HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20130625
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
June 25, 2013
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
MEETING AGENDA
I. Lodging Study Update
June 25, 2013 Council Work Session – Lodging
Page 1 of 5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: Tuesday, June 25, 4:00pm Council Chambers
RE: Lodging Study Update
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests Council direction for next steps related to Council’s
lodging goal, including what area of lodging should be addressed first and what potential policy
measures Council is interested in further exploring. A matrix of potential policy options Council
could pursue is attached as Exhibit A. Staff does not expect to get through the entire matrix in
one meeting, but would like feedback from City Council on potential direction that implements
Council’s goals related to lodging. Specific questions for Council are in bold throughout the
memo. A follow up work session is scheduled for July 15th to continue the conversation.
BACKGROUND: One of City Council’s Top Ten Goals is to “Complete a study on Lodging
that looks at the adequacy of lodging options in Aspen and suggested areas for improvement.”
Staff has checked in with City Council a number of times over the last year to ensure work is on
track. Based on these check-ins, three (3) main goals have emerged around this topic:
1. Encourage upgrades and renovations to Aspen’s existing lodges.
2. Given that 40% of our short-term rental bed base in in condominiums and condominium-
hotels, support ways to enable upgrades and reinvestment in these units while ensuring
they remain in the short-term rental pool.
3. Examine ways the City can make it easier for new lodge product to be developed in
Aspen.
Question for Council: Does City Council continue to support these general goals?
A great deal of background work has been completed to better understand Aspen’s existing
inventory and the different opportunities and challenges related to bolstering the short-term
rental base. Exhibit B provides a summary of the various studies and reports completed.
Complete reports are available online at: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-
Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Long-Range-Planning/. Staff can answer any questions
regarding the work to date at the work session.
Throughout the process, staff has worked with local lodging and short-term rental stakeholders to
understand the opportunities and challenges they experience, and to get their feedback on what
role the City could play in bolstering the bed base. The most recent outreach occurred over a
series of focus group meetings June 17 – 19.
P1
I.
June 25, 2013 Council Work Session – Lodging
Page 2 of 5
KEY FINDINGS: Based on the extensive background reasearch and outreach with the lodging
community, 5 key findings have emerged.
1. While Aspen consistently rates well with visitors in terms of available activities, family
appeal, scenic beauty, and outdoor recreation experiences, the quality and diversity of
lodging is rated fairly low. Combined with increased competition from other resorts, this
could make Aspen a less-desirable destination for future generations.
2. 40% of Aspen’s short-term bed base is located in free-market residential condominium
units. Many of these units are older and have basic infrastructure obstacles, including
low ceilings, that will impact their ability to remain in the short-term rental pool.
Enabling upgrades to these units will help ensure these remain a vital aspect of Aspen’s
bed base. Leasing agents have noted a trend of seeing these units removed from the
short-term inventory after substantial renovation. Staff believes it is critical that any
incentive program for condominium upgrades include some assurances that units will
remain in the short-term rental pool.
o Does Council support incentives to enable upgrades and/or expansions to
short-term condominium units?
o Does Council agree that any program enabling upgrades of condominium
units should include some requirements for maintaining these units in the
short-term rental pool?
3. Aspen’s competitor resorts have approved many new lodging products over the past 5
years, making them more attractive destinations. While Aspen cannot control what other
communities do, this competition represents a real threat to Aspen’s long-term viability
as a destination. Staff believes implementing incentives for upgrading existing lodges to
better meet visitor demands, as well as incentives for new lodges is important to combat
this trend.
o Does Council support exploring incentives for upgrading and refurbishing
existing lodges? Would Council support lower permitting fees and review
process requirements as part of incentives for existing lodge refurbishment?
o Does Council support exploring incentives for new lodges? Would Council
support policies that lower mitigation requirements, or increase allowed
heights and density as part of incentives for new lodges?
4. More families travel to Aspen, resulting in increased demand for units with multiple
bedrooms, common areas, and flexible unit configurations (i.e. a unit can be rented as a 1
bedroom or 2-3 bedroom). Bathrooms in existing short-term accommodations are cited
as an area where existing stock fails to meet visitor demand (i.e. visitors expect a separate
bath and shower, while many existing units only contain a shower or a combined
tub/shower).
o Does Council support more flexible unit configurations to help meet this
demand?
o Is Council interested in exploring incentives to enable existing lodge and
short-term condominium product upgrading to create larger units (i.e. more
bedrooms, larger bathrooms, common area, etc)?
P2
I.
June 25, 2013 Council Work Session – Lodging
Page 3 of 5
5. Aspen’s land use and building permit review processes can be unpredictable, lengthy, and
costly. This can detract an existing property from upgrading or remodeling, and can
detract developers from proposing new lodges. Countering this would minimize
Council’s role in reviewing the look and feel of lodging development.
o Does Council support changes to the review processes to enable more
efficient and timely reviews and decisions for lodging and short -term
condominium projects?
POTENTIAL NEW LODGING POLICIES: Based on the work to date, staff has prepared a
matrix of potential lodging policies that implement the goals listed above. These range from
minor policy changes that could be done relatively quickly or require minimal staff work, to
significant policy changes that will require significant staff or financial resources or rely on
working with outside groups. The matrix has been divided into the following policy areas:
Land Use and Building Permit
Process
New Incentive Programs
Physical/Zoning
Transportation
Parking
Affordable Housing
Financing/Taxes
Planning, Building, and Engineering
Fees
Improvement District
Improvement agreements
Data Tracking
Other
The intent of this matrix is to enable Council to pick different policies to implement. Council
may be interested in pursuing minor changes in one area, major or significant changes in another,
or not pursuing any changes in an area. Staff does not endorse moving forward with every item
included on the matrix, but wanted to provide a broad spectrum of options for City Council to
consider as this goal moves forward. Council may want to consider the following questions to
facilitate review of the matrix.
Are there certain policy areas Council is most interested in pursuing?
Is there a short-term bed-base segment (condominiums, existing lodges, new lodges)
City Council is most interested in pursuing first?
Should the same set of policy changes be made for traditional lodges and
condominiums?
Is Council comfortable pursuing significant changes listed, given that these will
likely take significant staff time and financial resources away from other goals and
work program items?
COMMENTS FROM LODGING STAKEHOLDERS: Staff held four small group sessions
June 17 – 19 with many of Aspen’s lodging stakeholders. They provided some general
comments about the policies that, if implemented together, would enable upgrades to existing
lodges, upgrades to condominium units, and creation of new lodge product.
In general the lodge focus groups recommended moving forward with policies focused on
existing lodges and short-term condominiums. A few policy areas were identified as potential
P3
I.
June 25, 2013 Council Work Session – Lodging
Page 4 of 5
top priorities that would make the most impact in bolstering Aspen’s bed base. City Council
may want to consider these highlights during review of the attached matrix.
Process: There were a number of comments related to the cost, length, and unpredictability of
the land use and building permit review processes. This was an area identified by all groups as
one that must be updated if the City is serious about bolstering the bedbase. Some specific
policies suggested by the focus groups included:
Allow reviews for lodges ad short-term condominiums, especially upgrades to existing
projects, to be consolidated to minimize the number of review bodies and processes.
Amend the PUD/SPA process so conceptual review is more meaningful. (Note, staff has
proposed this change as a code amendment that is being presented to City Council at the
regular June 24th meeting)
Establish timelines for board and administrative reviews to help streamline review times.
Amend the growth management system to either significantly increase the number of
lodge allotments available each year, or remove the lodge allotment cap all together.
Limit the scope of discussion during a land use review.
New Incentive Programs: Each group encouraged the City to rethink how requirements for
lodges are administered, and encouraged the City to move toward a system of incentives rather
than requirements. Some ideas for new incentive programs included:
Create a “package” remodel/upgrade program for existing lodges and short-term
condominiums for a specific time period. If a property upgrades to include specific ADA
and/or energy upgrades, review fees would be reduced or waived and the project would
move to the front of the review line.
Incentivize individual condominium upgrades by allowing certain expansions (square
footage, density, height, etc) in exchange for agreement to be in short-term rental pool for
a certain period of time.
Change the land use review process for existing lodge remodels and expansions that
allows each individual property to pick a few of the city’s current mitigation
requirements (i.e. parking, transportation, affordable housing, public amenity space, etc)
to meet, rather than requiring each project to mitigate everything. Each project is
different, so allowing lodges to meet city requirements that also contribute to their
success as a lodge was seen as a win-win.
Create a Lodge Ombudsman position that assists and guides lodges and condominiums
through city land use and building permit processes. This person would assist properties
in understanding requirements and fees, and could propose potential process changes
based on their work with the short-term rental community.
Physical/Zoning: There were a number of comments focused on the importance of enabling
minor expansions of existing lodges and short-term condominiums in order to ensure those units
remain viable visitor accommodations. In addition, the groups indicated the need to amend
zoning to allow for more height and density if the City is serious about wanting to attract new
lodge products. Some specific comments included:
Because most older lodges and short-term condominiums do not conform to their
underlying zone district, either allow certain expansions of those properties by right, or
P4
I.
June 25, 2013 Council Work Session – Lodging
Page 5 of 5
amend their zoning to establish that their existing physical structure is permitted. This
would make future remodels, upgrades, and expansions.
Amend zone district dimensions to allow increased density, heights, floor area, etc, for all
lodge projects, particularly for properties located on the mountain where higher heights
and density is more easily blended into the surroundings.
NEXT STEPS: Based on the priorities identified by Council, staff will return on July 15th to
present specific recommendations on programs and policies to implement, including the amount
of time and cost associated with each.
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A: Potential Lodging Policy Change Matrix
EXHIBIT B: Summary of background work completed
P5
I.
Exhibit A - Potential Lodging Policy Change Matrix
1 of 2
Minor Change Moderate Change Major Change Significant Change
Remove lodge development from GMQS Competition.Allow lodge and short-term condominium projects to consolidate all
reviews (Design, GMQS, PUD, Subdivision, etc).
Amend code to enable administrative review of lodge / short-term
condominium projects, with design continuing to be reviewed by P&Z/HPC.
Amend code to enable administrative review of lodge / short-term
condominium projects.
Increase available lodge allotments within GMQS.Allow combined HPC and Design Conceptual and Final reviews for lodge
projects.
Amend PUD/SPA review processes to make Conceptual binding, and final
review an administrative review to ensure compliance with the Conceptual
approval.
Establish a Redevelopment Authority focused on lodge or short-term
condominium projects.
Amend GMQS scoring system to give more points for new or
upgraded lodge / short-term condominium projects.
Update and simplify the Timeshare regulations, particularly as it related to
division of ownership interests.
Amend GMQS to account for free-market condominium units that are rented
on a short-term basis (i.e. a new project receives FM or Lodge allotments
based on the % in the rental pool).
Streamline and coordinate Engineering and Community Development
Department reviews.
Amend GMQS review for lodges to be based on a performance
standard. If a lodge meets the performance standards, the
allotments are administrative.
Amend administrative process (ex: easement/plat changes or minor land
use amendments) to require city review within a certain timeframe in an
effort to speed the process.
Conduct a Lodging Master Plan that indicates locational priorities for new
lodge or condominium product or existing product upgrades.
Establish timeframes for all review processes. If a recommending board
does not review within a certain timeframe, the project is automatically
forwarded on to the decision making body.
Increase the number of allotments available for condominium units
that commit to being rented on a short-term basis.
Move lodge and short-term condominium projects to the front of the
building permit review line.
Conduct a vision or master plan process for a new lodge at the base of Lift
1A.
Establish a staff assistance program where city staff from Building,
Engineering, etc, evaluate existing lodges for needed ADA, energy,
etc upgrades. If non-compliance with certain city standards is
found, do not require compliance unless it is a life/safety issue.
Establish a system allowing project-wide short-term condominium
upgrades where certain fees are waived, project is moved to the head of the
review line, etc, if the condominium building upgrades to meet accessibility
standards, adds elevators, upgrades energy systems, etc. System of fee
reductions and streamlined review time could be in effect for a certain
period of time. (note, incentivizing building energy uypgrades could help
the city meet energy and carbon goals).
Incentivize individual condominium upgrades by allowing certain expansions
(square footage, density, height, etc) in exchange for agreement to be in short-
term rental pool for a certain period of time.
Potentially create a grant program, where a lodge looking to upgrade based
on the Lodging Assistance Coordinator's recommendations receives a grant
to implement the changes.
Potentially exempt a lodge from any required land use review process if they
are implementing recommendations from the Lodging Assistance
Coordinator.
Create a Lodge Ombudsman position that assists and guides lodges and
condominiums through city land use and permit processes. This person
would assist properties in understanding requirements and fees, and could
propose potential process changes based on their work with the short-term
rental community.
Create a list of items an existing lodge may choose to do as part of an
expansion or upgrade (housing mitigation, traffic mitigation, adding parking,
etc), and allow that lodge to pick the 2 or 3 that make the most sense for
them to do, rather than requiring every lodge do everything/provide
mitigation for everything.
Reduce required parking ratios for lodging and short-term
condominium projects.
Allow three stories in CC and C-1 zone district for lodge (and possibly
associated commercial) projects on North and South sides of street.
Amend zone district dimensions to allow increased density, heights, floor
area, etc, for lodge projects.Annex areas for lodging development.
Amend zone districts to allow upgrades and expansions to existing
condominiums or hybrid lodge projects that are rented on a short-term
basis.
Amend Multi-Family replacement requirements for properties in the lodge
zone district that will be rented on a short-term basis.Rezone areas for lodging development.
Increase the allowed dimensions (height, density, floor area, etc) for short-
term condominium projects
Amend non-conformities portion of the code to allow certain expansions by
right.
Amend code to make all existing lodges conforming, regardless of the
underlying zoning.
Change zoning of areas located on Aspen Mountain to allow for greater
heights and density.
Transportation
Provide discounted RFTA passes, car share memberships, we-cycle
memberships, etc to lodges and hybrid lodge projects for their guests to
utilize while in Aspen
Provide free RFTA passes, car share memberships, we-cycle memberships,
etc to lodges and hybrid lodge projects for their guests to utilize while in
Aspen.
Establish shared transit/shuttle services between lodges and short-term
condominium projects.
Expand street parking guest pass program for lodges and establish
education/information packet for lodges.
Allow all lodges to maintain existing parking spaces located in the right of
way.Allow new parking in the right of way for lodges.
Limit the amount of parking special events can use in front or
lodges.
Increase parking for short-term condominiums and lodges, either on-site or
on city right-of-way.
Level of Policy ChangePotential Measures
Parking
New Incentive
Programs
Hire a Lodging Assistance Coordinator that can evaluate and assist lodges
in evaluating their facilities, marketing strategy, etc, and provide an
overview of what upgrades or changes would assist the lodge's long-term
viability and sustainability.
Physical/Zoning
Land Use and Building
Permit Process
P6
I.
Exhibit A - Potential Lodging Policy Change Matrix
2 of 2
Minor Change Moderate Change Major Change Significant Change
Reduce affordable housing mitigation requirements for new or upgraded
lodge / short-term condominium projects.
Waive all affordable housing mitigation requirements for upgraded lodge /
short-term condominium projects.
Waive all affordable housing mitigation requirements for new or
upgraded lodge / short-term condominium projects.
Allow existing lodge expansions/upgrade or new lodges to provide housing
mitigation off-site or out of town by right, rather than requiring an
additional review process.
Allow existing lodge expansions/upgrades or new lodges to prove their
project will require affordable housing mitigation, rather than automatically
requiring it. Could be done through an audit system.
Establish system that gives priority to the seasonal affordable housing
rental pool to lodge employees.
Only require affordable housing for a lodge or short-term condominium's
direct employee needs. The City builds affordable housing units for lodges.
Use the City's bonding authority to support infrastructure upgrades.
Establish a new city tax or earmark existing tax revenues to assist lodges
with upgrades. A lodge could apply for the assistance through a grant
program.
Discount or waive city taxes for lodges or short-term rentals.
Establish city-based financing for upgrades to existing/new lodges and
short-term condominium projects.
Fees
Planning Reduce fees for lodge / short-term condominium projects.Waive certain planning fees (i.e. all administrative review fees or all board
fees based on process changes).
Waive certain planning fees (i.e. all administrative review fees or all board
fees).
Waive all planning review fees for lodge/short-term condominium
projects.
Reduce fees for lodge / short-term condominium projects.Waive certain building and zoning fees.Waive certain building and zoning fees (higher percentage than "moderate
change").
Waive all building and zoning review fees for lodge/short-term
condominium projects.
Waive certain building and zoning fees for condominium upgrades if those
units are in the short-term rental pool.
Reduce engineering review fees for lodge / short-term condominium
projects.Waive certain engineering fees.Waive certain engineering fees (higher percentage than "moderate change").Waive all engineering review fees for lodge/short-term condominium
projects.
Waive certain engineering fees for condominium upgrades if those units are
in the short-term rental pool.
Improvement District
(addressing utility
upgrades, sidewalks,
stormwater
infrastructure, ADA
upgrades, etc)
Require lodge development to meet codes related to physical
upgrades, but do not require any payments to maintain the systems.The City completes all system-wide improvements for lodges.Establish city-wide tax to fund system improvements.
Improvement
Agreement
(addressing public
improvements)
City performs improvements in the right-of-way for "small lodges" (lodges
with 60 or fewer rooms and who self-identified as Economy/Moderate as
part of City's 2012 lodge inventory) with the lodge entering into an
agreement requiring reimbursement should the property use be changed from
"small lodge." Potentially enable a tiered payback system based on the
timeframe since the City performed improvements - the longer the lodge
remained in the short-term bedbase, the less they have to pay back.
City performs improvements in the right-of-way for all lodges with the
lodge entering into an agreement requiring reimbursement should the
property use be changed.
Track Timeshare occupancy.Assist coordination of special events and package deals with ACRA,
SkiCo, SAS, Aspen Institute, etc.Increase the City's marketing budget in an effort to attract additional visitors.Work with the State to amend property tax regulations related to lodges
(TABOR).
Develop a formal lodging audit/tracking of occupancy, room rates,
marketing techniques, etc. This could be coordinated with local
lodge groups/SAS.
Create incentives for condominium associations to remove short-term rental
restrictions from their covenants.
Establish a numerical goal of the number of new lodge and/or condominium
units that should be created in the next 5-10 years.
Work with County, SAS, and others to sustain and increase airline service
to Aspen.
Coordinate lodge booking systems (note, not a City measure, but the City
may wish to assist lodges and SAS in establishing a computer system that
enables all the different booking engines to "talk" to one another).
Assist lodging community in establishing a single organization or entity that
represents their needs.
Potential Measures Level of Policy Change
Other
Affordable Housing
Financing/Taxes
Building/Zoning
Engineering
P7
I.
6.25.2013 Lodging Work Session – Exhibit B
Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT B – SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS WORK TO DATE
ASPEN’S LODGING SECTOR: LODGING DEMAND AND LODGING ECONOMICS: This report,
released in June 2013, provides a big picture overview of the types of product most in demand by
Aspen visitors, updates occupancy and rate information, and includes an EPS report on the
economics of lodging development.
Based on visitor survey data from ACRA, and interviews with booking agents at Stay Aspen
Snowmass and Ski.com, there are more families visiting, flexible unit configurations and
condominium-style units are increasingly in demand, new lodging product in competitor resorts
impact Aspen’s competitiveness, and the difficulty (remoteness) of reaching Aspen impacts who
visits.
Since 2006, there has been a stead y increase in the number of families visiting, which is likely
related to the increased interest in condominium-style units with kitchens and a common gathering
area.
Aspen remains a strong destination, but investment by other mountain resorts in new lodge product
coupled with the relative difficulty and expense to reach Aspen, will impact Aspen’s ability to
attract guest in the future. In addition, visitors indicate they are happy with the relative quality of
lodging, though ratings related to the upkeep and age of properties has slipped in recent years.
Visitors consistently rate the range of lodging price points and the value of accommodations for
the money paid low. The economics analysis compiled by EPS echoes these findings, specifically
stating the newer inventory in competitor resorts may begin to attract visitors away from Aspen.
Other key findings from the economics report include:
If Aspen is interested in new or reinvigorated lodging product, trade-offs related to
accepting greater height, greater density, lower mitigation levels, or a combination of
these and other measures may be necessary.
Aspen’s development process, from entitlements through building permit and Certificate
of Occupancy is unpredictable, and can be costly and lengthy. If Aspen wants to
encourage new or reinvigorated lodging product, a more predictable process, as well as
some reductions in fees and review times at all levels of the review process may be
needed.
Aspen’s condominium base is aging and needs to be upgraded, but simply allowing
renovations may lead to a loss of those units from the rental pool. SEC rules related to
condominium hotel rentals are unclear, and may warrant additional research by the City
and other mountain resorts.
Current financial markets make any new hotel product difficult to finance and build, and
land costs in Aspen can make any project economically infeasible. Lender requirements
for condominiums and condominium hotels are more costly and strict than in years past,
while traditional lodges are often not economically feasible without some free-market
component.
P8
I.
6.25.2013 Lodging Work Session – Exhibit B
Page 2 of 5
ASPEN’S LODGING SECTOR: AN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS: This phase 1 report,
released in August 2012, provides a big picture overview of Aspen’s lodging base. The report
provides an overview of the City’s role in lodging over the years, outlines Aspen’s lodging
inventory, includes average occupancy and rate information, and provides a number of interviews
with local lodging experts. One of the findings of this report was that over 40% of Aspen’s short-
term bed base is in condominiums. Based on that information, staff contracted with Alan Richman
Planning Services to conduct a detailed study of Aspen’s condominium market (see next section).
In the summer of 2012, the Aspen Skiing Company commissioned a study with Mountain Travel
Research Program, LLC (MTRiP) to provide updated data on the lodging bed base in Aspen and
Snowmass. Findings from the study were included in the report, and showed there are 2,293 units
and 10,085 pillows in Aspen’s short term rental market. This represents 56% of the units and 53%
of the pillows in the overall resort area. This represents a decrease in units from 2009 and an
increase in pillows since 2009. The differences are likely a result of discrepancies in the 2009
reporting from individual properties, as there have not been any significant new projects or
decreases in projects in that time frame. The largest sector of the Aspen lodging inventory is
Hotels/Lodges, which account for 50% of the bed base (-0.17% from 2009). Condominium units
account for 41% of the City total (-5% from 2009), with private homes at 6% (+31% from 2009)
and bed and breakfasts at 3% (+6% from 2009). In terms of categories, the overall availability of
a range of lodging types and price points continues to favor deluxe accommodations, with Deluxe
pillows making up 68% and Deluxe Units making up 62% of the inventory.
The Rocky Mountain Lodging Report compiles data for lodging throughout Colorado and the
Rocky Mountain Region. The information includes average occupancy data as well as information
on average nightly rental rates. This information was compiled for the Phase 1 Report. The
seasonality of the Aspen is seen in the occupancy and room rate information over the years, with
the highest occupancy and room rates seen December through March and June through August.
December through March consistently command the highest average room rates, ranging from an
average of $542.30 in December between 2006 and 2011 and $419.89 in March between 2006 and
2012. Compared to other Mountain Resorts and the entire state, Aspen consistently commands
higher average room rates.
Perhaps the most telling information in the report is from the individual interviews with members
of the lodging community. Interviewees consistently stated how important special events are to
attracting visitors to Aspen. They also focused on the importance of ensuring Aspen is able to
attract the next generation of visitors. Several warned that while Aspen has enjoyed unparalleled
loyalty in its visitors for several decades, the younger generation is less influenced by loyalty, and
more driven by adventure, new experiences, new places and exploring the many choices offered
around the world.
Many emphasized staying true to the values that make Aspen special today, including the character
of the built environment, environmental stewardship, the metropolitan feeling of arts and cultural
offerings and the many recreational choices. Several were worried that locals don’t recognize that
the Aspen brand is very intimidating to many people who have never been here, which can deter
people from visiting.
P9
I.
6.25.2013 Lodging Work Session – Exhibit B
Page 3 of 5
Finally, the general consensus from interviewees was that the city should have a minimal role in
the actual development of a lodge, but that the city could help to provide incentives that could
make a new lodge project or lodge rehabilitation more feasible.
CONDOMINIUM REPORT: The Condominium Report produced by Alan Richman focuses on the
regulatory and non-regulatory barriers to developing and upgrading condominiums in Aspen.
Given that 40% of Aspen’s short-term bed base is in condominiums, staff asked Mr. Richman to
explore what steps the city could take to bolster this portion of the bed base. Much of the
information in the report is based on interviews with condominium and condominium lodge
owners and operators.
The report goes into great detail about how the land use code treats traditional lodge projects
differently from residential condominiums, and how that has resulted in a lack of maintenance and
upgrades in this segment of our bed base. These barriers range from zoning regulations to growth
management to the multi-family replacement program.
It is important to understand the difference between traditional lodging and condominiums that is
outlined in our code:
A hotel or lodge unit may not be occupied for more than thirty (30) consecutive days p er
year by a person who has an ownership interest in the hotel or in the unit and may not be
occupied by any person (owner or non-owner) for more than ninety (90) days per year. A
multi-family condominium is not limited in terms of how much of the year it may be
occupied by an owner or other person. Hotel units must be rented short-term, while
condominiums are rented at the discretion of the owner.
A hotel or lodge unit may contain “lock-off units” whereby portions of the entire unit may
be separately rented by locking the door between different rooms or combinations of
rooms. On the other hand, multi-family dwelling units must have common un-pierced
demising walls and cannot be separated into lock-off units.
These differences prevent condominium units, even if they are rented on a short-term basis, from
taking advantage of some of the height, floor area, and growth management benefits available to
a traditional lodge. There are a number of condominium hotel properties in town that act as lodges,
but are considered multi-family residential because of they are condominiumized. These
properties do not “fit” into any zone district very well, which often means these properties are
subject to additional land use reviews related to any maintenance or upkeep that a traditional lodge
is not.
LODGING CHARRETTE: On October 23, 2012 the city hosted a lodging charrette at the Gant with
many of Aspen’s lodging stakeholders. This was one of the first times in many years voices from
all of Aspen’s lodging sectors – from developers to condominium managers to large and small
hotel operators to land planners – were in the same room talking about lodging issues and what
role, if any, the city should play. Participants discussed new lodging product,
reinvestment/redevelopment of existing lodges, and condominium rentals. Below is a summary
P10
I.
6.25.2013 Lodging Work Session – Exhibit B
Page 4 of 5
of comments related to the roles the City could play moving forward. In addition, outside
consultants from EPS and BBC attended the charrette and provided written reports on their
conclusions from the meeting.
In terms of new lodging there were a number of comments that if the city wants to see more lodging
that the codes should be examined and updated to encourage, incentives, and perhaps even
subsidize new lodging. There was a general consensus that a free-market residential component
of some kind is needed to make any brand new lodge work from a financial stand point given all
of the city’s other requirements. Finally, there was consensus that lodging is the appropriate use at
the base of Lift 1A, and that the city may have a role in helping create an environment where a
new lodge could be successful. Some felt that improving that area would create a portal that then
helps other lodges. While there was interest in seeing new lodging product, there was more support
for examining ways to support our existing lodges and condominium units. One participant said
the city should “enable existing lodges to thrive before focusing on new lodges.”
In terms of reinvestment in existing lodges, there was a consensus that there are too many hurdles
from the City in terms of fees and land use reviews. The process is complicated, unpredictable,
and expensive, and the smaller lodges are often not able to afford the time or dollars it takes to go
through a review process. There were some suggestions that the city could provide tax incentives
or low cost loans to smaller lodges looking to upgrade. The Aspen Gems group has reformed, and
participants suggested the city work with that group to determine what specific incentives and
regulations would help these lodges thrive.
The discussion related to condominium units focused primarily on how the land use code dis-
incentivizes them. There were a number of suggestions on the city’s potential role, all in volving
ways to modify how the city regulates condominiums. Some felt the city should ease regulations
on condominiums if a certain percentage of units were guaranteed to be in the short-term rental
pool. Others felt requiring hotel-type amenities, like conference facilities and front desk services,
would help encourage new condominium units to be rented on a short-term basis. Nearly all
participants expressed concerns related to the multi-family replacement requirements and their
impact in stifling reinvestment in condominium units.
There were some general comments as well. Some felt that the city should look forward and
consider which areas of town or specific properties they would be interested in seeing a new lodge
or a revitalized lodge. This kind of exercise – focusing on what the city wants – could help the
private sector have more certainty to bring projects forward. In general there was a consensus that
the city’s regulatory structure is burdensome and prevents good projects from coming to fruition.
A final thought from the group is that the city does not actually know what types of lodging is
desired by our visitors because there hasn’t been any study or work on this issue. This was seen
as an opportunity as the discussion moves forward.
2011 FRACTIONAL LODGING OCCUPANCY STUDY: This report, released in November 2011,
provides information on Aspen’s fractional lodges. The report includes information about usage
and occupancy in Aspen’s fractional lodge projects and is based on interviews with lodge
fractional managers and officials from other mountain resorts. The report suggests better tracking
P11
I.
6.25.2013 Lodging Work Session – Exhibit B
Page 5 of 5
of fractional occupancies would be beneficial to understanding the real impact and success of these
units.
P12
I.