HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20190513Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
1
SPECIAL PUBLIC APPEARANCES .......................................................................................................... 2
CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS ................................................................................................................... 3
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 4
AGENDA AMENDMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 4
BOARD REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................... 4
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 4
Resolution #57, Series of 2019 – Boiler Maintenance Work at Red Brick .......................................... 7
Resolution #58, Series of 2019 – New City Offices Building – Shaw Construction GMP Contract
and Resolution #59, Series of 2019 425/455 Rio Budget Update and Budget Authority ............................ 7
Resolution #56, Series of 2019 – Building Permit Software System.................................................... 7
Resolution #48, Series of 2019 – Wagner Park Turf Restoration Contract .......................................... 7
Resolution #55, Series of 2019 – As Needed Excavation Contract ...................................................... 7
Resolution #60, Series of 2019 – Revised Intergovernmental Agreement for Governance of the
Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority ...................................................................................................... 7
Minutes – April 22 and 24, 2019 .......................................................................................................... 7
NOTICE OF CALL UP – Notice of HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development Review,
Relocation and Setback Variation at 105 E. Hallam Street .......................................................................... 8
RESOLUTION #52, SERIES OF 2019 & ORDINANCE #12, SERIES OF 2019 – Land use Code
Amendment and APCHA Referrals .............................................................................................................. 8
ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 2019 – Transportation and Parking Management .................................... 9
ORDINANCE #14, SERIES OF 2019 – Flavored Tobacco Ban ............................................................... 10
RESOLUTION #54, SERIES OF 2019 – 411 E. Hyman Avenue Extension of Vested Rights ................. 13
ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 2019 – 119 Neale Avenue, Transferable Development Rights .............. 13
ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 2019 – Spring Supplemental Budget ........................................................ 14
ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2019 – Historic Preservation Benefits Code Amendments ...................... 15
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
2
At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Frisch, Myrin,
Hauenstein and Mullins present.
SPECIAL PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Proclamation – month of the young child. Mayor Skadron read the proclamation proclaiming May as
month of the young child. Megan Monahan, Kids First, said thanks to council for your support and
making May month of the young child. The 29th annual children’s parade is next Tuesday at 10am.
Mayor Skadron said next in line to kids are trees. Mayor Skadron read the proclamation proclaiming
Arbor Day as May 18th. Ben Carlson, parks, introduced the new city forester David Coon. This is the
27th year we have been a tree city USA. This Saturday at Paepcke park will be a tree raffle, bucket truck
rides, hot dogs and kids activities, 10 to 12 at the park
CITIZEN COMMENTS
1. Peter Grenney asked questions on the GMP contract for city offices. He said it includes the
remainder of the building scope. Is that correct. Administrative oversite of change orders, how
often will that be shared with the public since they are not coming to council. There is an
additional 6,000 square feet of community space per council direction, when was it added. The
10% contingency by my math is less then 10 %. Who is ultimately accountable for the project.
Mayor Skadron replied city council. Mr. Grenney said the exhibits show a bid plan dated 3-28
the program changes were not part of ordinance 4, why are they not on the website. Since
February 11 about 3.4 million dollars in Shaw change orders. The overall contingency is 2.9
million. Do we feel 2.9 million is enough contingency based on all the changes to date. What
happens. We are $850,000 away from the voter approved budget. On the armory, last summer
the city manager quoted it at 15 million now it is 13. The armory budget is going down while the
city offices one is going up. Will this building be remodeled or will costs be shifted to the
offices. Are there allowances for cost escalation or will they be additional change orders. Is the
waste all going to the landfill.
2. Chris Counsel, member of APCHA. I’ve sent council an email and want to follow up.
Commenting on Reso 60. Everyone agrees the current system needs changes. The current call up
process makes changes take too long. The proposed changes eliminate the board as a citizens
board. It is reverting to a structure we had before that was determined to be ineffective. I don’t
understand why we are going back to something we had 20 years ago. Independent counsel
suggested the board be independent. There are a lot of good options out there including an
elected citizens board. The county and city can still control the budget. I’m disappointed in the
entire process. It has not been transparent. The board has not been engaged on the process. We
appreciate the meetings from the county. Council and commissioners have failed to listen to the
boards concerns. We asked that this wait until the new council is seated. I feel it has been
disrespectful to the citizen boards. It is scheduled to be implemented on August 1st and the details
of the citizen appointees have not been finalized. There has been no discussion regarding board
members who have remaining time in their terms. He asked that this be postponed until it can be
looked at holistically.
3. Peter Fornell spoke about APCHA governance, for a very long time we have been proud of our
citizen boards that have been voluntary in nature. It gives an open minded opinion to you what
an outside opinion is regarding the housing authority. I’m fearful what will go on with a board
consisting of elected officials and a minority of citizens who might be fearful of saying what they
think. He would like to see the board remain an advisory group of citizens. There are potential
unintended consequence where land use applications could be decided on by the board. Take a
step back in what you are doing with the APCHA governance. We wanted to have citizen
advisory groups giving recommendations to the elected boards.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
3
4. George Newman, Pitkin county commissioner. The sky is not falling down. We started a process
with a subcommittee 2 years ago. The idea was to look at ways to address the capital reserve
issues. Thorough those discussions we came up with 2 different alternatives. We could not come
to an agreement. We gave it to the APCHA board to make a recommendation. That never
occurred. The subcommittee reconvened and those discussions turned to governance. We even
looked at breaking up the IGA. We felt that 90% of APCHA was working well. We decided
what was needed to make it more effective was a new governance structure. After another year
of discussion, we had a joint meeting and what was decided was since certain policies were not
moving forward, including capital reserves, what was missing was the board making ultimate
decisions and be accountable. Where is the accountability with a voluntary board. We felt it was
appropriate to have elected officials back on the board. The majority is still citizens. In the long
run if we want APCHA to make policy decisions and not deal with call ups, this new model is the
way to go. There are still outstanding issues including accountability and who the director will
report to. That will happen with the new council. The model is to create a more effective
accountable board. BOCC approved the IGA unanimously last week. I urge you to approve it as
well.
5. Toni Kronberg said the airport advisory group is moving along well. I want to give credit to the
county. When I was in Glenwood one of the gas station attendants said all the kids here are
driving there to get their tobacco. On city offices, when Harry and Bill came here it was reported
that the city was reopening design. Mayor Skadron said that was regarding the plaza. Ms.
Kronberg said on consent tonight is approval for the Shaw contract. I don’t understand why it is
not a public hearing. I can’t understand why Rio Grande street is narrower. Hoping we would
have a safer street with this project. Where will parents drop their kids off. She asked if there
will be more check ins with the public regarding offices. Councilman Hauenstein said both Bill
and Harry stated they did not want to open ordinance 4.
6. Bob Morris said Ruth Harrison wrote a letter to the editor the other day regarding the study about
the arts. She said without the arts and institute we are just another ski town. We are so busy
during the music festival. Without it we would be empty. Is the goal to try to quantify dollars
spent for the arts. What’s the return. I don’t know if you will get the information you want and
the expense will result in the correct product. Sara Ott, city manager, said this study is organized
by ACRA. Our commitment is $10,000 as participants. The core team was assembled by ACRA
to represent the arts. The last time a study was done was 16 years ago. I wanted to understand
the employment component. The non profits want a better understanding of sales tax dollars
generated from events. We have nothing to track the collected impact of the arts on our
community. Many partners have come together for funding. Councilman Hauenstein said Alan,
Heidi and Jim were all here asking for funds from the city. Originally, I said we know it is
important, why do we need to do a study. They argued it has been so long since one was done
and we need to actually quantify the impact of arts on the community.
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Hauenstein said I’m wearing a Colorado Avalanche jersey. It came in late. I’m celebrating
the Avs. They made it to the 7th game of the 2nd round. On work force housing, I look forward to
building more. We have a revenue stream to pay for financing so I would like to move forward sooner
rather than later in providing work force housing.
Councilman Myrin said one more meeting than this council is over. Sara mentioned wanting to
understand the non-profit employee generation. We removed the affordable housing exemption for
historic properties. There is another exemption for non profits. If it is discovered there is employment in
that sector and the non profits are relying on the housing that exemption should be phased out. This
council has done some things on housing including raising the mitigation by 5%. If each council does the
same the gap between what we have now and 100% will eventually be closed.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
4
Councilwoman Mullins said on continuing to celebrate the kids. Colorado state passed legislation that
now funds full day kindergarten. That is something to celebrate. On the city manager recruitment
process we are having meetings with the recruiter. Thank you Ward and Bert for recognizing what this
council has done for housing. People have recognized that arts and culture are economic drivers. It is
important because currently the non profits use to get 80% of donations from 20% of donors. Now it is
95% form 5%. They are becoming dependent on a very small pool of donors. It is a great study and I’m
glad ACRA is doing it. It will be worth wile for the city. In terms of APCHA and city office comments,
I assume they will be pulled from consent.
Councilman Frisch said thanks for the comments. Everyone agrees subjectively how important arts and
culture are. I’m fully supportive of using community dollars for it. Happy spring.
Mayor Skadron said the ride for the pass is on Saturday. It benefits the independence pass foundation.
Also on Saturday from 10 to 12 is the arbor day celebration at Paepcke park. Tuesday 10am is the kids
parade downtown. This is also police week. Thank you to our law enforcement at all levels. On funding
full day kindergarten, what we hope to accomplish is free up funds for families to pay for other programs.
We hope we close the achievement gap that falls within racial and geographic lines. We believe Aspen
was the only municipality to pass an endorsement for the legislation that was signed.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
Ms. Ott said we reported that we anticipated to do the pavement repair on the bridge. It will be
postponed. We don’t not know the date of the permanent fix. We are still working through some things
with CDOT. We are going to recommend delaying the 2019 asphalt overlay program. Staff is
recommending that for 2020. Regarding emergency procurement for the Wheeler, it will come back on
Monday.
AGENDA AMENDMENTS
Jim True, city attorney, said 2 of the last 3 public hearings staff will request be continued. Resolution 54
had a noticing error by the applicant. Ordinance 10, 119 Neale Ave, we are going to request a
continuance until next Monday. There is a gentleman who cannot be here next week to comment.
BOARD REPORTS
RFTA – Mayor Skadron said we talked about CO and encroachment matters. The supplemental budget
including bus replacement and Glenwood maintenance facility. We talked about battery electric busses
this fall. The plan is to have 30% of fleet electric, 30% compressed natural gas and 30% other things.
That was my final RFTA meeting after 12 years. I’m really proud of the work we did there.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilwoman Mullins said on 58 there were good questions brought up. One of the things I emailed
about was where is the 6900 square feet was added on. What use is it for.
Jeff Pendarvis, asset, said that was over the course of design as it flushed out from one roof to two roofs.
There were discussions about Tasters, ACRA and replacing sister cities and the rio grand meeting rooms.
They were all included as part of ordinance 4. Councilwoman Mullins asked how would Tasters add to it.
Mr. Pendarvis replied we would need to replace the space.
Councilman Frisch said despite the looks, Tasters is open for business. Mr. Pendarvis asked how staff
should respond to Peter’s questions. Councilwoman Mullins said some are things that can’t be
determined until we are in to construction. Mr. Pendarvis said Jack is here today to talk about the GMP.
Jack Wheeler, owner’s rep, said the exhibits included what the number is for as well as a scope. I’m
happy to meet with Peter and address his questions. The GMP is a guaranteed maximum price. There is
a scope that goes with it. Shaw has been in business over 50 years and been involved in complex
projects. Councilwoman Mullins asked does the GMP accommodate any changes. Mr. Wheeler said
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
5
currently the design accounts for LEED gold. That has always been the criteria and continues to be. The
design far exceeds that. We are working with climate action to see what is important for the city. 85% of
the recommendations had already been taken in to account. We will be back in front of you if there is a
cost impact related to energy. Councilwoman Mullins asked for a comment about the voter approved
budget. Ms. Ott stated the ballot question was regarding location not budget. The estimate from the fact
sheet is 46 to 49 million. The GMP is within that. The 15 million was a number that was part of the
negotiations for the Hopkins property. Councilwoman Mullins said we are still working on finalizing the
interior. Ms. Ott replied correct. We will come back once a month to address the final issues including
net zero, plaza and a review of programming. Those are the three major decision packages. Some of
them have no price tag as they are included in the GMP. Net zero will have an increased cost.
Councilman Hauenstein said LEED gold, we have to pay for. It may be we get close to net zero for
cheaper than LEED gold. Mr. Pendarvis replied we are still weighing that. Councilman Hauenstein said
we still need natural gas as a back up. Mr. Pendarvis replied correct. Councilman Hauenstein said Peter
brought up a few things including the three million in change orders. Mr. Wheeler said the Shaw contract
was initially executed 4 years ago. The first piece was pre construction services, the APD, then the
housing, then the utility project. They were all change orders but were all anticipated in the overall
project. Councilman Hauenstein asked about the city manager executing change orders to keep the
project moving. As I understand it will be transparent and open to the public. You will be reporting back
and council will be approving after the fact. Ms. Ott stated the resolution tonight authorizes me to
administer the contingency. My expectation is to report to you and post to the project website at least
monthly. One of the things that came up is fluctuation and pricing of goods. It is absolutely a timing
reason. We will administer it to the detail you will like. There is not the need for council action on every
change order. Councilman Hauenstein said Peter asked if we will be taking from the armory for the
office project. I think the GMP covers everything. Mr. Wheeler stated the budget for the armory has
moved up and down over the last 5 years. It is back up to 13.9 million from what we know. The actual
construction cost has remained the same. It has never been higher than 15.8 or lower than 13.8. It is
based on the current market and what we plan to do for this building. We feel it is an adequate budget.
Councilman Hauenstein said the Shaw contract for tonight is for 24 million but that is not the total cost
for the project. It may be misleading to some that 24.8 for Shaw is to cover all the construction. That is
not the case. Mr. Wheeler said that is just to construct the building. Mr. Pendarvis said regarding waste,
we successfully diverted waste from the deconstruction.
Councilman Frisch said I assume there will be this conversation after the building is constructed. I
suggest questions should be presented in writing. I don’t think verbalizing 27 questions every week is the
best way to get answers. If the real goal is to get the answers my suggestion would be to email staff. Mr.
Greeney said getting a packet on Friday and answers by Monday is not realistic. Councilman Frisch said
not every question that council asks is able to be answered by staff on Monday either. I think staff will do
a good job getting back in a reasonable manner. It is better to submit everything. Scott Miller, assistant
city manager, said we have been meeting with Peter since February. Every time he asked we have met
with him. We have also met with other members of the public. Mayor Skadron said Toni, all you care
about is stopping this project. I don’t know what more we can do. Ms. Ott said from a procurement
standpoint, council has always done it by resolution not ordinance. That is why it qualifies to be on the
consent. If council wants to handle the consent differently we can.
Councilman Frisch said we should vote on everything so far and pull 60.
Councilman Myrin said I will vote no on 48 as I have for the past several years.
Reso 60 – APCHA IGA
Councilman Frisch said from a technical standpoint there are items about the land use. If resolution 60
goes forward then we need to bring in the amendment to discuss the land use code review. Mr. True said
that is consistent with how other referrals happen. I think staff would still recommend ordinance 12
moves forward. If you adopt Reso 60 the IGA goes to the county for second reading.
Councilman Frisch said there has been a lot of home health issues at home for me since December so I
have not been able to respond as quickly as I like. I’m not sure at any point any APCHA member that has
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
6
reached out wanting to talk has been turned down. There is no doubt that a bunch of great work has been
done. As George said, I think we all agree there are some governance stumbling blocks at the board level
that has kept them from being as effective as they can be. There are times when out reach has not been
what it could be. There has been some push bask we are talking these governance issues at the end of a
term. I’m pretty sure if we were up here backing what the folks on APCHA wanted we would be cheered.
Instead you don’t like our decision and want to kick it down the road. I think that is unfair and
unbecoming of the APCHA board. Not including the board has been discussed often. The board chair of
APCHA has been involved in every step of the process. At the December 11th meeting we dove in to the
governance issue. Your chair Ron Erickson was sitting there at the table for the entire part of the
conversation. A few months ago we had a conversation of fine structure and Mr. Erickson was at the
table. I don’t buy that all of a sudden we are springing this on to the community and board. Any time 10
elected officials don’t go to an APCHA meeting you are being slighted. I don’t know of a time where a
board member raised their hand and said I want to speak and they were turned down. A lot of things I’ve
read about is elected officials causing problems. I don’t see that happening up here. Currently there are
10 elected officials in the model. We are trying to narrow it down to 2 and get them involved sooner.
The new board will be made up of 3 community members and 2 elected officials. One of the things that
has been written about is some APCHA folks want 100% elected officials. To me it is not elected or not
but you don’t like some version of the 5 of us and 10 county making decisions. The other thing that came
up is don’t make the decision now while we have to tackle the staff issue. Nothing on the administration
staff level should affect how the board is composed. The whole frustration comes down to that the
members of the board and staff are looking at a traditional housing authority. APCHA was set up for a
different reason and revenue source. I think it would be a derelict of duty to hand over the money to an
independent board. The vast majority of money comes from RETT money. I think a lot of the angst is
coming form APCHA and why can’t we be like a traditional housing authority. To this point, I think it is
a huge upgrade from a lot of common frustrations we have shared. When an issue can’t be agreed on like
capital reserves one side can walk away which is not helpful. I think this is a brilliant compromise. If I
am a board person or staff member I would be thrilled we will have a more nimble board. As far as
reporting structure, it is up for discussion but I don’t think there is agreement as to what the problem is.
There is a pot of money and we all need to realize where it comes from. The most important thing is the
current residents of the program, future ones and housing stock. I’m supportive of the resolution and will
show up at the meetings and happy to continue the conversation. I’m glad the board will be jointly
appointed. There has been a lot of good work but sad the frustration has spun out of control.
Councilman Myrin said 3 of the council members here tonight received a vote of no confidence at the last
election. This council needs to give the next one accountability for the IGA. It is difficult for the
community to communicate and maybe that is why 3 of us who ran received a vote of no confidence.
Mayor Skadron replied that is not true, you are the only one who ran and was not elected. I think the next
council should have accountability for this.
Councilman Hauenstein said I think it is totally appropriate for the sitting council to make this decision.
It was this council that for over a year have been involved in the conversation how to fix something that is
broken. This resolution will streamline and give the board authority to make decisions. I believe in the
last few months the animosity that has serviced, I don’t feel it is a contentious relationships from the
elected bodies. I’m at a bit of a loss to understand where it is coming from. There has been numerous
work sessions where these issues have been discussed. The people sitting at the table now should be the
ones making the decision. Council didn’t ignore a resolution, there was no resolution. It failed for a lack
of a second. When a resolution fails it is not ignored. I take exception to the characterization that council
ignored a resolution that never passed. It is honestly not in the boards responsibility to advise on the
construct of the board. I advocated for an elected board but there was no traction for it. It has been
presented when elected are at a meeting it intimidates people from making honest open comments. If that
was the case how would an all elected body be less intimidating. If the board is dissatisfied with the
irregularity of elected showing up at the meetings yet say it is intimidating when they do, that is flawed
logic.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
7
Councilwoman Mullins said the question of if this council should make the decision or pass it off. We
have been working really hard on this for years. As a group we participated in the BOCC meetings. A lot
of effort has been put in to this. I don’t think it is at all inappropriate for this council to start the first of
these changes. Elected officials didn’t work 20 years ago but things are different now. We have a model
for a strategic plan. 20 years ago the new board may have worked better. We need to make a change. If
it doesn’t work we revisit it. I think we have put together a really good IGA to move forward. As far as
APCHA participation I think Adam outlined it well. Last, the appointment process, we still don’t have it
ironed out exactly what will happen. I think everyone is hoping the current board members will reapply.
Mr. Counsel said clearly there is a lot of emotion in the room. I don’t live in affordable housing and don’t
have a dog in this fight. I’ve been involved in housing issues for the past 20 years. I believe in housing
and our community. During the election cycle Ron wrote a letter that was inappropriate. I called him on
it at the next meeting. I contacted Adam that that letter was not reflective of the entire board. I sat
through all the work sessions. We were never given the opportunity to speak or were asked to speak. We
have not had the opportunity to speak publicly. It is a process point but we feel we have not been
engaged with in a public setting. I am not calling the process flawed as a function of not getting what we
want. All of us have the best interest of our community at heart. We have a disagreement of how to get
there. You seem to believe we have been involved. The APCHA board was not made aware of this until
August. There is animosity because we have been berated, cursed at and belittled. This will probably
pass and that is fine. I don’t know what the right answer is, but I think the context is important to
understand where the frustration is coming from. The entire board has not been involved in the process.
From the time we found out we repeatedly brought our issues to the floor and have not been responded to
in a public forum.
Mr. Fornell said I’m concerned about the width of the new boards decision making abilities. I don’t want
the county making decisions on city property.
Councilman Frisch replied the board will not be making final decisions on land use. Mr. Fornell said that
is a misunderstanding of mine.
• Resolution #57, Series of 2019 – Boiler Maintenance Work at Red Brick
• Resolution #58, Series of 2019 – New City Offices Building – Shaw Construction GMP
Contract and Resolution #59, Series of 2019 425/455 Rio Budget Update and Budget
Authority
• Resolution #56, Series of 2019 – Building Permit Software System
• Resolution #48, Series of 2019 – Wagner Park Turf Restoration Contract
• Resolution #55, Series of 2019 – As Needed Excavation Contract
• Resolution #60, Series of 2019 – Revised Intergovernmental Agreement for Governance
of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority
• Minutes – April 22 and 24, 2019
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt all but Resolutions #60 and 48; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
All in favor except Councilman Myrin. Motion carried. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Resolution
#48; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor except Councilman Myrin. Motion carried.
Councilman Hauenstein moved to adopt Resolution #60; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in
favor except Councilman Myrin. Motion carried.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
8
NOTICE OF CALL UP – Notice of HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development Review,
Relocation and Setback Variation at 105 E. Hallam Street
Amy Simon, community development, said April 10th was the HPC decision. This is a 3,000 square foot
lot with an unusual brick miners cottage on it. The application is to demo a small non historic addition,
lift the historic structure and move it forward and construct a new addition. There was no floor area
bonus request. It is also under the maximum floor area. The set back variations only had to do with the
historic house is wider than the setback in inches. It was a 4 to 2 vote. 2 had strong opinions about the
relocation and roof form.
Councilwoman Mullins asked what are the conditions. Ms. Simon replied HPC has been trying to reach
out to referral depts earlier. Some conditions deal with building code compliance. We want to make sure
parks is satisfied with the excavation. The basement will be a bit larger than the footprint with a green
roof. There are also details of the foundation treatment.
Councilman Myrin said the question about the relocation forward, what was the issues. Ms. Simon said
this block is all historic buildings. Relocation needs to be considered carefully. Would this place the
building differently than its neighbors. The historic buildings are not in perfect alignment. Moving this
forward would maintain the condition.
Councilman Hauenstein said this house is back from its neighbors. Why is it raised. Historically it
doesn’t have a step up. Staff was recommending a step up. Ms. Simon said we are trying to make sure
there is no change. The front porch is settling and almost flush. It is important the house stays the same
relationship to grade. We don’t want to change the existing design. Councilman Hauenstein asked if
there was a sidewalk it would be another one to no where. What is the health of the cottonwoods. Ms.
Simon said engineering had requested a sidewalk. After they met with parks they decided it would affect
the trees. Parks is trying to preserve the trees.
Mayor Skadron said this will not be called up.
RESOLUTION #52, SERIES OF 2019 & ORDINANCE #12, SERIES OF 2019 – Land use Code
Amendment and APCHA Referrals
Mr. True said you can discuss this in coordination with ordinance 12. The resolution is a public hearing.
Mike Kraemer, community development, said the policy conversation dictates how the land use
conversation goes. This is the 2nd step in a 3 step land use code amendment. The first is public outreach.
That has been done through the various work sessions. With the IGA change, staff has picked up on code
amendments that need to happen with a council member on that board. The code states APCHA review.
The text is not that complicated but there are 15 different sections that need amended to remove the
APCHA referral. It is being replaced to be compliant with APCHA guidelines. The executive director
will now be providing land use referrals. We are recommending 2nd reading for May 20th. Jessica
Garrow, community development, said Peter Fornell made some comments during the IGA discussion. I
want to make it clear that these amendments will address the issue he raised. This will also make all the
land use referrals consistent across the board. This amendment has needed to happen and would have
regardless of the IGA.
Councilman Hauenstein asked is there precedent that a policy resolution are held back to back. Ms.
Garrow replied yes it has happened a few times before on the more technical amendments. Councilman
Hauenstein said this makes sure an appointed board does not have authority over land use cases. Mr.
Kraemer said the make up of the board includes elected officials. We are trying to eliminate the referral
in the code. All referrals will be from staff. Ms. Garrow said a parallel example of this is parks. Trees
go to parks staff not the open space and trails board. It is not taking away the APCHA review. It is
handled more administratively. Mr. True said this is why I said earlier in the meeting we would
recommend this anyway to make it consistent with other recommending bodies.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
9
Councilman Frisch said I’m supportive of this. In the past APCHA has been reviewing land use
applications. I think on their own volition and made some recommendations. Don’t be surprised if there
is pushback that the board is losing power by reviewing this. Open space has never looked at them.
APCHA has for many years. It has been done more on an informal basis. Ms. Ott said the board
discussed this 2 meetings ago and were inquiring as to what the council is looking for from the m. They
questioned if this was the best use of their time as a board since council questioned their
recommendations.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public
comment.
Councilman Myrin said during the application for Lift One the board wrote an extensive memo. How
will that content be conveyed to council. MS. Garrow said Gorsuch and Lift One were unique in
timeframe and review process. In the IGA if there is a request from council for the board to wei gh in, it is
there. This amendment does not address the one off more complex cases. Councilman Myrin said I don’t
recall if the letter was signed by the board or the director. Mr. Kraemer replied I don’t know either. The
final reviews for those projects are with P&Z and HPC. Councilman Myrin said the content of the letter
was specific to housing. I think it was valuable for that content to be pushed on to council. Ms. Ott said
the executive director is to provide comment on proposals, if requested. It does not prevent them from
commenting but obligates it when asked.
Councilman Frisch said if the board wants to get involved or is asked, what do the elected officials do.
Mr. True said there is a recent case as long as the elected official is disclosing and can represent they are
reviewing the land use hearing that comes before them they do not need to recuse. I do believe those
issues may arise and the simple solution is the elected official recuses from the APCHA board or later
from the council or commission decision. It is something you have to weigh as it plays out. The recent
case would indicate it is not necessary.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Resolution #52, Series of 2019; seconded by Councilman
Hauenstein. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #12, Series of 2019; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 12
(SERIES OF 2019)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE
CODE RELATED APCHA BOARD REFERRALS AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
Councilman Hauenstein moved to adopt Ordinance #12, Series of 2019 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Hauenstein, yes; Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes;
Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 2019 – Transportation and Parking Management
Ms. Garrow stated this is minor clean up to transportation and parking management requirements. For
background, we had extensive meetings during the moratorium in 2015 and 2016. Parking amendments
were adopted and integrated parking and mobility requirements. We expected at that time there would be
cleanup. The ordinance maintains current development rights and regulations but provide clarification.
This is the first of what will be 2 or 3 ordinances over the next year. More substantive ordinances will
come in late 2019 and early 2020. We have been working with a focus group of architects and planners
as well as check ins with P&Z and HPC. This is improving formatting and eliminating confusing
technology. There is no change to development requirements, just adding and clarifying some terms. She
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
10
gave the example of accessory spaces. Typically, they are associated with a larger commercial business or
lodge where guests not there for a full day can load or unload. The moratorium changes described
parking requirements with metrics that will be updated. With shared parking we wanted it to coordinate
with the off street standards. It allows off site parking to be located off site. It is included in the mobility
plan process. We want to ensure the code delivers the council goals of the moratorium. Originally, this
included removing or reconfiguring parking where there is no clear process. We are going to take it out.
That seems like it is more policy change than code clean up.
Councilman Frisch said I’m fully supportive of the true clean up. The bigger stuff can be tackled at a
later date.
Councilman Hauenstein said anything that makes the regulations less confusing I’m for.
Mayor Skadron said on the shared parking, what are we hoping to see as far as change. What will parking
look like. Ms. Garrow said when we created the model if there was a larger redevelopment that provided
more parking than required it could be public parking or shared parking. Mayor Skadron said is this built
on the principle that a restaurant and office tower where the office needs the parking from 8-5 and the
restaurant from 5 on, one parking lot could satisfy both. Ms. Garrow replied yes, you may see that in a lot
of communities. There are enough parcels particularly in the lodging sector where you may see this. A
real world example is the benedict commons parking.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #13, Series of 2019; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO 13
(SERIES OF 2019)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO LAND
USE CODE CHAPTER 26.515, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #13, Series of 2019 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Myrin, yes;
Hauenstein, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #14, SERIES OF 2019 – Flavored Tobacco Ban
CJ Oliver, environmental health, said if passed this ordinance would ban the sale of flavored tobacco
products in the city. It bans the flavor of all tobacco and nicotine products. The ordinance includes
menthol cigarettes, chewing tobacco and vaping liquids. Council heard from a number of health and
school officials requesting a full ban. There were also questions about what impact a full ban would have
on local retailers.
Councilman Hauenstein said we received one or two emails saying there is no credible evidence that
vaping is safer or less harmful than smoking. I would like to have a comment on that.
Councilman Frisch said to Wards follow up, whether it is Dr. Levin or the health department it would be
helpful to have that. We received 5 or 6 emails from someone saying they own a retail store in Aspen and
their sales would be affected 35%. One person responded back that they own a store in Portland Oregon
and the trade association asked them to reach out. We should not be surprised to see similar
conversations. We are definitely on the radar across the country.
Councilwoman Mullins said thank you for putting this together in a week.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
11
Councilman Hauenstein said I still have concerns and trepidation telling someone over 21 what they can
do with their life. I understand it is our charge to look after the public health of the community. It is
something I’m struggling with. I will approve this on first reading. I also struggle with people who can
vote or die for their country, but we say can’t smoke menthol cigarettes. I don’t know where
overstepping the bounds is. I’m sensitive to the loss of revenue that consenting adults have for something
that is legal across the country. I do want to bring it forward for a public hearing.
Councilman Myrin said over 21 people should be able to decide what they want to do as long as it doesn’t
affect others.
Councilman Frisch said there is the do nothing, ban vaping or all menthol products. Do you not want to
get into the vaping discussion. We have been talking about youth and that is where the focus has been. I
argued last time if we want to switch from a youth discussion to a health discussion, we have 7 or 8
marijuana shops Aspen and multiple liquor stores.
Councilman Myrin said the over 21 should be able to do what they want as long as they are not impacting
others.
Mike Haisfield, owner of the Aspen Store, said I feel like the issue we are talking about is once 21 make
your own decision. I’ve been the owner of the Aspen store since 1996. I have 20 full time and part time
employees. I have talked to council and the general public and feel this was started to protect our youth.
Based on my first hand experience, vaping and E cigs are the issue with young adults not the other
tobacco products. The ban is imposing restrictions on grown adults who are, despite assumptions to the
contrary, the primary users of flavored tobacco products and should be allowed to make their own
decisions. In December of 2018 we voluntarily eliminated all vape and e cigarettes products from all our
stores. We took the initiative and were hoping to set an example. I believe we must educate our youth.
As of now there has not ever been a class or seminar to Aspen students on the effects of tobacco. The city
has raised over $300,000 on tobacco sales but has not taken any steps on trying to curb a young adult
through informative classes or seminars from even wanting to try it. A ban won’t stop a young adult for
wanting to try it, but education will. I ask that this ban is reconsidered and for the attention to be
redirected to other forms of support, not personal taste. Flavored tobacco and chew are options that a 21
year old adult has. There are seven dispensaries within walking distance that offer all type of flavors,
candy or other packages. If this is about youth lets focus on them. Mike introduced his sons John and
Brady, both who attend the high school. They are some what where I get my information from a school
level. Education would be more supportive than a ban. If it is not county and city wide, education is
more important. John said from a student perspective as far as tobacco products go is students using e
cigarettes or vape products. You never see them dipping. It is only e cigarettes. Brady said I’ve seen
people use the vape products but never a cigarette or tobacco. Mike said even if it was starting with the
vape and e cigarettes, get education involved so kids don’t even start would be much more effective. I’m
in the school system for quite some time. If we see kids using the other products I will pull them off my
shelves. Mayor Skadron asked what is the financial impact. Mike said from 2018 we were down 35% in
tobacco sales. This proposal would be another 25 %. Because of the age change and the tax. The tax has
been a major deterrent. Mayor Skadron said we talked about this at the work session and I referred to the
AACP and health of the community. The compelling argument you are making is the availability of the
product at nearby retailers. What we haven’t done is work in conjunction with the county, Basalt and
Glenwood making it unavailable. We are working on a plan to apply the 300K toward education. Mr.
Oliver replied that is the plan. A lot of it is the peer to peer piece that matters not a person my age saying
don’t do that. We’ve had a lot of conversations from kids at the high school addicted to vaping products.
That will be one of our focal points. Mayor Skadron asked what is the tine frame. Mr. Oliver said I will
be presenting recommendations later this summer. It will be incorporated in the 2020 budget. By all
accounts these programs work. The conversation aligning more closely with the county. The county is
about to embark on the same steps we have with licensing, tax and age restriction.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
12
Karen Kenneman, Pitkin county health director, said we have been following your lead on this. We are
waiting for HB 1033 to pass which will allow counties to do the same thing. We have the board of health
recommendation to do retail licensing, tobacco 21 and the tax. We totally feel your pain Mike and have a
consistent policy across the county. We commend you for taking vape products off your shelves
voluntarily. If you pass this ordinance you will be the biggest leader across Colorado. Whether you go
for a full or partial ban we are here to support you. Mayor Skadron said the issue around proximity and
availability will be addressed in the near future. Karen replied exactly. Mike said my thinking was to get
more people in line down the valley.
Councilman Hauenstein said thank you John and Brady for coming in tonight. After our meeting I went
to city market and John was on vacation. I would like to include him. I’m curious about the peer group
and if we can start a peer group advisory group to come up with ideas of what would be effective.
Although it is contrary to my personal belief, during prohibition it spanned organized crime. If adults
want to do something they will do it. I’m struggling with telling someone 21 they can’t do something.
Tobacco is a nicotine delivery system. Vaping is a gateway drug to tobacco addiction.
Councilwoman Mullins said for second reading it would be good to talk about the valley wide efforts.
Ward you make a good point. If there is some way to summarize the dangers of flavors tobacco. What is
the risk of keeping it on the shelf and the middle road of leaving menthol untouched to unrestricted.
Mayor Skadron said what is the effectiveness of us banning it when our neighbors don’t. Mike said for
me banning everything is getting away from what you want to do. If it is the youth you are concerned
with it is just vaping. The other ban is just talking to adults.
Councilman Frisch said the reason I’ll be voting no on first reading is the same as what I’ve been talking
about. Focusing on youth is a long term reduction of tobacco use. 95% of the people who smoke started
at 16 or 17. As Mike said a lot of the reason the community go behind T21 and the tax was because we
had a discussion about youth. I think we have a lot of great discussion on youth not what legal product
might not be healthy for everyone. I think we should focus on vaping. Snowmass has put in some type of
plan. It would be nice if we could square up the municipalities and the county. Tobacco is one aspect to
being healthy but not the end of it.
Mayor Skadron said the reason I support it is the community plan talks about community health. They
are hopes and dreams of the community. One of the chapters talks about health and well being and
encouraging healthy lifestyles. I’m not looking to burden your small business but to honor the aspirations
for the community. What is a compelling argument is the proximity. It is encouraging to hear our fellow
political bodies are getting behind this. I’m open to the discussion on a partial ban. My preference would
to be aggressive.
Councilman Myrin said the other issue on this is the tax has a fixed dollar amt for tobacco and a % for the
other products. The % will increase with inflation the fixed dollar will not. The incentive over time will
be to switch from vaping to tobacco.
Councilman Frisch said for a couple years we are ok then it is fixed.
Mayor Skadron said there is potentially 3 council members desirous of an option that was not presented.
Will there be 2 ordinances coming back. Mr. True said I would suggest you do pass something tonight.
Whether this as written with direction to bring back language for a partial ban. You could vote to amend
it right now. I believe that would be harder to back up to a full ban if you chose.
Councilman Frisch said as much as I would like to get to the partial ban right away I don’t want to rewrite
it now at the table. I think I’ve voted no a few times on first reading. I will vote yes but be clear I want
the partial ban.
Mr. True said I want to make certain there is direction to prepare a partial ban ordinance.
Councilman Myrin and Frisch replied yes.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
13
Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #14, Series of 2019; seconded by Councilman
Hauenstein. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 14
(SERIES OF 2019)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
TITLE 13 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN – HEALTH AND QUALITY OF
ENVIRONMENT – TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 13.26 ENTITLED: RESTRICTIONS ON THE SALE
OF FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS, INCLUDING MENTHOL, IN TOBACCO PRODUCT
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #14, Series of 2019 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Myrin, yes;
Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #54, SERIES OF 2019 – 411 E. Hyman Avenue Extension of Vested Rights
Councilman Myrin moved to continue to June 24, 2019; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 2019 – 119 Neale Avenue, Transferable Development Rights
George Bnninghoff said I live at the corner of Neale and Gibson in Urban Blight in unit 2. My co owner
is Darleen Vehr. His has been before council several times. At the last conversation there was a title
report commissioned by David Fluente. I’m trying to build evidence as to why you should not act
tonight. He entered negotiations to buy the property. It fell apart on fraudulent negotiations by Shoaf.
The title report concluded the urban blight condo association owns this small strip of property. I had my
attorney go over the same title work. He concludes the title is vested in urban blight. David Harris
purchased the benedict cabin subdivision. He needed an easement to park his vehicle. Shoaf drafted it on
our property. I couldn’t give it to Harris. He entered negotiations with Shoaf that are not privy to me. I
concluded that the result is he accomplished moving the easement. Darleen Vehr signed a quick claim. I
spoke with her and she feels deceived by Mr. Shoaf. I went back to Ann Marshall, former owner of my
unit, and said did anyone approach you. I am asking you to not take action to underwrite the transfer of
TDRs. They will be an encumbrance of a property I clearly own. I ask that Mr. Shoaf clean his hands
and go back and acquire proof he owns this property. The survey he has is inclusive of my property. He
acknowledged he was deceiving the city for many years. I believe he built a cabin on the riparian rights.
I don’t think it was built for anything than to antagonize the residents of urban blight. I ask you to have
Mr. Shoaf prove that he owns the property. I would like to come back in late July or August.
Mr. True said I believe there are some points and he did present to me a letter from Lenny Oats. I
understand his points but do believe there may be other ways to resolve this. I do not think it is
appropriate to continue this to July. I think it is appropriate to continue this to next week and try to
resolve this. I think there is another way to resolve it. What his question is, is the encumbrance of the
disputed property.
To act in good faith of the settlement agreement I would try to resolve this next week.
Councilman Hauenstein asked does the settlement agreement have a timeline. Mr. True replied it does
not but I think we should move prudently to avoid abandoning the agreement. Mr. Benninghoff said it
does have a timeframe for Mr. Shoaf in regards to the demolition of the shed. I ask the timeline be
extended to have Lenny go through all the paperwork. Maybe Mr. Shoaf and I can find a way to resolve
it.
Councilman Myrin said on the demo permit, is there a way to extend issuing the TDRs until the demo has
occurred. Mr. True said I’m trying to address that with Mr. Shoaf and his attorney. Councilman Myrin
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
14
said I would support that. I don’t understand us giving someone something until they do what they
promise.
Councilman Frisch said we are under settlement agreement discussions. Is someone saying there is a
settlement agreement with inaccurate information that the city has been provided. Mr. True said we are
aware of the disputed property. I do believe the disputed property does not need to affect our ability to
close this. We are asking this be continued. You may end up not passing it next week. We need to have
the opportunity to follow up on some of the issues that have been raised.
Councilman Myrin asked can I ask for a continuance until the shed has been demolished. Councilman
Frisch said I had the exact discussion with Jim this week. I think it is important for us the community
gets our side of the bargain. Councilman Myrin said why don’t we continue it until the shed is
demolished. Mr. True said I think there is a better way to handle it. We advised the attorney for Shoaf
we were going to request a continuance. You have options, but I think we need some more time.
Councilman Myrin asked is having too much time a problem. Mr. True replied it could be considered a
breach. Ms. Garrow said Mr. Shoaf has applied for a demo permit and it is ready for pick up today. He
made the application he was required to do and paid the outstanding fees. Mr. True said under the
agreement he has a period of time to take the shed down.
Mayor Skadron said we are sensitive to your comments. We have no desire to have this move forward
until the shed has come down. Mr. True said we will address the shed and the issue of the disputed
property. I can’t promise we won’t continue it again. I would like to negotiate in good faith to see if we
can resolve all of the issues. I do not think we will resolve the underlying property but how the TDRs
affect the property.
Councilman Frisch moved to continue Ordinance #10, series of 2019 to May 20, 2019; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 2019 – Spring Supplemental Budget
Councilman Hauenstein left the meeting.
Ben Sachdeva, finance, said the numbers have changed a bit since first reading, going down. Capital
carry forward decreased by 3.5 million.
Councilman Myrin said page 479 mentions the space rented at obermeyer. What is the square footage.
Ms. Ott replied it is the same footprint the police department was utilizing. Councilman Myrin asked is it
smaller than what county com dev moved out of. Ms. Ott stated the 3rd floor is not empty but very full.
There is not a way to put the entire team without dividing them. Councilman Myrin said the 7,000 square
foot old art museum or the mill building. Ms. Ott replied I don’t believe so but am happy to take you on a
tour. I put them through a lot to try to avoid it. We are not in a place to provide reasonable office space.
Councilman Myrin asked about Mail Trail. It is in desperate need of landscaping. I know it took longer.
Trish Aragon, engineering, said the landscaping is part of the project. It will happen soon. Councilman
Myrin said thanks for the continuation of the scanning project. Ms. Garrow said we have a lot of paper
and it has taken longer than we expected. Councilman Myrin said I think it is worth the investment.
Councilwoman Mullins asked where is the reduction. Mr. Sachdeva replied in carry forward related to the
AHP projects. Some of the costs were moved in to 2018.
Mayor opened the public comment.
1. Toni Kronberg said I don’t see where the fitness center and outside pool have been included in
these numbers. The spark group has been working on it for a few years. Mayor Skadron said it
has not been part of our discussion and either has a rocket ship to the moon. Ms. Kronberg said
the decrease in transportation, is that because of the cancellation of the Lift contract. The
increases for electric, water, stormwater and parks and open spaces. Are they for a specific
projects. With the city offices the interest that will be incurred for the borrowing is 30 million.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
15
Where will that come from. Where are the funds for parking and housing mitigation. Mr.
Sachdeva said the details on the funds is all outlined in the packet and available on the website.
The interest will be serviced by the debt service fund. Mr. True asked did she ask any questions
you want answered by staff. Councilman Frisch said I would continue to reach out to staff.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #8, series of 2019; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion
carried.
ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2019 – Historic Preservation Benefits Code Amendments
Ms. Simon said this is follow up on some revisions from April 8. It will amend benefits available to
historic properties. The concern with potential gutting of homes and enlarging something already
oversized. We had a citizen ask if instead of prohibiting it to sterilize the floor area. We were interested
in the idea, but it would require filing a deed restriction. It would involve tracking and we are not as
excited about it than the original proposal. The second item is how to handle the floor area bonus. We
are trying to reduce the bonus so smaller lots have a smaller bonus. A suggestion was made to do a
sliding scale. Staffs recommendation is based on lot size. We wanted it to be more straight forward. In
the proposed scenario a 4500 sq ft lot would receive a 250 bonus the sliding scale would be 75 feet more.
We would like to stick with the staff recommendation. Third is growth management amendments. The
direction was no special treatment for historic properties. We have removed all of that from the code.
Councilman Frisch said I think the problem on the demo is people were tearing out a 2nd floor then
increasing the mass of the property. That was the concern not the technical aspects. Someone is trying to
say I want to take away the 2nd floor but not earn back the space. We said it seems fine to us. You can’t
figure out a simple way to do it. Ms. Simon said we can do it but it is complex with deed restrictions and
tracking. Councilwoman Mullins asked which is most effective in lesser mass. Ms. Simon replied
option 1. People will be less likely to underutilize a historic building. Either would be a disincentive of a
total gut. Councilman Frisch said option one doesn’t allow it to be taken out. Councilwoman Mullins
said the simpler ones are more effective and enforceable. Councilman Frisch asked does staff have a
problem with option 2 if it could be executed in a reasonable way. Ms. Garrow replied we do not regulate
interiors thought the HP process. We were excited by this idea. We have found any time you introduce
another set of paperwork there can be more likelihood of error. The simpler path tends to make the most
sense. If council is interested in the deed restriction we can add it. If it is too complicated we can come
back for amendments in the future.
Councilman Myrin said it makes sense. Executing it does not seem like too much of a challenge. I don t
think the quantity of these will be too many. Ms. Garrow replied we can set up a process. If you are
interested in this flexibility it is fine, but our recommendation is option 1. Councilwoman Mullins said I
support the simpler solution. The other is what is the applicant anticipating. The revisions are partly to
make it clearer to the applicant what they can and can’t do. Councilman Myrin asked does one say you
can’t take out the 2nd floor. Ms. Simon said it is related to floor area. You can’t remove more than half.
Councilman Myrin said then they can move the floor area. While it is harder to manage, option 2 results
in a smaller project. 2 will result is a smaller bubble if you aren’t able to use any of the FAR. Ms.
Garrow said both result in less. One is a prohibition, 2 is a deed restriction. Councilman Frisch said only
option 1 can be larger than the physical structure. My original conversation was the bubble doesn’t get
any larger. That is what I want to support. Neither options gets us there. Ms. Garrow said right now you
can make interior changes and magically find floor area and add it anywhere on the property. We are
adding a restriction that is more strict for historic resources than a non historic. If you are removing more
than half the floor area you can’t do it. Option 2 is if you are removing more than half you can but it will
permanently deed restrict it. We are trying to be more strict. We are adding something that is stricter for
historic than non. Councilman Myrin asked why is it too complicated to make option two more simple.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 13, 2019
16
Whatever you remove you don’t get credit for. If you take out 10, 49 or 60 it doesn’t credit. Ms. Simon
said we said you can go up to 49% and it is ok. I don’t think Bill was looking to make it more restrictive.
Councilman Frisch said that is a whole different discussion that Bert and I thought we were having. Ms.
Garrow said based off of all the feedback we are making it a lot better than it is today. Ms. Simon said
there use to be a volume calculation but we got rid of it. This is a step forward while trying to limit
relocation of floor area. Councilwoman Mullins said I think we made some significant changes. We can
always look at them again. I support the more incremental approach. There is a danger putting
everything in at once. Ms. Simon said we have design guidelines that don’t let you more than double the
mass. Councilman Frisch said what is the reason we should think about doing 2. It allows someone to
still get 50% larger. Ms. Simon said option 2 lets you go past the 50% demo but only recoup 50%.
Councilman Myrin said I’m leaning towards option 2. Ms. Simon said they would be better off selling a
TDR than sterilizing the floor area. Councilman Frisch said option 1 is simpler but we lose some
creativity for an owner as to how they want to configure their house.
Mayor Skadron said I have to stay with staff recommendation on this. Councilman Myrin said I’m
leaning towards option 2. Councilman Frisch said this was recommended for creativity. Mayor Skadron
said I’m not opposed to option 2 but sensitive to how we manage the program. Ms. Simon said I am
concerned with tightening this up too much. Councilman Frisch said that is where option 2 allows for
more flexibility. Ms. Simon said option 1 is able to accomplish much more than we are now while
allowing us to manage it. Councilman Myrin said in Bill’s email it said allow removable on an interior
floor as long as the floor area is not available. Ms. Simon said that is how we go to the deed restriction.
Councilwoman Mullins said one of the challenges is these properties are not redeveloped once. What I’m
hearing is it could get really messy trying to track these deed restrictions. Councilman Myrin said we
have a program where we take away square footage with the TDR program and manage that. We must
have some tracking program. Why can we track that and not this. Councilwoman Mullins said with
TDRs you are talking 250 sq ft increments and it is a fairly simple program. Ms. Garrow said the
tracking is in our office. We track TDRs, AH credits, demolition by parcel and building. We are creating
something else that is very complicated to track. Councilman Frisch said I’m fine with option one for
now.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public
comment.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 2019; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Myrin, no; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion
carried.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adjourn at 9:50 pm; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor,
motion carried.
Linda Manning
City Clerk