Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20150622Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 1 CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION ................................................................................................... 2 COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2 NOTICE OF CALL UPS .............................................................................................................................. 2 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 2 ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2015 – Aspen Historical Society 620 W Bleeker Lot Split, TDRs .......... 3 ORDINANCE #22, Series of 2015 – Hutton Lot Split 725 Cemetery Lane ................................................ 4 ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 2015 – 530 W. Hallam Historic Landmark Lot Split ............................... 5 ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 2015 – HPC Work Session Code Amendment......................................... 5 RESOLUTION #64, SERIES OF 2015 – CC and C1 Policy Resolution ..................................................... 6 RESOLUTION #42, SERIES OF 2015 – Policy Direction – Residential Mitigation .................................. 8 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 2 At 5:05 pm Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Daily, Myrin and Frisch present. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION 1. Phyllis Bronson stated the Base 2 petitioners have looked like cult church members who may do more harm than good. The armageddon they fear may have already come. They are seeking to destroy the first viable good project. We are becoming a town of nimbys and losing vitality. We have wonderful small lodges but don’t have any projects that fit this demographic. We are being offered a gift of incalculable value. Base 1 and Base 2 well not perfect, are the first original projects in a long time and not about speculative real estate. The majority of Aspen elected the majority of you to be representative government and stand up for good projects. 2. Sara Plats said she started the North Mill artist building next to the Rio Grande park. She thanked the city for moving the bike path. She would like speed signs. She is dealing with a Comcast problem with an easement. She would like adjacent neighbors noticed when easements are approved. She asked the parks department to not make a lot of noise when cleaning in the park. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilmember Frisch said Food & Wine is a wonderful asset and a big success. 2. Mayor Skadron congratulated the Chamber, volunteers and City for a great Food & Wine postcard weekend. NOTICE OF CALL UPS 333 W Bleeker – No call up 61 Meadows Rd – No call up CONSENT CALENDAR Rubey Park IGA Mayor Skadron asked why are we seeing this now. John Kruger, transportation, said it is a timing issue. On February 9th Council passed the original IGA. This is restating it with the final numbers. There are no changes to the content just restating it with the final numbers. It was approved prior to the construction. Resolution 66 – USA Pro Challenge Contract Mayor Skadron asked if there is anything that is different from past years. Nancy Leslie, special events, replied the outreach will be heavy in July and August and being out front on traffic. The race will include Independence pass on both days. They are in the process of finalizing closure times with State Patrol. Mayor Skadron asked if the working budget is 300,000 dollars. Ms. Leslie replied it is a work in progress. Mayor Skadron asked if the 300,000 is our budget. Ms. Leslie said 125,000 dollars is allocated by the City. The rest is fundraised and sponsorship. Resolution 67 –Westin & Holiday Inn Hotel Contract – USA Pro Challenge Mayor Skadron asked what is the average room cost. Ms. Leslie replied 89 dollars, the same as last year. Mayor Skadron said the cost of the meals are variable. Ms. Leslie said the variable is due to some room attrition between now and the time of the bike race. The costs are fixed but how many are utilized is variable. Bill Tomcich, stay aspen snowmass, said the Westin and Wildwood provide two thirds of the room accommodations. The rest are at other properties. Only the one property is requiring a contract. The total room count is 678. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 3  Resolution #65, Series of 2015 – Ice Resurfacer Contract  Minutes – May 26, June 1, 8, 2015  Adoption of Charter Amendment Map  Resolution #70, Series of 2015 – Amended and Restated Rubey Park IGA  Resolution #66, Series of 2015 – USA Pro Challenge Contract  Resolution #67, Series of 2015 – Westin & Holiday Inn Hotel Contract – USA Pro Challenge  Resolution #68, Series of 2015 – Pickup Replacements for Water and Parks Departments Councilman Frisch moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2015 – Aspen Historical Society 620 W Bleeker Lot Split, TDRs Jennifer Phelan, community development, told the Council the museum currently sits on the 53,500 sq ft property in the west end. It is bounded by West Bleeker, North 6th Street, West Hallam and North 5th Street. The requests include memorializing the existing conditional use as a museum. There is also a request to subdivide a 9,000 sq ft lot on the corner of 6th and Hallam from the existing parcel and sever 3,000 sq ft of the allowable floor area as TDRs with the balance to be redeveloped as affordable housing. With this request to subdivide the new lot it creates a smaller side yard setback than allowed and the applicant is requesting a variance for a portion of the museum building. Staff is recommending the public hearing for July 27. Staff has recommended that the current conditions are appropriate for memorializing the existing conditional use of the property. Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, said they are proposing a 9,000 sq ft lot in the northwest corner of the property. They did commit to the lot never being fenced, the lot never being sold to a third party and any housing built would be deed restricted to museum use and remain open as a park. All access would come from the existing driveway. There would be very little change to the property. Councilman Myrin asked for more history of the last time it was raised to sever TDRs from the property beyond the minutes. Councilman Daily pointed out the conditional use review criteria and Staff found that three criteria not met. Councilman Frisch asked why are they doing this, revenue issues or a development game. He asked about the lot splits and what can be built. What is the community benefit for mucking up a beautiful piece of the west end. Mayor Skadron said he is also not clear about the motivation behind the application. He would like information on the history of the historical society becoming a taxing district. What are the stipulations around the City’s ability to dictate what it can and cannot do around the agreement. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #23, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 23 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, MEMORIALIZING A CONDITIONAL USE AND APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION, DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF HISTORIC TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR 620 W. BLEEKER STREET, LOTS A, B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q ,R, AND S BLOCK 23, CITY AND TOWNSITY OF ASPEN Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 4 Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Myrin. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #22, Series of 2015 – Hutton Lot Split 725 Cemetery Lane Hillary Seminick, community development, stated the applicant is requesting approval for a lot split that will divide the existing 39,704 sq ft parcel into two new parcels with parcel one being slightly larger than parcel two. Access will be provided through an easement in what will be parcel one. 725 has not been previously subdivided and is eligible for lot split. The Hutton lot is located in the R15 zone district where the minimum lot size is 15,000 sq ft. The dimensional characteristics of both new lots will comply with the R15 zone. There is an existing home on the property and it will be straddling the boundary between the new lots. Staff included a condition that will allow for the existence of the original building only. Staff recommendation is to adopt on first reading with the public hearing on July 13. Councilman Frisch asked if the assumption is a 4plex will be built. Ms. Seminick stated they can build two duplexes. There is no development proposed as part of this application. Councilman Daily asked if it is consistent with lot sizes on Cemetery lane. Ms. Seminick stated they are under code both at 17,681. When redeveloped they will be equal to what is allowed. Councilman Frisch asked if they are not asking for anything else. Ms. Seminick replied there is a condition addressing school land fees, park fees and affordable housing fees. The applicant receives a credit for the existing development for what is on the property. There is a condition that will split those fees. Mayor Skadron said the existing home straddles the boundary but it will be demolished. Ms. Seminick stated it is our understanding it will be. A plat needs to be submitted within 180 days. There is a condition that there needs to be no non-conformities and the house straddling is a non-conformity. They would not be able to submit the plat with the house there. Mayor Skadron asked about the non-exclusive access easement of 4,332 sq ft and how it is the same sq ft that reduces the lot two area. Brian McNellis, representing the applicant, stated it is by design. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #22, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 22 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE HUTTON LOT SPLIT FOR A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN LOTS 3 AND 12, SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING A PROTION OF THAT CERTIAN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 183 AT PAGE 271 IN THE RECORDS OF THE PITKIN COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD WHENCE THE WEST ¼ CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12 BEARS SOUTH 58 DEGREES 17 MINUTES WEST 1614.50 FEET; THENCCE SOUTH 76 DEGREES 26 MINUTES WEST 177.70 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25 DEGREES 14 MINUTES WEST 204.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 76 DEGREES 26 MINUTES WEST 219.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 13 DEGREES 34 MINUTES WEST 200.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD TO THE PONT OF Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 5 BEGINNING, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORAD; COMMONLY KNOWN AS 725 CEMETERY LANE. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #22, Series of 2015 of first reading; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 2015 – 530 W. Hallam Historic Landmark Lot Split Amy Simon, community development, told the Council this was passed by Council in April but there was an error in the noticing. They are asking for an amendment to change the effective date to change it to 30 days after tonight’s review. The Ordinance is for a lot split at 530 Hallam Street. The additions will be demolished and relocated on site with a modest addition. The lot will be subdivided. Overall square footage is 700 more than what is there today. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #10, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 2015 – HPC Work Session Code Amendment Ms. Simon stated this is the third step in the code amendment process. Staffs original proposal was to eliminate work sessions from the HPC process. Currently, work sessions are required when asking for floor area bonus and this ordinance will make that optional. They are also trying to better define what must be submitted including overall site plan, design intent, massing and programming. Full public notice will be provided and the discussion will be non-binding. The other code amendment is related to the building code and sites a specific section of the code and this will make it more generic. The ordinance will also clarify when in the process a floor area bonus is granted. Councilman Frisch said he likes the progress and it is headed in the right direction. Councilman Myrin asked if notice is given when a TDR is landed on a non-historic property. Ms. Simon replied no. He asked why would notice be required for this. Mr. Bendon replied this is for a development application. Our intent is to make sure everyone knows a development application is pending. Councilman Myrin asked if they received any public comment on this. Ms. Simon replied no. Mr. Bendon stated Council feels it is good dialog. Our interest is in making sure neighbors have full access and information. Mr. True said a lot of this came from the attorney’s office. They were legal meetings but there was no notice. We reviewed the process and felt the change was needed. Mayor Skadron said work sessions are non-binding and it appears to be some action is taking place. The public isn’t partaking fully. This is protecting the public’s interest. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. Peter Fornell stated the work session process is helpful. He supports the notion to allow those to continue to happen and not making them mandatory. He would have been happy to send out a public notice. Since it is non-binding it might not be inappropriate to have public comment. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 6 Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #13, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #64, SERIES OF 2015 – CC and C1 Policy Resolution Mr. Bendon, said this is a policy resolution and the first step to initiate a code amendment for the commercial core and commercial zone districts. Staff initiated this request to fix some unintended consequences of down zoning of Ordinance 25 of 2012. It reduced allowable height and eliminate free market residential use. As a consequence the removal of free market created a bunch of non-conforming uses. This created complications including investment limitations to no more than 10 percent per year. This is a somewhat old planning concept. We are in a process of code amendments to the non- conforming zone chapter. Staff also hears a non-conforming use presents financing challenges to owners. Staff is proposing amendments to these zone districts. Staff is proposing something short of what the Concept 600 folks are looking for. We recognize the 10 percent limitation is an obstacle and not sure what the purpose is. Staff reviewed this with P&Z and they felt comfortable with our recommendation. Staff is asking Council to endorse the policy and move into code amendments. Councilman Myrin said the applicant could pursue their own code changes. Do you think that would be different. Mr. Bendon said we have not even analyzed that. It would be a PD or code change. We try to do amendments on a zone district wide basis without calling out a single property. It also goes against a planned development to address an individual property. Creating property specific carve outs in the zoning code is against referendum 1. Councilman Myrin asked if it would make sense to just restore the rights that the previous ordinance took away. Mr. Bendon replied their attempt is to restore the conforming status to the residential units downtown. We are not trying to undo ordinance 25. They recognize the units prior to 25 as allowed uses. Councilman Frisch stated in 2012 the plan was no more free market residential and the height. We were focused on south of Main Street. There are parcels north that have it. Is this building zoned properly. Mr. Bendon said it is a different kind of condition since it is on the North side of Main. Councilman Frisch said it is nice to treat all the buildings the same. Did the 10 percent stipulation have anything to do with ordinance 25. Mr. Bendon replied no, it has been around for decades. Councilman Frisch asked if we want to get rid of it. Mr. Bendon said yes. The issue of the non-conforming status is something we should initiate and take care of. Councilman Frisch asked if improvement leads in to expanding. Are there limitations on combining units. Mr. Bendon said there are unit size limitations in the code prior to ordinance 25. It is possible to expand a condo unit. He encouraged Council to look at this as a district wide thing. Councilman Frisch said he would like to come up with a system wide program as much as possible. The original intent of ordinance 25 served the community well. How do we tweak the existing complexes. Mr. Bendon said there is a necessity to treat everyone equally. Zoning applies to the properties. We regulate land and properties. He encourages council to recognize there is that aspect of zoning and to look at it on an objective basis. Councilman Daily said the purpose of this policy resolution is understandable. He is willing to consider the expansion of units. In allowing the establishment of new free market residential units, he can see there may be risks associated with it. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 7 1. Herb Klein, representing the Concept 600 owners, said the owners feel they are collateral damage. It is a mixed use building with long time local residents. There are 24- 2 bedroom units, 6- 3 bed room units. It is a non-conforming building so no expansion can take place. He prepared ordinance language that can solve the problem. They would like to have deck expansion permitted as well as roof overhangs on the top floor. Combining units has always been considered expansion even though no new square footage has been created. They would like to be able to be eligible to apply to combine units. He handed out proposed amended language. 2. Lindsay Smith stated she lived here for 15 years. She handed out photos of the porch extension. She told Council they need help in restoring the rights they had prior to ordinance 25. 3. Ed Van Walraven, co-owner of one of the units said upgrades are necessary. He rents the unit out to working locals at less than market rate. 4. Pat Auldhouse , owner since 1984. Spoke about heat and snow accumulation on the fourth floor deck without a roof. Would like the ability to expand and build a roof over the deck that they had prior to ordinance 25. 5. Bob - Unit 208. Over 40 year owner with long term rental, short term rental and seasonal rental. Not a luxury condo but unique. Would like to get their rights back so they can stay unique. 6. Bill Stirling said he is a business resident of the building since 1978. He has witnessed the ebb and flow of the building. He wants to make it a level playing field. The unintended consequence has been the inability of being able to get loans due to the non-conforming nature. 7. Paul Otto is the past president and current treasurer of Riverview condos. When I heard what happened to concept 600 without being notified I was scared it could happen to us. Amazed this process has become so complicated. He urged council to make an exception and give it to concept 600. 8. Jim Smith, president of concept 600 HOA. Would like to have the property rights back. There are exceptions in the code for specific buidings/areas. He would like the property rights back and to be conforming. They will not and cannot increase the size of their building. 9. Peter Fornell commend council and comdev for recognizing an unintended consequence and taking action on it. It is not specific to the concept 600 building but every property in the cc and c1 zone. He urged council not to spot zone. Correct unintended consequence across the range it was done. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Myrin pointed out page 383 of the packet. His preference is to start with c1 since it is a smaller zone and not apply with cc until we know what it will impact. He would like to see ordinance 25 apply as an effective date for the zone. Councilman Daily said he is comfortable acting on both cc and c1. He thinks Herb Klein’s language is appropriate. Mr. Bendon said the resolution addresses the non-conforming status. There needs to be more analysis on decks and overhangs but not weave that into zone districts. Councilman Frisch said the nonconformity issue needs taken care of as soon as possible and the 10 percent cap needs taken care of. Improve means not adding an extra inch just making what I have better. I don’t want improve to mean expand. We need an answer to a porch overhang as an expansion question. He is fine with combination as long as they don’t go over the 2000 limit. As far as expanding decks and normal expansions I want to treat everyone the same in CC and C1. He does not want to get into spot zoning. Mayor Skadron said staff’s recommendation addresses the unintended consequences by ordinance 25. It does not allow anything defined as an expansion. Concept 600 also has a recommendation that addresses the consequences and allows for expansions. Councilman Myrin also has a recommendation but only for Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 8 C1. Mr. Bendon does not have the same apprehension as Councilman Myrin. Councilman Myrin said he would like to understand the impact of CC more. Mayor Skadron said it would act to change the issues the city created by putting back in place the uses and privileges prior to ordinance 25 but Peter is right and we should not zone around one building. We need to restore these permissions without spot zoning. He supports the Staff recommendation. Councilman Daily said he is pretty close to Councilman Myrin. He supports both zone districts and allow for certain expansions already allowed by the code. Councilman Frisch said he does not have a problem with expansion as long as it sticks to the rules, no problem with both zones, no problem with porch or roof. The expansion of decks needs more thought. The goal is to see as many lights on in units as possible and treat everyone as fair and equal as possible. Councilman Myrin moved to approve Resolution #64, series of 2015 with modification to section one to strike the second to last line “expansion of existing free market residential units and the word and” Mayor Skadron stated he will not support this. He is not prepared to act in a way with unintended consequences that will need to be undone in the future. While he believes the owners of Concept 600 should have their rights restored, he believes it should be done without undoing the intent of ordinance 25. Councilman Frisch asked him what concerns him the most and he replied expansion/combining of units. Councilman Myrin said everyone else in CC and C1 have to follow the code when expanding units except for non-conforming units and this is about aligning those rights. This is about trying to be upfront. Mayor Skadron said he agrees with correcting the unintended consequence of ordinance 25. Second by Councilman Frisch. All in favor except Mayor Skadron. 3 to 1 vote. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #42, SERIES OF 2015 – Policy Direction – Residential Mitigation Mr. Bendon said the City has impact mitigation requirements to offset the impacts of additional development on the community for parks, schools, transportation, air quality and housing. These are to offset new development. When something is torn down only the new development has the impact fees assessed. Residential impact fees have been in place since 1990 at a rate of one FTE for every 2000 sq ft of development and was lowered to one FTE for every 3000 sq ft. There is a need to update the requirement. Staff contracted with RRC associates last year. The report suggested the standard should be a max of .445 FTE for 3000 sq ft of floor area. He will focus on questions 5, 6 and 11 from the memo. #5- credit provided for existence of RETT. The presence of the tax shouldn’t interfere with new development. They don’t need to overlap. Lowering the impact fee in exchange for the tax may be work around to the tax. Mike Maple suggested to provide a reduction in the impact mitigation requirement based on the number of employee years that the property has supported the workforce. Staff has some concerns that the impact requirements now are based on the impact the community experiences because of expansion. We currently have in place the ability for deferral of mitigation requirement until the property is sold to a nonworking resident. This helps address self mitigation. There are challenges of administrating the program. Staff is not recommending in favor of Mr. Maples approach. The RETT tax is in place to try to address a long standing community problem. The presence of the tax does not undo or cure the impacts on the community when a property expands. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 9 #6 – Should City assess the full impact fee. We can assess up to 100 percent of the fee. The standard lowering is already a significant reduction. #11 – Should cash in lieu continue as a mitigation option. Staff recommends it continue. They recommend examining an upper limit as to what it accepts. Cash in lieu is the least desirable option. Affordable housing certificates is a relatively new program. They suggest keeping cash in lieu but keep an upper limit. Councilman Myrin asked about the report results. Five percent utilize pet sitters and five percent use child care. He questioned the results. Mr. Bendon said RRC was pleased with the result rate and statistical accuracy. Our recommendation is the report is solid. Councilman Myrin said some things don’t feel right. He supports #1, needs to know more for #2, agree with Council on #3 and #4, agrees with Staff on #5. Councilman Frisch said he appreciates they are from different pots but they are from the same pocketbook. He is sensitive to the view of what is fair. Councilman Daily supports Staff’s recommendation. He agrees with the comment in the memo that providing an impact fee credit to compensate for the applicability of this tax effectively waives the voter approved tax. If we go down that road we should be talking to the voters not Council. Mayor Skadron said he agrees with Staff’s recommendation. Applying an impact fee waiver and whether it should be adjusted should be asked to the voters not to Council. #6- Should the City assess the full impact fee. Staff recommended the full impact fee should be assessed. Councilman Frisch said we need to see how the numbers play out. This gets multiplied by something. If that number becomes too much then we have a discussion. Mayor Skadron said if we talk about assessing an impact fee at a rate less than the full amount it does not mean the community feels less of an impact. Councilman Myrin agrees with Staff. Councilman Daily agrees with Staff. Mayor Skadron agrees with staff. #11 – Should cash in lieu continue as a mitigation option. Councilman Frisch said he agrees with staff. Collecting little bits of money for a big project is a good option. We need to make sure what we collect in whatever form actually houses the workers. Is the program being effective. Mayor Skadron said it places the burden of mitigation on the community’s shoulders. Councilman Frisch said as long as we collect the right amount of money to house the worker. Councilman Daily agrees it should remain an option. Looking at placing an upper limit is worth talking about. Councilman Myrin agreed with considering upper limit. His hesitation is any cash in lieu. We should incentivize credits. All options need to reflect true market value and float with the market over time. Eliminate cash in lieu for all but less than one FTE. Mayor Skadron said he thinks Councilman Myrin is right. Councilman Frisch said if someone pays the RETT and doesn’t come here versus someone who lives here there needs to be something different for what they pay. Mr. Bendon said it is tricky to apply different Regular Meeting Aspen City Council June 22, 2015 10 policies to people based on their behavior. It is problematic territory. That is why the deferral program exists. Mitigating your own impact. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. Peter Fornell said for the RETT he is sensitive that people are paying to mitigate more than once and a house is paying more than once. Waivers to individuals who can prove they live and work in their home and the loss they will incur in RETT when they sell. There are logistical nightmares and it speaks of fraud. Already reaping a number of values of the community. If the cash in lieu number got the adjustment it needed you will get the benefit of more than me sitting here. All three of those will produce what we want. We need to keep cash in lieu so we have a mechanism to know what to mitigate for different categories. 2. Tim Semarau said he can’t understand why residential mitigation is wildly different than commercial mitigation. The inconsistencies are inappropriate. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Frisch asked about timing. Mr. Bendon said the prospect of the fee going down has put some people in a perplexing situation. It is good to move this to the ordinance phase. They are close enough to go in to ordinance phase. Councilman Myrin said he needs more information on the survey but this should move forward. He has hesitation on #11 and would lean towards removing the cash in lieu. Councilman Myrin moved to approve Resolution #43 with modification to strike the underlined sentence; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor except Councilman Myrin. 3 to 1 vote. Motion carried. Councilman Frisch moved to continue the Call up of HPC approval of 233 E Hallam Street to July 13, 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 10:00pm; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. Linda Manning, City Clerk.