Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20121203 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3,2012 COUNCILMEMBERCOMMENTS ..............................................................................................2 422 E. COOPER AVENUE—Conceptual Commercial Design and Major Development Call Up2 RESOLUTION#112, SERIES OF 2012—Contract Mitigating Transportation Impacts from Development....................................................................................................................................4 RESOLUTION#111, SERIES OF 2012—Ruedi Reservoir Water Acquisition............................5 616 E. HYMAN AVENUE - Conceptual Commercial Design Call Up........................................7 ORDINANCE #35, SERIES OF 2012 - .3% Sales Tax—Education..............................................7 1 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3,2012 Mayor Ireland called the meeting to order at 4:07 PM with Councilmembers Johnson, Torre, and Frisch present. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Torre noted the Sardy Christmas Tree lighting was a wonderful community event. 2. Mayor Ireland said Aspen High School basketball starts soon. 422 E. COOPER AVENUE—Conceptual Commercial Design and Major Development Call Up Councilman Torre recused himself as living within 300 feet of the project. Chris Bendon, community development department, pointed out this is the shop to the east of the Red Onion. The proposal, which has been to HPC, is to demolish the poster shop and replace it with a 3 story building. This was approved by HPC and that approval was called up by Council. Council's alternatives are to accept HPC decision or remand it back to HPC with or without directions. This is a one-story element on the front of the property; second floor is setback 12'. This HPC felt this setback was important in order to maintain the side of the Red Onion with the Red Onion sign. The third floor is setback 45' from the street. Council reviewed the view plane during their call up discussion. Bendon noted there is an exemption in the view plane regulations that allows projects behind existing buildings already in the view plane. This view is blocked by the Paragon building and the Roaring Fork building and staff does not think these buildings will be going away soon. The overall height of the building is 38' which complies with the zoning. Bendon told Council HPC used their design guidelines and made a fully informed decision. The HPC member who voted against the project did not want development on this parcel. Bendon recommended Council uphold HPC's decision. Councilman Frisch stated he supports HPC's decision. Councilman Johnson agreed. Councilman Johnson noted that the code does not allow call up because of view planes. Bendon answered HPC's decision was on commercial design review based on a decision about the view plane. Mayor Ireland said he thought the Wheeler view plane was from the Wheeler. Bendon said it is a broad view plane about 160°. Mayor Ireland said it does not seem a building directly north would shadow the view plane and how much of the building is affected by the Wheeler view plane. Bendon said this view plane is blocked by two buildings. Mayor Ireland asked if the code addresses "partial blockage". Jim True, city attorney, pointed out the code does not permit call-up of HPC's view plane decision, only call up on the commercial design review so the amount of blockage is not relevant. Bendon told Council HPC reviews the view plane, the extent to which it is already blocked, whether mass could be moved around to open up the view, the aesthetics of the parcel. HPC did that and found that this project should be exempt from view plane review. Mayor Ireland read from the HPC minutes where Ms. Berko said this feels like chipping away at HPC's mission, to preserve what Aspen has; the Red Onion deserves some prominence. Bendon 2 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3, 2012 told Council HPC has latitude over mass and scale; the code states mass and scale are not guarantees. Mayor Ireland asked if there might be covenants that the condominiumization of this building would preclude active uses. (Councilman Skadron arrived at the meeting). Council does not have the power to overturn HPC's grant of an exemption from view plane. Bendon noted the view plan legislation looks at the practicality of the view plane being opened up. Bendon said the existing buildings in the view plane are not going away. Councilman Skadron asked the principle of the original view plane legislation. Bendon said it was to preserve quintessential views that define Aspen, views of the mountain. Bendon said at some point, it became a tool to limit development and a strong planning tool. Councilman Skadron stated he would support remanding the application back to HPC for further consideration on the mass and scale issues. Councilman Johnson said from the HPC minutes, it appears mass and scale is what the discussion was about. Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, told Council HPC expressed concerns for the historic Red Onion building and voted 4 to 1 to approve this project. Clauson said HPC deemed this building to have no historic significance; it is part of the same property as the Red Onion. This building has structural issues and needs to be replaced. The building has 1,043 square feet net leasable on the first floor and the proposal adds 2,000 square feet net livable two story residence for a total increase of 3,000 square feet including the basement. The Red Onion would be minimally impacted; this project is stepped back 12' to 45' to assure no interference with the vertical Red Onion sign. Clauson showed plan views, showed buildings that intercept the view plan, showed renderings of the projects from different viewpoints to illustrate what can and cannot be seen of the proposed addition. Clauson said he cannot address the covenants; these properties are within the Red Onion commercial complex and this would be the sole residential property. Councilman Skadron asked what the protection of historic resources is when new development abuts it. Clauson noted there are criteria having to do with assessment of compatibility and that the new construction does not detract from the quality of the historic resource. This project does not violate any criteria. Clauson said a key factor for HPC was preservation of the Red Onion sign. Councilman Skadron asked why this application falls only within HPC's purview. Bendon answered it is within the historic district and is a landmarked property. Councilman Johnson moved to accept HPC's decision to grant conceptual major development, conceptual commercial design; seconded by Councilman Frisch Councilman Skadron asked why this does not qualify for joint review of P&Z. Bendon reiterated HPC has jurisdiction for development review of properties within the historic district whether they have a historic resource or not. Bendon pointed out development in historic districts goes through an additional review to make sure the new development is compatible with the historic district. Bendon said design review, even with the best guidelines, is a subjective review and committees can disagree on the outcome of design review. Mayor Ireland agreed with Ms. Berko whether this property subordinates the historic Red Onion property. There has been an attempt by the applicant to maintain some prominence of the Red Onion. Mayor Ireland stated he is concerned about the vitality of downtown and there is evidence that allowing residential development suppresses vitality measured by population, vacancy rates, and local ownership. Councilman Skadron agreed the concerns about the covenants should be addressed and he would 3 Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council December 3,2012 like this remanded to HPC to examine the criteria and the covenants. Councilman Skadron said P&Z review may have a different outcome. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Skadron. Motion carried. RESOLUTION#112, SERIES OF 2012—Contract Mitigating Transportation Impacts from Development Trish Aragon, engineering department, reminded Council this is a multi-departmental project including community development, engineering, transportation and environmental health. This action was one of the top items for action from the AACP. Ms. Aragon noted the goal of the project is to understand traffic impacts from development and determine how these impacts can be mitigated and to make the process clear and consistent. Ms. Aragon said there are currently no clear standards in reviewing traffic mitigation. Staff sent out RFPs and Fehr and Peers had the best proposal to address traffic impacts of development, including traffic counts establishing Aspen specific triggers to create a traffic analysis. Fehr and Peers will develop user-friendly tools for applicants to understand impacts of traffic and options for mitigation. Ann Bowers, Fehr& Peers, said this product will provide the city with traffic impact study guidelines, when will a traffic study be required, what are the details, what are the time frames to analyze; there will be an Aspen-specific trip generator model. Fehr& Peers will collect data in Aspen specific to land uses and sites. There will be a traffic demand scoring tool for things that can be done to mitigate impacts. Ms. Bowers said every development will give the city an idea of the amount of traffic that will be generated. Councilman Frisch asked about all the previous traffic information. Ms. Bowers said their company does different types of traffic counts rather than counting at intersections. Fehr & Peers will take existing, operating land uses in Aspen to determine how many trips that type of business generates in a day—driveway counts versus intersection counts. Ms. Aragon said the point of this is to help understand what impact a development will have on traffic. With that information, staff can look how traffic can be mitigated. Councilman Frisch stated he supports having this information when asking developers to mitigate their traffic impacts. Councilman Frisch asked how this is quantified when people come to town for various reasons. Ms. Aragon said this could be done by surveys for a particular business. Jon told Council they will do traffic study guidelines first which will give traffic numbers for existing businesses. A new business can look at data from an existing site and apply it to their proposal. Councilman Frisch stated he supports trying to figure out factual mitigation causes. Is the data legally or rationally binding and can the data pinpoint what businesses are causing X many trips. Councilman Frisch asked what variables are used when getting data in resort towns. Jon said in resort towns, they know when most visitors tend to arrive, how long visitors stay, what they do, and the seasonality. Jon told Council they will work with staff to find out the best times to collect this data. Councilman Skadron asked if the $100,000 expenditure is necessary for the city to establish a mitigation standard. Jon said there is a lot of data to collect and the consultants are starting from scratch; also they will leave the city with a working tool for this mitigation. 4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3,2012 Ms. Bowers noted on trip generations, they go back and validate the data collection. Each location they work in is different. Councilman Frisch asked if the intent is to add new fees or adjust the current fees. Ms. Aragon said these are on the ground improvements, not just fees, but improvements to traffic mitigation measures, like improving crosswalks,providing bike fleets. Lynn Rumbaugh, transportation, reminded Council there is a traffic demand management air quality fee in the land use code; staff is not looking to increase the fee but standardize the mitigation process for every development in front of the city. Councilman Johnson said he favors data collection; new projects require starting fresh and guidelines make sense. Councilman Johnson stated a concern is once the data is collected, how the tools are implemented and will this make starting businesses in Aspen more expensive. Councilman Johnson noted one of the goals is to improve Aspen's environmental metrics regarding air quality and that seems a stretch. Councilman Torre said he supports this because 3 city departments are requesting this process. Councilman Torre noted rather than hoping to increase mitigation fees, Council is looking at this to understand traffic, mitigation and future demand. Ms. Rumbaugh pointed out this will eliminate dueling traffic studies during development applications. The ambiguity of transportation mitigation measure will disappear and each applicant will be measured the same. Mayor Ireland moved to approve Resolution#112, Series of 2012; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION#111, SERIES OF 2012 —Ruedi Reservoir Water Acquisition Phil Overeynder, water department, noted this recommends the city acquire 400 acre feet from the Bureau of Reclamation for augmentation purposes for the city's future water management plan. Overeynder said this resolution implements a reimbursement agreement for the NEPA process necessary and to initiate purchase of the water. The city will be paying $32,000/year for the purchase of the water while the NEPA process is going on. Overeynder told Council the Bureau of Reclamation will review all applications for the purchase of the available 20,000 acre feet through an environmental policy act. The BOR will do this through an environmental assessment and if they can still offer that 20,000 acre feet and the city is a purchaser, an agreement to actually purchase the water will be entered into. Overeynder said Council asked if the contingency for which they are purchasing this water does not come to pass and what can be done about that investment. Overeynder said the Colorado River Water Conservation District is setting up a process through the BOR to serve as BOR's agent to take water from a purchaser and reconvey it to another purchase and keep everyone whole. The city can roll back part of their purchase if there are other buyers. Overeynder said staff feels there will be water shortages. Overeynder said Council asked if it is possible to use the water for in-stream flow purposes on an interim or long term basis. Overeynder said this can be done through an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Overeynder said the city should make those intentions 5 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3,2012 known to the BOR as information when they are doing their environmental assessment. Overeynder recommended the city plan on that as the highest and best use while they are looking at other alternative needs for that water. Councilman Torre asked if there are potential senior water rights between Aspen and Basalt. Overeynder said that depends on the seniority of the right. There are two key water rights upstream of the confluence of the Roaring Fork and Frying Pan; one is in-stream flow value in that section of stream and the other is the county has applied for a recreational in-channel diversion, a kayak course, which would have a junior priority but could be moved up. Overeynder noted another question is water conservation an alternative to purchasing Ruedi water. Staff notes there are circumstances the city has a water right they want to operate, like an exchange with the Salvation Ditch to leave more water in the roaring Fork and to improve the potable water supply, and that junior water right could affect the downstream users. Overeynder said in that instance, the city would release water from Ruedi which would enable the downstream users to be whole and allows the city to operate a project to improve water supply, maintain in stream flows or whatever the water management plan directs the city to do in response to tighter water supplies. The city has done a lot of water conservation and 1993, the city was using on a per connection basis 2/3 more water than today. This was done by plugging leaks,tightening up water management practices and billing, and encouraging conservation from the customers. Overeynder stated none of that buys the city one unit of credit in terms of consumptive use credits, which means water that is saved that would not get back to the stream. Overeynder said it is highly unlikely anything the city does in the future will result in gaining a credit in consumptive uses so in terms of buying more water, conservation does not work. Councilman Johnson stated he supports this; it is a one chance to purchase water and is a hedging strategy. Councilman Johnson asked if this is a mechanism to satisfy money owed to the BOR for Ruedi's construction. Overeynder answered it satisfies the BOR's need to go to Congress and tell them they have recovered the 1969 investment. Councilman Johnson said a large amount of money is due in 2019 and this is a negotiation to have that obligation go away and provides benefit to occur on the west slope. Councilman Frisch asked if this will decrease the need to dam up the Maroon and Castle Creeks rivers. Overeynder stated this acquisition is independent of that. Overeynder said there needs to be an analysis to look at all alternatives on the table, bring the public into the process, look at changes in how stream runoff occurs, look at these from an environmental standpoint, an economic standpoint, from public acceptability standpoint and which is preferred. The 1990 water management plan that building reservoirs filed on since 1970 is the last alternative and lowest priority. Overeynder said staff analyzed a more likely alternative, the pump back into the Salvation Ditch and exchange which would keep more water in the Roaring Fork and would meet more objectives, maybe at a lower cost and maintain environmental value, and costed out how much water would be needed for that. Dave Hornbacher, water department, presented an updated resolution removing the clause stating it is preferred to purchase water over a period of time so that Council can, once the BOR has gone through the steps, make a decision to purchase in one lump sum or over several years. Councilman Skadron moved to adopt Resolution#111, Series of 2012, as amended; seconded by Mayor Ireland. All in favor, motion carried. 6 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 3,2012 616 E. HYMAN AVENUE - Conceptual Commercial Design Call Up Jennifer Phelan, community development department,told Council this project was reviewed and approved by P&Z in October for expansion and remodel of a building for the same ground floor footprint, and expanded second story and a new recessed third story. A maximum height of 38' was approved for a portion of a third story. Ms. Phelan told Council staff recommended a maximum height of 36'; P&Z granted up to 38' as permitted in the land use code. Ms. Phelan said P&Z's decision was in accordance with the code and with the land use criteria. Ms. Phelan told Council they may accept P&Z's decision, may remand it back to P&Z with direction, or may continue the item for additional information. Councilman Torre said he wanted this called up because of the architectural features from ground through the second floor. Councilman Torre said his concern is not particularly this building but a development pattern in general, which is the use of glass as a material. Councilman Torre said he thought the design guidelines would look for more traditional development rather than vertical lines up two stories. Ms. Phelan pointed out conceptual review is for height, mass, placement of the building. Materials are not discussed at conceptual. There are guidelines regarding materials, type of materials, fenestration, and these were not discussed at conceptual but will be discussed at final review. The conceptual is to review whether the footprint is working,the height, massing, and setback and the skin is discussed at final. Councilman Frisch questioned waiting to final to bring up details that may be of concern to Council. Councilman Torre agreed Council should review their review to make sure the sequence is correct. Councilman Torre moved to accept P&Z's decision to grant conceptual commercial design; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #35, SERIES OF 2012 - .3% Sales Tax—Education Councilman Johnson moved to read Ordinance #35, Series of 2012; seconded by Mayor Ireland. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #35 Series of 2012 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING SECTION 23.32.0606(a), 23.32.060(c) AND 23.32.070(a) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO IMPOSE A NEW 0.3% SALES TAX FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND TO CODIY OTHER RECENLTY ADOPTED MEASURES Don Taylor, finance department, told Council staff is in the process of negotiating the IGA. 7 ReLyular Meeting Aspen Citv Council December 3,2012 Moved to adopt Ordinance #35, Series of 2012, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Roll call vote; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Torre, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. Council went into a work session to discuss the International Green conservation Code Mayor Ireland moved to go into executive session at 7:20 pm pursuant to 24-6-402(4)(b) for 3 items; 2 potential litigation and an update on Koch v. Branscombe and Marks; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Torre moved to come out of executive session at 7:52 pm; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Torre moved to adjourn at 7:52 pm; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. xt, ,""Kathryn Koch City Clerk 8