Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20161205Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 1 CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2 COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS .......................................................................................................... 2 AGENDA DELETIONS ............................................................................................................................... 2 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 3 Minutes – November 28, 2016 .............................................................................................................. 3 Chain Store Item – ........................................................................................................................................ 3 ORDINANCE #34, SERIES OF 2016 – View Planes .................................................................................. 5 RESOLUTION #175, SERIES OF 2016 – Extension of Vested Rights – Salon Tullio ............................... 6 ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2016 – Ranger Station Subdivision – Subdivision Amendment and associated reviews ......................................................................................................................................... 7 ORDINANCE #32, SERIES OF 2016 – Parking and Mobility Code Amendments .................................... 9 ORDINANCES 29, 30 &31 ........................................................................................................................ 12 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 2 At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Myrin, Frisch, Daily and Mullins present. CITIZEN COMMENTS 1. Peter Fornell spoke about limiting retail uses in the commercial core and said he does not support it. It is dangerous to micro manage the community. The unintended consequences are so many. Art galleries outnumber chains 10 to 1. Previous councils have considered numbering them and they went and got long term leases. It made things worse not better. We’ve gone the other direction and invited galleries in during the summer. People go on vacation and go shopping. We are driving this thing together. It is not on the landlords and tenants. We want the best including underground utilities and parks. We’ve perpetuated it ourselves. What if we do regulate retail and Gucci asks to rent my space and you tell them no, do I get to ask for an abatement in my taxes because you tell them no. The market has taken care of this town for 50 years and it will continue to do so. 2. Ward Hauenstein appealed to council to put off action on the chain store issue until after the LUC and AACP items are done. There are a number of areas the he objects to. Controlling the free market is problematic. P&Z being the deciders is an issue. It unfairly puts comdev in the hot seat. The CORA request is a huge distraction. He appealed to council to have staff suspend work on this until the LUC has been thoroughly resolved. Mayor Skadron said regarding the chain stores, it is part of the public hearings. We will take comment on it after the consent calendar. COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS Councilwoman Mullins said congratulations to Randy Ready. She is sorry to see him go. Good luck and we will miss you. Councilman Daily seconded that. It is a wonderful opportunity. Councilman Frisch said Frisco’s gain is our loss. It has been great working with you, best of luck. Hats off to Chris Klug and his foundation. Congrats to Lindsey Myer and John Gaston. Councilman Myrin gave congrats to Randy and thanks to all the work you have done here especially with transportation. Thanks to Adam for getting direction on the dams at the last meeting. Mayor Skadron said Randy is not leaving for a month. Council is starting the spill the beans program on Tuesdays. I will be kicking it off tomorrow at 3pm at Spring Café. AGENDA DELETIONS Resolution 169 waste and recycling services will be moved to December 12th. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS Steve Barwick said it has been a pleasure to work with Randy. He has been the most popular city employee and the glue that binds the organization together. He is the complaint central in the manager’s office. He is a great person to work for and his transportation expertise is unsurpassed. We will miss Randy. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 3 CONSENT CALENDAR  Minutes – November 28, 2016 Councilman Daily moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Chain Store Item – Mayor Skadron said staff is asking Council for what direction we want to go. We can work on the ordinance as part of the moratorium, do nothing and let it come back to us by initiative or there is a third option where Council can ask for a policy resolution from staff on February 13th that would start a code amendment process. We can rush, let the public run with it via referendum or wait till February. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. Peter Fornell said with all the options I didn’t hear let it die. 2. Phyllis Bronson said for me and a lot of people I know the issue isn’t this simple and about chains but about discernment. We need to reassess how we want the core to look. It needs to have diversity and a mixture of elegance and local businesses. It needs to have it all. In the big picture it will mean more empty store fronts and higher rents. The core needs involvement from people who are actually investing in it. 3. Toni Kronberg said a lot of the comment from the last meeting was from younger people that said rent was a barrier to starting businesses here. Unless we can create a commercial core for young entrepreneurs that are starting out, our hands may be tied. Ordinance 31, GMQS may be a better avenue for this. 4. John Bennett urged council to go forward with this and sooner rather than later. There is quite a bit of time for a full and public process. This is not a ban. Existing businesses could stay. It is a question of do we want Aspen to be 100 percent chain stores when we are 60 percent now. Most Aspenites would say that is not a good thing. Arguments against this would say it is messing with the free market. All zoning messes with the free market. That is normal. The hope is to do it in a reasonable way. Will there be unintended consequences, of course. 5. Dwayne Romero encouraged council to consider a resolution that would enable the public the ability to participate in the process. There is plenty of good intention. How do we make Aspen a vibrant community not only for our guests but our locals and up and coming generation. Find a lot of common ground. There has been opportunity to work on this but the community needs to catch up. He encouraged council to take the resolution that allows the public process. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Jessica Garrow, community development, said staff right now is working on the largest code rewrite in the last 10 years. There has been a great deal of work and they are against a pretty hard timeframe. Adding in this regulation, if we were to continue working on this we would need to extend the moratorium or adopt the ordinances by emergency. After we are done with the moratorium we will be meeting with council to determine our next work program and this would be a priority. It makes sense to have it as a longer process and direct staff to come back with a policy resolution on February 13th. It is a really complicated issue. The more we talk about it the more issues that are raised. We need to take the time to get this right and make sure it is what the community wants. Mayor Skadron said this was not initiated by the council but brought by a citizen. It is coming whether you like it or not. Councilman Frisch said Aspen has been a top notch unique community focused resort town for 60 plus years. Aspen has tinkered along the way with the free market. Is Aspen thriving because of or in spite of it. A little bit of both and we don’t always get it right. Many times we are better right tinkering. I have Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 4 no problem having the discussion about tinkering. There are much cheaper and easier places to get around. We probably have the thickest land use code per capital anywhere in the world. What I’ve heard is what do we want the downtown to look like and feel like. There are three points; economically of Aspen for young to make a career not just jobs. Not sure anything I’ve heard is going to make rents go from 200 to 7 dollars a foot in any way possible. There will be no 40 dollars a square foot space built because the cost to put that space in there is so high. There is discussion that there is too much expensive stuff in town. Sense of place and why do we live in Aspen. We decided to focus on the physical space. The first I heard of this was a few weeks ago. We are dealing with some pretty big code changes. If we had a month and nothing else on the schedule it would be one thing to have Jessica work on this. What I’ve heard over the past day is what the people who wrote the proposed ordinance and the people in city hall don’t even know they match up. I would rather stay away from emergency ordinances. In February having this conversation would be wise. There are some really important things that are 90 percent cooked. Making sure there is economically viability for people is important. Sense of place is really important. I support the Mayors option of holding off until February. Councilman Myrin said keeping the last week of January in mind he is hesitant to kick the can down the road. If we can do it in 30 days and come out of the moratorium via an emergency ordinance and give staff longer to work on this. Ms. Garrow said currently the moratorium is set to expire February 28th. During the last moratorium ordinances were passed by emergency. Councilman Myrin said the end of February would have no differing effect on applicants. Ms. Garrow said with all the other items the council meeting would be February 27th. Councilman Myrin said as far as the community the effective date as coming out of the moratorium using the emergency process doesn’t affect the 30 days. It still could be after the time to petition the May election but still show we are on board to accomplish this. There are always going to be things to fix in the future. This will not create a rush of applications. We will not end up with another art museum or tangerine monster. I suggested applying this in the commercial zones but exempting the ground floors. It would provide a place for these businesses to exist but still give some regulations. I would rather do this sooner than later and work on fixing it afterwards. I think the risk is if we don’t make it the best it can be it is coming whether we like it or not and I would rather see it the best it can be. Councilman Daily said I’ve been thinking about this all weekend. I think this process that is going to end in the next 60 days is one of the most significant legislative processes the city has embarked on. I’m highly impressed with the work being done. I don’t want to interrupt this process and I don’t see any reason to turn this into an emergency effort. I happen to be very interested in this idea of somehow providing a better balance in our retail community. I like what Jerry and Bill and others are bringing and I want it to be evaluated from all perspectives. I don’t see any abiding reason why we need to force it to a decision in the next 45 days but I think we have other priorities we need to honor. I’m more inclined to wait until the moratorium is over. We have been working towards this deadline for a year. I think we need to finish the moratorium and jump into this and get it right. Councilwoman Mullins said it wasn’t long into the moratorium that this idea came up and we dismissed it because it was a legal issue. Then this group came up with this great proposal. Not surprisingly, the more you explained and the better it sounded the more objections we heard. It is really complex and it would be good for the town to hear how to control chain stores. It needs a more robust discussion than can be had in the next 30 days. She is respectful of staff time and so many things have come up that is important, we would really burden them trying to get through this process. The need for a good debate and outreach. I would support the third option and getting to this after the moratorium. Mayor Skadron said the moratorium is a big deal. He is in support of councils comments. Bringing back a policy resolution is the right goal. It would insure the public contributes and should have influence in the decision. Public participation and preserving the right to be involved in the decision making process. Should we proceed in the policy direction puts the burden on the citizen committee. Will it be taken to Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 5 the initiative process. He believes the best ordinances are delivered through debate in council chambers not voting at city market because it sounded good. The citizen group has every right and perhaps will proceed through the initiative process. He will support the majority of council, in part due to staff’s ability to proceed with this. Councilman Myrin said if we pass an ordinance at council and need to change it, is there any limit on time. When an ordinance is passed by the voter it is six months. Jim True, city attorney, said when council passes an ordinance it is effective in 30 days and can be amended any time. Initiative ordinance language can be modified with changes that do not substantively change the intent of the ordinance before they are placed on the ballot. Once passed by the voters they can’t be changed for six months. If it is passed by an election it can’t be substantively amended for six months. Mayor Skadron said the direction is for staff to come back with policy resolution on February 13th that starts the code amendment process. Ms. Garrow said we have worked with consultants on preliminary work. Councilman Frisch said there are landlords all not on one mindset and a group of citizens. He suggests the landlords and committee get together and work on this. He does not expect a lot of staff time. There is an ordinance from the committee. The meetings I’ve been in have not been adversarial. He would encourage those dialogues between the stakeholders to happen. If there is still the need for the more formal process in February to happen maybe it can be shorter. Councilman Myrin said if this comes back in February through the regular process what is the quickest timeline. Ms. Garrow said two meetings later, March 13th. It would go to P&Z, the next week and public outreach. First reading would be February 27 and second reading on March 13th. It would be effective April 12th. Mr. True said there was direction last week to work on this and bring back a proposed amendment next week. If this is the change the work plan will be modified. I don’t think formal action is needed. Some work by the consultants have been done and we would like to share that. Mayor Skadron said he would expect to hear at some point from the citizen committee. ORDINANCE #34, SERIES OF 2016 – View Planes Philip Supino, community Development, stated view planes fall within the environmental sensitivity section of the land use code. The consultant has mapped all the view planes. They have also clarified the legal descriptions of each. They can be used in a uniform way to determine the view plane of any property. They have limited the extent of each view plane to the 8040 greenline. We have defined the fore, middle and background within each view plane. This will provide a higher degree of clarity of where a property lies within. The section has been rewritten for ease of use. Second reading is scheduled for December12th. Councilwoman Mullins said the section is well written. We heard from some citizens that the view planes have been a problem in certain areas. Will this address those issues as far as railings and ramps. Ms. Garrow replied it will. Councilwoman Mullins said on page 35, exempt activities, are there a listing and is it adjustable. Fore ground regulations, development over a to be determined height, when will that be determined. Fore, middle and background is what will make it work. The definition of minimal impact is really clear. Councilman Frisch said this is well done. Can we get middle, fore and back, to make more clear and objective, less subjective. Mr. Supino said each is mapped. Councilman Frisch said if someone wants to have a mailbox an inch taller its ok. Ms. Garrow said it’s ok. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 6 Councilman Myrin asked for more details on the city planting trees in glory hole park and if the city builds a bathroom in Wagner park how it impacts things. Does it change the result. This mentions one story buildings as fore ground regulations and how would this apply across from the Wheeler and the park looking back. Councilman Daily said he likes very much the draft. The creation of three zones really helps all of us to better understand the regulations as they should be. He likes the exceptions that have been added for minor development activity. That will really help the process. He is supportive of the ordinance. Mayor Skadron said he concurs with the comments. The definitions include fore, mid and back are strong. It helps us put a definition around an abstract thing. Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #34, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 34 (SERIES OF 2016) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE REVIEW: 26.435.050 Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #34, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Myrin. Roll Call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #175, SERIES OF 2016 – Extension of Vested Rights – Salon Tullio Sara Nadolny, community development, said this is a 3,000 square foot lot in the mixed use zone with a historic designated miner’s cottage and non-historic shed. In 2013 HPC approved final major demolition for the non-historic portion and approved a new residential addition attached to the miner’s cottage. On November 21st the vested rights expired. The applicant is asking for a three year extension of the vested rights. The criteria to consider the extension include progress made, benefits made and needs of the city served by the request. Minimal progress has been made. A plan has been developed but no application has been made. The applicant has cited financial hardships and difficulty finding a contract. There will be removal of the non-historic portion but it will be replaced with another non-historic structure. They are a locally serving business. They went to HPC with three rounds of conceptual and one at final. They worked with staff to find a design solution. Without the extension they may move forward but contingent with the code in place. While staff is sympathetic with the applicant we would support a one year extension. Sara Oates, representing the applicant, said it is a historic miner’s cottage and the property houses Salon Tullio. They have been in business in Aspen for 20 plus years. The applicant purchased the property in 2004. They pulled mechanical permits and reconfigured floor area to accommodate residential on the top floor. In 2013 they obtained HPC approval. Nothing has changed in the code. Even if the vesting expired they could build what was approved. This will be a significant investment for them and they want to know they can build what was approved. It is a win win for the city. It is a historic resource and a minor remodel. It is a 1,500 square foot addition. It will be helping out a local business that provides services to locals and tourists. Shelly Tulip, owner, asked for the extra time to find the right contractor to work with and get the permit. It is a complicated project on a zero lot line. They removed trees and created a parking space. They also Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 7 remodeled the existing apartment and brought it to code. She can’t believe three years have gone by already. Councilman Daily said he does not see any adverse impacts on the community associated with the request. Ms. Tulip said the project costs came in quite a bit more than they originally thought. Councilman Daily said he respects the business and will support the application. Councilman Frisch said thanks for being in business so long. Are you ready to go with everything as soon as you find a contractor. Ms. Tulip said within a year we will be ready. Councilman Frisch said the three years is a matter of not giving everyone unlimited vesting. Ms. Nadolny said we want to be cautious and the precedent this may set moving forward. Councilman Frisch said the other option may be 18 months or two years. I would rather give them a little more time now and be done with it. He would be more comfortable with two than Three. He appreciates where Art is coming from. Councilman Myrin said the ordinance is written as November 21, 2016. He is hesitant to extend past the one year. How does it work since the date has passed. Ms. Nadolny said the application was filed prior to the expiration date so any extension would be from that date. Councilman Myrin said a year from now is a reasonable hurdle. Mayor Skadron said the hardest part of this job is not being able to say yes to everyone. The list of criteria I’m given is not satisfied by your application. I am however able to support the staff recommendation of one year. Mayor Skadron said two support staff recommendation. Councilman Daily said after listening to the discussion he would like to see the applicant leaving and think the year will work. Councilman Myrin moved to adopt Resolution #175, Series of 2016 with the staff recommendation of a one year extension; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2016 – Ranger Station Subdivision – Subdivision Amendment and associated reviews Jennifer Phelan, community development, said these 5 lots are known as the Ranger Station Subdivision. This ordinance will record a plat approved by the city, rescind the PD overlay and memorialize the 2015 cash in lieu fee amount. Staff has met with the applicant and their representative since the last council meeting and they have proposed an alternative solution. Exhibit K proposes the rate be the 2015 rate and locked in to a three year vesting and agree to pay 20 percent of the fee in lieu up front with the balance paid at building permit issuance. With the 2015 rate each lot would pay around 70,000 dollars. Two lots would pay more. The city would receive over 360,000 dollars in the near future. Mayor Skadron asked what is the difference from where we left and today. Ms. Phelan said just there would be a cash payment earlier on in the process. Typically, the fee is collected at building permit issuance. They are still asking for the 2015 fee in lieu rate. The other difference is the three year vesting. It would start tonight the three year clock locking in the 2015 rate. Mayor Skadron said at the last meeting council was split. The two in support, what were we supporting. Ms. Phelan replied the 2015 rate to be locked in to the three year vesting with the approvals that were approved last year. Mayor Skadron said for those of us in support this is a departure of what we supported at the last meeting. Ms. Phelan said it would give an extra year of vesting and a cash advance in the fees. Mayor Skadron said he supported the applicant last time. I’m not certain I would support this. Mr. True said we submitted this to some degree to resolve the problems created by the Forest Service. Last time it was two year vesting at the old rate. This is three year vesting with a 20 percent cash payment now. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 8 Curtis Sanders, representing the applicant, said thank you for sticking with this. We have a fragile coalition of owners. I recognize this is somewhat different than what was discussed last meeting. We are making a cash payment and bridge the gap from the last meeting. One of the owners will not come off of the rate and feels very strongly. I believe the vested rights issue is justified because the timing. Two lots got approvals in May and three in October. The cash in lieu changes were in October and November. I filed this application six months ago. Added together these owners are a year into this process. To me, it is a fair request to reset the clock. George Baker, owner of one of the lots, said I purchased the lot hoping to build a family home on it. At this point we really can’t. If we get this behind us, hopefully we can put money in the city’s coffers sooner rather than later. He is hopeful we can get this behind us. Councilman Myrin asked what is the total gap we are trying to bridge. Ms. Phelan said page 131, prior to 2015, each lot would be paying 353,000. That increased 73,000 per FTE. The total per lot went up to 446,000 or roughly 200,000 per lot change. Councilman Myrin said around 200,000 per lot and no movement except paying sooner. This is 200,000 per lot that is not going into our affordable housing program. That to me is where the problem is. We are talking to five people who own vacant land in the west end. 200,000 seems like where it should be to support the affordable housing program. I support the new rates. The alternative is go out and build affordable housing or buy it somewhere else. You are not forced to take this option. Councilman Daily said he would like to see a solution that all three owners can get behind. 20 percent earlier doesn’t bridge any gaps but it is an effort to make a small difference. What concerns me most is we have three owners today and it a smaller number than the city thinks is justified. He will support the idea of the smaller cash in lieu payment. 20 percent up front is fine and not why I’m doing this. He would like to see the whole issue move forward. The point is well taken. Three times what west end lots pay resonate with me. He has changed his position on this. He wants to see this ownership group move forward. The vested rights idea doesn’t cut it. He does not think they need the extra year. He is more concerned with the small community of owners. Councilwoman Mullins asked how does the 20 percent off set the additional year of vesting. Mr. Baker said we have been here for a year trying to resolve this so it resets the clock. They are independent issues. Councilwoman Mullins said when this first came up she was in Bert’s camp saying buyer beware. When it became clearer and clearer how unclear the process became I think we need to resolve it for your sake and the city’s. I’m not supportive of the three years vesting and not convinced the 20 percent solves the problem. She would rather see the two year vesting. She would support what we saw last meeting. Mayor Skadron said they are asking for three years with a 20 percent down payment on mitigation. What is on the table is a concession from Art who is willing to support the ordinance from last year with a 20 percent prepayment. I would support that. There are some tangible benefits for the city including moving this on. Councilman Daily said he would like to resolve this in the interest of your group and the city. Mayor Skadron asked if they can go back with a two year vesting and 20 percent. Ms. Phelan stated the ordinance in the packet is from the last meeting locks in the 2015 rate to the end of the vesting period established last summer. If you decide you are interested in the cash payment it would be Exhibit K. Mayor Skadron said last time we were here it was 2015 vesting we supported. Ms. Phelan replied yes. Mayor Skadron open the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 9 Councilman Myrin moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2016 as presented in Exhibit K striking Sections 4, 5 and 6; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Mr. True said to clarify it is a 20 percent payment from when the plat is filed and vesting from the original approvals. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, no; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #32, SERIES OF 2016 – Parking and Mobility Code Amendments Mr. Supino said there are quite a few AACP policies that pertain to transportation and mobility. What we heard from the public is that proximity of parking to their destination is a barrier to using public parking. Most use a mix of parking and mobility options. Cost, access and availability drive parking decisions. Automobile needs and pedestrian safety are barriers to using alternative modes. Subgrade garages are preferred over every other type of parking facility. Key changes include a combination of mobility and parking. Eliminate carried parking deficits. Incorporate parking maximums. Encourage shared and or public parking. Parking impact requirements by zone district and update the cash in lieu rate. Combine mobility and parking. Current regulations treat mobility and parking separately with separate outcomes. This removes duplication and creates a more integrated approach. TIA and parking impact units work together to mitigate project mobility demand. Eliminate carried parking deficits. There is a loophole in the current code and ensures parity between new projects and redevelopments. Increases mitigation of impacts from redevelopment. Parking maximums. Currently there are no maximum amount of parking for projects. Ensure right size parking facilities for location. Incentivizes parking to be publically accessible and shared. Leverages existing parking to meet district wide demands. Assess fee for inefficient private parking above the maximum. Encourage shared parking. The current code discourages the provision of shared parking. Used soft maximum to incentivize sharing of supply when it otherwise isn’t being use. Flexible credit system allows for developers to design optimal parking format. New focus on district mobility needs, not project specific. Parking impact requirements by zone district. The current code is one size fits all. A tailored approach ensures the right balance of TDM, parking and cash in lieu for each project. It will be flexible for staff and the developer to create parking and a TDM solution that best fits each project. Update cash in lieu rate. Reflect 2016 development costs. The current structure is based on a 2005 analysis. Provides developers with additional option to mitigate impacts. District based approach ensures parking where we need it and other modes where we don’t. Councilwoman Mullins asked how will you determine what the most appropriate solution is. Mr. Supino said we have a chart. The closer to the core the more valuable cash in lieu becomes to the community. The further from that the less valuable it becomes in terms of parking. Mr. Nelson said as it relates to cash and impact requirements, many of the tools in the code are one size fits all. These introduce some flexibility. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 10 Reilly Thimons said it is a step by step application process. We will be assessing if the application is applicable to a TIA or impact requirement. How do you meet the requirement. If subject to the TIA you go through the normal process. The applicants provide a mobility plan with alternative components or parking provision and cash in lieu provision. Staff gave examples of parking requirements with the new code. The Crystal Palace is 6,207 square feet and located in CC. 3 parking spaces are provided on site and there is a 10.36 deficit. They are exempt for the TIA under the current and proposed code. They wouldn’t be offering any mobility improvements. They are not proposing additional parking. With the new code they couldn’t carry a deficit and would generate 14 parking impact units. They could pay cash in lieu up to 100 percent or approximately $840,000. Mobility up to 2 credits or parking up to 1 space. Shy Hotel Commercial net leasable area of 3,480 square feet with 104 lodge units in the Lodge zone. 66.5 proposed parking with 54 subgrade and 12.5 at grade. They are required to provide 57 spaces. Cash in lieu would be 3.42 million dollars at 100 percent. Mobility up to 1 credit. The additional impact would be 19 spaces. Mr. Nelson said this allows the city and developer to work together to find the right solution to meet the mobility needs of the city. Mayor Skadron said these numbers are huge. What I don’t know is what the effect on the local economy is. I need some level of comfort as to what degree this impacts the local economy. This is just one part of the whole. Ms. Garrow said we need some initial direct from council. Is this the right direction. Mayor Skadron said he is not interested in a cash grab from developers but the fundamentals of mobility. He wants to feel comfortable we are getting changes around the behaviors around mobility. Ms. Garrow said maybe not carry forward the deficit around mobility. Mayor Skadron said he likes the aggressiveness but is not comfortable about this with everything else. Ms. Garrow asked are we in the right realm with everything else. Councilman Myrin said it would help to have a few examples. A list of 10 that have been through recently and council picks three that seem the most interesting. Seems like this is a steal for developers. We’re selling parking without any land costs. Councilman Frisch said traditional parking models were how many spaces were we mandating. What I’m not trying to do is generate extra fees. They make sense until there is a conversion and hard dollars until they become astronomical. We have this huge amount of money we are asking for to go into great things. Restrictive is fine but it wasn’t to generate money. The fact is they are. If we are trying to have some discussion of affordability this is just going to set us back even further. Councilman Myrin said we could charge for land or say there be no change to parking requirement for second tier space. Councilman Frisch said the reason I have no problem charging for land is it’s not going to be built. Councilman Myrin said the only thing I would consider doing is charging for land and not mitigate for second tier space. Ms. Garrow said for January, they will bring back two options for second tier spaces, lower rate or no mitigation. One of the goals is to make this less complicated. Councilwoman Mullins said she is clear with the goals and it is a fascinated tool but really complicated. Her biggest concern is it is awfully complicated and do we know what the different options are for the developers. She suggested a map of some sort. Mr. Richman said if an applicant wants to build parking they are not looking at the costs so much but at creating an asset. Some of what we struggle with is the marking requirement and the TDM and MMLOS requirements. This is joining them together. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 11 1. Dylan Johns, Zone 4 Architects, said he is not clear on what is exempt or included in the different zones. How does it translate to someone looking to purchase or redevelop. At what point does a mitigation option stop becoming an option because we have enough. What will the threshold be for remodel projects. How are shared assets being tracked. It is a really nice ideas coming in to this but it is hugely complex. Councilman Frisch said he is willing to wait. Ms. Garrow said they will show a proposal as well as no deficit for second tier spaces. Councilman Myrin agreed that will be helpful. He does not want to see happen a developer running the numbers and not build second tier spaces because revenue is not high enough to cover second tier spaces. Mr. Richman said they are required to build them. Councilman Myrin said run our code through real world examples for what the building would look like and do the numbers make sense. Keep the deficit at least on the ground floor. Mayor Skadron said constructive on first versus second tier. Councilman Frisch said on cash in lieu he is not saying don’t touch it but maybe see what the totality looks like. Ms. Garrow said the minimum saying 38 to 60,000 per space. Councilwoman Mullins said to keep the cash in lieu at 60,000. The variable is the deficit or different mitigation rates for first floor and second tier spaces. 2. Mark Hunt said he is with Adam on the overall fees. He does not look at it as an incentive. It depends on what you want. This encourages building parking. The two examples show a big number. For the point of having an asset it encourages building parking. He is not sure how you would share it. Councilman Frisch said it costs a certain amount to buy the land and build it. At some point, there is something those second tier spaces are worth. When the ground floor gets built it gets rented to some wealthy entity. What we are trying to fill up the bottom and top to people who are optional. If they need 100 dollars a foot to break even and we are saying they should be charging 40, there is a disconnect. Ms. Garrow said the scenarios will help. We will continue to do the outreach. Knowing there is interest in the deficit for the second tier spaces is helpful. City market example 12,000 square feet with currently 30 parking spaces. Under the new code it generates 12 spaces and is subject to a PD. They can exceed 15 spaces using a shared parking model. Councilman Frisch said it is on the right track overall. We need the discussion on the two variabilities. He is not sure the 60 number is right across all levels of a building. That variable and the deficit variable. Can we create something that will allow rents to be something in the basement and second story. The moratorium will generate a lot more fees when we are done. When we started it was about smaller and simpler. The pricing is going to go up in real estate because the further restriction of supply. This is additional money and I’m trying to figure out if it is hurtful or helpful to the community. Ms. Garrow said we need to decide in January if this is where we want to push everyone in the CC particularly along the pedestrian malls. Councilwoman Mullins asked is it true all these revisions are generating more fees. Ms. Garrow said the major policy goals and preferences are less onsite parking. Public amenity is not duplicate the malls and provide cash in lieu. The public amenity amount is not proposed to change. The language is written to encourage more people to use it. It is really focused on the malls. The Cooper Avenue mall is impacted by the Wagner view plane. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 12 Mayor Skadron said to keep the deficit at least for the ground floor. Different rates for first tier and second tier. Different tiers for mitigation depending on distance from the core. Ms. Garrow said we are moving in the right direction. We will look at some of the levers, deficit in cash in lieu rate by building levels and bring more specific examples. Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing. Councilman Frisch moved to continue Ordinances 29, 30 and 31 to December 12, 2016; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Frisch said the worksession tomorrow is fairly short maybe we should take up one of these ordinances. Council agreed. Councilman Frisch moved to rescind his motion to continue Ordinances 29, 30 and 31; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried. Councilwoman Mullins moved to continue the meeting to December 6, 2016 at 4:00p.m.; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried. December 6, 2016 At 5:30 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the continued regular meeting to order. ORDINANCES 29, 30 &31 Commercial use mix Ms. Garrow said the AACP policies identify opportunities to reduce boom bust and encourage diversity and essential businesses. What we heard from the community includes preserve commercial areas for predominately commercial uses. Provide spaces for active vital businesses. Create public accessible spaces. Direction to date This is incentive based. Not define locally serving businesses. Create second tier spaces. Develop commercial replacement standards. Revise the use tables. The essential business overlay is for the NC or SCI zone. It can be thought of like a PD light process and achieved through a voluntary rezoning process. It is shorter than the traditional PD with a P&Z review then to council. It does not have dimensional incentives. Should it be limit to areas north of Main Street? Incentives include set back reductions, There are no overall increase in floor area but changes to ratios. It will maintain the existing 35 foot height in the SCI. There is the ability to include new or different uses. Other possible incentives include new or different uses or bulk and mass bonuses. Councilwoman Mullins asked where could it be located. Ms. Garrow said depending on council direction on height and floor area. Limit heights everywhere to 28 feet. There are pockets of NC in the downtown area around the Butcher’s Block building. With the proposal of the 28 limit are 35 foot heights appropriate there. Councilwoman Mullins said there are other aspects of the overlay other than height that may be appropriate. Ms. Garrow replied correct. Councilwoman Mullins said what is the overall intention of the overlay. Ms. Garrow said the ability for expansion with an easier process. Incentives for redevelopment. Councilman Frisch said we have the North Mill Street and the Butcher Block side of the NC zone. We have to be careful of the true penthouse issues happening on that block. It is much different than the stuff going on on Mill Street. These two zones are really different. The EB is really good basis to separate those. Locally serving discussion it will be so hard to execute the vision smack in the middle of down town because of how we limit growth, to build down town you are out 3 or 400 dollars a foot before you buy anything. I still argue the last thing standing is this piece of property on North Mill Street. My plea Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 13 would be we leave as much flexibility on this parcel as to what someone would pitch. I know we have talked about the ban of residential and I think it needs to stay in effect in the upper zone. We need to allow as much flexibility to happen down there as possible and see how it plays out and work out details later. Ms. Garrow said one of the threshold questions is do you want the EB to be more flushed out in terms of floor area and height bonuses or pushed off till later. We have proposed a starting point for after the moratorium. Given some of the public comment and the owner of the butcher block is interested in this. Mr. Richman said we have created the shell and basic elements. Councilwoman Mullins said adopt the shell and work out the details after February 13th. Councilman Frisch said we need to get back to the two main goals. We have a shell and tack it up in February. Councilman Myrin said currently both sites are subject to a PD. Ms. Garrow replied yes. If the EBO had different types of dimensions it would not trigger the Ref 1 vote. Councilman Myrin said it seems like a work around for Ref 1. Before infill SCI was 1 to 1. Currently it is 2.51 to 1. We are already saying we could go back to pre-infill numbers. Same with NC, now it is 1.5 to 1. Councilman Frisch said he is not concerned about a possible work around to get out of a vote. His concern is two zones that don’t have much in common other than a super market. People don’t walk around with a zoning map. He is not sure what he wants to see on Mill Street other than flexibility. He would rather focus on the core before we run out of moratorium time. Councilman Myrin said to return to pre infill FAR numbers and then increase them to get what we are trying to achieve. Mr. Supino said the overlay zone would allow council on a project by project basis without adjusting the numbers on a given zone. Councilman Myrin said if the FAR numbers aren’t aligned it is a problem. Mr. Richman said up to now we have been focusing on the uses and left the dimensions alone. Councilman Myrin said I think it is our responsibility to address that. Councilwoman Mullins said how does this relate to the overlay. Councilman Myrin stated if it is to encourage redevelopment we need to know what appropriate FAR is. Councilwoman Mullins said I think we are getting off track. As Adam keeps saying we need to keep in line to get this done. Ms. Garrow said the business overlay does not include dimensional incentives. My suggestion is if council wants to adopt the basic shell and then have the conversation of dimensions do that after February. Councilman Myrin said he can’t get on board with encouraging any redevelopment because we had an application that met all the code but was not appropriate. Ms. Garrow said that development included free market and could not happen. What we have tried to do is address those issues. Mayor Skadron said he is somewhere between Adam and Bert. My concern is Obermeyer place. I don’t want to see this evolve into what Obermeyer has become. While I understand Adams flexibility, we are rarely delivered what we are promised. I don’t want to be so restrictive we lose any entrepreneurial attempt. Ms. Garrow said she does not think Obermeyer could happen in this location. The commercial design guidelines are proposed to change pretty significantly in this area. That went through a coop process and is not available to these processes. Councilman Frisch said more than flexibility I’m looking for a discussion that does not need to happen under the gun but priorities. And those are C1 and CC. Ms. Garrow said refining the use list. Pull out the more high end uses, jewelry and clothing. Councilman Frisch said why don’t we just say the things we don’t want instead of the zillion things we do. I don’t want to see any proactive uses. I want to see a list of uses we don’t want. Ms. Garrow said what do we think are appropriate and inappropriate. In the CC we said office use are not appropriate on the ground floor. We could go that route. We can reframe the list. Councilman Frisch said there are probably 50 uses that speak NC to us that aren’t included here. Councilman Myrin said going back to EBO, why do we need to create it during the moratorium. Ms. Garrow said it gets back to the overall goal of creating the types of uses we want. We think it is one tool important and consistent with council direction. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 14 Councilwoman Mullins said this is one of the basic things we have been trying to accomplish. It does include new and different uses. This is what we have been trying to develop, facilitate locally serving/owned businesses in town. It would be a few steps backwards if we drop it. Councilman Frisch said there is a list of priorities and we can only do so much. The SCI and NC are not under any post moratorium rush. Councilwoman Mullins said look at the lodge overlay, it has helped to generate lodge rooms. A specific type of business will be generated. We are trying to generate something with the moratorium. The CC creates the character in town. It needs the SCI and NC to accommodate other uses and serve the locals but they aren’t working that way now. This enhances what is going on in the surrounding districts and keeps the downtown working as it does not. It takes off some of the pressure from downtown. To come back in February and say we have not done anything with those district is like saying what have we been doing for 9 months. Councilman Frisch said we are 5 years behind because there are already that many years of applications approved. Councilwoman Mullins said you can’t do those in isolation. Councilman Frisch said in an ideal world you could tackle everything. The EBO is a great way to separate the two zones and allow something to happen. We should have the discussion when we aren’t under the gun. Councilwoman Mullins said we need more detail but this is a very good start but we do need to keep it. Councilman Daily said in the NC do we want to say anything in the definition that there should be an emphasis on locally serving. Ms. Garrow said that is in the purpose statement. Councilman Daily stated it is an opportunity to focus those uses in this zone. Mayor Skadron said Ann, Adam and Art are supporting. I support the general principle. It runs the risk of delivering the outcome that fails to deliver its original intent. He would like to see something. Ms. Garrow said we will continue to have the EBO as drafted with no additional height or floor area. Dimensions Ms. Garrow said everything has a 28 limit except SCI which stays at 35. FAR goes down in CC and C1. 2 to 1 in CC 1.75 to 1 in C1 MU 1 to 1 – historic may be increased to 1.25 to 1 by special review. Non-historic may be increased to 1.5 to 1 NC 1.5 to 1 – stay the same SCI 2.25 to 1 – stay the same Make the commercial floor area match the overall floor area numbers. Councilwoman Mullins said it is very valuable that height is translated into workable FAR. Councilman Frisch said what gets a little lost is the amount of downzoning taking place. It is substantial in some of the zones. He has been in conversations with Jackie from the Butcher’s Block who’s building is located in the NC. He still stands by the direction we are going. Ms. Garrow said we will continue forward with the outlined dimensions. Affordable housing and free market residential. We are proposing to eliminate new free market as part of mixed use development. The proposed changes to affordable housing and the ability to generate credits. There is a decrease in the allowed floor area in all zones except MU. The CC zone should support commercial businesses instead of residences. Councilman Frisch said credits will only continue to get generated in MU. He has the feeling that the idea of using certificates in the CC will take the wind out of some sails. The only reason to build affordable housing downtown would be to offset mitigation. Ms. Garrow said the one change P&Z has Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 15 suggested is if someone is building onsite mitigation and there is a fraction of a unit that could be done by credits. Councilman Myrin said allow the generation of credits in each zone that would only be transferable within that zone. It might provide more flexibility. It might be more efficient. Ms. Garrow said the only suggestion we would have is if councils primary goal is commercial uses the exchange takes place only within the same zone district. We have seen in some pending applications there is a significant amount of employees generated and a property owner may like that. It is an option and still consistent with council direction. Mayor Skadron said he does not think it undermines council direction. Ms. Garrow said it would be an allowed use on the upper levels. Councilwoman Mullins said there is a benefit too. Councilman Frisch said he is willing to explore it. Affordable housing and growth management Does council want to move forward with an increase in the mitigation rate from 60 percent to 80 percent and does council want spaces that have not previously mitigated to provide mitigation. Councilman Frisch asked if the attorney will even allow council to have the second conversation. Mr. True said we have disputes ongoing in regard to how far we can go with that. If council wants us to explore it, we will. Councilman Myrin replied he would like us to have that conversation. Mayor Skadron agreed. Mayor Skadron said he does not have a sense of what the real impact is. If we are so restricting in the mitigation that it deters any kind of development or removes the return on investment, we will ultimately get nothing. He is not sure where the threshold is. Councilwoman Mullins said she would not support that or the new rate. We need some justification for 80. We do not want to put the housing program at risk because we have no justification for what we are doing. We are making so many changes and placing a burden on developers as Adam mentioned last night but we are also making so many changes, if something doesn’t work it would be nice to have a few things that stayed the same. Mainly she said she has not heard a strong argument for the 80 percent over another number. She suggests keeping it the same. Councilman Myrin said it is hard outside the moratorium increasing the affordable housing rate without creating a rush of applications. With Base 2 there were going to be two employee units with 5 floors. Mark Hunt said for the Pismo building next to Casa Tua to build the building would be 6 million. The mitigation came in at 12 million. There are other examples that are so preposterous. Even at Bidwell, the heights are at 28 but the grade change wasn’t figured in. The way the commercial design is we designed it is with a mezzanine. It added thousands of square feet and would have cost millions in mitigation. Base and the way the pillow counts was low determined the mitigation. It is highly inconsistent. Ms. Garrow said what Mark highlights is the on the ground real impacts that this change could have. Councilwoman Mullins said the lodging overlay was unrealistic generations. Councilman Myrin said page 277 – drive thru services prohibited. Will this get in the way of Wells Fargo. Ms. Garrow said this has been in the code for a while. Wells Fargo has one year. It is not an allowed use and falls under the non-conforming use chapter of the code. Councilman Myrin said gasoline service stations, can it be expanded to electric service stations. Ms. Garrow replied yes. Councilman Myrin said for trellis and canopy exempt from GM. Ms. Garrow said yes and likely to include some modifications. This is the Grey Lady issue. Councilman Myrin said on page 342 – additional commercial net leasable space for affordable housing versus credit for existing. Ms. Garrow said depending on the direction the language will need updated. Councilman Myrin said on page 311 – prohibits movie rental kiosks – there is one outside Clarks. Ms. Garrow stated it is gone. Councilman Myrin said on page 284 – vehicle sales – ATV rentals and the conversation with the BOCC. Ms. Garrow Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 5, 2016 16 said it is part of the business model with a lot of the outdoor companies. She suggested it is not something we want to look at as part of the LUC. Ms. Garrow said Monday is view planes and commercial design standards and second tier commercial spaces. We will continue the discussion on ordinances 29, 30 and 31. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Frisch moved to continue Ordinances 29, 30 and 31 to December 12, 2016; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Daily moved to adjourn at 7:25 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Linda Manning, City Clerk