Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20150112Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 1 CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION ................................................................................................... 2 COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 3 Agenda Addition ........................................................................................................................................... 4 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 4 Resolution #2, 2015 – Growth Management Allotment Carry-Forward Review ......................................... 6 Resolution #5, Series of 2015 – 520 E. Cooper Avenue – Temporary Use .................................................. 7 Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 – 101 W. Main Street (Molly Gibson Lodge) – Planned Development, Project Review and Subdivision ................................................................................................................... 7 Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper Street (Base 1Lodge) – Planned Development, Commercial Design, Growth Management Reviews ........................................................................................................ 9 Ordinance #1, Series of 2015 – 232 E. Main Street (Base 2 Lodge) – Planned Development, Commercial Design, Growth Management, Historic Reviews ........................................................................................ 11 Ordinance #41, Series of 2014 – 928 W. Hallam Street, Minor Subdivision ............................................. 13 Ordinance #40, Series of 2014 – Pitkin County Center Subdivision – Major Subdivision, Rezoning ....... 13 Ordinance #39, Series of 2014 – 709 E Durant, Sky Hotel Redevelopment .............................................. 14 Resolution 4, Series of 2015 – Vacated Rights of Way - Policy Resolution ............................................. 18 Ordinance 4, Series of 2015 – Rights-of-Way Code Amendment .............................................................. 19 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 2 Mayor Skadron called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Daily, Frisch, Romero and Mullins present. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION 1. Rubin Sadowsky and Joey Stokes told Council they are from the valley and have been working in the large event/festival production field. Last year they held the Superdope semi-secret dance party you can probably get into event at the Aspen Brewing warehouse at the ABC. They worked with the County for the special event permit and liquor license. There were 350 guests per night during the X games. It was a showcase of local music and art talents. This year they are having trouble finding a space. They thought they were going to get the old steak pit spot. They want to use the old Art Museum building for the event. It would be 300 people from 8-2am Friday and Saturday 1-23 and 1-24. He said the Art museum is excited but told them to talk to Council. Barry Crook said the manager’s office originally said no since they were concerned with impacts to the neighborhood. His understanding is the museum moved out in December but are storing art work and working on a separation agreement. He has not had any contact with the museum. Councilwoman Mullins said what a great spot to do it but she has some concerns. She has lots of concerns about noise and parking. She asked if the condition of the building is good enough to support this. She said it sounds like a great idea but a few things need to be look at. Mr. Sadowsky said they would provide shuttles and it is close enough to town people could walk. They have decibel meters and would measure the noise levels. He stated they are not throwing a rager. Councilman Frisch said it is a can of worms but interesting. Noise is important to handle. Councilman Romero ask why it is not at the Brewing Company this year. Mr. Sadowsky said they are doing a much larger production run and did not have the space at the building. Councilman Daily said he is up for it. Parking is a big deal and the shuttle is an excellent idea. Mayor Skadron asked if the concept is rager or safe house. Mr. Sadowsky replied it would be a mix. It is an awesome way to showcase local talent, athletic, artistic and musical as well as the production side. Mayor Skadron said it will be the threshold event for everything interesting they want to do in the future. It is a historic asset in a neighborhood where noise is a threshold issue. He needs to see more outreach as quickly as they can do it and would like to see each neighbor sign off on it. He does not want to be in a position where he has to justify the event. Jim True stated the concerns are an art museum issues since their lease goes through August 15. They have to agree to allow the event. They have to support any permits including liquor and special use permits. The event has to be processed through the art museum. Mr. Sadowsky said they will report back to the Manager’s office by Friday. 2. Jon Peacock introduced John Kinney the new airport director. Mayor Skadron asked them to comment on commercial flights being subordinated to private jets. Mr. Peacock said the busy season is right after Christmas. There were 842 flights December 27th through yesterday. 85 were canceled and 24 diverted. There is not prioritization between commercial and private. It is governed by the FAA. Flights are brought in on a first come first serve basis. Commercial flights don’t have the capacity to hold as long. It is not a decision by the county or airport but the FAA. Mr. Kinney came on December 15th. December 27th was the busiest day ever. He stated the FAA brings aircraft in on first come first serve basis. There is also a ripple effect because of weather. It is truly just rush hour in the sky. Bill Tomcich said he agrees 100 percent about the unique situations that occur over the holidays. It is a region wide phenomenon including highway 82. It also happened to other regional airports. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 3 Councilman Frisch asked if the commercial just roll with the punches or ask questions. Mr. Tomcich said they are not happy about it. Councilman Frisch said it is a busy time of year and not a great reason to be given. We know when we are busy. If you have a reservation on a commercial flight someone needs to figure out how to fit other planes in that. He said he hopes come July we have a plan. Maybe we need to have a certain amount of slots and there should be room for everyone. Mr. Peacock said he would welcome the support of Council as they engage in discussion. Councilman Romero asked what the next most pressing step is. Mr. Peacock replied the airport layout plan. The BOCC has given direction to prepare a new airport layout plan based on option 8A. The consulting team is working on the plan and final approval should come the end of March. After the plan is approved by the FAA it would go to the environmental assessment. Councilman Daily said he appreciates them coming in to talk. It is a big community issue. He understands they don’t prioritize but when commercial has a dedicated takeoff or landing time is that taking into consideration. Mr. Kinney said the airlines made reservations months in advance. The FAA is only accepting a certain amount of slots over that but they do overbook. Mayor Skadron asked what our peak vacancy was. Mr. Tomcich replied it was very close to zero. 3. Mike Maple gave congratulations on the new parking meters and the fact the City is no longer charging on holidays and Sundays. He congratulated the city for taking quick action on the hazard of the rain garden. As for in person voting versus mail ballot voting, the Mayor’s ideas are the ones right on as a nation and small community. Going to a vote center is what makes a small community. Extending the voting period is a travesty to the democratic process. He welcomed Mike Kosdrosky as the new housing director. He has Reservations over how much affordable housing is being built and if there is a demand for it. He is a proponent of rentals and they better serves our community. He has not heard a lot about enforcement efforts in the AH program. He encouraged Council to push APCHA towards an effective enforcement mechanism. Utilization of City owned parcels. What is being proposed should be compliant with the code. As for the Issue of aviation and it’s somebody else’s problem he does not believe that. Commercial aircraft should have priority. As for the entrance to Aspen and our traffic there is no discussion in a top ten goals on the entrance. It is the number one issue in our community. If Council is not talking about it you are not talking about the top issue. It is a County and City issue. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Frisch wished everyone a happy new year. He said he got stuck in Montrose traveling by air. It was a busy holiday season and he applauded everyone in the resort and service industry. There is a shortage of beds in town and he looks forward to continuing the conversation. We do have a well-balanced tourist base. 2. Councilman Romero said he has three resolutions for this year. 1. Resolve to push a greater awareness of health and human services for the community. The Aspen Hope Center and the work and services they provide are important this time of year. 2. Advocate locally serving restaurants including those with public and private sector landlords. 3. Continue to challenge our own planning and efforts around the space needs for the City of Aspen in particular the staff needs. He would like to see five percent less than what we think to be optimal. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 4 3. Mayor Skadron thank the Chamber for a successful Winterskol. He thanked Ski Co for keeping the mountains in good condition. He thanked the streets department for keeping the streets good. He also thanked the guests and locals Agenda Addition Move Resolution #4 vacated right of way to item 9D – public hearings. Jim True stated staff no longer requests an executive session unless something arises during the meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolution #3 – IGA to merge Public Health with Pitkin County Councilwoman Mullins asked about the City’s board representation. CJ Oliver, environmental health, said Aspen would appoint one member to the seven member board. He would be an advisor to the board. Mayor Skadron said the City is combining with this but divesting with the joint tech framework. Debbie Quinn, assistant attorney, said that is what we are doing. She is not familiar with the split but this is a merger for as long as the City wants it to be. Mayor Skadron said he is curious why it is right for one and not the other. Mr. Oliver said the majority of the services are provided by community health services. It was a duplication of efforts to pull on limited resources. It is more beneficial to have resources combined into one. Mayor Skadron asked who the doctor representative is. Mr. Oliver replied Dr. Kimberly Levin and she will be at the joint meeting. We cycle station contribution Mirte Berko said this was the second season for We-cycle and they saw a 76 percent growth in ridership. 63 percent of the rides were made by season pass holders. 93 percent were under 30 minutes. Season pass holders ride for average of eight minutes. People are coming into town for quick trips. Resolution # 6 ERP implementation Councilman Romero asked if we talked about this during the budget cycle. Don Taylor, finance, replied in general. Council Romero said we will be taking a 17 year old product into a more integrated multiple discipline model. How long will it take to install and get it up and running. Mr. Taylor said two years. Councilman Romero said the engagement not to exceed value is for two years. Alice Hackney, finance, said Ashley’s hours will fluctuate quite a bit. Mr. Taylor said they worked with GFOA technical services and they helped put together a needs analysis and the RPF. They could not emphasis enough to make sure we had the right level of human interaction for the implementation. It is worth the extra investment to make sure we have competent people helping. Councilwoman Mullins asked if Ashley is with a company. Mr. Taylor said she is an individual. Councilwoman Mullins asked if there is there a backup if she can’t complete the task. It is a major effort and we need reassurance. Mr. Taylor replied it is a valid concern but less probable as she has ties to the community. They talked to her about the needed commitment and she assured her commitment. Councilwoman Mullins asked if the 1.5 is software and installation. Mr. Taylor replied yes. Councilwoman Mullins asked about the ongoing costs for tech support or upgrades and will we need a hardware upgrade. Mr. Taylor said it depends on the software we pick. We are looking at a cloud systems with less hardware investments. When the selection is made it will come to Council with a Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 5 contract detailing other costs depending on the solution. Ms. Hackney said Council will see the contract around May. Resolution #10 – mail ballot election Linda Manning, city clerk, stated due to changes in legislation municipalities have the option of conducting mail ballot elections. In the past voters had the option to apply for an absentee ballot. The November 2014 County election was a mail ballot election. The resolution proposes the City also conduct an all mail ballot election with a voting center. If a run-off election is necessary that would also be mail ballot. The nominating petition pick up and drop off deadline gets moved up. Candidates would be able to pick up their nominating petition on February 3rd and would have until February 20th to drop it off at the Clerk’s office. If it was a traditional polling place election those dates would be March 2nd to March 23rd. If it was mail ballot, ballots would be mailed out 22 days prior to the election, April 13th. Starting that day voters would be able to vote in person at the City Hall vote center. If it was a polling place election, starting February 1st voters could start requesting absentee ballots. In the past there had been a permanent mail in voter list maintained by the County. This list is no longer up to date. To get a ballot in the mail the voter would have to request it. Mayor Skadron stated he likes traditional voting. Voting by mail alters the timetables and voters vote before all the information is presented by the candidates. Polling places are familiar and convenient and a tradition that says community. What is right for Pitkin County is not what is right for Aspen. It is to our benefit to maintain the traditional polling place election. Councilwoman Mullins said going to the polls is one of the most patriotic thing you can do. Her concern is the traditional way of voting and with no PMIV list, she is afraid more and more voters won’t make the effort to get a ballot especially if they have to contact the clerk every time. There was a five percent increase in turnout for the county election. It is a wonderful tradition but things changes. People are traveling and their schedules are different. It is a small town but not a small town when everyone is here on voting day. She would much rather facilitate voting by everyone getting a mail in ballot. She does not think the extended voting period offsets the convenience of being able to mail in your ballot or coming to the polls. She would hope more people come to the polls but more than that, that people vote. Councilman Frisch said sticking with the status quo two thirds of the people voted prior to election day. We are already seeing people vote early. We are only left with a third who wants to vote in person. With the new process they are still able to show up on election day and cast a ballot in person. It will be a little bit harder to make an effort with only one polling place. Those who want to vote in person will make the effort. If you think about the traditional workforce, a lot are gone. We would be doing a dis-service shutting out the traditional local to vote. We need to come up with ways to make it as easy as possible. He would be open to additional vote centers if needed. Councilman Daily said he is changing his mind and coming around to favoring traditional polling place elections. It does add a bit to strengthening the community. Before he was leaning towards the opportunity to increase voter turnout. It is a modest increase at best and may not occur over the long term. He leans towards community activity. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 6 Councilman Romero said he considers himself patriotic but this will not make or break any of our patriotism. He favors participation over nostalgia. Five percent is material and meaningful. Five percent would have swung the last election results. We are a resort community and elections are in May. For him it is participation over nostalgia. Mayor Skadron asked for a motion to vote on items A through E and the minutes.  Resolution #3, 2015 – Approve an IGA to merge Public Health with Pitkin County  We-Cycle Station contribution  Resolution #6, 2015 – ERP Implementation Project Manager Contract – Ashley Ernemann  Resolutions #7 and #8, 2015 – Professional Services Contracts for Burlingame Ranch Phase II Single Family Homes #1-4  Resolutions #11 and #12 – Regarding Burlingame Siding Litigation  Minutes – December 1, 2014 and December 8, 2014 Councilman Frisch moved to approve A through E including the minutes; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Romero moved to adopt Resolution #10; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Mr. True said there has been discussion about the deadlines that are modified based on a mail ballot election, Feb 3rd to 20th. He said Council can move the February 20th date but would not recommend moving the February 3rd date. It would require an ordinance and two readings. Councilman Frisch said he is supportive in making the window as wide as possible. Ms. Manning stated she would not recommend going any later than March 9th. Councilman Frisch said he is supportive of the change. Councilman Romero said to extend it out as a gestures to the community for people who are considering running. Councilwoman Mullins is also supportive.  Resolution #10, 2015 – Establishing the May 5th, 2015 General Municipal Election to be conducted as a Mail Ballot Election with a Vote Center All in favor except for Mayor Skadron and Councilman Daily. Motion passes 3 to 2. Councilman Romero asked staff to come back with an ordinance to modify the nominating petition due date to March 9th. Resolution #2, 2015 – Growth Management Allotment Carry-Forward Review Hillary Seminick, community development, told the Council every January Council reviews if allotments should be carried forward. In 2014 Council elected to carry forward 112 lodge pillows from the previous year. Of those 224 lodge pillows that were available in 2014 none are remaining to roll over to 2015. 12 free market allotments and 31,695 sq ft of net leasable commercial space are available to carry forward. Staff recommend no allotments roll over. Councilman Frisch asked for more explanation about not rolling forward. There is a healthy amount sitting there from 2014. Ms. Seminick stated all the allotments have been claimed and there are none available to roll over. Councilman Frisch asked how many between Base 1, 2, Jerome, Sky and Molly Gibson. Jessica Garrow, community development, stated those projects all applied in 2014 and have claimed all the 2014 pillows. Base 2 is requesting eight pillows from 2015 and will come in with a separate application to take from 2015. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 7 Councilwoman Mullins asked why Staff is recommending no carry forward. Ms. Garrow said typically Council does not roll over but last year staff recommended it. The 2015 allotments should cover what will be requested. There is a mechanism in the code for an applicant to request allotments from a future year. Mayor Skadron asked if GMQS is a mechanism to absorb and manage growth, and tonight we are seeing four development applications is the GMQS working. Ms. Garrow said it is working. The 2013 rollover was to encourage lodging. It is limiting growth particularly in the lodging realm. Mayor Skadron asked if applications were turned down because there were no allotments. Ms. Garrow replied no, there were enough allotments for the applications that came forward. Ms. Garrow stated the rollover has never been done to the residential category. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Romero moved to approve Resolution #2, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Resolution #5, Series of 2015 – 520 E. Cooper Avenue – Temporary Use Justin Barker, community development, stated the temporary use is to relocate a freezer on a designated parking area at the 520 East Cooper property for use by Little Annies restaurant. The Aspen Core project required the location of a transformer in the area previously located by the freezer. The property owner is anticipating a remodel but not likely till this fall. They are requesting the temporary use through the end of September 2015. Staff is recommending approval with the allowance of two additional six month extensions that could be approved administratively. Councilwoman Mullins asked if 520 E Cooper needs to find an additional parking space. Mr. Barker replied no, since it is a temporary use that is the allowance per the code. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Resolution #5, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 – 101 W. Main Street (Molly Gibson Lodge) – Planned Development, Project Review and Subdivision Sara Adams, community development, gave an overview of the schedule. Tonight is first reading for the Molly Gibson, Base 1 and 2. Second reading will be on January 26th. The Molly submitted first so they will give a full presentation on the 26th. Staff recommends Base 1 and 2 be continued to March 9th. There was a site visit with Council today and all five councilmembers were present as well as the applicant. The reviews include planned development, project review, subdivision and growth management. The Molly Gibson is comprised of two parcels along Main Street and Hopkins. They also request to incorporate a vacant lot adjacent to the Main Street parcel. The request is to merge the vacant lot with the Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 8 Main Street parcel to create an 18,000 sq ft lot. They will demolish the entire lodge and redevelop with a new lodge along Main Street at three stories adding 15 lodge rooms for a total of 68 lodge rooms averaging 300 sq ft in size. There will be one affordable housing unit to replace the existing unit. Along Hopkins there is a proposal for two single family detached residences. The applicant is requesting a variation from the mixed use underlying zoning for the overall lodge building floor area, the lodge floor area for the Main Street parcel, and some set back variations. Along Hopkins R6 with a LP overlay, is a 9,000 sq ft lot. This is the site for the two single family homes. They are requesting variances for site coverage, overall floor area and some side yard setback variances. The Main Street parcel is in the historic district. HPC did the recommendations to Council. They recommended five to one in favor of the project reviews. They approved commercial design, conceptual, demolition in a historic district, major development and residential design standard variances. The notice of call up is scheduled for tonight at the end of the agenda. Mayor Skadron said the call up is on the agenda under action items but they can entertain the call up now. They are not choosing to call up the project. Ms. Adams stated staff is recommending approval on first reading and second reading for January 26th. Stan Clauson is representing the applicant. Councilwoman Mullins stated she is looking for justification for the variance requests. They are more than anticipated. Some of which are justifiable and some she is not sure she would support. Specifically the parcel two side yard setback variance. The site coverage is going from 40 to 51.3 percent and is more than you see in many residential homes. The increase in square footage also needs justified. She does not question what is going on with the lodge itself. Councilman Romero said for second reading the nuance of the LP overlay deserves some air time. What is it intended to achieve. It overlays both parcels with one in the mixed use with a historic overlay. Parcel two sits in R6 with a LP overlay. The public needs to understand the original intent of lodge preservation and how it supports the proposal. It gives a new point to start the conversation and some level of justification for some of the variances. Councilman Frisch read from the memo “the proposal to place all the lodge use on Main Street has a positive impact on the preservation of the neighborhood but a negative impact on the applicant as to how floor area is calculated” goes back to what Councilwoman Mullins was talking about in the increase of variances. We need to spend some time flushing that out. Parking mitigation is coming up. It would be helpful to understand how people use cars when they do come to town. For moderately priced lodges what are the driving scenarios. He has no problem with dis-incentivizing to drive but we may see car creep into residential zones. It would be nice to know what the previous ask was and what the original application asked for. He appreciates all the work HPC has done. Councilman Daily said he is generally appreciative of the application. He recognizes that they are working with the LP overlay approach. The primary focus of a planned development process is for the project to fit into the context of the neighborhood. He is not sure if the proposed homes fit in the context of the R6 neighborhood. He would like to discuss more thoroughly if the justification for doubling the allowable floor area for single family homes is appropriate. Mayor Skadron stated he concurs with his fellow councilmembers. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 9 Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #3, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO 3 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVAL, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT – PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 101 W MAIN STREET, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MOLLY GIBSON PUD, AND FOR LOT 2 OF THE 125 WEST MAIN STREET HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 at first reading; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper Street (Base 1 Lodge) – Planned Development, Commercial Design, Growth Management Reviews Sara Adams told the Council she will discuss both lodges together. Base 1 is located at 730 E Cooper. It is zoned Commercial lodge with a planned development overlay. The proposal is to redevelop with a three story lodge with 44 rooms about 173 sq ft each. There will be commercial on the ground floor and a publicly accessible roof top deck. Through the planned development the request is to vary the height for the bathrooms on the roof that serve the deck. 39 feet is allowed and 43 is proposed. They meet all the underlying requirements for a commercial lodge other than the height of the bathrooms. They are proposing offsite parking with valet. They are required to have 26 spaces and will be asking Council to establish the parking requirement at second reading. They will also ask to lease spaces at the Rio Grande garage. They are in discussions to use some of the City’s spaces at Benedict Commons. They are also working with We-Cycle. There is a request to waive the affordable housing mitigation. The mitigation is between 1.97 and .9 employees depending on the rate of establishment. The code allows lodge projects to request waivers for impact fees including transportation demand management, air quality fee and parks development fees. The applicant is requesting waivers of those fees. Base 1 went to P&Z for Council recommendation. There were three public hearings and they adopted the resolution last week. They recommended approval for growth management and planned development project review by a four to two vote. They struggled with the site plan, public amenity and if the project fits into the neighborhood as well as parking. They recommended denial of commercial design. Staff is recommending approval on first reading and set the public hearing for January 26. Mitch Haas stated this lodge does not include any free market or fractional component. Councilman Romero said the memo talks about ordinance 2 series 2009 where Council approved to lift the FAR limit that previously existed. It was a condition of rezoning from office to commercial lodge. In 2009 there was an approval to remove the 1 to 1 but there was no subsequent setting of FAR on the site. He is interested to hear how that reconciles if it does at all. He asked if we have ever utilized any public Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 10 parking facility for other land use approvasl with a private applicant. If terms can’t be struck between private and public sector what is Staff’s opinion of the application. He asked if we have heard of other alternatives on the public record about parking. Councilwoman Mullins said she is concerned about the parking and wants to hear more about the proposal. They are finding 26 spaces around town and not asking for total mitigation. She would like to hear more about how a building this size is generating only one to two employees for mitigation. On height, she would like to know why it needs five more feet for the bathrooms. The architecture is quite flamboyant and out of character with the neighborhood and she understands P&Z’s hesitancy. Councilman Daily said he shares the same questions. He would like to hear more about the parking waiver. It is a tough one but he can be persuaded differently. It is the project’s responsibility to provide for parking and that is not the case here. The proposal is to use public spaces to meet a private development need. He is not sure it is an appropriate use of public spaces. It is a long term public facility with a long term need for public parking. He hesitates to give up part of that for private development. How does the roof top space qualify as public amenity as defined in 2.5 of the design guidelines. It needs further discussion. He shares Councilwoman Mullins concern about the appropriateness of commercial design in this neighborhood. Councilman Frisch said his comment about how cars are used in lodging is important here. The last applicant has a deficit of 27 cars. He’s wondering how that gels in the reality of the goals and tools. The goal is to have the right amount of parking. The assumption is how it affects the neighborhood. The denser the lodge the more onus is placed on the parking. He is not sure if the tools and goals are messed up. It is a valid concern. Councilwoman Mullins comments are good. Mayor Skadron said at second reading he would like to hear more about the concept, specifically rooms averaging 169 sq ft. He would like comments on the fee waivers and the principal behind them. Is it a cost reduction mechanism or more to it. He would like to believe a project like this and the audience it serves may not require the parking imposed on other projects. He would like to hear if the mechanism in place now should go away and there be no parking requirement would you still proceed with this concept. Does it make sense to build to this market with zero parking. Mark Hunt, applicant, said in both cases, Base 1 and Base 2, the parking requirement would be zero if the lodges were across the street from each other. If the gas station were on any other of the three corners it would be zero. Mr. Hass said the original submittal had zero parking and now they are proposing parking just not on site. Mayor Skadron suggested a conversation at the county with airport parking. It is time for projects to start having a more futuristic vision and reduce independence on the automobile. It is time to start changing the model. Parking is a problem here and we need to find ways to keep it out of the core. The traditional discussion about parking does not work. We need to do something to move the discussion forward and keep cars out of the core. Councilman Frisch said this will generate more parking. A guest at the Nell will fly in and utilize shuttles. It does not mean we should not look at a central lot or other options. The pushback is how much about parking and how much about the waiver. He needs to hear why some zones require a lot and some zones require none. Mayor Skadron asked about the target market and what is the car dependency factor. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 11 Councilwoman Mullins said if less parking is required for other lots we may need to talk about use. The City has a great start in the transportation mitigation plan and good ideas. She agrees with Councilman Frisch that a mid-range lodge will generate more cars than a high end one. She can’t imaging either project built without parking. Mayor Skadron asked what a pure commercial redevelopment looks like here in terms of sizing. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance 2, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO.2 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVALS, FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BASE 1 LODGE LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 730 EAST COOPER STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance 2, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, no; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #1, Series of 2015 – 232 E. Main Street (Base 2 Lodge) – Planned Development, Commercial Design, Growth Management, Historic Reviews Ms. Adams told the Council that Base 2 is located at the gas station. It is in the Main Street historic district. This went to HPC for a recommendation to Council. It is the same concept as Base 1 with different architecture. It is a three story building with 40 lodge rooms averaging 170 sq ft. There will be commercial on the ground level. They are requesting variations for height, overall floor area and lodge floor area and set back variations. They are proposing off site valet parking. The affordable housing mitigation requires mitigation between 3 and 1.75 FTE’s. They are requesting an affordable housing waiver as well as the impact fees. HPC held two hearings and voted four to two in favor with the condition to restudy the rear yard setback. They felt the project fit into the context of the neighborhood and a good transition from the historic to commercial core districts. If it were located across the street it would comply with height and floor area. Staff is recommending approval and set the public hearing for January26. Councilwoman Mullins said she has never heard a no vote on a first reading. She asked what happens if the first reading is denied. Mr. True said theoretically, for the process it is recommended the first reading consider the overall application but allow the applicant to have a formal proposal and public hearing. Under our Charter, Council has the authority to deny on first reading. Councilman Romero said it is the opportunity to make a signal. It is not the right starting point for this application. Councilman Frisch said the last time he voted no at first reading his thinking was he could not imagine it ever changing enough to vote for. He did not want to lead the applicant. Mr. True said if the application clearly does not meet the code requirements and there is substantial evidence, Council has the right to deny at first reading. They must have enough evidence on the record to justify that. He cautioned Council to make sure there was substantial evidence on the record that it did not meet the requirements to move forward. Mayor Skadron said the general belief is the applicant has the right to a public hearing. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 12 Councilman Frisch asked about the gabled roof versus the flat roof and would like to hear more about how the flat roof gets it in code but the gabled room honors the neighborhood context. Councilwoman Mullins would like more discussion on the public amenity. The rooftop is accessible to the public physically but not visually. She questions the validity of it. She also has great reservations on all the variances. She does not how the parking will work. The illustrations clarify that the land use code is good and helping to maintain the character of town. What is illustrated represents a variance in almost every aspect of the code and is not appropriate for the Main Street historic district. Councilman Daily said the principle areas to explore further are the same as for the other proposal, parking and the roof top space representing a public amenity. He shares Councilwoman Mullins concerns with the number of variances. He finds the design more appealing than Base 1. Councilman Frisch said for public amenity there is an asterisk subject to approval as an alternative method of public amenity. He asked for a briefing if there is a list of what they have traditionally been. He has no problem banking public amenity space through a fee that turns into a real public amenity. What is allowed and has it been expanded or shrunk over the past few years. Ms. Adams said she will go into that at second reading. Councilman Romero stated the totality of the variances is staggering. He asked if there is any other overlay or incentive to pursue other than the historic overlay. Ms. Adams replied no it is zoned mixed use. Councilman Romero said the FAR is one to one. His question for the applicant is how did this particular proposal come about and what led to this totality of parameters and attributes. Mayor Skadron had no additional comments. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance 1, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT – PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL, MAJOR DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, DEMOLITION APPROVAL, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVALS, FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BASE 2 LODGE LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 232 E MAIN STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance 1, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Mullins, no; Daily, yes; Romero, no; Frisch, yes, Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 13 Ordinance #41, Series of 2014 – 928 W. Hallam Street, Minor Subdivision Jennifer Phelan, community development, said the applicant is Gateway Aspen LLC with Stan Clauson as the representative. The request is to subdivide the lot into two lots, one with a single family home and one with a duplex. This is the last lot on the north side of highway 82 before crossing the bridge. Currently it is zoned R6. The lot is 16,076 square feet with a single family home. The current access is via the alley then through an adjacent property with an easement. There are two lots proposed A and B. B would be 6,000 sq ft with an access easement to benefit lot A. Lot A would be 10,076 sq ft. At first reading there were two issues. The current property has a small sliver of land with unknown ownership. The applicant tried to resolve it but to keep the project clean they are subtracting it from the subdivision. There was a question regarding if the existing vehicle easement is appropriate. The attorney has reviewed and said it is fine. Staff recommends approval with conditions. When the plat is recorded to formalize the access easement. Also to provide clear utility easements on the property when the plat is recorded. Councilman Frisch asked what happens to the 74 sq ft. Ms. Phelan stated the ordinance reads if the applicant is determined to have clear title it would go to lot B. It won’t change the lot lines but add 74 sq ft to the 6,000 sq ft lot. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Romero moved to approve Ordinance 41, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #40, Series of 2014 – Pitkin County Center Subdivision – Major Subdivision, Rezoning Justin Barker, community development, told the Council the application was submitted by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and is represented by Stan Clauson Associates. The site includes two properties located on Main Street. The first is the west property including the court house and jail. It is zoned as public. The east property includes the plaza building and zoned as commercial core. The applicant has three land use requests. The first is a lot combination. Staff is in favor with condition to document the utility easements on the subdivision plat. Staff would like the easement relocated to where the utilities are located now. There is also a rezoning request. When it becomes one lot the request is to be zoned as public. The third request is for the alley vacation and removal. It is a dead end section of the alley with an access easement. The County has been maintaining this area for 25 years. This will create a unified lot for county facilities. It will benefits the City by cleaning up the ownership. These approvals would not affect the City’s development of the adjacent lot. P&Z reviewed this with a unanimous approval. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Councilman Romero asked what the zoning for the Zupansis lot is. Mr. Barker replied it is CC and SCI. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance 40, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 14 Ordinance #39, Series of 2014 – 709 E Durant, Sky Hotel Redevelopment Councilman Daily recused himself. Jessica Garrow, community development, stated this is a continued public hearing. The applicant has made a number of changes since the last meeting. They will give their presentation then return to Staff for their comments and recommendation. John Sarpa, representing the applicant, said since December 1 they have been busy. They listened to what Council and the neighbors said. That is what is driving the changes. They have been communicating through thenewskyhotel.com website and email blasts. They have heard height is the main concern. If you can do it get rid of all variances. In addition to Council, there has been extensive discussion with the neighbors. In addition to the Little Nell and Glory Hole they have reached agreement with the Chateau Chaumont and Dumont. It is a big deal. They are still in discussions with the Alps and a single family home owner is now neutral. With John is Dave Jackson, president of north ridge capital and Sara Broughton the architect. The major areas changed include all heights being lowered to 40 feet or less. Most of the east wing is a three story building that reads as two and a half. The average height on the north side is 31 feet and on the outside about 25 feet. The western part of the building has been lowered four to five feet and is now 40 foot or lower at the mid points. There is no FAR variance. They eliminated the set back in the alley. They eliminated the elevator height variance. They dropped all free market units. It is now all lodge units. They redesigned the roof top and reduced the square footage of the roof. The public amenity space is completely met by the first and second floor lounge. They added more bunk rooms from three to six. They dropped one of the truck bay doors and were able to do that with dropping the free market. It will reduced truck traffic. They changed the roof line and architecture features. Dave Jackson, president of North Ridge Capital, thanked Council for the late nights. He complimented the professionalism of the planning staff. He is based in Washington DC but has been around for 17 years. A moderately priced hotel appeals to a younger demographic. In 1999 snowboarding was not allowed on the hills. He ended up at aspen club lodge and owned it for 14 years. He renovated it and reopened it as the Sky hotel in 2002 which led them to Kimpton. He had to bring them to town and convince them a boutique hotel is what Aspen needed. He has every intention to continue to operate the hotel and wants it to be a place where the locals go. Being welcoming to locals is a top priority. There are 75-90 employees. It has gone through three major renovations and about 8 million of capital investment. Band-Aids are not going to work anymore. The approach this time is to team up with the best local professionals and engage with the neighbors. This project is a reflection of those priorities. He hopes Council will approve as presented tonight. Sara Broughton told the Council the building now complies with the underlying zone districts and is under code. No more variances are being requested. The FAR is reduced to just under 92,000 square feet. Lodging is 80 percent of the FAR. There are 104 lodge rooms with 88 hotel, 11 fractional and 5 lock offs. There will be two affordable housing units on site. There is no more residential component. Height is at a maximum of 40 feet. There will be 54 parking spaces. It is a modern chalet style. The view from Durant and Spring shows the reduction in height. The ridge was brought down by four feet and carries across the entire façade. The view along Spring Street has Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 15 retained the sloping roof at the entry. They brought the overall height from peak down by 5.9 feet. Spring and Ute has a reduced mass and scale. The pedestrian amenity enhances access from the mountain. The second floor lounge has stone and includes glass. It is important to see what is going on in there. The view from the Aspen Alps 100 building shows the reduced east side by one floor. It is now three stories but given the grade it appears two and a half. They reduced the height well below what is allowed. The east side of the building has been reduced by one story to three. They worked with engineering and com dev on the site plan especially on the entrance sequence. All of the vehicular pull off has been moved onto the property. They also worked on the intersection of Durant and Spring. Ms. Broughton reviewed the floor plan. The biggest impact is on the first floor where they reclaimed space for additional lodge rooms and added a soundproof venue in the hotel. The second floor contains the community living room and lodge rooms. The third level is all lodge rooms. The fourth level is all lodging units with a public area and reduced roof deck. They pulled in the live activities and set back farther from the edge of the buildings. The roof deck is sunken in to the roof. The community living room has been redesign to be one of the key components of the project. Exterior materials will become interior finishes. Jessica Garrow stated there are no variances and they are meeting the parking requirements. Staff is recommending in favor of conditional use and growth management reviews. There are 11 proposed time share units. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision and planned development review. P&Z recommended four to one. There are 104 units with 117 bedrooms. The same amount of commercial space. There is a reduction of three affordable housing units. There is no free market residential component. The subgrade parking garage has 54 parking spaces but calculated at 47. They exceed the parking requirement. The Alps spaces are maintained. The public amenity space is over 12,000 square feet. The code requirement is 10 percent of the lot. This is met with the ground level and second floor space. There is an overall increase of 14 lodge units and 27 bedrooms. 82 traditional units, 6 bunk rooms and 11 fractional units. 80 percent is lodge uses and 14 is non-unit spaces. It is truly a lodge project. They are under all Floor area maximums and meet all dimensions. For commercial design it is an appropriate location for lodge massing. They support the overall direction but recommended additional study of the Aspen Alps elevations. There are significant height reductions and amended design elements. It meets the design standards. Staff supports the building. Ms. Garrow reviewed the design changes and showed slides of what it looked like before the changes and after. Staff thinks the applicant has really responded to Council and community comments. Other issues include noise. Part of P&Z’s recommendation is to complete a detailed noise study. The recommendation is the applicant needs to look at an engineered solution with a hard wired system. If that Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 16 does not work to meet the City noise requirements they need removable noise panels with a condition that they be transparent and removed within so many hours after an event. The second issue is vacated rights of way. The applicant requested an amendment to the right of way vacations ordinances from the 60’s. They have removed that request and are now recommending a code amendment. Staff supports the direction of a broader look and amending the land use code. Staff requests a continuation to February 9th. The application runs concurrently to the proposed code amendment. John Sarpa said it is a great project and the first time he can say no variances. It is definitely compatible with the neighborhood. He asked Council for their support. Mayor Skadron asked why it took 30 years. Mr. Sarpa replied the code has changed over time. The community has gotten more and more sensitive to changes in scale, mass and density. It has evolved over time. There is a heightened sense and a much higher priority. It is not an ideal hotel but they worked it out. Mayor Skadron asked Mr. Jackson the same thing. He replied this ownership is different than what they’ve seen in the past. He is an owner not a developer who will flip it. It is geared to young folks who want to have fun. Ms. Garrow entered public comment into record from Jim and Lindsey Smith. They had concerns related to the roof. Councilman Frisch said for the side with the Aspen Alps view, Staff is asking for more of a chalet but the design firm says this breaks up the mass more. He is still seeing sloping roofs and wood. Ms. Garrow said the varying roof forms feel tacked on instead of an integral form. There are five different gables and other pitches. They would prefer to get rid of one of the pitches and streamline the design. Staff thinks overall it is a good design. Ms. Broughton stated it is common to see chalets built together with multiple roofs. Councilman Frisch said it is a 60 decibel neighborhood. He prefers to stay away from individual projects and talking about noise. The code is for the neighborhood and they need to stay within it. He appreciates the tremendous amount of work. He appreciates the neighbors’ concerns but the protection is there at a City level. They are better off using the City wide noise ordinance. Councilwoman Mullins stated she is encouraged with what they are seeing tonight. She asked why they have to wait till February. Ms. Garrow said due to the noticing requirements for a code amendment. It requires a policy resolution and first reading tonight with a public hearing on February 9th. This application is dependent on the code amendment. Councilman Romero said there are no roof top mechanics. He asked if someone wants to buy all 10 fractions would you do it. Mr. Sarpa said he has not thought about it but it is not their intent. Mayor Skadron asked what is Staffs concerns adjacent to the Alps. Ms. Garrow replied it is predominantly the roof design. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 17 Mayor Skadron asked where the mechanicals are. Mr. Sarpa said there are no mechanicals on the roof but there are flues. Mayor Skadron asked what happens on the roof during winter. Mr. Sarpa said a good portion will have snow melt for safety and functionality. Mayor Skadron asked about the sound map in the packet and does it work. Ms. Garrow said that’s why they had environmental health take a look at it. Mayor Skadron asked about the three affordable housing units that were not converted to lodging. Mr. Sarpa said the requirement went down and they are still exceeding the requirement and were able to gain more hotel space. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. 1. Brian Douglas said it is a very appealing project for his demographic. It is a hotel that contributes to the community and an option for visiting friends. Maintaining reasonable options is hugely important. The worst possible scenario is a high end hotel. It is a massive improvement with this scenario over the alternative. 2. Lindsey Smith said the rooftop deck is basically unusable without some type of protection. Bathrooms are not included on rooftop deck. She agrees with the Mayor as to why did it take so long to get here. They have done a great job but there are still some things to consider. 3. Jim Smith said it is a great project. His principle concern is to make sure the expectation of the final appearance matches what is approved. The stairway should be fully enclosed. Enclosures are not bad. He is glad to hear about the snowmelt. They have to have shade on the roof. Trees won’t provide any shade. There will be something more than a trellis to allow people to use the deck. He is supportive of the project but wants to make sure we have a realistic depiction of the end result. 4. Riley Tippet said they took a good project and made it better. He hopes the Sky can continue to be the stepping stone for the next generation. It is extremely important and he supports the project. 5. Harry Peisach prepared a presentation (exhibit G6). The project is great for the City but they should be looking more at the big picture. Ski.com sells ski vacations at 120 resorts worldwide. They bring 10 thousand tourists annually. Sales are even with last year and down 50 percent from the high time in 2007-2008. Aspen business is going elsewhere. There is an accessibility issues. It is more expensive to get here. The bed base is smaller than and not as attractive as other resorts. Where is the business going. Just about everywhere else. Sky is the closest to what we need to sell the resort better. It is a beautiful contemporary design at the right price point for what this area demands. He asked Council to be progressive and approve as it. 6. David Corbin, Ski CO, said Ski Co supports the project. The Sky is in desperate need of refurbishment. It is critically important for the bed base. He was not previously concerned with height and is not concerned today. On a whole, visually the new building is a new positive and a visual improvement. He is sensitive to the noise impacts. There still is a City Code that will mandate conformance. The proposed mitigation is acceptable. At the end of the day we support the rejuvenation of the lodging base. He encouraged Council to support. 7. Maria Marrow said let’s not keep watering down the roof top deck until it is generic. It is designed to be a hotel that attracts youth at the base of the mountain. She asked Council to stop before running the heart and soul. 8. Bill Tomcich, stay aspen Snowmass, said this is the first project he can recall with no variances. He has seen many roof top decks in the City that are very tastefully done. It is a spectacular location for public amenities. Business is clearly going elsewhere. He has seen a lot of business move from Aspen to Snowmass and down valley. More people are staying down valley and commuting. He encourage Council to support and approve. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 18 9. Andy said the vitality that this project brings reminds him of late 60’s early 70’s. It is an opportunity for young people to enjoy. He hopes this comes through. 10. Skippy Mesirow said this is a community need, process of precedent, reality of the moment decision. It is a good project. Aspen is slowly losing its soul. It is not a project for the few but all of us. There are three pillars of the community, environment, built environment and social environment. It is integral to the Aspen experience. The built environment is linked to the social one. It is a good team of local developers and marketers and managers. They worked diligently with the neighbors. It sets a precedent that if you do good and right by the community you will succeed. We need to remember that we don’t live in a vacuum. Change will happen. Shape the changes that benefit the broader community. A no vote for the Sky is a yes vote for Nellification and penthousification. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Mayor Skadron asked for a response to the Smith’s comments. Ms. Broughton said there are bathrooms on the third level. Stair enclosures are not required and will not show up on this project. The trees in his diagram are not where they are proposing. Councilman Frisch said the Alps 100 view is not a breaking point. Councilwoman Mullins said it is a really complicated complex project with social and functional goals as well as aesthetic and community requirements. It needs to be recognized that they worked very hard. It would not need to be continued except for procedural reasons. The commercial design that was presented tonight is such an improvement. She disagrees with Staff on the Alps side. For the roof deck the views of the roofs from the mountain will work. It is so refreshing and fabulous to see a project with no variances. It is the biggest success. We are moving towards an Aspen vernacular architecture. Councilman Romero moved to continue to February 9th; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Resolution 4, Series of 2015 – Vacated Rights of Way - Policy Resolution Ms. Garrow said this is a code amendment proposed by the applicant. It would change the calculation section of the code. Currently, any portion of the property in a current or vacated right of way is excluded from the floor area calculation. This proposes to add an exemption that was previously in the code that was removed from the code without through thought. It would allow any vacated right of way prior to 1975 in the lodge zone be included in the calculation for floor area. The initial staff review showed it would impact five or six properties including the Sky, Alps, Little Nell, Lift 1 lodge and Aspen Mountain townhomes. It is focused in nature but appropriate and Staff recommends approval. Mr. Sarpa said they agree with staff. Square footage for any hotel is a big deal. The amount of square footage available is a big deal. It is a key to giving lodge owners flexibility and space to work with. Councilwoman Mullins asked if they are suggesting option two or if it is specific to the Sky. Ms. Garrow said it is not specific to the Sky but the lodge zone district and pre 1975 vacations. There are other things Council could consider and Staff is continuing to work with engineering on a complete list. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 19 Councilman Romero asked for more detail around potential impacts on other properties. Ms. Garrow said it is a unique district. Projects would have to come through with an amendment to the development. Councilman Romero asked about potential windfalls. Ms. Garrow replied there were not any in their initial research. She will have more information for second reading. Councilman Frisch said overall he agrees. It is the right way to look as we go forward. Mayor Skadron asked if we know the number of properties this effects. Ms. Garrow said initially the five noted. His concern is if they went with the other option and allowed for the whole zone district it would affect many properties. Mayor Skadron asked if we know what the additional square footage the proposed legislation might add to the zone district. Ms. Garrow stated she will have that for second reading. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Resolution 4, series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Ordinance 4, Series of 2015 – Rights-of-Way Code Amendment Ms. Garrow said this is the ordinance for the resolution they just discussed. Staff requests the public hearing for February 9. It is a code amendment for the calculation and measurement section. The specific language would include an exemption for vacations prior to the adoption of ordinance 11 series 1975. It is a targeted code amendment to encourage lodging. Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance 4, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 4 (SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.575 MISCELANEOUS SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance 4, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adjourn at 11:00 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 12, 2015 20