HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20180723Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
1
SCHEDULED PULBIC APPEARANCES .................................................................................................. 2
CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS ................................................................................................................... 3
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 4
Resolution #107, Series of 2018 – Replacement of two boilers at Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housing ... 4
Resolution #106, Series of 2018 – Progressive Trail Design ................................................................ 4
Resolution #105, Series of 2018 – Mail Trail Storm Line Upgrade ..................................................... 4
Minutes – July 9, 2018 .......................................................................................................................... 4
ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2018 – Changes to the City Procurement Code ....................................... 4
ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2018 – 500W Main Street – Historic Landmark Lot Split, Transferable
Development Rights, Special Review and Variations .................................................................................. 5
ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2018 – Code Amendment – Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance ........ 6
RESOLUTION #88, SERIES OF 2018 – Lots 1-5, Ranger Station Subdivision – Extension of Vested
Rights ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
2
At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Mullins,
Hauenstein, Frisch and Myrin present.
SCHEDULED PULBIC APPEARANCES
Councilwoman Mullins introduced Nan Sundeen, with Pitkin County Health and Human Service. She
said Colorado is not doing well reducing hunger. The Colorado health foundation has created a blueprint
to help combat hunger. There are five main goals including food distributers, growers, schools, hospitals
and senior centers. The County endorsed the plan in April. Ann heard about it and encouraged the city to
as well. We encourage people to come to the HHS building to work on applications to receive nutritious
meals. Mayor Skadron read the proclamation.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
1. Lee Mulcahy said the Supreme Court granted an extension of time to file a petition until the end
of September. He also submitted the deed restriction for his lot as well as the certificate of
occupancies for his neighbors. He said all of the lots were out of compliance by 2008. He asked
for council to support a work session on APCHA.
Jim True, city attorney stated that Mr. Mulcahy did ask the Supreme Court for an extension of time.
That can be granted by any Supreme Court Justice. A justice did grant an extension of time. It is not
based on the merits all it. It is based on his statement that he simply needed more time to file the
petition.
2. Amanda Tucker said Councilman Hauenstein would consider a work session about APCHA. She
said she is here not to speak about her case but to speak about the tax credit non compliance issue.
The issue is APCHA selectively chooses it cases.
3. Emzy Veazy III said there needs to be a system to monitor HOAs.
4. Amos Underwood submitted a letter on behalf of Peter Fornell.
5. Curt Hall on behalf of parents watching the RETT debate. He said he would like to figure out a
way to use the money more effectively. They believe the money is not being used very
effectively sitting in a bank and would like to work with council and other organizations. We are
focused on the schools and trying to get additional funding for them, specifically for the arts.
Most importantly we would like council to consider how we get the money freed from within the
four walls of the Wheeler to be reallocated within the community.
6. Tommy Sherman said he wanted to expand on what Curt said. The school spends around one
million dollars a year on art related activities. The school district theater is in dire need of
renovation of around seven million dollars. He asked council to consider this when creating a
ballot referendum to reallocate the RETT.
7. Ken Rambert said it seems a bit absurd that there is 32 million dollars sitting in a bank account
earning very little interest when it should be earmarked to the arts program. My allegiance is
towards the school district.
Councilman Myrin said it is a fair time for the community to raise this issue. Tomorrow we are talking
about the November ballot. It is past the time to petition. Council is the gate keeper of who gets on the
ballot for this November. If we select our favorite options there is no community control to override us.
By closing the opportunity for the community to petition and having us as the gatekeeper puts us in a
difficult space. Council can’t reallocate this on our own by picking favorites front runners over others.
Councilwoman Mullins said thank you for your comments and coming in. We all realize the funding for
the arts and the schools continue to decrease. This discussion keeps coming around and the resent
publicity of Jazz Aspen has brought this to the forefront. Worrying about something being on the
November ballot is premature. We need to consider about keeping the RETT in place but also fairness to
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
3
the community. I would not be concerned that there is a chosen group that will receive money. We
should continue to have discussions.
Mayor Skadron said enough with participations and referendums. Stand up as a council candidate with a
platform and get elected on it. That’s how local government should work.
Councilman Frisch said a little history, there is still council direction to explore the Jazz Aspen
discussion. Two months ago I pitched the idea there is more than enough RETT money to leave the four
walls of the Wheeler. That went over like a lead balloon. After that Jazz Aspen came up with their idea.
They were looking for a space and heard there may be need for a black box space. I think that gave
enough enticement to give direction to staff to explore that. Since then, I don’t think the community was
going to allow for any entity to allow for a bite of the RETT without a broader discussion. A few weeks
ago I gave a pitch for staff to quit the Jazz Aspen discussion and have a wider discussion. I doubt we
would have a vote in November. Since then aspencommunityvoice has been going on. The Wheeler has
a sub committee exploring the Jazz Aspen thing. I don’t think staff’s resources are being spent wisely
chasing this. We can still try and put something on the ballot this November but I’m not supportive of
that. Right now, Jazz Aspen doesn’t have a building. If the direction of council is still to focus solely on
the Jazz Aspen direction we don’t need to do anything. I still think we will end up having a broader
discussion. It will just take a little longer. I’m not sure the community is being best served for the arts
and I want to keep it for the arts. How we get to the money being distributed is a lot of different ways.
As I tell everyone before you come to city hall explore every private sector option first.
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Myrin said based on the comments on the community voice page the answer is pretty clear
on the Jazz topic, generally opposed. It’s a small group. Can we use the county com dev space for
APCHA. Steve Barwick, city manager, said we are hoping to get some council direction on the 30th.
Councilman Myrin said Peter Fornell emailed all of us. His concern was about the city council policy of
eliminating free market in the core but allowing affordable housing in the core. They both have some of
the same priorities. He was looking for a policy on onsite housing versus certificates. I don’t want
housing to shut down commercial in the core. Councilman Frisch said I think he is talking about a
specific application that is in the HPC process that raises a broader question. Jessica Garrow, community
development, said this is a question related to the multi family replacement program. Council said it is
not part of our work program right now. We can address it but something else comes off. It would be an
extensive work program. Councilman Frisch said it is prioritization and not preferred at the moment.
Ms. Garrow replied correct. Council specifically left it in at the moratorium.
Councilman Hauenstein said to keep the fire in Basalt on our minds. When the wind blows uphill the air
quality goes downhill. Be thankful for the people fighting the fire and be vigilant about preventing future
fires. He supports continuing the conversations about public private partnerships like the Jazz Aspen
discussion but without a building it is a moot point. He is willing to have additional conversations about
the RETT but they should be centered around the arts.
Councilwoman Mullins said related to citizen advocacy, we have strict noise regulations on resident/retail
but not on construction. A neighbor called me concerned about the noise from cleaning a storm drain. I
went down and the noise was deafening. She runs a small lodge and you couldn’t stand in the front yard.
April Long came right down. I would like to have a discussion about the noise levels that are permitted
for some of the utilities. Scott Miller, public works, said several of us heard of the complaints and we
stopped the operation. We won’t start it up again until we have a resolution.
Mayor Skadron gave a reminder to all the things happening in the community including Theatre Aspen,
Aspen Santa Fe Ballet. Belly up, ACES or a walking tour with the historical society
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
4
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution #105 - Mail Trail
Councilman Myrin said the trail lost all the trees in the last year. What concerns me is lighting. I saw
new lighting go in along John Denver. I hesitate to have everything lit like that trail. April Long,
engineering, said Parks will be involved in re-vegetation and resurfacing. It will be their responsibility
for lighting. We have no intention of changing the lighting. Ben Carlson, parks, said we have plans for
lighting the trail. Right now, there are three solar power lights that are not working well and have had a
number of complaints. They will be replaced with a bollard system light. It will be waist down lighting
illuminating the trail only.
Councilwoman Mullins said this is crazy expensive, was it anticipated. Mr. Carlson replied that it was
anticipated. Ms. Long said it has been in the capital plan for some time and because the pipe is so deep.
It is 16 feet deep and requires special equipment. Councilwoman Mullins said the trail will be lost for
how long. Ms. Long stated it will be rerouted thought he Red Brick. Councilwoman Mullins asked is
there signage. Ms. Long replied not yet. Councilwoman Mullins stated that would be a good idea. Will
the trees be replaced. Mr. Carlson replied yes, there is a replacement plan.
Mayor Skadron asked is the lighting coming before council and why is it necessary. Mr. Carlson said the
lights would be on a timer the same way the current lights are on a sensor. There would be more of them.
Part of it has to do with the grade of the trail. Mayor Skadron said lighting is a huge issue and a defining
character of the town. While safety is a priority we live by the dark sky initiative. If we want to change
that it is a huge policy change that needs to come before us.
• Resolution #107, Series of 2018 – Replacement of two boilers at Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housing
• Resolution #106, Series of 2018 – Progressive Trail Design
• Resolution #105, Series of 2018 – Mail Trail Storm Line Upgrade
• Minutes – July 9, 2018
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. All
in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2018 – Changes to the City Procurement Code
Rebecca Hodgson, procurement, told the Council this will raise the thresholds on procurement levels.
Specifically, we would like to allow departments to make purchases up to 25,000 dollars. Moving the
competitive quote threshold from $10,000 up to $25,000. From 25,000 to $50,000 would require
competitive quotes. Formal solicitations would be $50,000 or greater. Emergency procurement limits
would go from $25,000 up to $50,000. The city manager would have to approve that. We would also
like to be able to increase these thresholds based on the consumer price index. Every five years we would
round up to the nearest thousand. We are also requesting to add the websites for publication. We
currently use a website that a lot of municipalities use to publish our solicitations. Occasionally we will
use the papers as well, particularly when it is mostly locals who will bid. It is not currently in the code so
we would like to add that for consistency.
Mayor Skadron said the big item is the $50,000 threshold. I think this is long overdue.
Councilman Hauenstein moved to read Ordinance #16, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 16
(SERIES OF 2018)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO TITLE
4 PROCUREMENT CODE SECTION 4.04.050 PURPOSES, INTERPRETATION OF RULES THRU
SECTION 4.04.120.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
5
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #16, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Hauenstein. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Mullins, yes;
Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2018 – 500W Main Street – Historic Landmark Lot Split, Transferable
Development Rights, Special Review and Variations
Amy Simon, community development, stated the proposal was to add on to the building. Rowland +
Broughton is moving to this site. At some point they decided they didn’t need as much space and just
needed to do an interior remodel. They still would like to capture some value. The request is to split the
lot in half and with it separate what could happen on the west vacant lot with TDRs. They can create 7
TDRs. There are a few variations council will need to discuss. The Mesa Store is on a 6,000 sq ft lot and
meets dimensional requirements. On a 3,000 sq ft lot it would trigger variations and make the store over
allowed FAR. Through the special review process, you can find where this is appropriate. New set back
variation would be needed for the west side. We need to talk about the pedestrian amenity. This is more
than accommodated on the vacant lot. They are undertaking a major restoration on the building to bring
back the original character. Another item to discuss is parking. They plan to do mitigation partially on
site and through transportation measures. Staff is supporting the application. There is the potential to
more than double the size of the building, but they are proposing to sever the development off site. HPC
will be talking about the project on Wednesday.
Councilman Hauenstein asked if they are calling for both lots to be designated. TDRs are to leave the
western lot. He wants to know what incentives are left on the lot. What benefits are available to the
historic site after the TDRs are sold off and some of the parking is moved to the western lot. Staff is
recommending the additional sq ft, 451 be granted in consideration for the restoration work, I’m
wondering if that can be made up from TDRs from the western lot. Ms. Simon said you aren’t able to
land TDRs on a historic property, only take them away. Councilman Hauenstein said there are no
setbacks now so it is nonconforming now. How would that work for the western lot. Those would
remain in effect. Ms. Simon said they are required for a 5 foot set back on the wester lot. They can’t do
that due to the stairs. The building department needs to know there will be an easement due to fire
protection. Councilman Hauenstein said the building envelop on the west would be decreased. Ms.
Simon replied right. Councilman Hauenstein asked would the bike racks be just for their use. Ms. Simon
replied yes, they are on their property.
Councilman Frisch said long term it would be a big loss if that lot stays empty. He appreciates we are
trying to remove TDRs. He is hoping at some point there is some type of appropriately sized structure
there. Are we boxing ourselves in for no development. Dana Ellis, representing the applicant, said we
reached out to Amy and asking them to look again at the setback. It only allows for 17 feet of buildable
space. We are still entertaining options. Councilman Frisch said the historic pattern says there should be
a structure there. Ms. Simon said we will provide the Sandborn map. There was a small one story
structure there.
Councilman Hauenstein said the pedestrian amenity, the garden, is it a garden for both lots. John Roland,
owner, replied it is a passive garden. There is a lot of push and pull to make the lot buildable.
Councilman Myrin said page 149 mentions severing 1 TDR will permanently restrict the site for
commercial as well as residential. Ms. Simon said the west lot is allowed to be developed in the mixed
use zone. The day they sell the first TDR it will reduce the square footage but not restrict the use.
Councilman Myrin said he shares similar concerns that Adam raised about this parcel. In a way it seems
we are creating a problem with the lot split. Can you bring back where TDRs were requested but not
approved. It seems like an ideal place with no one commuting and everyone living next door.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
6
Councilwoman Mullins said the memo is very clear but she would like more info about the TDRs.
Looking at the character of Main Street, originally most of the lots were full creating a uniform edge. To
use empty lots were not the norm in town unless they were associated with higher end real estate. It does
break with the character. I understand projects change. I would like to know what was there historically.
I think it is doable, but I don’t know if I would support selling off all the TDRs.
Mayor Skadron said John you have council asking for development. This is the tension we have between
historic preservation and development.
Councilwoman Mullins said if we grant the TDRs the city can’t ask for them back. Ms. Simon replied
right.
Mayor Skadron said the allowable max floor area changes with the sale of a or multiple TDRs. Ms.
Simon said the lot split leaves the door open for a 3,000 sq ft development. Creation of TDRs doesn’t do
anything. When they start to sell them, they accept a reduced sq ft of what can be built there. Mayor
Skadron said to talk about the non-conformity and variations requested next time. Comment on the
pedestrian amenity too.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #18, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #18
(SERIES OF 2018)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, SPECIAL
REVIEW AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 500 W. MAIN STREET, LOTS
R AND S, BLOCK 30, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #18, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Hauenstein,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried
ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2018 – Code Amendment – Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
Lee Ledesma, utilities, stated the proposed changes to the ordinance will extension the pilot program to
December 31 of 2018 as well as incentives for best management practices on stormwater and design
criteria updates. Council adopted water efficiency plans in 2015. Mr. Carlson stated over the course of
the first 10 months we have seen a number of permits come in. The average water need per permit have
been 7 gallons per sq ft per season with a compliance rate of 87 percent.
Ms. Ledesma said we are asking to extend the pilot phase to gather more information. Right now, all the
criteria in the standards is required. The city will give a CO even if the max allowable water budget is not
met. Rick Magill, utilities, spoke about the cost associated with meeting the program. The estimate for
the average residential project is $3,000.
Mr. Carlson said the recommended changes to the standards will help to administer the standards. The
water budget incentives allow applicants to use non-irrigating protected native vegetation.
Fire wise design criteria, zoning exemptions.
Ms. Ledesma talked about the updates on the qualified landscaper certification. They received a $50,000
grant to put on a training this month. There were 20 participants. It was very successful. We were
recognized as the first water provider in the state to provide this type of training.
Councilwoman Mullins said she is very supportive of what you are doing. Aspen is a leader in putting
together the ordinance and now the training. Thank you.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
7
Councilman Myrin said early on it seemed like the right of ways were included, now they are exempt.
Mr. Carlson replied yes. Councilman Myrin asked would that be a city policy. Mr. Carlson said we
would manage the right of ways as we have based on the communities that they are in. Councilman
Myrin asked is there an example we can walk by to see a built product. Mr. Carlson said the first one
would be built this fall. That is part of the reason we are asking for an extension. The hope is we can get
the audit prior to shutting down in the fall.
Councilman Frisch said he appreciates all the work and flexibility. When this first came out my point
was I was worried about the Scottsdaleazation of Aspen and grass is bad because it uses water.
Residential irrigation is a big part of the water usage. I’ll support this on first reading. I’m still concerned
about trying to balance community values and we are getting into a much less humble landscape
environment. Running around in the backyard is drastically reduced. When I think about what Cemetery
Lane looks like now and what it will, that will be drastically changed. I’m still processing if this is a
necessary evil that water is so troubling a supply that we need to do something so drastically. I think we
are steering away from a natural environment.
Councilman Hauenstein said if 87% are coming in below maybe we should be having a stricter standard.
Maybe focus is more inside their homes than outside. I will support this on first reading. If most are
coming in below maybe it should be lower.
Mayor Skadron said we are speaking to efficiency and addressing healthy landscape and what can be
expected with new construction. A part of this demands new irrigation systems are extremely precise.
Those are all successes.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #17, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman
Hauenstein. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO 17
(SERIES OF 2018)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
TITLE 25 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN – UTILITIES 1,2,3 – TO UPDATE
CHAPTER 25.30 ENTITLED: WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING STANDARDS.
Councilman Hauenstein moved to adopt Ordinance #17, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Frisch, yes;
Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #88, SERIES OF 2018 – Lots 1-5, Ranger Station Subdivision – Extension of Vested
Rights
Jennifer Phelan, community development, said this resolution is to extend and reinstate vested rights for
three years for five lots. The extension will be until May or October 2021 depending on the lot. The
properties are located on West Smuggler and North 8th. They are represented by Curt Sanders. History –
The Forest Service owned a parcel of land. In 2012 they met with city officials with the idea to
redeveloped the campus as well as sell off a portion of the property. As a federal agency they represented
that they were not subject to city jurisdiction. In May of 2015 a plat was recorded and the lots auctioned
off. As a result of filing of the plat we began to get inquires on the lots. Most significant of the issues
associated with the lots is there were no development allotments granted with the lots. How is this
different. Typically, with a subdivision there is one development who gets agreements with the city. The
lots have road access, infrastructure, utilities where a house could be developed. There is a review
structure with agreed upon development. With three or more lots a portion is to be affordable housing.
We have examples of this throughout the city, Williams Ranch, alpine cottages, five trees, highlands,
maroon creek club. What we ended up with were lots that didn’t go through a review process and lots
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
8
that didn’t have a right to develop. In 2015 we were approached with an attorney representing lots 4 and
5. Staff recommended a provision of the code based on a single lot be used. With each individual lot we
applied the code where 30% of the floor area be applied for the affordable housing. We negotiated that
floor area could be mitigated by affordable housing credits or cash in lieu. There was a three year
vesting. Ordinances for the 2 lots were approved in May of 2015. The other 3 lots were approved in
October 2015. The fee in lieu would be calculated at time of building permit submission. At end of
December the city increased the fee in lieu rate. In 2015 discussions began with Curt to try to get more
clarity around these lots. We discussed developing an agreement for infrastructure improvements that
would happen. We discussed removing the PD overlay on the entire parcel. Another ask in the 2016
application was to lock in the 2015 fee in lieu rate prior to the December increase. Staff did not support
the lower rate. There were numerous public hearings on this. In the end, council approved the lower rate
but only for the 3 years. A twist in the approval was a negotiation where the applicants agreed to pay
20% when a new plat was recorded. We also said they could look at buying down a unit or off site.
There are multiple owners with multiple perspectives. The plat and development agreement have been
recorded. We have received the 20% payment. The vested rights for lots 4 and 5 expired in May. Lots 1,
2 and 3 locked in rate expires in October. An infrastructure permit has been applied for. The request is to
reinstate the vested rights for lots 4 and 5 until 2021 and extend for lots 1, 2 and 3 until October 2021 at
the pre December 2015 rate. They do have the ability to submit. 4 of the 5 lots are listed for sale. Staff is
recommending if something be accommodated, grant it till the end of the year. If you are concerned
about affordable housing, deny it.
Councilman Frisch said we had a once a century lowering of mitigation. We did a study and it said we
needed to reduce by half the fee. I’m wondering why. Ms. Phelan said there are two forms of mitigation.
You are talking about mitigation when there is redevelopment or expansion. Subdivision like this is
inclusionary development. It is a completely different requirement.
Curtis Sanders, representing the applicants, said the rub on this matter is the city is treating this as an
inclusionary zoning project. Each separate lot is being treated as its inclusionary zone. She referenced it
as a plat. The Forest Service recorded a survey. What happens is the city’s position is you are not a
special lot with development approval but you have to achieve your development rights. When the lots
were purchased at auction the applicable code said the only way the affordable housing could be
accomplished was on site, certificates or council approved cash in lieu. All the sites were too small for on
site. Two lots came in first in May of 2015 then 3 in October. Development approvals were granted. A
big part of the 3 years went when there were dramatic changes in the code. If you run the calculation
used for the RCC study. An identical lot with development approval was .52 FTEs. We have to provide
2.4 FTEs. This is real dollars to not only you all but to the lot owners. After the approvals were given in
2016 that’s when the lot owners got busy. The biggest item was the subdivision plat. We entered into a
development agreement with the city. The lot owners did cut the check as required. I didn’t see it
addressed in the application. There is criteria for granting vested rights. Has the applicant complied with
any conditions. We complied with all. What was the progress made. The permit has been applied for.
What is the nature of the benefits of the city. Prepayment of affordable housing fees, recordation of SI
Johnson ditch easement. What are the means of the city served by extension of the request. The property
sitting vacant for an extended of time. The lot owners are trying to be realistic with the 3 year request and
do this as quickly as possible and not come back with another request.
Mayor Skadron said I’m really unsettled that you are back here with this. Mr. True said I think you need
to review the criteria that is set in the code. The evaluation of that, and the extension of vested rights is a
legislative act, is a discretionary act. It is complicated. If you look at the criteria there has to be
discretion in your determination. For instance D – the needs of the city and application would be served.
You shall consider them but your evaluation becomes a discretionary act. You have to make a
determination of them.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
9
Councilman Frisch said there seems to be a few conversations, more time and monetary affordable
housing. Ms. Phelan replied correct. Councilman Frisch said if council is concerned about the loss of
affordable housing we should not reinstate / extend the vesting. Are we able to lock in the rate and have a
separate conversation on the vesting. Ms. Phelan said if someone submitted by December 31 they would
be locked in to the 2015 rate. If you are interested in approving an extension you could but it does lock in
the old rate. Councilman Frisch said we can’t treat them as different. It is all or nothing. Mr. True said
you can put conditions on it. Ms. Phelan said right now the request is to lock in the 2015 rate.
Councilman Frisch said it is not that there is 5 lots there but it was not platted. Ms. Phelan said they
never had any right to develop the lot. Councilman Frisch said we get asked to extend rights every so
often. I’m not sure the last time the clock ran out and we are asked to restart it. Ms. Phelan said the lots
have been for sale for a while. Mr. Sanders said the code doesn’t treat it different than the rights have
lapsed. Councilman Frisch said on intent, it seems like a variety of people bought it for a variety of
different reasons. They have been for sale for a long time. The idea is the applicants have been doing as
little as possible. No one is buying anything so now they are doing something. Mr. Sanders said I
understand that. There has been no sitting on anything. I believe the lots are more valuable with the
infrastructure in. All these things had to happen first. Councilman Frisch asked is all the work being
done to get to infrastructure or is there house designs. Mr. Sanders replied one house is designed. The
infrastructure cost is $425,000 per lot. There has been no strategy to it.
Councilman Myrin said in December I said it is $200,000 per lot not going to the affordable housing
project. At the time I thought it was a lot to support our affordable housing program. Is it still that per
lot. Ms. Phelan said there was an increase in December 2014 and an inflation adjustment in March 2015.
The difference is basically $230,000 per lot.
Councilwoman Mullins said you’ve been complaining this is taking a long time but that’s because we are
doing this backwards. We end up with this very expensive mix. We have made concessions giving up 1
million in affordable housing mitigation dollars. The goal should be to retrieve what we can out of this
and get the affordable housing we can and get the housing built. I don’t want to start over negotiations
with a different owner. I would support the December 2018 vesting.
Councilman Hauenstein said what’s troubling to me is you said the FTEs are 5 times what they are for
other properties. Mr. Sanders said that came out of the RCC study. The Forest Service lot has 3,200 feet
of allowable FAR. That translates to .52 FTEs. 2.43 in inclusionary zoning section of the code.
Councilman Frisch said if someone bought an undeveloped lot they would have paid a much lower rate if
it was never plotted. Mr. True said we did make it clear to the Forest Service and the buyers that was not
our position. Ms. Phelan said when the Forest Service took over the property the overlay was put on in
the 80’s. They never did anything with the property. In 2012 they started talking about redevelopment
and wanted to sell off part of the land.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Michael Brown, Forest Lookout 1 LLC and Forest Lookout 2 LLC, under contract to purchase
lots 4 and 5. It took much longer than expected to record and file the plat. There is a building
permit for the alley and work is in process. The request for the extension is reasonable and
should be granted. I understand there is animosity towards the government but it is not right to
take that out on the current applicant.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilman Hauenstein said he wants to be fair to the applicant but I don’t want to walk away from work
force housing mitigation. It appears there was a year delay from getting the plat done. Could we extend a
year to make up for that. Councilman Myrin said it doesn’t have to be extended at all.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
10
Councilman Frisch said the Forest Service completely botched this and we warned them. We tried to
make it clear to the real estate community. I’m happy to lock in the rate that is there. I don’t think the
2021 is going to fly. If it can be done in 3 I would rather see that if they need 6 fine.
Councilman Myrin said if this expires we don’t have to do it again. It is what the code says it is. We
don’t have to see it again.
Mr. True said we did get benefits from going through the whole process from getting the plat done and
the ditch settled. It is more trying to clean up the mess the Forest Service left us. I don’t want to say that
is minimal. Bert is right, at this point at least for lots 4 and 5 they could walk in tomorrow but they are
paying the 2018 rate.
Mayor Skadron said I think it is disingenuous to say it is not to avoid higher mitigation. While the city
did get a recorded subdivision plat and a ditch easement the investors got a million dollar reduction in
affordable housing mitigating. I think this has gone on long enough. Plenty of time has been provided to
get a permit. It just didn’t get done. I can’t as it stands now see that the needs of the city would be served
by the extension of rights, section D. I believe council should consider not granting the continuation.
Councilman Frisch said I’m going to separate these two. I don’t think lower affordable housing is going
to be accomplished. I’m open to a few more months to get something done. Ms. Phelan said if 4 and 5
were submitted today if would be at the 2018 rates. The other lots would have to submit by October 14th
to lock in the 2015 rates. Ms. Garrow said we are recommending the extension to the end of the year to
make up for some of the back and forth on the development agreement.
Councilwoman Mullins said she does support the extension until the end of the year.
Councilman Hauenstein said he feels that 4 and 5 are expired. If they want to develop they are at the
2018 rate. I could support the extension for the other lots.
Councilman Frisch said one of the suggestions is to give all 5 lots an extension till the end of the year.
I’m fine with that.
Bart Johnson, attorney, said we were under contract before the vested rights expired but we weren’t the
land owner. We were told you had to wait for us. The reason we didn’t come in prior was the other lot
owners wouldn’t let us.
Councilman Hauenstein said in light of what’s been said I think I could support staff’s recommendation.
Councilman Myrin said this is a huge amount of money that should be taken between the buyer and seller
not the affordable housing program.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Resolution #88, Series of 2018 reinstating the vesting for lots 4
and 5 and extending the vesting for all the lots until December 31, 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Hauenstein, no; Myrin, no; Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron,
no. Motion denied.
Mr. True stated at this point you don’t need to take action to deny. You could move to deny any further
extensions.
Councilman Hauenstein moved to deny any application to extend the vesting; seconded by Councilman
Myrin. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Hauenstein, yes; Myrin, yes; Mullins, no; Frisch, no; Mayor
Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
At 9:20 p.m. Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. All in favor,
motion carried.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 23, 2018
11
Linda Manning, City Clerk