Loading...
TC Council Packet 12-14-2004r STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF EAGLE ) SS TOWN OF AVON ? NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A WORK SESSION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, WILL BE HELD DECEMBER 14, 2004, AT 2:30 P.M. IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 400 BENCHMARK ROAD, AVON, COLORADO FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE FOLLOWING: 2:30 PM - 3:30 PM 1) Executive Session - (Conferring with Town Attorney) - The topic meets the requirements of C.R.S. 24-6-402-4 (e) - Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators. "Conferring with Town Attorney and discussing negotiation strategy in connection with possible condemnation proceeding." 3:30 PM - 4:00 PM 2) Council Assignment Updates - Open Space Committee / Eaton Parcel Update (Mayor Wolfe) 2005 Council Assignments (Mayor Wolfe) Avon Comprehensive Plan Update (Councilor McDevitt) 4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 3) Discussion of Potential School Site Locations within the Village at Avon Planned Unit Development (Tambi Katieb) - Review of the pro's and con's of potential school sites as evaluated by staff. 4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 4) White Paper on Town Borrowing Options, etc. (Scott Wright) - Discussion of Town borrowing options, debt capacity limitations, election requirements, and constitutional provisions affecting taxation and spending. 4:30 PM - 4:50 PM 5) Staff Updates a. West Avon-USFS Property / Trail System (Norm Wood) - update on meeting with Forest Service to discuss potential trail systems across the parcel b. 1-70 Mountain Corridor Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PETS) (Norm Wood) - update on the PEIS process c. Other Educational Topics (Larry Brooks) d. New Businesses in Avon (Patty McKenny) - memo only e. Loading & Delivery Activity on Metcalf Road (Jeff Layman) - memo only Consent Agenda Questions Council Committee Updates AND SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL THIS MEETING IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO BY: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk ¦ Estimated times are shown for informational purposes only, subject to change without notice. ¦ Comments from the public are welcome. POSTED AT THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC PLACES IN THE TOWN OF AVON ON DECEMBER 10, 2004 ? AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, MAIN LOBBY ? ALPINE BANK, MAIN LOBBY ? AVON RECREATION CENTER, MAIN LOBBY ? CITY MARKET, MAIN LOBBY PROPOSED 2005 COUNCILOR ASSIGNMENTS Assigned Area Proposed Changes & Currently Proposed Comments Since all assignments are not committees, Responsible Responsibility change nomenclature to "Councilor Assignments" Liaison With Other Governments & Organizations, Cast, I-70 Group Discontinue the "Eagle County Committee." This is a General and Expected Responsibility of Town Manager, Mayor And Mayor Pro Tem Town Manager, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem; "Eagle County" McDevitt & Wolfe Town Manager, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem TOA Transit Discontinue; Normal Responsibility of Staff and Council Mac McDevitt, Ron Wolfe, Bob Reed NA ECO Board Avon Probably New Chair on Wolfe, Alt: Debbie Ron Wolfe, Alt: Kristi Ferraro Buckley Community Development Expand Role to Include Capital Improvements Planning, Specific Land- Use Proposals and P&Z Membership, Brian Sipes, Ron Wolfe Brian Sipes, Tamra Nottingham Underwood, Chris Evans Functioning and Projects. Add P&Z Chairperson Comp Plan Steering Committee No Changes Now; Consider Specific Implemetation Assignments After Mac McDevitt, Brian Sipes, Amy Phillips Mac McDevitt, Brian Sipes, Amy Phillips Adoption of Plan (Are Three Council Members Ok if Village At Avon Liaison Primarily Town Mgr. Role Town Manager & en Meetings Are Public And Posted?) Mayor, Town Mgr. Marketing: ABA, VVCTB, Cooperative Expand to be More Encompassing Vacant Amy Phillips, Mac McDevitt Marketing W/BC, Others Assigned Area Proposed Changes & Currently Proposed Comments Responsible Responsibility Recreation, WECMRD, Berry Creek Discontinue No Current Activity; Reactivate If BOCC Or WECMRD Plans/Actions Warrant Ron Wolfe, Mac McDevitt NA NWCCOG Brian Wants Reassignment Brian Sipes Kristi Ferraro UERWA Need New Alternate; Debbie Suggests Turnover to New Alternate After Another Year Debbie Buckley Debbie Buckley, Alt: Tamra Nottingham Underwood Home Buyer's Assistance Committee BAC New; Member Being Solicited By Eagle County Housing Department NA Tamra Nottingham Underwood Channel 5 Need New Alt. Debbie Buckley Debbie Buckley, Alt: Amy Phillips Open Space Committee (OSAC Nomination Needed for New Term on Wolfe (Current OSAC Chair); Sipes Alt. Ron Wolfe, Alt: Brian Sipes If Interested in Continuing. Eagle County School District New Assignment NA Tamra Underwood Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thns Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Tambi Katieb, AICP - Community Development Director Date: December 8, 2004 Re: Discussion of potential School Site locations within the Village at Avon Planned Unit Development ("PUD") Background: As you are all aware, the Village at Avon PUD & Annexation and Development Agreement require the dedication of a "School Site" within the project boundaries. The requirement for dedication is predicated on the site meeting the school dedication requirements set forth in the Avon Municipal Code. Currently, the dedication site is known as Planning Area G, and is situated on 7.3 acres of land (.4% of the entire property) immediately east and adjacent to the Post Boulevard 1-70 interchange. It is bounded on both the north and southwest sides by Rights of Way, and on the northeast and southeast by Planning Area RMF1- 24.2 acres of land (1.4% of the entire property) zoned as Residential Multi-family at 6 dwelling units per acre. Through the course of deliberations of the last major amendment request to the PUD, it became apparent that this site was not acceptable to the School District, the Town and the Developer for a number of reasons. For purposes of this discussion, it is also important to understand that this dedication be used by either the Town (or ultimately the School District) exclusively for: "...school, outdoor recreation, parks or open space purposes and for no other purpose (including municipal purposes) without the Town having first obtained Owner's written consent." (Article 4.3(o of the Village at Avon Annexation and Development Agreement) Clearly, the eventual use of the site is a school, not a bus barn or other support facility, and in any case the dedication and conveyance is initially made to the Town and not the School District. These qualities of the dedication are important for you to consider as we review the `pros and cons' of each potential site evaluated by staff, how these sites fit within the existing Village at Avon PUD and the overarching Town wide goals being discussed in the Comprehensive Plan update, as well as how the potential new site would fit within the existing and desired land use patterns of the Town. Research Summary: Several weeks ago, staff forwarded a broad evaluation of potential alternative school sites with the PUD to Town Council. This evaluation (attached) reviewed seven potential sites, and analyzed both advantages and disadvantages to each site. At the same time, my staff has contacted the Colorado Department of Education and researched a number of generally accepted school siting guidelines. Though many of these guidelines are rooted in extremely technical considerations (NEPA Assessments, Geologic Hazard Evaluation, etc.), there are several general land-use planning considerations that appear to be fairly consistent: ¦ Sites should be located near the center of probable student populations. ¦ Sites should be located as near as possible to existing and proposed community facilities, including parks, recreations centers, health centers, etc. • Locations where zoning may permit conflicting uses such as commercial and industrial centers and congested business centers should be avoided. • In urban areas, the educational facility and the neighborhood should be related in a spatial sense- not isolating the school from the community it serves. ¦ For elementary schools in particular, sites should be located to safeguard children from arterial highways, heavily traveled streets, and traffic. Tempering these broad site selection considerations to the relevant policy contexts of the Town, particularly in light of the overall visioning and planning deliberations of the Comprehensive Plan update (and the existing Village at Avon PUD Development Plan), I would suggest that the following discussion further narrow the potential alternative school sites: The draft Community Framework Plan creates a depth to both sides of Avon Road in terms of commercial activity and visitor bed base. Goal and Policy discussions at the Steering Committee level are recommending that the area of the Village at Avon PUD zoned Village Center (Planning Area A) provides the logical conclusion to the mixed use redevelopment desired for properties between Chapel Square and Avon Road. Spatially, Planning Areas B and C of the Village at Avon PUD plan create a "bookend" to the commercial and mixed-use activity of the Town, an area not dissimilar in design to the area surrounding the municipal park, recreation facility, and fairly low density residential development. This has been discussed as a generally desirable land use pattern to retain during the Comprehensive Plan update meetings. Planning Areas B and C provide for cultural, recreational, and community amenities, while Planning Areas D, E and F provide for residential densities comparable to the Avon Municipal Code Residential Medium Density and Residential High Density. These Town zoning designations are most prevalent on the properties surrounding Nottingham Park, and also include the Sun Ridge development. The final build-out requirements of the Village at Avon PUD guide provide for minimum and maximum ratios of commercial and residential development, stated as a percentage of the aggregate square footage of development. The ratio does not include those areas zoned exclusively for residential uses north of 1-70. Of the entire PUD, the highest residential and lowest commercial ratio is contained within three planning areas - D, E and F. In fact, there is no minimum commercial development percentage required for these three areas. Recommendation: Though the last PUD amendment proposed a school site on Tract M (currently zoned as Regional Commercial) surrounded by mixed-use residential development, for the reasons stated in this memo I would recommend that should a new PUD amendment be submitted to move the existing school site, it be moved to one of two locations - Planning Area D or Planning Area F. While both recommended sites provide for logical land use contexts to place a school, there are several technical considerations that will need further exploration by the applicant and the School District at the time of application: ¦ Significant grading is required to Area D to guarantee access. Likewise, the soils should be evaluated to ensure the site is buildable at a finished grade. ¦ Access to a site within either Planning Area will require a higher level of PUD planning to that area of the project, specifically as it relates to the `parkway concept that currently exists on the plans. Residential access and lot configuration (particularly Planning Area F) should be refined to at least a preliminary level of review by the applicant. ¦ The list of uses by right for either of these areas should be clarified, particularly for Planning Area F if considered since it currently permits commercial uses. • The timing and construction of the overhead pedestrian bridge requires clarification, and in any case should be linked to the Certificate of Occupancy of the school itself so that the affordable housing component of the project (Buffalo Ridge) can be physically and socially connected to the Town through the Village at Avon. ¦ The `backfilling' of uses and densities on the currently approved school site requires clarification. The site appears to be most conducive to residential densities, and the PUD guide should be clarified as to the extent of commercial uses contained within planning area RMF-1. ¦ Tract M should be clarified in the amendment application as to uses, and amended to remove the regional commercial designation. Discussions during the Comprehensive Plan update appear to support a residential-only designation for uses north of 1-70 (including Tract M). Town Manager Comments: ]?. Attachments: ¦ The Village (at Avon) Potential School Site Evaluation dated Nov. 29, 2004 FACounciNMEMOS\2004\VAA School Site PotLocDiscussion121404.doc The Village (at Avon) Potential School Site Evaluation November 29, 2004 Planning Area G/RMF-1/Modified (Current Location North of I-70, Move to northwesterly corner of RMF-1 across Post Blvd. from Planning Area N, proposed park and away from I-70) Advantages: 1. Centrally located to all residential areas in The Village PUD. 2. Centrally located and easily accessed by I-70 from all residential areas in the region. 3. Across relatively low traffic volume street from proposed park. Street could be bridged to provide separated crossing from school to park. 4. Site grading should elevate southern portion of site above typical Interstate related activities providing separation and screening. 5. Regraded site should have good access from residential streets at northwesterly and southeasterly corners of property. 6. Site is close to proposed location for emergency services (fire and ambulance) providing (a) immediate response to the school in emergencies and (b) a presence that is a deterrent to any unsavory or illegal activity. 7. Should site remain in Town possession, increased general recreation area adjacent to park for regional purposes. Disadvantages: 1. Requires regrading of site with controlled embankment construction. 2. Reduces RMF-1 residential development area from original PUD, or requires adjustment of RMF-1 development area. Planning Area G/RMF-1 (Current Location North of I-70, across Post Blvd. from Planning Area N (proposed park) and adjacent to I-70) Advantages: 1. Centrally located to all residential areas in The Village PUD. 2. Centrally located and easily accessed by I-70 from all residential areas in the region. 3. Across street from proposed park. 4. Site is close to proposed location for emergency services (fire and ambulance) providing (a) immediate response to the school in emergencies and (b) a presence that is a deterrent to any unsavory or illegal activity. Disadvantages: 1. Reduces RMF-1 residential development area from original PUD. 2. Site is adjacent to I-70 and Post Boulevard Interchange with no physical or visual separation. C Documents And Settings\Tkatieb\Desktop\School Site Analysis-Rev.Doc Planning Area M Previously Proposed Location Outside Current Village PUD Development Plan Advantages: 1. Open, undisturbed area provides maximum flexibility for school site layout and uses provided they are compatible with surrounding uses. 2. Provides opportunity to establish surrounding uses most compatible with school site. 3. Located at end of street eliminating most by-pass (unrelated traffic). 4. Reasonably good access for both Village and Regional residential areas if access is across USFS land from Post Blvd. 5. Site is physically separated from I-70 and other potential problem areas Disadvantages: 1. Requires Special Permit to construct road across USFS property for most direct access. 2. Alternate access routes (around USFS Property or from US Highway 6) are excessively long or do not provide convenient access from residential areas in The Village PUD resulting in: a. Isolated area without multiple access routes. b. Not centrally located to residential areas in The Village PUD. C. Not centrally located and easily accessed from regional residential areas. 3. Conflicts with regional commercial uses currently entitled. Planning Area J Across Post Blvd. from Wal-Mart - Approximate Location as Designated on Original PUD Advantages: 1. Easily accessible from all residential areas in The Village PUD. 2. Centrally located and easily accessed by I-70 from all residential areas in the region. Disadvantages: 1. Site is adjacent to major arterial (high traffic street) Post Blvd. 2. Site is surrounded by high traffic commercial areas. 3. Underlying soil conditions are unknown. CADocuments And Settings\Tkatieb\Desktop\School Site Analysis- Rev. Doc 2 Planning Area D Currently Designated as Village Residential Adjacent to I-70 Across from Buffalo Ridge Housing Advantages: 1. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the Village. 2. Adjacent to Interstate but away from Interchange. 3. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the region. 4. Vertical separation from Village Core and commercial area. 5. Possible bike/pedestrian connection to Village trail and residential areas by bridge over I-70. 6. Located at end of street eliminating most by-pass (unrelated traffic). Disadvantages: 1. Underlying soil conditions are unknown. 2. Building pad may require extensive rework for structural stability. 3. Interstate noise may be significant for outdoor activities Planning Area A Located Adjacent to City Market and Chapel Square and Currently Designated as Village Center Advantages: 1. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the Village. 2. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the region. 3. Potential for relatively flat undisturbed site Disadvantages: 1. School is incompatible with existing and anticipated surrounding development. 2. Site is located in center of anticipated high-density commercial area. 3. Site is adjacent to and accessed from major collector/arterial street (East Beaver Creek Blvd. 4. School in this location separates Village Commercial Core from current Town Core rather than tying together for seamless development. Planning Area F Currently Designated as Village Residential Adjacent Ice Skating/Cultural Center Advantages: 1. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the Village. CA\Documents And Settings\Tkatieb\Desktop\School Site Analysis-Rev. Doc 2. Centrally located and easily accessed from all residential areas in the region (including potential pedestrian access from Eaglebend). 3. Potential for relatively flat undisturbed site. 4. Logical site for Town owned recreation and passive/active park should school not require land dedication in future. Disadvantages: 1. Site is adjacent to and accessed from major collector/arterial street (East Beaver Creek Blvd. 2. Close proximity to busy cultural, recreational, and event center may be a conflict if not adequately buffered. CAADocuments And Settings\Tkatieb\DesktopASchool Site Analysis-Rev.Doc 4 Larry Brooks From: Karen Strakbein [kttrakbein@eagleschools.net] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:16 AM To: Larry Brooks Subject: Village at Avon School Site Village at Avon Area D.pdf Larry, Attached is a letter that was sent to Traer Creek as a result of the Board meeting last night. I included a cc to you and the Town Council. Please accept this e-mail as the "carbon copy". Thanks, Karen Karen Strakbein Director of Finance Eagle County School District PO Box 740 Eagle, CO 81631 W. (970) 328-2747 F. (970) 328-1024 1 W A ? ??? m. EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT RE 50J P.O. sox 740 • EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 • (970) 328-6321 • FAX (970) 328-1024 November 9, 2004 Mr. Magnus Lindholm, Manager Traer Creek LLC PO Box 640 Vail, CO 81658 RE: VILLAGE AT AVON SCHOOL SITE Dear Mr. Lindholm, As you know, on August 3, 2004, the U.S. Forest Service denied the application for an easement to provide adequate access to Parcel M. As a result of this action, it became necessary for the school district, the Traer Creek LLC and the Town of Avon to look to other planning areas for the school site. On November 10`h, the Board of Education discussed possible optional sites. Additionally, on November 17th the Board of Education held a community meeting to listen to the community thoughts regarding the location of the school site. At this meeting, most participants felt that the school site should be located on the valley floor. At the December 8, 2004, Board of Education meeting, the Board discussed the possibility of the school site being located on planning area D, F or RMF-1. Based upon their discussion, the Board of Education would like to request that Traer Creek LLC proceed with planning the school site within planning area D. Additionally, the school district is willing to work with the developer on the shape of the parcel to meet both the district's building needs and the developer's design limitations. During this planning process, the school district would respectfully request the following considerations are applied to this school site: • Access and all utilities are delivered to the school site boundary at the developer's expense. • As school buildings, parking lots and athletic fields require large, flat footprints, we would request that the entire 7.3 acres be buildable and that the slope of the property be minimal. We recommend that, at a minimum, 80% of the School Site shall have a slope of 10% or less and the balance of the School Site shall have a slope of 20% or less. • The school site should be adequately buffered from any proposed commercial development by either residential land uses or a community park. • The timing of when the school site is available for development is critical. The Board requests that a reasonable development phasing plan be established to ensure that the school site is prepared and ready for development commensurate with the pace of residential development within the project. 54-a-91 5" Student 5:6 -5-14 Finally, the district would like to recommend that we enter into a school site agreement with the school district, Traer Creek LLC and the Town of Avon detailing these items. A draft of an agreement was produced when Parcel M was being considered. With your permission, the district will revise this agreement for Parcel D and, if executed, it could be included in the PUD approval process that relocates the school site to Parcel D. We look forward to working with you to identify and planning the future school site in the Village at Avon development. We believe that in working together we can jointly locate and finalize a superior school site for the residents of the Avon area. Sincerely, Karen Strakbein Assistant Superintendent cc Avon Town Council Larry Brooks, Town Manager 51datalG 15-r y stude tt 5;a .Saereaa Town of Avon Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Scott Wright, Finance Directo/ h? Date: December 9, 2004 Re: White Paper on Town borrowing options, debt capacity limitations, election requirements, and constitutional provisions affecting taxation and spending Summa nr. Included in council members' packets this week is a report to Council on the background and impacts of the Gallagher Amendment and the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), and an overview of various Town borrowing options, as well as some attachments regarding special financing districts and the Town's current debt service requirements. I will go over the key points of this report and answer any questions during Tuesday's worksession. Town Manager Comments: Attachments: White Paper Page 1 WHITE PAPER INTRODUCTION This white paper has been prepared with two objectives in mind: first to provide background and relevant information on the two Colorado constitutional provisions that control and mandate how local governments manage their finances relative to taxes and debt,; secondly to summarize the Town's ability and options when it comes to borrowing funds. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Two constitutional provisions limit property taxes in Colorado. The Gallagher Amendment sets a statewide cap on the taxable value of homes and other residential property; TABOR restricts the amount that each local government's property taxes may increase each year and requires voter approval for most tax rate increases. Although property taxes, like property values, tend to increase over time, these provisions have combined to hold down such increases, especially for homeowners, and have had unexpected consequences for local governments. Gallagher Amendment. The Gallagher Amendment was part of a 1982 property tax reform effort due to concerns over a lack of uniformity in assessing property for tax purposes and the potential for significant tax increases based on skyrocketing property values resulting from high inflation in the mid-1970s. Originally introduced and debated in the legislature as House Concurrent Resolution 82-1005, the measure provided immediate tax relief for residential property owners by lowering the residential assessment rate from 30 percent to 21 percent. However, prior to approving the measure and submitting it to voters, the legislature adopted an amendment establishing a long- term mechanism for providing residential property tax relief, commonly referred to as the Gallagher Amendment. Approved by voters at the November, 1982 general election, the Gallagher Amendment was drafted as a means for holding down residential property taxes in the future as home values rose by maintaining a constant ratio between property tax revenues from residential and commercial property. This constitutional amendment structured property taxes so that residential taxpayers support 45% of the property tax burden, while commercial taxpayers support 55% of the property tax burden. Per the requirements of the Gallagher Amendment, commercial property assessment rates (the percent of property value that is subject to taxation) are stabilized at 29%, while residential assessment rates fluctuate to maintain the percentage ratio. The fluctuations, in taxable percentages on residential property, are directly connected to fluctuations in the taxpayer base and the change in. property values. The effect of Gallagher has been to reduce the assessment rate whenever statewide total residential property values increase faster than business property values. Since the 'L passage of Gallagher, actual values for residential real property have grown at a faster rate than those of nonresidential property. Between 1986 and 2002, the actual value of residential property grew nearly twice as fast as the actual value of nonresidential property. The total actual value of residential real property in 2002 is three times the amount of nonresidential property values. Because of this dramatic increase in residential real estate values the assessment rate for residential property has declined over the years. Since 1987, when the amendment was first implemented, the rate has declined from 21 percent to 7.96 percent, or a reduction of 62 percent. The following chart shows how the residential assessment rate has declined since Gallagher's inception. The chart also shows the Legislative Council Staff's projected decline in the residential assessment rate. \ssesslllerlt Years Residential l\SSCSSIllellt Ratc (° ) 1983 - 1986 21.00 1987 18.00 1988 16.00 1989 - 1990 15.00 1991 -1992 14.34 1993 -1994 12.86 1995 - 1996 10.36 1997 -2000 9.74 2001 -2002 9.15 2003 - 2004 7.96 2005 - 2006* 7.60 2007 - 2008* 7.25 * Projected In summary, Gallagher prevents the shifting of a larger share of the property tax burden to residential property owners. The value of residential property now accounts for 75 percent of all property in the state, yet the residential share of property taxes is estimated to be closer to 47 percent. Finally, because of the passage of TABOR, the residential assessment rate can only remain constant or decline, because TABOR requires voter approval for any increase in the assessment rate for a class of property. This additional complication is commonly referred to as the "ratchet down effect". Tax Payers' Bill of Rights (TABOR). TABOR is a tax-and-spending limitation, constitutional amendment approved by the voters in 1992, and is contained in Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution. TABOR's main objectives were to contain government taxation and spending growth. TABOR requires voter approval of all tax 2 and debt increases and other changes in tax policy. TABOR also requires various public disclosures and ballot information about proposed tax or spending increases. TABOR mandates restrictions on both taxes and government spending and is currently the most stringent tax and spending limitation measure in the country. TABOR imposes both substantive and procedural limits. The substantive limits define the maximum amount of both general revenues as well as property tax revenues that government can retain and spend. Any increase in taxes or debt, at either the state or local level, must be approved by the voters. TABOR limits the amount of revenue growth the state can retain and spend to the sum of inflation and population growth. Revenue growth above that limit must be rebated to taxpayers. A similar limit is imposed on the growth of revenue and spending at the local level. The procedural limits necessitates voter approval for government to issue new debt, raise taxes, or to retain any revenue that is in excess of the maximum amount, as determined by TABOR's revenue growth formulas. Additionally, this amendment requires local governments to maintain an emergency reserve fund equal to 3% of fiscal year spending. This emergency reserve fund cannot be used to assuage problems related to changing economic conditions, revenue shortfalls, or salary and fringe benefit increases for employees. de-Brucing. Many local governments have contemplated ballot issues which seek a broad form of revenue and spending authorization and which are totally unrelated to any specific tax increase or dollar amount of new revenue. This concept is commonly referred to as "de-Brucing" and is based on the notion that TABOR is fundamentally intended to empower voters, and nothing in TABOR explicitly prevents voters from granting open-ended authorization for a government to keep and spend all revenues which might be derived from particular revenue sources. In November, 1998, the voters of Avon passed such a ballot issue authorizing the Town to keep and spend all revenues, thus, effectively de-Brucing the Town from any revenue or spending limitation. Several TABOR limitations continue to have an impact on Town of Avon tax revenues. The first is the apparent prohibition on mill levy increases, even if the levy is raised in the face of declining valuations simply to keep revenue constant. Second is the prohibition on any new or increased transfer taxes on property. Multiple Fiscal year Obligations. TABOR requires voter approval in advance for "creation of any multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect district debt or other financial obligation". This language now requires a vote for a wide variety of types of debt which were not required under the Town's charter. However, certain types of contracts which are subject to annual appropriation have been determined not to be a multi-year obligation. These financing vehicles will be discussed later under the section entitled Certificates of Participation. 3 4 MUNICIPAL BORROWING Town Charter. The Town's Municipal Charter gives approval for various types of borrowings including short-term notes, general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, special or local improvement bonds and any other legally recognized security which the Council may provide. Prior to the passage of TABOR, the Town was authorized to issue up to $5,000,000 of general obligation bonds without voter approval. The Town could also issue revenue bonds provided that the bonds be payable from the net revenue derived from the project or improvement for which the bonds were issued, as well as sales and/or use taxes. Subsequent to TABOR, all municipal borrowings save refundings must be approved in advance by the voters. Limitation of Indebtedness. The Town Charter provides that general obligation indebtedness not exceed the greater of $15,000,000 or 25% of the assessed valuation. Based on the Town's 2004 assessed valuation, this limit is calculated to be $38,236,245. The Town's current general obligation bonds outstanding is $5,470,000 thus leaving an amount of $32,766,245 that could potentially be issued. General Obligation Bonds. General obligation bonds (G.O. bonds) are bonds that are legally backed by the full faith and credit of the Town. The Town is legally obligated to use its full taxing power, if necessary, to repay the debt. The primary advantage to using G.O. bonds is the low cost of issuance and low interest rates. Since the bonds are legally backed by the full faith and credit of the issuer, they are considered very low risk for the investor; consequently, they usually sell at the lowest rates of interest. The bond issue is often less complex then other types of bonds so related costs of issuance are typically less than other types of issuances. G.O. bonds have a further advantage in that they do not require a debt reserve fund or use the services of a trustee, both of which may be necessary when issuing revenue bonds. One disadvantage of G.O. bonds is that they are generally not supported directly by the projects they finance and that there is often not a direct correlation between taxpayers benefiting from the project with the taxpayers paying for the project. However, it can be argued that all taxpayers benefit from certain types of general public-purpose facilities and improvements, and therefore the burden for repaying the bonds for such projects is rightly distributed among all taxpayers. Revenue Bonds. Revenue bonds are typically issued to finance public facilities or improvements that have a definable user or revenue base. These bonds are secured by a specific source of funds, either from the operations of the project being financed or from a dedicated revenue stream (i.e. sales taxes), rather than the general taxing powers of a jurisdiction; hence, revenue bonds are considered less secure than general obligation bonds. Revenue bonds are subject to more stringent issuance requirements than general obligation bonds. Issuers may be required to maintain a debt service reserve fund to be 4 6 used for debt service payments if planned revenues do not fully materialize. In addition, market conditions may compel issuers to enhance the credit of the bonds by purchasing bond insurance. One advantage of revenue bonds is that beneficiaries of the projects are often the ones paying for the debt service on the bonds if the bonds are repaid with a revenue source associated with the program or project that is being financed. However, revenue bonds generally carry higher interest rates than general obligation bonds because the risk of default is greater. Certificates of Participation (COPS). Certificates of Participation are defined as lease financing agreements-in the form of tax exempt securities that can be marketed to investors in a manner similar to tax exempt bonds. Legally, COPS are not considered a multiple-fiscal obligation under TABOR, however, and can therefore be issued by a vote of the Town Council rather than requiring a vote of the residents of the Town. In CON financing, title to a leased asset is assigned by the lessor to a trustee (non-profit corporation) that holds it for the benefit of the investors, the certificate holders. The participation of many investors in the lease transaction allows the transformation of what would otherwise be a straightforward financing instrument executed between a lessee and a lessor into a marketable security. A key characteristic of this tax-exempt lease that distinguishes it from bond indebtedness is the non-appropriation clause. The non-appropriation clause means that payments of the lease are dependent upon an annual appropriation by the governing body. This differentiates the lease from indebtedness because with the non-appropriation provision, the present-year government's action does not bind succeeding ones to pay the obligation. However, the non-debt classification of lease-purchase financing does not eliminate the need to fund lease payment expenditures nor does it eliminate the responsibility of the government to disclose the obligation in its financial statements. For some governments, CON can also be a method of leveraging public assets and borrowing the value of the equity in those assets in order to finance other assets. By entering into a tax-exempt lease financing agreement a governmental agency is using its authority to acquire or dispose of property, rather than its authority to incur debt. Unfortunately, the Town's Charter requires that disposal of municipally-owned buildings or real estate first be approved by a majority of the voters. Improvement Districts. Through its Charter, the Town may create Special or Local Improvement Districts in order to construct improvements within said districts, to assess the cost thereof, and to issue special or local improvement bonds. Because of the special rules surrounding these types of financing structures I have attached an article written by Dee Wisor from Sherman and Howard that reviews these districts and their benefits and limitations. 5 \.e VILLAGE AT AVON One provision of the Annexation and Development Agreement with the Village that the Council should be aware of is the exception to the general tax waiver contained in Section 4.5 which states that "except any sales or accommodations tax increases duly adopted by the Town after the date of this agreement, the proceeds of which increases are dedicated to specific projects identified in connection with such adoption." The intention of this exception was to give the Town the latitude to adopt a sales and/or accommodation tax increase earmarked for a specific purpose that would also tax the gross revenues of the merchants located in the Village, thus allowing a potentially greater amount of financing. Such a tax increase would have to be approved by the voters within the Town (including the Village). OTHER EXHIBITS Please find attached to this white paper a matrix of the various types of special financing districts and the statute reference, formation procedures, etc regarding each, as prepared by Sherman and Howard. Also attached is a summary of the Town's current debt service principal and interest requirements by year, by series of issuance, and in total. The final attachments are two graphs which plot the maturities of the Town's bonded debt. The first graph being all- inclusive, the second only including non-general obligation debt. 6 6 IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS FOR COLORADO COUNTIES, CITIES AND TOWNS Prepared by Sherman & Howard L.L.C. September 2004 1. INTRODUCTION The acronyms SID, LID, GID, PID, and BID each refer to types of "districts" that can be used by Colorado cities, towns, and counties to finance many types of public infrastructure. 2. SIDs and LIDs a. Definitions. SID: a "special improvement district", which is organized by a city or town. 131- 25-501 et seq., C.R.S. LID: a "local improvement district" which is organized by a county. '30-20-601 et seq., C.R.S. There are some minor differences between these two types of districts, but basically, a SID is formed by a municipality, while a LID is formed by a county. Because of the unique way in which they raise revenue, these districts are also sometimes referred to as Aassessment districts@. Neither SIDS nor LIDs are separate political subdivisions, and they have no independent existence apart from the municipality or county. They are instead merely geographical areas within which improvements are constructed and assessments levied. They have no board of directors, and the governing body of the municipality or county makes all decisions regarding the district, the improvements, and other matters. b. Revenue Raising Power. Both SIDs and LIDs raise revenue primarily through the special assessment process (although county LIDs have the ability to impose a district-wide sales tax as well). They do not levy property taxes. Special assessments are charges applied to individual properties in the amount of the "special benefit" conferred on such property by the improvements. Revenues derived from the County sales tax in a LID can be used for the operation and maintenance of improvements funded by a LID. 100 Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L. C. C. Types of Improvements. The types of improvements that can be financed through a SID or LID are those which confer special benefits upon the surrounding property. Roads, sidewalks, water lines, sewer lines, and similar improvements are those which are most likely candidates for special assessment financing. These improvements provide a benefit to the abutting properties which is different from the general benefit to the government as a whole, and thus the government is authorized to impose special assessments in an amount not in excess of such special benefit. d. Special Benefits. In order to be valid, special assessments against any particular property must be in an amount not greater than the special benefit conferred on such property by the improvements. Thus, the method of assessment, i.e., the method by which the assessments are distributed over the benefitted properties, must be formulated so as to equitably distribute such assessments based upon such benefit. Common methods of assessment include the front-foot method, the area method, and the per-lot method. However, any other method of assessment may be used, so long as it reasonably allocates the burden of the assessment upon the benefitted properties. In a development context, it is usually the case that the property owner is requesting the government to create the district and impose the assessments, and in such case we commonly recommend that the property owner sign a waiver agreement establishing the method of assessment, and consenting to the particular formula used. With such an agreement in place, the likelihood of disagreements later is substantially reduced. e. Financing. SIDS and LIDs issue special assessment bonds for the purpose of creating money to construct the improvements. With few exceptions, special assessment bonds are payable solely from the special assessments levied upon the benefitted property. The assessments constitute a lien on the benefitted property, which lien can be foreclosed upon generally in the same manner as foreclosures for property taxes. Property taxes constitute a lien superior to that of the assessments. LIDs may also issue bonds payable from a combination of special assessments and sales tax revenues. -2- Clk Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L. C. f. TABOR. Prior to the adoption of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR), special assessment bonds were issued without an election, because they are special revenue bonds and were held not to constitute a debt of the issuer. The issuance of special assessment bonds now requires holding a TABOR election to approve the Amultiple-fiscal year financial obligation@ represented by the special assessment bonds. As with all TABOR elections, the election must be held on one of the TABOR dates, which are every November, and every biennial election date of the issuer. The statutes provide that if the government so determines, the election may be held solely among the property owners and residents of the district, rather than among all of the voters in the municipality or county. The operating revenues of a LID or SID may constitute revenues of the body which created them, for purposes of TABOR's revenue limitations. This assumes that the LID or SID has revenues beyond debt service on bonds. g. Securities Exemption. Bonds issued by SIDS and LIDs are subject to the jurisdiction of the Colorado Securities Commissioner pursuant to the Colorado Municipal Bond Supervision Act. Consequently, in order to issue such bonds without registration, it is necessary to find an exemption under that act. There is an exemption for issues which, together with other such bonds of the district, aggregate to $2,000,000 or less. See ' 11-59-110 (1) (i), C.R.S. h. Procedure. The procedure for the creation of a SID or LID is generally as follows: 1. The government adopts a resolution of intent to create the district, either on its own initiative or in response to a petition from property owners in the proposed district. 2. After notice, a hearing is held on the creation of the district, after which the government may adopt an ordinance or resolution organizing the district. At or prior to this hearing, property owners in the proposed district may veto the district through a protest petition. 3. After a successful TABOR election, special assessment bonds are issued payable from the assessments (or, in rare cases, from a combination of the assessments and sales tax revenues for LIDs) and the project is constructed. 4. After notice, another public hearing is held on the assessments, at which point the -3- Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L.C. government puts on evidence supporting the assessments. After the hearing, the government adopts an ordinance or resolution imposing the assessments. 5. The government collects the assessments (usually through the county property tax process) and sales tax revenues, if applicable, and pays the bonds. Assessments are payable over a term of years (usually 10-15 years), and the property owner has the option of pre-paying them at any time. 3. GIN and PIN a. Definitions. GID: a general improvement district@ organized by a city or town. ' 31-25-601 et seq., C.R.S. PID: a public improvement district@ organized by a county. '30-20-501 et seq., C.R.S. Like the two types of assessment districts, GIDs and PIDs are very similar, with the primary difference being that the former are created by municipalities, and the latter are created by counties. Unlike assessment districts, GIDs and PIDs are separate political subdivisions, with their own board of directors, powers, and duties. However, in both cases the governing body of the organizing government (city council, board of trustees, or board of county commissioners) is the ex officio board of directors of a GID or PID. b. Revenue Raising Power. GIDs and PIDs raise revenue through a property tax imposed on the property within the district. They can also levy special assessments on property within the district and can impose fees, rates, tolls, and charges for the use of facilities provided by the district. Prior to H.B. 1159, special assessments were not available. C. Types of Improvements. Both a GID and a PID may construct and operate any improvement or provide any service which the county, city, or town, as the case may be, which created them is statutorily authorized to provide except for solid waste disposal sites and transfer stations and trash collection (unless provided in accordance with Title 30, Article 20, Part 1, C.R.S. ). -4- Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L. C. d. Organizational Requirements of GIDs and PIDs. GIDs and PIDs are organized by adoption of a resolution or ordinance, but only after a public hearing, and only after receipt of a petition. Petitions for both GIDs and PIDs must be signed by 30% or 200, whichever is less, of the property owners within the proposed district. If the petition is signed by 100% of the owners of taxable property in the proposed district, the governing body may, upon request, waive the requirements for notice, publication, and a hearing on the proposed district. One of the following must be true for the district: (I) The boundaries of the proposed district include at least one hundred eligible electors; (11) The boundaries of the proposed district include at least one eligible elector for each five acres of land included within the proposed district; or (III) The petition is signed by one hundred percent of the owners of taxable real property to be included in the proposed district. e. Financing. Both GIDs and PIDs are authorized to issue general obligation bonds after an election. They may also issue revenue or special assessment bonds after an election. Furthermore, they are authorized to impose rates and charges for their facilities, and to pledge such rates and charges to the payment of indebtedness. Prior to 1999 legislative session, PIDs were subject to a 25% debt to assessed value debt limit. There is a TABOR question as to whether the liberalizing of the RID debt limit is effective without a statewide vote. f. TABOR The issuance of bonds, whether they are general obligation, revenue, or special assessments bonds, requires the holding of a TABOR election. As with all TABOR elections, the election must be held on one of the TABOR dates, which are every November. The operating revenues of a GID or PID do not constitute revenues of the body which created them, for purposes of TABOR's revenue limitations, because GID's and PID's are separate political subdivisions. g. Securities Exemption. Bonds issued by GIDs and PIDs are subject to the jurisdiction of the Colorado Securities Commissioner pursuant to the Colorado Municipal Bond Supervision Act. Consequently, in order to issue such bonds without registration, it is necessary to find an exemption under that act. There is an -5- ?v Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L.C. exemption for general obligation bonds which do not exceed the greater of two million dollars or fifty percent of the valuation for assessment of the taxable property in the district, and that exemption is most commonly used. However, in a development context where the costs exceed $2,000,000, but the property in the district has a very low current assessed valuation, the Aaccredited investor@ exemption is also frequently used. 4. BIDs a. Definitions. BID: a business improvement district organized by a municipality. '31-25-1201 et seq., C.R.S. A BID is a hybrid entity specifically designed for economic development. It is a separate political subdivision under state law, and it exercises a variety of powers, including the power to levy ad valorem taxes and to issue general obligation bonds (like GIDs and PIDs). In addition, it has the power to levy special assessments and to issue special assessment bonds (like SIDs and LIDs). A BID can be organized only within a municipality, and its boundaries may include only commercial property. It can, however, have a service area that is broader than its boundaries, and that service area can be made subject to the revenue raising powers of the BID only when it becomes commercial property and is later included in the boundaries. The "service area" is defined so that no less than 50% of the area must have been developed and used as commercial property prior to the adoption of the ordinance creating the district and, at the time of the adoption of such ordinance, must be used primarily as commercial property. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the service area may include a location designated by the municipality, after public notice and hearing, as a location for new business or commercial development. b. Petition process. The creation of a BID is initiated by a petition which must be signed by persons who own real or personal property in the service area of the proposed district having a valuation for assessment of not less than 50%, or such greater amount as the city or town may provide by ordinance, of the valuation for assessment of all real and personal property in the service area of the proposed district and who own at least 50%, or such greater amount as the governing body may provide by ordinance, of the acreage in the proposed district. -6- Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L. C. C. Governing body. A BID can have any of four different forms of governing body. 1. Ex Officio Board - City council or town board of trustees acts as the ex officio board of directors. This is the case unless the city or town acts by ordinance to provide otherwise. 2. Appointed Board - If the city or town adopts an ordinance so providing, board members of the district can be electors of the district who are appointed by the city or town. 3. Overlap with other entities - If more than one-half of the property located within the district is also located within an urban renewal area, a downtown development authority, or a general improvement district, the city or town may provide by ordinance that the governing body of the urban renewal authority, downtown development authority, or general improvement district created by the municipality shall constitute ex officio the board of directors of the district. 4. Elected Board - If the organization petition or a subsequent petition so requests, the city or town may provide that the members of the district board are to be elected by the electors of the district. d. Electors. Unlike most political subdivisions, the BID statute permits non-registered electors such as corporations to vote under certain circumstances. The definition of Aelector@ is a natural person who is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Colorado, who is eighteen years of age or older, and who: 1. Makes his primary dwelling place in the district; or 2. Owns taxable real or personal property within the boundaries of the district; or 3. Is the holder of a leasehold interest in taxable real or personal property within the boundaries of the district; or 4. Is the natural person designated by an owner or lessee of taxable real or personal property in the district which is not a natural person to vote for such -7- .11? Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L.C. owner or lessee. Such designation must be in writing and filed with the secretary of the district. Only one such person may be designated by an owner or lessee. e. Revenue Raising Powers. Subject to the approval of the municipality, a BID may (1) impose ad valorem property taxes, (2) impose rates and charges for the services or improvements provided, and (3) impose special assessments. f. Type of improvements and services. The BID statute is very broad as to the type of public improvements that can be built and maintained, and includes streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, pedestrian malls, streetlights, drainage facilities, landscaping, decorative structures, statuaries, fountains, identification signs, traffic safety devices, bicycle paths, off-street parking facilities, benches, rest rooms, information booths, and public meeting facilities. The relocation and improvement of existing utility lines also qualify as "improvements" under the statute. Unlike most political subdivisions, a BID has specific powers relating to business and economic development, such as: 1. Consulting with respect to planning or managing development activities; 2. Promotion or marketing of district activity; 3. Organization, promotion, marketing, and management of public events; 4. Activities in support of business recruitment, management, and development; 5. Security for businesses and public areas located within the district; 6. Providing design assistance. g. TABOR The issuance of bonds by a BID requires the holding of a TABOR election. As with all TABOR elections, the election must be held on one of the TABOR dates, which are every November, and every biennial election date of the issuer. The operating revenues of a BID probably do not constitute revenues of the body which -8- .L, Improvement Districts Sherman & Howard L.L. C. created it, for purposes of TABOR's revenue limitations, because BIDS are separate political subdivisions. h. Securities Exemption. Unlike the other districts discussed here, bonds issued by BIDS are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Colorado Securities Commissioner under the Colorado Municipal Bond Supervision Act, and no exemption request is necessary in connection with the issuance of such bonds. -9- \\-e CHOICE OF ENTITY - COLORADO DISTRICTS Formed By Formation Procedure Control and Legal Status Types ofRevenues (1) Type of District Statute City/Tow n County Petition Required Election Re uired C t l El Separate Property Tax Assess- User Sales Tax Construction of these Types of Opera- Eminent q on ro ectors Entity(2) menu Pees TIF(3) Improvements tions Domain Special District 32-1-1001 X X X (4) X A E X X General Improvement District 31-25-601 X X (5) X (8) B F X J X X Public Improvement District 30-20-501 X X (5) X (8) B F X X X X K X X Special Improvement District 31-25-501 X B X X X X K X X Local Improvement District 30-20-601 X B F X K Business Improvement District 31-25-1201 X X (6) C F X X K Downtown Development Auth. 31-25-801 X X D G X X X X L X Urban Renewal Authority 31-25-101 X X (7) D H I X X M X X X N X Control Key: A = Independently controlled by its own board of directors, who are elected by the residents and property owners in the district. B = Controlled by the city, town or county which created the district. C = Control of the board of directors depends upon how the district is formed. Four possible structures exist. Regardless of board structure, however, BID's are subject to annual control by the city or town because the city or town must approve the BID's operating plan and budget each year. D = Control of the board of directors depends upon how the district is formed. For DDA's, the board must have at least one city or town council member on it. The remaining members may be council members or must be property owners, residents or officers or directors of businesses within the DDA. For URA's, the city or town council may designate itself as the board, or may appoint anyone else and may have only one council member on the board. Electors Kev: E = A person who is (a) a registered voter who (i) has been a resident for at least 30 days or (it) owns (or whose spouse owns) taxable property in the district; or (b) is obligated to pay property taxes under a contract to purchase taxable property in the district. F = A person who is a registered voter and who (a) has been a resident for at least 30 days or (b) owns (or whose spouse owns) taxable property in the district. Where such owner is not a natural person, "elector" includes a natural person designated by such owner. For SID'S and UD's, the city, town or county forming the district chooses whether registered electors who live within the entire town, city or county can vote on district debt, or only those electors who live within the district. For GID's and PID's, only electors within the district are eligible to vote. G = A natural person who is a U.S. citizen and Colorado resident and who (a) lives in the BID, (b) owns or leases taxable property in the BID, or (c) is designated by a property owner which is not a natural person. H = A (a) citizen of the U.S. and Colorado resident whose primary dwelling is within the DDA, (b) an owner in fee of any undivided interest in real property or any improvement permanently affixed thereto, or (c) the holder of a leasehold interest in real property within the district. Any landowner or lessee which is not a natural person may vote only if it designates by some official action a representative thereof to cast its ballot. I= Registered electors that reside within, and are eligible to vote within, the boundaries of the URA (which are coterminous with the boundaries of the city or town which formed the URA). Types of Improvements Kev: J= Fire protection, mosquito control, parks and recreation, safety protection, sanitation, streets, television relay, transportation, water and solid waste disposal. K = Generally, any improvements or services which the county, city or town creating them is authorized to provide. L = Broad range of improvements including streets, drainage, statues, fountains, signs, benches, information booths, and public meeting facilities M = Completion of a development project to improve a downtown area. N = Acquisition of slums, demolition of buildings, construction of streets, acquisition of property to improve health, lessen density, etc. Notes: (1) Property taxes are deductible from the gross income of the payer; the payment of assessments, sales taxes or user fees are not deductible by the payor. (2) SID'S, LID's and DDA's are not separate political subdivisions; rather, they are merely geographic areas within the city, town or county. (3) "TIF" = tax increment financing. Both incremental sales taxes and incremental property taxes are available to be pledged to the payment of bonds issued by DDA's and URNS. (4) Persons proposing to form a special district initially must file a proposed service plan with the applicable county, city or town, and must then file a petition with the applicable district court. (5) Petition must be signed by 30% or 200 of the electors of the proposed district, whichever is less. (6) Petition must be signed by persons owning at least 50% (or such higher amount as the city may establish) of the property within the proposed district, measured either by assessed valuation or by acreage. (7) Petition must be signed by at least 25 registered electors within the city. (8) An election is required unless 100% of the property owners waive the election. (9) DDA's may levy up to five mills for operational expenses. 8 2004 Sherman & Howard L.L.C. 11/1/02 Town of Avon Debt Service Summary Series 1996 G.O. Refunding Bonds Year Principal Interest Total 2004 2005 $ 440,000 .00 $ 101,790. 00 $ 541,790. 00 2006 465,000 .00 79,790. 00 544,790. 00 2007 490,000 .00 56,540. 00 546,540. 00 2008 515,000. 00 31,550. 00 546,550. 00 2009 90,000. 00 4,770. 00 94,770. 00 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total $ 2,000,000. 00 $ 274.440. 00 $ 2274.440 00 Year Series 1998 Certificates of 2005 ' $ 290,000.00 $ 269,502.50 $ 559,502.50 2006 305,000.00 256,887.50 561,887.50 2007 315,000.00 243,467.50 558,467.50 2008 330,000.00 229,292.50 559,292.50 2009 345,000.00 214,442.50 559,442.50 2010 360,000.00 198,400.00 558,400.00 2011 380,000.00 81,120.00 461,120.00 2012 400,000.00 162,500.00 562,500.00 2013 420,000.00 142,500.00 562,500.00 2014 440,000.00 121,500.00 561,500.00 2015 460,000.00 99,500.00 559,500.00 2016 485,000.00 76,500.00 561,500.00 2017 510,000.00 52,250.00 562,250.00 2018 535,000.00 26,750.00 561,750.00 Total $ 5,575,000.00 $ 2,174,612.50 $ 7,749,612.50 Series 1997 G.O. Bonds $ 5,000.00 $ 480.00 $ 5,480.00 5,000.00 242.50 5,242.50 Series 1999 Revenue Refundinq Bonds $ 320,000.00 $ 162,615.00 $ 482,615.00 330,000 .00 150,135.00 480,135.00 340,000 .00 136,935.00 476,935.00 350,000 .00 123,165.00 473,165.00 370,000 .00 108,815.00 478,815.00 380,000 .00 93,275.00 473,275.00 395,000. 00 75,985.00 470,985.00 405,000. 00 58,012.50 463,012.50 425,000. 00 39,585.00 464,585.00 445,000. 00 20,247.50 465,247.50 3, 4, Annual Total for Series 2004 G. 0. Refunding Bonds G.O.Bonds $ 163,477.66 $ 163,477.66 1 $ 710,747.66 163,072.50 163,072.50 713,105.00 168,072.50 168,072.50 714,612.50 168,072.50 168,072.50 714,622.50 245,000.00 188,072.50 433,072.50 527,842.50 410,000.00 120,722.50 530,722.50 530,722.50 425,000.00 107,397.50 532,397.50 532,397.50 445,000.00 90,397.50 535,397.50 535,397.50 455,000.00 73,710.00 528,710.00 528,710.00 475,000.00 58,012.50 533,012.50 533,012.50 490,000.00 40,200.00 530,200.00 530,200.00 515,000.00 20,600.00 535,600.00 535,600.00 460,000.00 $ 1,361,807.66 $ 4,821,807.66 $ 7,106,97076 Annual Total for All Bonds $ 1,752,865.16 1,755,127.50 1,750,015.00 1,747,080,00 1,566,100.00 1,562,397.50 1,464, 502.50 1,560,910.00 1,555,795.00 1,559,760.00 1,089, 700.00 1,097,100.00 562,250.00 561,750.00 $ 19.585.352 66 Z) 00 O C\j o N CD O N Lo j O I N O N co r O N N r O N ._ is L _ O N O (7 IM 0 O ? Fa Z O O F- O O N co O O N ti O O N CD O O N LO O O N O O O O O Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C5 0 6 C5 (5 ? CT CD O O O O O 0 0) co It M N junowy .a C a C m R .N 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O co r O cD r O r O N r O O O co r O co O ;unowv O r O N r O N d' r O N M r O N _N O N ` d r r O N O r O N O O O N co O O N ti O O N co O O N LO O O N O O O O O N 40 Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer Date: December 9, 2004 Re: West Avon - USFS Property / Trail System Summary: Mayor Wolfe, Larry, Tambi and I met with Don Cohen and Heather McInemy from Berry Creek and Beth Boyst, the USFS trails specialist, to discuss the West Avon USFS Parcel and potential trail systems across the parcel. Potential trail system was discussed including trail types and locations along with the approval process. One of the first steps will be to identify potential access locations. Follow-up actions include the public scoping and environmental review processes. It may be necessary to provide local funds to expedite the required environmental studies due to the lack of USFS funds for these activities. In order to stay on track, a proposed action plan needs to be in place by May. This should allow the project to be coordinated with the State Trails Grant Program Cycle with applications due in November of each year. Beth indicated this could be a 2 - 5 year project with a hard surface path possibly taking as long as 10 years. Beth Boyst did mention that this is one of her highest priority areas in the White River, and that the potential to finally manage and designate trails is well received by her office. Proposed Actions: 1. Research possible access locations 2. Contact property owners and agencies (CDOT) as applicable 3. Evaluate potential trail locations (Beth will meet with trail reconnaissance group). 4. Meet again at end of January/first of February to evaluate progress and develop action plan. Town Manager Comments: C:ADocuments And Settings\Lbrooks\Local SettingsUemporary Internet Fi1es\0LK3\Update Memo 12-09-04. Doc Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer Date: December 8, 2004 Re: 1-70 Mountain Corridor Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Summary: We received a copy of the I-70 Mountain Corridor Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). This copy is in the Break Room next to Patty's office. The Draft PEIS is available on the project website at http://www.170mtncorridor.com and I also have copy on a CD if anyone would prefer to review in that format. CDOT is beginning their 90-calendar day review period that begins December 10, 2004 and ends March 10, 2005. A series of nine public meetings will be held at various locations along the Corridor during this review period. One of these meetings will be held in the Avon Municipal Building on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 from 4:00 to 7:00 PM. Written comments on the Draft PEIS must be received by CDOT by March 10, 2005 if they are to be considered. The PEIS looks at the I-70 Corridor from C-470 to Glenwood Springs and addresses existing conditions and projected conditions through 2025. Factors considered in the study include social, economic and environmental and their impacts on transportation in the corridor. It also evaluates various potential transportation modes in the corridor and develops recommendations for preferred and non-preferred improvement alternatives. The preferred and non-preferred alternatives are based upon factors including ability to address service levels and economic viability. Copies of the PEIS transmittal letter, Public Hearing Schedule and Comment Process are attached. Town Manager Comments: io? (:AEngineeiing\CDO'"Ianning\PEIS Memo-I.Doc DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Region 1 18500 East Colfax Avenue OTAurora, Colorado 80011 (303)757-9371 Fax (303) 757-9746 oee?u oFrK.r"TAT"?: Dear I-70 PEIS Reviewers: Attached is a copy of the I-70 Mountain Corridor Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for public review. A 90-calendar-day public review period begins on December 10, 2004, and concludes on March 10, 2005. Written comments on the Draft PEIS to be considered must be received by CDOT by March 10, 2005. During this public review period, nine public hearings will be held along the Corridor. See the attached list of times and locations. Visit the project website at http://www.i70mtncorridor.com for an electronic version of the I-70 Mountain Corridor Draft PEIS, Appendices, and Resource Maps, and the methods in which to submit comments on the Draft PEIS. This website also provides the time and locations of upcoming public hearings, as well as the locations where copies of the PEIS are available for public review. NOTE: Please retain this document after you have completed your review for future reference when reviewing the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. The following individuals may be contacted for additional information concerning this document: Cecelia Joy, Project Manager Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 1 18500 East Colfax Aurora, Colorado 80011 (303) 757-9112 Jean Wallace, P.E. Federal Highway Administration 12300 West Dakota Avenue Lakewood, Colorado 80228 (720) 963-3015 or Chris Paulsen, Deputy Project Manager (303) 757-9156 Sincerely, 7 Project Manager CDOT, Region 1 1-70 Draft PETS Public Hearing Locations DAY, DATE & HEARING TIME' Cp FrY Y #1 Wednesday 1/12/05 Clear Creek County Evergreen Clear Creek High School 185 Beaver Brook Canyon Road 303-679-4601 phone 5:00 - 8:00 PM Evergreen, CO 80439 303-679-4690 fax #2 Sat d ur ay 1/15/05 Jefferson County Westminster Westin Hotel 10600 Westminster Boulevard 303-410-5030 1:00 - 4:00 PM Westminster, CO 80020 #3 Wed d nes ay 1/19/05 Mesa County Grand Junction Country Inn of Grand 718 Horizon Drive 970-243-5080 4:00 - 7:00 PM Junction Grand Junction, CO 81506 #4 Wed d nes ay 1/26/05 Eagle County Avon Avon Municipal Building 400 Benchmark Road 970-748-4035 4:00 - 7:00 PM Avon, CO 81620 #5 Wed d nes ay 2/02/05 Douglas County Littleton Marriott Denver South at 10345 Park Meadows Drive 303-728-5936 4:00 - 7:00 PM Park Meadows Littleton, CO 80124 #6 Wed d nes ay 2/09/05 Clear Creek County Empire Rocky Mountain 2644 Alvarado Road 303-569-2333 x301 4:00 - 7:00 PM Village/Easter Seals Empire, CO 80438 Handicamp Located on south side of I-70 at Exit 232 (approximately 8 miles west of Idaho S rin #7 Saturd p gs) ay 2/12/05 Garfield County Glenwood Springs Hotel Colorado 526 Pine Street 800-544-3998 x115 or 1:00 - 4:00 PM Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-6511 #8 Wedn d es ay 2/16/05 Jefferson County Golden Jefferson County 15200 West 6th Avenue 303-271-6600 4:00 - 7:00 PM Fairgrounds Golden, CO 80401 #9 Wedn d es ay 2/23/05 Summit County Silverthome Four Points Sheridan 560 Silverthome Lane 970-468-2685 or 4:00 - 7:00 PM Silverthorne, CO 80498 970-468-2882 1-70 Mountain Corridor Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, December 2004 Comment Process Methods: Thank you for your interest in the 1-70 Mountain Corridor Draft PETS. Comments on the Draft PEIS may be submitted in the following ways: 1. Online: After completing a simple registration process, you may submit your comments directly into our project database, http://www.i70mtncorridor.com/. See details below. 2. Mail: Mail all written comments to: Cecelia Joy, Project Manager Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 1 18500 East Colfax Avenue Aurora, Colorado 80011 or Jean Wallace, P.E. Federal Highway Administration 12300 West Dakota Avenue Lakewood, Colorado 80228 3. Public Hearings: To view the public hearing schedule, see the project website http://www.i70mtncorridor.com/ Steps for Providing Comments Online: You must register before you may log in to provide comments. Register - Register the first time you enter the site, providing: ¦ First Name ¦ Last Name ¦ Email address - use your email address • Password - create a personal password • You will receive a registration confirmation screen thanking you, followed by an email confirming your registration. Login - If you have already registered, simply begin by logging in: ¦ Email address • Password Begin Entering Comments - Enter comments on the Draft PSIS. Select the comment type: ¦ Provide a comment on a specific section of the Draft PEIS ¦ Provide a general comment When entering a comment on a specific section of the Draft PETS, select your comment location: ¦ Chapter, Appendix, or Map ¦ Section; Subsection 1, Subsection 2 ¦ Page Number Enter your comments and click "Submit Comment." After submitting a comment, you will see a list of all your comments. When entering a general comment, simply type in your comment regardless of location within the document and click "Submit Comment." After submitting a comment, you will see a list of all your comments. Contacts: For technical support, contact Frank Luna at 303.797.5050 ext. 1317 Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council From: Lary Brooks, Town Manager Date: December 9, 2004 Re: Other Educational Topics Discussion: I will be soliciting the Council to determine what topics you want to discuss or become more informed about from staff. I think it is important to establish these topics in your ongoing educational process as a council member. Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Patty McKenny !e-' Date: December 1, 2004 Re: New Business License List for Avon Summary: A request has been made to include a list of new businesses in Avon in your packet, so below are the new businesses and closed businesses registered in November / December. New Businesses Name of Business Street Address Nova Entertainment d/b/a Loaded 82 E. Beaver Creek Blvd, Suite 104 Joe's Particular Parings 330 W. Beaver Creek Blvd, Unit C UMG Group, LLC d/b/a Servicios De 51 Beaver Creek Place, #1 Taxes Mexicanos Ascent Physical Therapy 100 W. Beaver Creek Blvd, #204 Eagle County Paintball, LLC Terminated Businesses Name of Business Cottle Graybeal Yaw Architects Gotthelfs Intermountain Engineering 82 E. Beaver Creek Blvd, #109 Date Terminated 10/25/04 11/1/04 11/1/04 Home Type of Business Open Date Office Coffee House / Lounge December no Service - Personal Chef December yes Service - Income Tax December no Service Service - Physical December no Therapy Retail Sales December no Lic # Reason 2001-212 business closed / phone disconnected 2000-2004 Business moved to Edwards 81-14 Sold building to Evans Chaffee Town Manager Comments: MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Jeff Layman, Chief of Police Date: December 7, 2004 Re: Loading and Delivery Activity on Metcalf Road Summary: As you are aware, ongoing concern has been expressed regarding the loading and delivery activities at businesses along Metcalf and Nottingham Roads. That concern has typically centered on the inconvenience imposed on other drivers who must stop to avoid trucks turning, backing or parking on or near the street. Another obvious concern is the safety of all motorists in the area. Previous Council Action: The Avon Town Council has asked the police and public works departments to approach the problem in the following ways: Survey: The police department has prepared and conducted a survey of businesses in the Metcalf/Nottingham corridor to learn more about the trucks used, delivery times, vendors and businesses. Notify Businesses: The results of the survey will be reported to stakeholders of the problem, alert them to the "zero tolerance" enforcement stance and ask them for help identifying solutions to the issue. Give Suggestions: The police department has encouraged businesses to: • Discuss truck sizes and delivery times with their delivery services • Watch for trucks and have employees help them with backing • Encourage building managers to restrict parking in truck turning areas within the building's property lines. • Work with their delivery services to take other steps to avoid road blockages. The police department has encouraged trucking companies to: • Use only experienced drivers that are familiar with the delivery locations • Delivery drivers are encouraged to contact the delivery customer 10 - 15 minutes prior to arrival to allow the customer to take proactive measures to eliminate any impediment to quick and efficient maneuvering into delivery sites. Strict Enforcement: The police department will ticket all delivery drivers found to be violating town ordinances. Drivers of delivery vehicles, regardless of size or circumstance, found in violation of any of the below statutes or ordinances will be served a citation with the appropriate charge: 0 10.14.010 Parking to obstruct traffic. 0 902 limitations on turning around. 0 1202 Parking or abandonment of vehicles. 0 1211 Limitations on backing 0 18-9-107 Obstructing highways or other passageway. Educate Motorists: In that the police have to be made aware of violations and/or potential violations at the time they are occurring, Avon Public Works will post signs that encourage members of the public to call police immediately should they witness a delivery violation. TRUCKS BLOCKING TRAFFIC? CALL 479-2200 ext 0 AVON POLICE Problem Solving: A process of problem solving has been initiated involving all of the various stakeholders. Merchants, transport companies, Wildridge citizens, Avon's Public Works and Community Development departments and other interested persons will be invited to a meeting to investigate the scope of the problem and to develop some consensus on what the solution ought to be. This meeting will be held at the Avon Town Council Chambers on December 15, 2004 at 6:00 PM. Discussion: During the week of November 8, 2004, Officer Chris Peck went door-to-door conducting a survey of all businesses along Metcalf Road and those businesses on Nottingham Road near the Metcalf intersection. This represented a total of 41 businesses. The survey solicited basic business information [Owner / Managers name, phone number and mailing address] and information as to type, size and frequency of trucks making deliveries to the businesses surveyed. Survey Limitations In the course of conducting the survey, one limiting factor to a definitive and accurate collection of data became apparent. Often, the person/s interviewed could only estimate at the solicited information. Many of those surveyed could only guess as to the type or size of the trucks that delivered to their businesses. As an example there are several different descriptions of the standard 28-foot R.A.C Transit freight truck. When asked about the frequency of deliveries, answers were often best guesses and came in various time formats from weekly, monthly or yearly. Frequently those surveyed had little or no information regarding the names of the transportation companies responsible for deliveries, as the vendor shipping the merchandise generally arranged for the shipment. Preliminary Suggestions The survey was just a step in addressing the overall problem of trucks impeding traffic on Metcalf Road. It did create, however, an opportunity to propose some preliminary suggestions in an effort to begin to mitigate the problem. The police department encouraged businesses to: • Better communicate with the large truck drivers. Discuss truck sizes and delivery times with their delivery services • Watch for trucks and have employees help them with backing • Encourage building managers to restrict parking in truck turning areas within the building's property lines • Work with their delivery services to take other steps to avoid road blockages The police department has encouraged trucking companies to: • Use only experienced drivers that are familiar with the delivery locations • Contact the delivery customer 10 - 15 minutes prior to arrival to allow the customer to take proactive measures to eliminate any impediment to quick and efficient maneuvering into delivery sites Further, the Avon Police Department: • Encouraged businesses to advise all drivers that effective immediately a traffic summons will be issued in all cases of trucks impeding traffic • Advised businesses that signs directing inconvenienced motorists to call and report trucks found impeding are forthcoming Findings The Avon Police Department surveyed 41 businesses. • Area businesses receive approximately 40 delivery trucks a week. • Of those, approximately 30 to 35 are tractor-trailer or articulated combinations ranging from large flat bed trailers pulled by pick up trucks to full-length semi- trailers. • The remaining 5 to 10 are comprised of single axle "box trucks" of various lengths. • There are many businesses that receive delivery via the large full-length trucks, however, due to their locations and / or the frequency of delivery, four businesses were identified as representing the bulk of the truck traffic: 1. Colorado Mirror and Glass, 80 Metcalf; reporting one 18 wheel tractor-trailer a day. 2. Maverick Flooring; 371 Metcalf, reporting three to four 18-wheel tractor-trailers a week. 3. Ruggs Benedict: 810 Nottingham Road, reporting two to four 18- wheel tractor- trailers a week. 4. Select Surfaces; 780 Nottingham Road, reporting nine 18-wheel tractor-trailers a week. A contributing factor mentioned by several of the companies taking delivery from the larger tractor-trailer combination trucks is that of driver experience. Several businesses noted that an experienced driver is usually able to position their trucks for unloading with little to no effect to traffic using the roads. Problems invariably arise when a new or inexperienced driver is operating driving the truck. Several businesses expressed strong feelings regarding the speed of the traffic on Metcalf Road. Several of those surveyed said they felt very uneasy when entering or exiting their respective driveways. Next steps The department has sent out a letter to all the businesses outlining / explaining steps being implemented to address the problem. The letter extends an invitation for any and all concerned to attend the meeting to be held on the issue Wednesday 12/15/04 at 6:00 pm at the Avon Town Council Chambers. This meeting will be held specifically to solicit ideas and opinions from businesses on ways to continue taking delivery via truck while effectively ending the problems caused by those same trucks Town Manager Comments: Oonlq, rya cf, w TOWN OF AVON AVON HOUSING AUTHORITY AGENDA DECEMBER 14, 2004 - 4:50 PM MEETING TO BE HELD AT AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 400 BENCHMARK ROAD, AVON, CO 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Resolution Authorizing Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Buffalo Ridge II, LLP (John Dunn) - Resolution related to the Avon Housing Authority agreeing to serve as a limited partner of Buffalo Ridge II, LLLP in order to exempt the Buffalo Ridge Apartments from real property taxation. 3. Other Business 4. Consent Agenda 5. Adjournment MEMORANDUM TO: TOWN COUNCIL ACTING AS THE TOWN OF AVON HOUSING AUTHORITY FROM: TOWN ATTORNEY RE: BUFFALO RIDGE APARTMENTS DATE: December 6, 2004 In May of 2002, the Council, acting as the Town of Avon Housing Authority, authorized the Buffalo Ridge II Apartments, an affordable housing project jointly developed by Corum Real Estate Group and Wintergreen Homes. The project is owned and operated by Buffalo Ridge II, LLLP. The Council sponsored the issuance of Private Activity Bonds by Buffalo Ridge II to finance the project. In order to secure exemption from the ad valorem tax otherwise assessed against the project, the Authority was admitted as a special limited partner of Buffalo Ridge II (under the Housing Authority Law, a housing project may be exempted from taxation if the Housing Authority has an "ownership interest"). Neither the Town nor the Authority has any rights or obligations as a special limited partner, with the exception that the Authority's consent to any amendment to the limited partnership agreement is required. The Town has now been requested to agree to an amendment to the limited partnership agreement which will permit its amendment without the consent of the Authority so long as the amendment does not affect its rights or obligations under the Agreement, in the judgment of the General Partner and Investment Partner. Inasmuch as the Authority has no rights or obligations under the agreement, I recommend that the amendment be agreed to. JWD:ipse TOWN OF AVON HOUSING AUTHORITY RESOLUTION 04-01 Series of 2004 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OF BUFFALO RIDGE II LLLP WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 02-01 of the Town of Avon Housing Authority, the Town of Avon, acting as the Town of Avon Housing Authority ("the Authority"), agreed to be admitted to, and serve as a limited partner of, Buffalo Ridge II LLLP ("the Limited Partnership") in order to exempt the Buffalo Ridge Apartments from real property taxation pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. §§ 29-4-226 and 29-4-227; and WHEREAS, the Limited Partnership has requested that the Authority agree to an amendment to the limited partnership agreement which will permit its future amendment without the consent of the Authority so long as the amendment does not affect its rights or obligations under the Agreement, in the judgment of the General Partner and Investment Partner; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OF BUFFALO RIDGE II LLLP, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a copy of which is filed with the minutes of this meeting, is hereby authorized. 2. All action heretofore taken by the officers of the Town of Avon on behalf of the Avon Housing Authority relating to Buffalo Ridge II LLLP limited liability limited partnership and the agreements affecting the same is hereby ratified, approved and confirmed. ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon the 14th day of December, 2004. Ron Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk TOWN OF AVON REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA DECEMBER 14, 2004 - 5:30 PM MEETING TO BE HELD AT AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 400 BENCHMARK ROAD, AVON, CO 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Elect Mayor Pro Tern 3. Citizen Input a. Recreation Center - Cabin Opening & Nottingham Lake activities (Fraidy Aber) b. Holiday Lighting Contest Awards 4. Resolutions a. Resolution No. 04-48, Series Of 2004, A Resolution Levying General Property Taxes For The Year 2004, To Help Defray The Costs Of Government For The Town Of Avon, Colorado, For The 2005 Budget Year (Scott Wright) - b. Resolution No. 04-49, Series Of 2004, A Resolution Levying General Property Taxes For The Year 2004, To Help Defray The Costs Of Government For The Avon Metropolitan District, Avon, Colorado, For The 2005 Budget Year (Scott Wright) - 5. Ordinances Second Reading & Public Hearing a. Ordinance No. 04-20, Series of 2004, Second Reading, An Ordinance Providing for the Amendment of Ordinance No. 98-6, Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards, Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Eric Heidemann) - A proposal to the PUD to remove the 6 deed restricted housing units as required by Ordinance 98-6 to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. 6. New Business 7. Other Business 8. Unfinished Business 9. Town Manager Report 10. Town Attorney Report 11. Mayor Report 12. Consent Agenda a. Minutes from November 23, 2004 Meeting b. Resolution No. 04-50, Series Of 2004, A Resolution Canceling A Regular Town Council Meeting c. Resolution No. 04-51, Series Of 2004, A Resolution Approving the Amended Final Plat, a Replat of lot 4 and Lot 5, Mountian Vista Resort Subdivision, Town Of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Norm Wood) d. Auditor's Engagement Letter (Scott Wright) - Letter requirement for the independent auditor Clifton Gunderson LLP, provides quotes for fees for years 2005 & 2006 13. Adjournment Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Fraidy Aber, Meryl Jacobs Date: 12-09-04 Re: Icing on the Lake, Santa at Avon Rec, Dive-In Movies Summary: We have great plans for the holidays at the Recreation Department December 14, 15 and 16, we will have Santa in the lobby of the Rec Center from 4 - 5 pm. December 17'h is our second Dive-In movie nights. Our first evening was a smash success. We are showing films in the pool area utilizing inner tubes for seating. High school and middle school students are allowed in FREE for this program. Our goal is to provide a fun and safe activity for local teenagers. These evenings will occur the third Friday night of the month. All are welcome, but the program will only be free to students with ID's. The pool becomes a theatre at 6 - until close! On December 189' we are hosting "Icing on the Lake", this is basically the Town of Avon's Holiday in the Park event - and celebrates the seasonal opening of the Lob Cabin. We will be having $1 skate rentals, free hot cocoa, cookies that can be decorated with icing, crafts courtesy of the Art Factory and an ice sculpture that children can take their photo with. The event will run from 5 - 7 pm and is FREE. Promotion for all three programs will be running in the daily, on local radio, through TV 8 and in flyers to school children. Town Manger Comments: Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Scott Wright, Finance Directog-- - Date: December 1, 2004 Re: 2004 Property Tax Levy Summary: Two resolutions levying property taxes for general operating, debt service and the Avon Metropolitan District are also hereby submitted for adoption. The property tax mill rates will be levied as follows: o General operating purposes - 8.956 mills; o Debt service - 4.825 mills, a decrease of .33 mills from 2003; o Avon Metro District- 3.479 mills, a decrease of.14 mills from 2003 The decrease in the debt service mill rate is due to an increase in the Town's assessed valuation, as well as a decrease in the annual debt service requirements for general obligation bonds due to the recent refunding. The decrease in the Avon Metro District mill rate is also due to a increase in the AMD assessed value. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolutions discussed above as presented. Town Manager Comments: ? J. Attachments: A - Resolution 04-48 B - Resolution 04-49 Page 1 TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 04-48 SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION LEVYING GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2004, TO HELP DEFRAY THE COSTS OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, FOR THE 2005 BUDGET YEAR WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon has adopted the annual budget in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law on November 9, 2004; and WHEREAS, the amount of money necessary to balance the budget for general operating purposes from property tax revenue is $1,369,775; and WHEREAS, the amount of money to balance the budget for bonds and interest is $737,885; and WHEREAS, the 2004 valuation for assessment for the Town of Avon, as certified by the County Assessor is $152,944,980. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section 1. That for the purpose of meeting all general operating expenses of the Town of Avon during the 2005 budget year there is levied a tax of 8.956 mills upon each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property within the Town of Avon for the year 2004. Section 2. That for the purpose of meeting all bonds and interest of the Town of Avon during the 2005 budget year there is levied a tax of 4.825 mills upon each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property within the Town of Avon for the year 2004. Section 3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to immediately certify to the County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado, the mill levies for the Town of Avon as hereinabove determined and set. ADOPTED this 14r" day of December, 2004. TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 04-49 SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION LEVYING GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2004, TO HELP DEFRAY THE COSTS OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE AVON METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, AVON, COLORADO, FOR THE 2005 BUDGET YEAR WHEREAS, an Agreement for Dissolution of the Avon Metropolitan District was executed and a petition filed by the District with the District Court of Eagle County and the District was effectively dissolved on May 31, 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the District shall continue in existence as a political subdivision of the State for the sole purpose of securing payment in full of the principal and interest of existing indebtedness; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Town Council was appointed as the District Board of Directors and shall set mill levies as necessary in order to pay in full the costs of annual payments on the outstanding indebtedness; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon has adopted the annual budget of the Town of Avon including the Avon Metropolitan District Debt Service Fund in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law on November 9, 2004; and WHEREAS, the amount of money to balance the Avon Metropolitan District Fund budget for bonds and interest is $488,083; and WHEREAS, the 2004 valuation for assessment for the Avon Metropolitan District as certified by the County Assessor is $140,275,330. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section 1. That for the purpose of meeting all bonds and interest of the Town of Avon during the 2005 budget year there is levied a tax of 3.479 mills upon each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property within the Avon Metropolitan District for the year 2004. Section 2. That the Mayor acting as Board President is hereby authorized and directed to immediately certify to the County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado, the mill levies for the Avon Metropolitan District as hereinabove determined and set. ADOPTED this 14th day of December, 2004. TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Tambi Katieb, Director of Community velopment Eric Heidemann, Senior Planner Date December 8, 2004 Re: Second Reading of Ordinance 04-20, An Ordinance Amending Lot 1 and 2 Chateau St. Claire PUD (PUBLIC HEARING) Summary The applicant, Parkhill-lvns Architects, representing the owners of the Chateau St. Claire PUD (also known as the Gates on Beaver Creek) is proposing an amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD (Ordinance No. 98-6). At your last meeting on November 23, 2004, an Ordinance amending Lot 1 and 2 Chateau St. Claire PUD was approved on first reading. Accompanying this PUD amendment application is a development agreement (Exhibit "A") that has been modified since first reading based on direction from Council. The revised development agreement includes clarifying language with respect to the calculation of exactions (Time Share Amenity Fee, Employee Housing Fee) and language clarifying assessments and assignment of liens. The proposed amendments to the PUD includes the removal of the 6 deed restricted housing units as required by Ordinance 98-6 to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. Furthermore, the applicant agrees to enter into a development agreement with the Town which will include: (1) payment of an in-lieu fee (impact fee) of $100,000 to the Town of Avon's Affordable Housing Program; (2) establishment of a time share amenity fee; and (3) an agreement that should a certificate of occupancy not be issued by the second anniversary of the effective date (2006), the Town will retain a $60,000 cash deposit, the building permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals (i.e. all approvals will be null and void, including the PUD and the Design Review approvals). In the interest of continuing cooperation between the Town and the applicant, Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the PUD amendment in Resolution 04-26. Consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation, staff recommends approval of the PUD amendment of the Lot 1 and 2 Chateau St. Claire PUD with conditions as defined in Ordinance 04-20 and outlined below: 1. The PUD amendment is contingent upon a valid Development Agreement between CSC Land, LLC, and the Town of Avon being approved; Memo to Town Council, December 14, 2004 Page 1 of 2 Ordinance 04-20, Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire PUD Amendment (PUBLIC HEARING) 2. Eliminate requirement #3 (Ordinance 98-6) for employee housing to be replaced by three fractional ownership units; 3. Payment of a $100,000 fee to the Town of Avon to mitigate Employee Housing requirements prior to the issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; 4. Payment of a Time-Share Amenity Fee to offset additional costs for transportation and recreation; 5. Failure to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy within two years of the effective date of the Amending PUD Ordinance shall automatically terminate all permits and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals; 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. Recommendations Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 04-20 on second reading after opening the public hearing and receiving comments. Any final changes can be made as part of your motion on this ordinance. Alternatives 1. Approve on second Reading 2. Table the application Proposed Motion "I move to approve on second reading Ordinance 04-20, approving an Amendment to the Lot 1 and 2 Chateau St. Claire PUD, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado. " Town Manager Comments ,?4'_za Attachments: A. Memo from Town Attorney dated December 8, 2004 B. Revised Version of Development Agreement C. Ordinance 04-20 (First Reading) D. Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report E. Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 04-26 Memo to Town Council, December 14, 2004 Page 2 of 2 Ordinance 04-20, Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire PUD Amendment (PUBLIC HEARING) MEMORANDUM TO: TOWN COUNCIL FROM: TOWN ATTORNEY RE: THE GATES DATE: December 8, 2004 Accompanying this memorandum is a copy of the development agreement for The Gates, marked up to show changes since my memorandum to you on November 29. I believe that all concerns of council have now been addressed. CSC Land has also approved the agreement, and they are ready to sign. I therefore recommend that the agreement be authorized as part of second reading of the ordinance before you. JWD:ipse 3 Exhibit "A" to Ordinance 04-20 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE GATES ON BEAVER CREEK (formerly Chateau St. Claire) THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into as of , 2004 by and between CSC Land, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company (as more specifically defined below, the "Owner") and the Town of Avon, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (the "Town"). RECITALS: A. Owner is a limited liability company, duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the State of Colorado. B. Owner owns a parcel of real property described as Lots 1 and 2, FINAL PLAT OF CHATEAU ST. CLAIR SUBDIVISION - PUD, according to the plat thereof filed June 18, 1987 in Book 729 at Page 742, Eagle County, Colorado (" the Property"). C. By Ordinance No. 98-6, Series of 1998, the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards for the Property were approved, subject to the condition that deed-restricted affordable housing or employee units be included in the development in an amount equal to ten percent of the hotel, residential or timeshare units. D. Building Permit No. C-BP-2002-17, reissued on March 5, 2004 ("the Building Permit"), contained the conditions that 1) a Deed Restriction and Employee Housing Agreement be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and 2) a letter of credit in the amount of $60,000 be retained by the Town until such time as the site is restored to the Town's satisfaction or a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. E. Owner has deposited cash in the amount of $60,000, in lieu of a letter of credit, which deposit has been accepted and will be retained by the Town to be used either for site restoration or as a credit toward the Employee Housing Impact Fee hereinafter provided for. F. The Town is now willing to delete the affordable housing condition from Ordinance No. 98-6, the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards and from the Building Permit, in exchange for Owner's agreement to certain exactions and other conditions, hereinafter set forth. G. The legislature of the State of Colorado adopted Sections 24-68-101, et seq. Colorado Revised Statutes (the "Vested Property Rights Statute") to provide for the establishment of vested property rights in order to ensure reasonable 4 certainty, stability and fairness in the land use planning process and in order to stimulate economic growth, secure the reasonable investment backed expectations of landowners, and foster cooperation between the public and private sectors in the area of land use planning; said Vested Property Rights Statute authorizes the Town to enter into development agreements with landowners providing for vesting of property development rights. H. Consistent with the Vested Property Rights Statute, Chapter 17.14 of the Municipal Code authorizes the Town to enter into development agreements with landowners and other qualified applicants providing for the vesting of property development rights. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises set forth above, the terms, conditions and covenants set forth in this Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Owner and the Town agree as follows: ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS 1.1 Association. Timeshare ownership association formed to manage the timeshare ownership project located on the Property. 1_2 Effective Date. The effective date of the Town Council Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 98-6, Series of 1998. 1.3 Municipal Code. The Town's Municipal Code, as in effect from time to time. 1.4 PUD. Planned unit development or PUD, as such terms are defined and used in Section 17.20.110 of the Municipal Code. 1.5 Resubdivision Plat. A plat approved by the Town authorizing a resubdivision, condominium resubdivision, planned unit development resubdivision, or time- sharing subdivision consistent with Title 16 of the Municipal Code. 1.6 Certificate of Occupancy. Certification pursuant to the Town's building codes that the premises have been completed and comply with the provisions thereof. "Certificate of Occupancy" includes any temporary certificate of occupancy. 2 6 1.7 Time-share owner. A person vested with legal title to a timeshare estate in accordance with Section 38-33-110, Colorado Revised Statutes. 1.8 Time-share unit. A unit, the title to which is divided into interval estates or time-span estates in accordance with Section 38-33-110, Colorado Revised Statutes. 1.9 Time-share Amenities Fee. A consensual fee intended to mitigate the impact of a time-share subdivision, including the cost of transportation and of recreational facilities. 1.10 Employee Housing Impact Fee. A consensual fee intended to mitigate the impact of a condominium subdivision and associated facilities on employee housing needs. ARTICLE II WAIVER OF CONDITION The affordable housing condition contained in Ordinance No. 98-6, Series of 1998, and the Building Permit shall be deleted by the Town, by adoption of an amending ordinance, such amending ordinance to be effective upon occurrence of the Effective Date and Owner's compliance with the requirements of Article III hereof. ARTICLE III EXACTIONS The following exactions are intended to provide adequate facilities for the public benefit of the Town: 3.1 Timeshare Amenities Fee: Commencing as of the Effective Date and continuing in perpetuity, the Association is obligated to collect from each timeshare owner and remit to the Town a Timeshare Amenities Fee in the amount of $140.10 per year per fractional interest (defined as a 1 /10th (five- week) undivided interest or timespan estate in a time-share unit), or the equivalent of $28.02 per year per weekly fractional interest if conveyed in The Owner is exempt from the obligation for the Timeshare Amenities Fee until the first-time sale of a fractional interest. The provisions for the obligation for each timeshare owner to pay shall be a covenant running with the land and reflected accordingly on the Resubdivision Plat and Association covenants. Prior to the assignment of this Agreement to the Association pursuant to Section 6.9 hereof, the Owner shall be obligated to collect and remit any and all Timeshare Amenities Fees. 3 V The amount of the semi-annual payments will be calculated according to the following formula: Number of existing or newly deeded timeshare fractional interests per semiannual period (January-June, calculated as of June 1, and July-December calculated as of December 1), multiplied by the $140.10 fee (or as adjusted by CPI-U, as defined below), divided by 2. The due dates for the semiannual payment are August 20. and February 20 for the previous semiannual calculation period. On January 1, 2006, and on the first day of each year thereafter, the amount of the fee shall be increased, but not decreased, by the percentage change from the prior year average consumer price index for All Urban Consumers for the Denver-Boulder-Greeley metropolitan area as published semiannually and appearing in the January and July issues of the CPI Detailed Report published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (the "CPI-U"). It shall be the duty of the Association to keep and preserve such records as are necessary to determine the amount of fees due hereunder. Such records shall be preserved for a period of three years and shall be open for inspection by representatives of the Town during regular business hours. Prior to the formation of the Association, the Owner shall have the above-referenced obligation to keep and preserve such records. If a remittance to the Town is delinquent, or the remittance is less than the full amount due, the Town shall make a written demand of the amount due and deliver or mail the same to the office of the Association. The amount properly determined to be owing shall be from the due date of the remittance at the rate of one and one-half percent per month until paid. Prior to formation of the Association such written demand will be delivered to the Owner. 3.2 Assignment of Association Assessments and Lien. Owner, on behalf of the Association assigns and grants a continuing security interest in the Association's right to future income, including the right to receive common expense assessments of any kind levied pursuant to its condominium declaration, and its lien therefor, to secure payment of the Timeshare Amenities Fee. Upon default of the Association in collection and/or remittance of the Timeshare Amenities Fee and notice thereof to the timeshare owners, the Town shall have the right to directly receive common expense assessments and to foreclose the lien therefor. 3.3 Employee Housing Impact Fee. Owner shall pay to the Town, on or before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the sum of $40,000, which, together with the $60,000 already deposited with the Town, shall be accepted by the Town in full satisfaction of the Employee Housing Impact Fee and any other 4 exaction intended to mitigate the impact of the Property and the timeshare ownership project on employee housing needs, excluding the Timeshare Amenities Fee. ARTICLE IV TERM OF AGREEMENT 4.1 Term of Agreement. Owner and the Town agree that the term of this Agreement and the vested property rights established under this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue, unless sooner terminated pursuant to Article V hereof, until the second anniversary of the Effective Date. If a Certificate of Occupancy has not been issued by that date, this Agreement shall terminate, the Town shall be entitled to retain the cash deposit in the amount of $60,000, the Building Permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals. If a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by that date, this Agreement shall continue in effect until amended or terminated by mutual agreement of the parties. 4.2 Maintaining Active Permit. The foregoing notwithstanding, Owner shall maintain an active building perniit pursuant to the current provisions of Title 15, Municipal Code, on a schedule that will result in issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy in accordance with the above provisions. Failure to maintain the permit and schedule will constitute a default under the provisions of this Agreement, causing its termination and the same consequences as are contained in Section 4.1. ARTICLE V DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES 5.1 Default by Town. A "breach" or "default" by the Town under this Agreement shall be defined as the Town's failure to fulfill or perform any material obligation of the Town contained in this Agreement. 5.2 Default by Owner. A "breach" or "default" by Owner shall be defined as Owner's failure to fulfill or perform any material obligation of Owner contained in this Agreement. 5.3 Notices of Default. In the event of a default by either party under this Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall deliver written notice to the defaulting party of such default, at the address specified in Section 6.8, and the defaulting party shall have thirty (30) days from and after receipt of such notice to cure such default. If such default is not of a type which can be cured within such thirty (30) day period and the defaulting party gives written notice 5 to the non-defaulting party within such thirty (30) day period that it is actively and diligently pursuing such cure, the defaulting party shall have a reasonable period of time given the nature of the default following the end of such thirty (30) day period to cure such default, provided that such defaulting party is at all times within such additional time period actively and diligently pursuing such cure. 5.4 Remedies. (a) If any default under this Agreement is not cured as described above, the non- defaulting party shall have the right to enforce the defaulting party's obligation hereunder by enforcement of its rights granted by Section 3.2 hereof, including foreclosure of its lien, and/or an action for any equitable remedy, including injunction and/or specific performance, and/or an action to recover all amounts owing hereunder, including any damages. Each remedy provided for in this Agreement is cumulative and is in addition to every other remedy provided for in this Agreement or otherwise existing at law, in equity or by statute. (b) In the event of default by the Owner prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, which default is not cured as described above, this Agreement shall terminate, the Town shall be entitled to retain the cash deposit in the amount of $60,000, the Building Permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals. 5.5 Default Under Article IV. Any default under Article IV shall not be subject to the cure provisions hereinabove contained and shall primarily be remedied as set forth in said Article. ARTICLE VI MISCELLANEOUS 6.1 Applicable Law. Agreement shall be constructed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and the relevant portions of the Municipal Code. 6.2 No Joint Venture or Partnership. No form of joint venture or partnership exists between the Town and Owner, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall be constructed as making Town and Owner joint venturers or partners. 6.3 Expenses. Owner shall reimburse to the Town the costs and expenses, including attorney's fees associated with the preparation of, implementation of and enforcement of the terms of this Agreement. 6 1 6.4 Waiver. No waiver of one or more of the terms of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of other terms. Nor waiver of any provision of this Agreement in any instance shall constitute a waiver of such provision in other instances. 6.5 Town Findings. The Town hereby finds and determines that execution of this Agreement is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare of the Town. 6.6 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect so long as enforcement of the remaining provisions would not be inequitable to the party against whom they are being enforced under the facts and circumstances then pertaining. 6.7 Further Assurances. Each party shall execute and deliver to the other all such other further instructions and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out this Agreement in order to provide and secure to the other party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and privileges under this Agreement. 6.8 Notices. Any notice or communication required under this Agreement between the Town and Owner must be in writing, and may be given either personally or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. If given by registered or certified mail, the same shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (i) actual receipt by any of the addresses designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five days a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail, if personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the party to whom it is addressed. Any party hereto may at any time, by giving written notice to the other party hereto as provided in this Section designate additional persons to whom notices or communications shall be given, and designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to that parties at their addresses set forth below: If to Town: Town of Avon Attn: Town Manager P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 If to Owner: CSC Land, LLC c/o Tim Barton 70 Benchmark Road, Suite 102 P.O. Box 5570 7 ?d Avon, CO 81620 With Notice to:The Law Offices of Amber L. Severtson, P.C. Attention: Amber L. Severtson 16901 North Dallas Parkway, Suite 103 Addison, Texas 75001 6.9 "Owner" will initially refer to CSC Land, LLC, as well as any entity that subsequently acquires a fee simple interest of record in any portion of the Property as a transferee, grantee, assignee or successor of CSC Land, LLC. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the term "Owner" will not include (1) purchasers of condominium units, timeshare units, fractional interests or any other interest therein, except and to the extent that CSC Land, LLC or any of its assigns separately acquires any such unit or units or any interest therein (including any bulk purchase thereof) or (2) holders of a security interest in the Property or a portion thereof, except and to the extent that a holder of a security interest acquires any such unit or units or any interest therein through foreclosure. Following the Effective Date, upon formation of the Association, issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and payment of the Employee Housing Fee and all Timeshare Amenities Fees then due and payable, the Owner shall assign all remaining obligations hereunder to the Association (which shall then be deemed to be the "Owner"). 6.10 Assignments. This Agreement shall be binding upon and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, shall inure to the benefit of the successors in interest or the legal representatives of the parties hereto. Except as specifically set forth herein, Owner shall have the right to assign, delegate or transfer all or any portion of its interests, rights or obligations under this Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in the Property, including, but not limited to, time-share owners, purchasers or long term ground lessees of individual lots, parcels, or of any improvements now or hereafter located within the Property. Provided that the Town's approval of the assignee or transferee is first obtained, an assumption or transfer providing for express assumption of any of Owner's obligations under this Agreement by its assignee or transferee shall relieve Owner of any further obligations under this Agreement with respect to the matter so assumed. The Town's approval of any such assignee or transferee shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The Town approves of the assignment to and assumption by the Association of all of Owner's obligations under this Agreement following the Effective Date, upon formation of the Association, issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and payment of the Employee Housing Fee and all Timeshare Amenities Fees then due and payable, and the Owner shall be relieved of all liabilities and obligations hereunder upon recordation of such assignment and assumption. The Town's obligations hereunder may not be assigned or delegated without Owner's written consent, and any attempted assignment or delegation by the Town not in compliance herewith shall be null and void. 8 6.11 Counterparts. This Agreement shall be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 6.12 Amendments and Waivers. No amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement, nor consent to any departure here from, shall in any event be elective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the parties hereto, and then such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given. 6.13 No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing expressed or implied in this Agreement is intended or will be construed to confer upon, or give to, any legal person other than the parties, any right, remedy, or claim under or by reason of this Agreement or any covenants, terms, conditions, or provisions thereof, and all of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions in this Agreement by and on behalf of the parties will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the parties. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to interfere with the agreements of the parties with third parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and the Town have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above to take effect as of the Effective Date. TOWN OF AVON, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado BY: Mayor ATTEST Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney 9 \2 STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed before me this day of , 2004, by Ron Wolfe as Mayor and Patty McKenny as Town Clerk of Town of Avon, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado. My Commission Expires: Notary Public CSC LAND, LLC By: Managing Manager STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed before me this day of , 2004, by Tim Barton, as Managing Manager of CSC Land, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. My Commission Expires: Notary Public 10 TOWN OF AVON ORDINANCE NO. 04-20 SERIES OF 2004 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE 98-6, AMENDING THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LOT 1 AND 2, CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, CSC Land, has filed an application to amend the existing Planned Unit Development ("PUD") and Development Standards for the proposed Chateau St. Claire development; and WHEREAS, the Town and the Owner have negotiated the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement for Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision and ("Agreement"), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on November 16, 2004, at which time the applicant and the public were given an opportunity to express their opinions and present certain information and reports regarding the proposed PUD Development Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning & Zoning Commission forwarded its recommendation for approval on the PUD amendment application to the Town Council of the Town of Avon through Resolution 04-26; and F:\Council\0rdinances\2004\0rd 04-20 Chateau St. Claire PUD Amend.doc kq WHEREAS, after notices provided by law, this Council held a public hearing on the day of , 2004, at which time the public was given an opportunity to express their opinions regarding the proposed PUD Development Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence, testimony, and exhibits, and a study of the Comprehensive Plan of the Town of Avon, Town Council of the Town of Avon finds as follows: 1. The hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council were both extensive and complete and that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted at those hearings. 2. That the PUD Plan is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, and is compatible with surrounding neighborhood and the public interest. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, THAT: The Chateau St. Claire PUD Amendment is hereby approved, subject to the following: 1. The PUD amendment is contingent upon a valid Development Agreement between CSC Land, LLC, and the Town of Avon being approved; 2. Eliminate requirement #3 (Ordinance 98-6) for employee housing to be replaced by three fractional ownership units; 3. Payment of a S 100,000 fee to the Town of Avon to mitigate Employee Housing requirements prior to the issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; 4. Payment of a Time-Share Amenity Fee to offset additional costs for transportation and recreation; 5. Failure to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy within two years of the effective date of the Amending PUD Ordinance shall automatically terminate all permits and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals. 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. F:ACouncil\0rdinances\2004\0rd 04-20 Chateau St. Claire PUD Amend.doc \'? INTRODUCED, PASSED ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED POSTED, this day of , 2004, and a public hearing shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado, on the day of, , 2004, at 5:30 P.M. in the Municipal Building of the Town of Avon, Colorado. Town of Avon, Colorado Town Council Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk INTRODUCED, PASSED ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED POSTED the day of , 2004. Town of Avon, Colorado Town Council Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney F:ACouncil\0rdinances\2004\0rd 04-20 Chateau St. Claire PUD Amend.doc \?p Staff Report ' PUD Amendment VON C O L O R A D O November 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date November 10, 2004 Project type Amendment to Chateau St. Claire PUD, "Gates on Beaver Creek" Legal description Lot 1, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision Current zoning PUD Address 38374 Hwy 6 & 24 Introduction The applicant, Parkhill-Ivins Architects, representing the owners of the Chateau St. Claire PUD (also known as the Gates on Beaver Creek) is proposing an amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD (Ordinance No. 98-6). The proposed amendments to the PUD includes the removal of the 6 deed restricted housing units as required by Ordinance 98-6 to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. Furthermore, the applicant agrees to enter into a development agreement with the Town which will include: (1) payment of an in-lieu fee (impact fee) of $100,000 to the Town of Avon's Affordable Housing Program; (2) establishment of a time share amenity fee; and (3) an agreement that should a certificate of occupancy not be issued by the second anniversary of the effective date (2006), the Town will retain a $60,000 cash deposit, the building permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals (i.e. all approvals will be null and void, including the PUD and the Design Review approvals). These amendment items will be effectuated by a development agreement entered into by the property owner and the Town of Avon. The development agreement is currently being reviewed by the Town Attorney and should be finalized prior to the Council's public hearing. This submittal is also being reviewed in conjunction with a minor modification application for some of the previously approved design features. Background & Discussion The PUD was originally approved September 1996 and later amended in June, 1998. The PUD currently consists of 31 fractional-fee units, 6 employee housing units, 17 whole ownership units, and a total of 4,127 sq. ft. GLFA of commercial space. The applicant is requesting removal of the 6 deed restricted housing units to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. The PUD currently contains a condition which states " Deed restricted affordable housing or employee units shall be included in the development in an amount equal to ten percent of the hotel, residential, or timeshare units." The deed restricted units are located on the west end of the first floor. If approved, the total number of units would be reduced from 54 to 49 units. The payment of an in-lieu fee of $100,000 to the Town of Avon Affordable Housing Program is expected to offset the proposed reduction of 6 deed restricted housing units. Based on the draft development agreement, the expectation is that the owner shall pay to the Town, on or before Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 ?q Lot 1, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, "Gates on Beaver Creek" PUD Amendment November 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting 2 of 5 issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In addition, the applicant agrees to the establishment of a timeshare amenity fee. The amount of the fee and the fee schedule will be outlined in the development agreement Included in the proposed development agreement is a requirement that should a certificate of occupancy not be issued by the second anniversary of the effective date (2006), the Town will retain the $60,000 cash deposit, the building permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals (i.e. all approvals will be null and void, including the PUD and the Design Review approvals). Following is a detailed timeline for the activity that has taken place on the Chateau property: February 1996 - Chateau St. Claire LLC petitioned to the Town for annexation and PUD zoning and development plan approval. The proposed project was a 4-story building with 72,000 sq. ft. devoted to office, retail and restaurant. No residential use was included. September 24, 1996 - Council approved the Annexation (Ordinance 96-16) and PUD zoning and Development Plan (Ordinance 96-17) with the condition that the parcel be subdivided into two lots: a 2.42-acre development lot ("Lot 1") and a 3.38-acre Public Open Space lot ("lot 2"). Lot 2 is to be dedicated to the Town. July 1997 - Applicants received a building permit. This permit eventually lapsed due to a lack of progress. August 5, 1998 - Council approved a PUD Amendment (Ordinance 1998-6) allowing for 150 hotel rooms or 110 timeshare units with office, retail, restaurant and service commercial land- uses. The permitted uses were altered with this amendment, not the design of building. September 5, 2000 - Revised Final Design plan was submitted and approved for a 6-story, 118,000 sq. ft. building including 52 condominium units and a restaurant. The condominium units were proposed as a mix of interval ownership, fee simple ownership and employee housing. This revised design submittal is similar in height and massing to the original design approved in 1996. September 26, 2000 - Town issues a grading permit (X-EG2000-2) to clear debris and topsoil from the site. All work pertaining to this permit was completed October 12, 2000. August 2001 - Town issues a foundation, excavation, and retaining wall permit (X-EG2000-3) and retained a surety to ensure restoration of the site pending issuance of a complete building permit. June 2002 - Building permit (C-BP2001-4) is issued. Town expires building permit due to lack of construction activity on the site. The owner/developer is required by the Town to pay half of the building permit fee again to extend the building permit (allowed under the 1997 UBC). December 10, 2002 - The Town issues a new building permit (C-BP2002-17) with specific conditions for construction and development. Based on this revised permit, owner/developer was required to commence construction no later than May 10, 2003 and pay a recreational amenity fee in the amount of $58,808 Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 ?'b Lot 1, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, "Gates on Beaver Creek" PUD Amendment November 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 5 and a school impact fee in the amount of $11,415.81 for a total of $70,223.81. The Town collected all fees. ¦ Renewal #1 (January 27, 2004): 180 days pending satisfactory funding in place. • August 2004: Town Attorney determines funding in place • August 11, 2004 :Inspection performed on shared and partial footing. Permit will expire in 180 days (February 7th, 2005) with no substantial resumption of activity. PUD Design Criteria According to the Town of Avon Zoning Code, Section 17.20.110, the following shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating a PUD. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following design criteria, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a particular development solution is consistent with the public interest. 1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives. The fundamental reason for having a Comprehensive Plan is to generally communicate where and how land uses may and will occur in the Town. The land use plan is based upon these goals and polices. Implementation is through annexation, subdivision and zoning regulations. This proposed PUD Amendment appears to comply with the following goals and polices of the Town Comprehensive Plan based upon the following: Policy A1.1 Development and redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate for the neighborhood in which it is located. The proposed Chateau St. Claire PUD amendment will not increase the land use intensity or overall density. In fact, the proposed amendment to the PUD represents a reduction in residential density from 52 units to 49 units. The proposed amendment has no bearing on the scale of the project, based on the prior approvals. Additionally, the net anticipated change in average daily trips (ADT) generated from the site is negligible, and may create a reduction in ADT. Policy C2.1 New development, annexations, and major redevelopment shall include or otherwise provide for affordable housing. The application proposes the removal of 6 deed restricted housing units to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. Although this amendment would eliminate all deed-restricted units, the owner has agreed to contribute $100,000 towards the Town's Affordable Housing Program. Policy C2.4 The Town will encourage and, to the extent practical, participate in development of affordable housing. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949-5749 ea Lot 1, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, "Gates on Beaver Creek" PUD Amendment November 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 5 The $100,000 contribution to the Town's Affordable Housing Program provides the Town with the flexibility to participate in the development of a broader affordable housing program. 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub-area design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town. The proposed amendment application has previously been evaluated for conformity to the design guidelines of the Town with the original adoption of the PUD. The proposed changes are internal to the project and will not affect the exterior design. 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation. The proposal appears compatible with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties including the proposed conditions of approval. 4. Uses, activity, and density provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed uses appear to provide a compatible and efficient relationship with the surrounding uses and existing residences. 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed. The application does not appear to negatively affect a known geologic hazard. 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The site plan and location of buildings and open space are responsive to natural features of the existing PUD. 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation Plan. The proposed amendment will not affect the anticipated circulation system, creating no change to the access. 8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The landscaping has been reviewed through the design process when the PUD was originally adopted. 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. The phasing plan submitted has been reviewed through the design process when the PUD was originally adopted. 10. That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949-5749 '1Q Lot 1, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, "Gates on Beaver Creek" PUD Amendment November 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 5 The proposed amendment appears to comply with capacities originally contemplated in the first PUD approval. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 04-26 as presented with conditions. Recommended Motion "I move to approve Resolution 04-26, recommending to the Town Council to approve the amendment to Chateau St. Claire PUD (Ordinance No. 98-6), Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, as more specifically described in the application dated November 2, 2004 with the following conditions: " 1. Condition -#3 from Ordinance 98-6 is deleted upon the approval of the PUD amendment and execution of a development agreement by Town Council. 2. Should a certificate of occupancy not be issued by the second anniversary of the effective date (2006), the Town will retain a $60,000 cash deposit, the building permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748- 4000, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully-submitted, ric Heidemann Report Attachments: A. Ordinance 98-6 Amendment of PUD (amending ordinance 98-17) B. First Floor Plan Set with 3 interval units. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 ti\ TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-26 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD TO ELIMINATE CONDITION 3 OF ORDINANCE 98-6 WHICH STATES "DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR EMPLOYEE UNITS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 10 PERCENT OF THE HOTEL, RESIDENTIAL, OR TIMESHARE UNITS" AS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2004. WHEREAS, CSC Land, has filed an application to amend the existing Planned Unit Development ("PUD") and Development Standards for the proposed Chateau St. Claire development; and WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on November 16, 2004 at which time the applicant and the public were given an opportunity to express their opinions and present certain information and reports regarding the proposed PUD Development Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded its recommendation for approval on the PUD amendment application to the Town Council of the Town of Avon through Resolution 04-26; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval to the Town Council for the Chateau St. Claire PUD Amendment dated November_, 2004 with the following conditions: F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Resolutions\2004\Res 04-26 Chateau St. Claire amendment.doc v Z 1. The PUD amendment is contingent upon a valid Development. Agreement between CSC Land, LLC, and the Town of Avon being approved; 2. Eliminate requirement #3 (Ordinance 98-6) for employee housing to be replaced by three fractional ownership units; 3. Payment of a $100,000 fee to the Town of Avon to mitigate Employee Housing requirements prior to the issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; 4. Payment of a Time-Share Amenity Fee to offset additional costs for transportation and recreation; 5. Failure to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy within two years of the effective date of the Amending PUD Ordinance shall automatically terminate all permits and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals. 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. ADOPTED THIS 16th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2004 Signed: ?--- Date: /dic /61 Chris Evans, Chair Attest: ^ Date: /41 LOy. j. 4r:? - Terry Smith, Se retary F:APlanning & Zoning CommissionAResolutions\2004\Res 04-26 Chateau St. Claire amendment.doc TOWN OF AVON ORDINANCE NO. 98 - 6 SERIES OF 1998 4 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE 96-17, AMENDING THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LOTS 1 AND 2, CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, Chateau St. Claire LLC, has filed an application to amend the existing PLED Development Plan and Development Standards for the proposed Chateau St. Claire development; and ktc WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as 4 required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing, at which time the applicant and the public were given an opportunity to express their opinions and present certain information and reports regarding the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning & Zoning Commission forwarded reports and recommendations on the proposed amendment to the Town Council of the Town of Avon; and WHEREAS, after notices provided by law, this Council held a public hearing on { the 9th day of June 1998, at which time the public was given an opportunity to express their opinions regarding the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence, testimony, and exhibits, and a study of the Comprehensive Plan of the Town of Avon, Town Council of the Town of Avon finds as follows: 1. That the hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council were both extensive and complete and that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted at those hearings. 2. The amended PUD Development Plan and Development Standards are consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan. 3. That the proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding area and uses. 4. Adequate facilities are available to serve development for the project's type and scope. "NTSERVER'WILE SERVERICOIINCILKIRDINAW<119M9l-6cMle..Icls,rt.,.M.dm 2? NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, that the amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD to amend the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards is hereby f approved and shall be developed in conformance with the PUD Development Plan attached to this ordinance as Exhibit A and is subject to the following conditions: 1. An access casement shall be dedicated prior to issuance of building permit to < facilitate shared access between the Chateau St. Claire property and the Folson Tract. 2. Dogs shall not be permitted on the property, 3. Deed restricted affordable housing or employee units shall he included in the development in an amount equal to ten percent of the hotel, residential or timeshare units. INTRODUCED, PASSED ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED POSTED, this 266 day of May , 1998, and a public hearing shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado on the 9 thday ol7un4998 at 5:30 PM in the Municipal Building of the Town of Avon, Colorado. Town of Avon, Colorado Town Council ,1,? Jack Fawcett, Mayor ATTEST:., l /lG 4 Kris Nash, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, PASSED ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND , 1998, ORDERED POSTED, this 9th day of June Town of Avon, Colorado Town Council Jack Fawcett, Mayor A ST: Kris Nash, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: %WTSLRVER\FILE SERVERKOUNCIL'ORDINAW',Ir4tlyi'twh$Wsu xlllr s"'WAFc ... ? 5 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AVON TOWN COUNCIL HELD NOVEMBER 23, 2004 A regular meeting of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held at 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado in the Council Chambers. The meeting came to order with the Town Clerk reading the list of newly elected Council Member as Kristi Ferraro, Amy Phillips, and Tamra Nottingham Underwood. Other Council members present were Debbie Buckley, Mac McDevitt and Ron Wolfe. Brian Sipes was absent. Also present were Town Manager Larry Brooks, Town Attorney John Dunn, Assistant Town Manager Jacquie Halburnt, Town Clerk Patty McKenny, Finance Director Scott Wright, Police Chief Jeff Layman, Town Engineer Norm Wood, Recreation Director Meryl Jacobs, Public Works / Transit Director Bob Reed and Senior Planner Eric Heidemann as well as members of the press and public. The Honorable Judge Buck Allen asked that the new members repeat the "Oath of Office" and Kristi Ferraro, Amy Phillips, and Tamra Nottingham Underwood were sworn in as Avon's new council members. The first order of business was to elect a temporary chairman; a motion was made by Debbie Buckley to nominate Mac McDevitt. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). At this time each Council member noted reasons as to whether or not he/she were interested in the mayoral position, and if so why and what he/she could bring to the position. Ron Wolfe, Mac McDevitt and Debbie Buckley all expressed interest in the position. The ballots were counted and the Town Clerk announced that Ron Wolfe would be Avon's Mayor. Mayor Wolfe then thanked everyone, made some brief opening comments and then proceeded to the topic of selecting a Mayor Pro Tem. Mac McDevitt, Tamra Underwood and Debbie Buckley expressed interest in the position. The results of the votes cast for Mayor Pro Tem are as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Selection Debbie Buckley Mac McDevitt Tamra Underwood 1st Ballot Count: Two Votes One vote Two votes 2nd Ballot Count: Two Votes ---- Three votes Town Attorney Dunn again noted that four votes are required for this selection and the Charter is very clear about the Mayor not having a vote in this matter (he indicated that this is somewhat of a flaw considering the situation at hand). An alternative might be to defer this decision until the next meeting. Councilor Phillips moved to table the election of the mayor pro tern until all members of Council are present. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Resolutions Town Attorney Dunn presented Resolution 04-38, Series of 2004, Reappointing C.G. Allen, III as Municipal Judge. Per the Town's Charter this action is required once a new council is seated. Councilor D. Buckley moved to approve Resolution 04-38 Reappointing C.G. Allen, III as Municipal Judge; Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion and it passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Mayor Wolfe expressed appreciation on behalf of the Town for the years of public service of the outgoing members by reading Resolution No. 04-44, A Resolution in Appreciation of Albert D. Reynolds, Resolution No. 04-45, A Resolution in Appreciation of Michael Brown, Resolution No. 04-47, A Resolution in Appreciation of Peter Buckley. Councilor Buckley moved to approve Resolution No. 04-44 in appreciation of Buz Reynolds; Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion and it passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Councilor Buckley moved to approve Resolution No. 04-45 in appreciation of Michael Brown, Councilor Phillips seconded the motion and it passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Councilor McDevitt moved to approve Resolution No. 04-46 in appreciation of Peter Buckley, Councilor Underwood seconded the motion and it passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Ordinances Senior Planner Eric Heidemann presented Ordinance No. 04-20, Series of 2004, First Reading, An Ordinance Providing for the Amendment of Ordinance No. 98-6, Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards, Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado. He noted that the applicant, Parkhill-lvns Architects, representing the owners of the Chateau St. Claire PUD (aka the Gates on Beaver Creek) proposes an amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD (Ordinance No. 98-6). The proposed amendments includes the removal of the 6 deed restricted housing units as required by Ordinance 98-6 to be replaced by 3 fractional ownership units. He noted that the applicant agrees to enter into a development agreement with the Town which will include the following: 1. Payment of an in-lieu fee (impact fee) of $100,000 to the Town of Avon's Affordable Housing Program; 2. Establishment of a time share amenity fee; 3. An agreement that should a certificate of occupancy not be issued by the second anniversary of the effective date (2006), the Town will retain a $60, 000 cash deposit, the building permit shall be cancelled and no further development shall be permitted under existing approvals (i.e. all approvals will be null and void, including the PUD and the Design Review approvals). He highlighted the enclosures in the council packet and noted that Planning & Zoning recommended approval with some conditions also outlined in the memo. Further discussion ensued on the fractional ownership concept, the possible need to include a clause on "property liens", how the agreement would be enforced, and the possibility of including a collateral assignment. Town Attorney Dunn noted that the Town and the developer were already discussing some revisions to the agreement. He proceeded to outline some of the changes, i.e. including the revision to add more security, revise language in CPI calculation, and include temporary certificate of occupancy rather than final certificate of occupancy. A question was asked about the $100,000K to be paid to Avon's Affordable Housing and Town Manager Brooks commented that his recommendation would be to forward that money to the EagleBend Affordable Housing Corporation to make capital improvements to the EagleBend apartment buildings. Ultimately the Town Council would vote on where the monies would be spent. Applicant Mike Stornello, architect for the project, addressed Council with regards to the submittal and what benefits exist for the Town. Councilor Buckley moved to approve Ordinance No. 04-20, an Ordinance Providing for the Amendment of Ordinance No. 98-6, amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards, Lot 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision noting that she would prefer to spend money on existing affordable housing projects. Councilor Phillips seconded the motion and it passed unanimously with a roll call vote by those members present (Sipes absent). A public hearing would be held at the next meeting on December 14, 2004. New Business Senior Planner Eric Heidemann presented the appeal of the Carwash Building Permit Extension for the applicant Steve Grow for the property described as Lot 30, Block 1, Benchmark at Regular Council Meeting Page 2 of 3 November 23, 2004 Beaver Creek Subdivision, 710 Nottingham Road. He reviewed the Council packet materials noting the letter dated November 12, 2004 submitted by Steve Grow making the request for the appeal. The historical dates of the application were reviewed, with the reminder that the original permit was issued in June 2003, and the first extension in December 2003. Both Steve Grow and John Perkins, architect, addressed Council with the reasons behind the request, noting that some of the delays were related to town staff. After some discussion about the lack of activity on this site and possible restoration methods, a motion was made by Councilor McDevitt to deny the appeal request to extend the building permit. Councilor Buckley seconded the motion and it passed unanimously by those members present (Sipes absent). Town Manager Report It was noted that the Town offices would be closed on Thursday & Friday for Thanksgiving Holiday. Mayor Wolfe thanked Assistant Town Manager Jacquie Halburnt for compiling the orientation packet for new council members. Town Attorney Report Town Attorney John Dunn noted that nothing has been done regarding the Lot 61 litigation. It was noted that the recent buyers were no longer interested and that the current owners do not seem interested in moving forward with the development. Mayor Report Mayor Wolfe noted that a liquor board meeting would immediately follow this meeting. Consent Agenda Mayor Wolfe asked for a motion on the Consent Agenda. It was determined that the three current members would vote on the minutes. Councilor Buckley moved to adopt the consent agenda; Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion and it passed unanimously with Buckley, McDevitt and Wolfe voting yea. a. Minutes from November 9, 2004 Meeting There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 6:45 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk APPROVED: Debbie Buckley Kristi Ferraro Mac McDevitt Amy Phillips Brian Sipes Tamra Underwood Ron Wolfe Regular Council Meeting November 23, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager, Jacquie Halburnt, Asst Town Manager From: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Date: December 7, 2004 Re: Resolution No. 04-50, Canceling Council Meeting Summary: This Resolution cancels the December 28th Council meeting that falls the week following Christmas. This meeting has generally been cancelled in the past. TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 04-50 SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION CANCELING A REGULAR TOWN COUNCIL MEETING WHEREAS, the second and fourth Tuesdays in each month are set aside for the regular meetings of the Town Council of the Town of Avon; and WHEREAS, the fourth Tuesday in December, 2004, falls within the Holiday timeframe; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado, that: The regular meeting of the Town Council scheduled for Tuesday, December 28, 2004 is hereby vacated and canceled. ADTOPTED this 14th day of December 2004. TOWN COUNCIL TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager From: Norman Wood, Town Enginee Anne Martens, Assistant Town ngineer Date: December 8, 2004 Re: Resolution No. 04 -51, Approving the Amended Final Plat, A Replat of Lot 4 and Lot 5 Mountain Vista Resorts Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (0140 West Beaver Creek Blvd) Summary: Points of Colorado, Inc., a Colorado corporation, owner of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Mountain Vista Resort Subdivision, has submitted an amended Final Plat to resubdivide Lots 4 and 5. This is a Subdivision of a lot under development, providing minor lot line revisions to insure the office building is within the building envelope. Lot 4 is for the office building and Lot 5 is parking and common space. This subdivision was previously approved by council at the September 9, 2003 regular meeting, however the applicant neglected to record the document within the allowed timeframe and has made subsequent minor modifications. The Subdivision is in conformance with the Title 16 of the Avon Municipal Code, Subdivisions. Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 04 - 51, Series of 2004, A Resolution Approving the Amended Final Plat, A Replat of Lot 4 and Lot 5 for Mountain Vista Resort Subdivision; Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, subject to completion of technical corrections to be approved by staff. Town Manager Comments: l CADocuments and Settings\nwood\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\L45MVRS2004Memo.doc TOWN OF AVON RESOLUTION NO. 04 - 51 Series of 2004 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED FINAL PLAT, A REPLAT OF LOT 4 AND LOT 5, MOUNTIAN VISTA RESORT SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, Points of Colorado, Inc., a Colorado corporation has submitted an amended Final Plat for Lot 4 and Lot 5 Mountain Vista Resorts Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Amended Final Plat has been reviewed by the Town Staff; and WHEREAS, the Amended Final Plat was found to be substantially in conformance with Title 16 of the Avon Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements for consideration as an Amended Final Plat. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, that the Amended Final Plat, A Replat of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Mountain Vista Resort Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, is hereby approved by the Town of Avon subject to: The completion of technical corrections as identified by Town Staff. ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 2004. ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk TOWN COUNCIL TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO Ron Wolfe, Mayor C:ADocuments and Settings\nwood\Local Settings'Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK2\L45MVRSres045 Ldoc Y >r MR ¦ Gunderson LLP Certified Public Accountants & Consultants December 8, 2004 Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon Attn: Scott Wright, Finance Director P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 Dear Council Members: We are pleased to serve you as your independent accountants. The purpose of this letter is to confirm the terms of our agreement. This letter also clarifies the nature and extent of the auditing and accounting services to be provided. Bill Petri will be the client partner responsible for these services to be provided to you. Karla Whittenburg, Senior Manager also will be assigned to you. This arrangement assures that another person you know will be familiar with your operations. It also provides a person who can substitute for Bill should he not be available. We hope you will call either of these persons when you believe the firm can be of assistance. Our services will include' Auditing services. We will audit the the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Town of Avon, Colorado as of and for the year ended December 31, 2004. Our audit will be performed in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. The audit will include tests of your accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express our opinion on these financial statements. In planning and performing our audit for the year ended December 31, 2004, we will consider the internal control in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the basic financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. IN Inter attonel Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon December 9, 2004 Page 2 We will obtain an understanding of the- design of the relevant policies and procedures and whether they have been placed in operation, and we will assess control risk. Tests of controls may be performed to test the effectiveness of certain policies and procedures that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud that are material to the basic financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from illegal acts and other noncompliance matters'that have a direct and material effect on the basic financial statements. Tests of controls are required only if control risk is assessed below the maximum level. Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on the internal control policies and procedures and, accordingly, we will not express such an opinion. Also, as part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the basic financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, the objective of our tests will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions, and we will not express an opinion. Accounting services. We also will provide you with the following nonaudit services: • Proposing adjusting journal entries In connection with the services we provide, we will not perform management functions, make management decisions, or act in a capacity equivalent to that of a member of management or an employee. You are responsible for management decisions and functions, and for designating a competent employee to oversee these services. You are responsible for evaluating the adequacy and results of the services performed and accepting responsibility for the results. You are also responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls, including monitoring ongoing activities. We are not responsible for the preparation of any report to any governmental agency, or any other form, return, or report, or for providing advice not specifically recited in this letter. Our fee does not include any time for consultation with your personnel or third parties regarding the assistance for GASB statements 34 and 35. Charges for such additional services will be billed separately at standard rates. The nature and extent of such services are the subject of a separate agreement. This letter constitutes the entire agreement regarding services to be provided to you and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings, negotiations, and discussions between us, whether oral or written. This agreement may be supplemented by other written agreements. + Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon December 8, 2004 Page 3 The purpose and objective of our audit is to lead to the expression of an unqualified opinion with respect to the financial statements. You understand that circumstances may exist or may arise that would preclude submitting such an opinion. We will inform you if we discover circumstances that will have an effect on our opinion on the financial will be other than unqualified, the reasons will be fully disclosed. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form an opinion, we may decline to issue a report and terminate our engagement. Our audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance of detecting misstatements, whether caused by error or fraud, that, in our judgment, could have a material effect on the financial statements as a whole. It is not designed to detect error or fraud that is immaterial to the financial statements. Our audit will be based upon tests and samples, since detailed auditing of all transactions is not practicable. The concept of selective testing of data is generally accepted as a valid and sufficient basis for an auditor to express an opinion on financial statements. Selective testing involves judgment both as to the number of transactions we examine and the areas to be tested. Because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is an inherent risk that we will not detect material errors, fraud, or other illegal acts, if they exist. There is also an inherent risk that violations of compliance requirements and other responsibilities imposed by state and federal statutes and regulations or assumed by contracts, if they exist, will not be detected. Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a sound system of internal control and for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with the laws and regulations applicable to its activities. Management is also responsible for: designing and implementing programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud; informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting the Organization involving (a) management, (b) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (c) others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements; and informing us of their knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the Organization received in communications from employees, former employees, regulators, or others. While an audit includes obtaining an understanding of internal control sufficient to plan the audit and to determine the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures to be performed, it is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify reportable conditions. However, we will inform you of any reportable conditions that come to our attention. Our relationship with you is limited to that described in this letter. As such, you understand and agree that we are acting solely as independent accountants. We are not acting in any way as a fiduciary or assuming any fiduciary responsibilities for you. Your personnel will provide us with the necessary detailed trial balances and supporting schedules, a list of which will be provided. We expect that your office personnel will help us by locating and submitting to us invoices, vouchers, canceled checks and other documents and records that we request. Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon December 8, 2004 Page 4 Whenever possible, we will use your personnel to help in this work and so reduce costs. We wish to emphasize that management has the responsibility for the proper recording of transactions, for the safeguarding of assets, for compliance with all applicable laws, and regulations and for the substantial accuracy of the financial statements. Management is responsible for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for affirming to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the opinion units in the financial statements. Management's responsibility includes establishing and maintaining internal control and retaining, supervising and training qualified personnel in areas affecting financial matters. Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us. Although our firm may prepare or help in preparing your financial statements, the statements are the representations of management. As part of this responsibility, you agree to provide us, before the delivery date of the financial statements, with written confirmation of the representations made to us by you and your staff during the course of our engagement. The working papers for our engagement are the sole and exclusive property of Clifton Gunderson LLP and constitute confidential and proprietary information. We do not provide access to our workpapers to you or anyone else in the normal course of business. Should we be ordered by a valid subpoena or other appropriate court order to provide access to or copies of our workpapers, you agree to reimburse us for the time and out-of-pocket expense necessary to comply with such order. We must approve the masters or printer's proofs of the financial statements we have audited before they are reproduced or published for distribution if our firm's name is to be connected with the statements or report in any way. With regard to electronic filings, such as in connection with the SEC Electronic Data Gathering Analysis and Retrieval (EDGAR) system or the World Wide Web area of the Internet, you understand that electronic sites are a means of distributing information and, therefore, we are not required to read the information contained in these sites or to consider the consistency of other information in the electronic site with the original document. If our report on the financial statements will be included in another document (for example, in connection with a bond offering), the procedures we perform in connection therewith will be considered an engagement separate and distinct from our audit engagement, for which we will bill you separately. Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon December 8, 2004 Page 5 The charges for our work are to be based upon the time involved, degree of responsibility assumed and skills required, plus direct expenses. Bills for services are due when submitted. Interim bills may be submitted at periodic dates to cover charges and expenses incurred. If a bill for services is not paid when due, we reserve the right to cease work and withdraw from the engagement. In the event that any collection action is required to collect unpaid balances due us, reasonable attorney fees and expenses shall be recoverable. It is hereby agreed that our fee will be as follows: For the year ended December 31, 2004 $27,500 For the year ended December 31, 2005 $28,750 For the year ended December 31, 2006 $30,000 The subsequent years (2005, 2006) engagements and fee quotes are subject to annual agreement and may be canceled prior to the start of interim fieldwork each year. The above fee quote does not create a multiple year commitment. It is our understanding that your accounting records will be substantially completed through December. We do not anticipate that we will encounter any substantial amount of accounting work to be completed -or adjusted by us, or any defalcation or other significant problem or contingency. We will, of course, advise you before undertaking any work that would require an increase in the fee arrangement. We will do our uppermost to provide quality service to you. We do not anticipate any difficulties in meeting the expectations recited in this letter. However, in the unlikely event that there are any disagreements regarding our services, any claims against Clifton Gunderson LLP as a result of this engagement must be brought within one year from the date our report is delivered or our work is completed. As permitted by law, you hereby agree that Town of Avon will indemnify Clifton Gunderson LLP and its partners, principals and employees and hold them harmless from any claims, liabilities, losses and costs arising in circumstances where there has been a knowing misrepresentation by a member of the management of Town of Avon, regardless of whether such person was acting in the best interests of Town of Avon. If the above terms are in accordance with your understanding and acceptable to you, please sign, date, and return the duplicate copy of this letter to us. Avon Town Council Members Town of Avon December 8, 2004 Page 6 We very much appreciate the opportunity to serve you and will be pleased to discuss any questions you may have. Very truly yours, The services described.in the foregoing letter are in accordance with our requirements and we understand the terms and conditions recited above. Town of Avon By Title Date