Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.202202011 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION February 1, 2022 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS TO JOIN ONLINE: Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting" Enter Meeting Number: 2553 558 2003 Enter Password: 81611 Click "Join Meeting" -- OR -- JOIN BY PHONE Call: 1-408-418-9388 Enter Meeting Number: 2553 558 2003 Enter Password: 81611 I.WORK SESSION I.A.Community Development Workplan / Affordable Housing Code Amendments I.B.Moratorium Project Update 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Anderson, Principal Long-Range Planner Phillip Supino, Community Development Director MEMO DATE: January 27, 2022 MEETING DATE: February 1, 2022 RE: Residential Development and Short-Rental Moratorium Proposed Action Plan REQUEST OF COUNCIL: In response to an extensive discussion with Council on January 11, 2022, staff has evaluated Council direction, considered the inherent constraints in the development moratorium (time, etc.), and analyzed a range of possible policy responses. At this Work Session, staff will propose the policy areas that in staff’s view will have the most potential to positively address the concerns identified by Ordinance 27. Staff’s proposed approach is outlined in this memo and will be the subject of discussion at the Work Session. Council is asked to review the memo, be prepared to discuss staff’s proposal, and arrive at a level of consensus in directing staff’s work for the duration of the residential development moratorium. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Ordinance 27 is a response by Council to several issues that have come together and intersected in recent years in unprecedented ways for the Aspen community, environment, and economy. For the purposes of organizing the work that the community will engage in to sort through these issues, staff has categorized the topics in Ordinance 27 and subsequent discussions with Council into four specific areas:  Short-Term / Vacation Rentals (STRs)  The pace and scale of free-market residential development and redevelopment  Expanding opportunities for affordable housing production  Improvements to development procedures in the Land Use Code Two considerations are essential to further the organization and consideration of this work. First, fully intertwined throughout these policy categories is a commitment to Aspen’s Climate policy goals and a realization that aspects of the residential development sector are currently not in alignment. Secondly, the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) remains as the City’s primary guidance and vision as we work towards solutions to the issues identified in Ordinance 27. 2 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 2 of 9 At the January 11th work session, Council provided direction that staff’s summary of the issues and the problem statements provided in the memo were accurate and generally represented Council’s shared position on the matter. Additionally, staff presented and received confirmation of the constraints that are inherent in the City’s response to Ordinance 27. Staff additionally found that Council was aligned on the broad outcomes and measures of success that should be pursued in this work. Staff left the meeting on January 11th agreeing to further process the information that was heard, consider the totality of the context surrounding the issues, and return to Council with a proposal for a specific action plan. This memo and the anticipated discussion with Council on February 1st are the result of that work. STAFF DISCUSSION: When undertaking a code amendment process of this size and potential impact, it is necessary the process be open, intentional, and linear. This helps to ensure process integrity and alignment among Council members about problems at the beginning and assess the full range of possible solutions before the end. By not jumping from emergency declaration to solutions, we create the space to inform the public, provide them with opportunities to influence analysis and solution development; it brings the public and stakeholders along. This and future work session discussions will work through problems and possible solutions, focusing the conversation each time more narrowly to get to the right outcomes for the community. The following is an outline of information for Council’s consideration. Staffing Community Development will be leading the response to the moratorium with the assistance of other City departments. Additionally, numerous staff will provide supporting roles to these efforts, but the primary staff leads are as follow: Community Development Phillip Supino, Community Development Director Ben Anderson, Principal Long-Range Planner Garrett Larimer, Senior Planner Haley Hart, Zoning Enforcement Officer Climate Action Office Ashley Perl, Climate Action Manager Tim Karfs, Sustainability Programs Administrator Communications Jami McMannes, Communications Manager Finance Pete Strecker, Finance Director 3 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 3 of 9 Consultant Support Staff will finalize contracts (scope and budget) with several consultant firms in the provision of professional services support following the conclusion of the conversation with Council on February 1st.  Public Engagement Consultant Support: City Explained, Inc.  Data Aggregation and Analysis Consultant Support: Design Workshop, RRC, EPS  Employee Generation for Residential Development Consultant Support: RRC  Residential Development Analysis – Free Market and Affordable Consultant Support: Design Workshop, EPS  Short-Term Rental Policy Analysis Consultant Support: RRC, EPS, White and Smith  Case Studies and Reviews of Peer Community Responses Consultant Support: Design Workshop  Code Review Consultant Support: Design Workshop, White and Smith  Legal Sufficiency Analysis Consultant Support: White and Smith  Diagrams and Visuals Consultant Support: Design Workshop and local architectural firms Public Engagement Council and the community have provided clear direction on the expectations related to communications and engagement with the community. Staff certainly understands the importance of these efforts to successful outcomes and is in full alignment with Council desires to make this conversation as robust and transparent as is possible. With consultant support, staff has drafted a working engagement plan that responds to this direction, the realities of COVID, and changes to our workplan over time. Additionally, we are aggregating a list of community members who have already expressed an interest to be involved. Staff understands two aspects of this engagement effort will need to be blended effectively. First, this is a community conversation with broad interest and impact. We intend to provide appropriately broad opportunities for all those interested to get involved, participate in the conversation, and work together in improving aspects of this place that we all love. Secondly, some of the solutions to these issues may be very technical or have more impact to certain segments of our community and economy. So, it is important for us to have more focused conversations with stakeholders with specific expertise or with more direct involvement in the issue. In short, we are tailoring engagement tactics to meet both the needs of a specific topic and of interested parties. 4 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 4 of 9 Anticipated Engagement Tactics  Aspen Community Voice and other Web-based information  Technical Stakeholder Focus Groups example: development industry professionals  Specific-Interest Focus Groups examples: impacted community members, and short-term rental managers  Interviews  Neighborhood/HOA – presentations and conversations  Social Media engagement  Public meetings and Social Events – public health orders permitting  Boards and Commissions – P&Z, HPC, APCHA Timeline The proposed timeline depicted in the graphic below considers several factors. First, and most importantly is the established endpoint for the moratorium on June 8th. Staff understands clearly that it is the intent of Council to have Ordinances in effect by June 8th that address the issues raised in Ordinance 27. Staff has worked backward from this date. Next, staff utilized already scheduled Work Sessions and Regular Meetings to arrive at an anticipated number of meetings to get specific direction from Council on individual policy decisions and then begin the formal Land Use Code Amendment Process. Depending upon workflow and time constraints, this proposed schedule may shift as needed. Figure 1. Proposed Project Timeline. 5 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 5 of 9 March 22nd is scheduled for an important milestone – the Policy Resolution. This required step in the amendment process will propose the specific policy outcomes that staff and the consultant team will then work to finalize. By this point, staff believes that we will have received enough feedback from the community and Council and conducted sufficient analysis with consultant support to identify the content of eventual Ordinances. The details of these policy choices will still be left to define, but their general nature will be established by this Policy Resolution. Following the adoption of the Policy Resolution, Council should then anticipate first readings of Ordinances beginning in mid-April. As the project proceeds, staff will regularly update Council as to the progress of the work and will identify any needed changes or additional resources. Constraints As we begin this work, the following constraints have been previously presented and discussed. Staff, Council, and the community must acknowledge these issues as we begin this work. • Time It is essential that Council prioritize work that requires the protection of the moratorium to conduct. Topics and potential regulatory responses may emerge during staff and Council discussions. Staff will assess whether these require the protection of a moratorium to analyze and respond to and propose timelines for additional work in response. • COVID The types of conversations and collaboration that best support work of this nature between staff, staff and Council, and staff with the community are more challenging and less effective if they are held virtually out of necessity. • The “wicked” nature of the problems we face While staff has confidence that we can respond with impactful proposals, these issues are complex and often confounding. If they were easy issues to define or resolve, Aspen would have already done so. • Conflicting Views It is imperative for all involved to understand that any inherent friction on these topics and in these conversations are between people who care deeply about and hold a common interest in the future well-being of Aspen and its citizens and visitors. Staff is committed to providing Council and the community with the data and framing necessary to achieve shared understanding – knowing that we may not always arrive at agreement. Staff Recommendations for Policy Direction As staff analyzed the problem statements that were discussed on January 11th, evaluated staff and consultant capacity, and considered the constraints discussed above, staff is making the following proposal that identifies policy areas that have the potential for delivering the most positive impact in response to the issues identified in Ordinance 27. 6 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 6 of 9 Some introductory ideas that have framed staff’s thinking – and this proposal: • We want to be successful in these efforts – which in staff’s assessment requires focusing on the things that will have the most direct effect. • With the time that we have under the moratorium, we want to do a few things thoughtfully and effectively, rather than take an approach that superficially treats all the possible paths that we could take. • There needs be careful focus on the policy areas that require the moratorium for their completion. Work on topics that do not require the protection of the moratorium should not be undertaken on a timeline which reduces focus on those things which require that protection. • It is clear to staff that there are topics that can wait – and the list of topics that have already arisen, if pursued, could translate into years of Community Development workplan. • Even with unlimited time and resources, we cannot fix all the issues that have been identified. We can improve. We can make better. We can work to make Aspen a more sustainable and resilient community – that lives by its values. The work undertaken in the next few months are a step in that journey, not the whole trip. Exhibit A (attached) gives organization to each of the four overarching areas of policy work. It connects the problem statements to proposed policy direction, identifies the staff leads, the consultants that will be working on the topic – and potential outcomes that staff propose to be used in defining our success. The specific policy direction for pursuit during the moratorium, as proposed by staff, is summarized below. 1) Short-Term Rentals  Vacation Rental Permit Standards and Processes a.) Zoning – number, location, density/intensity of use, surrounding uses, b.) Operational standards – days of operation/year, occupancy, nuisances, wildlife/trash, parking/access, c.) Life safety – inspections, fire, signage and noticing, d.) Permitting – eligibility, transferability, e.) Financials – permit fee, impact fee, f.) Enforcement – staff support, enforcement plan, fine schedule. 2) The pace and scale of free-market residential development and redevelopment  Development allotments – analyze the current system of development allotments to: a.) manage development, 7 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 7 of 9 b.) mitigate environmental impacts, c.) support concurrency of infrastructure in accordance with the intent of GMQS, d.) address unmanaged development types, STRs, and annual allotment amounts, and e.) address residential energy and resource consumption from development and operation of structures.  Demolition - assess the effectiveness of the definition of demolition at: a.) triggering compliance with GMQS standards b.) mitigating environmental and community impacts from development, c.) restraining or eliminating non-conformities and delivering quality design outcomes.  Zoning and Calculations - analyze residential development allowances and the methods for calculating building mass and scale metrics to assess alignment with community character. 3) Promotion of Affordable Housing Opportunities  Credits Program – amend the AH credits program to support clarity in project financing, increase utilization, and realize more units from the program over time.  Residential Generation and Mitigation Study – conduct a generation and mitigation study which accounts for the current conditions of the residential development sector.  Zoning – assess opportunities to use zoning tools to reduce obstacles to and incentivize the development of more AH.  Review Procedures – assess by-right, administrative, and board review standards and procedures to ensure they support community AH policies. 4) Development Procedures within the Land Use Code  Demolition – analyze the definition of demolition & non-conformities to align regulatory standards with AACP policies and mitigate new community impacts.  Zoning Standards – assess Land Use Code regulations to ensure permitted, conditional, and prohibited uses support AACP policies.  Review Procedures – assess by-right, administrative, and board review standards and procedures to ensure they support community development and climate and environmental policies. 8 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 8 of 9 As has been said previously, the work within this project will be viewed continuously through the lens of:  The Vision and Goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and;  Aspen’s Climate Goals and Commitments. Specific Questions for Council Staff asks that Council use these questions as the basis for discussion at the work session. 1) Does Council support staff’s proposed policy direction for pursuit during the moratorium? 2) Are there areas of policy analysis that are missing from this proposal, that staff should pursue during the moratorium? 3) Are there areas of the proposed policy analysis that should be removed from the work under the moratorium and shifted to longer-term efforts? Relationship to 2022 Community Development Work Plan Prior to the adoption of Ordinance 27, Council reviewed and approved a Work Plan for Community Development staff in 2022. (The Work Plan is included as Exhibit B.) That Work Plan includes some of the work proposed to be completed during the moratorium – coordination of the Land Use Code with AH policy objectives, GMQS system analysis, short-term rental code amendments. And much of it is not. For the next few months, Community Development staff is focusing its attention and resources on a successful moratorium process, delaying the start of other Work Plan items. Currently, staff believe we have the time to undertake the full scope of the 2022 Work Plan. There are numerous public facing and important projects, including building code adoption, the lighting code update, a technical clean-up of the Land Use Code, an updated Climate Action Plan, and downtown COVID response and enforcement matters, which will require staff resources and Council direction. These were priority projects prior to Ordinance 27, and unless directed otherwise they remain so. Given the staff resources required to respond to the mandates of the moratorium, staff is assessing whether additional staff resources are needed to accomplish the full scope of the Work Plan. As of now, no modifications of the Work Plan are requested by staff. New resource requests will be included in future Community Development budget documentation. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS: With direction from Council provided during the Work Session, staff will launch our efforts. We will finalize contracts with our consultant support. We will begin our community engagement efforts and policy analysis and will next report back to Council on the status of the work on March 1st. With the deadline of the moratorium expiration on June 8th in mind, staff will return to Council almost week (as outlined in Figure 1) to craft and approve legislation. 9 Staff Memo, Moratorium Goals and Priorities Page 9 of 9 FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Staff is finalizing contracts with our consultant support per the approval language in Ordinance 27. The City Manager will be in communication with Council with further details on the total costs associated with consultant support of this project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: N/A. ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDATIONS: Council has received staff’s proposal for the policy areas to analyze and discuss with the community. Staff welcomes a robust discussion on February 1st and suggestions, additions, or deletions from the proposed program. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Topic Area Matrix Exhibit B – 2022 Community Development Work Plan 10 1 EXHIBIT A: Problem Statement – Policy & Regulatory Responses The following tables connect problem statements articulated by Council at the 1/11/22 work session with Land Use Code standards, regulations, and policies which staff and our consultants believe will address the concerns expressed by Council in Ordinance 27, Series of 2021. These will form the basis for staff work for the duration of the moratorium process. Short Term Rentals Problem Statements (from 1/11/22 memo) • STRs are a land use distinct from residential and lodge uses. Yet land use regulations do not make that distinction. This results in a variety of inequities and community impacts which our current system fails to address. • Aspen has not sought to mitigate the impacts of STRs on employee generation and other infrastructure and service demands. • The community has not established review criteria to ensure basic health and safety standards for individual STRs, or to provide common expectations related to property management and guest behavior standards. • The scale and rapid expansion of STRs are changing the nature of important aspects of neighborhood and community character in ways that we are just beginning to understand. Some STRs operate as commercial uses in residential zone districts. • STRs have accelerated a transition of many housing units that previously were owned or rented by working locals into de facto lodge units. STRs have brought a new scale and pace to this challenge. Staff and Consultants Pete Strecker Phillip Supino • RRC and EPS – FTE generation & impact fee, regulatory framework, best practices, comparable communities research • White & Smith – advisory and legal review Recommended Responses • Vacation Rental Permit Standards and Processes o Zoning – number, location, density/intensity of use, surrounding uses, o Operational standards – days of operation/year, occupancy, nuisances, wildlife/trash, parking/access, o Life safety – inspections, fire, signage and noticing, o Permitting – eligibility, transferability, o Financials – permit fee, impact fee, o Enforcement – staff support, enforcement plan, fine schedule. What success will look like • Permitting system operational by 9/1/21 • Regulations account for Condotels • Regulations account for local, owner- occupied operators • Regulations support diversified bed base • Regulations manage number and location of STRs • Regulations manage neighborhood impacts • Fees cover service costs and community impacts and employee generation 11 2 Pace and Scale of Residential Development Problem Statements (from 1/11/22 memo) • Aspen’s Growth Management Quota System does not capture or mitigate the impacts of current trends in the real estate and development context. • The cumulative impacts inherent in the demolition and redevelopment of large single family and duplex residential properties is inconsistent with Aspen’s on-going leadership in responding to the global climate crisis. Council has expressed desire to find solutions in reducing the cumulative energy demands and CO2 emissions resulting from our built environment. • The mass and scale of homes built in response to current trends in single-family and duplex development are inconsistent with established community values expressed in the AACP. • The scale, complexity, and concentration of residential construction projects creates an undue burden on neighbors who must tolerate construction noise, parking constraints, and other negative impacts of development that can take years to complete from start to finish. • The scale, complexity, and concentration of residential construction projects creates undue burdens on community infrastructure including roads and bridges, parking, and public utilities, as well as environmental infrastructure like solid waste management systems, air quality, and water quality. Staff and Consultants Ben Anderson and Garrett Larimer • Design Workshop – GMQS system analysis, development scenario analysis, environment and climate policy development • RRC – update to employee generation study • EPS – economic analysis • City Explained – outreach support • White & Smith – legal review • TBD – residential design and neighborhood character studies Recommended Responses • Development allotments – analyze the current system of development allotments to o manage development, o mitigate environmental impacts, o support concurrency of infrastructure in accordance with the intent of GMQS, o address unmanaged development types, STRs, and annual allotment amounts, o address residential energy and resource consumption from development and operation of structures. • Demolition - assess the effectiveness of the definition of demolition at: o triggering compliance with GMQS standards o mitigating environmental and community impacts from development, o restraining or eliminating non-conformities, and delivering quality design outcomes. • Zoning and Calculations - analyze residential development allowances and the methods for calculating building mass and scale metrics to assess alignment with community character. What success will look like • A GMQS system that meaningfully manages development and mitigates impacts from the residential sector. • Improved clarity in the meaning and administration of development regulations. • Land use and development regulations, policies, and programs which help in achievement of CO2e and solid waste reduction targets. • Fully mitigated neighborhood impacts from development activities. 12 3 Promotion of Affordable Housing Opportunities Problem Statements (from 1/11/22 memo) • The Land Use Code often acts as a barrier to the straight-forward development of new affordable housing. • Are there additional incentives that could be provided to encourage more private sector development? • The current system of leveraging development activities to extract units from and finance the development of new affordable housing relies on development activities which, to a degree, undermine community response to the climate crisis and the realization of community policies. Staff and Consultants Ben Anderson • Design Workshop – credits program, zoning analysis, review procedures analysis, development analysis • EPS – economic analysis • City Explained – outreach support • White & Smith – legal review • TBD – residential design and neighborhood character studies Recommended Responses • Credits Program – amend the AH credits program to: o support clarity in project financing, o increase program utilization, and o realize more units from the program over time. • Generation and Mitigation Study – conduct a generation and mitigation study which accounts for the current conditions of the residential development sector. • Zoning – assess opportunities to use zoning tools to reduce obstacles to and incentivize the development of more AH, and considering the following: o permitted and prohibited uses in specific zone districts, o new and modified zone districts. • Review Procedures – assess by-right, administrative, and board review standards and procedures to ensure they support community AH policies. What success will look like • Clarity in the approval process for AH projects. • Expanded utilization of the AH Credits program. • New or modified incentives for the development of AH units. • Zoning standards which deliver desired uses. • Zoning standards which incentivize AH development within the UGB. 13 4 Development Review Process Improvements Problem Statements (from 1/11/22 memo) • Are there ways to make the review process more efficient and predictable while still protecting the intent and integrity of a specific review? • Are there ways to reduce the loopholes in processes that can lead to undesirable development outcomes, particularly in the residential sector? • Can we ensure that review boards are granting approvals that align with the intent and letter of the Land Use Code? • The barriers to approval of AH development are too high relative to single-family and duplex development. Staff and Consultants Garrett Larimer • Design Workshop – procedure analysis and best practices, zoning analysis • White & Smith – legal review • TBD – site and neighborhood design and development outcomes analysis Recommended Responses • Demolition – analyze the definition of demolition and non-conformities to align regulatory standards with AACP policies and mitigate new impacts from redevelopment. • Zoning Standards – assess Land Use Code regulations to ensure permitted, conditional, and prohibited uses and change-of-use procedures support AACP policies. • Review Procedures – assess by-right, administrative, and board review standards and procedures to ensure they support community development and climate and environmental policies. What success will look like • aligning the scale of site-specific development activities with appropriate impact mitigation. • review processes which support and align with the development types needed to achieve community character, quality of life, and environmental policy objectives. • improved clarity in administration of Land Use Code development review procedures. 14 1 Community Development, Environmental Health & Sustainability - EXHIBIT B 2022 Work Plan The following provides high-level information on the various programs and initiatives of the Community Development, Environmental Health, and Sustainability Department. It includes ongoing projects and services and those to be conducted during the 2021-2022 work plan years. The table for each item includes a project overview, budget and timeline, data, and information about actions for Council consideration through the process. 2022 Departmental GOMs – All Staff The City Manager directed CDEHS to identify three GOM projects from the current CDEHS work plan to continue to work on in 2022 . These projects continue to have demonstrable external community benefit. Those projects are described below. 1.Implement CDEHS Development Services process improvements including Planning and Zoning SOP creation, successful outsourcing program for permit reviews, development of Building and Zoning division policy guides, ongoing Salesforce optimization. Community Benefits: improved customer service, decreased response times, efficient delivery of services, process improvement. Completion Metrics: Creation of SOP documents, budget spend-down of third-party review service funds, policy guide development, and implementation of Salesforce improvements. 2.Accomplish the first steps towards the implementation of City Council’s GHG reduction goal. These first steps include: 1. Presenting a City of Aspen policy to council for waste reduction and energy reduction at city facilities, 2. Develop an outreach/engagement plan for an organics diversion requirement, and 3. Present City Council with an updated GHG reduction goal. Community Benefits: Increased environmental sustainability, extended landfill life, decreased GHG emissions, reduced building energy costs, inter-jurisdictional cooperation. Completion Metric: Completion and documentation of the listed goal steps listed above 3.Org. Structure and Staffing optimization, including hire a CBO, develop and implement Building division succession plan, modify Operations staff (Permit Coordinators, Management Analyst). Community Benefits: improved level of service, decreased service response times, staff retention, supports permit process improvements project, improved achievement of CDEHS missions statements. Completion Metrics: complete hiring processes, map Ops. division org. structure and develop JDs, complete succession plan development. CDEHS Departmental Integration – Phillip 15 2 Ongoing The City Manager directed the Community Development Director to lead the integration of ComDev and EHS. Integration began in 2020 and will be ongoing. The 2022 scope of work includes: •streamlining administrative services, •increasing coordination on development review and permitting, •increasing coordination on code enforcement, •assessing the potential of budgetary synergies, •increasing coordination on policy and regulatory development. This is in internal project implemented by CDEHS staff and approved by the City manager. No Council input or action is anticipated at this time. Budget – n/a Council process – n/a CDEHS Staffing and Org. Structure – Phillip Ongoing The City Manager directed the Community Development Director to assess the optimize the staffing and organizational structure of all CDEHS divisions to ensure the efficient delivery of services and staff retention. That work includes: •proper staffing for the development review process, •Building division succession planning, •hiring of a CBO, •Operations division optimization and career ladder development, This is in internal project implemented by CDEHS staff and approved by the City manager. No Council input or action is anticipated at this time. Budget – TBD Council process – contingent on budget needs Development Review Process Improvement – Phillip Ongoing Assessing and implementing improvements to the development review and permitting process is a priority City Manager goal for CDEHS. Work on this project commenced (in its current form) in 2020 and has been ongoing. The 2022 scope of work includes: •hire and onboard a new Chief Building Official, •reorganize Permit Coordinator management structure, •develop process goals and principles for DevRev agencies, •reformat and implement the Managers Improvement Team process, •develop response and review time standards for DevRev agencies. This is in internal project implemented by CDEHS staff and approved by the City manager. No Council input or action is anticipated at this time. Budget – n/a Council process – n/a 16 3 Fee Study – Rebecca 2022 The Community Development fee structure has not been updated since 2010. These fees include land use review, permit review, and building permit fees, but do not include Impact Fees. Staff will participate in a city-wide, comprehensive analysis of the fee structure in 2022 to update the fees. This project is proposed to be led by the Finance department as part of larger, comprehensive review of city fees. Com Dev Staff time will need to be allocated to this project. Budget – TBD Council process - TBD Electronic Permitting System Maintenance – Rebecca 2022 The Salesforce electronic permitting system is operational. The contract for system maintenance was updated in 2021. ComDev staff remain engaged, alongside Quality Office, IT and referral agency staff, in maintaining and upgrading the system as needed. This is an ongoing work plan item. Budget - $200,000 in approved 2021 budget funds Council process – n/a Administrative Services SOPs – Rebecca 2021-2022 With the adoption of Salesforce and changes to most all of the planning and development review process in response to the new system, the Administrative staff has to re-think their role in supporting those processes. The admin. staff will work with relevant ComDev staff to identify roles and responsibilities in the process and develop SOPs to formalize these new practices and expectations. Budget – n/a Council process – n/a Building Division ICC Code Adoption – Stephen 2022 The City is on a six-year code adoption cycle. The 2021 ICC codes have been published and the City is poised to adopt them in 2022. At a May 12th, 2021 work session, Council directed Building staff to develop progressive energy, waste, and climate-conscious amendments to the I-codes, and to do so ahead of other valley jurisdictions. Staff has contracted with a code consultant to assist in the drafting and amendment process. Staff returned to Council for a work session in fall 2021. Budget – up to $50,000 for consulting assistance Council process – Q3 2021 work session, 2022 code adoption hearings 17 4 Organizational Structure, Professional Development, and Hiring – Stephen & Phillip Ongoing The division will maintain optimum staffing levels through the retention, development, and hiring of needed staff on an ongoing basis. This work is supported by the Building division succession plan and individual staff development plans and goals. Budget – annual budget allocation Council process – n/a Planning Division Growth Management Quota System Amendments – Ben 2022 In February 2021, during Council discussion of the affordable housing and Land Use Code amendment process, Council directed Planning staff to provide information in a work session on the relationship between aspects of the GMQS regulations and a variety of Council concerns around growth, development, construction activity, and AACP policies. Staff presented to Council in two work session (March and May, 2021) and received direction to return with potential policy and regulatory responses, including: •changes to the development allotment system, •changes to development and redevelopment regulations, •changes to the generation and mitigation rates for development. Staff returned to Council on this topic July 12, 2021. This topic is closely related to LUC and affordable housing code amendment process described below. The scope and duration of this project is dependent on future Council direction. Much Budget – n/a Council process – future Council action TBD LUC & AH Coordination – Ben 2020-2022 This is the continuation of a LUC amendment process commenced in Fall 2019 and in response to a top tier Council Goal. Council directed staff to review the LUC, identify regulatory constraints to the delivery of affordable housing units to market, and present to Council amendments to reduce those constraints. In pursuit of the Council Goal, staff presented four ordinances in May 2021, which were approved by Council. Through work sessions in 2020 and 2021, Council has staff to continue this process in another round of potential amendments, and they identified numerous policy objectives related to this topic to inform staff’s work. A work session is scheduled for 7/12/21 to scope this next round *Elements of this project are included in Council 2022 Council goals and significant aspects will be included as work under the Residential Development Moratorium. Budget – Council approved $75,000 in 2021 spring supplemental funding for consulting services in pursuit of this goal. Additional budgeting will be necessary for Moratorium work. Council process – future Council action TBD STR Amendments – Phillip Much of this work will now be included under the Residential Development Moratorium. 18 5 2022 There is emerging consensus among Council and staff that further work on the regulation of short-term rentals is needed to address council, staff, and community concerns. The scope of the project is to be determined, but ComDev anticipates collaborating with Finance on amending financial and Land Use Code regulations in response to Council direction. Barring a desire from Council to create new, untested regulations to meet community needs, staff anticipates tailoring existing regulations from other communities to fit local conditions. This work can be done in-house and with existing budget. Budget – existing annual Public Outreach and Long-Range Planning budget. Council process – work session Q3 and Q4 2021, Moratorium work Q1 and Q2, 2022. Lighting Code Update – Michelle 2022 Council directed staff in 2019 to update the lighting regulations in the LUC. Those regulations are over 20 years old, do not reflect current technology or design practices, and require updating to remain relevant and enforceable. An RFP has been issued for consulting services in support of this project. Council is the final review body of amendments to the lighting standards in the LUC. Budget – Council approved $50,000 in 2019 to fund consulting services for this project. Council process – work session Q3 2021, Council review and approval Q4 2022 LUC Clean-Up – Garrett 2022 The Land Use Code is a living document reflecting over 50 years of Aspen planning responses to community and planning needs. As the Planning staff work with the LUC, and as development dynamics, market forces, and construction techniques evolve, so to must the LUC. Over time, staff and applicants identify sections of code that require adjustment to respond to these changing needs. In past years, the Planning staff would process annual LUC clean-ups with Council to address these insubstantial code changes. This work has not been done for four years. Staff plans to present a clean-up ordinance to Council to address a backlog of needed amendments. Budget – Some of this work will be included under the Redidential Development Moratorium Council process – work session Q3 2021, code amendments Q2 2022 Census Follow-Ups – Ben 2022 The 2020 Census is complete, and the Census Bureau has begun the process of releasing results. There is the possibility of an undercount for the State of Colorado and the Aspen to Parachute region (the Census organizing region in which the City was a leader in 2019 and 2020). There may be formal procedural or legal processes associated with the finding of an undercount in which the City may choose to participate. Additionally, the release of new decennial census data is an opportunity for Long-Range Planning to assess changes in demographics and provide information to Council and the community about our community and important community health metrics. Staff will engage in data analysis and track regional and State responses to the census data. Council should expect to be informed 19 6 about these topics by staff, and possible be requested to take formal positions or actions as circumstances warrant. Staff continues to work with Pitkin County on these efforts. Budget - ~$5,000 to $7,500 in exiting, budgeted 2021 funds Council process - TBD HP Process Improvements – Amy 2021-2022 The Planning Department is currently working with a consultant to develop more specific standards for the submittal of Historic Preservation Land Use applications. This work is a result of the fine imposed on a project that removed historic material contrary to HPC approvals. The work includes standardized exhibits and descriptions of preservation techniques to help ensure that future preservation projects have clearly defined preservation processes and techniques. Staff is currently meeting with architects, contractors, and structural engineers to obtain feedback. Budget – existing funds Council process – n/a Downtown LUC Enforcement – Phillip 2022 - Continuing In response to the pandemic, Council granted heightened discretion to the Community Development Director to relax enforcement of certain LUC regulations and processes to support local businesses’ adaptations to public health orders. As public health orders and regulations have evolved, staff anticipates Council may choose to reinstate enforcement of various LUC regulations. Depending upon the scope of Council direction, increased enforcement may require additional staff time and resources. Budget – n/a Council process – Q1 Worksession (2/15/22) to assess continuation of activation efforts. Sign Code Update – Ben 2022 The sign regulations in the LUC were amended in 2017 to comply with the Reed v Town of Gilbert Supreme Court decision. At that time, Council removed sandwich board signs as an allowed sign type in commercial zones and created a 12-month sunset clause for businesses to comply. In 2018 and 2019, Council voted to extend that sunset. Due to the pandemic and enforcement discretion provided by Council to the Community Development Director, that extension was not acted upon in 2020. Staff will return to Council in Q3 2021 to request Council consider permanent changes to sandwich board regulations to eliminate the need for further action. Budget – n/a Council process – TBD Uphill Economy – Kevin 2022 In fall 2019 following a work session, Council directed staff to pursue further implementation of the Uphill Economy in 2020. Staff received $15,000 in budget authority in the 2020 budget year to continue this work, including the continued support of the 20 7 Friday Uphill Socials in the 2019-2020 ski season and planning for a third Uphill conference in 2021. The pandemic disrupted these plans and the funds were cut in response to organizational budget needs. Despite that, staff leveraged existing funds and was successful in completing two Council-directed projects – rebranding the initiative and creating content for use in support of project messaging in future years. Staff has also worked, as directed by Council, to plan for a fourth symposium on this topic in 2022. Budget – possible 2022 budget request per Council direction Council process – TBD Environmental Health Division Zero Waste as Part of Council GHG Reduction Goal – Liz 2021 Stakeholder engagement is required to understand the current barriers to reducing waste. Then a plan framework needs to be selected, using examples from other cities. The scope of this plan also needs to be determined including regional collaboration and tie-in with climate action plan. The plan will show that current voluntary measures are insufficient to reach net zero waste and the plan will show that only mandatory composting and construction waste diversion will be effective in achieving waste reduction goals. A strategy will be developed to enhance diversion in these areas. Collaboration with waste haulers and Pitkin County will be essential and are a focal point of lead up to bringing a plan decision before council. Budget – TBD, stakeholder engagement will require additional budget. Ongoing funding to retain the new staff and to operate expanded programming would also be required. Council process – Staff will propose an internal policy for waste diversion in late 2021 to use as a test case for upcoming community rollout. Presentation of a long-term waste plan will take place in 2022 and initial efforts will focus on asking council to consider a requirement to keep organic waste out of the waste stream using a teared approach. Construction waste will also be evaluated and likely brought to council for direction following analysis of existing PitCo program and stakeholder feedback/engagement process. Air Quality Program – Jannette Ongoing This is an ongoing program that will need to take on a new form in the coming years. Aspen will exit the ‘non-attainment’ status and will need a way to solidify air quality measures in perpetuity. A regional air quality plan is under development. This plan ought to link to other efforts such as AACP and the CAP. Wildfire smoke communication and preparedness will be an ongoing focus in 2022 for the summer months. Regular monitoring and provision of information will continue on the City of Aspen website. Budget – TBD Council process – TBD Food Safety Program – Natalie Ongoing In 2022 food safety staff will have more time to return to regular inspections and education. There will be a focus on trainings, particularly for Spanish speaking employees in the coming year to address identified challenges in the flow of food safety information and requirements. Revision on FDA regulations will take place in 2022 with implementation in Q3/Q4. 21 8 Budget – no additional Council process – TBD as needed Solid Waste Program – Liz/Ainsley Ongoing The current focus, now with new staff, is to increase restaurants composting and commercial waste diversion. Rio Grande management continues to require large amounts of staff time, attention, and funding. Facility trainings, troubleshooting issues with property owners/HOA/tenants has aided in diversion efforts and will continue. More monitoring and enforcement of regulations is planned for 2022 to ensure compliance with existing requirements and potential new ones as lack of this activity has shown to be a significant obstacle to effective diversion per the waste study. Budget – TBD Council process – TBD as needed. Focus will be on items related to council goal. Climate Action Division Climate Action Plan Update (as part of larger community sustainability plan) – Ashley & Tessa 2021-2023 Under City Council’s GHG goal and following best practices, staff is exploring the creation of an overarching sustainability plan that would include all climate actions, including waste reduction. This update started with data collection (GHG Inventory) in Q3 and Q4 of 2021. Staff is currently creating a strategy to make the plan an iterative document that can by ‘evergreen’ instead of static. This plan will also be centered in social and racial equity concepts. Budget – Existing Council process – An update on the process will be provided to Council Q3 of 2022. Building IQ – Tessa 2022 This program remains the priority item to help Council achieve its climate action goals. Best practice has changed, and it is now recommended that the city require buildings to benchmark their energy use and start on a path towards a Building Performance Standard. Budget – TBD, based on final Council direction. Council process – Work session held in Q4 of 2021 to revisit the program with Council. Adoption of an ordinance can take place Q2 2022. Electric Vehicles – Ashley Ongoing This includes two program areas: the City’s fleet and the public charging stations. Staff will work with Department Directors to finalize a goal and strategy for electrifying the City’s fleet. The charging station masterplan is now final and staff will begin to implement the plan. 22 9 Budget – Charging stations require additional funding from grants in additional to existing budget. Fleet electrification will require changes to the fleet replacement timeline and budget to support that revised schedule Council process – Staff will present a plan to electrify the City’s fleet in Q2/Q3 of 2022 Policy: State and Federal – Ashley Ongoing We continue to participate in national organizations (Mountain Pact, Climate Mayors, ICLEI) and track federal policy. All state policy is through CC4CA. Ashely is now serving as chair of the board. Budget - Existing Council process – As needed Energy Efficiency and Affordable Housing – Tessa Ongoing The $500K in REMP funding remains unspent. These funds can go towards a one-time net zero project or a longer-term low-income support program. Either way, this program requires CORE’s expertise and program management. Budget – Existing Council process – This program will be built into the City Council goal timeline towards Q3 of 2022 Water Conservation – TBD Summer The Climate Team runs voluntary conservation programs on behalf of the utility. This summer, the irrigation assessment program is available. Budget - Existing Council process – n/a Foundational Energy Efficiency Programs – Tessa Ongoing We continue to offer resources and expertise to residential and commercial properties. All customers are routed through CORE. The city supports these programs through outreach, facilitation and funding. Budget – Existing Council process – None 23