HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20140224Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
1
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION .......................................................................................................... 2
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS .............................................................................................. 2
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................... 3
RESOLUTION #11, SERIES OF 2014 – Golf Course Restaurant Lease ...................................... 3
RESOLUTION #14, SERIES OF 2014 – Truscott Housing Change Order................................... 3
RESOLUTION #15, SERIES OF 2014 – Employee Generation Study Contract RRC ................. 4
Resolution #11, 2014 - Golf Course Restaurant lea se ......................................................... 6
Resolution #12, 2014 - Data Center Rack & Cooling System ............................................. 6
Resolution #14, 2014 - Truscott Housing Change Or der .................................................... 6
Resolution #15, 2014 - Employee Generation Study contract RRC .................................... 6
Resolution #13, 2014 -- Wheeler Film Society Agre ement ................................................. 6
Minutes - February 10, 2014 ................................................................................................ 6
ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 2014 – Pacific Avenue Condominiums Affordable Housing
Credits ............................................................................................................................................. 6
ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2014 – Approving Lease Purchase Agreement IT Firewall ........ 8
ORDINANCE #3, SERIES OF 2014 - Code Amendment Procurement Thresholds .................... 8
ORDINANCE #51, SERIES OF 2013 – Hotel Aspen, 110 W. Main St PUD Subdivision ........... 9
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
2
Mayor Skadron called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Frisch, Mullins,
Romero and Daily present.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Sandy Iglehart, Hope Center, announced an event at the Wheeler March 31st to heal and
help the community, to offer outreach and education. There were 3 suicides in the valley within
10 days. The Hope Center would like to start the community communicating more effectively,
especially about suicides. The event at the Wheeler will have a keynote speaker and panel.
There is also a hockey game, the Aspen Police Department versus Snowmass Fire department
March 8th at the ice garden. There are training seminars for persons interested in helping
associates that may be in jeopardy.
2. Art Burrows said when the employee generation study is done, he would like the study to
be objective and contain input from the community. Burrows said the Council is not aware of
the effects of fees. Burrows suggested suspending the fees until everyone understands whether
they are a benefit or are causing full time resident to move away. Burrows said the fees seem to
be an unfair burden on full time residents. Burrows said the fees are approaching 50% of the
assessed valuation of their property, which makes it hard to sell. Colleen Collins agreed the
burden of fees is expensive and Council is not seeing all sides of the fees; they seem undefined
and limitless. Ms. Collins said the discussion on cost versus need for affordable housing is
critical; it is an expensive program.
3. Mike Maple said he has concerns about the employee generation study for residences and
that the city will look at all the benefits and burdens. Maple said these fees are burdensome and
drive people from the valley. Maple said the employee housing program should include every
aspect of the community. Maple pointed out single family homeowners pay RETT, which funds
go to employee housing and seems to be double taxation; residents of free market pay sales tax,
some of which goes to affordable housing and also seems to be double taxation. Maples say
residents of free market pay a disproportionate share of property taxes.
4. Rob Gile said the fees on residential development drive people into affordable housing
rather than the free market approach.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilwoman Mullins thanked Sandy Iglehart and the work on the Hope Center.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
3
2. Councilman Frisch said Pitkin County has the highest suicide rate in the state.
Councilman Frisch thanked the Wheeler staff and everyone who put on the memorial for Stewart
Oksenhorn.
3. Councilman Daily said the city needs to look thoroughly at the employee generation and
he would like to be part of that examination.
4. Councilman Daily and Mayor Skadron agreed the service for Stewart Oksenhorn was
well done and thanked Josh Berman for organizing the service.
5. Mayor Skadron reported on the RFTA meeting; they considered the contract for the
executive director and the Board is happy with his performance. Mayor Skadron said BRT is a
success and a sign of that success is the lack of parking at BRT stops.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council pulled Resolution #15, employee generation study contract RRC; Resolution #14,
Truscott housing change order and Resolution #11, Golf course restaurant lease.
RESOLUTION #11, SERIES OF 2014 – Golf Course Restaurant Lease
Mayor Skadron asked the lessees what they have learned from the previous lease that they are
applying to future plans. Jamie told Council they have updated the menu to meet their different
client’s requirements. Steve Aitkin, golf department, told Council these are the most successful
restaurant operators in this space to date and he is glad they are renewing their lease.
RESOLUTION #14, SERIES OF 2014 – Truscott Housing Change Order
Councilwoman Mullins asked about this change order being larger than the original contract and
does this apply to 3 separate areas or will there be another change order for the 3rd area. John
Laatsch, asset department, told Council the original contract with SGM was done through the
RFP process. The city started with the engineering contract, then a change order to add
landscape architectural services, and then survey work was added. Laatsch noted the identical
scope of work is considered for the 200 and 300 buildings next to the work being done. Part of
those buildings are impacted by the work done on the first group of buildings and there is
damage to some of the structures. The work is identical to the first area and staff had a choice of
rebidding or just adding to the existing contract. The scope of work for this change order
includes everything that was piecemealed in the original contract. The original contract was
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
4
$50,000 and this change order is $67,000. Laatsch told Council staff has received a soils report
on the 1A area and a recommendation for correction of the settlement problem. Staff will go out
for a RFP for that area.
RESOLUTION #15, SERIES OF 2014 – Employee Generation Study Contract RRC
Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council this contract is an outcome of a
work session in January where housing mitigation for single family and duplex development was
discussed. One question is whether the community wants to charge mitigation for single family
and duplex development. Staff received direction from Council to look for a firm that could
provide a study that demonstrates actual employee generation from single family development to
allow Council to have a more thorough discussion on this. Bendon said developers have said, I
am willing to pay my fair share but I want to know accurately what that is. This study is an
attempt to get a statistically accurate picture of actual employee generation.
Bendon said he asked for 3 categories; employees from initial construction, on-going
maintenance of a house, and employee generation from safety services. Bendon noted that
information will allow Council to get more refined and to understand whether the assessment
should be only for construction, only for maintenance or all 3 listed. Bendon said the
information is due back to the city in August and then Council can continue to have a
conversation whether fees should be charged on single family development. RRC will provide
information only, not policy. Bendon noted there will be a summary of all affordable housing
fee requirements including commentary on sales tax, RETT and property taxes, which can be
added to the RRC work or staff can provide that information. The study should show a
statistically valid way to calculate employee generation. Bendon pointed out if Council is not
interested in charging that fee, the study is not needed.
Councilman Frisch said the theory is for X square feet, so many employees are generated.
Council Frisch said all agree that the commercial employee generation is figured out.
Councilman Frisch said he supports learning the facts from this study in as thorough a manner as
possible. Councilman Frisch said the hierarchy of needs has probably changed since this fee was
instituted. Councilman Frisch noted he is interested in coming up with a number to try and
have a healthy balanced community on both affordable housing and free market and not have a
bifurcated community without free market residents.
Councilman Romero said there are 3 options staff is asking and the last one is reconsideration of
assessing affordable housing impacts to single family development and what is the thought
around that one. Bendon reiterated if Council is sure they do not want to continue to assess
mitigation fees for single family and duplexes, then the study would have no value. Councilman
Romero said one of the components of the study is to look at public safety services delivered to
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
5
residences. Councilman Romero said this has not been an issue in past discussion and most of
these services are accounted for and paid for through property taxes.
Bendon said he would ask the contractor what kinds of services are being provided in the
components that are not being provided for. Bendon said some other communities have that
calculations and he thought it could be part of the discussion. Councilman Romero said the
scope notes that RRC is considering adding market comps of other communities as part of the
data. Councilman Romero said that data would be interesting but other communities’ data
should not tilt Council’s analysis. Bendon agreed and noted it is useful to know where other
communities are, only as a reference point. Councilman Romero asked about community input.
Bendon said RRC will conduct some interviews; this will not have open house style feedback.
Councilman Romero said this analysis will be based on key assumptions and Council needs to
spend time establishing some themes or accepted truths for the community. Councilman Romero
suggested a milestone early on for a check in with Council to review the guiding assumptions for
this analysis. Bendon said the proposed cost is $33,000 which assumes two site visits, one of
which can be used for a conversation with Council.
Councilwoman Mullins stated she supports the study as Council needs this data in order to
determine what mitigation may be. Councilwoman Mullins asked if the contractors will present
a method to update the employee generation numbers. Bendon said fees need to be updated
every 5 to 10 years or the data becomes irrelevant. Councilwoman Mullins said she would like
to understand the method so that can be evaluated in 5 years to see if the method can be re-used.
Councilman Daily said he supports the study in order to have better understanding of single
family homes and their employee generation.
Mike Maple said the study should examine who lives in houses and are they employed, which is
mitigation; this needs to be looked at. Councilman Romero noted this point could be part of the
second step and look at the net add if the residence is one’s primary residence and the occupants
are gainfully employed and the add to overall community. Maple said it is hard to analyze
impacts if who is in the house is not looked at. Mayor Skadron said this is a topic at a work
session with the contractor. Bendon suggested asking the contractor as part of their
reconnaissance to figure out if the residence is ones’ primary or secondary to try and see if there
is a difference in employee generation.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Daily.
The consent calendar is:
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
6
• Resolution #11, 2014 - Golf Course Restaurant lease
• Resolution #12, 2014 - Data Center Rack & Cooling S ystem
• Resolution #14, 2014 - Truscott Housing Change Order
• Resolution #15, 2014 - Employee Generation Study contract RRC
• Resolution #13, 2014 -- Wheeler Film Society Agreement
• Minutes - February 10, 2014
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 2014 – Pacific Avenue Condominiums Affordable Housing
Credits
Councilman Daily recused. Justin Barker, community development department, noted this is a
request for two approvals; to accept affordable housing units outside city limits and to establish a
certificate of affordable housing credits. Barker said this site at the airport business center was
approved for 17 affordable housing units as mitigation for the Residences at Little Nell. The
applicant proposes to complete the remaining 8 units and requests affordable housing certificates
for the 24 FTEs generated by the project at category 2. This site is within the urban growth
boundary and Council has the ability to accept affordable housing units within the UGB. Barker
told Council the purpose of the UGB is to denote areas appropriate for affordable housing and to
prevent sprawl. The original boundary was beyond Woody Creek. Barker noted the AACP
promotes that affordable housing be developed within the UGB and further states on site
mitigation is preferred.
Barker stated affordable housing units within the UGB have been approved and have been
denied; the Residences of the Little Nell mitigation was approved at the ABC and the mitigation
for the South Aspen Street project was denied. Barker said units outside the city limits removes
Council discretion to review a project’s merits. Barker said Council could approve that these
affordable unit credits are appropriate and have the same value as those in the city; that
affordable unit credits are inappropriate as credits are a city programs and should only
appropriate for city projects; the third alternative is to approve them at a lower percentage of
credits than units within the city. Barker pointed out staff recommends approving the units at
75% of the total or 18 FTEs at category 2 level.
Peter Fornell, applicant, reminded Council he and community development staff brought the idea
of affordable housing credits to Council as a code amendment and then he produced eight
category 2 units at 301 West Hyman, which has been a success. The private sector produces this
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
7
affordable housing, which incentivizes the developer to build these units at lower category so
that the purchase price for the buyer is lower and the mitigation for a developer of higher.
Fornell noted he is currently building eleven category 2 and 3 units on Main street. Fornell said
the lot at the ABC was earmarked for affordable housing in an approved PUD, defined as an
appropriate location for affordable housing and has been approved for 10 years and no one has
built the affordable housing. Fornell noted the affordable housing credits have sold by one and
two for those who need one or two mitigation units.
Councilman Romero stated he supports the application as presented. Councilman Frisch said all
4 types of affordable housing mitigation need to be treated to same and there should not be a
discount for one of these because it is outside the city limits. Mayor Skadron said the issue is do
affordable housing units within the city limits have a greater value than units elsewhere. Chris
Bendon, community development department, said if Council agrees they have even value, staff
will return with policy discussions on this issue.
Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, said the applicant has been developing affordable
housing in the city and this is a proposal to develop more affordable housing without any city
money. This location has been approved by the city as mitigation for a development; it is
surrounded by affordable housing and is closer to town than Burlingame. Haas said there is a lot
of discussion about public/private partnerships and there have been none. This is a creative way
to generate affordable housing. Fornell reiterated these will be eight three-bedroom category 2
units; the inventory for those size category 2 units does not exist. Bendon pointed out this could
serve as a precedent. There is value in that this will be a brand new product, not a buy down.
Bendon told Council staff reached out to the applicant about this vacant piece of property and
lack of action on it. Steve Barwick, city manager, agreed that although this may be a precedent,
there may not be much raw land left in this area.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing.
Marcia Goshorn told Council the housing board supports this project; production of category 2
units has been a challenge. Ms. Goshorn said there are many children in this neighborhood.
Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing.
Councilman Frisch said he supports category 2 housing in the UGB and the 1:1 ratio works for
him. Councilman Romero agreed. Councilwoman Mullins said she supports 100% credits; this
was supported by both APCHA and P&Z; the infrastructure is there and the 75% seems arbitrary.
Mayor Skadron stated he does not want this to set a precedent without further policy discussion;
however the category 2 three-bedroom units and the value of new units and the support from city
boards convinced him to support 1:1 ratio of credits.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
8
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #4, Series of 2014, amending it to read
establishing 24 FTEs at category 2; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote;
Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2014 – Approving Lease Purchase Agreement IT Firewall
Don Taylor, finance director, reminded Council the city Charter requires lease purchase
agreement to be approved by ordinance. This is a three-year lease for firewall equipment for the
city’s network and the cost of the lease purchase is about the same as paying for support on the
old equipment.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 2014, on second reading; seconded
by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Daily, yes; Frisch, yes;
Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #3, SERIES OF 2014 - Code Amendment Procurement Thresholds
Barry Crook assistant city manager, told Council this will amend the thresholds governing the
city’s purchasing policies to raise department head approval from $5,000 to $9,999, to increase
the limits for competitive quotes requiring city manager sign off to $10,000 and $24,999, to
require formal RFPs at $25,000 and emergency procurement must be reported to Council. Crook
noted if this ordinance is adopted, the thresholds can rise by CPI every year. This creates
efficiency in city operations.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed
the public hearing.
Councilwoman Mullins said the limit of $5,000 for city manager approval should remain so that
he had knowledge of those expenditures. Councilwoman Mullins said the yearly cpi increase
should come to Council so that they know what the increase is rather than increasing every year.
Councilman Frisch said he feels the cpi has been at 1 to 3% annually and has not been jumping
around. Councilman Frisch, Daily and Romero stated they support staff’s recommendation.
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #3, Series of 2014, on second reading; seconded
by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, no; Daily, yes;
Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
9
ORDINANCE #51, SERIES OF 2013 – Hotel Aspen, 110 W. Main St PUD Subdivision
(Councilwoman Mullins recused) Sara Adams, community development department, reminded
Council this is a request to redevelop the Hotel Aspen and although the proposed project is a
good project, staff recommends continuation so the applicant can consider reduction of the
overall floor area and the unit sizes. Ms. Adams said the positive aspects of the project are site
planning, additional lodge rooms, on site affordable housing. Ms. Adams told Council since the
last public hearing, the applicant made changes to the residential portion of the project, reducing
the number of free market units from 4 to 3 in 3 separate buildings, adding gable roofs along
Bleeker, and lowering the heights along Bleeker to 26’9”. These changes give it a more
residential feel and respond to Council’s concerns and make the project relate more to the west
end. Ms. Adams said the overall floor area has not changed; reducing the number of units has
increased the net livable calculation and is 3,000 square feet over what is allowed in the mixed
use zone district. Staff is still concerned with the overall floor area of 36,500 square feet as well
as the net livable unit sizes for the free market units. Ms. Adams said if Council chooses to
approve the project, there should be a recommendation to HPC to address design issues during
final review. The applicant is requesting fee waivers of $91,000, which Council has not
addressed.
Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, told Council this project relates to the goals of the
Aspen Area Community Plan. Clauson said this project comes from incentives intended for
lodge development; this is the first project to take advantage of those incentives. Clauson noted
some of the most expensive lodging is in Aspen. Council has tried to have a balanced lodging
market, which is one reason they adopted incentives in the lodging code to provide for viable
lower cost lodge rooms. Clauson said small lodge rooms provide important vitality for the city.
This project proposes 54 new units with an average occupancy of 1.5 persons. Clauson said
although the lodge has been renovated, it is unsustainable to continue without redevelopment.
This is a frame constructed 50-year old building.
Clauson showed the 27,000 square foot site located in R-6 and mixed use zoning with an LP
overlay, which provides lodge incentives based on room size and requires planned unit
development. The LP overlay protects existing small lodge uses in residential neighborhoods; it
permits multi-family free market housing to support lodge redevelopment; it directs to the lodge
zone district for free market development which creates 60% residential development with an
average room size of less than 300 square feet. Clauson noted smaller room sizes generate less
revenue so the developer would need more subsidies; however, smaller room sizes would
perpetuate affordability of the rooms.
Clauson said the overlay allows dimensional requirements be determined through a PUD
process, which is part of this application. Clauson pointed out this lodge is located in two zone
districts; staff recommends rezoning the entire property to mixed use. Clauson noted mixed use
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
10
zone allows a higher height limit 28 or 32’, and a unit size limit of 2,000 square feet; both can be
varied with a PUD. Clauson said the R-6 zoned has a lower height limit and no unit size
limitation. Clauson said only one of these can apply and the LP overlay allows dimensional
requirements to be determined through a PUD process. Clauson pointed out a lodge located
entirely in R-6 would not have an issue with unit size limitations.
Clauson said the residential portion of the project has been redesigned; the applicants held a
neighborhood meeting. There will be 24,200 square feet for lodging; 10,500 square feet for
residential; and 2,000 square feet of affordable housing. There will be 54 lodge units. The
change in the application is 3 free market residential units rather than 4 units in townhouses and
they will be separate single family units. These units are essential to pay for the redevelopment
of the lodge. These units will have gabled, peak roof to better fit in with the neighborhood.
Clauson told Council the requested PUD variations are cumulative floor area and maximum free
market net livable units; the side yard setback along Garmisch has been approved by HPC. The
variations are 2750 square feet over the allowable special review floor area, which is an 8%
increase. This increase is attributable to the small lodge amenities, like lobby space and
breakfast room space, which are important for guests in small lodge rooms. The other issue is
maximum free market livable size, which is only an issue in the MU zone. The 3 unit proposal
increases the net livable and that variance but gives a difference feel to the street. Clauson said
the variances allow for a project to provide economical lodging alternative, free market units that
will generate money for the redevelopment. The LP overlay allows for incentives to preserve
existing small lodges and includes flexibility in dimensional requirements. Clauson pointed out
the free market floor area is less than 10,693 square feet that would be generated by using the
60% multiplier. The free market unit size is only an issue for one zone district. In this proposal
there is separation between the 3 free market units.
Clauson noted the importance of redevelopment is that Aspen is losing its lodging base. This
development proposes to increase the room count by 20% and to provide new rooms. Clauson
showed the building from Main street, the original design with flat roofs and the new design with
peak roofs.
Councilman Frisch asked about staff’s concern of the cumulative floor area and is that just free
market. Ms. Adams said the 36,500 square feet overall floor area for the whole project is too big
and does not meet the PUD criteria. Ms. Adams said the 10,500 square feet is 60% percent of
lodging and affordable housing and that calculation depends on the lodge unit size. Councilman
Frisch asked about the issue with the maximum unit size. Ms. Adams said the four free market
units had a multifamily feel and the unit size of 2,000 square feet in the mixed use zone was
applied. With the reduction to three residential units, net livable is still an issue determined by
the code and the variances. Staff is still concerned about the overall floor area on site.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
11
Councilman Romero said this design with 3 single family units seems to be more in keeping with
the R-6 zone character. Clauson noted there are a number of different parameters from the land
use code interacting; one required the 54 lodge rooms and if there are 54 lodge rooms and
Council wants to reduce the overall size of the project, the lodge rooms cannot be made smaller.
The residential component could be reduced but it is the subsidy for this project. The amenities
for the lodge could be reduced; however, that will have an impact on the guest experience.
There is a relationship between the number of hotel rooms and the size of the residential
component. The applicant needs all the hotel rooms to make the component work which gives
the free market figure of 10,693 square feet. Reducing the number of lodge rooms does not
work in making the project smaller.
Councilman Daily said the free market residences are proposed for 3-story in the R-6 zone with a
total square footage of 15,000 square feet, which seems to be a major variance. The mixed use
zone allows a maximum unit size of 2,000 square feet and this proposal is for 2.5 times the net
livable area to 5,000 square feet. The proposed floor area for the entire site is 36,500 square feet,
which is 35% over the maximum allowed by right in the mixed use zone. Councilman Daily
pointed out the land use code requires that the mass, bulk, height and architecture are each
compatible with the neighborhood and this does not meet that criteria. Council will need to
determine if it is close to be called compatible. There is no other place in the west end that
contains three 5,000 square foot residences; this would be a departure from the current character
of the R-6 zone. The residential component of this project is large for the neighborhood.
Councilman Daily said he likes this site plan and splitting the residences up into 3 buildings.
Councilman Daily said he would like to support this lodge redevelopment; however, he is
concerned about the residential portion and would like to see them redesigned closer to the mass
allowed by zoning.
Ms. Adams reiterated the R-6 zone does not require a net livable calculation but is a heated floor
area number. Ms. Adams told Council she tried to calculate this as if it had only one zone
district and if you look at the Bleeker street portion by that calculation, one could build 4,000
square feet. The applicant is proposing over 10,000 square feet. Mayor Skadron asked to what
degree he evaluates this project by the need of residential units to support the project. Clauson
said the applicants want to be in the hotel business and the residential portion of the project is a
way to keep the hotel going. Clauson pointed out the land use code addresses a lodge with small
rooms and states it is appropriate that 60% of the lodging net livable be allowed as free market
floor area. In developing that code amendment, the city had consultants who felt that
relationship was necessary to create a viable lodging project. The 10,500 square feet of
residential came from using the relationship and size of lodge rooms in the city’s land use code.
Ms. Adams pointed out the number and size of variances depends on the baseline being added; it
is allowable in the zone district or the special review. Staff is using what is allowed in the zone
district and the applicant is using the special review floor area. Ms. Adams noted the smaller the
average lodge unit size, the higher the percentage of free market residential is allowed. Ms.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
12
Adams stated this project is required to go through a planned unit development, go to HPC, go to
P&Z and go to Council to establish the parameters for the project. Chris Bendon, community
development department, reminded Council the financial aspect of projects is not part of the
review criteria. Applicants are to comply with the expectations and standards set forward for the
community.
Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing.
Ed Wolkenmuth, 121 West Bleeker, stated he supports affordable lodging; it is something Aspen
needs. This is a complex situation as it is not entirely in the lodge zone. Wolkenmuth quoted
from the land use code section 26.445.050(a) that the proposed development shall be compatible
with the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the property. Wolkenmuth noted some
residence sizes in the immediate vicinity on 3,000 square foot lots 1314 square feet and 2183
square feet and on a 6,000 square foot lot 3190 square feet. This proposal is three units of 5000
square feet for a total of 15,000 square feet. The code calls for a maximum of 2,000 square feet.
This project is out of scale with the neighborhood. Maggie deWolfe said this is not in keeping
with what is in the neighborhood and the neighbors object to the size of the project.
Mary Esbaugh Hayes said Council should go back to the original zoning and try and protect the
neighbors because neighborhoods are going to pot. Joan LeBac said rules and guidelines should
not change for affordable lodging. Ms. LeBac stated the community can have affordable lodging
and still have the brand and charm Aspen has. Ms. LeBac said there are loopholes in the code.
She does not favor giving up 1” in height or 1 square foot that may destroy the integrity of the
town. Aspen needs to keep respect for itself.
David Perry, Aspen Skiing company, reminded Council ACRA worked on economic
sustainability plan with a central focus of lodging, which has been in decline for decades.
Lodging is the economic engine in Aspen. Perry said this is a pivotal time; Aspen is at a
crossroads and needs to make a turn and get lodge rooms available. Phyllis Bronson said
citizens do not like projects like this because they do not feel they contribute to the quality of life
in Aspen. If people do not feel good about a building, they will not be happy about it. Bill Guth
noted there has been a change in scale of residential properties. Guth said he supports this
project and it will improve Aspen’s image as a lodging destination.
Junee Kirk showed Council some of the surrounding elevations of 15’, 22’, 18’; this project is
proposed at 25’, 28’ and 31’ and is not compatible with the character of town. This project is too
much impact for this neighborhood. Ms. Kirk said no zoning changes should be made for this
project. Ms. Kirk questioned what will happen to the 3 large trees on the property. This project
will change the historic district. Ms. Kirk presented an e-mail with 100 names opposed to the
project and stating it is not compatible with the neighborhood; that free market units should not
replace 80 year old trees, and the project should preserve existing small lodge character of one
story.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
13
Bill Tomsich, Stay Aspen Snowmass, stated there is not a lot of character in the existing lodge
and the redevelopment will help to upgrade the entire project. Tomsich said there is a strong
demand for small lodge rooms and this project should be supported. Shelly Cutler stated the way
to save small lodges is not to turn 1/3 of the property over to free market houses. Ms. Cutler said
this design is not graceful and this proposal is an abuse of the PUD process and is destructive of
the small lodge preservation zoning and replaces an appropriate building. Loretta Duroux said
she does not favor the height variance; it will block people’s view of the mountains. 54 units is
too big for the property; the building does not look like it belongs in Aspen.
Deborah Post said the code is flexible and the intent of that flexibility must have been to provide
Council with tools it needs to provide Aspen’s historic traditions; however, every year there
seems to be projects destroying that tradition. Council should not have to approve projects that
destroy the town’s character rather than promote preservation. Ricki Newman said this project is
too big and is out of character with the town. It will destroy the charm of Aspen. Lex
Tourminain said this is a good project. Aspen is an ever evolving place and needs low price
rooms. The renovated lodge would allow people to work in the service industry; Aspen is a
tourist economy and a ski resort economy and that too needs to be preserved.
Carolyn Landis stated she is opposed to the architecture not the development. Ms. Landis said
the numbers are confusing, what fits within the code and what doesn’t and this is not within what
they are allowed to build. Ms. Landis said this project would set a precedent for other projects.
Corey Enlow stated this is a project Aspen needs; Aspen needs to stay competitive with other
resorts and needs lodges of all ranges. Enlow said developers need to offset the cost of the hotel
with other options which is the point of the incentives. Enlow stated Aspen has to evolve or go
extinct.
Michael Tulio said he supports the project and feels it would enhance the neighborhood. Tulio
said time changes, Aspen changes and the community should allow these changes. Donny Lee,
ACRA, said he supports this and this is the first test of the conversations about rehabilitating
Aspen’s lodge inventory. Dennis Young noted increasing the bed base is a city goal and this
project would support that goal. Council should support this project. Joseph Speers said this is a
great project and important to the community. Aspen needs beds that will appeal to the younger
generation.
Hana Pevny said she supports hotel redevelopment; however, she has concerns about the
integrity of the surrounding neighborhood, particularly the height of this project. Irma Prodinger
questioned why lodge development requires such large buildings. Ms. Prodinger said she does
not want to see the town ruined. Julie Ansteel, next door to the Hotel Aspen, told Council the
height of her gable is 31’ and she is opposed to 3 stories on Bleeker street on the south side of
the street. The code allows higher buildings on the north side in some zones. Ms. Ansteel said
the historic nature of Aspen makes it unique.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
14
Maria Morrow said she is delighted someone wants to renovate a lodge with 300 square foot
units. Ms. Morrow stated there is a lot of risk in developing real estate in Aspen and this
applicant is only asking for 3 residential units for this risk. Ms. Morrow said there will be few
chances to support the building of an affordable lodge. Ms. Morrow pointed out the code is
flexible in this development. Walt Madden stated the proposed free market development does
not meet compatibility with the neighborhood. The 3-story structures along Bleeker street have
no visual setback. Madden noted the proposal is 9500 square feet or 35% more than the
maximum allowed.
Bert Myrin pointed out the minutes indicate HPC’s concern about the incompatibility with the
structures on Bleeker street. Myrin stated the code states 1:1 floor area or 27,000 square feet is
appropriate for this site and in order to go beyond that, there has to be special review. Council
should stick to the code and make no variances on the exterior size. Steve Garcia, adjacent
homeowner, told Council all homeowners in the Victorians are against over utilization of the
variances and zoning to get maximum mass and size for the benefit of the owners. Garcia said
the Hotel Aspen is currently an affordable hotel and will continue to be one. Garcia said the
proposed project does not meet the requirements for compatibility set out in the land use code.
Aaron Brown, applicant, said they are hoteliers and own three hotels in Aspen and have a vested
interest in what the community looks like and its future. Brown said the development is
predicated on not taking asymmetric risks. The project is designed with a commercial viable
hotel and a residential component, which mitigates the risk of building the hotel by financing the
redevelopment and making the residential units smaller makes the financial risk asymmetric.
Michael Brown said the project is to meet goals of the AACP by revitalizing a lodge. The
project also provides money and jobs for employees in Aspen by providing 54 new hotel rooms
to the community.
Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing.
Ms. Adams entered 21 e-mails in support and 3 e-mails not in support.
Clauson reiterated the 60% in the land use code was based on testimony to Council as essential
to development small lodge rooms. Clauson pointed out HPC approved the project after
addressing compatibility.
Councilman Frisch noted there are 12 small lodges in Aspen and if they do not stay relevant,
those lodges could be gone. Councilman Frisch said in the current economics, it is more
valuable to build residential rather than lodge square feet. Councilman Frisch said of the 12
small lodges, at least two will be changing to residential use. The city needs to make efforts to
preserve these lodges as there is nothing preventing them from changing to residential uses.
Councilman Frisch said future guests need places to stay and it is important to find a way to
make this project work. Councilman Frisch said he would appreciate a smaller story scape on
Bleeker.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
15
Councilman Daily said he is close on the project and his only remaining concern is a modest
compromise on the free market units. Councilman Daily said taking one story off each of the
free market units will resolve the contextual issue and will be closer to the R-6 neighborhood.
The range of 7700 square feet for free market is closer to what he could approve. Councilman
Romero agreed an incentive program is appropriate to change the trend of losing lodge rooms.
Councilman Romero said he supports the lodge as proposed and the composition of the design
on Bleeker street. Councilman Romero said from the public comments, there is clearly a
compatibility problem with the residences on Bleeker street. Councilman Romero said he feels
the trade offs are easy to understand and easy to support and he would like the project to move
forward.
Mayor Skadron said the city has a policy that seems to turn hotel owners into real estate
developers and the city is co-opted by the lure of speculative developments, which chisels away
at the city’s soul. Mayor Skadron noted he has issues with precedent, with sustainability, and
with speculative development. Mayor Skadron this application is asking for modification
beyond the maximum standards in the code. Mayor Skadron said the density and cumulative
allowable floor area does not meet design guidelines or the land use code and results in a density
is out of context with the surrounding neighborhood. Mayor Skadron said if the argument is that
the lodge cannot be saved without the free market development, what lodge floor area would be
required to make the next hotel application viable. Mayor Skadron stated Council did not intend
to foster speculative development in the name of lodge preservation. Mayor Skadron said he
can approve what is allowed under the code but not a project that provides an irreversible
direction. Mayor Skadron suggested working toward a project that fits in better with the
surrounding neighborhood. Councilman Frisch said lodge developers are not doing speculative
developments but are reacting to economics; the land use code does not require developers to get
into a speculative aspect.
Ms. Adams reiterated staff’s recommendation is to continue the issue for the applicants to reduce
the overall floor area as staff feels there is too much floor area on site. Councilman Daily said he
could support this if the floor area of the residential portion was reduced and the third story on
each unit were eliminated. This would allow three smaller residences and while this has
financial implications, it also has less impact on the neighborhood. Michael Brown said he
cannot go back to the drawing board in terms of the density. Brown stated he wants to be in the
hotel business; this lodge is 50 years old. Brown pointed out these types of incentives are what it
takes to build and to sustain a lodge in Aspen. Brown said having good lodging for Aspen is
important.
Clauson pointed out there are a number of 3 story buildings on Bleeker street, one across the
street from this property. Michael Brown stated the price of getting a revitalized lodge base
comes at some cost. Mayor Skadron said he has to consider the entire community, not just this
applicant. Aaron Brown said in this situation, the disbursement of benefits is for the entire
community and its guests. Mayor Skadron said he is not confident that the next lodge
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 24, 2014
16
application will subscribe to the notion of community values. Councilman Romero said there is
not just one solution to a site plan.
Councilman Romero moved to continue Ordinance #51, Series of 2013, to March 10, 2014;
seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 11:20 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in
favor, motion carried.
Kathryn Koch
City Clerk