HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20131118Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
1
ABETONE EXCHANGE PARTICIPANTS .................................................................................. 2
PROCLAMATION – National Diabetes Month ............................................................................ 2
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION .......................................................................................................... 2
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS ........................................................................................... 3
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................... 3
ORDINANCE #47, SERIES OF 2013 – Supplement Appropriation 2013 Budget ....................... 4
ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 2013 – 360 Lake Avenue (Erdman Partnership Lot Split)
Subdivision Amendment ................................................................................................................. 7
ORDINANCE #44, SERIES OF 2013 - St. Regis PUD Amendment – 315 E. Dean Street ......... 9
ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2013 – Fees for 2014................................................................ 10
ORDINANCE #45, SERIES OF 2013 – Retiring in APCHA Rental and Ownership Units ....... 10
RESOLUTION #104, SERIES OF 2013 – 201 E. Hyman Height Variance ............................... 11
ORDINANCE #42, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendments Title 29 Engineering Design
Standards ....................................................................................................................................... 13
ORDINANCE #43, SERIES OF 2013 - Code Amendments Title 21 Construction and
Excavation Standards .................................................................................................................... 13
ORDINANCE #36, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment – Planned Development ................. 14
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment – Subdivision ................................. 15
ORDINANCE #41, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment Approval Document....................... 15
RESOLUTION #99, SERIES OF 2013 – Amended IGA Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority
....................................................................................................................................................... 16
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
2
Mayor Skadron called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Daily, Frisch,
Mullins and Romero present.
ABETONE EXCHANGE PARTICIPANTS
Mayor Skadron said Abetone is about to become Aspen’s newest sister city and local school kids
spent 18 days in Abetone. The students and chaperones who went to Abetone introduced
themselves and told a little bit about their trip. Allegra, Abetone resident, told Council she has
been in Aspen for two months; she likes Aspen and the schools, the skiing. Mayor Skadron said
the Sister City program is important to Aspen. Allegra said it is a good program to understand
other cultures and meet new people. Hilary, chaperone, told Council she has been involved with
Shimakappu and Bariloche and recommends Abetone become a sister city with Aspen. Abetone
is a small mountain town and close to Florence. Grif Smith told Council he is the coordinator for
Bariloche. Abetone would be Aspen’s 7th sister city. The entire community is in the business of
educating Aspen’s youth and Aspen stands out in providing live changing opportunities; students
who go on foreign exchanges return to the countries, they study foreign languages and get
involved in those countries.
PROCLAMATION – National Diabetes Month
Mayor Skadron and Council proclaimed November 2013 National Diabetes Month and called
upon Colorado citizens, school systems, government agencies, nonprofit organizations, health
care providers, research institutions to join in activities that raise diabetes awareness and help
prevent, treat and manage the disease. Council presented the proclamation to John Sarpa, Aspen
Valley Hospital.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. John Sarpa, interim CEO of Aspen Valley Hospital, told Council besides building a new
hospital, the staff has been working on what can be done to improve quality of health care.
Sarpa said the vision of the hospital is to be leaders in fostering this community as the healthiest
in the country with measurable outcomes. Sarpa said besides good relationships with regional
health care in Colorado, Aspen Valley Hospital has developed a collaborative relationship with
the Mayo Clinic and will become part of the Mayo Clinic health care network. This is an
opportunity for staff at AVH to consult on all medical matters with the Mayo clinic in e-consult.
Sarpa said this is very important for Aspen.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
3
2. Andy Israel told Council Wagner Park is closed to the public for events over 100
days/year. Israel said he has done research on the snow polo event proposed for Wagner Park.
Israel said he thought snow polo would not be allowed in Wagner park. There is a requirement
from the parks department for an 18” snow base before the event will be allowed to take place.
Israel gave Council a measure stick showing 18”. Israel presented a petition with 30 signatures
stating that polo would be better at Marolt. Israel said his concern for Wagner park is larger than
just snow polo; however, winter polo has proven to be detrimental to the grass. Israel stated the
city’s jewel of a park should not be a horse park. Stephen Ellsperman, parks department, said
staff put together a specific protection level in the lease for snow polo to provide a layer of snow
and a performance bond to help restore the facility if needed. Ellsperman said if the levels of
snow – either imported or natural – cannot be reached, the event will not happen. Ellsperman
told Council this is a new applicant with a new management team than the previous applicant,
who has provided some consulting and some horses for the polo. Councilman Romero asked if
there is a “no go” date based on snow levels. Ellsperman said staff and the applicant have set
some dates to look at the natural coverage; the lease agreement sets up a trigger for a
mobilization plan and transportation plan for trucking in snow, which will be reviewed by staff.
This is about two weeks before the event.
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS
1. Councilwoman Mullins noted the current textile exhibit at the Red Brick is exceptional
and will be up until early December.
2. Councilwoman Mullins said the AVH announcement about the Mayo clinic is exciting
and is moving toward a new level of health care, which will make health care more economical,
accessible and more efficient.
3. Councilman Frisch said the skiing last weekend was great for this early in the season and
hopes it bodes for a good ski season.
4. Mayor Skadron thanked the Ski Company for opening the mountain early.
5. Mayor Skadron noted at the recent RFTA meeting, the budget was discussed and
adopted. RFTA’s budget is about $28 million with $7.5 in capital improvements. The budget is
based on 8% increase due to the new BRT program.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Romero moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
The consent calendar is:
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
4
Resolution #102, 2013 - Support Immigration Reform
Resolution #98, 2013 - Approval of Grant-funded Purchasing Web Based Commuter Services
Resolution #105, 2013 - FASTER Transit Grant Agreement
Resolution #103, 2013 - IT Backup & Recovery System Contract
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #47, SERIES OF 2013 – Supplement Appropriation 2013 Budget
Mayor Skadron noted staff is requesting an increase in total appropriations from $128.2 million
to $131.3 million. Pete Strecker, finance department, pointed out the ordinance was amended,
based on Council’s comments at first reading, to move a request for $40,000 from renewables
prep work for right-of-way permit, stream margin review, etc. to the water fund. Councilwoman
Mullins asked about the request for $800,000 and what percentage increase is that. Dave
Hornbacher, utility department, told Council it is about a 20% increase. Strecker told Council
over half that increase is due to the drought and that the city had to move away from cheap
hydropower to coal based energy, which was more costly. There was also an 11% rate increase
from the coal based power source. Councilwoman Mullins said staff should be prepared if this
were to happen again in the future. Strecker pointed out the 2014 budget has been increased over
the base 2% number for that instance.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Frisch said there is explanation about the $40,000 for the study as opposed to the
larger discussion about hydropower plant issue. Councilman Frisch noted staff has said there is
infrastructure proposed regardless of whether the hydro plant would be built. This infrastructure
would also be used by the hydro plant if it were built. Councilman Frisch said as a result of the
vote in November, he thought the city was not spending any more staff time or money
forwarding the hydropower plant. Councilman Frisch said this expenditure appears to be
spending money toward a hydropower plant. Councilman Frisch said he would prefer Council
have discussion on how to achieve 100% renewable before any money is spend on projects that
seem to be directly or indirectly used for hydropower. Councilman Frisch asked the effect of
delaying this project. Hornbacher said if that is put off, the outfall for Thomas reservoir would
be accomplished in 2015. Hornbacher noted this project includes the excavation for the second
electric feed, a second loop into town core. Currently the city leases space from Holy Cross and
there will be a cost savings when that second loop is complete.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
5
Councilman Frisch said there in an interpretation that overspill from the reservoir only happens if
there is a hydro plant. Hornbacher pointed out typically reservoirs are built right on the river,
meaning they have a means of exiting water as well as a spillway. Thomas reservoir is part of
the city’s water system and is up on a hill, far removed from a river. Hornbacher said
irrespective of a hydroplant, Thomas reservoir is an existing structure, a diversion structure on
stream, existing pipeways of a set capacity that come in. The risk is when both pipelines are
coming into Thomas reservoir and it is filling and spilling over, there is an unmanaged route to
the river, which could go down Castle Creek road or Doolittle Drive with a lot of dislocation of
materials which could cause damming. Councilman Frisch asked if the hydro plant is built, does
that increase or decrease the change of needing an overspill. Hornbacher said he does not think
it would increase the need for a drain line. The essential part of the drain line is that the inflow
can be matched as an outflow.
Councilman Romero asked what regulating body provides governance on the condition of the
city’s reservoir. Hornbacher said that would be the state and they have an engineering division
for dam safety. The engineering department reviewed this dam in the past; when the work was
done, information was forwarded to the state on this dam. The state report indicated the dam
was in compliance; the state classifies dams but does not get into further description. Mayor
Skadron noted Council’s first responsibility is public safety. Hornbacher reiterated there are two
pipe lines bringing in water beyond which water can be exited. The state focused on the
integrity of the dam.
Councilman Frisch said spending $40,000 on this project could interfere with Council’s ability to
have a discussion on national renewable energy lab and other topics. Councilman Frisch said he
would rather have that conversation before approving this expenditure. Steve Barwick, city
manager, told Council the $40,000 includes surveying, geotechnical work and other work related
to getting permits from CDOT in order to cross their right-of-way and the cost for that is
probably half the request. The other costs are engineering work, preparing bid package and
doing land use planning. Barwick recommended the CDOT permitting portion of the project
move forward. Barwick said the city has spent over $3 million on the emergency drain line to
date with only 300 feet left to complete. Thomas reservoir is an earthen dam and when those
dams go, they go quickly and staff will be strongly in favor of finishing that drain line sometime
in the future.
Councilman Romero asked the cost of finishing the loop electric portion of the project. Barwick
said that was always contemplated as the part of the drain line project and if it is done
independently, a route will have to be figured out that will not have to be replaced, a 4’ trench
and infrastructure to be the primary feed line into the city. The electric loop project is finished
except for this last 300’. Mayor Skadron asked the timeline if only the CDOT permitting portion
were completed. Hornbacher said that could be done in 2 to 4 months. Councilwoman Mullins
agreed with not approving the $40,000 which could imply the city is going ahead with the Castle
Creek Energy Center and reduce the scope of work for just the CDOT permit work.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
6
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing.
Maureen Hirsch said the drawings for the drain line project say on each of the 9 drawings that it
is for the Castle Creek Energy Center and that it is for the tail race. The electrical transmission
lines relate to the Castle Creek Energy Center and there are electrical vaults away from the
trench lines. Ms. Hirsch said the feeder lines all go to the Castle Creek Energy Center and it
does not make sense to continue with the hydropower transmission lines. Ms. Hirsch said the
drain line is not necessary because the new spillway will take care of that.
Maurice Emmer said looking at the already-built infrastructure, the drawings and this request one
would conclude a hydropower project is being built. Emmer noted this has been an incremental
project to try and get hydropower plant built. Emmer asked if the city has an engineering report
stating that an emergency drain line is needed. Emmer said this project is not a measure to
protect the dam from collapsing; the case is not made that this project is necessary for public
safety.
Hornbacher noted the electric system is not a dual use and if the energy center is built, it can plug
into the grid and provide power. Alone, it provides a second electric feed for the community.
Councilwoman Mullins pointed out the staff report states that McLaughlin engineers said the
reservoir did not have an adequate drain line for emergencies. Hornbacher explained that in
early work on the Castle Creek Energy Center, one item was an evaluation of the reservoir. At
that time, the city was advised by their consultant that the reservoir did not have any of the safety
features associated with a reservoir, no drain line outfall, no spillway, which is why the city
moved forward with the drain line. During the review for Thomas reservoir, the spill way was
added as required by the state. The final report prepared by McLaughlin for permitting
associated with the reservoir looked at the different risks.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #47, Series of 2013, eliminating the $40,000
outfall drain line project; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Councilman Frisch said Council needs to discuss the hydropower project so the topic of dual
projects does not keep coming up. Councilman Frisch noted Council agrees on wanting 100%
renewable energy by 2015 and will look at community-appropriate ways to get there.
Councilman Daily said he would like to see material independent basis for the outfall line,
separate from whether there is a hydro or not. Councilwoman Mullins said she perceives this as
a project independent from hydropower. Councilwoman Mullins noted she is sympathetic to
getting CDOT approvals and would support the reduced appropriation scope and amount.
Barwick noted when Council told staff not to do any more work on the hydropower project, staff
got permission from Council to complete the emergency drain line. Staff has spent no money on
the hydropower project. Mayor Skadron agreed this is about public safety, not the hydropower
project.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
7
Councilman Romero complimented staff on follow through and the breakout the reasons for the
requests, both spring and fall, which helped explain the relationship to the overall budget.
Roll call vote Councilmembers Daily, no; Frisch, yes; Mullins, no; Romero, yes; Mayor
Skadron, no. Motion NOT carried.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #47, Series of 2013, amended by decreasing the
outfall for drain line from $40,000 to $20,000 and no more than $25,000; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote; Councilmember Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes;
Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, no.
ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 2013 – 360 Lake Avenue (Erdman Partnership Lot Split)
Subdivision Amendment
Sara Adams, community development department, reminded Council this was continued from
the last meeting so all of Council could vote. There are two issues, correspondence between staff
and the applicant, and the land use request to amend an ordinance to allow TDRs to land in this
subdivision. The issue is whether more square footage is appropriate for this site. Ms. Adams
pointed out the staff memorandum outlines what floor area would be allowed in the R-6 zone,
the maximum floor area specified in the ordinance and compared the two. Ms. Adams said 700
square feet more is allowed on this site currently than would be allowed under R-6 zoning. Ms.
Adams said staff feels that is too much square footage for the context of the R-6 zone district and
adding 250 square feet more would be too much. Staff recommends against the request to land a
TDR on this site.
Council can agree with the staff recommendation or could delete or omit the maximum floor area
specified in the 1990 ordinance so the property would be subject to the floor area in the current
land use code. Council could also approve the applicant’s request. Ms. Adams noted she
received two e-mails in support of the request.
Chris LaCroix, representing the applicant, asked Council to look at the record of what transpired,
the information given, the decision made and money spent and that the mistake was not caught
for a year after the TDR was purchased. The existing house was allowed to be built in 1990 and
there have been no comments about the size of the existing house. LaCroix said it is reasonable
to allow a TDR in light of what has transpired between the applicant and staff. Steev Wilson,
representing the applicant, said this project has been noticed twice and there has been no public
comment against the project. Ms. Adams pointed out P&Z only reviewed this with regard to the
Hallam Lake bluff reviews, not the TDR. Ms. Adams said P&Z and the applicant discussed
reconstruction of the slope, which was changed when the house was built. P&Z did see the mass
and scale of the house but that was not their focus. The Hallam Lake review was adopted after
the 1990 ordinance regarding this property.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
8
Councilman Romero said P&Z in an open process reviewed this and may have made
assumptions on how this project looked. Councilman Romero said he feels a responsibility to
make a fair repair. Councilman Daily asked about the impact of 250 square feet. Ms. Adams
said staff feels it is too much for the neighborhood to have 250 square feet plus the 700 square
feet already over the current zoning code. Ms. Adams told Council if the applicant goes forward,
there will be less impact on the lake and more impact on the street. The applicants propose to
reconstruct the bluff and move the mass towards the street. Councilman Daily asked what period
of time the applicant made expenditures in reliance on staff’s position. LaCroix told Council the
discussion about a TDR with staff took place in July 2012, the TDR was purchased and a year of
planning, design and engineering went on.
Councilman Daily asked if the applicant had been aware that the 1990 approval prevented
landing of TDRs. LaCroix said they were not; he represented the purchasing of the TDR and
knew nothing about the property. LaCroix noted he offered to do the research and was told it
was not necessary. Councilwoman Mullins said in the development of land use planning,
thought and time is put into developing, changing and modifying. Councilwoman Mullins said
she would prefer to modify land use legislation than to make exceptions. It was unfortunate
there were miscommunications and staff could have been clearer. Councilwoman Mullins said
in reading all the e-mail correspondence, it appears the applicant could have done more research.
Councilwoman Mullins said she feels the 250 square feet will significantly impact the
neighborhood.
Mayor Skadron asked if the applicants feel they are entitled to the TDR because of the mistake.
LaCroix said given the information, that the client spent money on a TDR and money in
development of a house, and given when the mistake was discovered, it seems reasonable
solution to say a TDR would be allowed without creating a precedent. Wilson noted there was a
pre-application conference with staff and the TDR did not come up. The application was
submitted with square feet, variance and non-conformities, the package was accepted as
complete and allowed to go to P&Z before the TDR was caught. Ms. Adams pointed out when
she received the application as an official land use application, she determined immediately it
would take an amendment of the subdivision approval.
Bendon stated this does not rise to a position of detrimental reliance, where Council has to make
up for staff’s mistake. Bendon noted if staff were expected to be correct 100% of the time, it
will be difficult to get an answer from staff. Bendon said the land use question is whether it is
appropriate to add 250 square feet to this property which already has more square footage than
would be allowed in the R-6 zone. Council could also look at this and say it is a good design, it
achieves some good purposes with the bluff and allow the TDR for the project to succeed.
Councilman Daily agreed this issue could have been discovered earlier. Councilman Daily asked
how involved staff was during the year referred to by the applicant. Bendon said usually staff is
asked a question and then go on their way. Bendon said unless staff is presented with an
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
9
application or a question, they are working on other issues. Wilson told Council they worked
with staff because the applicant was suggesting a bluff reconstruction, which is not in the code.
They did an erosion analysis, met on site.
Councilman Frisch asked how complicated it is to answer whether a TDR can be landed or not.
Bendon said the city does have a complex code. There are intricacies within a parcel or within in
the code that will not be caught every time. Bendon told Council staff tries to advise people but
does not create estoppels letters. Bendon pointed out there is a process for administrative
determination, which is a formal process involving staff and the city attorney’s office.
Councilman Frisch asked how an applicant determines if a property can land a TDR or not.
Bendon said generally the process is straightforward and examination of all documents
surrounding a property.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #28, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Mayor Skadron said for him this is a land use issue, not a legal matter, and the property should
remain subject to the dimensional requirements specified in 1990. This property has additional
square footage based on that ordinance and landing a TDR should not be permitted.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Mullins, no; Frisch, yes; Daily, no; Mayor
Skadron, no. Motion NOT carried.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to deny the application; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll
call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, no; Mullins, yes; Romero, no; Mayor Skadron,
yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #44, SERIES OF 2013 - St. Regis PUD Amendment – 315 E. Dean Street
Sara Nadolny, community development department, told Council this is a PUD amendment to
remove language from a prior approval requiring the hotel to remain open year round. This
property is in the lodge zone district, is lot 1 of the Aspen Mountain PUD, and has 159 hotel
rooms and 24 fractional units. The hotel also has a spa and two restaurants on site. In 2003,
Council granted a PUD amendment to convert hotel rooms into fractional units and modified a
large ballroom into some spa space. There was a condition that the applicant commits to being
open all year round. The applicant would like to be able to close during slow off season times.
Ms. Nadolny noted there was a fear of loss of hot beds due to conversion of rooms to fractional
units. There was an issue that the St. Regis would add business for groups during off season.
Staff supports this request finding it meets the criteria for a PUD amendment; there is no change
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
10
in use, character or physical features. This requirement is not on any other hotels in the city.
Ms. Nadolny told Council she spoke with ACRA president, Debbie Braun, who is supportive of
the request noting the hotel remain open if the business would support that.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #44, Series of 2013, on second reading; seconded
by Councilwoman Mullins.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullin, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor
Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2013 – Fees for 2014
Pete Strecker, finance department, pointed out he sent information to Council on the history of
these fees. Councilwoman Mullins questioned the application for vacation going from $363 to
$5000. Scott Miller, asset management, told Council there are few requests for vacations, these
take a lot of staff time, and a successful applicant converts city right-of-way to his personal use.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #48, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Daily.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor
Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #45, SERIES OF 2013 – Retiring in APCHA Rental and Ownership Units
Tom McCabe, housing office, reminded Council at the last meeting they requested some
clarification and corrections, making the guidelines more clear. Changes have been made to
make it clear the retirement age in units will not change if the social security standards change
and that 67 is a not to exceed number. Another change was definition of a senior and that 150%
assets apply to the applicable income category in which the senior is living. The definition of
retiree in APCHA housing has a correction to “a person who has reached the retirement age as
defined in the guidelines and who has worked the applicable amount of hours as stipulated in the
guidelines for at least 4 consecutive years prior to becoming a retiree”.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
11
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
City Attorney Jim True questioned exhibit B referring to owner/retiree and it should refer only to
retiree. Council agreed it should be owner-retiree. Councilman Daily said qualified retiree in
APCHA housing should state “at least four consecutive years immediately prior to becoming a
retiree”.
Councilman Daily moved to adopt Ordinance #45, Series of 2013, on second reading as
amended; seconded by Councilman Romero. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch,
yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #104, SERIES OF 2013 – 201 E. Hyman Height Variance
Amy Simon, community development department, said this is landmarked property on an 8,000
square foot lot with a Victorian house with an outbuilding. HPC approved a conceptual project
consisting of picking up the historic resources, restoring them to their original size and
construction an addition along the side adjacent to the Limelight Lodge. The applicant has
requested a height variance. The project as measured from grade complies with the height limit
but the applicants have designed a large light well in the center of the site to make the space
more livable and the size of the light well requires the height to be measured from the bottom of
the light well, which causes the project to be 5’9” over the height limit and the applicant has
requested a height variance.
Ms. Simon noted there are strict criteria for this variance; Council is the only granting authority.
Council must make findings that not granting the variance would deny the applicant rights
enjoyed by other properties, that there are special circumstances unique to this parcel, that
granting the variance will not give the applicant any special privilege, that the variance will make
possible the reasonable use of the parcel. Staff recommends that the criteria are not met. The
variance is needed because of decisions made by the design team. HPC voted in favor of the
project and staff feels it is a good preservation design; however, there are alternatives like
moving or reducing the light well. HPC felt this was a good project. Staff recommends not
granting the variance.
Ms. Simon noted the public comments had to do with the variance along the alley. Ms. Simon
pointed out the rules are strictly written so that unusual circumstances would warrant a height
variance. Ms. Simon said the design uses all square footage available for the site.
Andrew, applicant representative said part of the criteria is a hardship and this site has a historic
resource on it, which requires the applicant to go to extraordinary steps to honor that resource.
Derek Skalko noted this abuts the west side of the Limelight wall at the corner of Hyman and
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
12
South Aspen. The plan is to utilize the lot and to maintain the character of the property; it is
non-impactive to the surrounding neighborhood. It does not affect any view planes. The
secondary massing is 20’9”; the mass will not change whether the height variance is approved or
not. The light well is self-contained and is in the heart of the lot. The rationalization for this
variance is that this makes the sub-grade area more amenable and it makes a great design. There
is strong support from the HPC for this project.
Mayor Skadron asked why this cannot be designed without a request for variance. Skalko said
the applicants believe this is the best design and is a win for everyone. This is economically
viable and works within the context of the neighborhood. It is a small scale residence.
Following the code does not necessarily make it a better project. Andrew said the hardship is a
historic resource on a property zoned mixed use in downtown Aspen. The challenge was to
design a single family residence harmonious with the historic resource, the surrounding area and
be code compliant. If the design were not to have this light well, it would not be as light and
livable to enjoy the Aspen area.
Councilman Daily said this code section may not have been intended to cover this type of
moat/light well. Councilman Daily said he appreciates the preservation of the historic resource
but is struggling with meeting the standards to grant a variance; an argument could be made
about the reasonable use of the property. Bendon agreed this is difficult as staff supports the
design, especially given the difficult site. Variance requests are dealt with a degree of strictness
and the reasonable use is addressed as a parcel and this parcel does have reasonable use.
Variance procedures are to provide the city with a step before going to court that a property may
have been stripped of all use. Bendon stated preferring not to live in a basement is not a
hardship. Bendon pointed out staff does not agree being in an historic resource is a hardship.
There are challenges in owning a historic landmark, including maintenance; there are benefits
that may offset those challenges. Bendon noted all of Main street is a historic district with mixed
use zoning, the same as this property.
Councilman Frisch said there is recognition for owners of historic properties in the city’s code.
Ms. Simon said there is flexibility in how historic projects are designed and this project received
setback variances as well as a 500 square foot floor area bonus to acknowledge the constraints.
Bendon noted there are differences between a hardship and practical difficulty in owning
property. Councilwoman Mullins agreed this is a challenging site and the applicants have
brought some integrity back to the historic structures. Councilwoman Mullins stated it is
important to adhere to codes in place and she does not support making exceptions. Councilman
Romero pointed out the code states in order to make a variance in a dimensional requirement, the
decision making body shall make a finding that the three circumstances exist and those
circumstances do not in this case. Councilman Romero said code dictates that Council shall
deny the variance.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
13
Bendon pointed out HPC has a lot of flexibility to make historic projects work; however,
variances in height and floor area approval are given to Council and there is a higher standard.
Councilman Frisch asked if being designated Aspen Modern gives more latitude. Bendon sat
Aspen Modern was purposefully set up to be a broad program. Ms. Simon noted 100 square feet
is 10 times bigger than other light wells and still allows flexibility
Mayor Skadron said a mixed used building on this property could be exciting and add to the
special character of the area and would promote human contact and social interaction and
promotes community involvement by relating to bordering uses. Mayor Skadron stated he is not
persuaded that a design alternative would need a variance. Design excellence is not a criteria
Council can use to approve height variances. Mayor Skadron said he cannot find the reasonable
use of the property is withheld. Andrew told Council the applicants did not feel a mixed use
project on this site would get HPC support. Ms. Simon agreed a 12,000 square foot mixed used
next to a small Victorian would not get support. Bendon told Council staff was intrigued by
mixed use but when a property is off the beaten path, an applicant needs a sizable project to
make it work economically.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Romero asked if a solution might be to continue this and see if a code amendment
would be processed that would address this issue. Mayor Skadron said the code should not be
amended for every circumstance and adherence to the code standards has made both this design
and the community desirable. Skalko said although this design is the best solution, it can be
addressed in different ways. Bendon told Council if they are interested in a code amendment,
they can direct staff to work on it. Bendon noted there are code amendments in the process and
may be adopted in the next 6 months. Council should make a decision on this pending case.
Councilman Daily agreed there is not discretion to make an exception in order to grant this
variance.
The applicants withdrew their application. Bendon asked if Council wants staff to evaluate the
100 square foot limit on light wells that are internal to a property. Ms. Simon said staff is
working on a series of code amendments on dimensional issues that this issue could be added.
Council directed staff to include this issue in the code amendment in progress.
ORDINANCE #42, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendments Title 29 Engineering Design
Standards
ORDINANCE #43, SERIES OF 2013 - Code Amendments Title 21 Construction and
Excavation Standards
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
14
Councilman Daily left the meeting.
Trish Aragon, city engineer, said there is an active design community of engineers, architects,
landscape architects and staff received over 130 comments from them on these amendments.
Ms. Aragon said everyone who has wanted to comment on these standards has commented. Ms.
Aragon reminded Council they requested an expansion in the introduction of design standards,
talking about sustainable development, incorporating a streets component, looked at this from a
holistic approach, master planning streets for the entire city. Council asked staff to look at
lighting in the right-of-way; this will be discussed separately at a work session next month.
Councilwoman Mullins said this amendment will improve the city’s work and elevate projects in
town.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinances #42 and 43, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes;
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #36, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment – Planned Development
Chris Bendon, community development department, noted amendments since previous hearings
add additional process for use variations. Requesting use variations requires outreach; the notice
must state the uses and describe what they are. During Council review, Council can halt the
review and require additional neighborhood outreach if they feel there was not enough outreach
or that adjoining properties owners did not understand the request. The ordinance has been
amended to include the parcel size limitation 27,000 square feet for a planned unit development.
Bendon noted staff feels the community, P&Z and Council are in a better position with this
amendment; the standards for regulatory plans, suitability of site, site planning issues,
dimensional variances, design standards and bicycle pedestrian and transit facility standards are
all improved. If these are all addressed during project review, one should know whether a
project has a future or not. The detail review is for growth management issues, site planning,
landscape architecture, specifics and phasing of the development plan.
Bendon told Council staff held an open house and personally invited people who work with the
code all the time. Generally there were good suggestions and support for this amendment.
Bendon proposed a change, “an application for a development order may only be initiated by a
person or persons who represent they have authority to affect title to the properties subject to
development application”. Mayor Skadron said his priority is that the power and vision rest in
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
15
the community and that their input should not be diminished by these changes. Councilwoman
Mullins said she likes the separate designations of SPA and PUD. Mayor Skadron agreed, each
category maintains its integrity.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #36, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes;
Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes;. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment – Subdivision
Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council he sent this proposed code
amendment to land use planners, architects, in the community. There was one suggested change
in the criteria within the boundary adjustment section by adding on C(2) after changes in
development rights for the individual lots may occur unless specifically restricted by the original
subdivision documents.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #37, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Romero. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Romero, yes;
Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #41, SERIES OF 2013 – Code Amendment Approval Document
Chris Bendon, community development department, reminded Council this will be a new chapter
in the land use code as a repository for all post approval requirements documenting that
approval. The section outlines plans that may be required to support the approval and represents
the final decision. A section was added to describe documents needed for a building permit and
permit sequencing. Bendon told Council there was a question whether an escrow was the only
type of financial surety that would be accepted and staff amended the ordinance to add “or other
financial security acceptable to the city attorney”. The ordinance was also amended to provide
language regarding partial releases of both site protection and site enhancement guarantees in
10% increments as the public safety issues are diminished. There is language about affordable
housing and the guarantee being around sequencing, building permits, c/o and proportional
sequencing. There is language with the form and timing of the guarantee stating it is staff’s
preference to first pursue every non-monetary performance guarantee possible in order to
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 18, 2013
16
minimize financial guarantees on the project. There is language that allows the developer to
assign the beneficiary of a surety release to a person of their choice.
Councilman Romero suggested rather than 10% releases, to cut down on the administrative work
and have 25% releases. Bendon pointed out these releases allow money to be freed up to
developers during the project. Council agreed to 25% releases.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #41, Series of 2013, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes;
Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #99, SERIES OF 2013 – Amended IGA Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority
Tom McCabe, housing office, told Council there are two proposed changes to the housing IGA;
adding two additional members to the housing board for a total of 7, and setting term limits for
board members of 2 four-year terms. This also adds call up procedures to give Council and the
County Commissioners an opportunity to call up a housing board decision within 60 days.
Councilman Frisch moved to approve Resolution #99, Series of 2013; seconded by Councilman
Romero. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch said he would like limits of 2 four-year terms for all city boards and that they
all be the same. This will require a Charter amendment vote by the electorate.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adjourn at 10:15 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in
favor, motion carried.
Kathryn Koch
City Clerk