Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20150209Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 1 SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES .................................................................................................. 2 CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION ................................................................................................... 2 COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2 AGENDA ADDITIONS ............................................................................................................................... 3 BOARD REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 3 Resolution #18, Series of 2015 – Approving Rubey Park Intergovernmental Agreement ............... 3 Resolution #21, Series of 2015 – Authorizing a Contract Amendment with GFOA Technical Services for Vendor Selection, Contract Negotiation and Implementation Advisory Services ................ 3 Minutes – January 26, 2015 .............................................................................................................. 3 PUBLIC HEARING FOR POLICY RESOLUTION - Resolution #15, Series of 2015 – amend Section 26.212 and 26.220 of the Land Use Code ..................................................................................................... 3 Ordinance #7, Series of 2015 - 1450 Crystal Lake Road – Aspen Club & Spa Planned Development Amendment ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Ordinance #8, Series of 2015 – Amend Section 26.212 and Section 26.220 of the Land Use Code to add a second alternate to HPC and P&Z ................................................................................................................ 4 Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper Street – Base 1 Lodge Planned Development .................... 5 Ordinance #6, Series of 2015 – Amend Chapter 9.10 – Conduct of Municipal Elections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code ............................................................................................................................... 17 Ordinance #4, Series of 2015 – Right of Way Calculations Code Amendment ......................................... 17 Ordinance #39, Series of 2014 – 709 E Durant – Sky Hotel Planned Development/Subdivision .............. 18 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 2 At 4:10 pm Mayor Skadron called the special meeting to order with Cpuncilmembers Frisch, Mullins, Romero and Daily present. Jim True, city attorney, recommend council go in to executive session pursuant to 24.6.402.b- discussion with attorneys for water issues. The special meeting was properly noticed but not noticed on web site. Councilman Romero move to go into executive session; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. At 4:12pm Council entered into executive session. At 5:00 pm Councilman Romero moved to come out of executive session; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Romero moved to adjourn the special meeting; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. At 5:10 pm Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Frisch, Mullins, Romero and Daily present SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES Ruthie Brown representing the Aspen Chapter of the Citizens Climate Lobby(CCL) told the Council they are a non-partisan organization that was created to address climate change. Climate change is the biggest crisis that we have ever faced. Mona Newton said CCL is a national organization with over 250 chapters with a goal to get federal legislation passed. We cannot accomplish the goal of creating a long term livable world. They are here to request Councils participation at the national conference in June by sending someone from Council and staff. She also requested a work session to talk about carbon in the valley. We need to work together at a national level. David Hyman said the effects of change effect the livability of the planet. The CCL is familiar with the canary initiative and responsibility and hopes that Council supports the work of the climate lobby. Rebecca Weiss requested that Council support the work by sending a Councilmember and staff member to the Washington DC conference in June. Aspen representatives will meet with Gardner and Tipton to pass carbon fee legislation. Mayor Skadron said Council will consider the comments and find time on the agenda for a work session. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION 1. Bert Myrin passed out a handout of the home rule charter on open space. The charter amendment they drafted is based on the restrictions for open spaces. The proposed amendment would add four things to charter relating to height, FAR, parking and housing. They are community assets and should be considered as. He said he would love to have Council support the petition. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilwoman Mullins attended the History Colorado awards in Denver where they presented the Steven H Hart award for exceptional project to the City for the Aspen Modern program. Amy Simon and Sara Adams also gave a presentation on the program. 2. Mayor Skadron thanked the Aspen Youth Center and Adam and Katie for supporting the spelling bee. It was an extraordinary event and a huge amount of work to benefit the youth center. Mayor Skadron congratulated Robin Smith the winner. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 3 AGENDA ADDITIONS Mayor Skadron said there is a change in the agenda order. The order of the public hearings has been changed with 730 E Cooper – Base 1 lodge first, Ordinance 6 second, followed by Ordinance 4 and the Sky Hotel last. BOARD REPORTS There were none. CONSENT CALENDAR  Resolution #18, Series of 2015 – Approving Rubey Park Intergovernmental Agreement  Resolution #21, Series of 2015 – Authorizing a Contract Amendment with GFOA Technical Services for Vendor Selection, Contract Negotiation and Implementation Advisory Services  Minutes – January 26, 2015 Councilman Frisch moved to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING FOR POLICY RESOLUTION - Resolution #15, Series of 2015 – amend Section 26.212 and 26.220 of the Land Use Code Linda Manning, City Clerk, told the Council this will add a second alternate to the Historic Preservation and Planning & Zoning Commissions. Interviews were held last month to fill vacancies and it took about nine month to get enough qualified applicants for the process. With some of the recent projects there have been members who have to recuse themselves since they or their firm worked on the project. Staff feels in general a second alternate would allow for a fuller board to hear and vote on applications. Since this section is in the land use code there is a policy resolution and if this is approved there will be a first reading of the ordinance later tonight. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilmember Romero moved to adopt Resolution #15, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Ordinance #7, Series of 2015 - 1450 Crystal Lake Road – Aspen Club & Spa Planned Development Amendment Mayor Skadron stated he didn’t know Michael Fox well for the original approvals and now he is a close friend with him and his family so he is recusing himself. Councilman Daily said he crafted the original PUD and he is also recusing himself. Jessica Garrow, community development, told the Council this is for a PUD amendment, growth management review and commercial design review. They are proposing to remove the approved subgrade garage and relocate the parking to the surface at grade. They are also proposing an additional five lodge bedrooms and a decrease of one lodge unit. They will improve ADA access and add an elevator. This lot has grade changes and the elevator will enhances ADA access. Some design changes are related to the reconfiguration. They are proposing to use a synthetic roofing material that appears as metal. There are minor dimensional clean ups and some dimensional changes. There is a proposed Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 4 decrease in overall floor area and set back changes. P&Z unanimously recommended approval and Staff also recommends approves. Councilman Frisch asked for the difference in lodge units and bedrooms. Ms. Garrow replied lodge units are individual units that are rentable and bedrooms are the bedrooms within the units. Councilwoman Mullins asked for a recent project that used the same roof. Ms. Garrow replied the music school and she will have a sample at second reading. Councilwoman Mullins asked for options for the permeable paving for the parking area for second reading. Councilwoman Mullins asked about the visual from the Ute trail and more detailed landscape plans. Councilman Romero asked if there was any public outreach to report on. He said he imagines the construction impacts to remove the parking will be seen as unfavorable to the neighbors. Ms. Garrow stated the applicant is required to do the standard public notice in advance of the March 9 meeting and staff recommend enhanced outreach. Councilman Frisch asked to see more information on the visualization from the top of the mountain. He asked if there are any increases or changes in variances. Ms. Garrow said there is a decrease in floor area and some changes in set-backs due to removal of the garage. Councilman Frisch asked for the second roof idea is the code behind the times. He is supportive of the synthetic roof and we should try to update the code. Ms. Garrow said this project was approved in 2010 and falls under an older code. Some of this is bringing it up to today’s standards. Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #7, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 7 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING LODGE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS, AND A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD (THE ASPEN CLUB), LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 15-A THROUGH 15-E OF CALLAHANS SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Councilman Romero moved to approve Ordinance #7, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Frisch, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #8, Series of 2015 – Amend Section 26.212 and Section 26.220 of the Land Use Code to add a second alternate to HPC and P&Z Linda Manning, city clerk, stated this is the ordinance that will add the language for the second alternate. Language was also added stating the second alternate will only vote with the absence of the first alternate and one regular member or the absence of two regular members. The public hearing will be on February 23rd. Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 5 ORDINANCE NO. 8 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.212 –PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND 26.220 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. Councilman Frisch moved to approve Ordinance #8, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper Street – Base 1 Lodge Planned Development Sara Adams told the Council this is for planned development, growth management, commercial design and tree removal. No variations are requested for this project. The height is under what is allowed in the commercial zone. The bathrooms have been removed from the roof. It is under the allowed floor area. The size of the rooms are 170 square feet and cannot be changed without a planned development amendment. There were questions at the last public hearing about affordability and a possible deed restriction. Staff is comfortable that the size of the rooms and the location prohibit an increase. For parking, the code allows the requirement to be established with the planned development review. It is not considered a variation but establishing the parking requirement. The applicant found 15 spaces at the St. Regis. They are off site spaces. Accommodating the parking on site changes the type of project that is being proposed. There is no incentive for high density lodges as far as parking goes. Redevelopments get to use the existing deficits on site. With new product they must mitigate for all new lodge rooms. Ms. Adams calculated they are mitigating to 62 percent of what the code says at .5 space per room. When you look at occupancy rates, based on a sample of lodges the rate is 25-70 percent occupied. This will provide 62 percent mitigation and Staff is comfortable with the proposal. They commend the applicant for going out to the private sector to look for parking. As for housing, Staff is comfortable using the .3 lodge preservation generation rate. The requirement is .99 FTE and the applicant is proposing cash in lieu or affordable housing mitigation credits. For impact fees the code allows reductions or waiver of fees. When the applicant first came in there was a request to waive fees. That is taken off the table and they propose to pay all fees. For architecture there are two new renderings to show wood louvers. They are proposed to soften the look and are more contextual with the neighborhood. Staff thinks the design is indicative of the use and they are excited about the architecture. The large windows make a small room feel bigger. There is a definite mixed context of the neighborhood and lots of architecture types. The site plan clean ups the corner. It removes the curb cuts and restores the sidewalks. Overall it adds to the character of town. Staff talked a lot about the architecture and did not think an affordable lodge with a focus on next gen should have architecture that fades into the background. It is a good addition to town. At the last meeting Council asked if they are asked to determine if Mark is asking for more than he is offering. He is not asking for much at all. He responded to Council and the public concerns. He is bringing in low glare glazing to reduce some of the lighting concerns. He is playing within all the rules of the code. The 2012 AACP says without diversity of lodging we limit the ability of future generations to experience Aspen. All the review criteria are met and Staff recommends approval. Councilman Frisch said at the last meeting the memo said they are required to provide 23 parking spaces and now at its 15. With no variances how does that work. Ms. Adams replied the planned development Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 6 uses the code as a guideline. It is not considered a variation. The number went down from 25.3 to 24.3 due to a miscount. Staff has come up with 15 based on occupancy rates and historical data. Councilwoman Mullins asked if it is .5 space per room at 60 percent occupancy. Ms. Adams replied it is one space for 1,000 square feet. Councilman Romero asked how much air time the application got on the issue of affordable housing. The underlying zone is CL and for large parts Staff is measuring against that criteria. How much discussion occurred on the notion of applying LP which are more beneficial for affordable housing mitigation. Ms. Adams said they spent a good amount of time on it when the application first came in. .06 is the CL requirement and is based on the level of service. LP is for the small lodges that have a different level of service. Staff felt comfortable using .3 for this project. Councilman Daily asked if the St. Regis spaces will be permanent spaces for this project and are not committed to other uses. Ms. Adams said the Regis has 220 spaces in the garage. They are required under the code to have 150 for the number of units. They have an overage of parking. They will have to do a PD amendment to change how the parking is allocated. Councilman Daily said it is a better proposal than the last one. Councilwoman Mullins asked if the proposal is for a valet service. Ms. Adams replied yes. Councilwoman Mullins asked if there are areas for drop offs. Ms. Adams said there are two loading zones required and the location is based on approval by engineering and parks. There is a requirement for two loading zones. Mitch Haas said the logic behind the type of lodging is more akin to the LP zone than the St. Regis, Nell or Jerome. The code does provide for that flexibility and for the employee generation review. For the big picture there has been an incredible amount of work over the last two weeks and he thanked Council for their direction and input. They made a real genuine effort to address those concerns. The AACP concept of equal access in regard to lodging has been present since 1976. It has been a 40 year old goal to provide affordable lodging. This is the first real earnest effort to provide an entry level lodge that is true to that goal. There is no free market or timeshare component. 177 square foot rooms where everything else is open to the public to enjoy. How do people know it’s there. Same as how we know we can go in the limelight or Jerome. The whole concept is geared that way as a place where locals hang out with guests. There is no onsite parking requirement for any property. Off street parking is a requirement but not on site. They are asking for Council to not waive the requirement but establish it at 13-15 spaces. Similar uses support these numbers. This identical proposal, if moved 150 feet to the west, is zero. He gave other examples around town to support this including the St. Mortiz with 37 units and no off street and the Hotel Aspen with 45 units and no off street parking. These are the types of lodges we try to support in town. None have been called a problem with a lack of parking. None have been the undoing of Aspen. Most use adjacent City right of way free of charge. They are not asking for that. They are asking to use off site parking that Mark will lease from a private property owner. They are hoping this is an adequate solution and will not cause the City to walk away from the opportunity of a meaningful affordable lodge. If we took the same proposal and tripled the average room size the result would be 14 lodge rooms and a code require seven parking spaces. Affordability is lost and the price point changes. Parking would be accommodated on site with a free market and fractional component. The amenities would be privatized and similar to the Dancing Bear lodge. They have done quite a bit to reduce the number of vehicles. If Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 7 not here where. They don’t know where. It is a good site for this type of development. It is 100 percent in keeping with the commercial zone district. If not now, when. The goal has existed for 40 years and none have stepped up to the challenge. The City is currently reviewing 4 other lodging options with a combined total of 25 new lodge units and not all affordable, including 11 fractional, 2 free market at Molly and 3 at Lenado. This is 40 units with no fractional or free market. We must not allow this opportunity to slip through our hands. What is there today is the existing building with parking, driveway, tree and picnic bench. From the alley it is a continuous curb cut. There are not really sidewalks present. It is hard to believe vehicles fit in the alley. Cars come and go in every direction out of the lot. It will be cleaned up to make it more functional and safe. He showed photos of the front and current side walk and the alley with roof overhangs and dumpsters. It is not a wonderful piece of property with a public amenity space. In the new design the curb cuts are all gone and replaced with detached sidewalks and trees. There will be new parallel parking spaces, a permeant we-cycle station, a courtyard in the center, a notch out for dumpsters and utilities, a 20 foot wide functional alley and bidirectional ADA ramps with cross walks. Mr. Haas talked about the tree permit appeal and showed a phot of the tree in the middle of the sidewalk. The removal permit was denied so they are appealing to Council. The City has made an effort of achieving accessibility standards. They cannot provide accessible sidewalk without losing a lot of rooms. They have gone to a lot of effort to provide a design that engages the street. It is a cotton wood tree that is currently healthy but he does not think it will survive the construction. Mr. Hunt said the interiors have not really changed. The concept is to provide affordable rooms for the next generation. The 177 square foot rooms are built out of efficiency. People are not coming here to stay in their rooms. The balance of property is designed to be social and communal. It is built off of the mining history of Aspen. It is a year round space for visitors and locals. There will be a multi-use check in with sundry and lots of communal spaces for food and beverage. There are plans for a bowling alley and a roof top deck. They will use natural products and finishes. It speaks to community with a front desk, tenants and operators who engage and welcome the local community and a barber shop. There will be a courtyard with a walk up window. He showed an Aspen historical photo of inside the smuggler mine. There are some concerns about the architecture. The neighborhood is eclectic and this lends to the history. He does want it to be a bit bold. It is intriguing and a building you want to go in. It is important to design an experience rather than a building with rooms in it. He showed a taller steel building from an earlier rendering. Then one with darkened steel and added street level windows. They softened it up more with going to wood. They have been working with the glass manufacture and there is lots you can do with glass in the way of zero reflectivity and tinting. They added screens and wood slats. It cut down on the light and added some privacy and less glare. They got the message last time loud and clear on parking. Go to the private sector before going to the public. He understands the concerns of using the rio grand. He went out to a handful of people looking for parking. He heard back from a lot of community members about parking in their garages. He met with the St. Regis via John Sarpa. They took the approach that they want to be part of the community and believe in affordability and would like to try to help. The St. Regis is committed up to 15 spots. They were blown away with the philosophy of getting people here and understanding the next generation. The reality is most people come back. There will be a snow melt system on the roof and no shoveling or snow removal. The idea is a place where guests and the community can go. As for the questions relating to noise, they have the same Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 8 concern since it is a hotel and they sell sleep. They are committed to working with the neighbors on a curfew. Would we do base 1 without base 2. Early on he would have said no. Through this process it grew into something bigger than what it started out as. He visited five other communities where they offered to donate the land to put the lodge on. It is not just an Aspen problem but an industry one. He would love to build it here. It is not perfect. It would be a great addition and opportunity to add rooms to the town. Mr. Hunt said he would love the first one to be here. Councilman Romero had some questions around the details of the parking arrangement and affordable lodging. He asked for more on the off street parking arrangement with the St. Regis. He appreciates they are going back into the market place to solve the problem. He is curious as to strength of the deal. Mr. Haas said it would be a long term lease with the ability to replace parking down the road. Councilman Romero asked what happens if the parking lease blows up. Mr. Haas said they would have to find more parking. Parking and affordable housing are the hardest things to address on a project to project basis. Councilman Romero said if lease were to blow up there needs to be an if then statement in the ordinance to address what happens. The valet service commitment is hand and glove with the parking model. It underscores the requirement of a valet service. There is a higher level for the staffing model into valet. Mr. Haas said it is a valet lot only. Councilman Romero said valet means more staff on campus. He appreciates they erased the other variances out of the application. It is affordable small letter versus affordable big letter. He wants to make sure that they are committing to it instead of just the hope and aspiration that will keep it affordable. Is it the design of the unit that will keep it affordable. Mr. Haas said they believe it is affordable by design. The demographic and amenity space lends itself to a certain market. The rooms are small. There will be times when it is priced higher but it will be extremely affordable on the Aspen end. Councilman Romero said there are going to be times when someone will offer 10 times to take the top floor and the team will make the smart business decision and take it. Councilman Frisch said he appreciates the fee waivers going away. It is easier to digest when the variances go away. Regarding noise, his belief is the city has a code regarding noise that is objective. Regarding the dark sky initiative is there something equal in objectivity we can use. Ms. Adams said there are light requirements that specify fixtures and wattage. They included a specification that low light glazing be added. Councilman Frisch said no one stands outside with a light meter in the country. Ms. Adams said the specific plans and fixtures meet the lighting code. A zoning officer checks for compliance. Councilman Frisch asked to hear more about the height issue and where they were before and where they are now. Mr. Haas said the building didn’t change they just got rid of the bathrooms on the roof. It became an issue with the code. It is under all the height requirements but it got thrown into being counted as a fourth floor due to the bathrooms. It is unfortunate not to have a bathroom up there. Councilman Frisch asked if the bulk and mass of the bathroom is replaced by mechanical. Mr. Haas replied yes the added height is allowed for mechanical but not a bathroom. Councilman Daily stated he appreciates the responsiveness to the concerns and eliminating three or four variance requests. Mitch raised the questions of if not here or when. Those are real questions. They are coming very close to answering those. It is truly an opportunity for the community. There has been a goal for a long time for more affordable lodging and this is the first project that offers that. The small rooms are hard to argue against. He asked how the valet will work. Mr. Haas said they will pull up and unload get a ticket and the car goes away. Ideally you get the car back when you are ready to leave. The Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 9 thought is it is car storage while you stay. There will be a nominal fee. If you want the car in between they will discourage that by making it an expensive fee. There is We-cycle, shuttle, a free bus and town is walkable. They will use the ski storage room for bikes in the summer. The idea of the valet is not to get your car four or five times a day. Mayor Skadron said this is a tough environment to support development and he’s torn. There is no mechanism for price control. Nothing in this town is affordable and this leaves him unsettled. He does not want to be sold a concept that does not come to fruition. Prices at the limelight have reached a point that are not affordable and that project was sold to the public as affordable. Mr. Haas said as it relates to Aspen it is affordable. Mayor Skadron said a room will cost 350 dollars and he wants to be clear the community knows what it is getting. Mr. Haas said it is not a motor lodge or youth hostel. There is a big gap between that and what else is available in town. The gap is the affordability. Mayor Skadron said he wants to make sure the verbal representations come to fruition. It is designed to provide an entry point to those who can’t come. Mr. Hunt said the average daily rate will be 150 dollars. For Christmas and New Year’s people are not coming here for 150. It opens the door for people who would not otherwise be here. Mayor Skadron said that should be the goal. He asked them to comment on how important the internal programing is specifically the amenities to the overall strategy. Mr. Hunt said it is critical. With rooms being small it is important and a big part of the experience. Mayor Skadron asked if it is unfair to say the overall foot print would be reduced if the amenities are excluded. Mr. Haas said the amenities are on the lower level and the roof top. Mayor Skadron said they used the term engage in a creative provision for parking. Have we satisfied the creative provision. Mr. Haas said he believe so. He is not aware of any projects that have offsite parking at all. Mr. Hunt said there are a lot more rooms as it relates to parking. Mayor Skadron asked where they are at on fees. Ms. Adams said they are offering to pay all the fees. Mayor Skadron asked if there is a mechanism to prevent the conversion to condos. Ms. Adams said they would have to go through a planned development. She said there is no language in the code for indoor lighting and that is one of the reasons they added low light emitting glazing to the ordinance. Mayor Skadron asked if it is zoned CL and not CC. Ms. Adams said it is one block from CC maybe two. Mayor Skadron asked for the height in CC and C1. Ms. Adams said the north side of the street is up to 38 feet in C1, 40 in CC and in CL a max of 40. The applicant is proposing 25.5. The south Side is 28. Mayor Skadron said the code talks about neighborhood compatibility as a criteria. When a commercial is adjacent to a residential building in what context do we discuss neighborhood compatibility. What criteria do we use. Ms. Adams said that is something that P&Z struggled with also. You need to look at the actual context of the neighborhood and what is allowed in the zoning. There is a mix of zone districts here including a grocery store, mixed development, town homes and affordable housing. Mayor Skadron asked the applicant to talk to the Benedict Common neighbors about the rooftop activity and how it might affect their quality of life and neighborliness. Mr. Hunt said they talked to them but not everyone came to the meetings. Johnny’s pushes 150 cars through a day. There is no direction or sidewalks. When he first sat down with them he looked at it more from the standpoint that it will be the biggest amenity. There is good and bad. It is inconvenient to go anywhere. He wants to be respectful that they are right next door. He explained the alley and that they can control the waste pickups. If there is a problem now you don’t know where it is coming from. This is the best amenity and a single point of contact. Traffic will be significantly reduced. Right now there is nothing obvious about the corner. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 10 1. Jay Maytin said it is amazing what happens when you start a project with someone who wants to start something. It is a project that was almost pushed off at first reading and now has no variances. You don’t see that often. Wouldn’t Hotel Aspen been amazing if instead of three free market homes it would have been 15 more rooms. Town would love this if it was 20 rooms with a private residence on top. We have a commitment from a development for rooms. Working with Mark he learned that this is something near and dear to his heart. He believes he wants to provide this for our community. It is setting a precedent that development does not need a private sector tied to it. The problem with parking is not the development dragging people into town. The problem is people who live here drive their car in every day. The problem isn’t people who are going to stay at the hotel but the behavior of our community. Mark shouldn’t be penalized for us who drive every day, park our car then drive home. There is a precedent that we award some lenience on parking and have the discussion of locals driving every day. The bottom line is ski and hockey teams and corporate events can spend 150 per night opens a door to new people. He is not asking for anything but maybe seven parking spots that are not needed. 2. Ian Peary said he is wearing two hats, one as a young business owner and another as Mr. Hunt’s tenant. He could not be more excited. It is impossible to invite people when there are no affordable accommodations. He understands the concern of pricing remaining affordable. It is a small room. Aspen has nothing like this and it is our best chance. He does not think the project could get better. It is a new sense of vitality to a decrepit building. He is also a tenant to Mr. Hunt. His space may be redeveloped and Mr. Hunt has been more than fair and caring. He is a proud new home owner and a non-car owner. We should be proud of our transportation system. 3. Marcia Goshorn stated she appreciates Mr. Hunt made the effort to talk to people one on one. He took the input and changed the plan. She is not sure if the parking is enough but he is putting it in a place where it will not impact people as much. She does not think it will be just a next gen place. She appreciates that he got rid of most of the variances. She think he is a good addition to town. 4. Bill Tomcich said Mark sat down with him one on one. He is strongly supportive of the project. The issue of pricing is one of supply and demand. The wonderful destination is responsible for the demand. There are times when the demand outpaces the supply. No matter what controls are in place prices will be high. Between peak demand pricing relaxes quite a bit. Athletes are staying here while they compete in Vail. Increasing the supply will help bring back into balance the demand. 5. Rubin Sadowsky said Aspen will never be a budget travel destination but these rooms will help bring people here who could not afford it. Aspen is special and this could be the heart of a new renaissance. The project has come to code and Mark has reached out to the community. We’re missing a range of thinkers, artists, musicians and athletes. 6. Andrew Sandler said he wants to say well done to everyone who already spoke. Mark has become a yoga star and gave in to what everyone asked for. He has seen Mark meeting with a bunch of people. He has done everything he can to meet expectations. 7. Nicolette Cantis said she is a Benedict Commons owner and is impressed by what Mark has done. Her concern was parking and it is awesome they are not using their garage. He has changed her mind and she is now for the project. Mark has done a great job and met her concerns. 8. Ron Cossack said he started out visiting here. This will help a lot of the 20 somethings come and fall in love and want to move here. 5, 10, 15 years down the line we will see the benefits. He wants to have his friends here too. 9. Mendel Mints stated in the last year his organization rented 300 hotel rooms and the lack of quality affordable rates is a challenge. This is a project well worth it and will do a lot for us. He hopes Council will support it. 10. Terri Butler said she owns the smallest lodge in town with eight suites and 12 bedrooms and no parking. She made a big mistake. It is hard to keep the hotel full and she depends on repeat customers. She has trained her clients not to rent a car. She does buy parking passes. Less than 20 percent rent cars. When Mark first proposed the hotel she thought do we really need it. She has one room below 300 dollars per night and it has always sold. She turns away a lot of people Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 11 in that budget. If she had to do it over again she would have 20 bed rooms and no suites. It is too late for her to change but he has a good idea. It is up to Council to decide if it’s a good idea and he’s the right person for it. It is important as elective representatives that they speak for us and recognize when something good comes by. People will remember the good things that happen to our town. If you want it you need to step up to the plate and figure it out. 11. Yvonne Klika said she lives at silverbell and is the only person in the room who doesn’t feel the project should be acceptable. If it doesn’t fit on the lot don’t put it up. Less traffic on the corner is nonsense it will always have heavy traffic. She thinks the city has done a disservice to Mr. Hunt by encouraging him through P&Z. It should not have got here to council. It is too modern with too much glass. It needs to be toned down. The drainage problems will continue. One thing she agrees with is removing the tree. It’s dangerous. Removing the pine tree is something else. In order to get the building up the pine tree will have to come down. It will not be affordable for the holidays. We have several good lodges that cater to families. Where are workers going to eat their lunch. We need a place for them. 12. Phyllis Bronson said they gave great presentations. It is a great project. It is a difficult environment when we are so disturbed about so much that has been built. We elected Steve to maintain the small town character but we should not ignore the possibility of a great project. It is the first time she is excited about a project since 1975. It resonates. It feels like one of the old lodges. There is a feeling of community. She appreciates he’s softened the exterior. It is quite beautiful. Currently it is a true eyesore. She can’t think of a better use for this bit of land. The only question she is uncomfortable with is the commitment of pricing. 150-200 resonates beautifully. She gets a little nervous when she hears that will change at times. She would like to see the blackout dates when it will change. 13. Steve Jaorwski stated he signed the charter petition. What council has inherited is hard to deal with. Inside of town we can only do what we can. He support this project because he think this corner needs uplifting and this can do a good thing here. He understand what Mr. Hunt is trying to do. In other town there is so much development outside of the towns. Those areas are more developable. It is hard to look at all this inside of town when we should be looking outside of town. Use Cozy point for development. Generally he is in support of this project. 14. Basil Falcone said Mark Hunt could make a significant change in this town. Infrastructure and variances can be resolved. The town is very sensitive to the architecture that is very contemporary and very different than what represents this town. Ask Mr. Hunt to focus on maintaining more of a look of historic preservation. 15. Sheri Petlar said she is an architect and urban designer and is in favor of the project. It seems to be what we have been looking for. It is a straight forward project that is doing what it says it is going to do. The architecture really resembles the Tippler hotel as an aspen icon. It is conforming to the architectural history of Aspen. She believes it is an appropriate architecture for Aspen. 16. Tom McCabe said addressing the issues from the previous meetings show good faith. The thing left is how do you maintain an affordable lodging rate. Council does not have anything in the code that addresses that. He asked the developer to think outside of the box with a metric that could be offered for the future. 17. Mack Keeling stated he is the son of an affordable lodge owner. He is a huge advocate for the project and the process. Mark figured out the parking. He addressed everything from the last meeting. He is close to meeting a goal that’s been around from before he was born. It is not perfect but it is perfect for Aspens future. 18. Maria Morrow said Mark is the right person to do this. She loves his passion. This was done in a time when development is viewed negatively. She told Mark he is on a suicide mission. He has a passion for the project and is the right person. She asked Council to visualize what 17x10 is. It’s small and will be affordable. She likes that it is both looking back and forward. She is blown away by how innovative it is. It is also the wave of the future. It is designed for people who will live like us. She loves the idea of parking storage and discouraging guests from driving. I know Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 12 we are part of the problem. Is the code the mandate of what we need. Are we so afraid of variances that we don’t want to have a bathroom on the top floor. 19. Sammy Hewings said he has had a business in the buckhorn for 11 years and has lived in Benedict Commons for the last 4. He is supportive of base one. Jay had a great point that the neighborhood can help with the parking. There are cars that should be in the garage that are parked on the street. These are little things that can help. He is glad to see some of the benedict common owners are switching sides. He may have a space in the new building. It is the most fun idea. 20. Josh Landis said he lives in Benedict Commons. He thanked Mark for speaking with the owners and going out of his way. A good number of us are in favor. The main reasons is it gives them things they can actually use over high end retail. He is ready for a bowling league over there. They will have a coffee shop close by. He would like to see the traffic study and noise on the roof top. He is less concerned with the alley after seeing how much width they will gain. They met with Mark as an HOA board. He encouraged everyone to have their own opinion. A slight majority is against it but it is moving in the other direction. Half of the members have not expressed an opinion. He can count six who are more inclined to be for it. Half have not chimed in. Those against it haven’t come to the meetings to get their concerns addressed. He is here representing his own interest not the HOA. 21. Mark Campezi revoiced his support. Mark has a lot to lose if he doesn’t follow through on his word. He has a lot to risk with his other properties. 22. Connie Daily asked Council to go to Benedict Commons and stand in the courtyard and look up to see how it will affect them. She asked Council to go and take a look. 23. Mick Ireland asked Council to ask the hard questions that don’t pertain just to this project. He said he was in this room when the limelight came through. They were told it would be a moderate priced lodge. He likes the limelight and it serves its purpose well. He lives in affordable housing but it has a deed restriction. Why can’t we have a deed restriction here and trade guarantees for hope. Guarantee is the right to develop the property in certain ways. The City cannot go back and should not. In return they are being asked to hope the rooms are affordable. They are doing that without any empirical review of rates. Smaller is not always cheaper. There is nothing in writing and no assurance he will continue to own the lodge. The affordable housing issue is a larger issue that this proposal. The ordinance says for LP the employee generation is .3 FTE per bedroom. No affordable housing mitigation is required. There is something wrong in the code. .3 x 44 is 13.2. Housing 13.2 employees may not mean they are not working there. They will generate employees and the cost will be borne by the tax payers by increasing transportation or building housing. It’s not free. It should be a city wide conversation. Independent of the zone there will still be this issue. Parking needs a reexamination. He would ask the applicant what we do when people come to town and don’t want their car seven blocks away. What will the impact on the neighborhood be. That study should be done. Council is not an architecture review board. It is not appropriate for the public to speak on architecture and a dangerous path to go down. It should be made clear that we are not an architecture review board. It is a subjective standard and should not be a factor in the approval process. If standards are too difficult they should be revised on a broader basis not an individual application. If this project meets the standards without variances that is proof it will be no harm putting in the home rule charter no variances. 24. Jim said the parking situation is real. He does not think the parking solution is the end all. The corner is outstanding. He is trying to bring affordable lodging into the core. He could have put commercial use there. 25. Dana Horton said we have the hind sight. The design is the guarantee it will remain affordable. Aspen is an ambassador in so many ways why not let Base be the ambassador for affordable lodging. 26. Kim Raymond stated she was opposed to this when it was first on the table. She lives directly across the street and is concerned with congestion and parking. It is important for the community and working people that the rules are applied the same to everybody. Tighten up the code and Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 13 make it simpler. The code only deals with exterior lighting. The earlier design was better. She does not think the roof top deck does anything for a public amenity. Parking can be taken care of. Cleaning up the alley is a great thing. The amenities will increase the congestion on the corner. The community does need affordable lodging and the deed restriction is critical. 27. Lex Truemeons said he supports the project. It is a solid project. The market will dictate the room rate. There is no need for a deed restriction. They will be the smallest rooms in town in a B minus location. Development is not all black and white. Council needs flexibility to work with a developer to make a project work. This project is what the community has been asking for. There are higher and better uses for this lot. 28. John Haily said they need more parking than 15 spaces. Everyone is competing for the same spaces. 29. Peter Greney said he truly thinks it is affordable by design. He is concern if we overburden the applicant he will pull this. Parking needs studied. He rents his place out on air BnB. They never ask about parking. He is confused how affordable lodging generates affordable housing. Affordable lodging is a community need and the applicant is going above and beyond. How can we prescribe this for the future. He encouraged Council to approve. Mayor Skadron asked Mark CAmpezi to come back. He asked for a response to Kim’s comments about traffic. Mr. Campezi said there is traffic from 11-5. After 5 the traffic is gone. He thinks this will alleviate traffic. His business is 65 percent delivery and 35 percent carryout. They have one delivery vehicle. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Ms. Adams said for the affordable housing calculation the project is required to provide .99 FTE if using the LP generation rate. This is based on the existing credit and figuring out the difference. The average room size provides the percent you need to mitigate for. For rooms this size it is ten percent. There is a credit. Any conversion of the limelight would require a land use application and a Council review. It would require mitigation and impact fees. Mr. Haas said the deed restriction seem to have come from the experience of the limelight. As a planner, just having an idea doesn’t get you near the finish line. This design is guaranteed by the physical nature of its size. We have to decide if this is right today. There are some kinks to address but this is it. FTE generation is in the code. You get a credit for the employees that are there. Rooms under 300 square feet the code says you house ten percent of them. One block over is the athletic club. It was considered contemporary and now it is historic. This will fit in. We need to rely on the code and when we do they say maybe the zoning is not right. He wrote the city’s outdoor lighting code. No one has asked us to address the indoor lighting but we have. It won’t be left on all night. Mr. Hunt said this one is tricky. If asked to tie it in to other properties I don’t know another place where this could go. I do want to be respectful of Aspen’s roots but I want it to be fun. I would rather look at a different use than make this work in something more quaint or boring. It is a real opportunity. Mr. Haas said so far Mark has built one project in town and it’s not horrible. This is a different spot. There is no pattern of architecture. Mr. Hunt said he understands John’s concern. 50 people a week. John is doing considerably more with 24 spots. The likelihood of someone using that parking for a hotel is different than someone grabbing a sandwich. There is a single point of contact. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 14 Connie mentioned the courtyard. No one is guaranteed a view. We are building a building that meets the code. Ben Carlson, city forester, said they were approached regarding Base 1 and asked to submit comments. The concern involves two trees, specifically one. There is a spruce tree in the south east corner on private property that we permitted for removal. It is small in size and on private property. The second tree where the permit removal was denied is for the cottonwood tree. It has good structure and is healthy and on the City right of way. We don’t have very many in the down town area. It is an important public amenity. Councilman Frisch asked if it is good in the sidewalk. Mayor Skadron asked if the tree can stay. Mr. Carlson replied absolutely but with the project as proposed no. It is 70 years old with approximately another 30 years life expectancy. Councilwoman Mullins said it is surviving in a pretty inhospitable environment. Would construction adjacent hurt it more. Mr. Carlson said construction would come two feet within the trunk of the tree. That excavation will cause the death of the tree. Councilwoman Mullins asked how many other cottonwoods are on that block. Mr. Carlson said none but some on the block before that. Councilwoman Mullins said she fights to save any of these trees in town. They are an important part of the historic streetscape. She would like to see it stay. It is a really hardy tree. Two feet from the trunk doesn’t work but construction could work. Mayor Skasron said she is absolutely right. It is a sensitive topic. A fabulous hotel application gets impeded because of the tree. He asked if they can save the tree. Mr. Hunt asked what if we pull the building back and go 4 floors. He finds it a little humorous and it is so dangerous as it sits. A City that fights so hard for developers and making ADA compliant it is so hard. Mr. Haas said they notched the building out and could notch the basement. I think the tree is still going to die in the construction anyways and it was all for naught. Councilwoman Mullins said if the tree is well enough protected and the construction is limited it would not necessarily die. Mr. Carlson said the limit would be ten feet away from the trunk and 15 feet away from the canopy. Chris Forman, parks, said the emphasis is not only on size and health but it is completely off the property and in the public right of way. They take that very seriously. There is an opportunity to have the discussions on how to create an amenable sidewalk. The conversations have not come to fruition to explore other options. Mr. Haas said they will lose two plus lodge rooms on each floor for the canopy. We can’t eliminate enough building to preserve the tree. There is no middle ground compromise. We are going to plant some trees. Councilwoman Mullins said a few summer ago construction impacts were significant lot line to lot line. The possible loss of this tree is another result of lot line to lot line construction. Mr. Haas said the tree would have to be a casualty of this development. If there was a way to work with the tree we would have tried to. Maybe there is a reason there is only one. Councilman Romero said the courtyard is a vital design characteristic. The feedback from the forestry group is well placed. He believes they are internally consistent and do look at private development. It is appropriate to have a conversation around this. His hunch is that they could solve it and it is not a fatal flaw to the business model. It could be a good faith gesture. The tree does not need to be a casualty. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 15 Councilman Daily said he respects the experience of the forestry group. They think it can be saved. He would like them to take a shot at a design that can preserve the tree. His concern is if they do that and the tree can’t survive. If we are certain we can save the tree and get it built in a reasonable configuration we should try. Councilman Romero said the good news is we are talking about saving a tree and not the project. Mr. Carlson said if the set back is 15 feet away from the canopy some pruning can happen. Mr. Haas said the trunk is two feet off the property. 13 feet is a big chunk of the building. Councilman Romero said the deal is going to die on the preservation of the tree. Councilman Frisch said if it plays out the tree stays and the tree dies does it have big ramifications going forward. Will it become something where we change setbacks to accommodate trees. What is 15 feet based on. Mr. Forman said it is our charge to preserve the right trees. Our distances are based upon site specific conditions and history. There is a level of exposure. We mitigate that and tender to it with our experience. I don’t think it would change the way we do business. It is another piece of information we have for the next project. Councilman Frisch said leave the tree where it is and finish the conversation or include it with everything else. Mr. Haas asked what the radius is. Mr. Carlson said ten feet on the north and east side. Mr. Haas said they would lose one room per floor and have to put more mechanical on the roof. Mr. Carlson said their biggest concern is where the construction will happen. Mr. Haas said they could accommodate it but lose two bedrooms of lodging. Councilman Romero asked for the process where this goes next. Ms. Adams said it should be a condition to be flushed out at the P&Z design review. They can deny the tree permit appeal and work with staff on the notch then it goes back to P&Z. Councilwoman Mullins said she appreciates the applicant coming back in. They clearly listened to the conversations. There are no variances or waivers. She does not know of anything smaller or less expensive in lodging. It is increasing the range of lodging in town. The price will fluctuate with seasonal changes but will probably be the least expensive. She would not support a deed restriction. It is a great solution to the parking by using parking that is already built. This is a flex situation until we get to the point where cars don’t come in to town. She is not worried about noise or lighting. What is compatible in a neighborhood like this. Something that is not detrimental, overbearing and still creates a pleasant street scape. They have done that without being a certain style. For the traffic impact, intuitively you would think vehicles will be down. There is the challenge of construction management. The tree is a challenge. She needs a more defined description of proof of offsite parking. Overall she thinks they are creating a public amenity. It is a great improvement to what is existing. Councilman Frisch said Councilwoman Mullins has the right view. There is a noise ordinance that is there to be used. People are not shy about using it. It is an industry problem and is amplified in this town because of the lack of supply. This extends the range and we should reach out to find what is appropriate. Where the applicant is going is where we need to get to liven up the lodging base. It is a better product than I would have ever dreamed of a couple years ago. Never would have thought of a stand alone lodge with no free market or a huge ask. The existing businesses are probably a bigger hindrance to the city market business than a lodge. There are rules about two hour parking without a permit and some Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 16 enforcement to be used. The St Regis is a good resource to use. Some type of solidification more than what we have now would be great. We have no control over the change of use. His heart says it would be great to work out the price thing but his head says no. It’s a lot more trouble than its worth. Mick is right this is not the board to get into design review. He does not see a lot of faux anything in this town and he thinks that’s important. With technology and design you are seeing a lot more glass used and it’s a little simplistic to say don’t worry about what goes inside. We are seeing more and more buildings with inside lights that effect the external. He is supportive of the project. As far as the tree, he would love to see the tree and a hotel. Councilman Romero said at first reading he sent a clear message. You responded with great creativity, enthusiasm and problem solving posture. The conversation around the tree hasn’t happened enough. He would prefer to refer the issue back to P&Z and let it be resolved. If it does need to go to keep this deal together he would support it. He is comfortable with the neighborhood compatibility and prepared to move forward Jim True said we have to address how to have parking as a long term commitment. It needs to be discussed here. The applicant indicated they are working on a long term lease. The question is what happens if the lease goes away and it can’t be replaced. Councilman Romero said it would default back to seeking out other options in the private sector. There is still that idea of the Rio Grande as a back stop. Mr. True said it needs to be specified. He wants to make sure we have the ability to address it. There needs to be a term of years of a minimal lease if they are not able to provide a permanent easement. He is not sure what to recommend. Ms. Adams said they are comfortable with it as part of the development agreement. It is a requirement to get a CO and they can include much more specific language in the development agreement. Councilman Romero asked what the number of the initial base term is. Mr. Hunt said they are looking at five years with five year options. Ultimately he wants to control his own destiny. Councilman Romero said he is comfortable with those windows and the development agreement. Mr. True said a five year term with at least one five year option. Councilman Daily said the longest term we can get with a comfort range. Councilman Frisch said it needs to be in perpetuity. Mr. True said the development agreement would have terms to initially be five years with five year opti on and satisfactorily substitution thereafter. The specifics would be hammered out in the development agreement with satisfaction of the city attorney. Mayor Skadron said there is clear direction on the next steps with the tree. Ms. Adams said it would go back to P&Z with a way to keep the tree or put the permit appeal on hold. Councilman Frisch asked if the applicant is denied an appeal does it shut them out from coming back. His preference is to put the appeal on hold. Personally he does not want to deny the appeal and at the end of the day the tree comes down or they find an alternative plan. Mr. True said there is an option to put the appeal on hold. Mayor Skadron said his preference is to maintain the tree. It is a principle the community stands on. It is fundamental to the roots of the community. It is a much more fundamental principle of holding on to the things we prioritize. Mr. Haas said they have to go to P&Z for detailed review. If they are unable to do it through P&Z they will be back. Mr. Hunt said they are losing two trees and planting five. Mayor Skadron said as Phyllis said it is a tough environment to support development. Generally there is a strong dislike of development approvals. Specifically penthouses that arose from a previous councils attempt at a moratorium and how the land use code is inconsistent with community values. There has Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 17 been damage to the down town core we hold dear. He learned from people who sat here before. Rachel Richards said don’t let good be the enemy. Because the art museum causes angst it should not keep us from recognizing when something good comes in front of us. The AACP says reach broader demographics and this application accomplishes that without variances. At this time, I can find for the staff recommendation for approval and the applicant satisfies the approval. He needs further comment on the construction management plan, lighting and the bathroom. Is the construction management plan hammered out. Mr. Haas said it is clearly not hammered out yet. He is perfectly comfortable with the condition it be hammered out before detailed review. P&Z will hear it. Ms. Adams said the lighting is required to meet the standards in the code. Section 15 of the ordinance added low light emission glazing. Council agrees with the bathroom on the roof. Mr. True said he is concerned with section 9 it needs to be amended for the appeal of denial of the tree removal permit is tabled pending review by P&Z for further consideration of design of the project. The appeal needs to be tabled and in section 9A. For the deed restriction regarding the price of rooms we don’t have the structure in the statutes to create it. There is no mechanism for it. It is not appropriate at this time. It is a legitimate thing to consider for proper legislation. Ordinance #6, Series of 2015 – Amend Chapter 9.10 – Conduct of Municipal Elections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code Linda Manning, city clerk, told the Council the current election section of the municipal code does not speak to mail ballot elections. This would add a section setting out the dates specific to a mail ballot election. The petition window would be extended to the second Monday in March and the write in and withdraw dates would be based off of this date. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. Mayor Skadron stated he will not be voting in favor of this and we should not be going to all mail ballots. Roll call vote Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Romero, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, no. Motion carried. Ordinance #4, Series of 2015 – Right of Way Calculations Code Amendment Councilman Daily recused himself. Jessica Garrow, community development, told the Council this ordinance will amend how previous right of ways are calculated related to floor area. The current code excludes right of ways for the floor area density calculation. A 6,000 square foot property with no vacated right of way gets to use the entire property or 6,000 square feet. If there is a property with a vacated right of way with 1,000 vacated that area is excluded from the calculation and in this scenario you could build 5,000. This was added in 1975. At the time it exempted pre 1975 vacations. In 1988 the City recodified and the exemption was removed. The record is unclear if it was ever discussed. Currently the right of ways are excluded. The applicant is proposing to bring back the pre 1975 exemption. Using the same examples it would restore the development potential. The applicant proposes this for only the lodge zone district and Staff recommends approval. The impacted areas include everything in the lodge zone district. There are nine vacations that would be impacted affecting six properties. The St Regis alley was vacated in 1960 for 3,700 square feet of floor area. Right of ways two and three are the Sky. Four is the Sky and Aspen Alps. The Alps would need a planned development to take advantage of it. Five is Lift 1 from 1963. The right of way is on Dean Street and is City property and not developed. Seven is Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 18 South Aspen Street town homes. The alley is vacated and would need a planned development review. Eight is the Lift 1 condos. This would be the most impacted by the amendment. There is the potential for 5,400 square feet. There is no PUD overlay but there would be a planning review. Nine is the Aspen Alps and does not result in additional floor area. This is a very limited approach for restoring the development rights. Councilman Frisch asked if the areas listed would need to have a review to take advantage of this. Ms. Garrow said that is correct they would need to amend the PD. Lift one would trigger other reviews including growth management and design. Ms. Garrow met with P&Z and they are generally supportive. If it is working they should take a look and perhaps expand it. There was one public comment from David Wish. John Sarpa said they worked quite a bit with Staff on how to approach this. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. David Corbin, ski co, said in the larger context this deals with the Sky. It seems like the removal of the exemption in 88 did not have a public policy piece behind it. By not going back it would squeeze floor area and there is no point in squeezing FAR out of the lodging district. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Romero moved to approve Ordinance #4, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #39, Series of 2014 – 709 E Durant – Sky Hotel Planned Development/Subdivision Ms. Garrow stated this is the continued public hearing for the Sky Hotel. There are no dimensional variations. There are 107 units, 117 lodge bedrooms, 11 fractional units, 82 traditional bedrooms and 6 bunk rooms. There are also two affordable housing units and 3,400 square feet of commercial space. The overall floor area is 91,000 square feet. The height at its highest is 40 feet. They are providing 54 parking spaces and 12.5 for the Aspen Alps. There is just under 12,000 square feet of public amenity space. It exceeds the requirement by 7,500 square feet. All of the proposed amenities meet the code. Staff examined the location of the affordable housing units. There is a required special review for these units. They are at or above natural and finish grade. There are significant grade slopes. There is a generous entry and high ceilings. Staff recommends approval of the special review for affordable housing. This is the best location for them. The commercial design has no changes. There is a conditional use to replace the commercial uses on site. It is the same as today. For the growth management review the housing provided exceeds the requirement. Staff recommends approval. Sara Broughton showed the view from Durant and Spring with the addition of landscaping on the roof. She showed the Spring street view of the front door with the modified addition of roof landscape as well as the public amenity space indicating the landscaping. Mayor Skadron asked what is significant. Ms. Broughton said based on the feedback they spent time on the roof plan. They were thoughtful with the placement of the trees. There is a minor reconfiguration of the pool. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 19 Councilwoman Mullins asked about the construction management plan. Ms. Broughton stated they are working on that. Mr. Sarpa said they are still in discussion with the Alps. There are a lot of layers to this project. It is a great reflection of the community values. Hundreds of people have helped shape this. He honestly believes it meets an important niche at the base of the mountain. It is a great example of what can come out if we work together as a community. Mayor Skadron asked him to comment on the issues with the Alps. Mr. Sarpa said it is not so much around heights but the impacts of parking and construction management. Mayor Skadron asked for comments on what changed in the internal program. Mr. Sarpa said they eliminated the free market units and converted them to lodge units. When they reduced the free market they did not need that much affordable housing and converted some of that to lodging. Mayor Skadron said he is curious how the reduction of free market units replaced by the addition of fractional lodge units impacts the overall economics. Mr. Sarpa said typically it is less desirable. Whole ownership of a unit in downtown is an attractive market. Can we let go of that. Was it our preference to have that, you bet. It is lodging and can be rented more easily and frequently. Fractional blends into the lodge and is a hotter bed. Mayor Skadron asked for a comment on the south elevation and address the massing question. Ms. Garrow said staff recommendation was changes to elevation and roof forms. Council had discussion and did not share Staff’s concerns. Mr. Sarpa said it reads as a 2.5 story building. Ms. Broughton said it is very much in keeping with the chalet style. Mayor Skadron asked why staff felt more modifications were needed. Ms. Garrow said there are lots of roof forms here and they thought combining two was appropriate. Council did not share these concern and Staff was not going to get hung up on it. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. Jody Edwards said his primary concern is the issue Ann raised about the construction management plan. It will be impactful to the neighbors when working on Dean Street. The Chateau Chaumont are clients and their primary access is Dean Street. They need to ensure they have the ability to get into their homes as well as police, fire and ambulance. They have been assured by the applicant that will be taken into consideration but it does not seem clearly written in the ordinance. He would like assurance they will not have issues to access or emergency vehicles. It is a tight alley and that is the primary access. The only off street parking are the spaces along Dean. People need to get there. Mr. Sarpa said they don’t have a construction management plan yet. Mr. Edwards asked for specific times and already agreed to those. It will be accessible to emergency vehicles. Ms. Broughton said the contractor has been in all these meetings. 2. Dave Corbin, ski co, said he has spoken in favor of this in the past. As a ski operator projects like this are critical and as an effected neighbor and an adjacent neighbor we support this without qualification. Simply put we ask Council to approve. 3. Dave Cook said he waited to speak because he wanted to make sure they go to the finish line. He followed the development closely and wanted to add his support. He is a believer of what they presented. Public amenity is where it needs to be and he feels like this fills the void. It has met all the criteria. 4. Duncan Clauss stated he watched the process and fully supports the Sky development. He commend Council for holding a hard line. He commend the Sky team for being creative and smart. Councilman Romero said today the public amenity space is the pool and bar and you can see it and access it. The proposed is one elevation up and another on the roof and the likelihood Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 9, 2015 20 is diminished use. Mr. Clauss said he see an improvement on the use. The elevated design gives a better perspective of the mountain and you will see it coming down the hill. 5. Mick Ireland said he represents the Chateau Dumont. They support the project as proposed and want to express appreciation to the applicant for bringing it forward without variances. They look forward to working with the applicant on the details around construction. He thanked the applicant for their corporation and willingness to work. 6. Maleck Enlow said this project needs to happen for Aspen and the vitality of the town. We are a tourist based economy and without appropriate/attractive lodging it will not stay as competitive with other resorts. The Sky needs to be redeveloped because it’s a bit of a mess right now. We don’t need sky scrapers but we also don’t need to stay at one story level. We need to find a happy medium. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Romero stated he supports Staffs findings and various reviews. There is sufficient evidence to support the project. Councilman Frisch said he agrees with Councilman Romero and appreciates the support of the community. Councilwoman Mullins concurs with her fellow Councilmembers. Mayor Skadron stated he finds it satisfies the appropriate criteria. Councilman Frisch moved to approve Ordinance #39, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote Councilmembers Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins; yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Linda Manning City Clerk