Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20110802 Special Meeting Aspen City Council August 2, 2011 Mayor Ireland called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM at the Commons Room, Mining Stock Parkway, Burlingame Ranch with Councilmembers Torre, Skadron and Johnson present. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2011— Burlingame Ranch Phase II Jennifer Phelan, community development department, told Council the city of Aspen, asset management department is the applicant for Burlingame Phase II. Phase II is proposed for 167 units, 161 of those are multifamily units, 6 single family houses. Staff expects the project will be built in phases. Ms. Phelan reminded Council they are acting as both owner of the project and as land use reviewer. Ms. Phelan said Council will look at density, mass and scale, dimensional requirements. Staff has planned several public hearings for this application, the next will be August 22 " at a regular Council meeting. Chris Everson, asset management, announced the Burlingame Ranch Phase II presentation will run on Grassroots TV and on the city's website aspenpitkin.com/capital asset department, current projects. Everson pointed out where the project is located and noted Phase I is 91 units and Phase II is proposed at 167 units, total 258 units. This is a sloping site and special attention has been made to the hillside. Everson noted there have been 12 meetings with Council and 12 public outreach meetings, all of which have resulted in guidance and suggestions. Everson said through the public outreach, the design team got general ideas to help solve the common problems of affordable housing. Everson told Council the design team tried to involve stakeholders. Through this, themes like construction at the site, open space, landscape, trails, and storage have been addressed. In the later stages of public outreach, the design team received more specific information on items like sinks and gas stoves, types of doors, interior finishes and the team worked on how to incorporate that input into the design. Everson noted there was a conceptual plan in 2008, which after the Citizen Budget Task Force and the city had to decide how to amend that design. The Construction Expert Group was formed to address possible changes to the project. Some of the construction group's recommendations were to increase density, try to utilize the land to a greater extent, try and standardize the unit sizes, and maintain construction efficiencies to keep the costs down, to engage in an integrated project delivery process, and to put together an initial conceptual plan. Staff took that plan and went to the Burlingame homeowners and spent time with them talking about density, ending with an agreement to increase the density from 236 total units to 258 total units. Everson noted Council has confirmed the proposed density of 258 units. Everson said the 2008 conceptual plan was the starting point for the for the IPD process. The staff and design team took all the input and created a new master plan. Everson told Council staff received over 500 comments from the community; some of these comments disagree and the design team figured out what was important to the majority of people commenting. Staff and the design team worked to determine which solutions satisfied all the criteria. Will Henschel pointed out a model of the project. Henschel said there were comments regarding the need for more open space, the parking should be as close to the units as possible, continue the trend of developing parks, like Harmony Park, the engineering should be integrated into the overall site. The plan emphasizes the pedestrian rather than the automobile and embraces open 1 Special Meeting Aspen City Council August 2, 2011 space. Henschel noted better alignments were established with the edges of Deer Hill and Phase I. Vehicle storage is on the outside of the development and buildings are aligned with the central open space. Henschel said under - building car parking was discussed; however, that created taller and more buildings on site. Henschel noted eliminating under- building car parking results in less site coverage and simplifies construction. There are 25 pods of buildings and 6 to 8 units within the pods for 161 units. The design is ranch vernacular and is in character with Phase I. Henschel pointed out there is vegetation surrounding each building for ease of maintenance and for aesthetic reasons and trees to provide shade. Henschel said the trail system will be continued and pointed out the various trails. There are 3 parks planned totaling 2.4 acres within the master plan and showed where each of the parks will be located. On the northeastern part of the site is the storm water detention system. There is a site reserved for child care. Henschel said 322 parking spaces are planned with 161 of those covered. Henschel noted the parking structures are 150' within the door of the corresponding unit. Everson said parking for the single family units will be on each particular site. Everson told Council the HOA will administer the other 161 spots and how they are allotted. Henschel pointed out that the back wall of the carport structures will be used as retaining walls or transit stops and mail pick up. Henschel said the design team also adopted the standard of no more than 200' from one's unit to trash or mail pick up. Everson told Council the phasing of construction will be important and the plan is to build from inside the site to out because there is access only from Harmony Road. After the construction road and the grading are done, the number of buildings constructed will be a flexible number depending on need. Henschel said there are 6 different pod types, which can be configured in a number of ways and adjusted to site conditions. Henschel said 2 and 3 buildings are used, getting efficiency from the slopes; stacking buildings equals efficiency. Henschel said the design team was careful to preserve horizontal articulation in order to avert a flat facade in the front. Building E is the only building not built into a sloping site. Henschel showed a slide of the proposed building materials and what will work with Phase I and is durable. They looked at materials that would allow little transfer of heat from inside to outside. They have designed "cold roofs ". Everson said the cold roofs are to help lower costs to homeowners and to eliminate the use of snow fences, heat tape, gutters, things that need annual maintenance. Henschel said the project is designed above code regarding the sound separation between units. Heat recovery ventilators are recommended. The mix of units is proposed at 30% one - bedrooms, 30% two - bedrooms, 40% three- bedrooms and 6 single family residences. There are 19 two - bedroom and 19 three- bedroom townhouses. Everson noted there are different styles, like townhouses, or flats, to meet different needs of families. Everson noted in general the units in Phase II are larger than the APCHA guidelines by about 10% and there is ample storage in the units. Henschel showed proposed floor plans for the different size and different type units. Henschel said the average storage for units is 100 square feet. Henschel noted the finishes have been available in public meetings and at the Saturday Market so that the public can touch and handle the finishes. Henschel noted that 60 to 70% of the units open up on grade so that they are accessible and visitable. Henschel told Council rather than going for LEED certification, they will focus on best practices and the project will be eligible for DOE grants. Henschel said LEED certification cost up to $250,000. The project team balanced everything against sustainability, 2 Special Meeting Aspen City Council August 2, 2011 cost to the overall project, and benefits to the end users. Henschel said the project has transportation, great site design, storm water control, reducing the carbon footprint in several ways. Henschel said no solar is proposed; however, there is the capacity for it on the roofs of the units as well as on the carport structures. Each of the multi - family buildings has enough roof space to allow for solar hot water heaters. Everson told Council the team worked on the construction mitigation plan using one that had high marks from staff, which is the construction at Aspen Valley Hospital. Everson said they took this plan as a starting point for mitigation of the impacts at Burlingame. Everson said they focused on traffic and not going through neighborhoods, providing safety fencing, parking or carpool options for the construction workers, dust control, recycling location and hours of construction. Everson noted one of the most important aspects of CMP is outreach, communication, public information, a 24 hour phone line, a website, single contact on the site, monthly meetings, and e-mail notifications. Everson stated this project is proposed for 39 category 2 units; 52 category 3 units; 33 category 4 units; 17 category 5 units; 12 category 6 units, 8 category 7 units; and 6 single family homes. Everson noted due to the standardized unit sizes, there will be flexibility to go through the land use process knowing that before the units are sold, the categories can be changed. Everson presented a graph of existing inventory of for sale affordable housing in Aspen and the effects of these 161 units on the existing inventory. This project proposes a high number of categories 2 and 3. At the last work session, Council agreed to continue with the pre -sales program and not to ask a funding question at the November election. Burlingame Phase II is on a two track approval — the land use approval process is separate from the funding and sales. Councilman Torre questioned the 150' walk to a person's car. Councilman Torre asked for the potential of PV in the project. Councilman Torre asked if there is an existing plan for the power lines on site. Councilman Torre questioned the child care facility and what numbers would it take to make a child care facility work. Barry Crook, assistant city manager, told Council staff envisions a child care task force surveying Burlingame residents and making a recommendation to Council. Councilman Torre asked about playing fields, percentage of open space, roads on the perimeters and percentage of green space in the new development compared to Phase I and do the current residents feel they have playing fields or just green space with sidewalks. Councilman Torre said he would like thoughts on a development encircled by roads. Councilman Johnson stated he, too, would like to know what will happen to the power lines. Councilman Johnson asked to understand how this phase will fit with Deer Hill, cutting back on Deer Hill would be a deal killer. Councilman Johnson asked how many people are expected to live in the 258 units. Councilman Johnson asked about stick built versus modular. Councilman Johnson said he would like to hear from the current Burlingame residents how the project is working, how they feel about increased density. Councilman Johnson said he wants to be clear that the length of construction will be specified in the CMP. Councilman Johnson said he would like the units livable and suggestions on way to increase the livability and which amenities are those items the residents want. Councilman Johnson stated he has issues with the parking plan. Councilman Johnson said he will wait for a work session to discuss the category mix. 3 Special Meeting Aspen City Council August 2, 2011 Councilman Skadron said his concerns are those listed by Councilmembers Torre and Johnson. Mayor Ireland stated it is time to move forward with this project. Aspen has been losing population, especially among young adults. Mayor Ireland said too many projects are ruined by the need of automobiles and putting cars on the exterior is a bedrock decision. Mayor Ireland stated he does not support certifying through LEED. Mayor Ireland said he feels electricity will become more and more expensive. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Scott Mills, integrated energy design consultant, said this is a great project. Mills said saving energy depends on insulation and sealing ability. Mills said he would like to see the city bring energy costs for affordable housing to the lowest cost possible and keep the utilities down. Peter Fornell agreed low cost energy is good but the city should make sure the systems are not expensive and complicated. David Ledingham, HOA board, told Council the homeowners have been working on the sustainability of Phase I told Council there are problems with the existing structures on boilers and on the siding and the homeowners are trying to deal with these. Ledingham cautioned the City to make sure they have proven systems and products. Ledingham said landscaping is a big issue for families with children to make sure there are places with sod for kids to play on as well as concrete places for skateboarding and basketball areas. Inge Lark said there is only one entry point and asked if there is a proposal for a second way in and out. Mayor Ireland explained that there was to be shared use of the Maroon Creek underpass; however, that was prohibited by Maroon Creek Club so the stoplight was the other alternative. Mayor Ireland suggested the homeowners make recommendations. Ms. Lark asked if the common room will be finished. Ledingham asked about access to the Airport Business Center from the site. Mayor Ireland said this is being worked on. Lee Mulcahey said there is an amazing sense of community at Burlingame, created by the design. Mulcahey suggested a better delineation between private and public areas, like landscaping, or other visual cues so people know when they are encroaching on someone's private space. Fornell encouraged Council to give the project the longest vesting period they can to give the program the best chance to work. Joe Quigley Ledingham asked about access to the river. Mayor Ireland said this is being worked on, there is an easement and the city is working to trade for a better easement. Ms. Lark said some of the concrete is cracking and the design team should look at the best product for the new phases. Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #22, Series of 2011, to August 22 " seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Johnson moved to adjourn at 6:45 PM; seconded by Councilman Skadron. All in favor, motion carried. oft t o n City Clerk 4