HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20100331Special Meetine Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
Mayor Ireland called the special meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. with Councilmembers
Romero, Torre, Johnson and Skadron present.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS
Mayor Ireland moved to appoint Chet Feldman, David Guthrie and Jim Iglehart to the
Board of Appeals; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #2. SERIES OF 2010 -Aspen Club Final SPA/PUD
Councilman Torre left the meeting due to a conflict of interest. Jessica Garrow read the
names of public comment letters and a-mails that came in after the packet deadline; Gary
& Debbie Kreutzer, Anne & Clarence Blackwell; Evan Boening; Gary & Debra Moore;
Georgia Hanson; Larry Fredrick; Chris Crowley; Lenny Allen; Junee Kirk; Andrew
Todd; Bert Myrin; Jeanette Darnauer; Paul Copaken; Dorothea Farris; BJ Williams; Tim
Cooney; Peggy Mason; Karinjo Devore; Bob Hoover; David Millar. Ms. Garrow also
entered exhibit Z-5 which is additional proposed changes to the ordinance.
Council agreed to hear public comment at the beginning of the meeting and again after
staff and applicant presentation. Mayor Ireland noted he has created a binder of all the
communication regarding the Aspen Club that has come to him.
Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing.
Roine St. Andre said she is overjoyed there is a land use code in place to protect areas
from further development. This is a residential area and development in this area is
ridiculous.
Gary Rappaport told Council with 32 units proposed, it is incredulous that zero traffic
increase is a reality. Rappaport said he has TDA's October 2008 plan which contains
studies of vehicle counts at various times. The study came up with 2170 vehicles passing
at Ute and Original and 1499 further up the street. Rappaport said this is entirely a
residential area with no restaurants. Rappaport said there about 63 residential units along
Ute, which comes to 10 one-way trips/dwelling units. Using that formula, if there are 32
units at the Aspen Club, it would add 320 vehicles trips/day. Rappaport told Council he
read David Millar's assessment of the Aspen Club's transportation demand management
study, which estimated 280 vehicle trips/day from the development. Rappaport said this
is a notable traffic increase and it would detract from the livability of Ute avenue.
Rappaport said in looking at how to create a TDM, he found the statement that
transportation accounts for more than half of the air pollution and also solid waste and
water pollution and TDMs are an important tool for a city to minimize these impacts.
Brian Speck told Council he supports this project and feels Michael Fox has been a great
steward of the Aspen Club. Speck said he would like to see some give and take on the
size of the development. Speck said this is a community project; it is part of modern
Aspen.
Special Meeting Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
Chris Klug told Council there is a lot of support in the community for this project. Klug
said he feels this is a vital part of the community and a community asset and the project
brings benefits to the town. Klug said about 1 /3 to '/Z of the community uses the club in
some way; the Aspen Club employs abut 200 people, making it one of the larger
employers in the community. Klug said the proposal would improve the safety of Ute
Avenue; it would provide on-site affordable housing; it would improve the trails in the
area. Klug said the proposal will bring additional tourists to Aspen and it will make it
more attractive to visitors and residents. The proposal, Aspen Club Living, will add
something new to the tourists as part of a destination experience. Klug said he feels this
will have a long term benefit to the community
Warren Klug urged approval of the Aspen Club expansion. Klug said the club is a
valuable asset to both residents and guests. The Aspen Club attracts world class athletes,
visitors and guests. Klug said one issue is the perceived public benefit of this expansion,
which includes residents and visitors who can take advantage of the enhanced facilities.
The condominiums will provide short term rental housing. The enhanced club will attract
visitors year round, not just during music or skiing season. The proposed employee
housing is a plus for the project. Klug said this project is a better one than the project that
first came to the city. Klug said everyone is concerned with the economic health and
vitality of Aspen and its appeal to tourists. Klug noted in the land use code, when there
are advantages to changing zoning, the SPA process would allow that to happen.
Jim DeFrancia told Council he is opposed to this project; this is not about saving a
business, which Council is not supposed to address; nor is it about building green or
about the employees. This issue is about land use; the underlying zoning is 12R, rural
residential, and this is a residential neighborhood. DeFrancia pointed out the AACP calls
for lodges to be in the core. The Council has relied on the AACP in the past when it has
rejected projects that do not comply with the AACP. If Council focuses on land use,
they have to focus on the AACP and land use policies. Les Holst said this project cannot
go forward because of the precedent it will be setting. This will be a disaster for the
community. Holst noted developers want time share because of the perceived increase in
value to the property. Holst said the inventory of time share is greater everyday.
Nicole Hammas told Council she is a resident of east Aspen and her opposition to this
project is based on the rezoning. Ms. Hammas said there are 191 fractional units for sale
in Aspen; there are over 480 residential units on the market for sale. Ms. Hammas said
she is concerned about adding more inventory to these unsold units. Ms. Hammas noted
she is not opposed to the upgrade of the Aspen Club but she does not see the benefit of
adding more units to the community.
Patrick Sagal said the Benedict building has been on Ute avenue for 35 years and has
about 201ocally serving businesses. Sagal said he would like to see the Aspen Club grow
and continue to be locally serving health centered businesses. Tim Murray, east Aspen
resident, said without the AACP, Aspen would be a very different place than it is today.
Murray requested Council respect the AACP and deny this project. Bob Murray said he
is respectful of the city's protection of residential neighborhoods and he would not like to
Special Meetine Aspen Citv Council March 31, 2010
see the city make rules to accommodate real estate development. Murray told Council he
does not feel this plan should be compared to the Aspen Institute and the ideals of Walter
Paepcke.
Marsha Goshorn said this time share project is different from others as it is part of a
comprehensive plan tying it to a health and wellness concept. Ms. Goshorn noted the
health and wellness sector of the economy is up and coming and this would give Aspen
the chance to compete in the new economy. Aspen needs not to depend on one or two
type of businesses in town. Council is supposed to create a situation where businesses
have a chance to flourish. Ms. Goshorn said during the update of the AACP, the idea of
year round sustainable economy has been discussed. Ms. Goshorn pointed out the Gant
is in this neighborhood and most of the homes were built after the Aspen Club
Naoma Gleason said the Aspen Club touches many sectors and members of the
community. Ms. Gleason said this is a good fit for the community and for the visitors.
Sam Ferguson told Council after he was injured, a local non-profit brought him into their
program and gave him confidence and he has grown with Challenge Aspen competition
program. Ferguson said these programs bring in many competitors who spend money in
Aspen. Ferguson pointed out the Aspen Club is the only facility that is handicap
accessible.
Susan Welch, Ute Avenue resident, said one thing that is bothersome is the projects in
Aspen that have been started and left unfinished. There are many fractional ownerships
in the community. Ms. Welch said she would rather see just townhouses and the Aspen
Club. Mike Lyons, fireman and paramedic, told Council the Aspen Club allows fireman
to work on their cardio at the club; this is a community asset. Lyons said the project will
increase businesses year round; this is a destination project. John Olsen said he favors
this project for many of the reasons expressed. This is a model business that the
applicant has made work and has tried to keep the club affordable. Supporting this is like
supporting locally serving businesses with development to keep the business viable.
Joan Lebach said the decision on the Aspen Club should not be based on personalities.
Ms. Lebach asked why people moved to Aspen, is it for density or urban sprawl or is it
For a small town feeling. Ms. Lebach said it is very aspirational to make a world class
health center. Alex Forsythe, Snowmass, said the application does not seem to meet the
requirements of the land use code or the provisions of the AACP.
Ms. Garrow went over the various approvals required and some changes to the proposed
ordinance. One change is to financial assurances, in which the applicant proposes a
completion bond. The applicant is requesting the removal of a reclamation bond.
Another change relates to energy commitments and the section formalizes the
commitments made by the applicant, which is after the new development is completed,
the energy use will be equal to or less than the current energy use. Mayor Ireland asked
if there is a current base line of energy use. Ms. Garrow said it is attached to the
ordinance as exhibit C. Accessibility of the club membership is addressed; the applicant
has committed to insuring that 50% of the dues paying members at any time will be
Special Meeting Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
locals, which is defined as anyone living 6 months of the year in the Roaring Fork Valley.
The enforcement mechanism is that if that 50% threshold is not met, city employees will
receive free membership. The applicant has committed to reinvesting a minimum of $5
million in the club. Section 25 talks about all the reporting requirements coming at one
time during the year.
Exhibit Z-5 is changes proposed by staff. Exhibit B has been changed to the 2009 traffic
impact study, not the exhibit B, traffic impact study from 2005. Section 11 of the
ordinance is changed to fill in the blanks related to the cul-de-sac improvements and
includes a schematic plan. The city attorney requests defining what the "club owner" is;
the record owner from time to time of lot 1 Aspen Club Living subdivision, PUD/SPA.
Section 27 is amended by adding "the affordable housing commitment made by the
applicant pursuant to this section represents in part a voluntary negotiated agreement
between the applicant and the city which has been proposed by the applicant as a public
benefit in connection with the Aspen Club development approved by the ordinance".
Councilman Skadron asked what variations are requested from the time share guidelines.
Ms. Garrow said the review criteria for time share are more technical and the applicant is
meeting all of the requirements. The use of time share is addressed under the SPA
criteria. Councilman Romero asked if there has been discussion about the details of the
completion bond so it will perform to the benefit of the city, not general or trade
contractors. City Attorney, John Worcester, pointed out the city is to be made a
beneficiary of the bond; it will be a completion bond to protect the applicant and the city.
Worcester noted any bonds will have to be approved by his office. Councilman Romero
said he feels like the bonds could be strengthened and improved. Worcester suggested he
and Councilman Romero work on this together.
Councilman Johnson asked about the growth management reviews. Ms. Garrow said the
applicants needs 112 pillows from the 2009 growth management year, which is the full
amount and 12 from the 2010 allotments, which Council must grant. Councilman
Skadron asked about the different results on the traffic studies. Trish Aragon, city
engineer, told Council the traffic study was updated in 2009 and reports an additiona1304
vehicle trips/day generated by this project, which is close to the figure quoted by the
other traffic engineer.
Councilman Romero brought up mass and scale and the possibility of removing two town
house units and has this been pursued. Ms. Garrow said after the last public hearing,
Council listed 4 or 5 items to be addressed, and these did not relate to mass and scale.
Ms. Garrow said staff feels there is too much mass on site and more open space would be
appropriate. Staff needs to see more specific plans in order to make a firmer
recommendation.
Michael Fox, applicant, said the Aspen Club is a good facility with a good team and
unique skills of helping people get healthy and stay healthy. Fox said fitness and
wellness are an increasingly important part of people's lives. The Aspen Club Living
project builds on a facility that is already in place and puts Aspen on the map for health
4
Special Meetin¢ Aspen Citv Council March 31, 2010
and performance. Fox said this is a year long pursuit independent of weather and would
bring a new type of visitor to Aspen. This project would move the community forward
consistent with the goals and ideals as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Fox said having this project in Aspen is a great community benefit.
Fox said the applicants have made commitments like insuring the Club is a health facility
that remains open to the public, reinvesting in the Club, improving Ute Avenue, adding
trail easements, increasing the tax base to the city and adding affording housing. Fox
said at the last meeting Council brought up 5 issues; one is how will the applicant insure
the Club is affordable and open to local residents. Fox said the applicant has other
solutions that would achieve the goal for not hitting the goal of local accessibility,
that would not include city employees.
Fox said the applicants have a mechanism to reinvest to the club and the issue of doing
that into the future. Fox said one way to do that is a percentage of HOA dues going into
a capital reserve fund and also the applicants will set aside some funds from sale of the
units into capital commitments. Fox said there are simple mechanisms to address the
energy commitments. The last issue raised by Council is the financial assurances and one
way to address that was a completion bond; another way is show the financials to the city
in order to prove the capital is available to build the project. Fox said a completion bond
and a reclamation bond are redundant. Fox said the construction financial world is
different after the last two years; banks will not lend money unless the project will get
completed.
Councilman Romero said one unresolved issue is the mass and scale and the
appropriateness of additional growth on this property as well as the appropriateness to the
neighborhood. Councilman Romero noted there is a fine balance between mass and scale
and cutting so much out of the project that it is no longer financially viable. Fox said this
question has come up throughout the process and the mass on the site was adjusted at
P&Z meetings; buildings were moved around and unit sizes were decreased and the
project received conceptual approval. Fox said at conceptual, Council indicated the
layout was okay and at final P&Z, they stated they were comfortable with the layout,
which had not changed since conceptual. Fox said layout has been vetted in the process
and the changes were made early on in the process. Fox agreed there are economic issues
and removing one or two units does not change any impacts but would change the
economic viability of the project. Councilman Romero stated mass and scale is still a
concern for him and there should be some evolution to get to a best solution for the
community and the applicant and to get to the yes.
Councilman Romero asked where the mechanism as a recourse for not achieving the 50%
minimum of local members for city employees. Fox said the applicants were trying to
come up with a viable penalty, like if they miss that 50% mark, the non-profit
membership costs could be reduced 10% until the 50% mark is reached in order to create
a penalty and to get the membership up to 50%. Councilman Romero said he likes the
financial incentive penalty for not meeting the energy commitments. Councilman
Romero suggested the penalty for not achieving the 50% local membership be similarly
Special Meetine Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
structured, that the applicants are fined a financial penalty to use the money for marketing
or for other local programs. Fox said he is willing to look at these suggestions.
Councilman Romero noted the financial assurances where sharing the capital and total
budgeted costs should be shared with staff members like the finance director and capital
asset manager. Councilman Romero stated that is a high standard to get one's building
permit. Councilman Romero said the performance and payment bond should run to the
benefit of the city of Aspen first, not the general contractor. The city may be compelled
to complete the project and use the bond as the funding source and make sure the bond
has sufficient detail in order to do that. Councilman Romero said if the failure is 60 days
or less into the project, the city may want to put the site back to its original state rather
than finish a project and the bond should have the latitude to do that. Worcester said he
feels a completion bond is a different instrument than a restoration bond. Worcester said
a completion bond takes time to put into effect. A surety or letter of credit for restoration
could be a lesser amount and limited to an amount and give the city an opportunity to
quickly put the site back to its original state. Councilman Romero agreed this could be a
lesser instrument. Fox agreed that type of surety with a sunset would work and makes
sense.
Fox said the challenge is not completing the project but getting a construction lender and
getting the project started. Councilman Romero agreed a lender may recoil at additional
burden on a project; however, a completion bond would be in the lender's favor and add
value to their property. Worcester said the financial commitment the applicant is going
to show the city and the completion bonds discuss public improvements. Fox said these
are meant to include the entire project. Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, agreed
the completion bond is to cover the entire building permit, not just the public
improvements. Worcester noted the ordinance states this is only to cover public
improvements and that will need to be changed.
Councilman Romero said the reclamation provision should also be rewritten to cover a
limited percentage of construction. Councilman Romero said he agrees with the method
for financing reinvestments to the club. The method to insure a percentage of local
members has to be re-examined.
Councilman Johnson said he is surprised at the lack of reaction to the elimination of
tennis courts as he views tennis as a community benefit. Fox told Council originally 50%
of the 2,000 members were tennis members. When he took over the club of the 450
members about 50% were tennis member. Today the Club has 1800 members and only
70 are tennis members. Fox told Council they are discussing with the Gant about sharing
their tennis courts for the Club members.
Councilman Johnson asked what percentage of existing members are locals. Fox said
currently is it about 70% of the members. Fox said the additional of integral owners as
members will lower the percentage of local members. Councilman Johnson said $5
million is probably not enough for reinvestment to the Club. Fox agreed that may not be
enough and the real figure will be between $10 and 15 million. Fox said he is trying to
6
Special Meeting Aspen Citv Council March 31, 2010
create a floor. Councilman Johnson said in the past the Aspen Club has come to Council
for concessions in order to upgrade the club and make it work. Councilman Johnson
asked if the funding for reinvestment in order to keep the community benefits is
sustainable over the long term.
Fox told Council the Aspen Club will be putting on programs 52 weeks/year, which will
generate revenues for the Club. Fox said a portion of the HOA fees will go to a capital
fund, which is standard practice. This is not a one time funding but will continue into the
future and will be added to continually. The one time investment from sales will see the
capital program. Councilman Johnson asked if it is appropriate for the ordinance to
contain a floor for funding the long term capital reserves.
Councilman Johnson asked about the request for 7 yeazs vested rights versus 3 years.
Fox told Council this is a marathon process and it will not happen in 6 months and the
applicant wants to be thoughtful in choosing partners and financial institutions.
Councilman Skadron said he has issues with the size and density of the project and asked
why this project is so far in the process and mass and scale are still an issue; this should
have been a closed topic. Councilman Skadron said he does not feel that issue has been
scrutinized and this case has not been discussed as a land use issue but has been discussed
as a quality of life and community benefit issue. Councilman Skadron said size and
density are an issue as they relate to the AACP and land use code. Councilman Skadron
said this is a land use decision and those standards associated with that rather than the
idea of community benefit.
Councilman Skadron said 50% local membership does not resonate as a community
benefit, which portion of the community would that represent. Councilman Skadron said
satisfying a substantial community benefit satisfies a higher societal good and includes
something more than concessions and promises than may not be enforceable.
Councilman Skadron said a public comment suggested '/4 to '/~ of the community is
impacted by the services of the Aspen Club, which means '/z to'/4 of the community is not
impacted by the Aspen Club. Councilman Skadron said this proposal devotes itself to the
health and wellness of its members and integral owners rather than "all of us".
Councilman Skadron said community benefits aze too often accessible to too few.
Councilman Skadron said he considered asking the applicant to construct an outdoor
swimming pool at the Aspen Rec Center, widening the area of health and wellness to all
Aspenites. Councilman Skadron said, however, he feels it is inappropriate to ask for
something like that. Councilman Skadron suggested the applicant address the mass and
scale and if there is something that can be done.
Fox said a challenge of this process is that it seems the goal line is changing. Fox said
this plan was worked out over a 6 month period at P&Z and the applicants have relied on
that plan. Fox said mass and scale came up at P&Z final and P&Z stated they were
comfortable with the mass and scale. Fox said it seems like a community benefit that has
to impact Y~ to'/< of the community is a very high standard. Fox said community benefits
7
Special MeetinE Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
like CMC and the library probably do not touch 50% of the community. Fox said there
are standazds of cost and standards of value. Fox said he feels the Aspen Club provides
value to the community. People participate in the Club programs because they see value
in those programs. Councilman Skadron noted government's role is to represent the
entire community, not just members of the Aspen Club. Councilman Skadron said the
ARC is not billing itself as a 5 staz health and wellness facility. Fox noted that the
applicants cannot be saddled with so many burdens that the project fails.
Mayor Ireland asked if the applicant stated they were willing to open their pro forma to
the city attorney's office. Fox said it was the construction budget. Mayor Ireland said he
is concerned about staff having information that is not available to the public. Sunny
Vann told Council if the applicants are required to give a completion bond, it seems
reasonable the city would question whether it was adequate. The applicants agreed to
provide the budget on which the completion bond is based so city staff can determine if
the amount of the completion bond is adequate.
Mayor Ireland asked how many fractional units there aze. Fox said there will be 20 units.
Mayor Ireland said at anytime there could be 20 families on the Aspen Club and how
does 1% of the existing membership add significant revenues. Fox said the issue is the
programs those guests will be doing; those guests will be participating in higher end
programs.
Bill Wiener presented a power point about Saving the Brand, including what Aspen is,
what Aspen cherishes, that Aspen is the best place to be and the Aspen brand is why
guests choose Aspen. The proposed impacts from this development are not good for
people and size matters. Jeremy Bernstein said Ute Avenue needs improvements no
matter what happens. Bernstein pointed out this is a private club and questioned whether
a private club adds to the cachet of Aspen.
Junee Kirk presented a petition from members of the community urging Council to deny
the expansion of the Aspen Club. Ms. Kirk said Council's mission is not to change the
land use code. Ms. Kirk noted when applicants change the use or density, it changes the
character of the entire neighborhood and the community ends up with the short end of the
stick. Ms. Kirk said developers seems to ask for more and more. Patti Simpson
presented a list of fractional units currently for sale in Aspen. Ms. Simpson said another
fractional project at this time with the economy in Aspen is objectionable. Ms. Simpson
said she is against that much development on Ute Avenue.
Pete Louras brought up the issues of what constitutes community benefit and the concern
that a private club cannot have a community benefit. Louras disagreed stating the Aspen
Club is one of the most important community benefits. Louras pointed out the Aspen
Idea, created 60 years ago, stated Aspen is a place where one could create a complete life,
recognizing the importance of health, physical recreation, combined with art, music and
creativity. Louras said the Aspen Club is an important health and wellness facility and
there is no other place that can compete with this facility, with trained staff, Louras said if
there was no Aspen Club, someone would be trying to convince Council to help get one
8
Special Meeting Aspeu Citv Council March 31, 2010
built. Louras said for him the issue of community benefit, it is the importance of a
facility to the health and well being of members of the community. Louras asked Council
to approve the project.
Bob Hoover, representing adjacent property owners, submitted a petition circulated with
114 signatures opposed to the project. Hoover brought up the nature of public benefits
and stated the Aspen Club is a private club and it cost money to belong to the club.
Hoover stated at least half of the community does not pay to belong to the Club. Hoover
said Council has to treat this as a land use issue. Hoover said this project is 189,000
square feet and is 2/3 the size of the airport business center and is a 2-1/4 increase over
the existing facility. Hoover said approving this will be setting a dangerous precedent.
Hoover noted this project is not consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and
staff notes it meets most of the requirements of the AACP. The SPA standards require a
project be consistent with all of the AACP. Hoover reminded Council in 2005, staff
recommended against this project because it was not consistent with the AACP goals and
keeping lodging in the central district. Hoover asked if what the project is proposing is
worth the trade of extending a hotel into a residential neighborhood. There will be
impacts on Ute Avenue and people do not believe the trade off is worth those impacts.
Hoover brought up the purpose and intent of the time shaze regulations, where it states
these will be limited time share development to the lodge and commercial zone districts
in order to protect residential neighborhoods. Hoover said this is a long term residential
neighborhood. Hoover said this is not just public benefits, the language states "great
public benefit" and great does not mean increased tax revenues or sidewalks; great means
a hospital, a museum, a new city hall, a community recreation center. A private
development for profit is not a great public benefit.
Mayor Ireland asked what the adverse consequences of this approval are. Hoover said
the traffic issues and their traffic engineer has never seen "no increase in traffic" in over
1000 plans. Hoover said the change to the river view plane and the view from the trail
will be changed and one will not be able to have a view of the mountains. This project is
moving more action to the neighborhood at all hours of the day and there will be service
vehicles at all hours. This is moving a use that the community has said needs to be in the
commercial core.
Allison Miller, Darnauer Group, told Council they were hired by neighbors to get their
concerns to Council and to the public. Ms. Miller said the primary consideration for
Council should be whether the requested development complies with the land use code
and the AACP. Ms. Miller noted in 2005, staff recommended against the Aspen Club
development and stated the Club should not be approved because the proposal is
inconsistent with the future land use map in the AACP and is not the location for lodging
development and is a departure for existing land uses in the area. The staff
recommendation also stated they feel the majority of new accommodations should be
located in closer proximity to the ski mountain. Ms. Miller said there is no testimony to
counter the prior recommendation. Ms. Miller said a vote in favor will be setting a
precedent and they should vote no on this application.
9
Special Meeting Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing
Vann said if the ceiling for public benefit is set too high, the city's ability to use it in a
unique way to solve community issues will be limited. Vann noted the Silver Lining
ranch does not serve the entire community but brings in sick kids to a ranch. Vann said
the businesses in the Benedict building are not used by the entire community. The SPA
was used to solve the Aspen Institute, which has a hotel in the middle of a residential
neighborhood. Vann pointed out both the Institute and the music festival cost money to
attend. Councils concluded the application from the Institute was important to the
community and the unique provision of the code was needed to solve the problem.
Vann pointed out the SPA provisions state it shall comply with the Aspen Area
Community Plan, not all provisions of the AACP. Vann said if every aspect of the
AACP must be met for every project, nothing would get approved. Council looks at the
AACP to see if projects are in the best interest of the community and consistent with
sufficient aspects of the plan. Vann brought up mass and scale and in planning, density,
mass and scale are used to determine compatibility of a physical product with a
neighborhood and a visual impact on the community. Vann said this is a 2.5 acre site that
already contains the Aspen Club and there are minor changes proposed to the exterior of
the Aspen Club which will make it more attractive. The proposal calls for townhouses on
the site in locations that have previously been developed. Vann said the floor area is .5
for the site. The most affected development, the Aspen Club Townhomes across the
river, have said they are in favor of this project. Vann pointed out the city has beefed up
the stream margin review criteria and this requires one preserve the riparian corridor,
setback from the top, and there are height limitations. Vann said on this site, the setback
is heavily vegetated. Vann noted from a visual aspect, few parcels are affected.
Vann said the removing one or two units would have small effect on the impacts. The
applicant has a significant TDM to reduce traffic impacts including a penalty if the TDM
is not met. Vann told Council this is not a solely residential neighborhood; many of the
vehicle trips are to the Benedict office building. Vann said it is not realistic to expect no
increase in traffic due to this development and the code does not state one cannot put
additional traffic on city streets. The applicant has worked to produce an extensive TDM
Plan to address the traffic.
Mayor heland noted he is using the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan, the 2000 AACP,
the 2009 community vision exercise, letters from people, and this ordinance. Mayor
Ireland said the public should know what Council has heard, in order to rebut or correct
it. Mayor Ireland stated the arguments in favor he has heard are the applicant is a good
and generous person, the Aspen Club supports non-profits and charities; the application
will provide affordable housing; the club is vital to its 2000 members; the idea that the
club will close if this is not approved; the club will provide revenue to the town as a
tourist amenity; it will be LEED certified; it will provide a center for healthy living; it
provides specialized services not available elsewhere; the club proposes to mitigate
traffic; jobs will be lost if there is no approval; the club will be upgraded if this is
approved.
10
Special Meetine Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
Mayor Ireland stated the arguments against are that this is contrary to AACP; it is out of
character with the residential neighborhood; it will cause traffic problems; past promises
have not been kept; there is a fear of being caught in the "bait and switch" where the
applicant comes back and states they cannot complete their promises. Mayor Ireland
noted there was a common agreement there is already a problem on Ute Avenue. Mayor
Ireland said the elected officials are supposed to ask hard questions of applicants and to
be skeptical of statements on either side. Mayor Ireland said he feels the city has to be
more demanding of assurances than in the past when the city was too trusting. Mayor
Ireland said it is difficult to hold corporations accountable. Mayor Ireland said promises
have to be structured in a way that is self-executing. Council has a responsibility to make
sure when approvals are granted that the applicants live up to the public benefits.
Mayor Ireland pointed out the Ski Company is a private organization and there is a
benefit to the community in having the ski company in town. The Aspen Institute is a
private organization, yet there is benefit to having the in the community. The Institute
has hotel rooms outside the downtown core. Mayor Ireland said the last time the Aspen
Club came in for approvals in 1996, the city should have said the underlying right to
develop single family homes as an alternative to the club goes away so there is not the
threat to tear down the club and build single family houses. Mayor Ireland proposed as a
condition of this approval, the underlying right to single family houses must go away.
Mayor Ireland said change in ownership also happens in past approvals of other projects
and suggested the city condition the approval on the idea the land, the membership
interest in the LLC, does not get sold until the improvements are complete. Mayor
Ireland said he favors this over completion bonds; if the owners complete all the
improvements, they then get the right to sell all. Mayor Ireland said the representation
about reinvestment of $5 million is meaningless. Mayor Ireland said the approval should
specify what the approvals are and the city does not get involved in how much these cost
and how were they paid for. The city's concern should be the promise to do certain
things, list what they are, they are completed or not.
Mayor Ireland said he asked for a summary of the objections to the application from Bob
Hoover. Mayor Ireland said he does not see it as an inherent right to be able to cut
through private property and still see views. Mayor Ireland noted many people have
stated traffic is the problem. Mayor Ireland stated he does not support 41 new parking
spaces on the south side of the river. Mayor Ireland said he can support zeroing out the
traffic with a defined number oftrips/day and if that is exceeded, there are consequences;
the applicant will lose something.
Mayor Ireland pointed out that the city has had zero vehicle increase across the Castle
Creek bridge since 1993. The city did that with paid parking, with transportation.
Mayor Ireland reiterated the city has been promised things in past approvals which did
not materialize. Mayor Ireland said if the applicant wants to protect the environment,
they have no increase in traffic. Mayor Ireland said city employees should not be the
beneficiary for enforcement of the number of resident members. Mayor Ireland said the
requirement to be a resident member is being in the valley 6 months/year and some other
11
Special Meeting Aspen Citv Council March 31, 2010
criteria. Mayor Ireland said the other criteria have to be identified. Mayor Ireland
suggested a restriction that the applicant cannot come back with the option of tearing
down the club and building single family residences. Mayor Ireland said institutions
serve different categories of residents; a public benefit does not need to be accessible to
everyone
Mayor Ireland noted this project is not exactly in character with the residential
neighborhood; however, this is not an affordable housing neighborhood with little
houses.
Vann asked about the once the improvements are in place, the applicant can sell whatever
they want. Mayor Ireland said the applicant does not get a certificate of occupancy for
the fractionals, the ownership of the LLC is not sold until all improvements are complete.
Mayor Ireland said the applicant receives the benefits but they have to make the project
work. Fox said he will be bringing partners and finance partners to make the project
happen. Mayor Ireland said there are equity instruments by which this can be done while
retaining control and responsibility in the hand of the applicant.
Vann said the applicant is willing to work on these issues; however, they would like an
indication there is closure. Councilman Skadron said he has no other issues. Mayor
Ireland said many of his issues are derived from public comments and he is ready to
move on if the city can get strong assurances that what is promised will be done and that
the impacts on the neighborhood will be minimized through a tough traffic program.
Vann said he feels the two most difficult are no increase in parking and the exact
mechanism by which the applicants can manage parking. Fox said he agrees with the
suggestions about traffic; however, there are other considerations, like seasonality, the
weather, but this is in line with the TDM and an issue of execution and tracking. Fox
said he wants to make sure the project is adequately parked.
Councilman Romero agreed on the amount of reinvestment that it is necessary and that
the figure of $5 million is meaningless. Councilman Romero for the traffic, a baseline
has to be measured and the methods to achieve that baseline, the applicants will have to
commit to actions to zero out traffic. Councilman Romero asked about vacating the
underlying single family zoning. Mayor Ireland stated the existing zoning is by right,
which needs to be eliminated so that a property owner does not come in and tell the city
they have a right to single family residences. Vann agreed with that. Councilman
Romero said he can support that. Councilman Romero said the resident members is
vague with no objective criteria; this needs further refinement.
Councilman Romero said he would like maintenance of general local membership or
local participation in programs at the club. Councilman Romero said Council has heard it
is not about the applicant and is a land use application, and then to tie ownership seems to
undermine the principle about land use. Councilman Romero said if the applicant is
willing to commit to that, it will combat the fear about the property being "flipped".
Councilman Romero said he still wants to consider the reduction of density on the
project. Mayor Ireland stated he shares Councilman Romero about working on mass and
12
Special Meeting Aspen City Council March 31, 2010
scale; however, his primary concern is the tool to maintain what is there and to protect
people against adverse impacts like traffic. Councilman Romero agreed mitigating traffic
is more important than reducing the density.
Councilman Johnson said the long term economic sustainability is most important for
him. For the reinvestment in the club, he would like the details of what will be done
filled out. Councilman Johnson said the removal of units 5 and 6 are not a high priority.
Councilman Johnson said he wants the club to be adequately parked to cover things like
physical therapy patients, handicap accessibility issues, the women's clinic. Councilman
Johnson said he feels there is a way to get to the correct number of parking spaces and
also make sure the neighborhood is not overburdened with traffic. Fox reiterated the key
issue is no increase in traffic. Councilman Johnson stated he is more passionate about
making sure this maintains local accessibility. Councilman Skadron concurred with the
comments.
Councilman Romero moved to continue Ordinance #2, Series of 2010, to May 10, 2010;
seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Romero moved to adjourn at 9:15 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson.
All in favor, motion carried.
7
Kat .Koch, City Clerk
13