Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.201909241 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 24, 2019 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I.WORK SESSION I.A.Housing Development Outreach Update I.B.Pedestrian Mall Design Update 1 Page 1 of 10 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Project Manager, and Michelle Bonfils Thibeault, Capital Asset Project Manager THROUGH: Scott Miller, Public Works Director MEMO DATE: September 20, 2019 MEETING DATE: September 24, 2019 RE: Affordable Housing Development - Community Outreach Update REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This is an update to Council on the community outreach efforts for the proposed affordable housing developments Burlingame Ranch III, Lumberyard and Water Place II. Staff welcomes additional input and guidance from Council. BACKGROUND: On June 11, 2019, Council directed staff to move forward with community outreach for three affordable housing developments: Burlingame Ranch Phase III, the Lumberyard and Water Place II. On June 24, 2019, Council approved contracts for community outreach and design with 359 Design for the Burlingame Ranch Phase III and Water Place II projects and with DHM Design for the Lumberyard project. On August 20, 2019, staff provided an update to Council including a schedule of outreach activities planned for August and September as well as sample collateral materials being used for the outreach effort. During the August 20 work session, Council expressed a desire to see some additional public-facing outreach opportunities. In response, staff added the September 12 Luncheon at the Aspen Fire Station, additional days at the Aspen Saturday Market, and one additional day at the Basalt Sunday Market. DISCUSSION: The coordinated public outreach efforts of the three proposed projects has resulted in the City communications theme, Framing the Future, and accompanying logo. This branding effort has been used to unify the public outreach efforts for the three projects resulting in a maximization of community input. The outreach and design teams have engaged with over 30 stakeholder groups, over 400 online participants, and around 800 event participants. Stakeholder groups reached include Burlingame I and II residents, Burlingame HOA board members, ABC HOA management, Annie Mitchell HOA and owners, Aspen Airport master plan team, RFTA, CDOT, APCHA residents, property managers and maintenance staff, active citizens and community groups, senior community- members, Spanish-speaking community-members, the ACRA Board and membership, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, teachers and educators, youth, NextGen, AYPA board and members, APCHA board and staff, City Departments, Pitkin County staff, project neighbors, current and future APCHA housing owners and residents, and more. 2 Page 2 of 10 Calendar of events: A calendar of events to date for each project is shown below, where checkboxes indicate project participation/availability of information at that event and hig hlighting indicates a higher level of focus at that event for the highlighted project. Date - Event Burlingame Ranch III Water Place II The Lumberyard July – Sept Stakeholder Interviews    July 27 Aspen Saturday Market    July 31 Next Gen Commission    August 6 Popup at Aspen Ped Mall    August 7 Popup at Burlingame Ranch    August 8 Popup at Castle Ridge    August 14 Popup at the Lumberyard  August 14 Tent at Community Picnic    August 16 City Barbecue at Connor Park    August 20 City Council Work Session    August 21 CCLC Presentation    August 24 Aspen Saturday Market    August 27 ACRA Board Presentation    August 27 Burlingame Neighborhood Meeting  September 4 APCHA Board Presentation    September 7 Aspen Saturday Market    September 9 Basalt Sunday Market    September 11 Grassroots TV “City Matters”    September 12 Aspen Fire Station Luncheon    September 19 Open House Limelight Hotel    3 Page 3 of 10 There have also been many non-public-facing meetings with staff from various organizations: • Aug 7 – Site tour of Lumberyard area with City Parks Staff • Aug 10 – Annie Mitchell site visit and unit owner interviews • Aug 14 - Site tour with Burlingame Ranch Phase II property manager • Aug 28 & 30 - Water Place II City staff clicker session • Sept 4 - Lumberyard Tech. Advisory Committee (CoA, CDOT, RFTA, Pitkin Cty, Airport) • Sept 5 - Water Place II City staff clicker session • Sept 11 – Water Place II Meadowood HOA meeting • Sept 12 – Burlingame meeting with City Community Development staff • Sept 16 - Lumberyard meeting with City Engineering staff • Sept 17 - Lumberyard meeting with Builders FirstSource management • Sept 19 - Burlingame meeting with City Engineering staff • Sept 24 - Burlingame meeting with City Parks staff Throughout the process, people were also directed through PR and marketing efforts to go to www.aspencommunityvoice.com to provide input. Community input: It is difficult to cite exact statistics on how many people were reached. The data collection methods used provide the opportunity for people who participated in numerous ways to be counted numerous times. We also had two outreach teams collaborating across three projects, and despite our best efforts to coordinate every bit of effort, some of these statistics could be mixed across projects accidentally. For these reasons, the information provided below has been rounded down, and staff feels these quantities are reasonably accurate: • Total outreach events, meetings, interviews Over 50 • Event participants: Approximately 800 • Open comments recorded: Over 600 • Online surveys: Over 400 • Total Online participants: Over 400 The survey highlights shown below are not meant to provide a comprehensive data set, but staff found these items noteworthy. Burlingame Phase III Highlights of 90+ existing Burlingame residents survey results: • 50% of respondents have families of four or more • 65% of respondents need 3 or more bedrooms • Existing conditions at Burlingame ranked great by majority of respondents included circulation on-site and existing green spaces. • Top 3 building design items are: 1) Interiors, 2) Building noise, 3) Storag e areas • Top 3 construction priorities: 1) Quality, 2) Noise/dust mitigation, 3) Construction duration Water Place II Highlights of 160+ City staff survey results: • 24% single-person; 32% two-person household; 45% three or more people • 66% of respondents have moved one to five times in the last five years • 37% live in free market housing • 51% live in affordable housing through APCHA or COA • Current housing needs: 27% 1-bedroom, 29% 2-bedroom, 30% 3-bedroom 4 Page 4 of 10 • 79% of employees were interested in purchasing or renting a unit at the proposed Water Place II (60% purchase /19% rent) • Top 3 livability qualities most valued 1) decks/patios 2) more storage 3) increased natural light It is important to note that these survey results are specifically of potential residents of Water Place Phase II and do not include input from the neighboring Twin Ridge or 5 Trees HOAs, both of whom the first available meeting with is after this work session. General Housing Highlights of 90+ general survey results: • 36% of respondents are a single-person household • 46% live in Aspen • 55% live in free market housing • 83% are interested in an affordable housing unit if it were to become available • Of those interested, 66% want to purchase, 17% want to rent • Current housing needs 26% 1-bedroom, 31% 2-bedroom, 30% 3-bedroom • 85% of respondents support the City building more affordable housing • 76% supported Burlingame moving forward as approved ACRA Highlights of 60+ employer survey results: • 64% of business owners are interested in renting or purchasing a unit through APCHA • 73% need a 2- or 3-bedroom unit • 43% have worked or owned a business in Aspen for over 15 years • Respondents represent 11 different industries • 22% of respondents’ businesses or place of work currently own employee housing • Over 50% were interested in owning employee housing depending on cost and location • Many businesses are interested in partnering on the development of affordable housing • Cost and availability are two biggest obstacles to housing employees • 75% of respondents supported the City building affordable housing • 72% supported Burlingame moving forward as approved The PR and marketing tools used to promote this outreach effort included two press releases, numerous local newspaper ads and local radio spots, social media posts, “City Matters” on Grassroots TV and email list pushes including City of Aspen, ACRA, AYPA, Burlingame HOA and more. What we’ve heard - Burlingame Ranch Phase III: The proposed 2021 construction start for Burlingame Ranch Phase III would be best facilitated by submitting building permit applications by June 2020. This would require a complete set of construction documents by that time. To meet the proposed schedule, the current schematic design process needs to move forward incrementally between now and the next Council check-in which will be scheduled for late November or early December. 5 Page 5 of 10 The table below lists some of the most common public input topics which the team proposes to include in the designs as we continue to move forward toward the next Council check-in: Common Design Topics Burlingame Ranch Phase III Design Team Notes Utilize modular construction The prior phases are site-built construction. Cost savings may be achieved with factory- built modular construction, but even if there is no cost savings, sound and vibration improvements, construction quality improvements and decreased on-site construction impacts make factory-built modular construction highly beneficial. Increase unit-to-unit sound insulation In the prior phase, high STC and IIC wall and ceiling assemblies were designed, but were still limited by site-built construction. This will be an inherent improvement with factory-built modular construction due to separate floor and ceiling framing and separate demising wall framing that is inherent in factory-built modular construction. Unit layout improvements In order to facilitate meeting the design parameters for modular construction, there are no major modifications to the units needed. The design team is instead making a few slight modifications where suggestions have been made for small matters related to day-to-day livability. Simplify mechanical systems The prior phase utilized natural gas fueled high-efficiency boilers for both hot water and space heating. This dual-purposing of the boilers ended up causing complexities which were initially unforeseen. The team is examining opportunities for simplified, high- efficiency, all-electric mechanical systems. Use residential fire alarm systems, not commercial which are more costly to maintain Simplified fire alarm systems can be explored to the extent allowed by code. Increase storage by moving “water entry” mechanical rooms out of space which could be used as in-unit storage. Some of the buildings in the prior phase have “water entry closets” with the main water meter for each building located within the building envelope and using up valuable floor area which was otherwise part of a larger storage closet in some of the units. It will be highly beneficial to move these “water entry closets” outside the building envelope so they are no longer located above livable area thus reducing the risk of damage from flooding 6 Page 6 of 10 and adding back the otherwise lost storage in the affected units. Add storage closet near entry of lower level units In the prior phase, the lower level units do not have a coat/storage closet near the entry. The door can be moved slightly to improve circulation and provide a storage opportunity. Add linen closet/storage There is an opportunity to add a linen closet by rearranging the storage space in the hallway outside the bathroom door. Provide a larger kitchen sink 2-bowl undermount sink is proposed. Provide two sinks in the bathroom vanity In the prior phase, one sink was provided, but the vanity had space to accommodate a second sink. Provide better quality finishes In the prior phase, the “upgrade package” was included in about half of the units. This should be the baseline finish package in the next phase. Provide better quality appliances In the prior phase, the “upgrade package” was included in about half of the units. This should be the baseline finish package in the next phase. Provide more in-ceiling overhead lighting In the prior phase, some ceiling light fixtures were included, but in some of the rooms, a switched plug was provided for use of lamps in lieu of in-ceiling lighting. More in-ceiling lighting can be provided. Provide ceiling fan with light In the prior phase, a switched junction box was provided for owner-installed ceiling fans. The fixtures can be added. Avoid drip-through balconies In the prior phase, the stacked balconies were designed with “drip-through” drainage and can instead be designed to capture and divert runoff to be less intrusive to areas below. Provide vertical railing balusters, not horizontal which allow children to climb We understand the majority of this concern comes from the 4” square mesh which was used on the upper level balcony railings which can be replaced as requested. Timber look and feel is preferred to tube steel The prior phase used wood timbers and glu- laminated beams at the exterior of the buildings. The team proposed to replace with steel, but there is a desire to maintain the look and feel of wood. The team is looking at providing some more articulated ideas for providing the functionality of steel with a texture that works with the existing style. Provide expanded patio space Cobble stone areas around patios can be replaced with pavers under covered decks to 7 Page 7 of 10 increase usable patio space adjacent to unit entries. Increase privacy at unit entries, decks, patios In the prior phase, not much screening was provided at the unit entries and at adjacent patio areas. Wing walls and screening can be strategically added to provide an increased sense of privacy between these areas. More bike storage Seek opportunities to provide additional bike storage including potential for more covered bike storage. Improved integration of grading, stormwater devices and planting design Reduce soggy lawn areas, exposed inlets and other box covers, abrupt grade transitions that are difficult to maintain, stormwater to supplement and reduce need for irrigation, and other improvements. Use native landscape for steeper areas or areas that are otherwise more difficult to mow Landscape variation will be considered to provide appropriate plantings for ease of maintenance and improved hierarchy of plantings. Lawns should be flat for active use Further opportunities to create flat lawn areas can be sought and grade transitions can be softened. Better anticipate site and landscape maintenance requirements, including irrigation and planting Simplify irrigation system details and refine plant palette to reduce amount of non-native species and species that require regular maintenance or are considered nuisances. Traffic-calming such as raised, shortened crosswalks In the prior phase, the crosswalks are painted on the pavement. The possibility of raised crosswalks or speed humps can be explored with City Engineering. Carport parking columns interfere with opening car doors Make columns narrower. What we’ve heard – Lumberyard: The following are themes/topics commonly invoked by stakeholders, members of the public, and/or technical advisors related to upcoming program alternatives development: Housing Type/Population Served • Provide a variety of unit types and densities serving a mix of demographics. • Provide higher density (particularly when compared to Burlingame Ranch). • The contextual scale (Deer Hill, highway corridor) make this site appropriate for larger buildings/higher density than may be appropriate elsewhere. • Fairly even split amongst respondents in preference for rental or for-sale units. • If both rental and for-sale are offered, separate those unit types. • There is a broad need for retiree / aging population housing. 8 Page 8 of 10 • Consider incentivizing people to downsize units as their families change over time. • A broad need for housing of all types was clear in public engagement; when pressed for what’s most appropriate at the Lumberyard site, a general trend emerged towards a variety of housing with a focus on 1-2 bedroom units. For example, Burlingame Ranch serves families; Lumberyard could address a different demographic need. • A majority of Annie Mitchell owners like their location, unit, and neighborhood. The format of Annie Mitchell is consistent with a number of trends heard during the process (unit type, size, building design, and parking). • Significant advocacy for a dog-friendly development. • Concerns about future cost of HOA dues. Lumberyard Operations • A majority of contractors polled defended the need for a contractor-focused building supply operation in Aspen. Many use it daily. • Average homeowner does not frequent the existing building supply operation. • Most contractors commute from downvalley of the project site. • About 40% of the existing business is in providing materials to Snowmass Village / Brush Creek area. • The response from the general public about the need for the building supply operation varied broadly. When asked to prioritize housing or building supply, a majority of the general public prioritized housing. • Most general public respondents indicated that a full-service operation (requiring large equipment and tractor-trailer circulation) is not compatible with family-friendly housing. • A smaller-format building supply operation may be feasible at 2 or 3 acres. • Concerns: Increased construction costs, traffic and emissions if building supplies are no longer available in Aspen. Mixed-use Opportunities • ABC residents, employees working in the ABC, and potential housing applicants indicated a need for additional neighborhood commercial space in response to the growing residential population in the area. No current options for dinner, drinks, etc. Existing restaurants (breakfast and lunch) are well-liked and Roxy’s fills a need for convenient groceries. • Willits in Basalt was often cited as an example of good mixed-use development. • Child care is a broad need in the community and may be appropriate at this site. • Concern: Existing neighborhood commercial struggles; don’t compete. Transportation: Overall • Members of the public, stakeholders, and technical advisors have identified the existing challenges in traffic and circulation at the ABC at-large. • Current projects in planning, including CMC, AFPD, Airport, and the Lumberyard are cited as cause for concern for future traffic patterns and parking. • Traffic analysis will need to include projections for other future developments. • Existing trail connectivity is excellent, with Annie Mitchell and ABC trails connecting to downtown, and recreational trails connecting to the Roaring Fork River and Rio Grande Trail. 9 Page 9 of 10 • Access to public transit is good, with proximity to up- and downvalley BRT stations (about 1/4 mile to downvalley station and 1/3 mile to upvalley station). • Numerous comments and requests for an ABC-to-downtown-specific bus route. • This process has increased awareness of the 2012 CDOT Airport Area Access Control Plan, which includes a signalized intersection at the Lumberyard and future Airport access and a frontage road between ABC and Lumberyard. • The existing intersection currently functions for four-way circulation; turning left (upvalley) during peak traffic periods is difficult. Transportation: Personal Vehicles • Parking is challenging at ABC; don’t export a parking problem to ABC by under-parking Lumberyard. • Consider parking/storage of ‘toys.’ • Covered parking and attached storage is desirable. • Higher density may require underground parking. • The grade change at the back of the site is conducive to tuck-under parking. Transportation: Transit & Trails • Maintain existing and accommodate future possible local and regional trails. • Provide a grade-separated crossing of the ABC trail at the Lumberyard site entry. • Accommodate WE-cycle; good site for future E-bike share. Parks and Open Space • There is not a public park in the ABC. Format of public park space within Lumberyard will need to respond to the population served by the development. • Small outdoor gathering and communal spaces are important in building a sense of neighborhood. • Access to green space associated with the development is important. • Managing access restrictions to Deer Hill is important. • The space behind the lumber yard property is a de-facto off leash area. If dogs are allowed, a dog park is desirable. Noise and Air Quality • Mitigating noise through landform, site design, and building design is important. • Expectations: Some identified noise as a threshold problem for the ABC at-large; more broadly the public acknowledged the noise and conceded it as a reality of living at the ABC. • The team did not hear comments from employees or residents of the ABC or Annie Mitchell related to poor air quality. 10 Page 10 of 10 What we’ve heard – Water Place Phase II: Feedback from an initial Meadowood HOA board meeting and individual conversations wit h residents at Twin Ridge find common concerns related to proximity of development to existing houses, traffic impacts, and concerns regarding drainage from the site. Staff expects to learn more as the process continues to move forward. Additional information will be provided to for Council at the next work session check-in which will be scheduled for late November or early December. PROPOSED NEXT STEPS: Burlingame Ranch Phase III: Continue moving forward with the current schematic design process including the items noted in the table above. Schedule next check-in with Council as noted in late November or early December. Lumberyard: The project team will be developing master plan/program alternatives in October. These alternatives will explore three primary land use scenarios, including (1) all affordable housing, (2) mixed-use commercial and housing, and (3) building supply operation and housing. Each land use scenario may include alternatives within the land use components (eg, format and arrangement of housing units). The land use scenarios will be vetted with stakeholders and the Technical Advisory Committee and shared for feedback in a public open house(s). Refined land use scenarios and public outreach summary will be presented to Council in late November or early December. Water Place Phase II: Continue to meet with neighboring HOAs, begin developing draft programs (i.e. number and type of units) that reflect the City’s strategic needs as an employer regarding housing, public input, and neighbor comments. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the next steps as noted above and welcomes additional input and guidance from Council. BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: TBD – Staff will be able to provide budget information later in the process. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: N/A 11 Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM:Michelle Bonfils Thibeault, Project Manager Darla Callaway, Design Workshop, Associate THRU:Jeff Pendarvis, Interim Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO:September 18, 2019 MEETING DATE:September 24, 2019 RE:Aspen Pedestrian Mall Project –Refined Conceptual design REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This is an update to Council on the Pedestrian Mall Project’s current status and discussion of next steps. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council previously approved the Phase 1 & 2 Contract for Design Workshop on November 14, 2016 (resolution 166-2016). Phase 1 of the project included documenting inventory of the mall’s many components (i.e. historical aspects, trees, grading, utilities) and analysis of that inventory.Public outreach and information efforts were launched in Phase 1. Phase 2 was Conceptual Planning for restoration of the aging mall inventory and rigorous community outreach. On November 11, 2017 the team presented the three concepts and received comments and incorporated the comments into this refined conceptual design. Both Phase 1 and 2 are well documented on the project website, www.AspenPedestrianMall.com On March 20, 2018 the preferred alternative was presented to Council and the team received direction and budget authority in the 2019 budget to take the preferred alternative to 90% construction documentation. DISCUSSION AND HISTORY: The Aspen Pedestrian Mall surface is more than forty years old, and some of the underground infrastructure has not been upgraded in sixty years. Not only are the bricks significantly deteriorating, but the uneven surface is not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations. Similarly, most of the trees along the mall are reaching maturity, and their size and confined growing space creates challenges for their health. The goals of the Pedestrian Mall Redevelopment Project are to: Maintain historical integrity and character of the Malls while upgrading infrastructure and access. Explore innovative ways to improve the storm water infrastructure systems to further protect the Roaring Fork watershed. Replace aging utilities to serve customer needs for the next fifty years. Retain the Malls as an urban park with a strong forestry program that promotes best practices for the continued health of the urban forest. Increase mall accessibility to meet modern code. 12 Page 2 of 3 Engage the public and business owners to explore the best ways to enhance the Mall experience. Guide pending private development along the mall to allow for future grading improvements, meet ADA compliance, stormwater drainage improvements,and other identified infrastructure service needs. Aspen Pedestrian Mall Redevelopment Project includes Hyman, Mill, Cooper and Galena streets. Significant utility upgrades are necessary to anticipate the next fifty years of service demands in downtown Aspen. The project’s scope emphasizes achieving those utility upgrades while preserving the underlying character, historic integrity, and businesses within the Mall for future generations. The project was envisioned to be implemented in five phases, each involving public input (see AspenPedestrianMall.com). On September 9, 2019, the team received direction from the Manager’s office to give the current Council an update with Phase 3 revised (starting with Schematic Design and addressing final design documents and construction documents at a later date). Revising the current Phase 3 to Schematic Design documents only, will reduce the current financial commitment from $3,881,548 to approximately $1,000,000 as well as allow thorough and comprehensive discussion about this complex project. Schematic design will provide information on construction phasing and costs allowing both the citizens and City Council to understand and prioritize the many aspects of this project. Schematic design documents will similarly guide the City in developing a holistic approach and criteria to partner with anticipated private development projects along the malls. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The spending authority of $1,135,530 was approved in 2016 for Phases I & 2 of which $942,282 was spent. The spending authority of an additional $3,688,300 was approved in 2019 for Phase 3. Appropriation Obligated Budget Year Amount Amount Balance 2016 $ 1,135,530 $ (72,212)$ 1,063,318 2017 $ (698,544)$ (698,544) 2018 $ (142,256)$ (142,256) 2019 $ 3,688,300 $ (29,270)$ 3,659,030 $ 4,823,830 $ (942,282)$ 3,881,548 The project funding is through the following sources: 2016 2019 Funding Sources Fund Cost Center % Allocation Amount Amount Total Project Budget AMP (000)000 119 26.50%$300,915 $977,400 $1,278,315 Parks (100)100 572 35.50%$403,113 $1,309,347 $1,712,460 Stormwater (160)160 328 9.50%$107,875 $350,389 $458,264 Water (421)421 322 28.50%$323,626 $1,051,166 $1,374,792 Total 100.00%$1,135,530 $3,688,300 $4,823,830 13 Page 3 of 3 The 2019 allocated budget of $3,881,548 will be reduced to approximately $1,000,000 for schematic design only with the opportunity to pursue final design documents and construction documents later. RECOMMENDED ACTION:Discussion and approval from Council to bring the appropriate contracts to Council on consent to initiate Schematic Design. CITY MANGER COMMENTS:___________ ATTACHMENTS: 14