HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20240226AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
February 26, 2024
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen
I.Work Session
I.A GMQS Demolition Allotment Program
I.B Downtowner Service Territory
Zoom Meeting Instructions
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:
Please click this URL to join: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85884849000?
pwd=3x8IiuEANlby1n0rHuOZvaFxZBZv0p.1
Passcode: 81611
Or join by phone:
Dial:
US: +1 346 248 7799
Webinar ID: 858 8484 9000
Passcode: 81611
International numbers available: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kczHTlfKt
2.26.24_Demo Allotment Worksession.docx
downtowner FINAL work session memo 2-26-24.docx
1
1
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council
FROM:Ben Anderson, Community Development Director
MEMO DATE:February 20, 2024
MEETING DATE:February 26, 2024
RE:Work Session Discussion:
GMQS Demolition Allotment Program
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This work session’s purpose is to follow-up on the Council’s
interest to hold further conversation on the GMQS Demolition Allotments Program. In this
memo and in the discussion, staff will update Council on the status of the program and
will provide a framework for possible changes to the program, should a majority of Council
have interest in pursuing Land Use Code Amendments. If Amendments are desired, staff
would ask for majority direction to pursue a Policy Resolution and initial guidance about
the specific topics for possible amendments.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
As one of the outcomes of Ordinance #13, Series of 2022 (Moratorium response), Council
implemented a package of new code language and regulations related to single-family
and duplex demolition. Central to these changes was the use of the GMQS Allotment
system to limit single-family and duplex demolitions to six per year.
The rationale for the demolition-related code changes emanated from comments from
Council and the community related to the felt and observed impacts of development –
particularly in single-family and duplex redevelopment scenarios that involved demolition.
The following impacts of this type of development were identified:
More modestly sized and constructed, older homes being replaced with much
larger and more complex new homes.
Demolition and construction waste impacts at the landfill.
Neighbor noise and other impacts from intense residential construction activity.
Significant employee generation impacts from initial construction and long-term
maintenance and operations.
The carbon impacts related to demolition, construction and long-term operations
and maintenance of redeveloped single-family and duplex homes.
In response to these identified impacts, staff and the consultant teams analyzed these
comments against the reality of development context and potential regulatory responses
within the Land Use Code. Recommendations were made for potential amendments.
2
Page 2 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
While certainly a topic that was debated during the adoption of Ordinance #13, it seemed
clear the outcomes generated by this type of development were consistent with the
Purpose Statement at the beginning of the GMQS chapter of the LUC (26.470.010):
a)Implement the goals and policies for the City and the Aspen Area Community Plan;
b)Ensure that new growth occurs in an orderly and efficient manner in the City;
c)Ensure sufficient public facilities are present to accommodate new growth and
development;
d)Ensure that new growth and development is designed and constructed to maintain the
character and ambiance of the City;
e)Ensure the presence of an adequate supply of affordable housing, businesses and events
that serve the local, permanent community and the area’s tourist base;
f)Ensure that growth does not overextend the community’s ability to provide support
services, including employee housing, traffic control and parking; and,
g)Ensure that resulting employees generated and impacts created by development and
redevelopment are mitigated by said development and redevelopment.
Council agreed to the policy and regulatory direction with clear understanding that it was
aligned with community expectations, the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), and
elements of the purpose statement above in responding to and mitigating the impacts of
growth and development.
Status of the Program
Below is a tracking spreadsheet that shows the demolition allotments issued to
date. Six allotments were issued for 2022 and 2023. Four 2024 allotments were
issued as a result of an appeal in summer of 2023.
In December of 2023, Council passed Ordinance #23, Series of 2023 that
implemented a lottery system for the issuance of available annual allotments. In
addition, this same Ordinance granted two (2) additional 2024 allotments.On
3
Page 3 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
February 20, 2024, a lottery was held for the four available 2024 allotments. 15
applications were deemed complete and compliant and vied for the available
allotments. Staff will have an update about the outcomes of the lottery at the work
session discussion.
To date, not a single Demolition Allotment project has been physically demolished.
The first batch of building permits for projects with 2022 and 2023 allotments (4
projects) should be issued in the next few weeks. As a consequence, the program
has not yet provided one of its most important outcomes – data. Two requirements
of the program require reporting on construction waste diversion (both during
demolition and in the construction of the new home) and the embodied carbon
outcomes of the demolition and redevelopment.
STAFF DISCUSSION:
Before identifying areas that Council may wish to consider for potential LUC changes,
staff would like to address two criticisms of the program that that have been part of
previous Council discussion.
First, during discussion related to the passage of Ordinance #23, Series of 2023, a
comment from a Council member indicated that they perceive the Demolition Allotment
Program to be “petty”. The word “petty” can mean many things, but most commonly it
means something that is small, or of little importance, or trivial.
During the moratorium work, the primary concerns that staff encountered directly from
many members of the community – were related to the massive residential construction
projects that were dominating neighborhoods, the changed nature of a property or of a
neighborhood following a demolition and redevelopment project, and the environmental
and neighborhood impacts created by the redevelopment of modest homes into much
larger homes. As staff navigated these comments and scanned Aspen’s development
context, it became clear that single-family and duplex demolition projects were the
development type that were directly causing many of the negative externalities that the
community and City Council were concerned about. While there can be honest
disagreement about the Demolition Allotment Program, the program is responding to
problems that can hardly be described as “petty”.
Second, at the Council table and from members of the community the Demolition
Allotment Program has been described as “mis-guided”, “a failure” and under several
other negative framings. From staff’s view, the program cannot yet be evaluated in this
way. Until we have projects that are realized and provide the data and development
outcomes that the program was designed to produce, it seems premature to label the
program either positively or negatively. It is an experiment that we do not yet have any
results from.
If the negative comments have merit, it could be that they are directed and reflect
concerns about the application process to this point. While staff agrees that the
application process should have considered the lengths that applicants or their
4
Page 4 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
representatives would go beyond the norms within the typical the land use application
process, the challenges have not translated into a catastrophe. While Council has
needed to consider appeals and staff (including the City Attorneys) have needed to spend
additional time processing applications and appeals, the current outcomes within the
program are exactly as Council intended. Following the 2024 application period – six
2022 allotments have been issued, six 2023 allotments have been issued, and eight 2024
allotments have been issued.
Staff is clear that disagreement with this program exists in the community and at the
Council table. However, staff remains committed to the concept of the program, believes
that it is a fully legitimate response to the issues that Council and the community were
responding to in declaring the moratorium, and is confident that once demolition allotment
projects materialize – that the program will deliver the types of projects and resulting data
that the program was intended to produce. With the improvements made to the
application process and selection of annual allotments, staff is currently satisfied with the
status quo.
Potential Changes
In previous discussions with Council, there have been suggestions made for changes to
the program – from eliminating the program in its entirety to nuanced changes to individual
elements of the program. Below are brief descriptions of the ideas that staff has heard at
least one member of Council suggest.
Expanding the number of annual allotments
When Ordinance #13, Series of 2022 was being finalized, staff proposed a range of
the number of annual allotments that may be appropriate – and Council agreed to
six as the number. In the years leading up to the ordinance, the highest number of
demolition permits that we saw in a year was thirteen, but over the course of nine or
ten years of tracking, the average was roughly six per year. Since the demolition
allotment program was initiated, we had twelve eligible applications in August 2022.
All twelve were granted either a 2022 or 2023 allotment. We received eight
applications over the course of 2023. Four were granted an allotment on appeal,
two were denied on appeal, one pursued a “long-time local” and was denied, one
pursued a “long-time local” allotment and will be in front of City Council in the near
future (this application appears to meet the criteria). As stated previously, fifteen
applications are in the lottery for the four available 2024 allotments.
In thinking about whether expanding the number of allotments is appropriate, it
should be noted that based on the allotments issued to date, the community will
likely be experiencing twenty-one demolition and redevelopment projects in the near
future – based on the allotments issued to date (or are on the verge of being issued).
Again, the first 3 or 4 of these projects will be getting permits in the coming weeks.
5
Page 5 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
Changing the criteria for getting an allotment
There have been suggestions that demolition and redevelopment projects could be
subject to:
Further increases to the construction and demolition waste diversion rate.
Further incentives in the movement toward electrification.
Alternative affordable housing mitigation requirements.
Other heightened standards in delivering community benefits from this
impactful development activity.
There could be an interesting relationship between a larger number of annual
allotments being made available combined with a heightened set of standards. If
Council were desiring to change standards, staff continues to believe that a
“competition” between applications would be difficult to manage and apply in a fair
and consistent manner. Consistent standards that are either met or not met remain
staff’s preference – should changes be desired.
Modifying the criteria for getting a “long-time local” allotment
Staff struggles with the concept of defining a “local” or what “long-time” means.
While staff certainly understands the desire to make sure that policies are
distinguishing Aspen’s speculative real estate development market from the
interests of families that have lived here full-time and contributed over decades to
the community, the ownership structures and relationships present in the community
are difficult to differentiate in a way that is fair and can be applied consistently.
Giving preference in the allocation of allotments to homes that are of a certain
age
During the moratorium outreach, staff heard concerns that community members felt
that increasingly newer and newer homes were being demolished and redeveloped.
It is also true that some homes that are now 40, 50, or 60 years old were not built
particularly well in the first place. However, to just say that a home that is of this
vintage should be torn down is missing some crucial distinctions and nuance:
Not all homes are built alike. Some were built well, others were not. Some
have architectural interest, others do not. Anecdotally, my parents live in a
home built in 1958. While it has needed maintenance and renovation, it would
be a shame if it were demolished as it has great mid-century architectural
character.
If we as a community write off homes from the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s (and
90s) as unworthy of our attention and based in an assumption that they should
be torn down, we could lose a whole generation of homes from this era, that
also contribute to Aspen’s architectural fabric. If Aspen was a different place in
the 1920’s, it would have been parallel to today in simply stating that all of the
Victorians were deserving and assumed to be ripe for demolition. Keep in mind
that many of our Victorian structures were not initially built all that well, either.
6
Page 6 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
Much has been said about the poor energy inefficiency of older homes.
While some homes are easier to upgrade than others, a renovation project that
improves insulation and upgrades windows and mechanical systems would be
a far more sustainable project than a full demolition and redevelopment. One of
the data points that we hope to get from these demolition allotment projects is a
reporting and a holistic evaluation of the embodied carbon calculation.
Giving a weighted advantage in a future lottery selection to projects that
applied but were not selected in a previous year(s).
This is essentially how APCHA applicants are treated in lotteries for ownership units.
It could be done, but a fair, equitable, and trackable system would need to be
implemented.
Provide additional incentives for significant renovation projects that do not
pursue demolition.
Appropriate and effective incentive programs are difficult to arrive at within Aspen’s
real estate context, but a package of incentives could be out together for projects
that upgrade and modernize a home rather than a full demolition/redevelopment
project.
Eliminate the program entirely.
Five years from now, as 15 or more of the allotted demolition projects are complete
and have provided a set of examples and connected data on which to evaluate the
program, and no tangible benefits are identified – staff would likely be advocates for
getting rid of the demolition allotment program. However, as stated previously, staff
believes the pursuit of this end is wholly premature and that the potential of the
program to deliver community benefit remains.
CONCLUSION:
For some members of the community, particularly those engaged in speculative real
estate development and long-time local homeowners, the initiation of the demolition
allotment program has been concerning. Others in the community see a program with
the potential to mitigate and pace the redevelopment pressures that are transforming
neighbors. Others see it as another tool to help protect our landfill from construction
waste and to create additional sustainability within our built environment. Staff
acknowledges the presence and legitimacy of all these perspectives. While staff
continues to support the program’s potential and in general, the status quo, staff is also
committed to supportively responding to the majority Council position should change be
desired.
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL:
1) Does Council support the future consideration of a Policy Resolution that
would open up sections of the Land Use Code to facilitate changes to the
GMQS Demolition Allotment Program?
7
Page 7 of 7
Development Allotment Application Process
2) If yes to Question #1, what specific areas of the program would Council
desire to consider for amendments within a Policy Resolution.
Note: An approved Policy Resolution would not commit Council to a set of
amendments or even establish specific amendments. The Policy Resolution
simply provides direction to staff to pursue code amendments in a particular part
of the code and to implement a specific policy outcome.
8
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council
FROM:Pete Rice, P.E., Director of Transportation and Parking
Lynn Rumbaugh, TDM-cp, Mobility Division Manager
THROUGH:Tyler Christoff, Assistant Director of Public Works
Scott Miller, Director of Public Works
MEETING DATE:February 26, 2024
RE:Downtowner Program Update
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
This memo provides information and a brief history of micro-transit service in Aspen
including the current service boundaries and relationship to the Comprehensive
Transportation and Parking Plan (“Aspen Gets Us There”) currently in process. Staff
requests feedback from Council regarding any desired modifications to service goals,
feedback on service quality, or delivery.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND
This memo provides background on the history and current operation of Aspen’s micro-
transit service operated by Downtowner Holdings, LLC (referred to as Downtowner).
Micro-transit is defined by the National Association for Transit technology as on-demand
service available to the general public that uses app-enabled trip requests. The service
can be provided through various models such as the installation of specialized software
on public transit agency buses or the contracting of a turnkey provider. In the public
transportation industry, micro-transit is utilized primarily as a complement to fixed route
transit. Micro-transit supports fixed-route service in several ways:
service to/from a transit hub (first/last mile),
service in areas and/or periods of time where fixed route is not available, and
9
2
service in areas and/or period of time where fixed route is not well-utilized.
In 2016, at Council’s direction, an RFP was issued for the provision of micro-transit
service between the downtown core and nearby neighborhoods. At the time, the service
was aimed at reducing the demand for single occupied vehicles parking within the
downtown core and offering an alternative for trips to downtown shops, restaurants, and
events. Since that time, two additional contracts have been awarded via the City’s
procurement process. The City’s current micro-transit agreement, approved in 2023,
allows for up to five years of service provided fare free to the customer. The contract
total for 2024 service is $678,864.00. Service is turnkey, with app, drivers and vehicles
provided by Downtowner Holdings, LLC.
Downtowner service has carried over 480,440 riders since 2016. In 2023, Downtowner
served 74,141 passengers who traveled an average of .69 miles. The average wait time
for service in 2023 was nine minutes with the customer service rating averaging 4.96
out of a possible five. Customer feedback from the Downtowner app’s push survey
indicates that 59% of respondents replaced a personal vehicle trip with Downtowner
service.
The 2024 winter fleet consists of two electric Chevy Bolts and a Ford Transit shuttle
vehicle. The Ford Transit was added to the fleet to improve ADA access for vulnerable
users and to add capacity without adding multiple cars during the 2020/2021 winter.
Downtowner and City staff have been considering hybrid and electric options for as an
alternative to the Ford Transit which is budgeted for 2024. Considerations when
changing the fleet include the balance of technology and the movement of more
passengers in potentially fewer vehicles.
DISCUSSION:
The discussion portion of this memo focuses on service span, service area boundaries,
possible regionalization, and micro-transit’s role in the Aspen Gets Us There planning
process.
10
3
Service Span: Micro-transit service operates daily from 8:00am-11:00pm in the winter
season and from 10:00am-11:00pm in the spring, summer and fall. In general, the
busiest hours for service request are between 3pm-10pm, with the 2023 peak request
occurring at 6:00pm. Service hours are being analyzed as part of the current Aspen
Gets Us There planning process and staff can present options that include modifications
with estimated funds per Council direction.
Service Boundaries: The existing service area boundaries are generally between Aspen
Mountain to the south, Gillespie and Puppy Smith Streets to the north, 8th Street to the
west and Midland/Crystal Lake Road to the east. A boundary map is included in this
memo as Attachment A, along with a trip request map. The current service area was
developed with the following factors in mind, in keeping with the objectives for the
Downtowner set forth by Council in 2016, which necessitated efficiency, convenience,
and focus on high-demand core areas:
service goal: focusing service on the Council focused goal of providing quick trips
between the downtown core and nearby neighborhoods,
service quality: maintaining a 15-minute level of service as much as possible,
service efficiency: focusing service on neighborhoods lacking the highest level of
transit,
private sector concerns: reducing private sector concerns regarding competition.
A variety of service area modifications are being assessed as part of the current Aspen
Gets Us There planning process, discussed further below. Changes to service
boundaries can be made with Council direction and approval of funds necessary to
facilitate directed changes.
Regionalization of Micro-Transit: Downtowner has been providing micro-transit in Basalt
(Basalt Connect) with additional communities likely to be added in 2024. With that in
mind, staff from a variety of valley communities have begun discussions on the
11
4
development of a regional micro-transit app and a co-branding effort as a means of
making service seamless for the customer.
Gets Us There Planning: In the fall of 2023, the City kicked off a Comprehensive
Transportation and Parking Study in partnership with Walker Consultants. This process
has been branded Aspen Gets Us There. Through the fall and winter of 2023, the
project completed its discovery and visioning phase which included an in-depth review
of existing conditions and extensive public outreach.
From September through February, the project focused on an initial round of outreach
including a project website and public survey, along with the staging of several in-depth
focus groups and pop-up events. A third round of outreach will occur in April, as will a
presentation to Council work session for April 1.
Specific to Downtowner service, the Aspen Gets Us There planning process collected
feedback on six service area expansion suggestions via its project web page and
surveys. These comments focused on Mountain Valley, Cemetery Lane and the North
40. Comments have also been received supporting expanded service hours.
Additionally, the team has fielded both interests and concern about micro transit
expansion in its focus group meetings and pop-up events which are paraphrased below:
interest in further utilizing micro-transit for first/last mile transit connections,
interest in maximizing resources by using micro-transit in place of fixed route
during seasons or times when demand is lower,
concerns about expanding transit, micro-transit or any other single
service/transportation option as a “silver bullet” without clear standards or an
understanding of how expansions would advance broader goals and priorities,
concerns about the potential that expanded micro-transit service would add more
vehicles to the roadway, contributing to existing congestion,
concerns about increasing micro-transit in areas well-served by fixed-route
services and other transportation choices,
12
5
concerns that expanding the service boundary could result in a decreased level
of service overall, and
concerns about pulling riders from private providers’ services and/or from existing
fixed route transit.
As a next step in the planning process, staff and the consultant team are excited to look
at options for expansion to hours or service area that have potential to reduce private
vehicle trips, complement fixed route transit and provide a service option in areas where
fixed route is not efficient or available, or where other access/mobility concerns exist.
Staff and the consultant team seek to balance the expansion of services carefully
against the above concerns, while providing a comprehensive set of tangible
transportation and parking improvements that will advance Council’s goals and
priorities.
A discussion on specific plan recommendations, including those related to micro-transit
will be presented to Council on April 1.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
Financial requests are not included in this memo. Staff can explore modifications to
current contracts and financial impacts based on any proposed changes from the
Council table. Staff will bring any budget requests forward based upon changes
requested by Council and/or approved through the ongoing planning process assessing
mobility holistically.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:Micro-transit trips that reduce single-occupant vehicle
use have a positive impact on Greenhouse Gas emission goals and improved air
quality. On-road transportation emissions (i.e. tailpipe emissions) from gasoline/diesel
powered vehicles represent 11% of Aspen’s total emissions according to the 2020
Community-wide GHG Report. While transit will play a critical role in reducing on-road
emissions in the long-term, the use of smaller, fuel-efficient vehicles has the potential to
quickly reduce emissions especially in low-density neighborhoods such as in the west
13
6
end which has limited transit services. As the City continues to support flexible micro-
transit services it is important to weigh the competing interests from high utilization of
these services, and the overall positive environmental impacts of fewer personal
vehicles on the road, with the potential for increased congestion or Vehicle Miles
Traveled that may result from circulating micro-transit vehicles.
ALTERNATIVES:Council may immediately direct staff to review alternatives beyond
service span and service area if so desired and begin implementation without utilizing
the Aspen Gets Us There planning process.
A second alternative would include Council setting the goal for micro-transit mobility and
allow staff to review service area based on the goal for immediate implementation.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that Council provide any requested changes which can be reviewed
for budgetary and ridership impact. This information can be brought back to Council at
the upcoming Gets Us There work session, scheduled for April 1.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Service Boundary Map and Trip Requests
14
7
ATTACHMENT A
Downtowner Service Area and 2023 Trip Requests Map
Service Area
15
8
2023 trip requests
16
9
17