22 Version 2015
GRANTOR: Town of Breckenridge, Colorado
By: ______Its:______
STATE OF COLORADO, ) )ss. COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by [Grantor name(s) from above]:
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission Expires Notary Public
23 Version 2015
24 EXHIBIT A SHEET 2 OF 2 PARCEL A
N
LOT 2
SPRUCE PARK SUBDIVISION
N41°52'03"E269.18'
N61°07'09"W NW1/4, SEC 9, COUNTY ROAD 528 T7S, R77W RIGHT OF W AY POINT OF COMMENCEMENT (PER PLAT) (MOST S'LY COR, LOT 2)
POINT OF BEGINNING S87°22'28"E L4 131.91'
17' CL SCR 528 ±
L3
L1
(UTILITY ESEMENT BY OTHERS) PARCEL A 1,640 S.F. (0.038 AC.) M/L L2
LINE TABLE
LINE BEARING LENGTH
L1 S10°12'19"W 100.32'
L2 N56°00'55"W 18.58' 12640 Cedar Drive L3 N10°12'19"E 92.83' Suite F Lakewood, Colorado 80228 L4 S79°47'41"E 17.00' Phone: 303-586-5800 FAX: 303-586-5801 www.sehinc.com 25
PSCOC 140589 24.0 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Town Attorney Date: 1/16/2018 Subject: Council Bill No. 3 (Ordinance Approving Utility Easements on Town-owned Lands)
The second reading of the ordinance authorizing the establishment of utility easements for the Second Water Plant on certain Town-owned lands is scheduled for your meeting on January 23rd. There are no changes proposed to ordinance from first reading.
I will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
26 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/SECOND READING – JAN. 23 2 3 NO CHANGE FROM FIRST READING 4 5 COUNCIL BILL NO. 3 6 7 Series 2018 8 9 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEED OF DEDICATION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS IN 10 CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN’S SECOND WATER 11 TREATMENT PLANT 12 13 WHEREAS, the Town Council has been advised that it is necessary for the Town to 14 establish public utility easements over, under, across, and through certain Town-owned real 15 property in connection with the construction of the Town’s second water treatment plant; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the Town Attorney has prepared a form of Deed of Dedication of Utility 18 Easements, a copy of which is marked Exhibit “A”, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by 19 reference; and 20 21 WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the proposed Deed of Dedication of Utility 22 Easements and finds and determines that it should be approved. 23 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 25 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 26 27 Section 1. The Deed of Dedication of Utility Easements (Exhibit “A” hereto) is 28 approved, and the Mayor is authorized, empowered, and directed to execute such document for 29 and on behalf of the Town of Breckenridge. After it has been signed the Deed of Dedication shall 30 be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Summit County, Colorado. 31 32 Section 2. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that it has the 33 power to adopt this ordinance pursuant to the authority granted to home rule municipalities by 34 Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and the powers contained in the Breckenridge Town 35 Charter. 36 37 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as provided by 38 Section 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 39 40 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 41 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of _____, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 42 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 43 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 44 Town. 45 27 1 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 2 municipal corporation 3 4 5 6 By: ______7 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 8 9 ATTEST: 10 11 12 13 ______14 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 15 Town Clerk 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 600-290\Deed of Dedication Ordinance (01-15-18)(Second Reading) 28 DEED OF DEDICATION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS
The TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, Colorado municipal corporation, whose address is P. O. Box 168, Breckenridge, CO 80424 (“Town”), as the owner in fee simple absolute of the hereafter described real property, hereby creates, establishes, and dedicates to the perpetual use and benefit of the public the hereafter described public utility easements (together, the “Dedicated Easements”).
The Dedicated Easements are described and depicted on the attached Exhibit “A”, Exhibit “B”, and Exhibit “C”, which exhibits are incorporated herein by reference.
The Dedicated Easements may only be used for the location, operation, and maintenance of underground water utility transmission lines and appurtenances owned by the Town, together with the full right and authority to the Town, its contractors, licensees, lessees, and other persons authorized by the Town, and its and their agents and employees, to enter the Dedicated Easements at all times to survey, construct, repair, remove, replace, reconstruct, control, inspect, improve, enlarge, and maintain the water transmission lines and facilities, and other fixtures, devices and appurtenances used or useful in connection therewith.
This Deed of Dedication may be amended or terminated by ordinance duly adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado.
This deed is authorized by Ordinance No. ____, Series 2018, adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge on January 23, 2018.
Dated: ______, 2018
TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado municipal corporation
By:______Eric S. Mamula, Mayor
ATTEST:
______Helen Cospolich, CMC, Town Clerk
Page 1 29 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ______, 2018, by Eric S. Mamula, Mayor, and Helen Cospolich, CMC, Town Clerk, of the Town of Breckenridge, a Colorado municipal corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: ______.
______Notary Public
600-290\Deed of Dedication (Utility Easement)(12-14-17)
Page 2 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Town Attorney Date: 1/16/2018 Subject: Council Bill No. 4 (Ordinance Authorizing Sale of 34 Sheppard Circle)
The second reading of the ordinance authorizing the sale of the Town’s land located at 34 Sheppard Circle is scheduled for your meeting on January 23rd. There are no changes proposed to ordinance from first reading.
I will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
37 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/SECOND READING – JAN. 23 2 3 NO CHANGE FROM FIRST READING 4 5 COUNCIL BILL NO. 4 6 7 Series 2018 8 9 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TOWN-OWNED REAL PROPERTY 10 (Lot 3, Block 1, Vista Point Subdivision, Filing No. 2; also known as 34 Sheppard Circle, 11 Breckenridge, Colorado) 12 13 WHEREAS, the Town of Breckenridge is the owner of the following described real 14 property: 15 16 Lot 3, Block 1, Vista Point Subdivision, Filling No. 2, according to the plat filed 17 July 10, 2003 at Reception No. 722435 of the records of the Clerk and Recorder 18 of Summit County, Colorado; also known as 34 Sheppard Circle, Breckenridge, 19 Colorado 80424 20 21 (“Property”) 22 ; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the Town desires to sell the Property; and 25 26 WHEREAS, Section 15.3 of the Breckenridge Town Charter provides that the Town 27 Council may lawfully authorize the sale of Town-owned real property by ordinance. 28 29 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 30 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 31 32 Section 1. The Town Manger is authorized, empowered, and directed to take all necessary 33 and appropriate action to sell the Property to a qualified buyer. The sale price shall be $630,000.00, 34 subject to normal closing adjustments. In connection therewith, the Town Manager shall have full 35 power and authority to do and perform all matters and things necessary to the sale of the Property, 36 including, but not limited to, the following: 37 38 1. Selecting a qualified buyer to purchase the Property; 39 40 2. Entering into a contract to sell the Property to the Buyer, and amending the contract 41 if necessary; 42 43 3. Signing and recording with the Summit County Clerk and Recorder 44 an appropriate affordable housing restrictive covenant that will 45 encumber the property when sold; 38 1 2 4. Signing settlement statements, closing agreements, and other usual 3 and customary closing documents; 4 5 5. Signing the deed of conveyance for the Property; and 6 7 6. Performing all other things necessary to the sale of the Property by 8 the Town. 9 10 Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that it has the power to 11 adopt this Ordinance pursuant to the authority granted to home rule municipalities by Article XX of 12 the Colorado Constitution and the powers contained in the Breckenridge Town Charter. 13 14 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as provided by Section 15 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 16 17 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 18 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of _____, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 19 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 20 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 21 Town. 22 23 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 24 municipal corporation 25 26 27 28 By: ______29 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 30 31 ATTEST: 32 33 34 35 ______36 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 37 Town Clerk 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 600-284\34 Sheppard Circle Sale Ordinance (01-15-18)(Second Reading) 39 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Town Attorney
Date: 1/16/2018
Subject: Council Bill No. 5 (Mayor and Council Ordinance)
The second reading of the ordinance fixing the salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers elected at the April 3, 2018 regular Town election and thereafter is scheduled for your meeting on January 23rd. There are no changes proposed to ordinance from first reading.
I will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
40 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/SECOND READING – JAN. 23 2 3 NO CHANGE FROM FIRST READING 4 5 Additions To The Current Breckenridge Town Code Are 6 Indicated By Bold + Double Underline; Deletions By Strikeout 7 8 COUNCIL BILL NO. 5 9 10 Series 2018 11 12 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-7-1 OF THE BRECKENRIDGE TOWN CODE 13 CONCERNING THE COMPENSATION OF COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAYORS 14 ELECTED ON OR AFTER APRIL 3, 2018 15 16 WHEREAS, Section 4.7 of the Breckenridge Town Charter provides that the members of 17 the Town Council shall receive such compensation and the mayor shall receive such other 18 compensation as the Town Council shall prescribe by ordinance; provided, however, that the 19 Town Council shall neither increase nor decrease the compensation of any member during his or 20 her term of office; and 21 22 WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to fix the compensation of the Mayors and those 23 members of the Town Council who are elected on or after April 3, 2018. 24 25 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, 26 COLORADO: 27 28 Section 1. Section 1-7-1(A) of the Breckenridge Town Code is amended to read in its 29 entirety as follows: 30 31 1-7-1: SALARIES: 32 33 A. Elected Officials: 34 35 1. Council Members: Compensation for council members elected before April 1, 36 2008, shall be six thousand dollars ($6,000.00) annually for each, payable at the 37 rate of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per month. Compensation for council 38 members elected April 1, 2008, and thereafter shall be nine thousand six hundred 39 dollars ($9,600.00) annually for each, payable at the rate of eight hundred dollars 40 ($800.00) per month. Compensation for council members elected at the 41 Town’s regular election in 2016 shall be nine thousand six hundred dollars 42 ($9,600.00) annually for each, payable at the rate of eight hundred dollars 43 ($800.00) per month. Compensation for council members elected at the 44 Town’s regular election in 2018, and for all council members elected 41 1 thereafter, shall be twelve thousand dollars ($12,000.00) annually for each, 2 payable at the rate of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per month. 3 4 2. Mayor: Compensation for the mayor elected April 1, 2008, and thereafter shall 5 be fourteen thousand four hundred dollars ($14,400.00) annually, payable at the 6 rate of one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200.00) per month. Compensation 7 for the mayor elected at the Town’s regular election in 2016 shall be fourteen 8 thousand four hundred dollars ($14,400.00) annually, payable at the rate of 9 one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200.00) per month. Compensation for 10 the mayor elected at the Town’s regular election in 2020, and for all mayors 11 elected thereafter, shall be eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000.00) annually 12 for each, payable at the rate of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00) 13 per month. 14 3. Deduction For Absence From Meetings: One twenty-fourth (1/24) of the above 15 mentioned salaries may be deducted for the failure of any elected official to attend 16 any regular meeting of the council, by a majority vote of the council. 17 4. Further Compensation: Council members and the mayor elected April 4, 2006, 18 and thereafter shall receive a credit of five hundred dollars ($500.00) each twelve 19 (12) month period commencing April 15 of one year and ending April 14 of the 20 following year. Such sum may be used by such elected official only to pay to the 21 town the cost of the elected official and his or her family (if applicable) accessing 22 town owned recreational facilities for which a fee is charged. No unused portion 23 of the five hundred dollar ($500.00) credit may be carried over to the following 24 year. The additional compensation described in this subsection A4 shall not apply 25 to council members or the mayor who were elected prior to April 4, 2006. 26 5. Appointment To Council Vacancy: A person elected or appointed to fill a 27 vacancy on the town council pursuant to subsection 4.8(c) or section 4.8(d) of the 28 town charter shall receive the same compensation as the person who held the 29 office immediately prior to the vacancy being created. 30 6. Insurance: For those members of the town council elected at the town’s regular 31 election to be held April 1, 2014, and for all members of the town council and the 32 mayor elected or appointed to office thereafter, the cost of participating in the 33 town’s health insurance plans shall be the same as the cost paid by the 34 active/current/eligible town employees who participate in such plans. 35 36 Section 2. Except as specifically amended hereby, the Breckenridge Town Code, and the 37 various secondary codes adopted by reference therein, shall continue in full force and effect. 38 39 Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that it has the power 40 to adopt this ordinance pursuant to Section 4.7 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 41 42 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as provided by 43 Section 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 44 45 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 46 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of _____, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 42 1 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 2 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 3 Town. 4 5 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 6 municipal corporation 7 8 9 10 By:______11 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 12 13 ATTEST: 14 15 16 17 ______18 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 19 Town Clerk 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 500-392\Mayor and Council Salary Ordinance_2 (01-15-18)(Second Reading) 43 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Town Attorney Date: 1/18/2018 Subject: Proposed Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC Development Agreement and Ordinance
Enclosed with this memo is the proposed Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC Development Agreement, together with a form of ordinance that can be used to approve the agreement on first reading if that is the will of the Council.
You will recall that the Council reviewed both of these documents previously. However, there are proposed amendments to both the Development Agreement and the ordinance as shown in redline formatting on the attached documents.
The changes to the documents can be summarized as follows:
1. Development Agreement –
A. Recital G on Page 2 of the agreement has been revised to make it clear that the Planning Commission is authorized, but not required, to approve a reduced off-street parking requirements for this project.
B. Section 1 of the agreement (beginning on Page 3) has been reformatted to make it easier to read and understand. In addition, clause (B) toward the end of the section has been revised to make it clear that the required TDRs must be purchased and paid for prior to the issuance of a building permit, and the price to be paid by the Developer for the required TDRs is the current price at the time the TDRs are purchased.
2. Ordinance –
A. A new Finding C has been added on the first page of the ordinance for the purpose of defining the term “Developer” in the same way that the term is defined and used in the Development Agreement; and
B. Finding “O” on the third page of the ordinance has been revised to reflect that the development agreement proposal was referred to and reviewed by the Planning Commission.
If directed to do so by the Council, staff can make additional changes to the Development Agreement and Ordinance.
I look forward to discussing this matter with you on Tuesday.
44 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/FIRST READING – JAN. 23 2 3 COUNCIL BILL NO. _____ 4 5 Series 2018 6 7 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH 8 LIONHEART BGV VENTURES, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 9 10 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, 11 COLORADO: 12 13 Section 1. Findings. The Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge finds and 14 determines as follows: 15 16 A. Vail Summit Resorts, Inc. (“Owner”) is the owner of the Remainder of Tract C, Peak 17 8 Subdivision according to the Third Resubdivision Plat of The Remainder of Tract C, Peak 8 18 Subdivision Filing No. 1 recorded September 19, 2016 at Reception No. 1121860, Summit 19 County, Colorado (the “Property”).
20 B. The Property is subject to the Amendment to Amended Peaks 7 & 8 Master Plan 21 approved by Development Permit PL-2015-0444 on January 12, 2016, the Notice of Approval of 22 Master Plan for which Amendment was recorded August 30, 2016 at Reception No. 1120265 of 23 the Summit County, Colorado records (the “Master Plan”).
24 C. Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (“Developer”), 25 is an affiliate of Lionheart Capital, LLC.
26 C.D. Owner and Lionheart Capital, LLC, an affiliate of Developer, have entered into an 27 agreement for the potential sale of the portion of the Property located to the east of One Ski Hill 28 Place and representing the remainder of the developable area of Planning Area B, Peak 8 Base of 29 the Master Plan (the “Sale Parcel”) for Developer to develop a hotel, condominiums, 30 commercial facilities, amenities and space for Owner’s use.
31 D.E. As owner of the Property, Owner has the right to authorize and has provided to the 32 Town written authorization for the Developer to propose an amendment to the Master Plan, to 33 request density transfers to the Sale Parcel, to request Town approval for the gross density 34 recommended by the Town’s Land Use Guidelines (“Guidelines”) to be exceeded as provided 35 for in Subsection 9-1-19-39A:I.(2) of the Breckenridge Town Code, and to enter into agreements 36 with the Town concerning such amendment to the Master Plan, such a density transfer, such 37 density in excess of that recommended by the Guidelines, and such other matters as the Town 38 and the Developer may agree is appropriate.
39 E.F. Pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Breckenridge Town Code the Town Council has the 40 authority to enter into a development agreement. Further, in connection with a master plan 41 amendment, there is no process in the Town’s Development Code for approval of density in 45 1 excess of that recommended by the Guidelines and the transfer of density pursuant to a 2 certificate of development rights (“TDRs”) issued pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement 3 concerning transfer of development rights between the Town and Summit County, Colorado 4 (“IGA”), and, therefore, a development agreement provides a means for such an approval and 5 transfer.
6 F.G. In order for Developer to develop the Sale Parcel in a manner that will include a 7 four star, flagged, luxury hotel containing approximately 150 rooms and 110,000 square feet of 8 condominiums, with the amenities and commercial services required for such a project, up to an 9 additional 60 SFEs of residential density and 2.0 SFEs of commercial density will be required 10 and an amendment to the Master Plan and authorization to acquire and transfer TDRs to 11 accommodate such density will be required.
12 G.H. In connection with the review of the amendment of the Master Plan, to allow for the 13 approval of a mixed use development containing not less than one hundred thousand (100,000) 14 square feet to have the off-street parking requirements of Section 9-3-8 of the Breckenridge 15 Town Code decreased, as provided for in Subsection 9-3-8:D of the Breckenridge Town Code, it 16 is required that the Breckenridge Planning Commission be authorized to approve a reduction in 17 the off-street parking requirements to no less than .85 spaces per hotel room if such reduction is 18 supported by a written analysis prepared by a qualified parking consultant and paid for by the 19 Developer.
20 H.I. Because there is no provision in the Breckenridge Town Code allowing site work to 21 begin prior to issuance of a building permit, in order to facilitate the beginning of vertical 22 construction of Developer’s proposed project in the spring of 2020, the Town is prepared to 23 authorize its Department of Community Development (“Department”) to grant permission for 24 the commencement of infrastructure improvements, including, but not limited to, demolition of 25 Owner’s administration office building and ski patrol locker building located on the Sale Parcel 26 (“Administration Facilities”), construction of storm water management facilities, relocation of 27 utilities, and site excavation prior to issuance of a building permit, but subject to receipt of 28 assurances of completion deemed satisfactory by the Department.
29 I.J. In order to accommodate Owner’s administration functions necessary or appropriate 30 for the operation of the Breckenridge Ski Resort, which currently occur in the Administration 31 Facilities, the Town acknowledges and understands that a one or more temporary structures will 32 need to be placed in acceptable locations on the Sale Parcel or elsewhere within the Property and 33 maintained in such locations until the proposed Guest Services (as defined in the Master Plan) 34 spaces to be included in Developer’s proposed development on the Sale Parcel (the “Guest 35 Services Spaces”) are completed and ready for occupancy by Owner and a temporary permit 36 will need to be issued. The permit referenced in this paragraph must be reviewed and approved 37 by the Town’s Planning Commission and Town Council in accordance with such permit process 38 as is required by the Department.
39 J.K. As the commitment encouraged to be made in connection with an application for a 40 development agreement in accordance with Section 9-9-4 of the Breckenridge Town Code, 41 Developer has proposed a payment to the Town of $125,000 to be applied toward the Town’s
46 1 improvements to and maintenance of its Cucumber Gulch property or as otherwise directed by 2 the Town Council.
3 4 K.L. The Town Council has received a completed application and all required submittals 5 for a development agreement, had a preliminary discussion of the application and this 6 Agreement, determined that it should commence proceedings for the approval of this Agreement 7 and, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Subsection 9-9-10(C) of the Breckenridge 8 Town Code, has approved this Agreement by non-emergency ordinance.
9 L.M. A proposed development agreement between the Town and the Owner addressing 10 the topics described above has been prepared, a copy of which is marked Exhibit “A”, attached 11 hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Development Agreement”).
12 M.N. The Town Council had a preliminary discussion of the development agreement 13 application, and the proposed Development Agreement, as required by Section 9-9-10(A) of the 14 Breckenridge Town Code.
15 N.O. The Town Council determined that request for a development agreement need not 16 should be referred to the Breckenridge Planning Commission for its review and recommendation 17 pursuant to Section 9-9-10 of the Breckenridge Town Code. The Planning Commission reviewed 18 the matter at its January 16, 2018 regular meeting and has submitted its comments and 19 recommendation on the proposed development agreement to the Town Council. The Town 20 Council has received the Planning Commission’s comments and recommendation, and has given 21 them due and proper consideration.
22 O.P. The Town Council has reviewed the Development Agreement.
23 P.Q. The approval of the Development Agreement is warranted in light of all relevant 24 circumstances.
25 Q.R. The procedures to be used to review and approve a development agreement are 26 provided in Chapter 9 of Title 9 of the Breckenridge Town Code. The requirements of such 27 Chapter have substantially been met or waived in connection with the approval of the 28 Development Agreement and the adoption of this ordinance.
29 Section 2. Approval of Development Agreement. The Development Agreement between 30 the Town and Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (Exhibit 31 “A” hereto) is approved, and the Town Manager is authorized, empowered, and directed to 32 execute such agreement for and on behalf of the Town of Breckenridge. 33 34 Section 3. Notice of Approval. The Development Agreement must contain a notice in the 35 form provided in Section 9-9-13 of the Breckenridge Town Code. In addition, a notice in 36 compliance with the requirements of Section 9-9-13 of the Breckenridge Town Code must be 37 published by the Town Clerk one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town within 38 fourteen days after the adoption of this ordinance. Such notice shall satisfy the requirement of 39 Section 24-68-103, C.R.S. 40 47 1 Section 4. Inapplicable Code Provision. Because the Development Agreement involves 2 constitutionally protected property rights, the Town Council finds, determines, and declares that 3 Section 1-16-15 of the Breckenridge Town Code does not apply to the Development Agreement. 4 If Section 1-16-15 of the Breckenridge Town Code is ever determined to apply to the 5 Development Agreement, the Town Council irrevocably waives any right it might have to seek 6 to void the Development Agreement based upon such determination. 7 8 Section 5. Police Power Finding. The Town Council finds, determines, and declares that 9 this ordinance is necessary and proper to provide for the safety, preserve the health, promote the 10 prosperity, and improve the order, comfort and convenience of the Town of Breckenridge and 11 the inhabitants thereof. 12 13 Section 6. Authority. The Town Council finds, determines, and declares that it has the 14 power to adopt this ordinance pursuant to the authority granted to home rule municipalities by 15 Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and the powers contained in the Breckenridge Town 16 Charter. 17 18 Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be published and become effective as 19 provided by Section 5.9 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 20 21 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED 22 PUBLISHED IN FULL this ____ day of ______, 2018. A Public Hearing shall be held at the 23 regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado on the ___ day of 24 ____, 2018, at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible in the Municipal Building of the 25 Town. 26 27 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE 28 29 30 By:______31 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 32 33 ATTEST: 34 35 36 37 ______38 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 39 Town Clerk 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 1800-497\Development Agreement Ordinance_4 (01-17-18) 48 1 2 APPROVAL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONSTITUTES A VESTED 3 PROPERTY RIGHT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 68 OF TITLE 24, COLORADO REVISED 4 STATUTES, AS AMENDED 5
6 DRAFT January 17, 2018 DRAFT 7 8 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 9 10 This Development Agreement (“Agreement”) is made as of the ____ day of______, 11 201___ (the “Effective Date, which shall be the date when the ordinance approving this Agreement 12 becomes effective) between the TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a municipal corporation of the 13 State of Colorado, (the “Town”) and LIONHEART BGV VENTURES, LLC, a Colorado limited 14 liability company, (the “Developer”). 15 16 Recitals 17 18 A. Vail Summit Resorts, Inc. (“Owner”) is the owner of the Remainder of Tract C, 19 Peak 8 Subdivision according to the Third Resubdivision Plat of The Remainder of Tract C, Peak 20 8 Subdivision Filing No. 1 recorded September 19, 2016 at Reception No. 1121860, Summit 21 County, Colorado (the “Property”). 22 23 B. The Property is subject to the Amendment to Amended Peaks 7 & 8 Master Plan 24 approved by Development Permit PL-2015-0444 on January 12, 2016, the Notice of Approval of 25 Master Plan for which Amendment was recorded August 30, 2016 at Reception No. 1120265 of 26 the Summit County, Colorado records (the “Master Plan”). 27 28 C. Owner and Lionheart Capital, LLC, an affiliate of Developer, have entered into an 29 agreement for the potential sale of the portion of the Property located to the east of One Ski Hill 30 Place and representing the remainder of the developable area of Planning Area B, Peak 8 Base of 31 the Master Plan (the “Sale Parcel”) for Developer to develop a hotel, condominiums, commercial 32 facilities, amenities and space for Owner’s use.
33 D. As owner of the Property, Owner has the right to authorize and has provided to the 34 Town written authorization for the Developer to propose an amendment to the Master Plan, to 35 request density transfers to the Sale Parcel, to request Town approval for the gross density 36 recommended by the Town’s Land Use Guidelines (“Guidelines”) to be exceed as provided for 37 in Subsection 9-1-19-39A:I.(2) of the Breckenridge Town Code, and to enter into agreements 38 with the Town concerning such amendment to the Master Plan, such a density transfer, such 39 density in excess of that recommended by the Guidelines, and such other matters as the Town and 40 the Developer may agree is appropriate. 41 42 E. Pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Breckenridge Town Code the Town Council has the 43 authority to enter into a development agreement. Further, in connection with a master plan 44 amendment, there is no process in the Town’s Development Code for approval of density in Formatted: Centered EXHIBIT “A”
49 1 excess of that recommended by the Guidelines and the transfer of density pursuant to a certificate 2 of development rights (“TDRs”) issued pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement concerning 3 transfer of development rights between the Town and Summit County, Colorado (“IGA”), and, 4 therefore, a development agreement provides a means for such an approval and transfer.
5 F. In order for Developer to develop the Sale Parcel in a manner that will include a 6 four star, flagged, luxury hotel containing approximately 150 rooms and 110,000 square feet of 7 condominiums, with the amenities and commercial services required for such a project, up to an 8 additional 60 SFEs of residential density and 2.0 SFEs of commercial density will be required 9 and an amendment to the Master Plan and authorization to acquire and transfer TDRs to 10 accommodate such density will be required.
11 G. In connection with the review of the amendment of the Master Plan, to allow for 12 the approval of a mixed use development containing not less than one hundred thousand (100,000) 13 square feet to have the off-street parking requirements of Section 9-3-8 of the Breckenridge Town 14 Code decreased, as provided for in Subsection 9-3-8:D of the Breckenridge Town Code, it is 15 required that the Breckenridge Planning Commission may, but shall not be required be authorized 16 to, approve a reduction in the off-street parking requirements to no less than .85 spaces per hotel 17 room if such reduction is supported by a written analysis prepared by a qualified parking 18 consultant and paid for by the Developer.
19 H. Because there is no provision in the Breckenridge Town Code allowing site work 20 to begin prior to issuance of a building permit, in order to facilitate the beginning of vertical 21 construction of Developer’s proposed project in the spring of 2020, the Town is prepared to 22 authorize its Department of Community Development (“Department”) to grant permission for the 23 commencement of infrastructure improvements, including, but not limited to, demolition of 24 Owner’s administration office building and ski patrol locker building located on the Sale Parcel 25 (“Administration Facilities”), construction of storm water management facilities, relocation of 26 utilities, and site excavation prior to issuance of a building permit, but subject to receipt of 27 assurances of completion deemed satisfactory by the Department.
28 I. In order to accommodate Owner’s administration functions necessary or 29 appropriate for the operation of the Breckenridge Ski Resort, which currently occur in the 30 Administration Facilities, the Town acknowledges and understands that one or more temporary 31 structures will need to be placed in acceptable locations on the Sale Parcel or elsewhere within 32 the Property and maintained in such locations until the proposed Guest Services (as defined in the 33 Master Plan) spaces to be included in Developer’s proposed development on the Sale Parcel (the 34 “Guest Services Spaces”) are completed and ready for occupancy by Owner and a temporary 35 permit will need to be issued. The permit referenced in this paragraph must be reviewed and 36 approved by the Town’s Planning Commission and Town Council as provided for in 37 subparagraph 1(a)(iv) below.
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
2
50 1 J. As the commitment encouraged to be made in connection with an application for a 2 development agreement in accordance with Section 9-9-4 of the Breckenridge Town Code, 3 Developer has proposed a payment to the Town of $125,000 to be applied toward the Town’s 4 improvements to and maintenance of its Cucumber Gulch property or as otherwise directed by 5 the Town Council.
6 K. The Town Council has received a completed application and all required submittals 7 for a development agreement, had a preliminary discussion of the application and this Agreement, 8 determined that it should commence proceedings for the approval of this Agreement and, in 9 accordance with the procedures set forth in Subsection 9-9-10:C of the Breckenridge Town Code, 10 has approved this Agreement by non-emergency ordinance.
11 Agreement 12 1. Upon: 13 14 (a) final approval of all of the following: 15 16 (i) the transfer of TDRs consisting of up to 62 SFEs (60 for residential use and 2.0 17 for commercial use) to the Sale Parcel; 18 19 (ii) a Class A development permit amending the Master Plan to allow for such 20 transferred density in addition to the 71.6 residential SFEs and 9.0 commercial 21 SFEs remaining available for the Sale Parcel under the Master Plan (the “Master 22 Plan Amendment”); 23 24 (iii) a Class A development permit acceptable to Developer allowing for the 25 development of the Sale Parcel to accommodate: a four star, flagged, luxury hotel 26 containing approximately 150 rooms; approximately 110,000 square feet of 27 residential condominiums; approximately 11,000 square feet of commercial; and 28 approximately 10,300 square feet of Guest Services and Support Facilities (as 29 defined in the Master Plan) space for acquisition and use by Owner (the 30 “Permit”); 31 32 (iv) such permit as may be required by the Town to allow one or more temporary 33 structures accommodating Owner’s administration functions necessary or 34 appropriate for the operation of the Breckenridge Ski Resort to be placed in 35 acceptable locations on the Sale Parcel or elsewhere within the Property and 36 maintained in such locations until the proposed Guest Services Spaces are 37 completed and ready for occupancy by Owner, and 38 39 (v) a Class B subdivision permit approving the subdivision of the Property to create 40 the Sale Parcel; 41
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
3
51 1 and 2 3 (b) the passage of any time periods within which any referendums, appeals or other 4 challenges to such approvals must be brought, without any such referendums, appeals or other 5 challenges having been filed, commenced or asserted, or, if filed, commenced or asserted, after 6 any such appeal, referendum or challenge is resolved with affirmation that the Development 7 Agreement is effective, 8 9 then Developer shall: 10 11 (A) pay $125,000 to the Town to be applied to the improvement and maintenance of 12 the Town’s Cucumber Gulch property or as otherwise directed by the Town 13 Council; and 14 15 (B) prior to the issuance of a building permit for the development of the Property as 16 contemplated by this Agreement, and pursuant to the terms of the IGA, pay the 17 then-current price per TDR at the time of purchase of the TDRs at the time of 18 purchase of the TDRs for each TDR required to support the total residential and 19 commercial density authorized by the Permit minus the residential density of 71.6 20 SFEs and the commercial density of 9.0 SFEs remaining available for the Sale 21 Parcel under the Master Plan.
22 2. Pursuant to Subsection 9-1-19:39.I.(2) of the Development Code, the Town’s 23 Planning Commission is hereby authorized to review and approve, within 1 year of the Effective 24 Date and subject to compliance with all other applicable development policies of the Town, both 25 an application for the Master Plan Amendment and an application for the Permit.
26 3. Upon approval of the Master Plan Amendment and the Permit, the Developer is 27 hereby authorized to process the transfer to the Sale Parcel of up to 62 TDRs providing for up to 28 60 residential SFEs and 2.0 commercial SFE, pursuant to the terms of the IGA.
29 4. The requirements of Section 9-3-8 of the Breckenridge Town Code may be 30 decreased for Developer’s proposed development of the Sale Parcel to no less than .85 spaces per 31 hotel room, if the Planning Commission finds that the written analysis prepared by a qualified 32 parking consultant and paid for by Developer supports such decrease. Further, the Planning 33 Commission is hereby authorized to review and approve, within 1 year from the Effective Date, 34 an amendment to the Master Plan providing for parking in accordance with the foregoing, which 35 will be less than required by the Breckenridge Town Code.
36 5. Subject to the Department’s receipt of adequate assurances of or security for 37 completion of the authorized infrastructure improvements or return of the Sale Parcel generally to 38 the condition it was in before the commencement of any work, the Department, after final approval 39 of the Master Plan Amendment and the Permit, is hereby authorized to permit the demolition of
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
4
52 1 Administration Facilities and the excavation for and construction of infrastructure improvements, 2 including, but not limited to, construction of storm water management facilities, relocation of 3 utilities, and site excavation, after issuance of the Permit but before issuance of a building permit.
4 6. Except as provided in Section 24-68-105, C.R.S. and except as specifically 5 provided for herein, the execution of this Agreement shall not preclude the current or future 6 application of municipal, state or federal ordinances, laws, rules or regulations to the Property 7 (collectively, “laws”), including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, engineering, electrical 8 and mechanical codes, and the Town’s Development Code, Subdivision Standards and other land 9 use laws, as the same may be in effect from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. 10 Except to the extent the Town otherwise specifically agrees, any development of the Sale Parcel 11 which is the subject of this Agreement, the Master Plan Amendment and the Permit shall be done 12 in compliance with the then-current laws of the Town.
13 7. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude or otherwise limit the lawful authority of 14 the Town to adopt or amend any Town law, including, but not limited to the Town’s: (i) 15 Development Code, (ii) Master Plan, (iii) Land Use Guidelines and (iv) Subdivision Standards.
16 8. Prior to any action against the Town for breach of this Agreement, Developer shall 17 give the Town a sixty (60) day written notice of any claim by the Developer of a breach or default 18 by the Town, and the Town shall have the opportunity to cure such alleged default within such 19 time period.
20 9. The Town shall not be responsible for and the Developer shall have no remedy 21 against the Town if the development of the Sale Parcel is prevented or delayed for reasons beyond 22 the control of the Town.
23 10. Actual development of the Sale Parcel shall require the issuance of such other and 24 further permits and approvals by the Town as may be required from time to time by applicable 25 Town ordinances.
26 11. No official or employee of the Town shall be personally responsible for any actual 27 or alleged breach of this Agreement by the Town.
28 12. Developer with respect to its interests or benefits provided for in paragraphs 1, 2, 29 3, 4, and 5 agrees to indemnify and hold the Town, its officers, employees, insurers, and self- 30 insurance pool, harmless from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, 31 loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, 32 sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which 33 arise out of or are in any manner connected with such benefits under this Agreement, if such injury, 34 loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, 35 the negligence or wrongful intentional act or omission of Developer; any subcontractor of 36 Developer, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of Developer or of any subcontractor 37 of Developer, or which arise out of any worker’s compensation claim of any employee of
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
5
53 1 Developer, or of any employee of any subcontractor of Developer; except to the extent such 2 liability, claim or demand arises through the negligence or intentional act or omission of Town, its 3 officers, employees, or agents. Developer agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide 4 defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims, or demands at the sole expense of the 5 Developer. Developer also agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including 6 court costs and attorney’s fees.
7 13. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall 8 not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions of the 9 Agreement.
10 14. This Agreement constitutes a vested property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title 11 24, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended.
12 15. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed or constitute a 13 waiver of any other provision, nor shall it be deemed to constitute a continuing waiver unless 14 expressly provided for by a written amendment to this Agreement signed by both Town and 15 Developer; nor shall the waiver of any default under this Agreement be deemed a waiver of any 16 subsequent default or defaults of the same type. The Town’s failure to exercise any right under 17 this Agreement shall not constitute the approval of any wrongful act by the Developer or the 18 acceptance of any improvements.
19 16. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Town and 20 Developer, and their successors and assigns.
21 17. If and only if Developer has acquired title to the Sale Parcel, this Agreement shall 22 be recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Summit County, Colorado promptly after 23 Developer has acquired title to the Sale Parcel and all documents required to be recorded in 24 connection with such acquisition of title have been recorded, and, thereafter, shall run with title to 25 the Property.
26 18. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the Town’s 27 sovereign immunity under any applicable state or federal law.
28 19. Personal jurisdiction and venue for any civil action commenced by either party to 29 this Agreement shall be deemed to be proper only if such action is commenced in District Court 30 of Summit County, Colorado. The Developer and Town expressly waive their right to bring such 31 action in or to remove such action to any other court, whether state or federal.
32 20. Any notice required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be 33 sufficient if personally delivered or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed 34 as follows: 35 36 If to the Town: Rick Holman, Town Manager
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
6
54 1 Town of Breckenridge 2 P.O. Box 168 3 Breckenridge, CO 80424 4 With a copy (which 5 shall not constitute 6 notice to the Town) to: Timothy H. Berry, Esq. 7 Town Attorney 8 P.O. Box 2 9 Leadville, CO 80461 10 11 If to the Developer: Graham Frank 12 Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC 13 100 S. Main Street 14 P.O. Box 6879 15 Breckenridge, CO 80424 16 With a copy (which 17 shall not constitute 18 notice) to: Jessica Wasserstrom 19 Lionheart Capital, LLC 20 4218 NE 2nd Avenue, 2nd Floor 21 Miami, FL 33137 22 With a copy (which 23 shall not constitute 24 notice) to: John L. Palmquist, Esq. 25 GC Legal Strategies 26 2520 S. St. Paul Street 27 Denver, CO 80210 28 29 With a copy (which 30 shall not constitute 31 notice) to: Vail Resorts Management Company 32 390 Interlocken Crescent 33 Broomfield, CO 80021 34 Attn: Legal Department 35 36 Notices mailed in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph shall be deemed to have been 37 given upon delivery. Notices personally delivered shall be deemed to have been given upon 38 delivery. Nothing herein shall prohibit the giving of notice in the manner provided for in the 39 Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure for service of civil process.
40 21. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the 41 parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes any prior agreement or 42 understanding relating to such subject matter.
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
7
55 1 2 22. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of 3 Colorado. 4 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and the Developer have executed this Agreement as 6 of the date first above set forth. 7 8 9 10 11 12 [SEPARATE SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] 13
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
8
56 1 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE 2 Attest: 3 4 5 ______By:______6 Helen Cospolich, CMC, Town Clerk Rick G. Holman, Manager 7 8 9 10 11 STATE OF COLORADO ) 12 ) ss. 13 COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) 14 15 The foregoing was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ______, 16 201___ by Rick G. Holman as Town Manager and Helen Cospolich, CMC, as Town Clerk of the 17 Town of Breckenridge. 18 19 Witness my hand and official seal. 20 My commission expires:______21 22 ______23 Notary Public 24
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
9
57 1 LIONHEART BGV VENTURES, LLC 2 a Colorado limited liability company 3 4 5 6 By:______7 ______, Manager 8 9 10 11 STATE OF COLORADO ) 12 ) ss. 13 COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) 14 15 The foregoing was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ______, 16 201___ by ______as the Manager of Lionheart BGV Ventures, LLC, a Colorado 17 limited liability company. 18 19 Witness my hand and official seal. 20 My commission expires:______21 22 ______23 Notary Public 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Dev Ag – Lionheart-BGV 12-01-17(01-17-18)
10
58 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Chris Kulick, AICP, Planner III Date: 1/17/2018 Subject: East Peak 8 Parcel (1599 Ski Hill Road) - Lionheart BGV Ventures Hotel Development Agreement Request
The Planning Commission held a work session on January 16th to conduct a “Fit Test” for a Development Agreement request for the property located at 1599 Ski Hill Road, also known as the Breckenridge Ski Resort Administration Property.
Attached to this memo is the complete staff report that was presented to the Planning Commission and attachments including a concept plan and the Peak 7 & 8 Master Plan. At the work session the Commission answered questions on several items listed below.
1. Six out of seven of the Commission was comfortable with the general building locations and proposed connection above grade to each of the building modules as well as the site buffering.
2. Six out of seven of the Commission believed the proposed building height could comply with Land Use District 39 and be subordinate in height to the eastern cross gable of One Ski Hill Place (one felt more information was needed).
3. Three Commissioners did not feel they had enough information to weigh-in on the parking reduction request. Three other Commissioners were not supportive of the reduction of parking spaces and one Commissioner was supportive of a reduction in parking spaces.
4. The Commission found the circulation off of Ski Hill Road may be achievable as proposed but all were strongly against the secondary access for deliveries and garbage from Sawmill Run Road.
5. Six of seven of the Commission found the commitment to lowering the eastern façade height, by averaging 2.5 stories and breaking-up the buildings into modules, allows for better transitions to the eastern single-family neighborhoods and improves the view corridors as identified by the Sheet 5-Fit Test and Sheet 8 - View Corridor Study (one felt more information was needed).
6. Six of seven of the Commission found the proposal’s density, broken into multiple building modules, could comply with the Development Plan of the Peak 8 Base section of the Master Plan if the “peach colored” connector height was low enough (one felt more information was needed).
7. All Commissioners emphasized to the applicants to work with the neighbors and provide skier access to the Four O’ Clock Subdivision and keep the plaza and building connection low
8. Based on the information provided, five out of seven of the Commission believed there is reasonable possibility the proposal, with up to an additional 62 SFEs of TDRs could pass a point analysis at a future formal review process. One Commissioner thought 62 SFEs of additional density was too much and another thought there wasn’t enough information provided to make a determination. 59 1 Additionally, beyond the Commission’s comments, the Commission received both written and public comments from three property owners in the Four O’ Clock Subdivision. The main concerns from the neighbors included:
• Concern over continued skier access from the neighborhood.
• Opposition to vehicular access to the development from Sawmill Run Road.
• Concern over light and noise from potential patios along the eastern façade.
• Concern over building design affecting views.
The above bullet points are just a summary of comments. For more detail, the meeting minutes are also included in your packet. Staff will be available at the meeting to answer any questions.
60 Page 2
Memo
To: %UHFNHQULGJH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
From: &KULV.XOLFN$,&33ODQQHU,,,
Date:
Subject: (DVW3HDN3DUFHO 6NL+LOO5RDG /LRQKHDUW%*99HQWXUHV+RWHO'HYHORSPHQW $JUHHPHQW5HTXHVW
7KH7RZQ&RXQFLOUHFHLYHGD'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQWUHTXHVWIRUWKHSURSHUW\ORFDWHGDW 6NL+LOO5RDG NQRZQ DV WKH %UHFNHQULGJH 6NL 5HVRUW $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ 3URSHUW\ ZKLFK LV WKH ODVW GHYHORSPHQW SDUFHO LQ WKH 3HDN 0DVWHU3ODQ7KH7RZQ&RXQFLOUHYLHZHGWKH'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQWDVDZRUNVHVVLRQDWWKHLU 1RYHPEHUDQG'HFHPEHUPHHWLQJVDWZKLFKWLPHWKH7RZQ&RXQFLOGHFLGHGWRGLUHFWWKH VNHWFKOHYHOSURSRVDOWRWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQIRUUHYLHZRIDSUHOLPLQDU\OHYHO³)LW7HVW´SULRUWRWKH7RZQ &RXQFLOWDNLQJDFWLRQRQWKH'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQWRQ-DQXDU\
$WWKH'HFHPEHU7RZQ&RXQFLOPHHWLQJVWDIIUHFRPPHQGHGWKH7RZQ&RXQFLOGLVFXVVWKHSURSRVDO DQG FKRRVH RQH RI WKUHH RSWLRQV GHQ\ WKH SURSRVHG DJUHHPHQW DSSURYH LW ZLWKRXW 3ODQQLQJ &RPPLVVLRQ LQSXWRUUHIHULWWRWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQIRUWKHLUUHYLHZ HVVHQWLDOO\WKLVLVDILWWHVWWRVHHLIWKHDPRXQWRI GHQVLW\UHTXHVWHGDFWXDOO\ILWVRQWKHVLWH $WWKHFRQFOXVLRQRIWKHGLVFXVVLRQZLWKVWDIIDQGWKHDSSOLFDQWVWKH &RXQFLOHOHFWHGWRUHIHUWKHSURSRVDOWRWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQIRUDILWWHVWDQGFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKH3HDN 0DVWHU3ODQ
7KHSURSRVDOLVWRFRQVWUXFWDZKROO\RZQHGIRUVDOHFRQGRPLQLXPSURMHFW VTXDUHIHHW DVZHOODVD IRXUVWDUIODJJHGOX[XU\KRWHOFRQWDLQLQJDSSUR[LPDWHO\URRPVFRPPRQDUHDDQGDVVRFLDWHGDPHQLWLHV :LWK WKH SURSRVHG 'HYHORSPHQW $JUHHPHQW SURSRVDO IURP WKH DSSOLFDQW DWWDFKHG WKH DSSOLFDQW /LRQKHDUW %*99HQWXUHVLVUHTXHVWLQJ
x 7UDQVIHURIXSWR5HVLGHQWLDO6)(V VTIWIRUFRQGRRUVTIWRIKRWHOGHSHQGLQJRQ VSHFLILFXVH DQG&RPPHUFLDO6)(V VTIW&RPPHUFLDO 7KLVVTXDUHIRRWDJHZRXOGEHLQ DGGLWLRQWRWKHH[LVWLQJHQWLWOHGGHQVLW\RQWKHVLWHRI5HVLGHQWLDO6)(V&RPPHUFLDO6)(V DQG*XHVW6HUYLFHV6)(VEULQJLQJLWWRDQHVWLPDWHGWRWDORI VTIWH[FOXGLQJDGGLWLRQDO *XHVW6HUYLFHVVTXDUHIRRWDJH
x 'HFUHDVHWKHSDUNLQJUHTXLUHPHQWIRUKRWHOURRPVIURPVSDFHSHUKRWHOURRPWRVSDFHVSHU URRP EDVHG RQ D WKLUG SDUW\ SDUNLQJ VWXG\ DQG DSSURYHG E\ WKH 3ODQQLQJ &RPPLVVLRQ $ VLPLODU UHTXHVWZDVJUDQWHGWRWKH0DUULRWW5HVLGHQFH,QQLQD'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQW WKLVSDUNLQJ UHGXFWLRQZDVDFFRPSOLVKHGDIWHUDWKLUGSDUW\SDUNLQJFRQVXOWDQWVWXG\IRUWKHVLWHZDVVXEPLWWHGDQG DSSURYHGE\WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQZLWKWKH0DUULRWW5HVLGHQFH,QQVLWHSODQGHYHORSPHQWSHUPLW DSSOLFDWLRQ 7KHUHVLGHQWLDOFRQGRPLQLXPSDUNLQJVSDFHUHTXLUHPHQWZRXOGPHHWFRGH
x &RPPHQFH LQIUDVWUXFWXUH LPSURYHPHQWV LQFOXGLQJ GHPROLWLRQ RI WKH FXUUHQW DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ EXLOGLQJ UHORFDWLRQRIGHHSXWLOLWLHVFRQVWUXFWLRQRIVWRUPZDWHUPDQDJHPHQWV\VWHPVDQGPDVVH[FDYDWLRQ GXULQJWKHVSULQJDQGVXPPHURI SULRUWRWKHLVVXDQFHRIDEXLOGLQJSHUPLW
x (VWDEOLVK EXLOGLQJ KHLJKW UHJXODWLRQV WKDW DUH LQ DFFRUGDQFH ZLWK WKH 0DVWHU 3ODQ ZKLFK VWDWHV LQ LWDOLFV
o Heights of buildings shall be established in accordance with the Development Code applied against the recommended heights for Land Use District 39, as they are in effect at the time of the approval of this Amendment on February 26, 2013 and point assessments will be applied in accordance with such Code based on the recommended heights for such Land Use District, provide: 61 A. That, for buildings at the Peak 8 Base area only, the measurement to be made in accordance with the definition of Building Height in Section 9-1-5 of the Development Code, to account for the lack of natural grades and the anticipated filling of the lowered and generally flat grades currently existing at the Peak 8 Base area, shall be made “to the proposed finished grade elevation at the exterior wall below”, and not to natural grade, which generally does not exist in the area, provided that such proposed finished grades shall not include artificial appearing berming or fill. Artificial appearing berming or fill is characterized by excessive rise and steep grades in the vicinity of building foundation.”
,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKLV ODQJXDJH WKH 7RZQ DQG 'HYHORSHU ZLOO HVWDEOLVK D PHWKRG IRU GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH ILQLVKHG JUDGHV DERYH ZKLFK KHLJKWV VKDOO EH PHDVXUHG LQ RUGHU WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH ODFN RI QDWXUDO JUDGHV DQG WKH DQWLFLSDWHG ILOOLQJ RI WKH ORZHUHG DQG JHQHUDOO\ IODW JUDGHV FXUUHQWO\ H[LVWLQJ DW WKH %UHFNHQULGJH 6NL 5HVRUW $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ3URSHUW\7KLVVWDWHPHQWZLOOEHDGGHGWRWKH'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQW
7KHSURSRVHGFRPPXQLW\EHQHILWIRUWKHDERYHUHTXHVWVLV
x WRZDUG WKH FRQWLQXHG SUHVHUYDWLRQ RI &XFXPEHU *XOFK RU RWKHU SXEOLF EHQHILWV DV GHWHUPLQHGE\WKH7RZQ&RXQFLO
)LW7HVW $VQRWHGDERYHWKLVZRUNVHVVLRQVHUYHVWKHUROHRIWKHILWWHVWDQGLVZKHUH&RPPLVVLRQHUVFDQ UDLVHTXHVWLRQVDQGPDNHFRPPHQWVDERXWWKHSURMHFWLQWKHFRQFHSWOHYHOGHVLJQSKDVHEHIRUHDFWLRQLVWDNHQ E\WKH7RZQ&RXQFLORQWKH'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQWDQGEHIRUHWKHSURMHFWHQWHUVWKHIRUPDOUHYLHZSURFHVV 7KLVLVWKH&RPPLVVLRQ¶VRSSRUWXQLW\WRYRLFHFRQFHUQVRUVXSSRUWIRUDQ\SLHFHVRIWKHSURSRVDOSULRUWR7RZQ &RXQFLO WDNLQJ DFWLRQ RQ WKH SURSRVHG 'HYHORSPHQW $JUHHPHQW ,W LV DOVR WKH WLPH IRU WKH &RPPLVVLRQ WR UHYLHZWKHTXHVWLRQEDVHGRQWKHLQIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGFRXOGWKHSURSRVDORIDQDGGLWLRQDO6)(VRI7'5V SRWHQWLDOO\ SDVV D SRLQW DQDO\VLV DQG EH LQ FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK WKH 3HDN 0DVWHU 3ODQ DQG DSSOLFDEOH 'HYHORSPHQW&RGHSROLFLHV"
+LVWRU\ 7KH3HDN GHYHORSPHQWDUHDVUHDOO\EHJDQLQWKHODWH ¶VDQGHDUO\¶VZLWKVHULHVRI 'HYHORSPHQW $JUHHPHQWV $QQH[DWLRQV 0DVWHU 3ODQ $PHQGPHQWV DQG 'HQVLW\ 7UDQVIHUV 7KH RULJLQDO 0DVWHU3ODQZDVDSSURYHGE\WKH7RZQLQ DQGWKHQDPHQGHGLQ DQGPRVW UHFHQWO\7KHFXUUHQWPDVWHUSODQDOORZVIRU6LQJOH)DPLO\(TXLYDOHQWV 6)(V RIGHQVLW\ SOXVD FUHGLWRI6)(VRIVNLHUVHUYLFHV DWWKHEDVHRI3HDNRIZKLFK5HVLGHQWLDO6)(V&RPPHUFLDO 6)(VDQG*XHVW6HUYLFHV6)(VUHPDLQ7KH0DVWHU3ODQDOORZVPXOWLXQLWUHVLGHQWLDOGXSOH[FRPPHUFLDO JXHVWVHUYLFHVIDFLOLWLHVJRQGRODDQGSDUNLQJ
&KDQJHV VLQFH WKH -DQXDU\ :RUNVHVVLRQ 6WDII 5HSRUW LWHP ZDV SXOOHG IURP WKH 3ODQQLQJ &RPPLVVLRQPHHWLQJE\WKHDSSOLFDQW
,QUHVSRQVHWRWKH-DQXDU\VWDIIUHSRUWWKHDSSOLFDQWVUHTXHVWHGWRKDYHWKHZRUNVHVVLRQFRQWLQXHGWR -DQXDU\ WR DOORZ WLPH WR PHHW ZLWK SODQQLQJ VWDII DQG UHFHLYH GLUHFWLRQ RQ ZKDW FRQFHSWXDO PRGLILFDWLRQVPD\EULQJWKHSURMHFWLQWREHWWHUFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKH0DVWHU3ODQ%DVHGRQIHHGEDFNIURP6WDII WKH DSSOLFDQWV KDYH PDGH WKH IROORZLQJ FKDQJHV WR WKH FRQFHSWXDO SODQV WR DGGUHVV WKH PDMRULW\ RI VWDII¶V FRQFHUQVPLQXVVWDII¶VUHFRPPHQGDWLRQRIHOLPLQDWLQJDFFHVVWRWKHVLWHIURP6DZPLOO5XQ5RDG
x 7KHDSSOLFDQWVKDYHPRGLILHGWKHLUFRQFHSWWRLQFOXGHWZRRUPRUHSHUFHLYHGEXLOGLQJPRGXOHV VKRZQ LQEURZQ FRQQHFWHGDWORZHUOHYHOVDERYHJUDGHE\DVWRU\HOHPHQWRUE\EULGJH SLQNDUHD 7KLVLQ RUGHUWRVXEVWDQWLDOO\FRQIRUPZLWKWKH3HDNVDQG0DVWHU3ODQZLWKHDFKSOXVVWRU\PRGXOHWR KDYHOHVVGHQVLW\WKDQ2QH6NL+LOO3ODFH$QH[DPSOHRIWKHVHSURSRVHGPRGLILFDWLRQVFDQEHVHHQ LQ([KLELW$ x 7KHPDVVLQJKDVEHHQEURNHQXSWRDGGUHVVYLHZFRUULGRUVSHUWKH3HDNVDQG0DVWHU3ODQ$Q H[DPSOHRIWKHVHSURSRVHGPRGLILFDWLRQVFDQEHVHHQLQ([KLELW$ x 7KHDSSOLFDQWVKDYHFRPPLWWHGWRVWHSSLQJWKHEXLOGLQJGRZQRQWKHHDVWHUQVLGHRIWKHVLWHWREHLQ FRQIRUPDQFHZLWKWKH3HDNVDQG0DVWHU3ODQ x 7KH DSSOLFDQWV KDYH DFNQRZOHGJHG 6WDII¶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¶&ORFNQHLJKERUKRRG%HORZLV ODQJXDJHIURPWKHILWWHVWDQGWKH0DVWHU3ODQWKDWGHPRQVWUDWHVWKHFRQVLVWHQF\RIWKLVPHVVDJH
“…smaller multifamily condominiums or "inn" buildings will transition the development from the Grand Lodge to the adjacent subdivision… (A Fit Test illustrating the location of these buildings has been provided on Sheet 5. This is only to illustrate how the proposed densities can possibly fit, further refinement is anticipated.)” - Breckenridge Ski Resort Peaks 7 and 8 Master Plan Amendment Class A Preliminary Hearing: PC#2000155, November 19, 2002 – “Fit Test”
“Toward the ends of the Peak 8 Base area the buildings will be lesser in height and density as compared to the center core of the Peak 8 Base. Visual Impacts adjacent to the 4 O’Clock Subdivision and Skiwatch will be minimized by utilizing roof forms that step down at the edges, while maintaining steeply pitched roofs, which are characteristics of mountain architecture.” – 2016 Breckenridge Ski Resort Peaks 7 and 8 Master Plan Amendment
$VVKRZQFXUUHQWO\WKHHDVWHUQSRUWLRQRIEXLOGLQJVDUHVLWHGDJDLQVWWKHPDWXUHVWDQGRIORGJHSROHSLQHWUHHV $WWKHLUFORVHVWSRLQWWKHEXLOGLQJVDUHVHWDSSUR[LPDWHO\¶IURPWKHHDVWHUQSURSHUW\OLQHDQGDUHVKRZQ JUHDWHUWKDQ ¶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
%XLOGLQJ +HLJKW ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKH ODQJXDJH DERYH ZKLFK GLUHFWV WKH WDOOHVW EXLOGLQJV WR EH SODFHG LQ WKH FHQWHURIWKH3HDNEDVHDQGWKHQOHVVHQWKHKHLJKWRQGHYHORSPHQWWRZDUGWKHHGJHVWKH0DVWHU3ODQDOVR JLYHVVSHFLILFGLUHFWLRQRQKRZWRPHDVXUHKHLJKWVEDVHGRQWKHODFNRIQDWXUDOJUDGHVRIVLWH%HORZDUHWKH VSHFLILF EXLOGLQJ KHLJKW UHJXODWLRQV IRU WKH 3HDN %DVH $UHD WKDW ZLOO DOVR EH FRGLILHG LQ D 'HYHORSPHQW $JUHHPHQW
“Heights of buildings shall be established in accordance with the Development Code and applied against the recommended heights for Land Use District 39, as they are in effect at the time of the approval of this Amendment on February 26, 2013 and point assessments will be applied in accordance with such Code based on the recommended heights for such Land Use District, provide:
A. That, for buildings at the Peak 8 Base area only, the measurement to be made in accordance with the definition of Building Height in Section 9-1-5 of the Development Code, to account for the lack of natural grades and the anticipated filling of the lowered and generally flat grades currently existing at the Peak 8 Base area, shall be made “to the proposed finished grade elevation at the exterior wall below”, and not to natural grade, which generally does not exist in the area, provided that such proposed finished grades shall not include artificial appearing berming or fill. Artificial appearing berming or fill is characterized by excessive rise and steep grades in the vicinity of building foundations.”
,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKLV ODQJXDJH WKH 7RZQ DQG 'HYHORSHU ZLOO HVWDEOLVK D PHWKRG IRU GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH ILQLVKHG JUDGHV DERYH ZKLFK KHLJKWV VKDOO EH PHDVXUHG LQ RUGHU WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH ODFN RI QDWXUDO JUDGHV DQG WKH 63 DQWLFLSDWHG ILOOLQJ RI WKH ORZHUHG DQG JHQHUDOO\ IODW JUDGHV FXUUHQWO\ H[LVWLQJ DW WKH %UHFNHQULGJH 6NL 5HVRUW $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ3URSHUW\
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
7KHILQLVKHGJUDGHDVGHVFULEHGLQWKH0DVWHU3ODQZLOOEHSUHSDUHGDVDVSHFLDOH[KLELWSULRUWRWKHUHYLHZRI WKH'HYHORSPHQW$JUHHPHQWE\WKH7RZQ&RXQFLORQ-DQXDU\7KH0DVWHU3ODQ DQGWKLVSURYLVLRQLV VWLOOSDUWRIWKH0DVWHU3ODQ DOORZVWKHDSSOLFDQWWRHVWDEOLVKILQLVKHGJUDGHDWWKHEDVHRI3HDNVLQFH6NL+LOO 5RDGWKHSDUNLQJORWVGULYHZD\VDQGWKHH[LVWLQJ$GPLQLVWUDWLRQIDFLOLW\ZHUHSODFHGLQWRWKHQDWXUDOKLOOVLGH GHVWUR\LQJWKHQDWXUDOVORSHZLWKQHZFXWDQGILOO
2QFH ILQLVKHG JUDGH LV HVWDEOLVKHG WKHQ EXLOGLQJ KHLJKW LV PHDVXUHG WKH VDPH ZD\ DV GHVFULEHG LQ WKH 'HYHORSPHQW&RGH7KHKHLJKWRIDEXLOGLQJDVPHDVXUHGXSIURPDQ\SRLQWIURPZLWKLQDEXLOGLQJ¶VIRXQGDWLRQ RUDURXQGDEXLOGLQJ¶VIRXQGDWLRQSHULPHWHUWRDSRLQWRQWKHILQLVKHGJUDGH to the roof as described in the Development Code
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heet 5 – Fit Test.7KLVUHFRPPHQGDWLRQLVDOVR GHVFULEHGLQJUHDWHUGHWDLOLQWKHPlan ComponentsDQGView CorridorsVHFWLRQRIWKLVPHPR
'HQVLW\ $V SURSRVHG WKH SURMHFW¶V GHQVLW\ LV DSSUR[LPDWHO\ DERYH WKH 2QH 6NL +LOO 3ODFH SDUFHO¶V GHQVLW\ KRZHYHU WKH SURMHFW LV EURNHQ LQWR PXOWLSOH EXLOGLQJ PRGXOHV VLPLODU WR WKH GHVLJQ RI WKH *UDQG &RORUDGR%XLOGLQJVDQG$VQRWHGDERYH “…at the ends of the Peak 8 Base area the buildings will be lesser in height and density as compared to the center core of the Peak 8 Base.”
)RUUHIHUHQFH 7KLV3URSRVDO 86*6+HLJKW±¶´DWWKHHDVWFURVVJDEOH 'HQVLW\± VTIWEXLOGLQJV VTIWDYHUDJHIRUWZREXLOGLQJV VTIW2YHU2QH6NL+LOO3ODFH 0DVV±1RW'HWHUPLQHG 2QH6NL+LOO3ODFH 86*6+HLJKW±¶´DWHDVWDQGZHVWHQGULGJHV 'HQVLW\±VTIW 0DVV VTIW
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
3ODQ &RPSRQHQWV RI WKH 0DVWHU 3ODQ 7KH 0DVWHU 3ODQ LGHQWLILHV VSHFLILF SODQ FRPSRQHQWV VXFK DV FLUFXODWLRQWUDLOVDQGYLHZFRUULGRUV7KHODQJXDJHIURPWKH0DVWHU3ODQUHDGVDVIROORZV
“9) PLAN COMPONENTS:
The Town’s approval of this plan is based on the development being carried out substantially in keeping with the foregoing Notes on this Amended Sheet 4, the Fit Test on Sheet 5, the plan for Circulation and Trails on Sheet 6 and the View Corridors Study on Sheet 8. While it is acknowledged that the Fit Test and View Corridors shown on Sheets 5 and 8 are conceptual in nature and that actual locations, configurations and numbers of buildings have not been established by this plan, it is also acknowledged that a substantial deviation having a significant negative impact on the plaza areas, circulation, or views of lifts and the mountains may require a further amendment to the plan. In addition, in connection with the site specific development permits for buildings, the adjacent exterior improvements shall be included as a part of the development if it will not be necessary to remove such adjacent exterior improvements in connection with the future construction of other buildings. The plan for Circulation and Trails shown on Sheet 6 is not conceptual in nature and any significant deviation may require an amendment to this plan. In addition, to the extent not already existing, trails shall be constructed as and when improvements adjacent to such trail occur.”
Sheet 8 – View Corridor Study on Master Plan Proposed Hotel
65 9LHZ&RUULGRUV 6WDIIUHYLHZHGWKHSURSRVHGFRQFHSWDJDLQVWWKHYLHZFRUULGRUVWXG\UHIHUHQFHGLQWKH0DVWHU 3ODQ ,Q JHQHUDO WKH UHYLVHG FRQFHSW LV PRUH FRPSOLDQW ZLWK WKH FRQFHSWXDO SODQ DERYH FRQVLVWLQJ RI WKUHH EXLOGLQJVRQ6KHHW2IWKHWKUHHYLHZFRUULGRUVLGHQWLILHGLWDSSHDUVWKHUHYLVHGFRQFHSWPDLQWDLQVDOOWKH VXJJHVWHGYLHZFRUULGRUV$GGLWLRQDOO\Sheet 5 – Fit Test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
&LUFXODWLRQ 7KH 0DVWHU 3ODQ VKRZV WKDW SULPDU\ DFFHVV ZLOO EH WDNHQ RII RI 6NL +LOO 5RDG ZLWK D VHFRQGDU\ FRQQHFWLRQ RII RI &RXQW\ 5RDG 6DZ 0LOO 5XQ 5RDG $WUDIILFLPSDFWVWXG\ ZLOO EH UHTXLUHG DV SDUW RI WKH IXWXUH GHYHORSPHQW SHUPLW DSSOLFDWLRQ
7KH FRQFHSW DOVR HQYLVLRQVDVHSDUDWH Sheet 6 - Circulation DFFHVV IRU GHOLYHULHV Sheet 5 - Fit Test DQG JDUEDJH RII RI &RXQW\ 5RDG 6DZ 0LOO 5XQ 5RDG :KLOH LQ FRQFHSWVWDIIDFNQRZOHGJHVWKHEHQHILWVRIVHSDUDWLQJWKHDFFHVVRIJXHVWVDQGGHOLYHULHVZHGRQRWVXSSRUW XVLQJDORZYROXPHUHVLGHQWLDOURDGWRKDQGOHGHOLYHULHVDQGWUDVK'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQFRQFXURUKDYHDQ\ DGGLWLRQDOWKRXJKWVUHJDUGLQJWKLVFRQQHFWLRQ"
6WDIIKDVDOVRLQFOXGHGDQHPDLOUHFHLYHGIURPDQRZQHULQWKH)RXU2¶FORFN6XEGLYLVLRQDWWDFKHGWRWKLVUHSRUW UHJDUGLQJWKLVLVVXH
6WDII 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ ,Q VSLWH RI SRWHQWLDOO\ LQFUHDVLQJ WKH GHQVLW\ RI WKH GHYHORSPHQW XS WR WKH DSSOLFDQWVKDYHPDQDJHGWRSURGXFHDFRQFHSWWKDWZRUNVZLWKPRVWRIWKHPDQGDWHVDQGUHFRPPHQGDWLRQV RIWKH0DVWHU3ODQ,QSDUWLFXODUVWDIIWKLQNVWKHDSSOLFDQW¶VDSSURDFKWREXLOGLQJKHLJKWLVRQWKHULJKWWUDFNE\ EHLQJEHORZWKHUHFRPPHQGHGKHLJKWRI/DQG8VH'LVWULFW DQGEHLQJVXERUGLQDWHLQKHLJKWWR2QH6NL+LOO 3ODFH6WDIIDSSUHFLDWHVWKHUHYLVLRQVWRWKHFRQFHSWXDOSODQWKDWFRPPLWVWRVWHSSLQJGRZQWKHEXLOGLQJDQG EUHDNLQJXSWKHPDVVLQJRQWKHHDVWHUQIDoDGHWREHWWHUWUDQVLWLRQWRWKH)RXU2¶&ORFNDQG%RXOGHU5LGJH 6XEGLYLVLRQV%UHDNLQJXSDQGVWHSSLQJGRZQWKHHDVWHUQIDoDGHDOVRLPSURYHVWKHYLHZFRUULGRUV2YHUDOO WKHSURMHFWPDNHVJRRGXVHRIWKHPDWXUHWUHHVWDQGVWKDWZLOOSURYLGHDQLFHEXIIHUWRWKHDGMDFHQWQHLJKERUV 6WDIIQRWHVWKHSODFHPHQWRIEXLOGLQJVDOVRJLYHVDPRUHFRPIRUWDEOHGLVWDQFHDSSUR[LPDWHO\¶¶IURPWKH SURSHUW\OLQHDQGJUHDWHUWKDQ ¶IURPWKHDGMDFHQWKRPHVLWHVDVZHOO&LUFXODWLRQPD\EHDFKLHYDEOHDV SURSRVHGEXWVWDIIGRHVQRWVXSSRUWWKHVHFRQGDU\DFFHVVIRUGHOLYHULHVDQGJDUEDJHIURP6DZ0LOO5XQ5RDG +RZHYHUFLUFXODWLRQDQGSDUNLQJPXVWERWKEHORRNHGDWE\WKLUGSDUW\WUDQVSRUWDWLRQDQGSDUNLQJVWXGLHVDQG ORZHULQJWKHSDUNLQJUDWLRWRVSDFHVSHUURRPLVRIFRQFHUQEHFDXVHLWZRXOGEHDVLJQLILFDQWUHGXFWLRQ VSDFHVWRWDOIRUDURRPKRWHO/DVWO\WKHUHYLVHGFRQFHSWXDOGHVLJQQRZFRPSOLHVZLWKWKHFXUUHQW0DVWHU 3ODQ¶V UHFRPPHQGHG WRWDO YROXPH RI GHQVLW\ VLQFH WKH SURSRVHG GHQVLW\ KDV EHHQ EURNHQ LQWR VHYHUDO PRGXOHVDOORIZKLFKDUHOHVVWKDQ2QH6NL+LOO3ODFH¶VGHQVLW\6WDIIDSSUHFLDWHVWKHDSSOLFDQW¶VUHVSRQVHWR FXUHPRVWRIWKHSUHYLRXVO\LGHQWLILHGLVVXHVWKDWZHUHLQFRQIOLFWZLWKWKH0DVWHU3ODQ VLQJOHPRGXOHGHQVLW\ EXLOGLQJDERYHVWRULHVRQWKHHDVWHUQHGJHYLHZFRUULGRUVDQGHOLPLQDWLQJFLUFXODWLRQIURP6DZPLOO5XQ 5RDG 66 %DVHGRQVWDII¶VDQDO\VLVDWWKLVZRUNVHVVLRQZHKDYHWKHIROORZLQJTXHVWLRQVIRUWKH&RPPLVVLRQ ,VWKH&RPPLVVLRQFRPIRUWDEOHZLWKWKHJHQHUDOEXLOGLQJORFDWLRQVDQGSURSRVHGFRQQHFWLRQDERYHJUDGHWR HDFKRWKHUDVZHOODVWKHVLWHEXIIHULQJFRQFHSW" 6WDIIEHOLHYHVWKHSURSRVHGEXLOGLQJKHLJKWFDQFRPSO\ZLWK/DQG8VH'LVWULFW DQGEHVXERUGLQDWHLQKHLJKWWR WKHHDVWHUQFURVVJDEOHRI2QH6NL+LOO3ODFH'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQDJUHH" 'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQKDYHDQ\LQSXWUHJDUGLQJWKHUHTXHVWIRUDUHGXFWLRQLQSDUNLQJVSDFHV"
6WDIIILQGVFLUFXODWLRQPD\EHDFKLHYDEOHDVSURSRVHGPLQXVWKHVHFRQGDU\DFFHVVIRUGHOLYHULHVDQGJDUEDJH IURP6DZPLOO5XQ5RDG'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQDJUHH" 6WDIIILQGVWKHFRPPLWPHQWWRORZHULQJWKHHDVWHUQIDoDGHKHLJKWE\DYHUDJLQJVWRULHVDQGEUHDNLQJXSWKH EXLOGLQJVEHWWHUWUDQVLWLRQVWRWKHHDVWHUQVLQJOHIDPLO\QHLJKERUKRRGVDQGLPSURYHVWKHYLHZFRUULGRUVDV LGHQWLILHGE\WKH6KHHW)LW7HVWDQG6KHHW9LHZ&RUULGRU6WXG\'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQFRQFXU" 6WDIIILQGVWKHSURSRVDO¶VGHQVLW\EURNHQLQWRPXOWLSOHEXLOGLQJPRGXOHVFRXOGFRPSO\ZLWKWKH'HYHORSPHQW 3ODQRIWKH3HDN%DVHVHFWLRQRIWKH0DVWHU3ODQ'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQDJUHH" 'RHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQKDYHDQ\DGGLWLRQDOFRPPHQWVRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWGHVLJQDQGRUVFRSH" %DVHGRQWKHLQIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGGRHVWKH&RPPLVVLRQEHOLHYHWKHUHLVUHDVRQDEOHSRVVLELOLW\WKHSURSRVDO ZLWKXSWRDQDGGLWLRQDO6)(VRI7'5VFRXOGSDVVDSRLQWDQDO\VLVDWDIXWXUHIRUPDOUHYLHZSURFHVV"
67
'. !(%,8-756; ". % & ( 1 !! !#%' !' %" .% %! 1 "! %'!'(%& . "%% !&' ;% 2 "! %'!'(%&) "# !'% !' $(&' % &- ! ,"("%' !' ' '",'" #(&''%(!%&'!' %7<-756: !! ! ' "! ''&'#% '%&/"(!' ' !'")%,#%"(' )/&%&( '"' ' !-*#%"#"&' " "* !"%) (' "!"' ''&''" &(&&'' !(%,69- 756; !! !" && "! ' !. • "! %'!'(%&* " ,"(%# !'" ! ('*""% "%#% )( ! &'%('(%& !"% "!!'' "*% ) &")%"%,% - !"%%'" &(&'!' ,"!"% * ' ' &:!; &'%# !* ' #% )( !"% '" ! (!& ',(!%' !& ',/!+ # "' &#%"#"& " ' "!&! &! !+ '/ • %" ! && !* #%&&) *"%% "%&#%' &:!; &'%# !/! + # "' &#%"#"& " ' "!&!&! !+ '/ • "! %'!'(%&* " ''"&'## !' ( !"*!"!' &'%!& " ' & ''" !"!"% !* ' ' &:!; &'%# !/ • "! %'!'(%& !"* & !! !'0&"!%!%% !" % )% &' %"( %& !' %-!*# !'") ('' & ',"' &#%"#"& &&' %"( '% &'(,* * &(&'!' '"(%#"& ' "!"!' & '," #&& !#" !'&! ,& &/ & !"% ' "!* &( ''!' !"(%(#" ! % !%, !! !" && "!&( '' &(&$(!''"' &*"% &&& "!/ ' ' &#%"#"& !&-*%"! !'' '*!#&& !! !" && "!#" !' ! ,& &* ' "('% ") !!,"' #%"#"&!& ',%" ' & '/ ! ,"("%,"(%' !"!& %' "!- %% %! %! "! %'1!'(%& 68 69 70 EAST PEAK 8: FIT TEST EXHIBIT A
* 5 2 $ 1 1 3 ' ( & $ 2 . / 2 % 5 8 $ , ' /' 2 ,1 *
*5 $1'& 21 2/25 3($. $'2 %8,/ ',1*
$'2 &2/25 *5$1' /',1* .%8, 213($
21( 6.,+,// 723($. 3/$&(
(3
127( 3/$16$5()25),77(67385326(6 21/<$1'0$<1275(35(6(17),1$/'(6,*1 25&21),*85$7,21)257+(352-(&7
($673($. <
7 72:1 1
1 &
8 2817< :
2
2
& 7 ( ,& 9
5 &
( 7 2 6 6 2
6 8 5 ( :
6 1 & 1 %
& 7 $ <
' 5 / / , 1257+ 0 : $ 6 PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MAP DATE: 2018.01.04 SCALE: 1” = 80’-0” 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 .XOLFN&KULV
)URP 3XHVWHU-XOLD 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R .XOLFN&KULV *URVVKXHVFK3HWHU 6XEMHFW )ZG 6DZPLOO5XQ5RDG &RXQW\5RDG
^ĞŶƚĨƌŽŵŵLJŝWŚŽŶĞ ĞŐŝŶĨŽƌǁĂƌĚĞĚŵĞƐƐĂŐĞ͗
&ƌŽŵ͗ĂǀŝĚ,ĂƌƚŵĂŶфĚĂǀĞΛǁŽŽĚǁŝŶĚƐďƌĞĐŬ͘ĐŽŵх ĂƚĞ͗:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϱ͕ϮϬϭϴĂƚϭ͗ϭϯ͗ϯϵWDD^d dŽ͗ΗůŝŶĚƐĂLJŚΛĐŽ͘ƐƵŵŵŝƚ͘ĐŽ͘ƵƐΗфůŝŶĚƐĂLJŚΛĐŽ͘ƐƵŵŵŝƚ͘ĐŽ͘ƵƐх Đ͗ΗWƵĞƐƚĞƌ͕:ƵůŝĂΗфũƵůŝĂƉΛƚŽǁŶŽĨďƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞ͘ĐŽŵх͕ΗΖ>ŝnj,ĂƌƚŵĂŶ;ůŝnjŵĂƌŝĞŚĂƌƚŵĂŶΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵͿΖΗ фůŝnjŵĂƌŝĞŚĂƌƚŵĂŶΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵх͕ΗĞƌŝĐŵΛƚŽǁŶŽĨďƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞ͘ĐŽŵΗфĞƌŝĐŵΛƚŽǁŶŽĨďƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z ͗^ĂǁŵŝůůZƵŶZŽĂĚ͖ŽƵŶƚLJZŽĂĚϳϬϵ
>ŝŶĚƐĞLJ͕ ŶĐůŽƐĞĚŝƐĂůĞƚƚĞƌƚŚĂƚ/ƐĞŶƚƚŽLJŽƵŝŶƵŐƵƐƚŽĨϮϬϭϱ͘ /ƚůŽŽŬƐůŝŬĞƚŚŝƐŝƐƐƵĞŝƐĐŽŵŝŶŐƵƉĂŐĂŝŶĂƐƚŚĞdŽǁŶŽĨƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞŝƐƚĂůŬŝŶŐƚŽĂĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌĂŶĚsĂŝů ZĞƐŽƌƚƐĂďŽƵƚĂ,ŽƚĞůŝŶƚŚĞĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚĂƚƉĞĂŬϴʹƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞ^ŬŝƌĞĂ͘ /ƐĂǁƚŚĂƚĂĐĂƌĐŽƵŶƚĞƌǁĂƐŽŶƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚ͘ŽŶ͛ƚŬŶŽǁǁŚŽǁĂƐĐŽƵŶƚŝŶŐĐĂƌƐ͘ dŚŝƐƌŽĂĚŝƐƐƚŝůůĂŵĞƐƐǁŝƚŚĐŽŶƐƚĂŶƚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͕ĚƵƐƚ͕ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞŽĨĨƚŚĞƐŬŝĂƌĞĂ͕ĂŶĚƌƵƚƐŽǀĞƌ ƚŚĞLJĞĂƌƐ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚǁĂƐƉƌŽŵŝƐĞĚŵĂŶLJLJĞĂƌƐĂŐŽƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚǁŽƵůĚŐŽĂǁĂLJĂĨƚĞƌƚŚĞKŶĞ^Ŭŝ,ŝůůWůĂĐĞĐŽŵƉůĞdžǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͘ dŚĞ^ŬŝĂƌĞĂŶĞǀĞƌŚŽŶŽƌĞĚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽŵŝƐĞĂŶĚĐƌĞĂƚĞĚĂĐĐĞƐƐŽĨĨŽĨ^Ŭŝ,ŝůůZĚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚ͘ KƵƌĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝƐƚŚĂƚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐǁŝůůĞƐĐĂůĂƚĞĚƵĞƚŽĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌĞƐƐƵƌĞ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚŝƐĂĚĂŵĂŶƚƚŚĂƚŽƵƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƌŽĂĚŝƐŶŽƚƵƐĞĚĂƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶĂĐĐĞƐƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐŚŽƚĞů͘ &ƌŽŵŽƵƌƉĂƐƐĞĚĚĞĂůŝŶŐƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐŝƐƐƵĞ/ǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽŵĂŬĞƐƵƌĞŽƵƌŽƵŶƚLJZŽĂĚϳϬϵŝƐŶŽƚƐŬŝƉƉĞĚ ŽǀĞƌĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉƵƐŚďLJƚŚĞdŽǁŶŽĨƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞ͕sĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌ͘ dŚĞůĂƐƚƚŝŵĞƚŚŝƐŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚƚŚŝƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůZŽĂĚǁĂƐůĞĨƚŝŶůŝŵďŽďĞĐĂƵƐĞŝƚŝƐĂŽƵŶƚLJZŽĂĚƚŚĂƚ ĂĐĐĞƐƐĞƐdŽǁŶŽĨƌĞĐŬĞŶƌŝĚŐĞĂŶĚĂsĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͘ tĞĚŽŶŽƚǁĂŶƚƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚŝƐƐƵĞůĞĨƚŽƵƚƚŚŝƐƚŝŵĞ͘ ƚŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĨŽƌƚŚĞĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚŝƐŵĂƚƚĞƌ͘ David Hartman 'DYLG+DUWPDQ 83 32%R[ %UHFNHQULGJH&RORUDGR GDYH#ZRRGZLQGVEUHFNFRP )$; )URP 'DYLG+DUWPDQ>PDLOWR GDYH#ZRRGZLQGVEUHFNFRP@ 6HQW :HGQHVGD\$XJXVW 30 7R OLQGVD\K#FRVXPPLWFRXV 6XEMHFW 6DZPLOO5XQ5RDG &RXQW\5RDG >ŝŶĚƐĂLJ͕ zŽƵŚĂǀĞĂƐŬĞĚƵƐƚŽƉƌŝŽƌŝƚŝnjĞǁŚĂƚǁĞǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞĂƐŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐŽŶ^ĂǁŵŝůůZƵŶZŽĂĚ͕ŽƵŶƚLJZŽĂĚ ϳϬϵ͘ ηϭ͘tĞǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽƐĞĞƚŚĞsĂŝůƐZĞƐŽƌƚƐŽŵƉĂŶLJƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚŚĂǀĞĂŶŽƚŚĞƌĂĐĐĞƐƐďĞƐŝĚĞƐ^Ăǁŵŝůů ZƵŶZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŽĨĨ^Ŭŝ,ŝůůZŽĂĚ͘dŚŝƐƌŽĂĚƐŚŽƵůĚŶĞǀĞƌŚĂǀĞďĞĐŽŵĞƚŚĞƐŽůĞĂĐĐĞƐƐ ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐ͕ǀŝƐŝƚŽƌƐĂŶĚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐŽĨsĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƐ͖ĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞůŽĐŬĞƌ ƌŽŽŵƐ͘EŽƚŽŶůLJŚĂƐƵƐĂŐĞŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚ͕ŝƚŚĂƐďĞĐŽŵĞĚĂŶŐĞƌŽƵƐ͕ĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůůLJǁŚĞŶĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐĂƌĞůĂƚĞĂŶĚ ƐƉĞĞĚŝŶŐ͘dŚĞLJƐŝŵƉůLJĚŽŶ͛ƚĐĂƌĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŚĂƐďĞĞŶƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽŶƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚϮϰͬϳƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĚŝǀĞƌƐŝŽŶĂŶĚŝƚ ŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƐǁŝƚŚƐƉĞĐŝĂůĞǀĞŶƚƐ͘^ĞŵŝͲƚƌƵĐŬƐĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůĞǀĞŶƚƐƵƐĞƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚĂůƐŽ͘tĞŬŶŽǁƚŚĞ ĐŽƵŶƚLJŚĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚĂƐĂďůĞƚŽŚĂŶĚůĞϱϬϬĐĂƌƐĂĚĂLJ͘tĞĚŝƐĂŐƌĞĞǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƌĂƚŝŶŐ͘dŚĞ ĐŽƵŶƚLJĐŽƵůĚĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚĂƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƵƐĞŽŶůLJĂŶĚĨŽƌĐĞsĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƐƚŽďƵŝůĚƚŚĞŝƌŽǁŶĂĐĐĞƐƐ ŽĨĨ^Ŭŝ,ŝůůZŽĂĚ͘ ǀĞƌLJŽƚŚĞƌďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚĨŽƌƚŚĞƐŬŝĂƌĞĂŚĂƐĂĐĐĞƐƐŽĨ^Ŭŝ,ŝůůZŽĂĚĂƚƚŚĞ ĂƐĞŽĨWĞĂŬϴ͘ ηϮ͘dŚŝƐŐƌĂǀĞůƌŽĂĚŚĂƐŶŽƚŚĞůƉƵƉǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘/ƚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚĂŶƚůLJƌƵƚƚĞĚ͘dŚĞŐƌĂǀĞůŚĂƐ ďĞĞŶǁŽƌŬĞĚĚŽǁŶůĞĂǀŝŶŐŽŶůLJƚŚĞĨŝŶĞƐĂŶĚĚƵƐƚŽŶƚŚĞƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͘dŚŝƐLJĞĂƌƚŚĞƌŽĂĚďĞĐĂŵĞ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚůLJŵƵĚĚLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐŬŝĂƌĞĂŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐŝƚ͘ĞĐĂƵƐĞƚŚĞƐŬŝĂƌĞĂŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶƐƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚ͕ƚŚĞ ĐƵůǀĞƌƐĂŶĚĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞĚŝƚĐŚĞƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŝŐŶŽƌĞĚĂŶĚŚĂǀĞŶŽƚďĞĞŶŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ͘dŚĞƵƐĞŽĨDĂŐŶĞƐŝƵŵ ŚůŽƌŝĚĞŚĞůƉƐĨŽƌƐŚŽƌƚƉĞƌŝŽĚƐŽĨƚŝŵĞďƵƚĚŽĞƐŶ͛ƚůĂƐƚĂŶĚŚĂƐĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽƚŚĞ ǁĂƚĞƌƐŚĞĚ͘dŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǁĞƐĞĞŝƐƚŽƉĂǀĞƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚ͘ ηϯ͘dŚŝƐŽƉƚŝŽŶ͕ǁŚŝĐŚǁĞĨŝŶĚƵŶĂĐĐĞƉƚĂďůĞĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͕ŝƐƚŽƌĞͲŐƌĂǀĞůƚŚĞƌŽĂĚĂŶĚĨŝdž ŝƚƚŽƚŚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐŽĨĂŐƌĂǀĞůƌŽĂĚƚŽϭϱLJĞĂƌƐĂŐŽďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚŝƐƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƐƚĂƌƚĞĚ͘ /ŶĐŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ͕ďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽŶƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚĚƵĞƚŽsĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJ ŽƉƚŝŽŶǁĞƐĞĞŝƐƚŽŐĞƚƚŚĞŵŽĨĨ^ĂǁŵŝůůZƵŶZŽĂĚ͘ ǀĞƌLJŽƚŚĞƌŽƉƚŝŽŶǁĞĐĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƐƐƚŽŝŵƉƌŽǀĞƚŚĞ ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƌŽĂĚƐƵƌĨĂĐĞǁŽƵůĚďĞĂĐŽƐƚƚŽƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞŚŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐŽŶ^ĂǁŵŝůůZƵŶ ZŽĂĚ͘tĞĨĞĞůƐƚƌŽŶŐůLJƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐƐŚŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĂsĂŝůZĞƐŽƌƚƐĐŽƐƚǁŚĞŶƚŚĞLJĚŝǀĞƌƚĞĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĞďĂƐĞŽĨWĞĂŬϴƚŽƚŚŝƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƌŽĂĚ͘/ƚƐŚŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞŶĞǀĞƌŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚ͘dĞŶLJĞĂƌƐĂŐŽǁĞǁĞƌĞ ƉƌŽŵŝƐĞĚƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂƚƚŚĞĂƐĞŽĨWĞĂŬϴǁŽƵůĚŶŽƚŝŵƉĂĐƚŽƵƌƌŽĂĚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƚŚĞĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞůŽĐŬĞƌƌŽŽŵƐǁŽƵůĚďĞŵŽǀĞĚŽĨĨWĞĂŬϴǁŝƚŚŝŶĂĨĞǁLJĞĂƌƐ͘dŚŝƐŽďǀŝŽƵƐůLJ ŚĂƐŶŽƚŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚĂŶĚǁĞĨĞĞůǁĞ͛ǀĞďĞĞŶƚĂŬĞŶĂĚǀĂŶƚĂŐĞŽĨ͘tĞĚŽŶŽƚƐĞĞĂŶLJĐŚĂŶŐĞƐƚŽƚŚŝƐ ƐŝƚƵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ'ƌĂŶĚsĂĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͕ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶĂƚƚŚĞ'ŽŶĚŽůĂ >ŽƚĂŶĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŽWĂƌŬŝƚLJďĞŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƌƉƌŝŽƌŝƚŝĞƐ͘ tĞƌĞĂůůLJĂƉƉƌĞĐŝĂƚĞLJŽƵƌĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚŝƐŵĂƚƚĞƌĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶŚĞůƉŝŶŐƵƐŝŵƉƌŽǀĞƚŚŝƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 84
ĂǀĞĂŶĚ>ŝnj,ĂƌƚŵĂŶ 'DYLG+DUWPDQ :RRG:LQGV,QF $OSLQH6SRUWV//& 32%R[ 10DLQ6W %UHFNHQULGJH&2 & GDYH#ZRRGZLQGVEUHFNFRP ZZZZRRGZLQGVEUHFNFRP
85
Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Helen Cospolich, Town Clerk Date: 1/17/2018 Subject: Election Code Emergency Ordinance
This ordinance would allow the Town Council to cancel a municipal election by resolution when there are only Council/ Mayoral seats on the ballot, and no more candidates than offices (seats) available have submitted nomination petitions by the deadline specified in the Municipal Election Code. In addition, the election may only be canceled if no write-in affidavits have been submitted by the 64th day before the election, and this ordinance requires any potential write-in candidate to file an affidavit of intent with the Town Clerk prior to that deadline.
The Colorado Revised Statutes Municipal Election Code (CRS 31-10-507) allows municipalities to cancel an election as long as an ordinance, as specified above, is in place prior to the 64th day before the election. Given that the Town Clerk believes there may be a possibility to cancel the 2018 election, the deadline to have this ordinance in place is January 29th, 2018, and an emergency ordinance is necessary due to the short timeframe.
Canceling the municipal election under these circumstances would save the Town money and time when the seats are otherwise guaranteed. The Municipal Election Code does not allow municipalities to cancel an election without this ordinance in place. Staff will be available to answer questions.
86 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/ADOPTION AS EMERGENCY 2 ORDINANCE – JAN. 23 3 4 Additions To The Current Breckenridge Town Code Are 5 Indicated By Bold + Double Underline; Deletions By Strikeout 6 7 COUNCIL BILL NO. ___ 8 9 Series 2018 10 11 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF TITLE 1 OF THE 12 BRECKENRIDGE TOWN CODE CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS 13 14 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, 15 COLORADO: 16 17 Section 1. Chapter 12 of Title 1 of the Breckenridge Town Code is amended by the 18 addition of new a Section 1-12-9, which shall read in its entirety as follows: 19 20 1-12-9: WRITE-IN CANDIDATE AFFIDAVIT: No write-in vote for any 21 Town office shall be counted unless an affidavit of intent has been filed with 22 the Town Clerk by the person whose name is written in prior to sixty four 23 (64) days before the date of the election indicating that such person desires 24 the office and is qualified to assume the duties of that office if elected. 25 26 Section 2. Chapter 12 of Title 1 of the Breckenridge Town Code is amended by the 27 addition of new a Section 1-12-10, which shall read in its entirety as follows: 28 29 1-12-10: ELECTION MAY BE CANCELLED – WHEN: If the only matter 30 before the voters is the election of persons to Town office and if, at the close 31 of business on the sixty fourth (64th) day before the election, there are not 32 more candidates than offices to be filled at such election, including write-in 33 candidates filing affidavits of intent pursuant to Section 1-12-9 of this 34 Chapter, the Town Clerk, if instructed by resolution of the Town Council 35 either before or after such date, shall cancel the election and by resolution 36 declare the candidates elected. Upon such declaration the candidates shall be 37 deemed elected. Notice of cancellation shall be published by the Town Clerk, 38 if possible, in order to inform the electors of the Town, and notice of such 39 cancellation shall be posted at each polling place and in not less than one (1) 40 other public place. 41 42 Section 3. Except as specifically amended hereby, the Breckenridge Town Code, and the 43 various secondary codes adopted by reference therein, shall continue in full force and effect. 44
87 1 Section 4. The Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge hereby finds, determines, and 2 declares that an emergency exists and that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate 3 preservation of public property, health, welfare, peace or safety. The only matter before the 4 voters at the April 3, 2018 regular Town election will be the election of persons to Town office, 5 and the Town Council has been advised by the Town Clerk that it appears that there will not be 6 more candidates than offices to be filled at such election, including write-in candidates filing 7 affidavits of intent as required by Section 1 of this ordinance. The Town Council finds and 8 determines that it would be in the best interest of the Town for there to be in place a mechanism 9 to allow for the cancellation of the April 3, 2018 regular election if, in fact, there will not be 10 more candidates than offices to be filled at such election. However, in order to comply with 11 Section 31-10-507, which is part of the Colorado Municipal Election Code of 1965, this 12 ordinance needs to be in effect not less than sixty four (64) days prior to the April 3, 2018 regular 13 Town election. This means that this ordinance cannot be adopted as a non-emergency ordinance. 14 For this reason, the Town Council further determines that the adoption of this ordinance as an 15 emergency ordinance is in the best interest of the citizens of the Town of Breckenridge. 16 17 Section 5. Pursuant to Section 5.11 of the Breckenridge Town Charter this Ordinance 18 shall take effect and be in full force upon adoption of this ordinance by the affirmative votes of at 19 least five (5) members of the Town Council. 20 21 Section 6. This ordinance shall be published in full within ten (10) days after adoption, or 22 as soon thereafter as possible, as required by Section 5.11 of the Breckenridge Town Charter. 23 24 ADOPTED AND APPROVED as an Emergency Ordinance this ___ day of ______, 2018. 25 2018. 26 27 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 28 municipal corporation 29 30 31 32 By:______33 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 34 35 ATTEST: 36 37 38 39 ______40 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 41 Town Clerk 42 43
88 1 APPROVED IN FORM 2 3 4 5 ______6 Town Attorney 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 300-24\Election Emergency Ordinance_2 (01-17-18) 89 Memo
To: Town Council Work Session
From: Scott Reid, Open Space & Trails Department
Date: 2018-01-23 15:00:00
Subject: River Park Naming Resolution (Resolution)
90 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Open Space Staff
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: River Park Renaming Resolution
During Council’s last work session on January 9, 2018, Council provided support and direction to staff for renaming Oxbow Park to River Park.
As Council will recall, DTJ Design originally coined the Oxbow Park name as part of the 2008 Blue River Corridor Improvement Plan. The original intent of the moniker was to highlight the addition of an oxbow to the river corridor (an oxbow is defined as a U-shaped river bend). The Oxbow Park name was therefore used in the GOCO grant application and the associated Council resolution in 2016. However, as the park design evolved, the “oxbow” was deleted from the river corridor and the design was modified to include more mountain, forest, river, and other nature elements. The River Park name is broader and more reflective of the long term park vision.
Under the Town’s 2014 Naming Policy, a resolution must be approved to rename the park. Please see the attached resolution.
Staff will be happy to discuss this matter with you on Tuesday.
91 1 1 FOR WORKSESSION/ADOPTION – JAN. 23 2 3 RESOLUTION NO. ____ 4 5 Series 2018 6 7 A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE NAME OF “OXBOW PARK” TO “RIVER PARK” 8 9 WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 13, Series 2014 the Town Council adopted certain 10 policies to establish a systematic and consistent methodology for the naming of Town-owned 11 properties; and 12 13 WHEREAS, the Town owns and operates the public park commonly known as “Oxbow 14 Park;” and 15 16 WHEREAS, the Town Council has been requested to formally change the name of 17 “Oxbow Park” to “River Park;” and 18 19 WHEREAS, the Town Council has considered the request, and finds and determines that 20 the public park currently known as “Oxbow Park” should be formally renamed “River Park;” and 21 22 WHEREAS, in considering this renaming request the Town Council has given due and 23 proper consideration to the polices and procedures set forth in Resolution No. 13, Series 2014. 24 25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 26 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 27 28 Section 1. The public park owned and operated by the Town known as “Oxbow Park” is 29 renamed and shall hereafter be known as “River Park.” All references in Town documents to 30 “Oxbow Park” shall be taken to mean “Oxbow Park” without formal amendment. 31 32 Section 2. The property name established in Section 1 of this resolution may be changed 33 by the Town Council in accordance with Section 6 of Resolution No. 13, Series 2014, or any 34 successor resolution or naming policy of the Town. 35 36 Section 3. This resolution is effective upon adoption. 37 38 RESOLUTION APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ___, 2018. 39 40 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE 41 42 43 44 By:______45 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 46 ATTEST: 92 1 2 3 4 ______5 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 6 7 Town Clerk 8 9 APPROVED IN FORM 10 11 12 13 ______14 Town Attorney Date 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 500-363\River Park Renaming Resolution (01-16-18) 93 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Chris Kulick, AICP, Planner III
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: Miller Annexation Agreement Amendment Request
The Town Council received an Annexation Agreement Amendment request for the property located at 13545 Colorado State Highway 9, known as the Stan Miller Property. The applicants have requested this amendment as the first step to potentially allow a future concrete batch plant operation on their property. The annexation agreement specified the development of 162 units of residential housing, including 105 deed restricted workforce housing units, to be developed over eighteen years, in two phases. The Annexation Agreement also acknowledged the operations of Stan Miller Inc., which is an industrial use, would likely continue for 10 years from the date April 24, 2008. The Miller property was identified in the Annexation Agreement as part of Phase II and its development would commence after the Phase I development was completed. The Phase I property is not owned by the Miller’s but by Braddock Holdings, a subsidiary of Breckenridge Lands, LLC. Currently the Phase I property is not under development and staff is not aware of any plans for the owners to begin development of the property at this time. As noted above, the Annexation Agreement Amendment is the first of three steps required to have a batch plant approved on the property. Since the property is subject to the Annexation Agreement and Miller Master Plan which specify the phasing out of the current industrial use in 2018 and the recommended land use as residential and mixed use, both the Annexation Agreement and Master Plan will need to be modified to allow an industrial use such as a concrete batch plant. Below describes the three steps required for a potential concrete batch plant approval:
1. Annexation Agreement Modification – The first step of the process is to modify the existing Annexation Agreement’s section 3. Proposed Use of the Master Planned Property, subsection d. Phasing; Extended Vested Property Rights to extend the current operations of Stan Miller Inc., which are industrial in nature, to December 2027, and allow for an additional industrial use of a concrete batch plant. 2. Master Plan Modification Class A Combined Hearing – This would be a modification to the Current Miller Master Plan to add Industrial use as an allowed land use for a limited to duration to select areas of the Miller Master Plan. 3. Batch Plant Review Class A Combined Hearing – This would be the actual review of the batch plant site plan. A site plan, detailed information about the types of equipment to be used and a detailed narrative of proposed operation are required as part of this application. Staff Recommendation: Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to amend the current Annexation Agreement as a first step to potentially allow a concrete batch plant. Staff has come to this recommendation based on the absence of residential development in the Phase I area. Furthermore, there are existing industrial uses on the owner’s property that have been in existence for several decades without any conflict with neighboring properties. The proposed amendment also has a sunset date for industrial uses in 2027. And lastly there is a need for locally sourced concrete for current development.
94 1 Staff will be available at the work session to answer any questions pertaining to the attached Resolution.
Page 2 95
96 1 FOR WORKSESSION/ADOPTION – JAN. 23 2 3 RESOLUTION NO. _____ 4 5 SERIES 2018 6 7 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND 8 RESTATED ANNEXATION AGREEMENT WITH SMI LAND, LLC, A 9 COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 10 11 WHEREAS, an Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement, dated as of January 12, 12 2010 and recorded in the Summit County, Colorado real estate records on February 26, 2010 at 13 Reception No. 934610, was entered into among the Town, Braddock Holdings LLC, and SMI 14 (“Agreement”); and
15 WHEREAS, the real property that is the subject of the Agreement was subdivided by the 16 recording of a plat of Miller Subdivision in the Summit County, Colorado real estate records on 17 April 24, 2008 at Reception No. 886225 (“Miller Subdivision”); and
18 WHEREAS, SMI now owns Tracts A and E, Miller Subdivision; and 19 20 WHEREAS, SMI has proposed an amendment to the Master Plan for Miller Subdivision 21 (“Master Plan”) concerning Tracts A and E that requires an amendment to the Agreement; and 22 23 WHEREAS, the only property affected by the proposed amendment to the Master Plan 24 and this Amendment are Tracts A and E, Miller Subdivision, which are owned by SMI; and 25 26 WHEREAS, the Town and SMI have come to an agreement with respect to the terms and 27 conditions of a proposed Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement, a copy 28 of which is marked Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and 29 30 WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Breckenridge has reviewed the proposed 31 Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement, and finds and determines that the 32 approval of the proposed Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement would 33 be in the best interests of the Town and its citizens. 34 35 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF 36 BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO: 37 38 Section 1. The Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement between 39 the Town and SMI Land, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (Exhibit “A” hereto), is 40 approved and the Town Manager is authorized, empowered, and directed to execute such 41 agreement for and on behalf of the Town of Breckenridge. 42 43 Section 2. This resolution is effective upon adoption. 44 97 1 RESOLUTION APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ___, 2018. 2 3 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE 4 5 6 7 By:______8 Eric S. Mamula, Mayor 9 10 ATTEST: 11 12 13 14 ______15 Helen Cospolich, CMC, 16 Town Clerk 17 18 APPROVED IN FORM 19 20 21 22 ______23 Town Attorney Date 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 1300-49\Resolution Approving Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement (01-16-18) 98 1 Additions To The Current Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement Are 2 Indicated By Bold + Double Underline; Deletions By Strikeout 3 4 AMENDMENT 5 TO 6 AMENDED AND RESTATED ANNEXATION AGREEMENT 7 8 THIS AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED ANNEXATION 9 AGREEMENT (“Amendment”) is dated as of ______, 2018 and is 10 between the TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado municipal corporation (“Town”) and 11 SMI LAND, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (“SMI”). 12 13 WHEREAS, an Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement, dated as of January 12, 14 2010 and recorded in the Summit County, Colorado real estate records on February 26, 2010 at 15 Reception No. 934610, was entered into among the Town, Braddock Holdings LLC, and SMI 16 (“Agreement”); and
17 WHEREAS, the real property that is the subject of the Agreement was subdivided by the 18 recording of a plat of Miller Subdivision in the Summit County, Colorado real estate records on 19 April 24, 2008 at Reception No. 886225 (“Miller Subdivision”); and
20 WHEREAS, SMI now owns Tracts A and E, Miller Subdivision; and 21 22 WHEREAS, SMI has proposed an amendment to the Master Plan for Miller Subdivision 23 (“Master Plan”) concerning Tracts A and E that requires an amendment to the Agreement; and 24 25 WHEREAS, the only property affected by the proposed amendment to the Master Plan 26 and this Amendment are Tracts A and E, Miller Subdivision, which are owned by SMI; and 27 28 WHEREAS, Town and SMI have come to an agreement with respect to the terms and 29 conditions of the amendment of the Agreement, as more fully set forth hereafter. 30 31 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, promises, and covenants contained herein, 32 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby 33 acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 34 35 1. The first paragraph of Section 3.2(d) is hereby deleted and the following is 36 substituted therefor: 37 38 (d) Phasing; Extended Vested Property Rights. The Town acknowledges 39 that SMI has sold Tract B to Braddock, and that Braddock intends to develop 40 Tract B as soon as possible. The development of Tract B is planned to include 22 41 Restricted Units and 24 Unrestricted Units. The Town further acknowledges that 42 SMI intends to continue the current operations of Stan Miller, Inc. on Tracts A
AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Page 1 99
1 and E for approximately 10 years and that development of Units on Tracts A and 2 E is not likely to occur until after those current operations cease. With respect to 3 Tracts A and E, the Town and SMI further agree that until December 31, 4 2027: (i) the current industrial operations of Stan Miller, Inc. on such 5 property may be continued; and (ii) the approved uses on such property are 6 amended to include the operation of a concrete batch plant, or similar 7 industrial uses, and such additional uses may be approved by a development 8 permit issued by the Town.
9 2. This Amendment will not become effective and may not be recorded until an 10 amendment to the Master Plan authorizing the change to the Master Plan described in Section 1 11 of this Amendment has been approved. 12 13 3. Except as specifically provided for in this Amendment, all other terms and 14 conditions of the Agreement will remain in full force and effect. 15 16 TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, a Colorado 17 municipal corporation 18 19 20 21 By: ______22 Rick G. Holman, Town Manager 23 24 ATTEST: 25 26 27 28 ______29 Helen Cospolich CMC, 30 Town Clerk 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Page 2 100
1 SMI LAND, LLC, a Colorado limited liability 2 company 3 4 5 6 By:______7 Kermit Miller, Manager 8 9 10 STATE OF COLORADO ) 11 ) ss. 12 COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) 13 14 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of 15 ______, 2018, by Rick G. Holman, Town Manager, and Helen Cospolich 16 CMC, Town Clerk, of the Town of Breckenridge, a Colorado municipal corporation. 17 18 WITNESS my hand and official seal. 19 20 My commission expires: ______. 21 22 23 ______24 Notary Public 25 26 27 STATE OF COLORADO ) 28 ) ss. 29 COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) 30 31 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of 32 ______, 2018, by Kermit Miller as Manager of SMI Land, LLC, a Colorado 33 limited liability company. 34 35 WITNESS my hand and official seal. 36 37 My commission expires: ______. 38 39 40 ______41 Notary Public 42 43 44 1300-49\Amendment to Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement_2 (01-16-18)
AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Page 3 101
Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Shannon Smith, Capital Projects Manager
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: Public Projects Update
Rec Center Renovation and Tennis Center Construction
Schedule: The 1/12 “Debut for You” public opening of the Recreation Center renovation area was a success, with over 400 guests taking advantage of free daily admission to the facility. Recreation Center staff offered hourly tours of the new space and tour participants expressed appreciation for the opportunity to explore the new area and ask questions of staff. The Mayor’s Coffee Talk was well attended, although many of the questions pertained to topics other than the Recreation Center. Demolition within the future administrative and youth wing areas has begun and a lengthy punch list is being addressed within the now-open fitness wing.
The Breckenridge Tennis Center is getting close to opening, with much of the finish work underway. The floors have now been sealed, fixtures in the locker rooms are being installed, and the front desk installation is pending. Staff is still anticipating opening the facility by the end of January.
The complete Recreation Center renovation project is scheduled to be completed in April 2018. More information on this project is available at www.BreckRecRenovation.com.
Budget:
Project Funding 2016 2017 Total CIP Budget 550,000 7,150,000 7,700,000 CIP Supplemental 9,500,000 9,500,000 Total Budget 17,200,000
Broadband Update
Schedule: The Broadband project has taken a substantial step forward with the selection of Foresite Group as our consultant. Foresite will proceed with next steps, which will involve information gathering and asset evaluation. Once those steps are completed, Foresite will produce for us a network design and implementation plan, as well as ownership, operations, and financial modeling. With this information in hand, staff can present a comprehensive and detailed analysis to Council to inform a “go/no go” decision. We will be talking with Foresite to establish the timeframe for the delivery of this report.
The current scope, as described above, will cost $130K. Staff will request to roll the $75K budgeted for the broadband study in 2017 to 2018. We would like to request an additional $55K if Council agrees to the expanded project scope. We have applied for a $22K grant from DOLA for this engagement and are fairly confident our project will qualify, but cannot be 100% sure until we hear from DOLA. If we receive the grant, the net increase in budget for this phase of the project is $33K. 102 1 CIP projects with no updates:
River Park (updated 1-9-18) Kingdom Park Shade Structure Ski Hill Wall Reconstruction Roadway Resurfacing Warrior’s Mark Paving and Turnaround Ball Field LED Lights Indoor Ice Rink Lights Blue River Habitat and Landscaping (updated 11-28-17) Sawmill Creek Culvert Repair (updated 10-10-17) Pool Area Lights and Window Replacement (updated 9-26-17) Turf Installation on Outdoor Ice Sheet (updated 9-26-17) Ski Hill Road Reconstruction by Alpine Metro District (updated 8-22-17) Morning Star Culvert Repair (updated 8-8-17) Outdoor Ice Rink Bleacher Heating (updated 4-25-17) Riverwalk Improvements & Minor Repairs
Page 2 103 Workforce Housing Committee Report January 9, 2018-12pm Laurie Best
The Housing Committee held a special meeting on January 9th. Both Committee members (Mike Dudick and Wendy Wolfe) were present. Laurie Best, Nichole Rex, Peter Grosshuesch, and Rick Holman were also present. Representatives from the Finance Department (Heather Pezzella and Leslie Fischer) attended the Short Term Rental Discussion and David O’Neil, Courtney Kenady, and Alicia Donovan from Poplar Homes attended the Lincoln Park Pricing Discussion. Following are notes from the discussion:
Short Term Rental: Laurie advised the Committee that the Finance Department will be the lead department for the Town’s short term rental program. Leslie led the discussion; the goal was to begin to identify the Town’s goals for managing short term rentals in the community.
Committee Comments: There was consensus that the most significant issues that should be addressed with any regulations/fees are the equity issues (commercial use that is taxed and treated as a residential use), mitigation of employee/jobs created by STR, neighborhood impacts, community preservation, potential loss of long term local housing, and monitoring and enforcement. The Finance Department will begin identifying strategies to address these issues and prepare a presentation for the full Council.
Lincoln Park Pricing: Laurie advised the Committee that the sale prices for the last deed restricted units in Lincoln Park exceed the maximum sale prices that is calculated in accordance with a pricing formula that was established in the annexation agreement negotiated in 2014. Staff advised the developer back in summer/fall of 2017 that the prices were too high. Closings are expected in late January/early February and the developer is asking the Committee and the Council to allow a price increase based on cost escalation. He indicated that because the pricing formula relies on AMI and an higher than prevailing interest rate, he has been unable to increase sale price even though his construction costs have increased by approximately 20%.
Laurie explained the pricing formula and the obligation for the developer to provide a specified number of units affordable at different price points. Of the 226 deed restricted units 15 must target 80% AMI, 10 @ 90% AMI, 81 @ 100% AMI, 26 @ 110% AMI, 86 @ 120% AMI, and 8 @ 150% AMI. Only 15 100% AMI units and 8 120% AMI units remain in Phases 3 and 4. The developer is asking permission to increase the maximum permissible sale price for these 22 units by 3.7%.
Laurie explained that the majority of the buyers in Lincoln Park are opting to add capital improvements and considerable upgrades which creates some concerns about long term affordability, but there still is significant demand for these units and they do serve a certain segment of the workforce. Given that this request is limited to the last 22 of 226 units, and recognizing that costs have increased and AMI has declined (which was unexpected), staff is OK with the request.
Committee Comments: The Committee acknowledged the challenge the developer is facing because his sale prices have been 104 capped, primarily because of the decline in AMI since 2014, while costs have increased. Since this change would require Council action (Resolution to Amend the Annexation Agreement) the Committee supported referring this to the full Council.
The Committee meeting adjourned at 2pm
105 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Rick Holman, Town Manager Date: 1/18/2018 Subject: Committee Reports
The Liquor and Marijuana Licensing Authority Annual Report is attached.
COMMUNICATIONS January 17, 2018 Haley Littleton
Analytics
106 1 Instagram
991 followers – averaging 30-40 per week, can do paid promotions to get more profile visits and/or likes
*will need to add to the number of daily/monthly tweets but profile visitors and mentions show an increased engagement with tweets that are going out.
Logo
We have received all the files and full standards/guidelines from Dave and new logo is being implemented across Town departments.
Campaigns
In process of developing campaigns and communication plans for the 2nd Water Treatment Plant and Parking Structure, developing more information for all the Sustainable Breck pages in conjunction with our renewable energy goals. For our Breck Bag campaign, we will have a large digital push with ads being placed in publications throughout Summit County.
Committees* Representative Report Status CAST Mayor Mamula/ Erin Gigliello No Meeting/Report CDOT Rick Holman No Meeting/Report CML Rick Holman No Meeting/Report I-70 Coalition Rick Holman No Meeting/Report Mayors, Managers & Commissioners Mayor Mamula/ Rick Holman No Meeting/Report Liquor and Marijuana Licensing Authority Helen Cospolich Attached Summit Stage Advisory Board James Phelps No Meeting/Report Police Advisory Committee Interim Chief Nicola Erb No Meeting/Report CMC Advisory Committee Rick Holman No Meeting/Report Recreation Advisory Committee Jenise Jensen/Scott Reid No Meeting/Report Workforce Housing Committee Laurie Best No Meeting/Report Child Care Advisory Committee Jennifer McAtamney No Meeting/Report Breckenridge Events Committee Shannon Haynes No Meeting/Report Parking and Transit Taskforce (Breck Forward) Shannon Haynes No Meeting/Report Communications Haley Littleton Included Note: Reports provided by the Mayor and Council Members are listed in the council agenda.
107 Page 2
November 30, 2017 Financial Reports
Department of Finance
Breckenridge Ski Area Opening Day for the 2017/2018 season - November 10, 2017
108 Executive Summary November 30, 2017 This report covers the first eleven months of 2017. We are tracking ahead of budget and prior year results year- to-date. November is largely reflective of October tax collections. We are approximately $3.92M over 2017 budgeted revenues in the Excise fund. This is largely the result of Sales Tax exceeding budget by $1.94M and prior year by $1.24M. Additionally, Real Estate Transfer Tax is $1.81M over budget and up $986k over prior year. See the Tax Basics section of these financial reports for more detail on the sales, accommodations, and real estate transfer taxes. Expenditures are holding the line, with the General Fund tracking below YTD budgeted expense amount (see General Fund Expenditures Summary for details).
ExciseYTD Actual vs. Budget - by Source
$18,000,000
$16,000,000
$14,000,000 YTD Actual $12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000 YTD Budget
$2,000,000
$- SALES TAX ACCOM TAX RETT OTHER
YTD Actual Revenues - Excise OTHER 2% RETT 23%
ACCOM TAX 9% SALES TAX 66%
Prior YTD Prior Annual YTD Actual YTD Budget % of Budget Annual Budget Actual Actual SALES TAX $ 16,903,845 $ 14,965,571 113% $ 19,310,000 $ 15,664,197 $ 20,758,147 ACCOMMODATIONS TAX 2,412,280 2,258,492 107% 2,873,500 2,322,112 2,992,963 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER 5,789,842 3,978,032 146% 4,350,000 4,803,832 5,240,098 OTHER* 576,705 565,476 102% 738,695 656,423 842,345 TOTAL $ 25,682,672 $ 21,767,571 118% $ 27,272,195 $ 23,446,565 $ 29,833,553 * Other includes Franchise Fees (Telephone, Public Service and Cable), Cigarette Tax, and Investment Income
109 The Tax Basics
Net Taxable Sales by Industry‐YTD 2016 2016/2017 $ 2016/2017 2017 Description YTD 2014 YTD 2015 YTD 2016 % of Total YTD 2017 Change % Change % of Total Retail $97,253,065 $111,401,319 $120,989,453 26.27% $125,624,380 $4,634,927 3.83% 26.25% Weedtail $7,015,797 $6,944,783 $8,179,205 1.78% $8,559,796 $380,591 4.65% 1.79% Restaurant / Bar $85,845,994 $94,415,990 $103,329,967 22.44% $110,319,960 $6,989,992 6.76% 23.05% Short‐Term Lodging $93,732,880 $107,387,158 $119,726,128 26.00% $120,746,349 $1,020,220 0.85% 25.23% Grocery / Liquor $46,547,246 $49,826,562 $53,030,690 11.52% $54,554,068 $1,523,378 2.87% 11.40% Construction $20,008,152 $27,256,713 $29,998,568 6.51% $33,097,142 $3,098,575 10.33% 6.92% Utility $24,338,113 $24,138,619 $23,345,189 5.07% $24,145,456 $800,268 3.43% 5.04% Other* $1,520,850 $1,396,740 $1,877,458 0.41% $1,561,910 ($315,548) ‐16.81% 0.33% Total $376,262,099 $422,767,882 $460,476,658 100.00% $478,609,060 $18,132,402 3.94% 100.00% * Other includes activities in Automobiles and Undefined Sales. Utility Utility YTD 2016 Other* 5% YTD 2017 5% Construction Other* 0% Construction 7% 0% 7% Retail Retail 26% 26%
Grocery / Grocery / Liquor Liquor 12% 12% Weedtail Weedtail 2% 2% Short‐Term Short‐Term Restaurant / Lodging Lodging Restaurant / Bar Bar 25% 26% 22% 23%
$140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 YTD 2014 $60,000,000 YTD 2015 $40,000,000 YTD 2016 $20,000,000 YTD 2017 $0 Retail Weedtail Restaurant / Short‐Term Grocery / Construction Utility Other* Bar Lodging Liquor
New Items of Note: ● October net taxable sales are currently ahead of October 2016 by 0.32%, and November 2017 net taxable sales are ahead of prior year by 6.28%. ● Construction sales sector October and November 2017 were ahead of prior year by 10.55% and 14.16% collectively. ● Weedtail was down over prior year for October, by 2.98%, due to declined sales. However is up for November 2017 by 2.28%. ● Restaurant/Bar, Short‐Term lodging, & Grocery/Liquor are all up over October & November 2016. ● Retail sales sector being down in October 2017 over October 2016 is due to an assessment inflating October of 2016 not an actual decline in sales. ● Disposable bags distributed experienced an increase of 0.83% in October 2017 and 1.76% in November 2017 over prior year.
Continuing Items of Note: ● For the Construction sector in January 2015, a large one‐time return was filed in relation to a single project. This was an anomaly that would not be expected to repeat in future years. ● As previously noted, the decline in the Utility sector is largely related to the recent decrease in gas and electric prices. ● In 2014, a new category was added to the Sales by Sector pages for the Weedtail sector. The category encompasses all legal marijuana sales, regardless of medical or recreational designation. The Retail sector has been adjusted to remove the sales previously reported in this category. The jump in sales from 2013 to 2014 can be attributed to the legalization of sales of recreational marijuana. ● A section on Disposable Bag Fees was added in 2014. ● Taxes collected from the customer by the vendor are remitted to the Town on the 20th of the following month. ● Quarterly taxes are reported in the last month of the period. For example, taxes collected in the first quarter of the year (January – March), are include on the report for the period of March. ● Net Taxable Sales are continually updated as late tax returns are submitted to the Town of Breckenridge. Therefore, you may notice slight changes in prior months, in addition to the reporting for the current month. ● "Other" sales relate to returns that have yet to be classified. Much of this category will be reclassified to other sectors as more information becomes available.
110 Net Taxable Sales by Sector ‐ Town of Breckenridge Tax Base
Total Net Taxable Sales Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $52,813,402 $60,029,524 $65,830,946 $67,451,151 2.46% Apr Feb $52,566,814 $58,737,650 $63,819,635 $64,734,661 1.43% May 2017 Mar $67,724,183 $73,113,081 $79,655,704 $79,237,526 ‐0.52% June Apr $26,147,526 $27,407,472 $26,868,938 $28,599,800 6.44% 2016 May $14,189,545 $15,656,265 $17,804,029 $21,463,680 20.56% Jul 2015 Jun $24,957,643 $28,738,228 $31,658,829 $35,468,925 12.03% Aug Jul $36,152,286 $42,072,384 $46,899,160 $47,731,013 1.77% 2014 Sep Aug $32,688,897 $36,562,500 $38,987,483 $40,903,398 4.91% Oct Sep $27,141,794 $33,494,746 $37,500,894 $39,811,887 6.16% Nov Oct $19,053,762 $21,549,487 $24,723,835 $24,802,664 0.32% Dec Nov $22,826,247 $25,406,547 $26,727,204 $28,404,356 6.28% Dec $66,086,375 $71,657,860 $79,852,856 $0 n/a $0 $500,000,000 $1,000,000,000 Total $442,348,474 $494,425,743 $540,329,513 $478,609,060
Retail Retail Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $12,489,843 $13,998,522 $14,933,038 $16,336,019 9.40% Apr Feb $12,880,816 $14,240,511 $15,152,255 $15,695,443 3.58% May 2017 Mar $17,213,253 $18,818,841 $20,121,980 $19,907,078 ‐1.07% June Apr $6,479,642 $7,281,848 $6,857,887 $7,454,926 8.71% 2016 May $3,703,068 $4,302,676 $5,520,490 $5,538,548 0.33% Jul 2015 Jun $6,899,340 $8,090,642 $9,285,597 $10,385,663 11.85% Aug Jul $8,778,047 $11,980,701 $11,445,696 $12,169,190 6.32% 2014 Sep Aug $7,962,503 $9,097,833 $9,851,506 $10,296,680 4.52% Oct Sep $8,773,272 $9,794,918 $11,517,616 $11,905,184 3.37% Nov Oct $4,915,350 $6,160,240 $7,779,856 $6,973,862 ‐10.36% Dec Nov $7,157,931 $7,634,586 $8,523,532 $8,961,786 5.14% Dec $18,697,196 $19,733,859 $20,844,738 $0 n/a $0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 Total $115,950,261 $131,135,178 $141,834,190 $125,624,380
Weedtail Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $951,609 $1,069,983 $1,181,014 $1,263,370 6.97% Apr Feb $787,796 $809,146 $1,045,184 $1,076,236 2.97% Mar $1,068,198 $976,179 $1,170,045 $1,300,844 11.18% May 2017 Apr $597,513 $496,701 $647,524 $683,486 5.55% June 2016 May $397,864 $376,877 $424,305 $436,712 2.92% Jul 2015 Jun $493,672 $463,026 $561,981 $608,808 8.33% Aug Jul $755,747 $659,118 $768,474 $798,038 3.85% 2014 Sep Aug $612,329 $638,780 $731,985 $756,690 3.38% Oct Sep $482,512 $524,591 $607,308 $596,781 ‐1.73% Nov Oct $425,385 $453,781 $499,149 $484,253 ‐2.98% Dec Nov $443,172 $476,602 $542,237 $554,576 2.28% Dec $1,336,055 $846,691 $1,013,140 $0 n/a $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 Total $8,351,852 $7,791,474 $9,192,345 $8,559,796
111 Restaurant / Bar Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $12,287,466 $13,757,283 $15,420,296 $16,254,018 5.41% Apr Feb $12,055,279 $13,618,840 $15,065,159 $15,181,858 0.77% Mar $14,454,999 $15,042,121 $16,112,662 $16,595,811 3.00% May 2017 Apr $6,151,085 $6,024,685 $6,064,174 $6,821,901 12.50% June 2016 May $2,428,694 $2,805,424 $3,001,520 $3,448,281 14.88% Jul 2015 Jun $5,693,974 $6,313,126 $6,963,372 $8,089,688 16.17% Aug Jul $9,450,034 $10,367,272 $12,231,535 $13,124,240 7.30% 2014 Sep Aug $8,837,677 $9,608,649 $9,947,952 $10,631,602 6.87% Oct Sep $5,562,124 $7,153,442 $8,109,315 $9,211,502 13.59% Nov Oct $3,949,397 $4,605,454 $5,123,843 $5,203,825 1.56% Dec Nov $4,975,264 $5,119,695 $5,290,140 $5,757,234 8.83% Dec $11,626,886 $13,248,488 $13,796,003 $0 n/a $0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 Total $97,472,880 $107,664,478 $117,125,970 $110,319,960
Short‐Term Lodging Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $17,396,888 $19,188,488 $21,932,260 $21,478,451 ‐2.07% Apr Feb $17,021,231 $20,148,752 $22,065,748 $21,740,825 ‐1.47% Mar $24,784,662 $26,775,099 $30,017,480 $29,262,889 ‐2.51% May 2017 Apr $4,924,312 $5,948,425 $5,134,749 $5,314,457 3.50% June 2016 May $1,282,258 $1,384,455 $1,449,212 $1,993,973 37.59% Jul 2015 Jun $4,320,729 $5,253,897 $5,831,874 $6,563,320 12.54% Aug Jul $7,609,855 $8,914,967 $11,269,614 $11,082,815 ‐1.66% 2014 Sep Aug $6,494,128 $7,398,588 $7,746,013 $8,241,488 6.40% Oct Sep $3,831,790 $5,222,636 $6,767,070 $7,395,544 9.29% Nov Oct $2,309,997 $2,704,866 $3,067,830 $3,166,387 3.21% Dec Nov $3,757,030 $4,446,985 $4,444,277 $4,506,201 1.39% Dec $20,778,550 $23,234,025 $29,162,026 $0 n/a $0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 Total $114,511,430 $130,621,183 $148,888,154 $120,746,349
Grocery / Liquor Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $5,396,818 $5,825,759 $6,250,584 $6,450,303 3.20% Apr Feb $5,757,724 $6,069,614 $6,449,794 $6,475,853 0.40% Mar $6,142,314 $6,296,838 $6,769,678 $6,527,831 ‐3.57% May 2017 Apr $3,595,471 $3,836,903 $3,850,758 $4,195,465 8.95% June 2016 May $2,494,938 $2,724,433 $2,928,950 $3,063,908 4.61% Jul 2015 Jun $3,390,186 $3,735,382 $3,960,786 $4,342,262 9.63% Aug Jul $5,095,846 $5,388,915 $5,839,136 $5,923,764 1.45% Sep 2014 Aug $4,876,297 $5,231,601 $5,625,836 $5,715,123 1.59% Oct Sep $3,605,574 $3,997,242 $4,322,032 $4,525,953 4.72% Nov Oct $3,098,289 $3,344,571 $3,623,882 $3,724,937 2.79% Dec Nov $3,093,789 $3,375,304 $3,409,252 $3,608,668 5.85% Dec $8,996,820 $9,500,929 $9,661,918 $0 n/a $0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 Total $55,544,066 $59,327,490 $62,692,608 $54,554,068
112 Construction Jan % change Feb 2014 2015 2016 2017 from PY Mar Jan $1,111,433 $3,142,768 $3,162,190 $2,293,489 ‐27.47% Apr Feb $1,218,801 $1,232,799 $1,520,592 $1,769,306 16.36% Mar $1,230,163 $2,385,327 $2,262,792 $2,765,004 22.19% May 2017 Apr $1,364,235 $1,539,706 $1,923,258 $1,652,902 ‐14.06% June 2016 May $1,789,728 $2,193,144 $2,353,384 $4,919,462 109.04% Jul 2015 Jun $2,228,387 $2,870,200 $2,974,258 $3,564,860 19.86% Aug Jul $2,148,996 $2,698,078 $3,091,802 $2,732,756 ‐11.61% 2014 Sep Aug $2,078,461 $2,841,883 $3,187,750 $3,191,971 0.13% Oct Sep $2,681,977 $3,248,244 $4,049,856 $4,061,746 0.29% Nov Oct $2,545,426 $2,604,251 $2,823,165 $3,121,078 10.55% Dec Nov $1,610,546 $2,500,314 $2,649,520 $3,024,568 14.16% Dec $2,037,438 $2,508,730 $2,484,830 $0 n/a $0 $20,000,000 $40,000,000 Total $22,045,591 $29,765,442 $32,483,398 $33,097,142
Disposable Bag Fees
The Town adopted an ordinance April 9, 2013 (effective October 15, 2013) to discourage the use of disposable bags, achieving a goal of the SustainableBreck Plan. The $.10 fee applies to most plastic and paper bags given out at retail and grocery stores in Breckenridge. The program is intended to encourage the use of reusable bags and discourage the use of disposable bags, thereby furthering the Town’s sustainability efforts. Revenues from the fee are used to provide public information about the program and promote the use of reusable bags.
1,000,000 # of Disposable Bags Reported by Month 900,000 800,000 200,000 700,000 600,000 150,000 500,000 100,000 2016 400,000 300,000 50,000 2017 200,000 0 100,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 123456789101112 2016 2017 Change 5,556 ‐690 ‐2,082 5,015 1,226 ‐246 ‐3,923 2,102 25 392 783 0 Total 936,929 795,904
Bag Fees Remitted by Month Net of Retained Percentage* $20,000 $10,000 2016 $0 2017 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
*Retailers are permitted to retain 50% of the fee (up to a maximum of $1000/month through October 31, 2014; changing to a maximum of $100/month beginning November 1, 2014) in order to offset expenses incurred related to the program. The retained percent may be used by the retail store to provide educational information to customers; provide required signage; train staff; alter infrastructure; fee administration; develop/display informational signage; encourage the use of reusable bags or promote recycling of disposable bags; and improve infrastructure to increase disposable bag recycling.
113 Real Estate Transfer Tax
New Items of Note: ● Revenue for the month of November was behind prior year by 5.02%, and ahead of the monthly budget by $251,032. ● Revenue for the month of December was behind prior year by 8.26%, yet ahead of the monthly budget by $28,268. ● For the year, revenue finished ahead of prior year by 18.13%, and surpassed budget by $1,840,078. ● Single Family Homes sales accounted for the majority of the sales (40.49%), with Condominium sales in the second position of highest sales (25.83%) subject to the tax. Timeshares sales were in third position with sales (18.13%) in sales level for the year. ● 2017 YTD churn ended the year 21.37% above 2016. Continuing Items of Note: ● 2017 Real Estate Transfer Tax budget is based upon the monthly distribution for 2015.
Jan Total RETT
Feb 2015 2016 2017 % change 2017 budget +/‐ Budget Mar Jan $390,189 $293,839 $432,417 47.16% $310,368 $122,048 2017 Apr 2016 Feb $239,023 $338,604 $436,538 28.92% $190,126 $246,412 May Mar $320,123 $407,901 $579,302 42.02% $254,636 $324,666
Jun Apr $352,876 $418,228 $439,375 5.06% $280,688 $158,686 May $465,365 $389,525 $510,213 30.98% $370,166 $140,046 Jul Jun $395,675 $351,831 $533,957 51.76% $314,732 $219,225 Aug Jul $341,504 $363,545 $533,735 46.81% $271,643 $262,092 Sep Aug $479,287 $593,429 $564,623 ‐4.85% $381,240 $183,383 Oct Sep $622,189 $551,616 $478,875 ‐13.19% $494,909 ‐$16,033
Nov Oct $1,018,439 $515,748 $730,352 41.61% $810,098 ‐$79,746 Nov $376,431 $579,565 $550,457 ‐5.02% $299,425 $251,032 Dec Dec $467,631 $436,266 $400,236 ‐8.26% $371,968 $28,268 $‐ $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 Total $5,468,732 $5,240,098 $6,190,078 $4,350,000 *December #s are as of 12/31/2017
by Category
Vacant Land Description 2016 YTD 2017 YTD $ change % change % of Total Commercial $ 165,512 $ 139,645 (25,867) ‐15.63% 2.26%
Townhome Condominium 1,388,212 1,598,638 210,426 15.16% 25.83% 2017 YTD Timeshare 1,073,092 1,122,380 49,288 4.59% 18.13% Single Family Single Family 1,942,173 2,506,420 564,247 29.05% 40.49%
2016 Timeshare YTD Townhome 405,817 623,406 217,588 53.62% 10.07% Vacant Land 265,293 199,589 (65,704) ‐24.77% 3.22% Condominium Total $ 5,240,098 $ 6,190,078 949,979 18.13% 100.00% * YTD as of December 31st
Commercial
$‐ $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000
YTD Churn Analysis
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$‐ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 YTD 2017 YTD
114 TAXES DUE ‐ SALES, ACCOMMODATIONS, AND MARIJUANA TAXES
Tax Due by Industry‐YTD 2016 2016/2017 2016/2017 2017 Description YTD 2014 YTD 2015 YTD 2016 % of Total YTD 2017 $ Change % Change % of Total Retail $4,308,311 $4,935,078 $5,359,833 21.44% $5,565,160 $205,327 3.83% 21.52% Weedtail $766,827 $759,065 $893,987 3.58% $935,586 $41,599 4.65% 3.62% Restaurant / Bar $3,802,978 $4,182,628 $4,577,518 18.31% $4,887,174 $309,657 6.76% 18.90% Short‐Term Lodging $7,339,285 $8,408,414 $9,374,556 37.50% $9,454,439 $79,883 0.85% 36.55% Grocery / Liquor $2,062,043 $2,207,317 $2,349,260 9.40% $2,416,745 $67,486 2.87% 9.34% Construction $886,361 $1,207,472 $1,328,937 5.32% $1,466,203 $137,267 10.33% 5.67% Utility $1,078,178 $1,069,341 $1,034,192 4.14% $1,069,644 $35,452 3.43% 4.14% Other* $67,374 $61,876 $83,171 0.33% $69,193 ($13,979) ‐16.81% 0.27% Total $20,311,356 $22,831,191 $25,001,453 100.00% $25,864,144 $862,691 3.45% 100.00% * Other includes activities in Automobiles and Undefined Sales.
Utility Other* Utility Other* 4% YTD 2016 Construction YTD 2017 0% 4% 0% Construction 6% 5% Retail Retail 22% 21% Grocery / Grocery / Liquor Liquor 9% 9% Weedtail Weedtail 4% 4%
Restaurant / Restaurant / Short‐Term Short‐Term Bar Bar Lodging Lodging 18% 19% 38% 37%
$10,000,000 $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 YTD 2014 $4,000,000 YTD 2015 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 YTD 2016 $1,000,000 YTD 2017 $0 Retail Weedtail Restaurant / Short‐Term Grocery / Construction Utility Other* Bar Lodging Liquor
Items of Note: ● The general sales tax rate includes the 2.5% Town sales tax + 1.93% County sales tax distributed to the Town. ● The Short ‐Term Lodging sector includes an additional 3.4% accommodation tax. ● Weedtail includes an additional 5% marijuana tax (recreational and medical). The 1.5% distribution from the State is also included in this category. While the State distribution is only due on recreational sales, the majority of weedtail sales are recreational and the distribution has been applied to the entire sector. ● Report assumptions include: applying tax specific to a sector to the entire sector, as well as assuming the same tax base across the State, County, and Town taxes due. As a result, the numbers indicated above are a rough picture of taxes due to the Town and not an exact representation. Additionally, the data is representative of taxes due to the Town and not necessarily taxes collected year to date.
115 General Fund Revenues Summary November 30, 2017
These next two pages report on 2017 year-to-date financials for the General Fund. This area contains most "Government Services," such as public works, police, community development, planning, recreation, facilities, and administrative functions.
General Fund Revenue: At the end of November, the Town's General Fund was at 100.6% of YTD budget ($18.24M actual vs. $18.09M budgeted).
Note that for 2017, the parking and transit cost centers were relocated to the new Parking & Transportation Fund.
Public Safety revenue is up due to grant revenue (offset by training expenses).
Community Development revenue is up mostly in relation to building permit fees and building plan check fees, related to a large project. GENERAL FUND YTD REVENUES Community Public Safety Dev. Recreation revenue has made a recovery, now 2% 9% slightly exceeding the YTD budget. The increases were Property Tax Public Works 15% seen in Recreation Programs and the Ice Arena. 4%
Recreation 15%
Transfers/ other 59%
Gen. Fund YTD Revenue Act vs. Bud - by Program
2,784,162 $3,000,000 2,769,996
$2,500,000
$2,000,000 YTD 1,578,528 $1,500,000 Actual 1,036,996 758,089 $1,000,000 694,809 YTD 310,043 285,356 $500,000 Budget
$- Public Safety Community Dev. Public Works Recreation
116 General Fund Expenditures Summary November 30, 2017
The General Fund at November 30, 2017 was at 93.9% of budgeted expense ($17.12M actual vs. $18.23M budgeted). The below graphs represent the cost of providing the services contained in this fund (Public Safety, Recreation, Public Works, Community Development, and Administration).
Variance Explanations: Wages continue to be a significant contributor to budget savings. Recreation is 9.3% under budget, largely related to Recreation Programs that were interrupted by the renovation. Additional areas that are significantly under budget include: Human Resources, Building, & "Other" (relating to solar purchases and the broadband assessment).
Note that for 2017, the parking and transit cost centers were relocated to the new Parking & Transportation Fund. YTD Actual Expenses Public Other Safety Rec. 17% 23% Admin. 15%
Public Comm Works Dev 8% 33%
Gen. Fund YTD Expenditures Act. vs. Bud. - by Program
$7,000,000
5,853,488 $6,000,000
$5,000,000 5,627,820 4,355,665 3,902,883 $4,000,000 2,965,000 2,970,704
$3,000,000 2,661,603 2,476,123
$2,000,000 YTD Actual 838,533 $1,000,000 1,549,537 727,695 1,424,169 YTD
$- Budget Public Safety Admin. Comm Dev Public Works Rec. Other
117 Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures All Funds November 30, 2017
% of YTD REVENUE YTD Actual YTD Budget Bud. Annual Bud.
General Governmental 1 Gen/Excise/MMJ/Child Cr/Spec Prj $ 34,887,116 $ 30,772,888 113% $ 36,879,703 2 Special Revenue 17,204,706 15,392,816 112% 25,351,101 3 Internal Service 4,851,095 4,872,225 100% 5,248,029 4 Subtotal General Governmental $ 56,942,918 $ 51,037,928 112% $ 67,478,833 5 Capital Projects 274,258 46,761 587% 4,320,500 Enterprise Funds 6 Utility Fund 5,417,781 57,946,080 9% 58,510,348 7 Golf 2,716,833 2,627,549 103% 2,644,906 8 Cemetery 3,630 21,300 17% 21,300 9 Subtotal Enterprise Funds $ 8,138,245 $ 60,594,930 13% $ 61,176,554 10 TOTAL REVENUE 65,355,420 111,679,619 59% 132,975,887 11 Internal Transfers 38,111,628 38,081,508 100% 50,970,488 12 TOTAL REVENUE incl. x-fers $ 103,467,048 $ 149,761,127 69% $ 183,946,375
EXPENDITURES YTD Actual YTD Budget % of Bud. Annual Bud.
General Governmental 1 Gen/Excise/MMJ/Child Cr/Spec Prj $ 22,428,930 $ 23,554,107 95% $ 32,588,897 2 Special Revenue 28,727,714 34,873,290 82% 41,549,931 3 Internal Service 8,246,835 5,743,918 144% 9,588,311 4 Subtotal General Governmental $ 59,403,478 $ 64,171,315 93% $ 83,727,139 5 Capital Projects 8,726,013 22,561,268 39% 22,561,268 Enterprise Funds 6 Utility Fund 4,129,177 52,426,869 8% 55,095,942 7 Golf 2,334,983 2,570,649 91% 2,660,110 8 Cemetery 0 4,500 0% 4,500 9 Subtotal Enterprise Funds $ 6,464,160 $ 55,002,018 12% $ 57,760,552 10 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 74,593,651 141,734,602 53% 164,048,960 11 Internal Transfers 37,826,770 37,983,866 100% 50,970,488 12 TOTAL EXPENDITURES incl. x-fers $ 112,420,421 $ 179,718,468 63% $ 215,019,448
13 TOTAL REVENUE less EXPEND. $ (8,953,373) $ (29,957,341) N/A $ (31,073,072)
General Governmental Funds - General, Excise, Child Care, Marijuana and Special Projects Special Revenue Funds - Marketing, Affordable Housing, Open Space, Conservation Trust, and Parking and Transportation Internal Service Funds - Garage, Information Technology (IT), and Facilities 118 ALL FUNDS REPORT November 30, 2017 The YTD breakdown of the revenue/expenses variances is as follows: Fund Descriptions: Governmental Funds: General Governmental - General, General Fund: Excise, Capital, Special Projects, •Revenue: Child Care, Marijuana •Over budget by $150K. Please see General Fund Revenue page for more detail. Special Revenue Funds - •Expense: 38,111,628 Marketing, Affordable Housing, •Under budget by $1.1M. See General Fund Expense page of this report for more details. Open Space, Conservation Trust, and Parking and Transportation Excise Fund: •Revenue: Enterprise Funds: Golf, Utility, •Ahead of budget by $3.9M - see Executive Summary or Tax Basics for Cemetery more information.
Capital Fund: Internal Service Funds - Garage, •Revenue: Information Technology (IT), and •The Combined Statement does not include transfers (appx. $16.4M). Facilities Revenue is up due to payments received from CDOT and Summit County for reimbursements of projects. Related expenses also exist for this 37,826,770 revenue. •Expense: YTD Actual Revenues and Expenditures vs. •Under budget due to timing of capital project expenses. The entire Budget annual budget is allocated to January 2017. Although, spending is expected to occur throughout the year. 160,000,000 Special Revenue Funds: 140,000,000 •Revenue: •Sales tax and impact fees remain above budget in the Housing Fund. 120,000,000 However, Huron Landing rental income is down due to a delay in timing. •Parking & Transportation revenue is up due to lift ticket tax and pay parking revenue. 100,000,000 •Expense: •Housing is under YTD budget due to the timing of projects, expected to 80,000,000 complete later in the year. Actual 60,000,000 Enterprise Funds: Budget Utility: 40,000,000 •Revenue: •While PIFs are exceeding budget, the fund is under budget due to the 20,000,000 timing of debt proceeds for the new water plant. •Expense: 0 •Under budget due to timing of new water plant related expenses.
Internal Service Funds:. •Expense: •Over budget due to timing of automobile purchases related to insurance recoveries.
119 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Laurie Best-Community Development Department Date: 1/17/2018 Subject: Block 11 Proposal-Mixed Use w/Commercial Component (ZL Sustainable Ventures)
We are seeking Council input on a mixed use commercial/housing proposal that has been submitted by ZLSV for the southern portion of the town-owned Block 11 property near Fraction Road. Specifically, we are asking Council if you are willing to contribute (sell) Town land for the commercial component of this development, and if the Town is willing to sell the land, what would be reasonable value of the land with no density. The plan that has been submitted by ZLSZ is approximately 7.5 acres and includes approximately 38 residential units (14 one, two, or three bedroom single family homes with a single car garage and an additional studio that can be used as an ADU and 8 small one bedroom single family Kleiner homes), plus 23,000 square feet of not for profit commercial space (co-work, non-profit, affordable commercial incubator space) with 9 residential units vertically integrated with that commercial, and a 10,000 square foot Broken Compass Brewery. It should be noted that the Block 11 LUGS allow employee housing at 20 UPA and governmental uses, but do not allow for commercial uses. If the Council is supportive of this development, the project would need to pass a point analysis with negative points for land use and the commercial density that would need to be addressed. The applicant has indicated they are willing to pay for the land as well as the density for the ‘for profit’ Brewery. It should also be noted that the ZLSZ project fits on Block 11 only if the skier parking (and snow storage) is relocated off of Block 11. In summary, in addition to the approval of the commercial land use, the sale of Town-owned land, and the calculation and source of TDRs for the ‘not for profit’ as well as the ‘for profit’ commercial, the project is also contingent on the relocation of the parking.
While there are many hurdles and details to vet, Staff is generally supportive of the ZLSV proposal because it includes a new and different housing type that will serve the workforce, with an emphasis on sustainability including near net zero goals, an innovative CLT building system which could save time and money, and a ‘for profit’ commercial component as well as a ‘not for profit’ commercial component that would complement the residential development on Block 11. Staff supports the concept of mixed use because it adds variety and vibrancy to residential neighborhoods. The other residential development on Block 11 includes Denison Commons, Blue 52, and approximately 100 additional apartments and up to 60 additional townhomes that are included in the Corum housing plan that is currently being refined for the northern 8-9 acres of Block 11. The attached plan shows the overall Block 11 site plan which is still in preliminary form.
Block 11 RFP Background In 2017 the Town began the process of identifying the next workforce housing project (s) to follow the Blue 52 Townhomes which will be completed late summer/fall of this year. Since the planning, pre- development, and entitlement phases can take considerable time, we issued the original RFP back in June. Five proposals, including the Corum plan and a ZLSZ plan were received, and ultimately the plan submitted by Corum was selected as the preferred option. Staff has been working with Corum to refine that plan which includes up to 100 apartments and up to 60 townhomes on approximately 8-9 acres. We expect to have a full site plan, program, and business deal to Council soon. The Corum development which is located on the northern portion of the remaining Town owned part of Block 11 will function as a compatible extension of Blue 52. The balance of the undeveloped Town-owned land on Block 11is approximately 7.5 acres which can accommodate the required skier parking. In the event 120 1 the skier parking is relocated off Block 11, the 7.5 acres could accommodate the ZLSV proposal. The final configuration of this 7.5 acre parcel will be defined as part of the overall Block 11 planning.
Summary/Recommendation Following are staff comments/recommendations in regard to the most significant issues:
Disposition (Sale) of Town-owned land for the Brewery: While the need for additional workforce housing is significant (500 units by 2020) and land for development is the most significant challenge, we have seen many examples of mixed use neighborhoods where the commercial components provide important vitality. In this case we believe the Brewery is a unique commercial business and would be an amenity for the neighborhood.
Price for Town-owned land (1 acre): The applicant has proposed $88,000 for the one acre parcel for the Brewery. This price was calculated based on the 2016 appraisal provided by Colorado Mountain College for the one acre Denison Commons site. The value of approximately one acre of similar land was assessed at $880,000. But, because this Block 11 parcel has no density, it is common practice to discount the actual value. Staff is exploring comps but it appears that 10% of the assessed value is used by many entities, including land trusts to determine the base value of land without density. We will report back to Council once we investigate this valuation methodology, but would look forward to your reaction to the applicant’s proposal.
Density for Brewery (1,000 TDRs): The applicant is proposing $490,000 for the TDRs/density for the Brewery. This is consistent with the current TDR pricing; however there are discussions on-going in regard to increasing the TDR cost. Since it is unlikely any development would occur this year, the developer may need to account for increased costs in the future.
Density for Not for Profit Commercial: The applicant is asking for density waiver or transfer of TDR’s by the Town for the ‘not for profit’ commercial. They have not included any TDRs in their project proforma. There is no precedent for this, but the uses could be considered a public benefit to the community. The applicant is concerned that the additional costs cannot be covered without some subsidy. Staff has asked the applicant for additional information regarding the market for this commercial space, projected vacancy rates, and options in the event the ‘not for profit’ is not economically sustainable.
Skier Parking/Timing: There are on-going negotiations in regard to relocating the skier parking, but there is some uncertainty if and when that will happen. The applicant should be advised that their project is completely contingent on that coming to fruition. In addition, we are working on the overall civil plan for Block 11 and will likely remove excess rock from the site which can be processed into construction material that is needed for other projects. This will result in 2-3 feet of rock removal. The timing of this rock removal and the relocation of skier parking, if it happens, will impact the timing of any development, including the overall civil work and infrastructure. Most likely the earliest the site would be available is summer of 2019.
Development Permits/Fit Test: It should be noted that the plan has not been fully vetted and the final parcel configuration has not been determined. A fit test based on the Town’s development code would be a necessary and important next step.
We will attend the worksession on January 23rd to discuss this proposal. We look forward to your comments on the issues listed above. The applicant would also like to make a short presentation and provide additional information on their approach and on the CLT building system which would be a unique, but potentially cost saving approach.
While this is early in the process, your early feedback is important to understanding the viability of this project. Thank you.
121 Page 2
122 123 124 125 126 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Revenue Services Administrator – Heather Pezzella
Date: 1/16/2018
Subject: Managing Short Term Rental Impacts
Purpose
The purpose of this memo is to serve as a guide for a Council/Staff conversation around our Town’s housing challenges. While the Town has established an excellent compliance program with regards to licensing and collecting all applicable fees and taxes in this area, there is still a desire to explore other options to mitigate our housing challenges.
As such, we would like to provide Council with potential ideas in order to assist in facilitating a discussion on next steps within our Town.
Next Steps
Finance Department staff have attended several meetings relating to STR’s including: The Frisco short term rental panel, Board of County Commissioners meeting addressing short term rentals in Summit County, Housing Committee meeting, and have met with the Summit County Assessor’s Office in order to seek information regarding short term rental compliance. From our research, outlined approaches could include:
Implement a fee or tax to offset impacts of STR activity o Property tax differentials, commercial rate (29%) vs. residential rate (6.11%) o Incremental tax revenue to fund Affordable Housing programs Additional property management regulations o Local manager requirement o DORA registration requirement o Maintain Town business license Retaining neighborhood character o Placing a cap on short term rentals in areas of Town o Placing an at large cap on rentals in Town o Placing a cap on short term rental per owner o Limiting occupancy per bedroom, square footage, or other metric Amend single family accommodation units in code to expand applicability to all units in Town o Strengthening Town Code to mitigate neighborhood complaints through a hearing process o Allowing only property owners to short term rent their units
The Finance Department is now seeking guidance from Town Council on the next steps that the Town should take in managing STR’s, specifically relating to impacts STR’s have on our community. At the January 23, 2018 Town Council meeting, the Finance Department and Housing staff will present on the next steps to facilitate the discussion.
127 1 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Haley Littleton, Communications & Marketing Coordinator Date: January 16, 2018 Subject: February Installment of Median Banners
Below you will find the graphic designs for the February banners. There will be one change in that “Nordic” will become “Nordic Skiing” on the half banners. The intention for the design of these banners was to highlight other winter activities during a month where we do not have a major signature event. The goal is to encourage our guests to utilize other town facilities like the Gold Run Nordic Center and Stephen C. West Ice Arena. We have decided to not put the full names on the half banners in order to not breach CDOT’s regulations about direct advertisement on the highway. Staff will be on hand for any questions.
128 1 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Mark Truckey, Assistant Director of Community Development
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: Memorandum of Understanding with Xcel Energy
The Town Council adopted two resolutions in 2017 setting renewable energy goals for the Town. One of the resolutions, adopted in August, set a goal of reaching 100 % renewable energy sources for town facilities and operations by the year 2025. The second goal, adopted in November, set a goal of reaching 100 % renewable energy community-wide by the year 2035. In the discussions leading up to the adoption of these resolutions, it was understood that achieving both of these goals would require a strong partnership with our utility provider Xcel Energy. Therefore, staff has been having regular discussions with Xcel Energy representatives since spring of 2017 regarding developing this partnership. After months of discussion, we have developed a “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) to formalize the partnership, which is attached for the Council’s review.
The MOU is titled “Energy Future Collaboration – Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Breckenridge, Colorado and Xcel Energy”. The MOU is intended to be a non-binding agreement between both parties regarding how we will move forward towards the Town’s renewable energy goals. The MOU is a separate document from the franchise agreement that Xcel has with the Town and nothing in the MOU affects the existing franchise agreement.
Staff has been strongly encouraged by our discussions with Xcel Energy to date. Xcel appears committed to providing resources towards our effort and shares a goal of increasing its portfolio of renewable energy. They currently are seeking approval from the Colorado Public Utility Commission that would ultimately result in having 55 % of all Xcel’s Colorado electric energy coming from renewable sources by the year 2026.
The attached MOU contains the following:
1. A Background section outlining how the Town and Xcel have gotten to this stage.
2. A Mutual Collaboration section, outlining shared Values of the Town and Xcel, along with the shared Vision of both entities, Guiding Principles of the agreement, and a section that outlines the beginnings of a work plan to move towards our renewable goals.
3. The attachment outlines the partnership Work Plan Ideas, which will be further refined in upcoming months and modified as needed. The ideas are broken into near-term and longer term actions. Near term actions include Energy Efficiency projects that the Town will be undertaking and that Xcel will be providing technical resources towards. Longer term projects include: the Town and Xcel working together to identify a Pathway to 100 % renewable energy; opportunities for participating in solar gardens in adjacent counties and through other avenues (e.g., on national forest land); electrification of town vehicles and heating sources; furthering grid storage technology; and a recognition that there may be opportunities to address wildfire mitigation with some projects in forested locations.
As noted above, staff is encouraged with our efforts with Xcel to date. Xcel is currently working with the Town to assist us in subscribing to RenewableConnect, which will move us towards 100 percent 129 1 renewables for town facilities and operations. We anticipate more joint efforts as we embark on other projects outlined in the work plan. One thing to note is that, depending on the effort, some projects might require the Town to commit additional resources to accomplish. For example, the earmarking of renewables directly to the Town could require the Town being actively involved in a request to the Public Utility Commission or potentially with the state in a legislative matter. Likewise, some special renewable programs that are not available to the general Colorado customer base of Xcel could involve some premium in terms of cost. It is too early to know what these costs would be, but the MOU stipulates that the Town would be made fully aware of any cost commitments prior to participating in any such programs.
Council Action
The MOU is provided here for Council’s review and input. Xcel representatives will be attending Tuesday’s meeting and will be able to respond to any questions or comments that the Council may have. Formal action of the Council is not required. The Mayor can sign the MOU on behalf of the Council.
Page 2 130
ENERGY FUTURE COLLABORATION - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO AND XCEL ENERGY
This Memorandum of Understanding (“Memorandum”), dated January 23, 2018, outlines various overarching values, goals and shared principles between the Town of Breckenridge (the “Town”) and Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado corporation and an Xcel Energy company (“Xcel Energy”). The Memorandum provides a strategy for cooperation and achievement of a shared vision through broad collaboration, focusing on innovation, clean energy, economic development opportunities, customer choice programs and technology (“Energy Future Collaboration” or “EFC Partnership”). The Town and Xcel Energy are each a “Party” and collectively the “Parties” to this Memorandum.
BACKGROUND
A. The Town is a Colorado home rule municipality and the Summit County seat. It is responsible for protecting the public health and safety of its residents.
B. The Town has various clean energy, economic development, public works and innovation goals and desires, which have been developed in collaboration with the community including with Xcel Energy, at times.
C. Xcel Energy is a statewide, integrated public utility energy provider, which is regulated by the Colorado Public Utility Commission (“PUC”). Xcel Energy provides electric and natural gas service to the Town and its residents.
D. Over the decades, a strong tradition of working together has progressed between the Town and Xcel Energy, resulting in an interwoven history linked to the Town’s growth, development, planning and energy needs and objectives.
E. The Town and Xcel Energy have many aligned interests at a local, state and federal level and desire to advance those interests in a new way, capitalizing on each entity’s strengths and expertise via partnership.
F. To do this, the Town and Xcel Energy are creating a holistic, collaborative, mutually beneficial relationship that supports the community.
G. The Town and Xcel Energy desire to memorialize, in this Memorandum, their shared vision, guiding principles, values and goals regarding the EFC Partnership.
131
- 1 -
MUTUAL COLLABORATION
VALUES
We seek to lead with our values. The standards that define what the community, the Town and Xcel Energy determine are important and desirable are the values. In essence, values help shape the “why” of what we do on a daily basis. Overall, the community has a large impact on determining both the Town’s and Xcel Energy’s values. Below are the Town and Xcel Energy values related to the EFC Partnership.
1.1 Reliable and Affordable Energy: Xcel Energy must deliver safe, reliable, and affordable energy that its customers need and expect, including adding cost effective renewable energy to its system.
1.2 Emission Reductions: Reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions will benefit Town residents, visitors, and businesses, through improved public health, additional economic opportunities, and long-term energy price stability.
1.3 Economic Development: Innovation and technology as well as investment in clean energy resources provide opportunities to boost the local and state economy, attract businesses, and be an innovation leader.
1.4 Thriving Energy Provider: Xcel Energy continuing to be a healthy business and a thriving energy provider is essential to the Town achieving its goals and objectives – ranging from the Town advancing its environmental goals to advancing economic development efforts – as well as to the success of the EFC Partnership.
1.5 Thriving Town: The Town continuing to be a healthy and thriving community is essential to Xcel Energy achieving its goals and objectives as well as to the success of the EFC Partnership.
1.6 Regional Collaboration: EFC Partnership solutions should be sought through regional collaboration whenever feasible.
1.7 Community and Stakeholder Input: Community and stakeholder input regarding the EFC Partnership priorities will be sought through each Parties established processes and any new processes that the Town and Xcel Energy believe may be beneficial to the EFC Partnership.
VISION 132
- 2 -
Aspirations and goals, which drive a desired future, represent a person or organization’s vision. Each of the Town and Xcel Energy has a vision and, as part of the EFC Partnership, they have identified a shared vision.
2.1 The Town’s Vision: In 2002 the Town adopted a Vision Plan that focuses on core areas that drive the Town’s vision, including topics such as community character, natural resources, transportation, and housing. Based upon this foundation, the Town subsequently adopted the SustainableBreck Plan, which identifies actions the Town can take to sustain the Town’s resources. Increasing the use of renewable energy and decreasing the Town’s carbon footprint are goals of the plan. In 2017 the Town adopted several resolutions that include: (a) the Town’s commitment to taking action to reduce its impacts on the climate; (b) a goal of deriving 100 percent of the electric energy needed to power municipal operations and facilities through renewable energy resources by the year 2025; and (c) a goal to achieve 100 percent renewable electricity community-wide by the year 2035, working in partnership with Xcel Energy.
2.2 Xcel Energy’s Vision: Xcel Energy will be the preferred and trusted provider of the energy its customers need. As such, Xcel Energy wants to partner with the Town to support the Town’s energy vision, goals and objectives and also advance its plans that align with those of the Town and Xcel Energy’s customers.
2.3 Shared Vision: Through the EFC Partnership, in areas of mutual alignment, the Town and Xcel Energy will work to support and achieve each other’s vision and objectives, for the benefit of residents, businesses and the broader community.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
As the Town and Xcel Energy, in conjunction with the community, seek achievement of their shared vision certain tenets will be followed. These principles will supply the “how” of achieving the shared vision and execution of the EFC Partnership.
3.1 Collaboration: The Town and Xcel Energy will work collaboratively to achieve the shared vision, with respect, transparency and innovative thinking as well as by establishing open and effective channels of communication to further our shared vision. They will also look to share lessons learned from other communities that are participating in similar collaborations with Xcel Energy.
3.2 Prioritization: The Parties will make the EFC Partnership, and its successful implementation, a priority. As part of this, the Parties will prioritize their goals and objectives.
3.3 Scalability: The EFC Partnership paradigm developed between the Parties must be scalable and available to other communities in Colorado.
133
- 3 -
3.4 Avoidance of Cost Shifting: Pursuit and execution of the EFC Partnership, including renewable energy and sustainability targets, will be in a manner that is cost effective to Town residents and does not shift costs among them or to others in the State.
3.5 Public Policy Support: The Town and Xcel Energy will collaborate to advance public policy matters at the state and local level where they share common interests. However, nothing in this Memorandum requires the Town to take any action that it deems not to be in its best interest.
3.6 Colorado Regulatory Model: The state regulatory model will be fully utilized to support the EFC Partnership and the Parties support using this model to achieve the shared vision. The Parties also agree that this model supports Xcel Energy being a thriving energy provider.
3.7 Leveraging Town Efforts: The EFC Partnership will support the Town’s efforts that buttress the Town’s goals, such as collaboration on federal and private grants and funding opportunities that align with the partnership efforts.
3.8 Leveraging Xcel Energy Statewide Efforts: The EFC Partnership will support Xcel Energy’s efforts that buttress Town goals, such as Xcel Energy’s proposed Colorado Energy Plan, which provides a jump start on the Town achieving its sustainability and environmental objectives in an economic manner.
COLLABORATION FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND THE ECONOMY - PLANNING, PROGRESS AND EXECUTION
4.1 Planning and Deliverables: The Parties will develop a plan to advance the EFC Partnership, typically on a biennial basis (the “Work Plan”). The Work Plan for each time period will detail the deliverables to be presented and will follow the guiding principles outlined in this Memorandum. The Parties will use their best efforts to achieve such deliverables. An overview of the Work performed and the results achieved will be prepared by the Parties on an annual basis. In prioritizing the items to be performed in a specific Work Plan, the Parties will consider the shared vision as well as regulatory requirements in Colorado and will focus on selecting the top two to three priorities. Initial ideas for the Parties to consider for the Work Plan are outlined in Attachment 1 to this Memorandum. These ideas are not exhaustive or controlling, but illustrative.
4.2 Meetings and Staffing: The Town and Xcel Energy will meet at least quarterly. The Parties will provide staff and resources appropriate to support the work.
4.3 CPUC: The Parties recognize that future action taken by Xcel Energy to support the Town’s goals and the EFC Partnership may be subject to state regulatory utility requirements under Colorado law. If the Parties agree on certain actions in support of the EFC Partnership that require state regulatory approval, they agree to 134
- 4 -
cooperatively work together to seek necessary approvals or regulatory changes to facilitate such regulatory approvals. Program costs and customer incentives offered by Xcel Energy to its customers in Colorado extending beyond the scope of programs offered to all Xcel Energy customers will be the responsibility of the Town or, as applicable, another entity that has agreed to be responsible. The Town will be able to decide if it wishes to participate in any EFC Projects that would cost the Town additional money.
4.4 Waiver and Legal Applicability. Nothing in this Memorandum constitutes a waiver of the Town ordinances, the Town’s regulatory jurisdiction or Colorado’s utility regulatory jurisdiction. It is agreed by the Parties that nothing in this Memorandum will be deemed or construed as creating a joint venture, trust, partnership, or any similar legal relationship among the Parties. Each Party shall be responsible for its own obligations under this Memorandum. The Parties agree that this Memorandum is to memorialize the intent of the Parties regarding the EFC Partnership, but does not create a legal agreement between the Parties. There will be no legal or equitable remedies available to either of the Parties if the other Party fails for any reason to fully comply with this Memorandum. This Memorandum is for the benefit of the Parties and does not create third party rights.
4.5 No Impact on Franchise Agreement or other Agreement. The Town and Xcel Energy are parties to a Franchise Agreement, effective as of March 30, 2008 and adopted as Ordinance No. 17, Series 2008 (“Franchise Agreement”). The Franchise Agreement has no impact on this Memorandum, which Memorandum likewise does not alter or modify the Franchise Agreement.
4.6 Duration. The EFC Partnership is a new endeavor and therefore the Parties want to provide adequate time to develop the partnership and successfully implement its goals and Work Plans. It is anticipated that the duration will coincide with the term of the Franchise Agreement, but either Party may end the EPC Partnership at any time in the event it elects to do so.
135
- 5 -
This Memorandum has been signed on the date first above written.
TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE
By ______
Its ______
XCEL ENERGY
By ______
Its ______
136
- 6 -
ATTACHMENT 1– EFC PARTNERSHIP WORK PLAN IDEAS
Potential Near-Term Focus Areas
Energy efficiency: Lowering energy consumption reduces operating costs for Town businesses and residents, while lowering air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Energy efficiency is the lowest cost energy resource and should be utilized across all sectors to achieve the shared vision. The Town has prioritized and budgeted for an increased number of energy efficiency upgrades in 2018 and beyond. Through its existing programs, Xcel Energy will assist in these efforts through providing the following as currently available: rebates, free or discounted lighting and energy audits, and other technical assistance and programs.
Renewable Energy and Carbon Emission Reduction Goals: The Town can leverage Xcel Energy’s statewide renewable energy plans, such as the Colorado Energy plan, to provide a strong foundation for its renewable energy and carbon reduction goals. Building upon that foundation, the Town and Xcel Energy would like to explore renewable energy offerings that can support the Town meeting its 2025 goal for 100 percent of the electric energy needed to power municipal operations and facilities coming from additive renewable energy on the Xcel Energy grid, e.g., through programs like Renewable*Connect and Solar*Rewards Community, etc. They also desire to explore options of how Xcel Energy and the Town could collaborate to achieve the Town’s 100 percent renewable energy goal community-wide by 2035 (see the “Pathway to 100% Renewable Electricity” section below).
Transparency and data access: The success of this relationship will depend, in part, on cooperative sharing of information and data in a timely manner. Sharing should be in alignment with EFC partnership activities and be to the full extent permitted by law and data sharing capabilities.
Potential Long-Term Focus Areas
Pathway to 100 % Renewable Electricity: The Town and Xcel Energy will work toward identifying a realistic path for the Town to reach its 100 % renewable targets. Analyses of the Town’s electric demand, both for Town facilities/operations and community-wide usage, will be part of this process. This effort will also include a list of actions that could be taken by both Parties to move the Town toward its 100% renewable energy goals, including:
o Exploring Xcel Energy tools and programs at a variety of levels to support the Town and communities with similar renewable aspirations; and o Creating a roadmap and plan that would support the Town and similar communities reaching their goals, including incorporation of (i) Xcel Energy’s addition of future solar and wind resources and other clean energy sources to its system as part of Xcel Energy’s planning process, along the 137
- 7 -
lines of the proposed Colorado Energy Plan; and (ii) expanding programs like Renewable*Connect to allow residents, customers, and businesses to participate in additive renewable products, constructed and operated here in Colorado.
Solar Gardens in Adjacent Counties and Additional Collaborations: Over eighty percent of the land in Summit County and Breckenridge is national forest and much of the remaining 20 percent of private land has been developed. Given the extremely limited amount of vacant land available in Summit County to accommodate solar gardens, the Town desires to pursue opportunities to participate in solar gardens in adjacent counties. There are currently significant system capacity issues that preclude these opportunities. The Town and Xcel Energy would like to explore possible collaboration opportunities with Summit County, local ski resorts and the United States Forest Service as it relates to the possible siting of community solar gardens under the Solar*Rewards Community offering. There may also be an opportunity to collaborate with other EFC Partnership towns in the region on these efforts, including studying opportunities to encourage interconnection capacity for Solar*Rewards Communities in collaboration with solar garden developers and others.
Electrification: Explore more nearer-term opportunities for meaningful emissions reductions in transportation though electric vehicles and, long-term, conduct assessments to understand the feasibility, impact, and costs of potential space and water heating electrification opportunities.
Grid Storage Technology: Currently, the ability to reach 100 percent renewable electric energy on a “24/7” basis is linked to a cost-effective approach that stores renewable energy and delivers it back to the grid when renewable sources like solar and wind are not producing. Xcel Energy is already undertaking certain battery storage pilots and the Town and Xcel Energy will focus on lessons learned and determine if there are opportunities for pilots in the Town.
Wildfire Mitigation Efforts: Both the Town and Xcel Energy have engaged in certain mitigation efforts related to wildfires. The Town and Xcel Energy would like to explore opportunities to work together in this area, particularly as it relates to protecting certain infrastructure from fire damage.
138
- 8 - Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Julia Puester, AICP, Planning Manager Date: 1/17/2018 Subject: 322 North Main Street and Downtown Overlay District Boundary Modification Request
Background on the Downtown Overlay District
The Downtown Overlay District was adopted in 2007 to address concerns from Town Council members that, if allowed to go unchecked, residential uses may proliferate in desired commercial locations and the pedestrian/shopper experience would be diminished (map attached). A concern noted at the time was that residential uses may offer a higher initial investment return rate than retail in some areas, particularly along North Main Street near the gondola, which was an area that the Council wanted to see become a more viable commercial area. Increasing the number of residential uses fronting Main Street interrupts the natural pedestrian flow for the pedestrian shopper, causing the pedestrian to turn around. This was of particular concern regarding North Main Street as the desire has been to continue the visitor experience further north on Main. The Prospector Park was also a part of this effort, providing a bread crumb trail for families down North Main Street.
In 2007, staff made numerous contacts with local planners, realtors, etc., in some of the Colorado jurisdictions that had implemented such regulations to get their feedback including Aspen, Vail, Steamboat Springs, Crested Butte, and Boulder. The feedback staff received was unanimous in that every person contacted indicated that the ground floor restrictions were something that had to be done in order to maintain the retail feel of the commercial areas, and that enactment of the restrictions had helped maintain pedestrian vitality. The Town Council was supportive of these efforts and thus adopted in the Downtown Overlay District, which prohibits new residential uses from being located on the ground floor level adjacent to the street.
While there was a desire to restrict first floor uses at street-level, retaining the ability for residential uses to be located on second stories or further back from the pedestrian way was not found to negatively impact the pedestrian experience. Therefore, the Downtown Overlay District allows for residential uses both on second stories and further back from the street frontage (e.g., set back 40 feet or more from the front building facade).
Proposal
Staff received a letter requesting one of two options be considered for the property at 322 N. Main Street (highlighted in yellow in the aerial photo). Option 1 would create a variance process to remove Lot 1, Dosse Court Subdivision, located at 322 N. Main Street, from the Downtown Overlay District due to its residential character (attached). The historic home on Lot 1 was incorporated into a master plan for the property (in 1999), which includes multiple uses on site (commercial and residential-Retail/office-in historic house, Great Western Lodging office, Arapahoe Architects office and residential second floor unit) in 3 primary buildings and 2 sheds.
Option 2 of the letter requests that the eastern side of the 300 North Main block be removed from the Downtown Overlay District.
139 1
Staff Analysis
Lot 1 of the master plan and subject property is located in the North Main Street Residential Character Area and has a historic structure on it. In 1990, the owner, Mr. Dosse, applied and received approval for a change of use from residential to commercial use for the historic home. The property had an interior remodel in 2001 which states on the building permit that it was to be used for commercial purposes. From what staff can deduce from the property files, the home has been used for commercial use for the past 28 years, albeit vacant recently. With the 2007 implementation of the Downtown Overlay District, conversion of the property back to residential would not meet the ground floor residential use restriction.
Staff is sympathetic to the owner’s request and understands that there has been difficulty in selling the property. Staff has visited the property with the listing realtors and believes that there remains commercial potential for the right buyer. Staff is recommending the Town Council not create a variance process for historic properties residential in character. Staff is concerned that, if a variance process was established for historic structures of residential character, this could set a precedent for similar requests throughout the Downtown Overlay District. It is important to note that three of the four Character Areas that make up Main Street, with the exception of the Core Commercial Character Area around the 100 block of Main Street, are residential in character as seen in the Character Area map of the Historic District below. Many of those surviving historic structures are residential in character such as Starbucks, Breckenridge Associates, Little Creatures, Ready Paint Fire, Vertical Runner, and so on. If allowed, we believe it has the potential to detract from the goal of maintaining a flow of commercial uses within the Downtown Overlay District.
Staff further recommends that the Council not remove the 300 North Main Street block from the Overlay District. Change to make an area more commercially vibrant takes time, as was noted when the Overlay District was established in 2007. With the potential of the North Main Street area, with the new Prospector Park, proximity to the gondola, and vacant commercial property on the west side of N. Main and gondola lots, staff believes that it is too soon to abandon the commercial potential there, and therefore does not support either of these requests.
Staff will be available at the Town Council meeting to answer any questions.
140 Page 2
141 Page 3
322A N. Main St. Dosse Court Sub., Lot 1
142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members From: Laurie Best-Community Development Department Date: 1/17/2018 Subject: Lincoln Park at Wellington Neighborhood Phase 3 and 4 Pricing
The developer of Wellington Neighborhood/Lincoln Park is requesting the Town approve an increase to their sale prices for the final two Phases of Lincoln Park. This impacts thirteen deed restricted units in Phase 3 and the final nine deed restricted units in Phase 4. If approved the maximum permissible sale price of the Phase 3 units would be increased by 3.7% and by 7.4% for the Phase 4 units. All of the Phase 3 units are under contract with the first Phase 3 homes nearing completion. Closings will begin in 30 days +/-. The Phase 4 units should be completed in the spring of 2019 at which time the neighborhood will be built out.
Background: The development of Wellington Neighborhood began in 1999 and the first homes were occupied in the fall of 2000. When complete, there will be 226 deed restricted homes and 56 market rate units. As of January 2018, there are 22 deed restricted and 7 market rate units left to complete the neighborhood. The annexation agreement that was originally negotiated in 1999 contains rules and conditions for the development of the neighborhood and these rules/conditions establish the basic framework for the project. Among other things, the annexation agreement includes the affordability benchmarks (AMI targets) for the deed restricted units and the maximum allowed sale price formula. It should be noted that since 1999 the annexation agreement has been modified five times, in 2006 to add the details for Wellington Phase 2 development, in 2010 to convert double homes to small single family homes, in 2014 to modify the Lincoln Park pricing formula, add carports for the 80% AMI units, and approve subordinations for vertical financing, in 2015 to expedite the 80% AMI units, and in 2017 to modify the vertical subordination language. These changes were approved by previous Councils in response to changing market/development conditions. The developer is asking for a sixth modification to the annexation agreement for a price increase to modify the pricing formula that was established in 2014.
That pricing formula approved in 2014 utilizes the local AMI as published by HUD and specified interest rates (5-6.5%) to calculate the maximum permissible/affordable sale price. The pricing formula that was in effect from 1999 through 2014 used the same basic formula but allowed the developer to use the then current prevailing interest rates which varied from 7% in 2000 down to 3.5% by 2012. In 2014 the prevailing rates were 3.5-4% and there was concern that the historically low interest rates would result in higher sale prices because housing is more affordable when rates are low. Therefore, the formula was revised to reflect a fixed 5 to 6.5% range, just slightly higher than prevailing in order to insure the prices would be more affordable to local workforce based on their buying power as indicated by AMI and would stay affordable to the initial target as rates increase.
However, since that annexation agreement was negotiated in 2014 the AMI published by HUD has declined, and because the pricing formula relies on AMI, the developer has been unable to increase pricing. It should be noted that the 2014 formula did include an AMI floor so the developer was protected and did not have to decrease pricing when it dropped, but they have been unable to increase pricing. During this same time, construction costs have increased approximately 20% and other indexes such as CPI and local wage data would indicate that incomes/wages probably did increase 2014-present. As the Council is aware, AMI is not an ideal measure of local employee income and 152 1 especially of the change over time, it can be erratic, HUD can change the methodology, and it appears to be 4-5 years delayed in regard to actual local conditions. Unfortunately, there are no other indexes available to measure employee household income so in general we have continued to rely on AMI for pricing but are moving away from AMI for calculating appreciation.
Summary/Recommendation: This issue was reviewed with the Housing Committee on January 9th at which time the developer explained the AMI issue and also presented their pricing for Phase 3 (see attached). As noted these units are all under contract at the higher base prices that vary from $348,583 for a two bedroom double home to $446,083 for a 3 bedroom single family home. It should be noted that these buyers can and have opted to add up to 10% for capital improvements that they can recoup at resale and they have also opted for upgrades that may not be recouped at resale. It appears that there is still significant demand for the units at these prices, and that they do serve a segment of the workforce that includes higher income households. Because there is demand and because of the increase to construction costs staff has no objection to the request for a 3.7% increase to the maximum sale price for the last 22 units(Phase 3 and 4) and would support that change. However, it is recommended that the developer and staff meet again after the 2018 AMI is released this spring to review any further increase above 3.7% for the final Phase 4 units.
Since we are approaching the final buildout of Wellington Neighborhood, staff is also tracking the other final obligations relative to the master plans, plats, and wetland issues. We believe the developer is on schedule to meet the various deadlines and triggers for completion. (see table at the end of this memo)
Finally, it should be noted that if the Council supports the request for the price increase, that does require a sixth amendment to the Annexation Agreement which must be approved by a Resolution. We have talked with the Town Attorney and we believe that the earliest that a Resolution could be scheduled for formal adoption is sometime in February. The developer does have several closings anticipated in February and has been advised that technically they are assuming some risk by closing before the Resolution has final approval.
In conclusion, we support the revised pricing as discussed above. We’ll attend the Council worksession to discuss this request and look forward to your input.
153 Page 2
OBLIGATION DEADLINE/TRIGGER STATUS as of 1/16/2018 Midnight Sun Pedestrian Bridge Prior to completion of Phase 2 Anticipate CO for bridge by January 19, 2018 Grading/Improvement of Stables Prior to completion of Phase 2 complete Road Completion of Vern Johnson Prior to completion of Phase 2 Anticipate CO for park by Park January 19, 2018-bond for landscaping to be complete in the summer Phase-3 ROW and paving Prior to completion of Phase 3 On-going Stables Road Central Park Pedestrian Bridge Prior to completion of Phase 3 On-going (bridge is complete but lands onto Boss Green which is still a construction site- developer indicates the bridge will be available for use in early summer 2018) Phase-4 ROW Prior to completion of Phase 4 Will be complete as part of Phase 4 Bridge Street Vehicular Bridge Prior to CO’s for 50% of Phase 4 Developer indicates this bridge units will be complete summer 2018 Final Trails, French Creek Prior to completion of Phase 4 Will be complete as part of Easement, Public Open Space Dedication by Phase 4 Plat Phase 4 EPA Approved Wetlands Plan Letter from EPA approving the Developer indicates they’ll and completion of off-site plan must be received by Town have EPA approved plan early construction prior to recording Filing 4 plat February with work complete and the required mitigation must fall of 2018—note the be completed in accordance with completion schedule will be triggers/plan approved by the established by the EPA in the EPA approved plan. EPA indicates they have not received the plan yet (1/11/18)
Public Improvements for Phase Bond in place Progressing 3 and 4 (utilities, sidewalks, etc.)
154 Page 3
Phase 3 homes and pricing AMI Model Lot Block Address Category Description Sqft Pricing* DEED RESTRICTED HOMES Aspen II 2 3 16 Boss Green 100%/Cat4 3bed/1.75bath 1223 $429,876 Honey Locust 1 3 10 Boss Green 100%/Cat4 3bed/2bath 1274 $429,876 Hawthorne III 5 3 15 Boss Green 120%/Cat5 3bed/2bath 1544 $446,083 Willow 6a 3 11 Placer Green 100%/Cat3 3bed/2bath 1287 $364,545 Fir 6b 3 15 Placer Green 100%/Cat2 2bed/1.5bath 1008 $348,583 Fir 7a 3 39 Placer Green 100%/Cat2 2bed/1.5bath 1008 $348,583 Willow 7b 3 33 Placer Green 100%/Cat3 3bed/2bath 1287 $364,545 Honey Locust 8 3 27 Placer Green 100%/Cat4 3bed/2bath 1274 $429,876 Juniper II 9 3 22 Placer Green 120%/Cat5 3bed/2bath 1491 $446,083 Cottonwood II 10 3 30 Placer Green 120%/Cat5 3bed/2bath 1494 $446,083 Honey Locust 11 3 42 Placer Green 100%/Cat4 3bed/2bath 1274 $429,876 Hawthorne III 12 3 16 Placer Green 120%/Cat5 3bed/2bath 1544 $446,083 Oak 13 3 10 Placer Green 100%/Cat4 3bed/2bath 1469 $429,876
Fir 2 Phase 4 Homes Willow 2 Fir 1 Aspen II 1 Willow 1 Honey Locust 3 Aspen II 1 Oak 1 Honey Locust 1 Juniper II 1 Oak 2 Cottonwood II 1 Cottonwood 1 Hawthorne III 2 Hawthorne 2 13 9
155 Memo
To: Breckenridge Town Council Members
From: Mark Truckey, Assistant Director of Community Development
Date: 1/17/2018
Subject: Upper Blue TDR Price
At the Council’s December 12 work session, staff discussed an adjustment to the price of TDRs in the Upper Blue Basin. As we discussed, the price of TDRs has not kept pace with the cost of purchasing backcountry land. The TDR price has actually decreased the last four years while backcountry acquisition costs have increased. The reason for this difference is the current TDR pricing methodology, which staff has found is not accurately reflecting backcountry land costs. As such, staffs from the Town and the County are proposing a change to the TDR methodology. Please refer to the memo for the December 12 work session for more background.
Since December, the County and Town staffs have done more fine-tuning to the data spreadsheet to ensure that all private and public transactions of backcountry land have been accurately reflected in the data. With this further refining, the dollar amounts have been slightly adjusted. These final adjustments resulted in dropping the price from $69,869 (as proposed in December) to $64,600. For comparison, the current TDR price is $47,800. Given that the goal of this effort was to see an increase in TDR price that more reflected costs, staff has some concerns with this final adjusted price. Therefore, we wanted to receive Council feedback on two options for setting the TDR price. The Board of County Commissioners will also be discussing the price options on January 23.
Option 1. Median of All Time Sales
This option was used to calculate the $64,600 TDR price listed above. The price is based on an evaluation of all private and public transactions of backcountry land since the County and Town open space programs were initiated back in the mid-1990s. Our first acquisitions were in 1995. Pros and cons of this approach include:
Pros
It looks at the full history of backcountry acquisitions and establishes a price that reflects a modest increase (35 percent) over the existing TDR price. If we were to base the TDR price on cost of the price we are paying today (or even in the last five years), the price of a TDR would exceed $140,000. Staff feels that would be too large of a jump in price. The $64,600 price reverses the downward trend of TDR prices and moves us in the correct direction. The price will be annually adjusted to reflect another year’s data, thus we have every reason to believe that this price will move upwards over time.
Cons
The $64,600 price is still fairly underinflated compared to the actual costs to acquire backcountry land. As the Council may recall, the initial goal of setting a TDR price was to recoup most of the dollars it would cost to go out and purchase more backcountry land. With a current acquisition price of over $140,000 per TDR, we are falling well short of recouping these costs. We should note that staff feels a full 100 percent recoupment is not needed, because the backcountry land still has some 156 1 value after density has been stripped from it. When a TDR is placed in the bank, the density is stripped off a backcountry property but the Town and County retain ownership of the property.
Option 2. Median of All Sales Since 2000
The TDR program was initiated in July, 2000. Given this, another viable date for the price setting would be all sales from 2000 and onwards. Using the median of all sales since 2000, the TDR price would be $82,500.
Pros
The $82,500 price (compared to the $64,600 price in Option 1) comes closer to reflecting actual costs of acquiring backcountry land. However, it is still short of actual prices being paid today for backcountry lands. Similar to Option 1, it reverses the current downward trend of TDR prices and the price should continue to slowly escalate over time. The $82,500 price will provide more $ to the County and Town open space programs for purposes of acquiring backcountry property.
Cons
The price is about $18,000 higher than under Option 1 and is a 71 percent increase over today’s price. Some may feel that it is too much of an increase from today’s price. In contrast, the $64,600 price under Option 1 reflects a 35 percent increase over today’s price.
Ultimately the TDR price is a policy decision that both the BOCC and Town Council need to make. The current TDR price, along with either of the above options, still falls well short of actual backcountry land costs. Thus, the decision hinges on questions such as: how much do we need to recoup for land we acquire and place in the TDR program?; and how much are developers willing to pay for TDRs? Staff feels that Option 2 comes closer to setting an appropriate price for TDRs, given today’s costs of purchasing backcountry land. However, we look for Council input on the policy questions stated above and other issues the Council may identify.
Administrative Fees
The TDR program previously included a 10 percent administrative fee for all acquisitions. This fee is included to account for the time the County spends administering various aspects of a TDR acquisition (e.g., extinguishing density off TDR sending parcels, drafting staff reports, issuing TDR certificates). At the December Council work session, Council requested that the County re-examine this fee. Summit County has re-evaluated the fee and is now proposing to have a separate stand-alone application fee that will accompany all TDR applications. The fee would be based on hours of work devoted to an application, with additional hours charged for larger TDR transactions, which require more work.
Current Development Proposals
There are a couple development proposals (one approved by the County, another currently undergoing review with the Town) that would require a sizable amount of TDRs. These developers would be advised that they may prospectively purchase TDRs at today’s TDR price until before the time that the BOCC and Town Council take action to jointly approve a resolution setting the new TDR price (tentatively slated for February 6 and February 13).
Council Action
Staff will be available to answer any questions that the Council may have. We look for Council direction regarding which of the above options for establishing the TDR price is more preferable.
Page 2 157