HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20120521MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jessica Garrow, City Long Range Planner
Chris Bendon, City Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: Monday, May, 21,�:30pm Council Chambers
RE: Changes to CC and C-1 zone district
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: No action is requested at this time. Staff is providing a status.
update on the process for updating the CC and C-1 Zone Districts.
BACKGROUND: On April 2"d, City Council a es to the CC and C-1 zone
approved changes
districts related to height and free-market residential development. The specific changes
included reducing the maximum height in the CC and C-1 zones to 28 feet for two-story
buildings. At the time, City Council indicated an interest in exploring additional code
amendments to allow a third story, but that additional discussion regarding the specific height
and allowed third floor uses was necessary. Staff has outlined the process for updating these
zone districts, in the "Public Outreach Process," below.
In addition to changes to height, the April code amendments incorporated minimum first floor
floor -to -floor heights into the zone districts (13 — 15 feet , in CC, and 11 — 13 feet in C-1). The
amount of Free -Market Residential floor area allowed for non -historic properties was reduced
from .75:1 to .5:1 in both zones, and only if equal amounts of Affordable Housing is provided on
the same parcel. Historic properties maintain a .5:1 Free -Market Residential FAR by right.
Finally, changes were made to the allowances for rooftop equipment. The required setback for
all rooftop equipment, except railings, was increased to 20 feet from any street -facing fagade. In
addition, rooftop railings must be setback equal to the height of the railing.
PUBLIC OUTREACH PROCESS: Earlier this year, City Council approved a new process for
amending the Land Use Code. The following steps are part of Step One of that process —
Community Input:
1. Compile existing public feedback from the AACP update related to appropriate
downtown heights and land uses.
2. Conduct an updated survey asking the community to identify the heights and uses that are
appropriate for downtown. The survey went on-line today and will be open for 3 — 4
weeks. Staff sent a survey link to ACRA, CCLC, P&Z, and HPC asking them to* respond
to the survey. In addition, staff has sent a "letter to the editor" asking the public to
respond to the survey.
3. Conduct an online forum using Open City Hall. Staff is utilizing this new tool to enable
community members to provide their own comments and feedback on the code
amendment. This went "live" today and will be open for 3 — 4 weeks. +
4. Receive input from P&Z and HPC. Staff will be meeting with P&Z and HPC in early
June to receive their feedback on downtown heights.
5. Conduct an analysis of mechanical and stfuctural needs in mixed -use buildings. Staff has
commissioned an outside study to explore this issue. The final report will be reviewed by
local architects and city building officials to ensure it reflects the realities of construction
in our climate.
6. Receive initial direction and input from City Council on the uses / heights that are
appropriate for downtown. Staff has scheduled a follow-up work session on June 18th,
which will provide City Council an opportunity to discuss all the public outreach and to
give staff direction on processing a code amendment. Staff is also organizing a
downtown walking tour for that date.
7. Utilize selected 3-D modeling to illustrate what different heights might look like. This
information will be presented later in the process, when there is more clarity on what
direction City Council is interested in going.
The second and third steps of the code amendment process are presenting City Council with
specific code language. Staff anticipates being able to present code language to City Council in
early August, with public hearings expected in August and early September.
Staff requests City Council provide feedback on the proposed Public Outreach process and
timeline
2.0
TO:
MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jessica Garrow, City Long Range Planner
Chris Bendon, City Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: Monday, May Z 1, 15:30pm Council Chambers
RE: Mitigating the Impacts of Development white, paper
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting City Council provide direction on the suggested
implementation steps outlined in the Mitigating the Impacts of Development white paper.
BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, City Council directed Community, Development staff to
analyze the various negative impacts of development as part of the implementation of the AACP.
The attached report (Exhibit A) is a compilation of work by the Transportation, Parks,
Environmental Health, Engineering, Building, and Planning Departments, as well as the Canary
Initiative, APCHA, and Kids First.
The report focuses on six areas of the community that are impacted by development. Staff has
outlined how impacts are currently mitigated and, where appropriate, outlines recommendations
on other methods to mitigate those impacts. The chapters are:
• Parks, Open Space, Recreation & Trails
• Transportation
• Environment
• Affordable Housing
• Construction
• Public Health and Human Services
The purpose of this paper is to outline, at a high level, how development impacts these areas, and
what steps the City currently takes to mitigate those impacts. In many cases the City has
effective and proven methods of mitigation. In other cases the City could, mitigate in a different
or more effective way. The paper outlines, when appropriate, potential additional
implementation steps the City could take to better mitigate the negative impacts of development.
Staff requests direction from City Council on proceeding with any of the steps outlined. Some
items are currently underway, or are in existing work programs, like APCHA's update to the
housing cash -in -lieu fee study. Other items are not currently part of department work programs
or will require additional monies, like the standardization and study of transportation mitigation
methods.
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A: Mitigating the Impacts of Development white paper
Mitigating the Impacts of
Development
r yR°..
4�� .:•:F� '�:)•..y:i: ?§'4::• aX,
Development creates a myriad of both positive .and negative impacts.
On the positive side, development of affordable housing creates
places for local workers to live, and development of transit systems
improves the connectivity of the community. Development can also
increase the tax base and result in new community organizations..
On the negative side, development creates construction which can
increase the dust and noise in our neighborhoods. It can also result
in more people using our parks and trails. All development has
an impact, both positive and negative, on our quality of life and
community character.
This white paper, Mitigating the Impacts of Development, outlines
the impacts most often associated with development as "bad," or
"negative. It is important to note from the outset that the positive
aspects of development are not the focus of this paper this paper is
intended to provide a general overview of how negative impacts are
mitigated. -While there are a variety of impacts from development,
this paper focuses on six key areas of Aspen's community character,
natural resources, and quality of life. -
Parks, Open Space, Recreation & Trails - pg 3
• Transportation - pg_ 5
• Environment - pg 8
• Affordable Housing - pg 13
• Construction - pg 18
• Public Health and Human Services - pg 19
The purpose of this paper is to outline, at a high level, how
development impacts these areas, and what steps the City currently
takes to mitigate those impacts. In many cases the City has effective
and.• proven methods of mitigation. In other cases the City could
mitigate in a different or more effective way. The paper outlines,
when appropriate, potential additional steps the City could take to
better mitigate the negative impacts of development. Each topic is
divided into four sections:
• Identify the impact
- Methods to offset impacts
• Current mitigation techniques
• Suggested Next Steps
It is important to note that mitigation takes three general forms, but
in all cases it is meant for physical, or capital, improvements:
1. A physical offset, such as a newly deed -restricted affordable
housing unit, or additional bike racks.
2. A fee -in -lieu, such as a cash -in -lieu payment for affordable
housin Fee-in-lieus are intended to enable the construction
g
of physical improvements at a later date. As an example, the
C
ity of Aspen
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1
City collects a cash -in -lieu fee for the School District at the
time of building permit. The money collected from. this fee is
transferred to the School District for their use on physical/capital
improvements.
3. A Development Impact Fee is a one-time fee assessed on
development for their infrastructure impacts. Impact Fees
can only be used for capital infrastructure improvements.
' They cannot be used for ongoing operations or maintenance
costs and they cannot be used to address -existing service
deficiencies. The City assesses Impact Fees for Transportation
/ Air Quality, which is used for capital costs related to transit.
The City also assesses a Parks -Impact Fee, which is used for land
improvements, land purchases, and facility construction.
City Council requested this Mitigating the Impacts of Development
white paper as part of the implementation, of the 2012 Aspen Area
Community Plan. Community Development staff requested input and
direction from City Departments to ensure the white paper is accurate
and up to date. This white paper represents a collaborative effort
of the Transportation, Parks, Environmental Health, Engineering,
Building, and Planning Departments, as well as the Canary Initiative,
APCHA, and Kids First.
2 Mitigating Impacts of Development
Parks, Open Space,
Recreation Tr ils
..\a dent"fy
J3:1ti.:;:�..:R� •:r:., a�a,,. ��...: LZ:f 1..:,. x: impact
The impact of development on parks, recreation, open space and
trails can be measured in terms of population: As the number of
people in a community increases, so does the intensity of use on
active and passive parks, recreation facilities, trails and open space,
potentially reducing the quality of the experience, impacting ecological
health and wildlife habitat, reducing the availability of facilities, and
resulting in increased maintenance costs.
�. ,..\\.;. ...R\":.. Q\r:,, .:i .a :±'+i'\'. a\ ..a�.. \iih.;:; 'i. ti<L. .\o,: :;w. .r.,:. �'�'�i±:. Y::<.•.:. '•• .. a:• .• f.: .ab. .... .:.. ::.. ...i � ':S .,,... �h, v`\ ,: `hr '♦o.. .�,.. '` \\.' �. .\:" \..4 oE.. �..\ ?\;t;, ) :;'\i. .,... ,` < :\�a$; ".r.Y,q,, :.. �:}. ..,.,
•:w' ;:�'' :.�.. )Z :.'P `:. x: a�:' :an `$0 :.�. y '.\�.:�: .\� a`r< \ :.\: \\L S\„� y2� .;:\; y1.S. ': t.�: Iy 2;:> �4:Y
�.<: :�:r: �r '��a;2w . .:: \$.`' .<'7. \La+ 'ai:;> ':::�W` pro.. .\. :\'< :C: ' .�." � •era:.: '':t:;.:i \;A .`x:.c. '<C,. \.. .R�• :,'4:.v ,:J.::: h�.
�M
The types of mitigation for parks, open space, recreation and trails
are relatively straightforward: Obtain land for active and passive
parks, recreation, and open space, and obtain land and/or easements
for trails. Another type of mitigation is ensuring there is adequate
physical infrastructure and maintenance in the parks, open space,
recreation, and trails system required to accommodate the increase in
users and created by the new development.
Determining the level of development impacts may be easiest in
terms of active recreational parks and river -related recreation
areas. A healthy balance means there is adequate capacity so that
recreational areas are available for use by sports groups, schools
and ind.ividual users without conflict. The Parks Department regularly
evaluates this balance.
For open space and trails, this balance may be harder to assess, as
they are used by individuals and not organized groups. Surveys, trail
counters and field staff observations help determine the quality of
experience and level of impact to the trails and open space.
Current iiton i
techniques
Currently all development is assessed a Parks Impact Fee. The basis
for the Parks Impact Fee was established by a 2006 consulting study
by BBC Research & Consulting. Essentially, the total cost of replacing
all land now used for parks, trails and open space, along with the
cost of replacing infrastructure (paved trails, etc) was divided by
total developed floor area in the City. This established a baseline
service level for the fee. Today, the Parks Impact Fee is $5.45 per
square foot of residential floor area, and $4.10 per square foot of net
leasable commercial floor area.
The Parks Department uses the Parks Impact Fee along with a 1.5%
sales tax for open space to buy parks, open space and trails, and
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1 3
to install appropriate infrastructure to optimize public use. After
more than a decade of extensive land purchases and acquisitions,
the Parks Department is now more focused on establishing open
space management plans and designing and constructing capital
improvements to existing structures. Land management planning,
while costly, does not involve capital purchases and cannot be funded
by the Parks Impact Fee.
Suggested Next Steps
The Parks Department believes the current Parks Impact Fee is
adequate to mitigate for the infrastructure impacts seen from
development. In the future, the City may want to re-evaluate amount
of the fee to ensure it continues to adequately offset the impacts to
the parks, open space, and trails system.
4 Mitigating Impacts of Development
Transportation
Identify
.;x,`;' "C .:
impact
Development can result in increased traffic and congestion. This,
in turn, results in additional strains on the heavily burdened valley -
wide transportation system, a reduced quality of life for commuters,
residents and visitors, and increases in a.ir pollution, such as PM-10,
carbon dioxide and ozone emissions.
1..+. ... Li .. .. .. .. \ .. .vv.v , .. na.,.]... .v. ... v. ,\\�v .nM n v.nP .. .:v,n \vv ... v..:. .\:.. ]n 4.v:^: „�`• :J•;.''\vv •iCn'<:'. :' M., .. \\,.... ...\. .
:•).. ' .s>: .e,,,. o\ .o.a ..,.. ..1,: \ .K:.; .2: �ijy� ?:. \<' \..,Z '.�,. '`?;): apt::.;�.,..,v
.:'.. ,: ..;:': �:!:a. ...,`'.......,.;,' "' <. ':>. , ., .]! ..,.: is\. :.:... .v.,• :4?. :\�` .!•.lRRF:`:4�. �: �Y. V:f.:
a:. +
fin. .. ... , .:........ .. n.. ..� .. ..v " :, •.v.:. :tv., ':..::. .., .. :\.., ..i !. ..�. n'N ]. 1.. .,f+'
r.
\ .•4a
+
v\
There are a variety of methods to offset transportation impacts.
For instance, on -site improvements such as on -site bike fleets or
participation in the City's Car to Go program can encourage fewer
vehicle trips from new development. . The development of affordable
housing can result in fewer transportation impacts on the valley's
transportation system by enabling commuting workers to live and
work in the same community. Additionally, the provision of alternate
methods of mobility, including valley -wide public transit, park n'
rides, carpooling, Transportation Demand Management strategies, an
efficient and user-friendly airport, and a network of safe and efficient
pedestrian and bicycle paths can offset adverse impacts.
Exactly what types and amounts of mitigation is appropriate for a
given development application is a challenge to define. The City does
not currently have a clear set of standards outlining what mitigation
types are appropriate for a given development proposal.
Current
�<;]::?i:e!,<�::ii.i. E`:: '?:k!:"::;::i§'<>>rfi.`i`:�.: n:mitigation
'.`:Q,..\.vs:.<:�:J)� •R>.\;'i,..:�.�i:'f";�, ¢;:.c:' `:�:]��yA�.>..+c..v!:; �\:.:C>;`J\'k:..n?ay \.•'\.o a,;`�`(;�' ':;�:��\' ���'�?:`��o-.,,.�.,;,`��'YS:„1: :'�2�'' �. .,yr`�' vv" ;�,.. F;:i':',::;1v"`,, : `..:!C].: :'.i<'.+}:`i] "Vi,..E>C:: '.?;..: Y••;4 ;4, .`qy,',L`:'.�,.,JZ�:'. \f), :..� '.r ., a+:. «�!w.J.,.,` :o:t sEJ; ':. .... .:.v.::2 :vxC^: ]:`\`.ti v\C,`.3,:, .3,,; •�;iy;.?;
kvX4\.
is \..
techni,,..,
At
In 2006, the city instituted a Transportation Demand Management/Air
Quality Impact Fee. The fee can be used for infrastructure and capital
improvements, but cannot be used to defray operation costs. The fee
is currently set as $0.61 per square foot of floor area for residential
and hotel projects, and $0.46 per square foot of net leasable
commercial space. This fee is currently the only mitigation method
for air quality impacts.
The primary tool for requiring mitigation is review standards
contained in the Land Use Code. These are varied and do not
provide clear direction. There is currently no specific requirement
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1 5
that an applicant provide a baseline study of existing parking and
traffic conditions in the vicinity of a new development. Nor is there
a formalized requirement for an applicant to generate. a study of
potential parking and traffic impacts that may result from the new
development. While the city has requested studies for PUDs and SPAs,
there is no consistent scope of work for such studies, and the Land
Use Code does not provide clear direction that non-PUD/SPA project
in the downtown is required to provide such information.
Determining a development's share of mitigation is done on a case -
by -case basis, starting with meetings of the City's Development
Review Committee which reviews applications and informally
discusses impacts and possible mitigation strategies. Because there
is no set of clear guidelines regarding potential mitigation methods,
the applicant often relies on the Transportation Department to provide
a mitigation strategy for the review process. Currently, a mix of
mitigation options is worked out between the applicant, staff, the P&Z
and City Council. This is often a haphazard process with constantly
changing targets, and it is often not resolved until the final ordinance
is ready to be drafted for approval. Staff believes there is substantial
room for improvement in this process.
Aside from mitigation that is directly related to a specific
development, the City gathers revenues for the Transportation Fund
from the following sources:
• 0.15% sales tax;
0.5% accommodations tax;
2.1 % construction materials use tax;
• A portion of Parking Department revenues, determined annually.
Revenue .from the Pitkin County 0.5% sales tax is collected and
disbursed by the Elected Officials Transportation Commission (EOTC),
mode up of representatives from Aspen, Pitkin County and Snowmass
Vi1.l,l.age. Substantial funds are provided to RFTA, as well an annual
"set -aside" for a future Entrance to Aspen project.
Suggested Next Step
Planning,, Transportation, Environmental Health and Engineering
staff believe there is room for substantial improvement in this
area. There are a number of implementation steps outlined below,
but staff believes the following 3 should be completed to ensure
all development mitigates for its share of transportation impacts
and that all development is treated fairly and consistently. Staff
estimates these efforts will require $50,000 and 1 year to complete.
This money is not currently allocated and will require a supplemental
appropriation.
1. Establish a "`trigger point" for required parking and traffic studies.
This should include a standardized scope of work for the studies,
including baseline information, projected impacts, and potential
mitigation options. Quality of Service as well as Level of Service
should be addressed in any studies.
2 " Establish Transportation. Demand Management (TDM) Guidelines,
which will include a wide range of potential user, infrastructure,
and safety improvements to mitigate varying levels of
development impact.
6. 1 Mitigating Impacts of Development
3. Explore the creation of an Aspen -specific trip generation model
that can be used by applicants when they prepare traffic and
transportation studies. This would ensure that the data provided
in transportation studies relates to on -the. ground conditions in
Aspen.
Standardize the review standards for different types of land use
review. Language should address developer's share of mitigation.
Planning staff believes this will provide greater clarity for staff and
applicants alike.
There have been changes in the composition of,transportation and air
quality infrastructure funded by the current Transportation Demand
Management / Air Quality Impact Fee. Staff believes it may be
worthwhile to update and re-evaluate the fee in the future to ensure it
continues to adequately offset transportation impacts.
Explore the ability to impose a fee or other form of mitigation to offset
the transportation and air quality operational impacts that result from
development.
Re-evaluate on -site parking requirements to ensure they 'reflect the
parking demand resulting from development. This could include a
discussion of a maximum parking standard.
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1 7
Environment
Identify t-he i
Development has numerous impacts on the environment, ranging
from destabilization of mountain slopes, destruction or removal of
riparian areas, the generation of stormwater run-off and pollutants,
energy consumption, the production of demolition debris and
household wastes, and the degradation of the visibility and quality
of air. Air pollution caused by increased traffic and congestion can
lead to a multitude of health impacts to the community, including
increased respiratory illnesses and heart disease. Because of their
ties to transportation, air quality impacts are discussed in the
Transportation section of this paper.
;\C, ;'a,+�vt2.., .,.,�\•°: ''.a:{.,. ,v . iis�,.:�., . <..,.\ .<av ` .vp:>'.::::`iifi:3:,?
-to
x:
S,
Riparian areas:
Development located in riparian areas can affect the health of our
rivers and streams. It can result in increased erosion and sediment
in our watercourses, changes to the natural river flow, and changes
to the natural vegetation. These impacts can be offset by locating
development away from the top of the river bank, requiring areas
adjacent to the river to be undisturbed, or allowing only native
vegetation.
Storm water run-off:
All development generates stormwater runoff, and is required to
calculate the amount of runoff it generates and propose mitigation
techniques. Stormwater management requirements are. detailed in
Chapter 28 of the Municipal .Code, which assigns the updated version
of the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) as the document that
governs the standards and guidelines for managing the quantity and
quality of runoff allowed from each development. The URMP requires
development to mimic natural site conditions by detaining to the
historic rate of runoff and by capturing and treating runoff from 80%
of rain and snowmelt events that occur within the City. It details
all information required to meet the City's minimum storrmwater
standards and provides a menu of options for meeting those
standards. By following the requirements of the URMP, developments
are reducing the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the site and
reducing the amount of pollutants leaving their site.
Waste & Recycling:
All development creates waste. The clearest way to mitigate the
waste generated is through recycling and composting. Waste is an
8 I Mitigating Impacts of Development.
AXoperational" aspect of new development and as such cannot be the
subject of an impact fee. To some degree, participation in recycling
programs becomes an individual responsibility. However, the City
works to encourage recycling and proper management of waste and
the City could require construction to recycle all applicable items.
The Environmental Health Department has continually improved _the
City's recycling program, and is currently working to expand the
compost program. The Environmental Health Department is also
researching possible code amendments to update the amount of
space required for waste collection.
Demolition debris:
Impacts on the landfill is under Pitkin County's purview, however,
the. City has continually explored and implemented new types
of mitigation through the building permit process. The Efficient
Building Program included a demolition component, which required
development to outline where demolition debris was going and how
much was being recycled, re -used, and thrown away in a landfill.
In 2009, the City adopted a new Energy Code which eliminated the
requirement that a development track. demolition debris. Since the
code change, the Building Department has seen that the recycling and
re -use of materials has become a regular course of business because
it is more cost effective than simply sending everything to the landfill.
Energy Consumption:
Buildings use energy, which has impacts on the environment,
especially when that energy is created from non-renewable sources
like coal or oil and gas. As an electric utility, the City is striving to
increase its usage of alternative energy sources, such as solar, hydro
and wind power, from 75% to 100%.
In addition, energy consumption is addressed through the Building
Department's Energy codes.
Current
A'c'+'.,.;:;..:.dya. .•.;\Z'..to
.: aq �:',::'ti <''.`a i.::.i.J,'.,. ismi
..: \..., toi-ga
.1;:>, ;;;);!••: ., h•..y �...\,'^ �'."{,0. :,.��M' 2 0 \ion
.:. ;4a: G.} .tt'"^ y•!. �:2.:`�. ,$:a:£�; d'••�.�;; �:.i t \ :: to :}w. ,�c,.' .�;,��+� '?<`>
techniques
Mountain slopes:
The land use code includes a chapter called "Environmentally
Sensitive Areas" (ESA), which requires all development within 150
feet of the 8,040 elevation line to go through a heightened review,
called the 8040 Greenline Review. This review is intended to reduce
impacts of development on our air, water, steep mountain slopes, and
the forest. Visual impacts of development are also addressed through
this review.
,The code does not clearly identify the kinds of baseline information
needed to conduct a thorough review. Nor does it clearly outline the
required information or the minimum standards that must be met
for development to prevent or mitigate negative impacts. The review
typically includes highly technical issues, including how the applicant
is addressing ground stability, mine subsidence, mud flow, rock
fall, avalanche dangers, adverse effects on the natural watershed,
runoff and soil erosion. An applicant must submit a site improvement
survey, and may be required to submit a 3-D model illustrating how
the development proposal will blend into the open character of the
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1 9
mountain. However, the scope and adequacy of technical information
to be submitted is typically negotiated on a case -by -case basis, which
creates confusion in the review process.
Riparian areas:
The Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) chapter of the land
use code requires a heightened review of development located
adjacent to rivers and streams, called the Stream Margin Review.
Developments within 100 feet of the high water line from our rivers
or within the 100-year floodplain trigger Stream Margin Review.
This review is intended to reduce impacts of development on the
natural watercourses and natural ecosystems along the rivers. Visual
impacts of development are also addressed in this review through an
additional setback requirement and lighting requirement.
Like the 8040 Greenline Review, the Stream Margin Review
typically includes technical issues ranging from drainage, erosion,
sedimentation, bank stability and floodplain impacts. The code does
not prescribe the kinds of baseline information needed to conduct a
thorough review.
Stormwater run-off.
Developments are required to detain all increases in runoff to the
historic, undeveloped rate and are required to remove pollutants from
the first 1/4 inch of runoff from all impervious areas. Developments
are encouraged to accomplish this through green infrastructure and
infiltration, thereby reducing the amount of runoff generated from
each site. Essentially developments are required to mimic the natural
system (to the extent reasonable) that would be present, as if the
development did not exist.
Waste & Recycling:
All.development is currently required to provide a minimal amount of
space for trash, recycling, grease and other types of waste collection.
If:. a development has adequate space for recycling, trash and compost
bins, it is easier to implement a new program. Any new recycling
program would require a contract with one of Aspen's waste haulers
for the pick-up and disposal of these items. Implementing recycling
programs such as an expansion of the compost pick-up program
typically involves negotiations and contracts with waste collection
firms/franchisees.
Demolition debris:
There are currently no requirements in the building code to recycle
or re -use materials. The City is expected to adopt the 2012
International Green Construction Code (IGCC), which contains a set of
standards for the demolition of structures. The goal is separate 75%
of all construction waste into the recycling stream.
If. the City adopts the IGCC, it will be enforced by the Building
Department and will represent a new cost of development. Because
rriany developments currently recycle and re -use materials now, the
new cost will essentially be for the additional documentation. Builders
who do not currently recycle demolition debris would need to begin
doing so.
Energy Consumption:
Energy consumption is mitigated in a number of ways. The City's
Canary Initiative produces a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
every three years, calculating how transportation, the heating and
1G.Mitigating Impacts of Development
cooling of buildings and other sources impact our Greenhouse Gas
Emissions. This inventory helps guide different mitigation techniques,
which are currently voluntary for development. The Canary Action
Plan is our guiding document with the comm.unity-wide goal of 30%
reduction in GHG over the 2004 baseline by 2020 and 80% by 2050.
The Canary Initiative, in cooperation with CORE provides a number
of incentives for property owners to upgrade their buildings to use
less energy. They conduct "contests" between property owners to
challenge them to make energy upgrades -to save the most energy.
Additional programs could be explored to continue encouraging
property owners to make energy improvements.
The City's REMP. program requires applicants seeking to use energy
outside the principal structure (pools, heated driveways etc.) to offset
such energy use through on -site renewable energy systems, or the
payment of a fee. Funding from REMP helps pay for renewable energy
systems, as well as education, and energy efficiency ,,improvements,
like electric car charging stations or solar panels on public buildings.
An energy code review fee equal to 10% of the permit fee is collected
to offset the additional plan review and field inspection workload.
Explore increasing the required stream margin setback and adding
techniques to effectively re-establish native vegetation when past
development has negatively impacted the stream margin area. This
would be a joint effort between Planning, Engineering, and Parks.
Storm water run-off:
Examine methods to better coordinate the Land Use Code's Stream
Margin Review requirements and the Engineering Department's
stormwater requirements.
The Engineering Department believes the stormwater section of the
municipal code is, at this time, adequate to address the estimated
environmental impacts from stormwater runoff and no amendments
are recommended. In the future, the Engineering Department may
consider limiting the amount of impervious area on a site or requiring
infiltration of a certain amount of stormwater runoff generated by the
site.
Waste & Recycling:
Expand the compost pick-up program. Amend the Land Use Code,
and/or the Environmental Health Code to include more space
requirements for waste collection. Research other options for
encouraging waste reduction at new and existing development. The
Environmental Health Department is currently working on this effort.
Mitigating Impacts of Development I 11
Demolition debris:
Adopt and implement the 2012 International Green Construction Code
to separate 75% of construction debris into recycling stream.
Energy Consumption:
Explore the creation of a Clean Energy Plan. This would require
continued multi -departmental collaboration and public process.
The Plan would rank future renewable energy. projects in terms of
feasibility and cost/benefit, followed by long-term capital planning.
Explore implementation of an'Aspen-specific energy rating system
for buildings. Consider requiring an energy audit at the time of any
real estate sale, which would indicate how energy efficient the unit/
building is so the new owner can prepare for energy upgrades using
existing incentives. The Canary Initiative is currently exploring this
possibility for affordable housing units.
Create a Climate Adaptation Plan to help plan for climate change.
This will require updating the 2006 inventory. The plan could include
considerations for development impacts.
Consider updating the Building Department's Energy Codes. The
2012 International Green Construction Code (IGCC) contains a
new approach to reducing "phantom" energy loads in commercial
b.uild.ings related to unnecessary energy consumption by commercial
appliances, office equipment, elevators, restaurant equipment, etc.
For residential development, the I -CC 700 Standard requires energy
star appliances and basic standards related to energy efficiency.
Neither the IGCC nor the ICC 700 Standard are currently adopted by
the City, but if adopted they could go a long way toward improving
energy efficiency in buildings.
12 Mitigating Impacts of Development
Affordable Housing
, is v to
. a...:v:: .. v..vv c, ...:. . ,,,.yamoffset
§q'. ... , �: � .v::.,.; ., ..2....i.v::; v �:\i:,iS^:iiii is� v:.q.>A.A a:.,,v. \•. '. •.v..:.!'i .'(,C.l�. .:1:� .<v:,v•. ,:,��i.,... ::::q: 'Yam, '.... ♦.?..,.. �\....,�. +, Q.v:`:: !..:;; \ \?; A �.,..?.. \,;::..:;`>a`J:;?:' :+` fir. impacts .i.. .. 4:;..
The generation of new employees creates the need for additional
housing for those employees. The provision of affordable housing or
a cash -in -lieu fee for the construction of future affordable housing
offsets the job and housing impacts created by development.
Under the Growth Management section of the land use code, job
generation is calculated by land uses: Commercial, Lodging, Free -
Market Residential, Essential Public Facilities, and Affordable Housing.
The Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) outlines different
employee generation rates for each use.
Development has been required to provide affordable housing for its
employee generation since the 1970s, when the Growth Management
Quota System was established. The City has never required
development to mitigate for all of its employee housing impacts the
highest rate of housing mitigation is 60%.
The amount of mitigation required of development varies widely,
based on the proposed land uses and on various identified
"community benefits."
Currently, GMQS requires:
• New commercial space to provide affordable housing mitigation
for 60% of the employees generated.
• New lodge units with rooms averaging 600 square feet to
provide affordable housing mitigation for 60% of the employees
generated.
• New free-market residential units (multi -family units and units
in a mixed -use building) to provide affordable housing mitigation
equal to 30% of the free-market net livable area.
• New free-market residential units (demolition and redevelopment
of single-family and duplex) to provide affordable housing
mitigation based on the net increase in floor area.
There are many instances where mitigation rates are lowered in an
effort to gain a community benefit, for example:
• After determining that small lodge rooms were becoming scarce,
the City reduced the mitigation rate to 20% of new employees
generated if a new lodge project featured average room sizes of
400 square feet or less.
There are similar rate reductions for the expansion commercial
Mitigating Impacts of Development ( 13
lodging, and residential uses in Historic Landmark buildings. The
rationale is that such properties are already under a unique and
costly regulatory burden, and it is preferable for the long-term
health and viability of the landmarks to be physically improved
and functional, while retaining historic integrity. Many properties,
include those going through the AspenModern Program, have
utilized these exemptions.
• "Alley stores" of 600 square feet or less are exempt from any
housing mitigation. The concept is that small, "out of the way"
stores would create a unique experience and might tend to be
local -serving or locally -owned and therefore reflect a community
benefit. There have been no applications for such space since this
exemption was established in 2005.
While affordable housing has clearly been a priority for the City since
the .1980s, the City's track record of providing exemptions from
mitigation indicates that other community benefits are considered
to be just as important. It may simply be that housing mitigation is
the City"s most powerful and versatile negotiating instrument when it
comes to influencing the nature of new development.
Current
m"itiogation
L.t {:a.a:.o .,::...:. '.�<: isra ty,, Asa\, w.. i,Fo;, ,2 Cfi'..�vG,�'N:
Z
There are a wide range of methods for providing housing mitigation.
Over the years, the most highly valued method was the construction
of affordable housing on the same site as the new development.
However, this has at times resulted in objectionable height and
_massing to fit all uses on the site. As a result, the code allows new
development to provide affordable housing through actual units built
or deed -restricts off -site, through the payment of cash -in -lieu or a
housing impact fee, or through an Affordable Housing Certificate
program.
Cash -in -Lieu & Housing Impact Fee:
The code allows for a "cash -in -lieu" payment as a method to pay for
required affordable housing mitigation. The amount of the cash -in -lieu
payment for one free-market unit is intended to equal the amount
necessary to subsidize one affordable housing unit.
The current cash -in -lieu fee has its origins in 1992, when the Housing
Authority reviewed the costs and sale prices of the West Hopkins
affordable housing project to establish a subsidy amount for one FTE.
In 1995, the Housing Authority looked at the costs and sale prices at
the Juan Street and Benedict Commons projects to further refine the
subsidy estimate. Since 2001, the Housing Authority has used the
Denver Area Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) for Urban Wage Earners
and Clerical Workers to approve annual fee increases.
To complicate matters, the City uses a cash -in -lieu fee in some cases,
as noted above, and a "housing impact fee" on other cases - and the
fee amounts differ substantially.
For development that involves free-market multi -family residential,
commercial, or lodging uses, the cash -in -lieu fee is based on the
subsidy amount necessary for a Category 4 housing unit. Because
Category 4 units are intended for relatively high -income households,
14 I Mitigating Impacts of Development
the sales prices are higher, and therefore the subsidy is lower. The
current Housing Guidelines establish $139,890 as the subsidy for one
Category 4 unit.
However, for development that involves the demolition and expansion
of single-family homes or duplexes, the "housing impact fee is
imposed. This fee is based on the subsidy required for the average
of Category 2 and Category 3 housing units. Because these lower
categories are intended for lower -income households, the sales prices
are lower, and therefore the subsidy is higher. The current Housing
Guidelines establish $230,790 as the subsidy for one such unit.
Some argue that the cash -in -lieu and housing impact fee amounts are
lower than the funding necessary to subsidize one housing unit.
Affordable Housing Certificate Program:
The Certificate of. Affordable Housing Credit program was enacted in
2010. Three projects, each proposed by the private -sector, have been
approved through this process. Only one project is fully constructed,
so there has been little chance thus far to demonstrate the
effectiveness of this program. However, it could emerge as a critically
important method of producing affordable housing.
Previous to the -new Certificate program, the private sector rarely
volunteered to build affordable housing, largely because of the
artificially low sale or rental rates they were allowed -to charge for the
units. The new Certificate program allows the private sector to not
only sell/rent the units, but also to sell the Certificates to others in
the private sector who needed to meet City mitigation requirements.
This makes it more financially viable for the private sector to build
affordable housing. Because a Certificate reflects that affordable
housing has already been voluntarily constructed and occupied, it
also means that developers buying the Certificates are offsetting. their
impacts immediately, if not sooner.
Demolition and Replacement of Single -Family and Duplex
Development:
When a property owner proposes to demolish a single-family or
duplex home and replace it with a larger structure, they are given a
`menu' of mitigation methods from which to choose:
1. Construct an on -site Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), which can
be rented to an eligible employee by the property owner on a
voluntary basis;
2. Pay the affordable housing impact fee;
3. Provide a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, reflecting that
a fully deed -restricted unit has been voluntarily constructed
elsewhere.
4. Provide a fully deed -restricted housing unit off -site, within the
Aspen Infill Area;
5. Place a Resident Occupancy (RO) deed restriction on the single-
family .dwelling, or one unit of the duplex.
Since 1990, property owners have overwhelmingly chosen either
option 1 or option 2 - to build an ADU or pay the fee. In the last 10
years, property owners have overwhelmingly chosen to pay the fee.
Going back to the mid-1990s and currently, critics have strongly
maintained that because ,ADUs are not required to be rented, they
represent an ineffective method of mitigation. Others believe ADUs
house more people than the impact fee and is therefore a valid
method of mitigation.
Mitigating Impacts of Development
15
In APCHA's experience, the above options each have strengths and
weaknesses. It is unclear how many employees are housing in
ADUs. Some study of this issue would be beneficial. APCHA believes
there have been successes with options 2 and 3, partly because the
mitigation it straightforward and there are few future enforcement or
tracking issues. Option 4 has resulted in_ unforeseen complications
related to minority deed -restricted units in a majority free-market
complex or a mixed use building. Over time, owner assessments
(monthly dues) become completely un-affordable for the owner of the
deed -restricted units, with some affordable housing units ultimately
being sold as free-market units, with the proceeds going into the
Housing Fund to help fund future affordable housing opportunities.
Regarding option 5, it is very rarely used, but perhaps more
importantly APCHA's data indicates that there is an overabundance of
RO homes in the program.
Inclusionary Zoning:
It is important to note that much of the provision. of affordable
housing in the downtown core (Commercial Core and Commercial
Core-1 zone districts) and other commercial areas is based on
inclusionary zoning and not mitigation. This means that the zoning
code requires the development of affordable housing when free-
market residential development is proposed on a parcel, regardless
of_.th,e mitigation requirements outlined in GMQS. In most cases, the
inclusionary zoning requirement will result in more on -site affordable
housing than GMQS mitigation would.
Other Sources of Funding for the Development of Housing:
Aside from mitigation that is directly related to a specific
development, the City gathers revenues for the Housing Development
Fund from two sources:
• 1 % fee on real estate transactions, known as the RETT
45% of the income from a 0.55% sales tax for housing and day
care
without a current "target" or ceiling for the production of affordable
housing, it is difficult to determine whether the current revenue
streams are adequate to meet housing goals. Both the RETT and the
sales tax fluctuate considerably with economic conditions, as does the
demand for affordable housing.
Suggested Next
Staff believes there is substantial room for improvement regarding
affordable housing mitigation. The following are suggested areas of
focus:
The job generation study that was used for commercial, lodge and
office uses is 10 years old and should be updated. Staff believes this
is an important step in ensuring the Growth Management program
reflects accurate and current mitigation levels.
The cash -in -lieu and housing impact fees also need to be updated.
This process is currently on -going and is scheduled to be completed ain
Au.9ust 2012.
City. Council may want to consider evaluating the accuracy of using
16 1 Mitigating Impacts of Development
CPI-W for annual cash -in -lieu increases and determine if updated
methodology is appropriate. It is possible to have this discussion
following the conclusion. of the cash -in -lieu study.
The "mitigation menu" for single-family and duplex development
should be reviewed for effectiveness. This should include a review
of the ADU program and the viability of the Certificate of Affordable
Housing Credit .program. Planning and AHPCA staff believe .this is an
important policy issue that needs to be addressed going forward.
Address issues related to single affordable housing units within a
mixed -use or free-market residential building. The Land Use Code
encourages the development of affordable housing units within
mixed -use buildings. Planning staff believes this is an important
aspect of zoning and ensuring downtown remains a vital and vibrant
neighborhood. APCHA has experienced issues related to condo
declarations and assessments on single affordable housing units
within mixes -use buildings. Staff believes some improvements
to the approval process, such as requiring separate condominium
declarations, could address these issues. Planning staff recommends.
that this be addressed through the APCCA guidelines rather than the
Land Use Code.
The recent zoning changes to the Commercial Core (CC) and
Commercial (C-1) zone districts should be reviewed. Any update to
these zone districts, including what uses are appropriate for a third
floor, should include an evaluation of how inclusionary zoning has
performed, an examination of the on -site housing incentive and a
feasibility study regarding the ability to provide mitigation on -site
versus restrictive dimensional requirements.
If Council desires to define or redefine "community benefit," it
will involve a comprehensive review of Growth Management to
determine whether current exemptions should remain, if some
should be removed and whether new community benefits should
be added. This process should also include a re-evaluation and
update of the objective scoring system. Based on past work, staff
estimates this process would take 1 - 2 years due to the complexity
of the discussion - one person's "community benefit" is not anothers
and coming to a consensus on this issue is difficult. While this is a
worthwhile endeavor, staff does not recommend proceeding with this
analysis at this time.
Mitigating Impacts of Development 1 17
Construction
Identify the Impact
All development, whether a small remodel or a large redevelopment,
has a construction impact. This can range from street or sidewalks
closures to .noise and dust to changes in traffic patterns.
The types of mitigation for construction impacts are relatively
straightforward: require a plan that controls dust, noise, sidewalk
closures, etc. However, each construction project is different, so the
specific methods change based on project scope and location. The
Engineering Department administers the Construction Management
Plan (CMP) process and the Construction Mitigation Officer monitors
compliance with the plans.
A larger policy discussion could focus on the creation of a construction
pacing program, which could limit the amount of construction in town
.at any one time.
Current mitigation
techniques
Currently, all projects impacting or disturbing 400 square feet or more
S
no
uggested
2`•.by<, :Y.. �`2:+, '!•y . .n.:.:Next
:x}f k: i. \�i!�.:Steps
C:; •,: , ;\ .?c;::;A>. p �;.;:.. ,Y.So!? �k! ` „o . v.k � :b$:"'>`.„0, �� ..`.'9.,�v „.. x,:C;`�?�.' `C
1� . `.'aN�nk: Cv. `� S3 '�h�. Y�`:. \'y;x::;.,`u.•�,n.4 ;!•::: �'\'� '',>�\r,''. �. `ix1 .Y'!;.Y.,<.::•.•:.•. , h�\`.. �\y. .,`, '�\'.. C:Ji. • :: �?it .m�p.': ,+� ` y�yy� .s.�. y:"� S�\bo \ , :'' y:'a ' a4 y � ..y�,\::a;; \0;: w '\@ .: •. ).` .:''. � u..,. yx':a " '\i.' Y C;??:sb
The CMP process was instituted in 2006 and has been regularly
updated as appropriate. It has been effective in managing the impacts
of development. Staff recommends a continuation of this approach.
Based on recent City Council direction, Engineering staff is exploring
changes to encroachment licenses related to construction work
during peak seasons and in areas with high pedestrian traffic. This
effort could include revising the fee schedule related to right-of-
way encroachments by area or by time of year. Staff recommends
continuing this effort. A Council check -in is scheduled for this
summer.
18 1 Mitigating Impacts of Development
City Council may want to consider a construction pacing'system that
would limit the number of construction projects occurring at any one
time. This has been discussed a number of .times over the past 30
years, but has never been implemented. In. staffs experience, this
issue is raised every few years and significant community and city.
time and resources are spent exploring options, but no program is
ultimately adopted due to significant lack of community consensus.
Staff --does not recommend moving forward with this work at this time.
Mitigating Impacts of Development 19
Public Health and Human
Services
identify the impact
In the past few years, the planning and public health professional
communities have engaged in a discussion related to the impact that
development has on health and social services. This is an emerging
area in the planning and land use field. Typically, a large development
or redevelopment project is asked by the local government to quantify
its impacts through a Health Impact Assessment (HIA). That was
recently done in Battlement Mesa related to the development of Oil
& Gas Development in a residential area. An HIA is ,not typically
required of projects like the ones seen in Aspen as they are of a
smaller scale and it is not easy to quantify how a single mixed -use
development might impact health. It would be more typical for a city
policy to be evaluated through an HIA. For instance, a policy related
to housing or bike connections might be evaluated through this
process.
A Health Impact Assessment (HIA), as defined by the World Health
Organization, is "a combination of procedures, methods, and tools
by which a policy, program, or project may be judged in terms of its
potential effects on the health of a population, and the distribution of
those effects within the population."
Currentrri'im anon
techniques
Currently there are no adopted City policies or fees related to
health and human services impacts specifically from a development.
Determining the impacts in this area, and therefore a developer's
share of impacts, is complicated because of the relatively small scale
of projects in Aspen. There are no straightforward impacts from a
specific development. While there may be impacts from development
in general, or a unique project, research in this area would need to
be conducted to accurately determine any incremental impact directly
related to a development project.
A portion of the Housing and Day Care sales tax goes to the Kids
First Program each year. This is a dedicated tax passed by Aspen
voters, which funds operational costs, as well as direct contributions,
indirect services, and support to young children, families, and
2O' I Mitigating Impacts of Development
childcare programs, through the Kids First department. In addition,
fho rninfvtc wmmifhv r'nmmi inifw M inA iL f# ir%AnA f-hrn� �nh rl�,rlir•��-r..�l
Mitigating Impacts of Development 21
FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner
Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner
Chris Bendon, Community Development Di ector
MEETING DATE: Monday, May 21,1J30pm Council Chambers
RE: Lodging Study Update
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: No action is requested at this time. Staff is providing a status
update on the Lodging Study, and is interested in Council direction regarding the next phase of
this work.
BACKGROUND: One of City Council's Top Ten Goals is to "examine the desirability and
sustainability of preserving existing lodging and producing more lodging in Aspen." As part of
this effort, staff is conducting a lodging study to examine our existing inventory and to
understand the current state of the lodging market. Staff is utilizing a two-phase approach to
Council's Lodging Goal.
Phase One: The first, stage includes an overview of the City's role in the lodging sector,
interviews with key players in the lodging industry, and an inventory of lodging in Aspen. This
initial report is attached as Exhibit A.
The lodging inventory was compiled through staff conversations with lodge operators. In some
cases information was not available at the time of this phase due to seasonal closures. Staff will
continue to update these numbers as lodges open for the summer season. In addition staff will be
updating the lodging inventory with new MTRiP data (expected in late June), and will be
conducting an analysis of lodging demand, building off of the 2006 HVS report,
Phase Two: Staff requests City Council direction on proceeding with the second phase of the
lodging study. Staff proposes the following process for Phase Two of this work. This process
would be based on the work contained in the Phase One Report, and would require hiring outside
consultants.
a
Phase two would begin with a series of facilitated roundtable discussions between lodging
owners, planners, developers, general businesses, ACRA, the Aspen Skiing Company, Stay
Aspen Snowmass, and outside lodging experts. The discussion would- focus on three topics:
1. Is there a problem in the lodging sector as it relates to product diversity?
2. Should the City have a role is addressing any problems?
3. If so, what can the City do?
Staff would like to hire .two to three outside consultants to each create a report on. potential code
changes to the City's lodging program. Either during the drafting of the reports, or after, staff
would request the local lodging -experts interviewed. as part. of the Phase One report to review
these to provide an "Aspen reality check" to the proposals. Staff believes this conversation, even
if it results in a finding that the City does not have a role in lodging, is an important one.
Phase Two work could be handled as part of the existing AACP Implementation budget, and
would take approximately 3 — 4 months to complete, depending on how quickly consultants
could be hired.
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A: Lodging Study Phase One Report
Aspen's Lodging,.S . ector
An Analysis of Existing Conditions
One of City Council's Top Ten Goals is to "examine the desirability
and sustainability of preserving existing lodging and producing more
lodging in Aspen." This study represents the first phase of .this effort.
It is intended to provide a "big picture" overview of Aspen's lodging
sector. The study is divided into five sections:
• History of Aspen's Lodging Policies - pg 2
This section provides an overview of the City's role in lodging since
the 1970s.
• 2006 Analysis of Aspen's Lodging Profile - pg 7
This section provides a brief summary of a detailed 2006 report on
the lodging sector, and possible the role government could play in
providing moderate lodging.
• Lodging in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan - pg 8
This section outlines the public feedback that was received as part
of the 2012 AACP update, as well as an overview of the lodging
policies contained in the plan.
• Interviews with Aspen's Lodging Sector - pg 10
This section provides detailed interviews with key players in
Aspen's lodging sector.
• Aspen's Lodging Inventory, 2012 - pg 28
This section lists Aspen's current lodging inventory based on
conversations with Aspen area lodges. Some information was
not available due to off-season closures. This information will be
updated as these lodges open for the summer season.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 1
.. ... ) . . .... :.,... ....:,,,u;T< "' .'•u, .:: ..^. :. •..,.::T :•. r>!.:.:. •T?; .. .i, .u... •R,\: !i!\� :a.an. .. 52:�:?.. ;�Pr+
, �. ,a : .,.• v, �.,:... .?,:n \,. .:: v. ,\R \\. �; �, ,..� F, .. :..i ,i,.: r .. .. .:... .... .. `�+. � . a..:.. .<. . :2:.^c�\ \�'<? G;2� ti ��'
Y \ ,`) T J. �, .! \ . M :P) .,\. ,,:Y .•:(�",.}. ..`,�. Cl+. Y .\, C ?�,. •,.£ \:A •�:. w\ .<.n .\. ,M2
.l..ti. \v. \. �;Z� .r•: ;a` .\\. ;..\ T... yip
\
1+
K
o �\
U\
s .,. , ,.. T PT • a, \,p... �\,,,�,,,v .,,, � .,..., �.:\.. .,,v .... ..,T. ,. k. .. vC a . ....,... >, ..,.v ..Jt., .\t : r. ...�.\. s.... ..� . .\. .. \ "^\`: :; ...� ..
City government has played a wide variety of roles in Aspen's lodging
sector over the years, ranging from the philosopher -sociologist to- the
market economist - and at times, financial supporter.
One of the earliest statements about lodging came in the 1966.Aspen
Area General Plan, which defined the purpose of the Accommodations/
Recreation Zone District as ... encouraging varied and interesting
development as a means of perpetuating Aspen's prominence as a
quality resort....
This perspective reflected a belief that local government should
treat lodging as infrastructure for the local economy. Without a solid
lodging base, a resort is not a resort - and every other sector of the
economy suffers. Over the years, this viewpoint meant sometimes
giving lodge development a break from Aspen's rigorous regulations
and mitigation requirements.
On the other hand, growth management advocates have supported
annual development limits and tough mitigation requirements on
lodging, just as they would on any other kind of private sector
development. These different positions have been debated through
the years - often favoring lodging during economic slumps, and
Favoring stronger growth restrictions during boom periods.
The. philosophical side of the lodging debate emerged in the Aspen/
Pitkin County Growth Management Policy Plan of 1977:
"In short, we have a responsibility to vacationing, working Americans
who hold the vision of one or two weeks a year in a quality Colorado.
mountain environment ... (rather than) a setting for the fortunate few
who, are wealthy enough ... In other words, working Americans are
entitled to enjoy the public lands surrounding Aspen, and high costs
shouldn't act as a barrier.
The other side of this argument has been to let the market decide
what kind of lodging is built, how much it costs and what demographic
is. targeted. This viewpoint often takes note that a destination resort is
expensive by definition, due to high land and travel costs.
2 Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
Hotel Lenado, one of the hotels
redveloped in the 1980s and taking
agvantage of the zoning changesof
.the. time.
In addition, affordable housing for lodging projects had to be provided
on -site, potentially creating conflict with the emphasis on limiting
mass and scale, and physical compatibility with the neighborhood.
As the national economy suffered, the Lodge at Aspen (26 rooms) was
the only lodging development to apply for GMQS approval between
1977 and 1981.
The City commissioned a lodging study in 1981, .which concluded
that "most of the lodging available today was built .many years ago
and consequently do not reflect current standards for maintaining a
premier resort classification."
The report also found that a mid-1970s downzoning "resulted in
severe limitations for their opportunity to expand and modernize" in
some neighborhoods, including the Shadow Mountain area. The report".
claimed the City had lost about 4% of its lodging base each year
during the 1970s.
Loosening Regulations & Lodging as Infrastructure
City Council responded in July 1982, by increasing the annual lodging
allotment from 18 to 35 units. A month later, Council stopped
awarding GMQS points for smaller lodges, removed the mandate for
on -site affordable housing and. increased the percentage of points
awarded for guest amenities from 10% to 20%.
In August 1983, Council created a Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone,
making it easier for dozens of older lodges in areas such as Shadow
Mountain to renovate and expand. At the same time, Council awarded
new GMQS points for "rehabilitation and reconstruction," and set aside
a- quota of 10 lodge. units per year for development in the new Overlay
Zone.
Between 1982 and 1987, many lodges underwent renovations,
including Independence Square, Snowflake, Aspen Club Lodge,
Endeavor Lodge, Shadow Mountain Lodge, the Inn at Aspen, Red Roof
and the Prospector Lodge.
Four lodges added units between 1982 and 1987: The Aspen (+3),
Hotel Lenado (+4), the Sardy House (+21) and the Jerome Hotel
(+67). The Aspen Mountain Lodge project essentially replaced the
Aspen Inn and Blue Spruce, and The Little Nell (92 units)
opened in 1989.
In 1987, the City Council stepped squarely into the role of financial
supporter for lodging, by establishing the Aspen Lodge Area Special
Improvement District. Council authorized $5.4 million to pave streets,
install storm drainage, sidewalks, landscaping, streetlights etc., with
the City picking up the large majority of the bill. The public works
project was focused on neighborhoods featuring small lodges and
condos, including the Shadow Mountain neighborhood, and from
Spring Street to the Roaring Fork River.
Ritz -Carlton as Sbol: The Upscale Trend
As the 1980s wound down, the Aspen area was experiencing a whole
new level of popularity and celebrity. Home prices were increasing
dramatically, many locals were selling their modest houses and the
percentage of commuting workers jumped from 40% to 55% between
1987 and 1991.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 3
During that same period, the proposal for a massive Ritz -Carlton Hotel
was being hotly debated, and was slowly making its ways through the
City's review process. Council approved non -binding Resolution No. 29
in 1988, setting the size at 294 units and 305,000 square feet.
In July 1989, City Council responded to growth management
advocates by cutting the annual quota for free market residential
units from 39 to 20, and decreasing the lodging quota from 45 to 22.
In February 1990, a much -debated City ballot election on the Ritz -
Carlton was a snapshot in time of political feeling about lodging:
• Option A would approve the 294-unit Ritz -Carlton Hotel.
• Option B would reduce the size of the hotel by 60,413 square
feet (about 20%), reduced the height and required much more
employee housing.
Sixty percent chose Option A, with 1,561 in favor and 1,059 opposed.
The approval of the Ritz -Carlton symbolized a distinct trend away
from economy or moderate rate hotels, and towards more deluxe
accommodations. The Ritz partially met its mitigation requirements
by converting the 43-unit Alpina Haus Lodge and the 14-unit Copper
Horse Lodge into affordable housing.
In: the late 1990s, the economy/moderate rate Grand Aspen Hotel
was demolished to make way for the deluxe Grand Hyatt. Perhaps in
response to the trend, the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP)
emphasized the importance of small lodges.
"S.m.all lodges immediately set the stage for the guest experience in
Aspen," according to the AACP Growth Action Plan. "These lodges
promote a sense of scale and feel that provide the visitor with a
transition into the uniqueness of Aspen."
The 1993 AACP called for lowering mitigation costs for small lodges,
but it turned out to be a losing battle. Throughout the 1990s, older
lodges were converted either to free market homes or affordable
housing, including, to name a few:
. ..The 20-unit Fireside Lodge converted to townhomes.
1
.The 22-unit Bell Mountain Lodge converted to five free market
homes and five affordable units.
.. The 11-unit Alpine Lodge converted to four free market homes
.: and 10 affordable units.
The Aspen Country Inn was converted entirely to affordable
housing
All told, the number of "Economy" lodge pillows dropped from 1,012
to 704 during the 1990s, a 31% drop. By 1998, the percentage of
"Economy" lodge pillows had dropped to a mere 12% of the total.
Oddly, the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan barely touched
on the subject of lodging. The Economic Sustainability chapter
ca.:lled for "a lively, small-scale downtown with ...a varied choice of
accommodations, including small lodges."
In winter, taxable lodging sales eroded significantly between 1997 and
2003, a pattern linked to a decline in skier visits and a slowdown in
travel after 9/11. Winter lodging rebounded after 2003, along with the
national economy.
The Ritz -Carlton, now the St. Regis
Hotel.
4. I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
While Aspen's lodging inventory continued to shrink (a 27% decline
from 1994 to 2007), it was the "Economy" (-79%) and "Moderate"
(-47%) lodges that were disappearing the fastest. The decrease was
smaller for "Deluxe" lodge" (-7%).
Despite the declining base, taxable lodging sales jumped 49% from
2003 to 2007, reflecting an estimated 40% increase in average prices.
It was no great surprise that new lodges approved during this boom
period featured large rooms and deluxe amenities, including 26 units
at the Residences at Little Nell, 21 units at The Chart House and- 18 at
the Dancing Bear.
City Tries to Re -Balance the Lodging In ventory
While a few luxury lodges were being approved in the 2000s, city
government was launching an effort to replenish the overall inventory,
and was also trying to encourage the return of so-called "moderate"
lodges.
In its 2002 report, the Economic Sustainability Committee made the
deteriorating lodging base its "#1 Issue," stating:
"Aspen has a deteriorating lodging and tourist facilities inventory.
This includes small lodges and condominiums that are placed in the
rental pool. Not only has the number of available rooms decreased
greatly, but also remaining facilities are not perceived by -the visitor
as offering appropriate value for their pricing. Lodging owners
and potential developers do not perceive a sufficient return on
investment to improve existing facilities and develop new -ones. "
At the same time, the Infill Advisory Committee was drafting code
changes to encourage more downtown area development, including
lodging.
In 20,05, City Council approved the Lodge Incentive Program,
encouraging the development of lodging with rooms that averaged
no more than 500 square -feet - relatively small compared to recent
deluxe lodge approvals.
The Lodge Incentive Program cut the housing mitigation rate in half,
and allowed the development of free market residential condos on
25% of the development's total floor area (also at half the usual
mitigation rate), to make the overall development financially viable.
Also in 2005, the Limelite Lodge applied to demolish its 60-year-
old facility next to Wagner Park, along with the Snowflake Inn next
door, proposing to replace 115 rooms with 125 rooms in one larger
new building. The development application argued that "Preserving
and expanding mid -priced lodges such as the Limelite will allow
the community to provide accommodations for a `diverse visitor
population,' as emphasized in the (2000) AACR"' Along similar lines,
the application quoted the AACP Vision for the Aspen Area; "Our
nature has been consciously inclusive and has abhorred exclusivity ..."
In addition, the Limelite argued that mid -priced lodges are a "staging
area for supporting personnel and participants ... in the special events
that are a vital element of the local economy." (The' point was made
following the recent departure of the HBO Comedy Festival, which
publicly blamed the lack of affordable lodging for its relocation to Las
Vegas.)
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 I 5
T_.e. Limelite proposal was in the form of a PUD because it proposed
to.. use 40% of total floor area to build condos (more than the 25%
that code changes allowed). Lodge incentive code changes from
2005 also allowed for greater height and massing in the Lodge Zone
District, and the large Limelite building drew many critics, but Council
approved the project.
In 2007, Council adjusted the Lodge Incentive Program, creating a
sliding scale: As room size grew smaller, the ratio of total floor area
for free market condos increased and affordable housing mitigation
was reduced. Lodge projects .with room sizes of 300 square feet or
less would have to mitigate only 10% of employees generated, and
could use 60% of total floor area for condos. No lodge projects have
since applied for the incentives.
Current Status
As ,,part of the 2008 State of the Aspen Area Report, a build -out
analysis showed that zoning could allow for about 330,000 square feet
more lodging, with the most potential in the Lift 1A neighborhood.
In November 2011, City Council approved a lodging proposal at
in the Lift 1A neighborhood, including 22 lodging units with a
room configuration allowing them to be broken down into 84 units
averaging 524 square feet. Although technically eligible for reduced
housing mitigation (60% to 40%, due to a room size between
500.and 600 square feet), the developer proposed 100% housing
mitigation for the lodging, five condos and 6,000 square feet of
commercial space.
At the same time, former lodges continue to convert to other uses,
th,e most recent being the Boomerang Lodge, which received approval
to, convert its existing rooms and build an expansion, all as affordable
housing.
The 2012 AACP calls for "replenishing" the Lodging base, while seeking
to,..balance the inventory by encouraging a wide range of product
types. Aside from the Lift 1A area, the greatest potential for a new
lodging development is at Buttermilk Ski Area, which is under Pitkin
County jurisdiction.
The former L'Auberge d'Aspen Hotel.
The property is approved for a
redevelopment that does not include
lodging.
6 Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
... .Y1. �. .. ! v ., ....: v. ,. ..n .v•, , n, iiJi.v\ ^'. ': , � vV. .,,:..
.,, .. \Y. .... ., ., ....,. ,. .. ., , , ,, o., .,. ., ..a ..,1 ., .. .,• ., .. ... � \,. .\ :Jxo Y. ..\ Y^C:, ..w.. ?Y •t. :?.\: .a.. \ . ,,.+.+. .ttt:. ::,tii :;k`'''�`,.
, C.JJ. j'.Ci
n... .♦ .. n,. ,. ,\nn v n ,. `? n.. , \. v , , •, n .. \ ': •:., .'fd+ �Sv..v.K.., n,
.... ... .:,.. o....., ..,.v ... E. c. .,t,..... J. ....... ....t,.. .. .. :::v ....... vv w✓ .+.o.,r,^.:. ..\.: ..� >.:sa:.fi.
-:
Council asked HVS to generate a financial feasibility report for an
"example" hotel in the City of Aspen. HVS found that for a 103-
room hotel on 1.4 acres, the cost of land and development would
"far exceed the economic value of the hotel," based on projected
revenues. HVS said either the land costs would have to be subsidized,
or a profitable "residential component" would have to be included to
make the project feasible.
Council had already adopted free market residential incentives in
2005, a year before the .HVS report. The new code allowed 25% of the
total floor area of a development to be developed as condos, with the
other 75% featuring a lodge with an average room size of 500 square
feet or less. This 25% allowance was essentially a "guesstimate," and
Council later approved the Limelite Lodge application with 40% of the
total floor area to be developed as condos to make the rest of the
hotel financially feasible.
After the 2006 HVS report estimated that moderate lodges averaged
room sizes between 300-400 square feet, Council adopted a sliding
scale in 2007: Lodges averaging 500 square feet could use 40% of
total floor area for condos; lodges averaging 400 square feet or less
could use 50% of total floor area for condos; and lodges averaging
300 square feet or less could use 60%. Although this language has
been in the land use code since 2007, no applications have been filed
to use the incentive.
The HVS report concluded that a moderate hotel could be developed
in the City of Aspen either by allowing a substantial free market
component, or if the land was donated by the City or subsidized in
some substantial way.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 I 7
As part of the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), the city
conducted extensive public outreach. to hear how the community felt
about growth and development issues. The public outreach process
included a number of questions related to lodging, and the issue of
lodging consistently rated high in terms of importance to the public.
There was consistently high opposition to building more large, deluxe -
style lodging units, and fairly strong support for focusing on additional
moderate or economy lodges.
The public feedback came after the 2008 State of the Aspen Area
Report found the lodging based had declined by 27% since the mid-
199.0s, but that lodging rated moderate and economy had declined
even more steeply.
A Population Segments Chart, which estimated population changes.
between 1990 and 2008, estimated that the average number of
people -staying in lodging during a given day in peak season declined
from 6,548 in 2000 to 5,778 in 2008. At the same time, the number
of people staying in the area's growing inventory of second homes
climbed from, 8,563 to 9,427.
AACP Feedback Summary
Respondents to the 2010 Instant Keypad Voting Sessions in ranked
"smaller lodging units" as their second choice in terms of the type
of development they want "to encourage." In terms of the type
of, development they most wanted "to discourage," the top choice
was "larger lodging units." When asked a similar question in 2009,
respondents stated they "would place the most growth restrictions"
on . larger lodging units and "would place the fewest restrictions" on
smaller lodging units. (2009 Instant Keypad Session)
On, the same topic, respondents were even more emphatic when the
q.u:estion included some well-known slang terminology for the Aspen
Area: Sixty-one percent wanted to focus on lodging for "the next
generation of ski bums," versus 15% who wanted to focus on "deluxe"
lodging for our "world class" resort. (2009 Instant Keypad Session)
Area residents felt strongly about encouraging a diverse visitor
population - 75% of Aspen area voters and 66% of homeowners
were willing to support government "incentives for small to moderate
dodges." (2008 Community Survey)
In ithe 2011 Community Survey, the "most beneficial" type of
djevelopment was identified as "essential businesses," with "diverse,
balanced lodging" coming in second. In a related question about
replenishing lost lodging inventory, the top choice was to replenish
inventory without a specific focus on type (35.5%) - but coming in a
c.lose second (31%) was to replenish inventory with a specific focus
on moderate and economy lodging.
However, the gap was wider in the 2010 Instant Keypad Session,
when 51% favored replenishing lodging inventory ,with no particular
focus on type, compared to 28% who favored replenish inventory with
a: focus on moderate to economy lodging.
8 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
- In the 2011 Community Survey, smaller lodging units dropped from
second to sixth in terms of the type of development people wanted to
encourage - but larger lodging units remained at the, top in terms of
development people most wanted to discourage.
If there was a community value that appeared to work in opposition
to replenishing the lodging base, it was preserving small town
character. Asked why they might keep lodging development modest
in size; the most popular answers were 'small town character" and
"mountain views." (2011 Community Survey) The top answer to a
very similar question at the 2010 Instant Keypad Session was "small
town character" at 38% -- but the second most popular response was
"don't restrict Lodging size" at 31%.
AACP Lodging Policies
During the drafting of the AACP, many discussions focused on the
feasibility of producing moderate lodging and what role the city could
playa Because the AACP is an aspirational document, focused on
establishing a vision for the future, the AACP itself does not address
these issues. Instead, it outlines a vision of a thriving, diverse visitor
base.
The Philosophy of "The Lodging Sector" contained in the 2012 AACP
states: "The formulation of a strategy that replenishes the lodging
base and favors a diverse lodging inventory is important to the long-
term sustainability of a visitor -based economy that purposefully seeks
to attract a diverse visitor base. Without a diversity of lodging options,
we limit the ability of future generations of visitors to experience the
Aspen Area and its surrounding public lands. Many of today's longtime
Locals first experienced Aspen thanks to "entry-level" lodging. The
concept of providing equal access to Aspen has been present in long
range plans dating back to 1976. We seek a broader demographic
in order to sustain a diverse, visitor -based economy. Finally, we
recognize that a diverse lodging inventory ensures there are places
to stay for those who produce and participate in many of our critically
important special events, workshops and other activities."
The top two lodging policies in the 2012 AACP are "Minimize the
further loss of lodging inventory," and "Replenish the declining lodging
base with an emphasis on a balanced inventory and diverse price -
points."
Regarding the scale of new development, the 2012 AACP includes
a policy saying new lodging should be "compatible and appropriate
within the context of the neighborhood."
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 I 9
v ., r•.+: :'✓fi: c a ::y: '+a. �?.; `�� ::SEE :;:i�;:;:5:
n✓
h. �.,v.. C\ \nv n. v v ..< \v v \ v V, n .. �': n. v:: •3. .n.n ,. liii: .:: :':C�fiii. :•!:Ji J: a3;JY
ll p ,. ,. , .. n. n .. ,.. n.• :U+:: \:;tin/.
i. v1. A .0 ,J: >.�, ;C Y� ,\ n,� :R: ,v., ., .: \ . ...•A ... ....v v:. � N:.J .vN: �W\w:: ^Y:. A:•!...,..
: J .. .... m It ,.n .. .. vv. : , �: , � .v vJ... ... v. ;.!••.vC,v ., l aC. ..., v ... \. C .[n. :v\•.: %a::
.\. L J .. .. + n:.. tl v.+. .v.. „v< •. < v.».. C; »; vh�: :n:: �h:v v. v. ;Y,, ;;�. n\.. 'JC:4�� �: i5 ;.v);;
Div .ti .\ .. .... ..vm. ... .. .v :... .. v.., � .. . .....a Z... Z.. , ...1 $.
a .\ ... .\ .n a`t .h., .. n. .l n,. \ .., ... ,. , .. n. ,. ..,n .... ...\. .k:. .. \v.v.. .♦.+..,... 1.. .\�� �nY:. 4�fY f: v .n.
The following is a distillation of the answers from interviews
with lodging managers, describing repeated themes, ideas and
suggestions. Full responses begin on page 13.
1. For many years, stayAspensnowmass and ACRA asked
lodges to identify themselves as deluxe, moderate or economy.
Which category does your lodge fall under?
The lodges represented in this feedback effort ranged from economy
to moderate and deluxe, with several including two to three
categories within the same lodge. For older structures that don't
meet the expectations of modern travelers, high levels of service can
place them in the deluxe category. In general, economy lodges tend
to, be further from downtown, while deluxe tend to be closest to the
ountain. Although the economy/moderate/deluxe categories are
not industry terms, and some lod-ges might choose a category for
.marketing purposes, most felt the categories were generally accurate.
2. Can you describe your average customer, or the different
kinds of clientele that stay with you? Is there a certain type of
room, or size of room that people like most?
There are many niches in the Aspen lodging market. Some focus on
Baby Boomer skiing families, some on beginner skiing families, others
focus on couples and/or single professionals attending conferences
or consulting. Still others tend to cater to the support personnel and
participants of special events. In the deluxe category, the share of
the foreign market (South America, Australia) appears to be growing.
The' -only hostel in town (St. Moritz) appears to be less in demand in
recent years.
There is no single type of visitor, so a successful lodge is about
meeting expectations in their niche. Families and those staying for
longer periods (i.e. the Music Festival, or extended skiing vacations)
tend to demand larger room sizes to accommodate kids, to stow gear
and, to allow for work -space. In general, the lodging industry has
retreated from the 1,000 to 3,500 square foot room size that was the
trend before 2008. Smarter, modern design is aiming to accommodate
reeds from roughly 400 to 700 square feet. Everyone emphasizes
the importance of service, but especially those working with outdated
structures, such as the aging condo inventory. (Many condos have
eight -foot ceilings, far lower than what modern travelers expect.)
3'Are there amenities that you find people demand more and
more? If there is one thing you could add to your lodge, what
Would it be?
The top demand is technological services. Free Wi-Fi is a must, along
with I -Pod docking and enough outlets to handle everyone's needs:
high speed and bandwidth are key as well. Pools and exercise rooms
..
a .. re standard. Transportation is also key, with more lodges offering
bicycle fleets as well as shuttle and car service.
Almost everyone emphasized service: People traveling to a destination
resort place a very high value on their time. Service means not just
having a stack of brochures, but talking with customers about the
many choices of events and recreation options - including tips about
Community Development Staff
conducted interviews with ** local
lodging experts, ranging from
developers to operators. The
interviews are intended to highlight.
the various opinions and experiences
within Aspen's lodging sector.
Interview were conducted with large
and small hotels, and, hotels from
economy to luxury.
1 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
P'
,l Y
having a genuine Aspen "experience."
4. What is your lodge's strategy for success? What are the
ingredients that make up long-term viability for you?
Trends in the lodging industry change quickly: many said the .key is
continually evolving with the interests and demands of the customers.
Phrases used by respondents included `staying fresh," "building
relationships," "providing choices," "creating memories" and "keeping
up with technology."
S. How important are special events? What special events
bring you the highest occupancy? Is there a type of special
event that you think would fill your lodge?
Generally, the participants named Food & Wine and the, Music Festival
as most important, followed closely by the X-Games. Most also
described the constellation of smaller events (Aspen Eco Fest, Aspen
Institute Socrates Dinner etc.) as creating an atmosphere of choices
that's important to the modern traveler - and reinforcing the -Aspen
brand.
Many wanted to see at least a modest expansion of the tourist season
- into the first two weeks of December and the last week of August.
Most were satisfied with the level of collaboration that's critical to
producing specials events. Many said events should be consistent
with Aspen's character. While all resorts have special events, Aspen's
exceedingly strong arts and cultural institutions bring a level of quality
that few other resorts can match.
6. How will Aspen as a destination stay. relevant, attractive and
compelling for future generations? Are you seeing changes
in demand for types of rooms, amenities? What do you think
visitors will be looking for in the future?
Most respondents talked about the importance of Aspen being
compelling to young people, with a sense of vitality in the downtown,
including things like jugglers on the pedestrian malls. Changes that
lodge managers liked included informal public gathering places,
including the increase in outdoor dining, tables and chairs around
the pedestrian malls, the upgrade of the Durant Street ice rink,
the Saturday Market. Managers wanted more of the same. Among
the suggestions were more colorful vendors (i.e. jugglers etc.); a
revival of the (FAC) Friday Afternoon Club (music and kegs outside
the Jerome); more Music Students on the malls (as in hiring them);
nightclubs for young people (the loss of Cooper St. Pier was a
negative); and improving the way we leverage the Aspen Idea.
Many emphasized staying true to the values that make Aspen special
today, including the character of the built environment,, environmental,
stewardship, the metropolitan feeling of arts and cultural offerings and
the many recreational choices. Several were worried that locals don't
recognize that the Aspen brand is very intimidating to many people
who've never been here, which can deter people from visiting. (There
seemed to be no easy answer to that problem.) Most applauded the
Skiing Company's efforts at attracting young people, dating back to
opening Aspen Mountain to snowboarders in the late 1990s, and the
X-Games.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 11
7 'Many of today's year-round residents stayed at a relatively
affordable lodge when they first came. to town, grew to love
Aspen and decided to live here. Today, public feedback tells
us there is strong support for "entry-level" lodging. With 'a
steady decline in moderate and economy lodging since the
mid-1990s, there is. a community aspiration to replenish those
types of lodges. What do you think about this? Do you agree?
Disagree?
Responses were mixed to this question: Many agreed that the aging
of. the Baby Boomer generation is resulting in fewer visits, and
attracting the next generation is critical. Some said a diverse visitor
base is good for the town in general. Others said the young seasonal
workforce will become future guests, adding that affordable seasonal
housing has helped build for the future in that sense - though many
employees commute from cheaper housing markets downvalley.
Managers of economy properties said they continue to offer entry-
level lodging, one adding that Front Range and West Slope residents
are a market for lower -end lodging that could be tapped. Economy
lodges were also identified as essential for support personnel and
participants of special events to stay while in town.
Non -economy lodge managers said the erosion of the lower -end is
due. to several factors, including inability to market aggressively; too
few rooms to achieve critical mass economically; difficulty in matching
service levels offered by others;. the competition when upper -end
lodges aggressively lower off-season rates; and outdated buildings
and facilities.
Many said that the reality is that people must pay for the quality
of. -.the amenities that the Aspen area offers, including the natural
environment, scenic views, multiple recreational opportunities,
high. -quality arts and cultural offerings, the genuine historic built
environment and even the genuine and vital local community. Several
would rely on the market to find a balance in lodging inventory.
Several warned that while Aspen has enjoyed unparalleled loyalty
in its visitors for several decades, the younger generation is
less influenced by loyalty, and more driven by adventure, new
experiences, new places and exploring the many choices offered
around the world. Several again cited the "intimidation factor" as a
barrier that should be addressed.
S. Do you think the growth management incentive program
for small sized -rooms is viable?
Respondents said the program was either flawed, not widely
applicable or could be improved to be more effective.
9. There has been talk of the city partnering with a developer
to - build a moderate/economy lodge. Do you think this is
viable? Do you think it's a good idea?
Respondents were generally unenthusiastic. Such a partnership was
c es�cribed as possible if the City "put real value on the table," and if
s'u:ch a lodge were "in off -beat locations."
12 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
Interviews With Aspen's Lodging Sector'*
low
:»v. \. v.. ,,.. .... 1... ..1 ... .. n..m ..)....
v n... ... \.. ..\. ...., .... '. ..n� v• .� .: ,. f. .:: :.: v: n: ::::: v,. Q:vvnri.i•.; :'ir' .,\ :.J:\�...�:v:< \.:�...!.. :M :\;;j .\); ..;\!•
..... ..\. .. �. .. .. . �, :o-.. I
vv!!:
1. For many years, StayAspenSn'owmass and ACRA asked
lodges to identify themselves as deluxe, moderate or economy.
Which category does your lodge fall under?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
We have very different types of accommodations, from a 900 square
foot condo to the 2nd floor hotel rooms and the 3rd floor hostel.We
have people from millionaires to flat -busted.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
We provide economy to luxury rentals.
-1
Donald Lee / The Gant
We are deluxe, but sell in all three categories. Our premier units have •
been completely remodeled at very high levels and include king size
beds and washer/dryers among other things to achieve sucha rating.
Standard units don't have such amenities and weren't remodeled to
the same extent and therefore command lower rates and occupancies.
It varies, but generally our clientele makes $150,000 per year and up.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
The Inn at Aspen is comprised of privately -owned condos, often used
by owners and otherwise leased as lodge units. We are an economy
hotel partly because of the age of the facility a,nd the location -
everyone wants to stay in town. But we're looking to move into the
moderate category -- half of the rooms are now under renovation. We
want to perform well at the economy level, and break into the next
level as best we can.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
After the renovation in 2007, The Innsbruck became a fractional
property, selling 1/12 interests. Although we don't have a kitchen, all
the units have kitchens and washer -dryers. I consider us deluxe.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
The Little Nell is luxury, the Limelight is moderate.
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
The practice of lodges choosing the category they fall into (economy/
moderate/deluxe) may have as much to do with their own marketing
and positioning than which category is appropriate. The factors that
go into determining a hotel's category are cost, room size, amenities,
location, design, ambience and character.
Terry Butler/ The Residence Hotel
Deluxe.
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
On an annual basis, about 45% of the people here are owners and
their guests. I think everyone has a niche that goes beyond the.
categories of economy, moderate and deluxe. Even though we're 50
years old, I'd consider us deluxe because of our location, privacy and
decorum - 70% of the people here are return guests who value those
things.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 13
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
Deluxe.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
The categories don't always capture what the hotel is all about. We
are generally viewed as. an economy sector hotel, though we have
very nice deluxe rooms and 2 bedroom apartments that are definitely
not economy. We also offer a list and quality of amenities that is not
typical in the economy level.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
The categories we use in Aspen are not industry terms, but generally
they're OK. If anything, the "deluxe" category is a little too much of a
catch-all - I would add the category of "luxury" just above that, which
would have only a very small number of lodges in it.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
I consider us in the moderate category. We are a full ownership
condominium hotel, and draw visitors from the upper -middle class.
2. Can you describe your average customer, or the different
kinds of clientele that stay with you? Is there a certain type of
room, or size of room that people like most?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
I_ -have upper -middle class people who are happy with the 200-plus
�yare feet on the second floor. I have people staying for all the
athletic events. The average age used to be low 30s; now it's more
low 40s.
People used to be satisfied with the hostel, but that's been changing
- in the last five to 10 years, people have been more willing to pay
extra to have privacy, and the kitchenette. I don't know how long the
hostel is going to last. The hostel was also affected when the City built
seasonal housing, such as Marolt Ranch, for the music students and
Sk'i. Company workers - it's hard to compete with that. a.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
Our customers tend to be on the wealthier side, considering the travel
costs. Because we rent condos and homes, we have more families.
Compared to the resort industry in general, Aspen condos are smaller
because the buildings are older and dated by ceiling heights and
lack of master bathrooms. We overcome it by providing hotel -type
services.
Donald Lee / The Gant
We are deluxe, but sell in all three categories. For example our
premier units must have been completely remodeled at very high
Levels and include king size beds and washer/dryers among other
6i�n, rgs to achieve such a rating. Standard units do not have to contain
such amenities and would not have been remodeled to the same
extent and therefore command lower rates and occupancies. It varies,
but. generally our clientele makes $150,000 / year and up.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
Ouraverage client is beginning skiing families and economy -minded
travelers. Grandma can sit in a chair inside our common area and
watch the kids learning to ski. Our room size averages 350 square
feet, and that works for the short stays we have now. Some of the
14 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
older owners will stay much longer of course.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
We have 10, two -bed units at 1,275 square feet, and 7 one -bed units
from 600-750 square feet. The Larger size of our rooms makes us
attractive to families, and 30% are coming from South America and
Australia, staying one or two weeks.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
Little Nell: Our customers are well traveled and affluent and tend to
stay about five days. The off-street suites are in highest demand.
People who are staying two to six weeks want the bigger rooms with
all the activities and gear.
Limelight: We get a variety of guests, from the economical traveler
to the affluent for our suites. The customers of the old Limelight were
saying the rooms were too small for families, the hallways were small
and they needed two beds. What we have now, averaging 500 square
feet, and two beds in half our inventory, seems to .work well.
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
We have had clients with differing ideas about lodge size. There are
those who believe that it requires 1,000 square feet and up to create
a viable lodging product, and a recent lodge owning client who is
happy with units that average 300 square feet - it's all over the map..
But many lodging professionals seem to believe that 500 s.f. makes
for an minimum size lodge room in the context of a ski resort.
Terry Butler The Residence Hotel
I have mostly couples in their 40s and 50s. It's not the size of the
room they care about as much as. the spaciousness of the high
ceilings, and the elegance of the decor.
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
People do care about size. We have families who are looking to spend
quality time away from their work lives - people who stay up to three
to six weeks, whether they own here or rent. I think high quality,
established events like the Music Festival, the Ideas Festival draw
those people here. When people are on vacation, they are still going
to work, and that requires space that condominiums provide.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
We expect to be family -oriented, but we have flexibility as well
because of the ability to lock off so many units into smaller units.
If you have a Baby Boomer couple that wants to spend time alone,
they can; if they want to bring the extended family, they can do
that as well. I think it will be multi -generational - there are a lot of
safe choices for kids, being so close to downtown. In general, the
industry has started to look at pulling back from very big rooms (in
excess of 1,000 sf), although there are still properties that cater to
this segment of the market and is looking at smarter, more functional
design, flat screens and the right kind of furnishings. One of the
challenges in the mountain environment is accommodating all the
stuff people bring on mountain vacations.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
Our typical traveler is an older skiing couple from the United States
who has stayed with us before. As often as not, someone we would
call a friend. Generally, people prefer more space, though they seldom
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 1 15
ask about that when booking a room. They want to know what kind
of beds and other amenities there are. It depends on the time of year,
.but the economy rooms that at least have a queen bed usually sell
out first. During certain times, such as Food & Wine, our middle of the
road rooms tend to sell out first, followed by deluxe rooms, and the
economy rooms sell out last.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
Market demand for room sizes has been changing. A few years ago,
people were focusing on very big rooms and very high rates, but the
industry has come down from there. Location has a lot to do with how
big rooms can be. The Nell averages 600 square feet - I'd say for
a winter resort, you don't want to go much below 450 square feet,
which is roughly where the St. Regis is. But there are other niches -
for your 3.5 to 4 star hotels, 350-400 is OK. A lot of. it is about just
satisfying expectations for whatever market niche you're after.
.Warren Klug / Aspen Square
Our customers tend to come from the upper -middle class. We have
a lot of visitors 50 years old and up, but they are not our only
customers. We get families and couples, partly because we have
diverse options, from studios to three -bedroom units. Out of 102
condominium, 68 are studios at about 500 sq ft, so they are good
for couples. Studios are roughly size of a hotel room, but they offer
more than an average hotel. Each has a full kitchen, fireplace, living
and seating area, and balcony. We get some groups who will use our
conference room. On average, customers will stay for 5 nights in the
winter and 3 nights in the summer.
3. Are there amenities that you find people .demand more and
mpr.e? If there is one thing you could add to your lodge, what
would it be?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
We have a pool and a small common area. I think we need more
common area. If I could I'd have an elevator, a bigger kitchen, an
exercise room and a real conference room for groups.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
The most important amenity is service, service, service - we treat
customers like family. The age and size of our inventory can be a
liability and we have to make it up with a lot of personal service - you
won't find that anywhere else. Most condo rentals involve picking up
a':key and that's.it. We pick people up at the airport, get them a pass
to the Aspen Club, we offer 24/7 concierge and maid service ... If
there is one thing we could add, it would be parking, larger units and
master baths.
Donald Lee / The Gant
Transportation is our marquee service, also Wi-Fi, exercise rooms,
strong TV programming with HD TV's, well appointed kitchens, high
quality bedding and linens are just expected - even more than just
five. years ago. We now see more demand for king size beds and
washer/dryers in the units - consumers want luxury offerings and
high service levels.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
Because of our out-of-town location, we emphasize the free parking
and, our ability to serve breakfast, lunch and dinner - to be self-
16 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
s.
contained. We have three banquet halls, which helps us get groups
here. We also provide what people are demanding now, including free
Wi-Fi, I -Pod docking and chargers. The shuttle to town is key for us -
:: everybody want to experience downtown.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
Since we are relatively new, we have all the technology people
are demanding, such as Wi-Fi, I -Pod dockers, plenty of outlets.
Transportation is key - we have a van, an electric car and eight bikes.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
It's not just Wi-Fi anymore, it's speed and bandwidth. You can't
make excuses for not having high-speed, and that's a significant
investment. You can have six devices in one unit and both the
.Limelight and the Nell have recently reinvested in this area. I hear
expectations that the entire town should have Wi-Fi - after all,
it's Aspen. Fewer people are renting cars, so everybody expects a
complimentary shuttle, and the Nell is offering Audi test drives. The
Limelight provides five bikes, with a room set aside for storage and
tuning. The Nell has six bikes for rental.
The lack of bigger meeting spaces across the board is a barrier to
landing groups. We're always interested if the City is exploring a new
public gathering place, as stated in the Civic Master Plan and the
AACR
Stan C/auson / Clauson Associates
In terms of amenities, people with busy lives and short stays want
amenities on -site. A pool and a work-out area are almost essential
now.
Terry Butler The Residence Hotel
We've been wireless for years, people like the Jacuzzi tubs. Because
of our downtown location and the land and leasing costs, you can't
have on -site amenities. But we're the most centrally located hotel
in Aspen, so we partner with Jean Roberts Gym, the Little Nell for
the pool, our guests have access to the Caribou Club and the Aspen
Mountain Club. We bring in any kind of service, from masseurs to spa
treatment and baby-sitting. And we're right in the middle of all the
restaurants. If we could add something ... parking would be nice -
that's a big problem for us.
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
The biggest demand for amenities right now is free Wi-Fi, and
we had to invest in that. The other two. are concierge service and
transportation. People place a high value on their time here, and they
don't want to sweat the details. If I could add something, it would be
nicer, newer more spacious accommodations.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
We're going to have the advantage of being a new product that -
responds to people's technological needs which have become more
and more a requirement for guests. Also convenience and service are
two big things that customers demand. Traveling is more of a hassle
today than ever and once they arrive, they want to fully enjoy their
experience without hassles.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
To most travelers it is first and foremost about value. What am I
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 I 17
getting at this hotel for this price versus what I would get at another
hotel for another price. They are firstly looking at price, room type
and location. They then consider the amenities and the character of
the hotel. They associate a set of expectations with each price level.
For us, the personal connections over the years are very important.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
At the Residences at Little Nell, we're focused on creating memories
every time someone visits - you have to love to come back to
overcome the competition and the transportation barrier. Providing
guests with options for things to do during their stay is part of a very
high level of service that places a high value on people's time while
they're here.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
We are a limited service hotel, which means we don't have our own
food and beverage service. We have a front desk with concierge
services, a fitness area, conference facilities, pool, and hot tub.
I'd say our most important amenity is our service. We strive to
provide high quality service in all aspects of the business. In the
condominium business there are different levels of service. We only
manage the Aspen Square, so we can focus on the service provided
here. We operate similarly to the Gant in that respect. If we were
going to add one thing it might be limited breakfast service because
it seems travelers, especially Europeans, expect breakfast to be
included in their rates. We might also consider additional meeting
and function space to accommodate more groups and special events,
like weddings.
4L What is your lodge's strategy for success? What are the
ingredients that make up long-term viability for you?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
Xust keep giving good value. I don't plan any changes in the short -
run, but if present trends continue, we may want to convert the hostel
to regular hotel rooms.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
I think there's a lack of awareness in town about the stock of
functionally obsolete condos. We had the very first condos in the
United States, and a lot of them have 8-foot ceilings, and many have
no .parking. The level of service we provide and the attraction of
Aspen is what keeps us going. But it would be great if the City could
focus on how to address this inventory - we're talking about a lot of
units and a lot of customers that spend money.
Donald Lee / The Gant
continuous improvement of the product and service, service, service.
You truly have to connect to the customer - knowing their name,
what they like. Overall, staying current with customer expectations is
critical, which includes staying ahead of all the technological changes
- that can be as simple as having enough outlets when every family
member is plugging something in.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
We're looking at both interior and exterior remodels. We have room
fo-r`Water features outside in the back, volleyball or bocci courts,
outside food service - it's still in the planning stage. Beyond that,
when you have a building that is dated, you need to focus on
18 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
customer service, and that means building relationships one at a
time. We need to continue to leverage the three banquet halls by
focusing on group business.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
High quality rooms and service. I think we are in a niche that will
.keep working, in terms of occupancy. The fractional ownership market
has been down for a few years now.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
Little Nell: Twenty years ago, the Nell was the only five-star hotel in
a mountain resort. Now there are hundreds. You have to continually
evolve as people's interests and expectations change all the time.
We've had tremendous loyalty, but now as they're getting past 60
and 70, they're not coming as often. We have to make sure we're
relevant, we're looking to stay fresh and have a more modern appeal.
That's reflected in the renovation and the new room furniture -less
overstuffed, more spacious.
Limelight: Younger people are more adventuresome and value -
conscious, and they're getting bombarded by marketing. This
generation will have 15 jobs in their lifetime, while the older
generations had two - in general, the sense of loyalty is not as strong
as it was. I think we'll need a bigger fitness center.
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
As a lodge, you need a critical mass of rooms to make the economics
work, and that's why so many of the smaller lodges aren't here
anymore. The small lodges that remain tend to be owned by people
who are committed to keep it going for their own reasons.
Terry Butler The Residence Hotel
As the owner -operator, I follow up with customers all the time. I live
in the hotel, so we sit down and talk and become friends. I call them
on the phone, I send cards to their dogs - we're very dog -friendly.
Forty percent of our customers bring their dogs. People who want the
new modern room, they won't come here - but there are people who
like the heavily decorated rooms with antiques from all over the world
and a lot of personality. It's a very personal hotel, like a big family..
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
We're always keeping a close eye on the implications of generational
change. What is happening with the Baby Boomer generation? What
are the personal interests of the next generation?
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
We recognize that the Gen X and Gen Y generations want more
choices and a variety of experiences - there's less automatic loyalty
than in the past, and that's a reality. We need flexibility and options in
terms of our product mix.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
The hotel biz is pretty simple: provide a quality product for a good
value. We have the huge advantage of owning the property for a long
time, so we have avoided the difficulty of new costs of building.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
The seemless ability to have different experiences through the
lodge. We want to bring people choices of experiences - we want
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 19
the customer to look back and say; "They convinced us to do it
and we loved it" - whether it's hot air ballooning, Nordic skiing or
:experiencing the real Aspen.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
We build on the strengths we have - our location is almost
unmatched, and we have high quality accommodations. We really
emphasize quality and friendly service. This goes for the staff as
well as the quality of the accommodations. We have to keep the
apartments up and remodel as necessary. Our owners are committed
to maintaining and upgrading our common areas and individual units
as needed to keep up with the marketplace. We are really fortunate
to have condo accommodations that have in -room facilities (full
kitchen, living/siting area, patios, fireplace). We also have a full time
marketing and sales person. We've started focusing on international
sales, which was a huge success this winter.
5. How important are special events? What special events
bring you the/'highest occupancy? Is there a type of special
event that you think would fill your lodge?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
We benefit from all the special events except Forstmann -Little (an
annual gathering of the very wealthy). We have all kinds of people
bleeding over to us, with our prices -- from Food & Wine to all the
athletic events. We get participants and the support personnel.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
There's a huge correlation between special events and occupancy.
They do work and they're essential.
Donald Lee / The Gant
Some special events are vital and others not so much. Food & Wine
is, extremely important to the community. It is a great example of
what the right type of special event can grow into and is a good fit for
Aspen. I'd like to see a greater focus on reviving Gay Ski Week - that
A wa.s working extremely well and then it wasn't. We should be working
with them, maybe move it to March and support it. One -day events
like the bike race just don't have the impact on lodging, but the PR
and marketing is important - the question will become: Is it a big
enough return for the investment? The collaboration on special events
across lodging, retail, restaurants, ACRA - that has gotten better over
the years.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
We get a lot of support crews for special events - the most extreme
example if the X-Games, when we're ESPN's headquarters. We
get a lot of participants in the athletic events, and from events in
.:-
Snowmass.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
Food & Wine and X-Games are no-brainers. I like the bike race; it
keeps our name on TV, and if it grows it could become a big deal.
Bicyclists love Aspen.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
They're very valuable, especially the destination events, the long-term
events with more moving parts and support personnel, where most
of the participants and spectators are from out of town. Eventually,
20 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
the bike; race could become that. In the summer, it's all about timing
- what is there before Food & Wine? What is there after the Music
Festival, in the last week of August? The smaller events are also
important because they add to vitality; people want choices and that
small event could make them stay another day.
There has been . more collaboration across the board on events, and
that's good for everyone - there's been more of an effort to get all
the players involved. The restaurants are becoming more of a player,
and that's a big deal. We need a short-term, mid-term and long-range
strategy on special events. The City has been reaching out more with
the Mining for Ideas Committee. It might be valuable for the City to
track specific events with tax revenues, so we can all get a sense of
the impact. When the Music Festival changed its dates, it had a huge
impact - we even saw it in the Gondola rides.
Finally, there are so many calendars, it doesn't seem as if there's'a
one -stop shopping calendar. We know through our service experience
that people love to be handed a menu' of events with the kind of
detail they need.
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
If special events are consistent with Aspen's character, they work
really well. Food & Wine is a very successful special event. The
X-Games are a little dysfunctional with regard to the lodging sector
and overall ambience, but the overall publicity is certainly important.
Terry Butler/ The Residence Hotel
Food & Wine and X-Games are great, but we need more big events to
fill out the seasons; 'in early December and late August. I'd rather one
big event than four little ones. It helps me because I can't do the kind
of marketing that others do.
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
Special events are great - we participate in lower rates. It's important
to experiment with events that are consistent with Aspen's character,
which is a combination of culture and outdoor activities. Only rarely
do newer special events have any contribution to the bottom line for
us - usually it is the established events that are more productive.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
Every mountain resort has festivals and things like that, but Aspen
has a really strong set of arts and cultural institutions that bring a
level of quality that's undeniable. That's what sets us apart. People
know the difference between a "made up" festival and one that offers
a real experience. The X-Games is so critical, it creates a young, h i p
vibe that Aspen just didn't have before and helps Aspen be relevant
for the future snow riders.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
Special events make Aspen a more desirable place to be, and whether
that improves our bottom -line directly or indirectly is not important.
I'd say the Music Festival is the longest lasting and the best for
business. Considering short-term events, Food & Wine is the best.
The bike race is a nice addition, but we will have to wait each year to
see if it comes to Aspen so it is not ideal. And it requires a lot of comp
(or nearly comp) rooms. Any popular event that happens downtown
is likely to fill our lodge.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 21
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
The big special events are big enough to fill everything. While the
smaller ones aren't that great for occupancy, they do build the brand
a.nd that's important.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
They are extremely important to the community because they give
people that much more reason to come visit. The king of special
events is X-Games and Food & Wine. Food & Wine is important
.because it is at a time when we're not typically busy. June can be a
tough month to attract people because people are wrapping up school
and haven't maybe made their summer plans yet. The bike race is
also an important event, but it has only brought people for one night.
As the race continues to gain notoriety we expect it to help drive
visitors to the area. It can be hard to attract visitors in June and
even in August, so Food & Wine and the bike race are helpful for us.
we were disappointed to see the BBQ event dissolve. It was during a
slow week, and could have helped draw more visitors.
6. How will Aspen stay relevant, attractive and compelling for
future generations? Are. you seeing changes in demand for
types of rooms, amenities? What do you think visitors will be
looking for in the future?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
more venues for young people. downtown. If you approve a larger
building, let's have an economical nightclub in the basement. We
really lost something with Cooper St. Pier. The more outdoor dining
the better, more buskering* and jugglers, more vendors, more music
-,how much would it cost to pay different groups of music students to
be gout every night? The chairs .around the pedestrian malls are great,
but more tables that aren't just for a restaurant would be nice. The
new C.P. Burgers at the ice rink and things like the Saturday Market.
(A busker is a street performer.)
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
One aspect that people might not be aware of is the tremendous
success of the fractional inventory. People who own a whole ownership
condo outright have been less and less likely to rent .it over the years.
R,u.stJn terms of hot beds, the performance of fractionals is better than
anyone anticipated.
Donald Lee / The Gant
It's about the exceptional experiences that Aspen has to offer. The
sheer number of cultural offerings gives people a lot of choices - it
gives us metropolitan flair in a small town. We don't have to reinvent
t.h,e -wheel. I think we are all after the same thing -- how do we
bridge maintaining Aspen's, character while embracing modernization,
embracing energy efficient technologies, etc? We need to. maintain
strong air service, continue to modernize. What the SkiCo and the
lodges have done with international markets is really showing up now.
Paul , Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
Stay fresh, stay relevant - you have to evolve and change. The TV
exposure of the X-Games shows Aspen is.a place where young people
can have a good time. - it's not as elite and stuffy as the reputation
ca n be.
22 Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
y.
h.i t
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
I'd love to see Aspen get young again. Only two of our 13 employees
live in town. I think if we had more rental employee housing, you'd
r see that young labor force enjoying town and coming back, not just
for work. On the other hand, losing the Cooper St. Pier was a real
loss. It's not easy for working kids to go out and have a. good time at
night like they used to.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
How do we get the 16 to 20-year-olds coming back we've focused
on that ever since allowing snowboarding on Aspen Mountain and with
the X-Games. That has to be part of the mindset in the whole town.
There has to be as many compelling things off -hill, with music and
public gathering areas. People don't do 8:30 to 4:30 skiing anymore we need to feed that social component.
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
We need to keep changing and evolving. We need to embrace
dramatic bold strokes; the new Art Museum is an example of that. If
it's a I I about preserving a certain image of the 1970s and `80s, that's
not, in our best interest. There's a certain phobia about development
that's not based in reality - to have a three-story town is not
emulating Vail; we won't inherently lose our soul and character.
Terry Butler/ The Residence Hotel
I've been on the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission for 15
years and fought for the outdoor dining - we need more nightclubs.
We need fun, exciting activities that keep our visitors busy. The City
shouldn't pass so many regulations that it's no longer fun.
John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
We need to stay true to ourselves. What are our values? It's
recreation, the arts and culture, environmental stewardship - all the
things that make this place special - we shouldn't lose sight of those
basic` things. I would trust the people who come here in the future to
appreciate what's here, and also to be part of innovative thinking -
that's part of Aspen's heritage; but I don't think it's necessarily the
government's job.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
The Skiing Company has done a great job of planting the seeds.
Carbondale has done some interesting things with First Fridays. In
Aspen, we used to have the FAC (Friday Afternoon Club) where the
Jerome had music and kegs outside. As a traveler, coming across
things like that, finding that informal fun is so important. We should
remember that for most people who don't know Aspen, it's very
intimidating, and we need to be aware of that. The malls are great,
with outdoor dining, and people playing music that's. a comfortable
approachable environment for visitors no matter their background.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
Character and media attention that derives from special events,
which are on track thanks especially to the Ski Co. Also, we need to
maintain the character of downtown, but I have no idea how. We do
a fair job of maintaining the look, but you can't force character. The
market will determine what succeeds.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
The Aspen Idea is unique to us, it's historic, it's genuine and we don't
May 1812012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 23
leverage it as much as we should. The three parts of the Aspen Idea
mind, body, spirit - could be a way to organize the choices Aspen can
offer - like a menu of experiences.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
We need to honor our history and the historical look of our
community. New development should fit in with the community.
We also need to understand that a discerning public wants nice
accommodations. There are a lot of old and tired condominiums in
town, so updating and upgrading those accommodations is important.
We have to keep up with guest expectations, and remember there
is a lot of new, high quality inventory all over ski country (Park City,
Deer Valley, Vail, etc.). We must have an ongoing and concerted
effort to make sure our service is the best there is. Personal service
is important. In terms of new lodging, we need to think about -on -
site mitigation requirements. It doesn't always make sense to have
employees living on -site, especially when they have families, and
when that space could be used for lodging.
7. Many of today's year-round residents stayed at a relatively
affordable lodge when they first came to town, grew to love
Aspen and decided to live here. Today, public feedback tells
us,there is strong support for "entry-level" lodging. With a
steady decline in moderate and economy lodging since the
mid-1990s, there is a community aspiration to replenish those
types of lodges. What do you think about this? Do you agree?
Disagree?
Michael Behrendt / St. Moritz
I `think we already. serve that purpose. I understand the common
wisdom that we need low-cost accommodations and I can sympathize,
bmt there are economical lodges. Our phones aren't ringing off the
hook. People thank us for being here, but at the same time, we're
not turning people away the way we used to. Occupancy levels for
economy lodges show only moderate demand. Lower prices don't
seem to give me a big advantage. If the price is too low, people can
be suspicious of the product.
Chuck Frias / Frias Properties
I don't know the solution. There are plenty of owners I know who
came on a college trip or with mom and dad and that's how Aspen
became their place. The question is how do we keep young people
coming? We used to have significant college groups in the 1970s, but
then the resort industry expanded substantially. There were lots of
other choices where the travel costs were lower, and the Internet has
made all resorts more visible. That makes higher -priced resorts like
Aspen more difficult to sell. We should continue to solicit economy
lodging customers but the lodges over the years have closed because
they are not financially viable without subsidies.
The intimidation factor of Aspen as a luxury celebrity destination is a
reality as well - I'm not sure as locals we really appreciate how the
rest of the world sees us.
Af'd since the mid-1980s, we've lost about 50% of our company's
original condo inventory because people don't want to rent out
anymore - they don't have to financially, and they don't want to
worry about damage to the property.
24 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
Donald Lee / The Gant
It is not 1970 any longer, times have changed. While I do think that
period 'was the glory years for the ski industry for a lot of reasons, it
'is now 2012 ... I don't think we move forward by looking backwards ... I
don't think we replenish new ski bums with economy lodging. I
think other factors are at play today. There is simply no demand for
this lodging and it is not viable to run .and maintain the appropriate
infrastructure to be competitive at economy rates, which is why these
properties have diminished.
Paul Lovelace / Inn at Aspen
I think entry-level lodging is important for Front Range and Western
Slope visitors who want to see what Aspen's all about. We want them
to stay for two or three nights and not just one - getern hooked on
skiing and the area. People budget their vacations: They might spend
on the lodging and skimp on food. Families with kids might prefer the
comfort of the lodging versus going out to eat. I see people being
more frugal not renting a car, and we want to provide amenities
like free wine and cheese in the common area to help them decide to
come.
Rick Moore / The Innsbruck
My parents owned Bethune & Moore at the ABC back in 1966 when
I was starting college and we used to stay at the Smuggler Inn as
a family, and Aspen has been my home base since. I see that the
demand is there for the upper end, but I'd like to see more lower end
for people with limited means - it's good for town. I'd even go along
with a government subsidy.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
Nell: Six months out of the year, we are economy and entry-
level. I think there is an on -ramp in Aspen. We're trying to build
a late April skiing school and are looking at a coordinated effort
for early December. The Skiing Company supported the COWOP
recommendation for the Lift 1A area - a bigger hotel base would be a
catalyst for bigger citywide events.
The economy hotels struggle at that entry-level because they can't
market the way people expect today, or Expedia takes a big cut. We
recognize that our low rates in the off-season are tough for them - if
their rates are relatively low in peak season, where do they go from
there in off-season?
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
The bottom line is that it's not cheap to get to a destination
resort, and you have to pay for the quality of Aspen: the natural
environment, the scenic views, the recreation, the arts and culture,
the historic buildings. It's a unique place. that's in demand, and that
means prices are relatively high to stay here, to eat here, to ski
and paraglide and so forth. Relatively few people will come here as
tourists with limited means. On the other hand, the workers who
come from all over, with six or eight. kids renting a house - many
of them are going to enjoy Aspen and come back as they get older.
So I don't really subscribe to the idea that we can effectively bring
economy travelers here with affordable lodging.
Terry Butler / The Residence Hotel
I believe in the free market. Water finds its own level. I'd like to see
less government control of everything.
May 1 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 25
,John Corcoran / Aspen Alps
A -healthy mix is important, but I think the market can take care of
that. The lodging incentive program is fine, as long as it does not
serve as a disincentive for higher end accommodations. I don't think.
it's the City's place to have an impact on the industry.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
Part of the answer is that the next generation comes from the current
generation bringing their kids with them to vacation. Another is the
young people who are willing to live eight to a house to work here
- they're going .to come back. The reality is that there are far more
opportunities now with the affordable housing program for people to
come and live here than there were when I arrived in 1988.
Craig Melville / Mountain Chalet
I agree and disagree. I think that there is a strong desire for value
lodging. We are not going to get many customers who are looking for
the cheapest vacation. They simply will not look to Aspen because of
our reputation. However, there are a lot of middle -income people who
\have heard about how great the skiing and town, are here and want
to come, but cannot afford the more expensive properties. They want
a value option and those are hard to come by because of the costs
associated with a new hotel. How do you build a new hotel and run
it"profitably in the moderate sector? I do not have an easy answer
for, that question. When you get into the costs of building in Aspen it
be very hard to make it work -- from the land, to the stringent
codes, to the design/architectural work in conjunction with city
council to construction costs. The cards are stacked against building
affordably and thus succeeding as a moderate hotel.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
It's a great idea to see if we can preserve the few that are left or find
a way to assist some development in the lower tiers. The question for
the, community is how much do we want to do this, because it's going
to take either public funding, financing or some public land.
At the same time, we need to continue to attract a high -end clientele
-we're one of the best in the world, but there are far more choices
now. The traveling public spends less time in more places, and that's
new.. There's more pressure on maintaining the high -end clientele
than ever before.
Warren Klug / Aspen Square
Times have changed. That is no longer Aspen's market. We are a
middle to upper -middle class market, in terms of lodging, restaurants,
and activities, and should not be building ski bum accommodations.
I.don't think small lodge rooms will sell because it's not Aspen's
market. And I don't think the City should be promoting that. If the
goal is affordable lodging, that goal is wrong. The marketplace should
determine what the town needs, and the market is just not there.
Aspen has a strong affordable housing program, which helps with this
issue. We have a few affordable housing units both on and off -site.
8. Is the growth management incentive program for small
sized -rooms viable?
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
We are very familiar with. the program. The residential component and
lowered mitigation are essential incentives and need to be retained.
On the other hand, the smaller rooms favored by the incentive
program will not be favored by all lodge development.
26 1 Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
It would work better if the requirement was just a certain square
footage average for rooms. But when you add in the total floor area
requirement, it really squeezes people too, much. The effect is there
just isn't enough room for basic amenities and non -unit space you
need to make the hotel work efficiently and to meet the demands of
the guests.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
Generally speaking, it's not viable. It might work here and there, but
there aren't many properties I can think of where it would work.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
Discussion ran late, no answer on this question.
9. There has been talk of the city partnering with a developer
to build a moderate/economy lodge. Do you think this is
viable?. Do you think it's a good idea?
Stan Clauson / Clauson Associates
Generally, I don't think the City should get into the. lodging business.
If the City is going to partner on anything, it should make sure the
Lift 1A area.truly becomes a second portal with great amenities.
This should have happened with the COWOP process, but now needs
some alternate incentives. I'd even suggest that upper Aspen Street.
is a blighted area worthy of an Urban Redevelopment. Authority.
More than anything, Aspen Street/Lift 1A improvements will help
save the smaller lodges in the Shadow Mountain and Main Street
neighborhoods.
Also, the City should consider taking the Lodge Incentive Program
and let it apply to multiple sites. If a lodge project on one property,
can use 40% of its total floor area as free market condos to make
it financially viable, there's no reason we shouldn't be able to apply
the same math to two sites. One site might get the residential
development, the other would get transferred lodging units to make
for a more viable lodging complex.
Bob Daniel / Lift 1 Lodge
If you want to do it, do it in locations that make sense. Where do you
see the affordable lodges now? They're in off -beat locations. Maybe
the Zupancis property, maybe the BMC property, where you're on. a
bus line. The City shouldn't be a developer, but it's possible to partner
with someone if the public sector brings land to the table, or very
steeply discounted - and you couldn't require full mitigation.
John Sarpa / Centurion Partners
Only if the town puts more value on the table. Even then, the private
and public sectors are very suspicious of each other. I think the
private sector would be worried about how long the whole thing would
take. I think meaningful incentives are the best way to go, and let the
market take it from there.
Skiing Company / The Little Nell + The Limelight
The City can be most helpful by focusing on how to improve
occupancy as a whole, and helping existing lodges.
May 18, 2012 Lodging Study - Phase 1 27
.AspenLodging inventory - 2012
28 I Lodging Study - Phase 1 May 18, 2012
* Staff unable to verify information at this time.
** Christiana Lodge only rents 1 unit as a hotel
*** L'Auberge d'Aspen is in the process of converting from a hotel to a religious use. These hotel
units appear to be off-line
May 18, 2012
Lodging Study - Phase 1 1 29