HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20071113Continued Meetine Aspen Citv Council November 13, 2007
Mayor Ireland called the continued meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. with Councilmembers
Johnson, DeVilbiss and Romero present. Councilman Skadron is recused due to a
conflict on Ordinances #28 as he voted on that project at P&Z.
ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 2008 - 508 East Cooper Subdivision
Sarah Adams, community development department, told Council there have been no
changes since the first public hearing September 10, 2007. Ms. Adams said staff finds
the subdivision meets all applicable review criteria and recommends approval. Ms.
Adams said the proposal is 3,827 squaze feet of net leasable space, one free market unit
2,008 square feet next livable, which is permissible as this application was made prior to
the 2,000 squaze foot limit on free market units. Ms. Adams noted there are 2 parking
spaces on an adjacent pazcel. These spaces were purchased when the building was
purchased and will be used by the new development rather than being rented on the free
market.
P&Z approved acash-in-lieu payment for the affordable housing mitigation, which is
12.6 square feet. The application was made before code changes and the multi-family
replacement requirements will be reviewed administratively. Ms. Adams reminded
Council the view plane originating outside the Cooper Street building was discussed at a
previous meeting. This application is not subject to view plane review because the view
plane does not begin on this property. A property across the street would be subject to
view plane review but not the Cooper Street Pier building.
Ms. Adams told Council staff finds this application consistent with the AACP. It is a
mixed use building in the commercial core within walking distance to commercial and
office uses and it is near transit. The project will provide money to the housing fund to
create units in town. This project is consistent with the character of uses in the area and
will not adversely affect future development. Ms. Adams said the subdivision is intended
to demarcate individual ownership within the building. The proposal has met all land use
reviews and has satisfied its affordable housing requirement of 12.6 square feet with a
cash-in-lieu payment.
Ms. Adams pointed out the table in section 1 and the height clarification is included and
specified it is 44' if it is setback from the property line 15' or more. Ms. Adams said the
street tree was discussed at the last public hearing and the proposed motion was to delete
12(d). That section was not deleted as the motion was not voted on and the street tree is
still in the ordinance.
Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, noted the first subdivision review standard
requires the proposal to separate the legal interests be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan. Haas said the commercial core zone district regulations, the growth
management regulations and the affordable housing mitigation requirements under which
the application is being reviewed were all adopted within the last two years. The first
standazds for these code amendment adoptions are that they are consistent with the Aspen
Area Community Plan. Haas said this project is within the growth management quota
1
Continued Meeting Aspen City Council November 13, 2007
limits of 2% annual growth rate as outlined in the managing growth section of the AACP.
The growth management allotments have been granted by P&Z.
Haas told Council the housing board and P&Z approved the housing mitigation proposal
finding it is consistent with the requirements and with the AACP. Haas noted the site's
location is consistent with the AACP; it is walkable to shopping, is a block from the
transit station and within biking distance within the city. The proposal generates a net
decrease of full time equivalents under the land use code standazds and tables for
determining those numbers. The project will have a net decrease on the effects and
impacts associated with commuting, traffic, and public transportation.
Haas pointed out pazk impact fees will be paid; there will be sidewalk improvements and
anew street tree if Council wants. The project was reviewed by HPC and found to be
consistent with the commercial design standards, the Aspen historic preservation design
guidelines and the commercial core in general. The subdivision is wholly consistent with
the chazacter of existing land uses in the area. The proposal has the same uses as
currently exist on the property. There are several buildings in the commercial core with
commercial uses on the lower levels and residences above, like the Paragon, the Baldwin
building, the Syzygy and Isis buildings and others. Mixed use projects like the Ajax
Mountain building, the La Comeda and Stage Three building have been recently
approved by Council.
Haas noted the land use code states subdivision shall not adversely affect future
development of the surrounding azeas. Haas said the surrounding areas are close to or
already fully developed. This project will do utility upgrades, as needed. A construction
management plan will be required and impact fees will be paid. Haas told Council the
new building will comply will all code requirements. Haas reiterated there will be less
commercial square footage. The subdivision complies with all applicable land use
requirements and dimensional requirements. The GMQS approvals included a finding of
consistency with the AACP of meeting all affordable housing mitigation standards, of
satisfying the city's growth rate, of being consistent with and not have undue impact on
infrastructure and of being compatible with surrounding uses.
Haas reiterated this is not a land subdivision but the ability to separate uses within a
building. The property is not subject to natural hazards. Haas noted the existing building
could be condominiumized by filing a plat. This subdivision does not cause
inefficiencies or premature extension of public facilities. There will be no change in the
spatial patterns from existing conditions. Haas said the GMQS mitigation was approved
by P&Z upon recommendation from the housing board. The mitigation requirement was
a net decrease in full time equivalent employees from the commercial portion of the
project and a requirement for 12.6 square feet of housing for the free market part. Haas
stated the school land dedication fees will be paid.
Councilman Romero asked about the view plane regulations. Haas stated these do not
apply to this building. There is a spot in the sidewalk mazked with the survey stake
where the view plane begins facing Aspen mountain. The view plane does not include
2
Continued Meeting Aspen City Council November 13, 2007
this property. Councilman Romero asked when the view plane originated. Ms. Adams
said this view plane was established in the 1970's with 6 other view planes. Chris
Bendon, community development department, said the view planes all originated from
important places in the public realm with orientation toward Aspen Mountain. Haas said
there are view planes in front of the courthouse, the Wheeler, the Jerome, the Cooper
Street Pier, Wagner and Glory Hole parks. Four of these originate on the sidewalk. The
protected view plane is from the public realm, from the sidewalk, not the buildings
behind the view planes. Haas told Council the original plan was to set the building back
from the sidewalk. HPC wanted the building brought up to meet the sidewalk. The
building has been designed to accommodate a restaurant use on the first floor.
Councilman Romero asked what green building. efforts are part of the project. Haas said
much effort has gone into preserving what is left of the historic building; the two side
walls of the original building are being preserved. This is voluntary on the part of the
applicant. Andy Wisnowski, architect, told Council when this project was started, the
energy code requirements were not as stringent. Wisnowski said they propose to meet
the energy and building requirements as they exist when the project was submitted.
Haas noted there is one residential unit in the building currently, which makes the
building a mixed use and multi-family building. Reconstruction will trigger the multi-
familyreplacement requirement. Haas said applicants have 3 options to mitigate; one is
match the same existing floor area which is no deed restriction and no cash-in-lieu. To
do that, 42 square feet would have to be removed. The second option is match the same
number of units with the same number of bedrooms and pay acash-in-lieu fee
commensurate with the increase in net livable area. The increase of 42 squaze feet would
generate acash-in-lieu fee between $13,000 to $15,000. The third option is to replace
half the square footage, half the number of units and half the bedrooms, pay cash in lieu
for half a unit. Haas noted the applicants are being generous in offering full cash-in-lieu
in the most conservative calculation. One half unit is 985 square feet, and the applicant
used 400 squaze feet which generates acash-in-lieu figure of $305,000.
Councilman Johnson noted he has been instructed to correct the record. Councilman
Johnson said the October 8th Aspen Times he was paraphrased as saying "he would vote
against it because, while the project meets all land use code requirements, it does give
back to the community". Councilman Johnson said he reviewed the tape and stated for
the record he did not claim this project met all the land use code requirements.
Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing.
Toni Kronberg noted HPC determined the design quality and the developers wanted to
keep the original store front with recessed windows and a pedestrian space. HPC would
not approve recessed windows and wanted everything flush with the street. Ms.
Kronberg suggested Council direct the developers to go back to their original plan. Ms.
Kronberg said the residential unit on site houses many employees of the Cooper Street
Pier. Ms. Kronberg said the pedestrian experience out front should be retained.
3
Continued Meetine Aspen City Council November 13, 2007
Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing.
Jim True, special counsel, noted there is a motion to approve with conditions on the floor
from the last meeting. Councilman Johnson said he did not claim Cooper Street was
included in the mountain view plane and should go through a view plan review.
Councilman Johnson said the view plane had to have been done for the benefit of one
property owner; that there was recognition on the part of the people considering mountain
view planes that there was sufficient public good in sitting at the Cooper Street Pier to
restrict the property rights of the property across the street.
Councilman Johnson stated his objections to the project remain unchanged. This project
fails to meet the general requirements (a) the proposed subdivision shall be consistent
with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Councilman Johnson said the project fails
because of transportation and traffic issues created by the fact that there is insufficient
amount of affordable housing either associated with this project in general or included on
site. Councilman Johnson said to the degree that no affordable housing is required will
require people to take public transit or to drive. Councilman Johnson said when
employees are not able to find affordable housing; it becomes the city's business to have
to build affordable housing. Councilman Johnson said this project fails in the AACP on
both transportation and on housing.
Councilman Johnson said this project fails under suitability of land for subdivision (b)
spatial pattern efficient -the proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial
patterns that cause inefficiencies, supplications or premature extension of public facilities
at unnecessazy public costs. Councilman Johnson said the way this is written is that this
is not the act of subdivision but the result per the definition in the land use code of
subdivision, meaning the building, and that it shall not be designed to create spatial
patterns, the program of the building, how it is spatially divided internally that cause
inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities at unnecessary
public cost. Councilman Johnson said if one only considers roads, utilities and sewers, it
would not be a problem. One of the infrastructure needs of Aspen is affordable housing.
Councilman Johnson said in this project, the public bears the cost to a great degree for
this project. Councilman Johnson said the project could have been designed to alleviate
public costs. Councilman Johnson said infill was considered to create public benefits for
private redevelopment by a series of trade offs; increased heights and densities and lower
mitigations in exchange for community benefits in the redevelopment. Councilman
Johnson noted the section "economic sustainability" in the AACP clearly states one of
the main goals is to maintain and enhance existing business. This proposal fails on that.
Mayor Ireland said the city's land use code needs some amendments. The current land
use code does not assess changes in intensity and changes in use. Mayor Ireland said the
assumption that a high end restaurant or high end residential unit will have the same job
generation as the existing restaurant is not a correct assumption. High end uses generate
more demand. Mayor Ireland agreed this application does not meet the standard of
section 26.480.050 general requirements (a) cited by Councilman Johnson, consistency
4
Continued Meetine Aspen City Council November 13, 2007
with the Aspen Area community general goals; transit, walking, bicycling, affordable
housing are things the community finds unable to defer any further.
Mayor Ireland said Council is not trying to save any particular business. Mayor Ireland
said projects should create interaction and pedestrian space and this project does not do
that. Mayor Ireland stated the assertion that the city has created a code that takes away
Council's discretion to view a project in the totality of its impact is a sorry development.
The code is not just a checklist. Aspen has chosen to have Council serve as final review
to make sure a project meets code requirements and is in compliance with the overall
direction of the community plan. Mayor Ireland noted the point of a community master
plan recognizes code changes are mechanical and cannot weigh the totality of impacts the
same way a group of elected officials can. Mayor Ireland said he cannot support this
project as designed.
Dave Lenyo, representing the applicants, requested an opportunity to respond to technical
and legal points raised by Council. Councilman DeVilbiss agreed the applicant had the
opportunity to present everything they wanted to present during the public hearing;
however, he is will to reconvene after the meeting with the County commissioners.
Councilman DeVilbiss stated he does not want this to become a precedent. The
applicants are to present their case at the public hearing and then the Council should vote.
Councilman Johnson moved to continue the meeting at 5:00 p.m. until after the work
session; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried.
Council reconvened at 6:25 p.m
Dave Lenyo, representing the applicants, told Council in his practice in Colorado, it has
been his experience that judges and elected officials welcome opportunities for the
attorneys to address factual and legal issues beforehand. Lenyo said staff submits an
extensive memorandum which addresses factual issues and the legal standards applicable
to applications which is submitted to Council prior to the meeting. Lenyo said the
applicants have been contacted by staff and asked if they wanted to submit anything that
would be helpful to Council's consideration. Lenyo said they submitted the
memorandum which they thought would be helpful in the decision making process.
Lenyo said they tried to address issues that have arisen during the course of review of this
project. Lenyo requested Council consider this application and apply the standards they
feel are applicable to subdivision review.
Mayor Ireland stated he is not prejudiced by the memorandum of law. Mayor Ireland
said in his years in government, he cannot remember any applicant submitting a brief.
Mayor Ireland said he does not want to start the precedent that land use applications are
the first round of litigation and lengthy legal briefs are needed.
Mayor Ireland reiterated there is a motion to approve Ordinance #28 on the floor from the
November 12`h Council meeting. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, no;
DeVilbiss, no; Romero, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion NOT carried.
Continued Meeting Aspen City Council November 13, 2007
Mayor Ireland moved to deny the subdivision application; seconded by Councilman
Johnson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes; DeVilbiss, yes; Romero, no;
Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #95, SERIES OF 2007 -Extension of vested rights
Councilman Skadron joined the meeting.
Eban Clark, representing the applicant, stated they are requesting an extension of vested
rights in order to continue a restoration and remodel on an existing historic Victorian
house which has been classified as a nice example of the era. The project has been
reviewed 3 times by HPC and approved on all 3 occasions including a side yard variation.
Clazk told Council the applicants have discovered the garage on the northeast corner of
the alley encroaches on the neighbor's property. Clark said they have been working on
this issue with staff and to resolve the boundary issue.
Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council staff supports the
request as the applicant is attempting to resolve logistic and legal issues. Bendon said
this is a good project and has obtained HPC approvals for the restoration and remodel.
Bendon told Council the original vesting is 3 years and this is a request for 3 additional
years.
Mayor Ireland moved to approve Resolution #95, Series of 2007; seconded by
Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Romero moved to adjourn at 7
All in favor, motion carried.
OS p.m.; seconded by Councilman Johnson.
Kat och, City Clerk