HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20150126Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
1
Annual Meeting Aspen Public Facilities Authority ...................................................................................... 2
CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION ................................................................................................... 2
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2
Agenda Addition ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Board Reports ............................................................................................................................................... 2
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 3
Resolution #19, Series of 2015 – Approving Contract for Internal Audit Services .......................... 4
Resolution #14, Series of 2015 – ARC Waterslide Replacement Contract ...................................... 4
Resolution #1, Series of 2015 – Designating the Public Place for the Posting of Notices of Public
Meetings ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Resolution #9, Series of 2015 – Updating Financial and Investment Policies ................................. 4
Board Appointments ......................................................................................................................... 4
Resolution #16, Series of 2015 – Burlingame Phase II Construction Contract Amendment ........... 4
Resolution #17, Series of 2015 – Galena Plaza Improvement Project – Construction
Administration Services .................................................................................................................... 4
Minutes – January 12, 2015 .............................................................................................................. 4
Ordinance #6, Series of 2015 – Amending the Election section of the Municipal Code regarding Mail
Ballot Elections. ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Resolution #13, Series of 2015 – Limits of Variations to Land Use Code Requirements, Policy Resolution
...................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Resolution #20, Series of 2015 – 305 S Mill Street, Temporary Use ........................................................... 8
Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 – 101 W Main Street (Molly Gibson Lodge) – Planned Development,
GMQS, and Design Review ........................................................................................................................ 11
Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper St. (Base 1 aka Domino’s) Planned Development, GMQS
and Design Review ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Action Items ................................................................................................................................................ 21
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
2
Mayor Skadron called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Daily, Frisch, Romero and
Mullins present.
Annual Meeting Aspen Public Facilities Authority
Mayor Steve Skadron called the meeting to order with members Taylor, Manning, Mullins, Daily, Frisch
and Romero present. Mr. Taylor explained the Authority was created to secure a theatre in the City. The
City leases the space to the theatre and two commercial units. When the COP is complete the City will
deed out its interest.
Councilman Frisch moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor,
motion carried. There was no unfinished or new business. Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 5:12
p.m.; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried.
CITIZEN COMMENTS AND PETITION
There were none.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilwoman Mullins said the progress on the top ten goals is good. She said we don’t want to
forget what should happen at the top of Aspen Street. The more proactive the City is the better the
outcome will be.
2. Councilwoman said we need to find a solution for the aging affordable housing and it needs to be
a high priority.
3. Councilman Romero said we need to keep affordable housing on the radar and there is still work
to be done.
4. Councilman Romero said there was great positive energy during the X Games.
5. Councilman Frisch gave a hats off to the X Games, City, Sheriff’s Department, County and Ski
co. It was a wonderful event and is imperative we have it.
6. Mayor Skadron congratulated Ski Co and ESPN.
7. Mayor Skadron thanked Shirley Ritter and the kids first team for the Wheeler symposium on high
quality early childhood experiences.
8. Mayor Skadron said the affordable housing especially at Centennial is a sensitive matter.
Council and the homeowners have to work together to have a plan to address the condition of the
property that does not pass all on to the future home owners. There is a responsibility on the part
of the home owners to be open to alternatives. This can be followed up at a work session.
Agenda Addition
Jim True, city attorney, recommended an executive session pursuant to 24.6.402.4.a for the possible
purchase of property.
Board Reports
1. Councilman Frisch stated the Nordic Council met and discussed the fat tire bike issue. They
talked about using these bikes on the trails specifically at the golf course. They discussed a trial
period and possibly a dedicated trial. There is support from staff but still issues with open space
and trails.
2. Councilman Frisch said Frontiers met and Mike Kosdrosky the new housing director attended.
Capital reserves have come up. There are 25 to 30 HOA’s that participate. It is imperative we
take care of the physical aspects of the buildings for the long haul. He said the board formed as
an off shoot of a Burlingame I budget committee and involves citizens, an APCHA
representative, and the county. They discuss long term strategic issues affecting affordable
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
3
housing. They meet at the APCHA offices the second and fourth Tuesdays and meetings are
open to the public.
3. Mayor Skadron said RFTA signed the IGA for the 2015 grand hogback service. It serves I70 to
Rifle. They also signed the draft for the rio grande corridor control plan. This gives them the
ability to maintain the bike path and keep the possible rail reactivation for future use.
4. Mayor Skadron attended the CAST meeting in Dillon. These meetings allow ski towns to
develop a closer relationship with Denver. Barry Crook sat in for part of the meeting where a
marijuana panel talked about their experiences over the last year and said it was not a big deal.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Skadron pulled Resolution 19 –approving contract for internal audit services. He stated this was
triggered because of the parking scam and is not a standard audit. It is Council’s mission to validate we
have a high degree of internal controls. It will identify any deficiencies so we can take quick action. We
expect to have the report by the end of February. It will come directly to Council. Don Taylor, finance,
said the financial advisory board will review it also. Mayor Skadron said we are expecting to see a
through vetting of what went on with parking. Steve Barwick, city manager, stated it will review the
revenue controls of finance, parking, recreation, golf, the Wheeler and utility fees. Mayor Skadron said
the City requested proposals for evaluation and received three bids. With the help of the financial
advisory board they chose Colorado Independent Consultant Network. Councilman Romero said there is
a disconnect with the time period in exhibit A. He thought the scope was to look back for several years.
Mr. Taylor said as it relates to revenue collection it will evaluate 2014 and recent transactions. For
parking, as it relates to debit and credit card issues from the old meters the internal control tests will go
back further. Councilman Romero said it can generally be described as a deep dive and testing of
historical as well as a robust forensic review of parking but more generally to examine policies,
procedures and practices across other departments. He asked if there was another department deserving a
deep dive what would it be. Mr. Taylor said they picked the biggest ones. This will affirm the new
parking system will work. Councilman Romero asked if there is evidence we have deficiencies in other
departments. Mr. Barwick stated we came up with a list and the financial advisory board hope to find
areas of improvement. Mr. Taylor said the audit firm has lots of work in this area including Adams and
Jefferson Counties and DIA. Councilman Daily said the scope of work is far broader than just parking
revenue. It involves a wide range of departments and revenues and is appropriate for what we are trying
to achieve.
Resolution 14 –ARC water slide replacement
Councilman Romero asked if we are seeing failure. Tim Anderson, recreation, stated not yet. The life of
the slide is around ten years and ours is going on twelve. We are erring on the safe side. Councilman
Romero asked about the cost. Mr. Anderson replied there is also engineering work to make sure it fits the
existing structure. He is comfortable we have the right company. Councilman Romero asked about
resurfacing the existing. Mr. Anderson said it is not possible.
Councilman Frisch said with 167,000 dollars there is some sticker shock and he wants to make sure we
aren’t getting something fancy. You don’t hear people complaining about the existing one. Mr.
Anderson said it will have a different configuration and they will reuse some of the existing structure.
There is not a lot of mark up in replacement water slides.
Mayor Skadron said they are asking to increase by $38,000. Mr. Anderson said the total is $166,900 and
there is a ten percent contingency. They will come back in the spring with a supplemental request.
Resolution 9 – updating financial policies.
Mr. Taylor said the City has adopted financial policies that lay out guidelines for finance and the City to
follow. There were some technical adjustments they wanted to make. Councilman Romero asked when
the last time staff and council had a work session on these policies. Mr. Taylor stated it has been at last
four years. Councilman Romero said it may be timely to add a work session to shed light on these
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
4
policies and more of an effort to build greater awareness. He has no direct objection or outright concern
on the changes. Mr. Taylor said he will set up a work session for the near future.
Resolution 17 Galena Plaza improvements and Resolution 16 – Burlingame II
Jack Wheeler, asset, stated we are at the point where we need to move forward. The original contract was
written to incorporate the construction management process. He will be back next week at a work
session. Councilman Romero asked if the bid proposal is consistent with the original estimate. Mr.
Wheeler said yes. Councilman Romero said at Burlingame it is the same construction manager and scope
of work. It is getting close to the end of the phase but are now asking for 95,000 dollars. He asked if it is
a time extension or scope. Mr. Wheeler replied a time extension. Councilman Romero said there are
three scope ads that were not in the original proposal of work. Mr. Wheeler said the original engagement
included a pump house but was delayed due to a tie in to a parks project. That was set aside. It could
have went under construction but it made more sense to wait and do it with parks. Now they added tying
in to the irrigation. The reuse and ditch were not available. This spring they will tie those systems in.
The infrastructure is there for the most part. The new work is tying the systems together. Archiving
became a bigger issue. Councilman Romero said that after this amendment we will still have roughly 1.1
million of uncommitted contingency. Mr. Wheeler said that is correct and this does not increase the
overall budget just reallocating. Councilman Romero said there is an added scope and we have to pay for
that. We are using the contingency but we should have known that going in. He does agree that
archiving is the most important set of investments to be made. It will benefit and mitigate some of the
things we saw in phase I.
Mayor Skadron said his primary concern is the increase of 95,000 and understanding the scope
Board Appointments
Councilman Frisch thanked everyone who applied. Terry Murray was reappointed to the Local Licensing
Authority. Jim Stark was appointed as an alternate to the Open Space and Trails Board. Kelly
McNicholas and Skippy Mesirow were appointed to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Bob Blaich
and Gretchen Greenwood were appointed to the Historic Preservation Commission. Brian O’Neil and
Richard Stettner were reappointed to the Wheeler Board. Calan Gibney was appointed to the Housing
Board.
Mayor Skadron thanked everyone who applied. There were an abundance of candidate and it was
encouraging to see new people entering the process. The competitive nature was spectacular. The degree
of preparation for P&Z and HPC was astounding.
Councilman Daily said the applicants were prepared and thoughtful and it was a thoroughly enjoying
interview process.
Councilwoman Mullins said after several periods of disappointing interest it was great to see this
involvement. She appreciated the participation.
Councilman Romero said there was representation from every spectrum on the generational scale. He
was humbled to be part of the review.
Resolution #19, Series of 2015 – Approving Contract for Internal Audit Services
Resolution #14, Series of 2015 – ARC Waterslide Replacement Contract
Resolution #1, Series of 2015 – Designating the Public Place for the Posting of Notices of Public
Meetings
Resolution #9, Series of 2015 – Updating Financial and Investment Policies
Board Appointments
Resolution #16, Series of 2015 – Burlingame Phase II Construction Contract Amendment
Resolution #17, Series of 2015 – Galena Plaza Improvement Project – Construction
Administration Services
Minutes – January 12, 2015
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in
favor, motion carried.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
5
Ordinance #6, Series of 2015 – Amending the Election section of the Municipal Code regarding Mail
Ballot Elections.
Linda Manning, city clerk, told the Council at the last meeting Council approved a resolution setting the
May general election as a mail ballot election. This pushed the nominating petition deadline forward to
February when it would typically be April. The request is to add a section to the Election part of the
Municipal Code pertaining to mail ballot elections moving the nominating petition deadline to March 9th.
Councilman Frisch asked if this date is the same for ballot issues. Ms. Manning said it depends on the
type of petition. The current petition going around is for a charter amendment so the dates are different.
Anyone interested in running for council can pick up their petition starting February third and it would be
due back to the Clerk March ninth.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance 6, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All
in favor, motion carried.
Ordinance No. 6
(Series of 2015)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER
9.10 – CONDUCT OF MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 2015 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Resolution #13, Series of 2015 – Limits of Variations to Land Use Code Requirements, Policy
Resolution
Chris Bendon, community development, told the council this is related to the charter amendment that is
out in the field. The amendment would require a citizen vote for four circumstances; if the approval adds
height, floor area, parking or affordable housing less than what is required. It includes a subset of
commercial and lodging properties east of Castle Creek. Staff did meet with the proposers of the charter
amendment. They made suggestions to the language they were receptive to. The question is whether
Council would like to initiate a code amendment. The options include initiating their own charter
amendment that would compete with the one in the fields. They could initiate a land use code
amendment. The charter amendment has a zero tolerance. Council could choose to take a wait and see
approach.
Mayor Skadron said he would like to see Council do something. Independent of the charter amendment
Council should make limits on what is approved on specific applications and direct staff to work on that.
They could initiate code amendments to curtail council’s ability to authorize excessive variations.
Councilman Daily said he agrees with the Mayor. He would like staff to recommend a sensible,
functional limits to variances. It is a smart policy to give more thought to the whole issue and is also
beneficial to the community. If Council were to adopt a series of limits it will be taken into consideration
when the blanket no proposal goes before the electorate. He likes the idea of the community having those
choices.
Councilwoman Mullins said she is not a big supporter of variances. She worries about the premise of
setting a limit. Just setting the bar a little higher we might as well stick with the current code. It is a
tough one to resolve. She supports that it would be a code amendment rather than a charter one. It is
more appropriate to have discussion with a code amendment. She wants to make sure it is something that
scrutinizes anything that deviates from the land use code.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
6
Councilman Frisch said there are a lot of moving parts. A charter amendment requires a vote of the
entire community. Code amendment can be taken by any three councilmembers. If we stick to a code
amendment by Bert’s point of view it will be easier to change. Secondly, allowances agree that it is
important for Council via the community to have some type of allowance but will become a new
maximum. The bar is only raised. It is important in some instances to have some flexibility. Third, he is
not sure the wisdom of having two charter amendments. The Charter amendment is on its way and
assuming it will get the signatures he does not want Council to have its own charter amendment. It is a
horrible thing to do. The question is how different is what is coming with what Staff is proposing. He
does not think passing a code amendment will stop enough signatures coming up. Trying to figure out if
we are doing something that is 95 percent the same. This will be voted on in May. Is the goal to get the
charter amendment pulled or come up with something until May. Mr. Bendon said independent of the
charter amendment, the question is does Council want to amend the land use code. It could look
identical, similar or different. There is some merit in amending the land use code. Look at it as two
independent efforts. Councilman Frisch said if for some reason the petition does not pass it does not
mean Council should not try to do something. Mr. Bendon said if Council feels there is a need to change
the land use code this is the opportunity to do it. There is a community of interest in doing so. It does not
have to be tonight. Councilman Frisch said both of these do not set what the numbers should be but say
stick to what is in there. He appreciates the bulk and mass and height but there is a big concern about it.
Smaller is better in this town. He is not sure parking rules are helpful to this community. In trying to
balance that, maybe we should study parking mitigation. The upside of waiting until after May is if we
put something in place what is approved is more stringent. It will become a community discussion and if
it does not pass Council will make a better decision if they wait. He is not sure if there is a lot of upside
to do it right before the election. What is the downside of waiting. Mr. Bendon said it is more of a
political dynamic. Staff does outreach and a first and second reading at the end of February or March. If
Council thinks there is an issue they should proceed to changing the land use code.
Councilman Romero said if we took up staff’s recommendation for a code amendment that establishes
limits then the question is approved on the ballot, what are the steps to adjust the land use code. Jim True
said Council would have to process a new amendment. The proposed amendment has language that says
the code needs amended to reflect the charter. Councilman Romero said with that in mind the proposed
change is void of any upper limit but tied to the land use code limits. He realizes there is some signaling
that Council is willing to do something. It may disturb the overall question by making a rush effort on the
code to put in a compromised play. It might cloud or confuse the question. If presented with a choice of
an upper limit or an absolute the consensus is pretty clear. The bias is not to confuse the issue or create
unwanted controversy. Who are we to get into the way of that will. He would like a clean question asked
and a clean set of responses.
Councilman Frisch said elected officials are judged by how long the rules stay in place. If we make
changes we will be mandated in May to reverse ourselves. How do we get across signaling that we care,
hear and are trying to manage this. He is not sure what the upside is.
Councilwoman Mullins said she is listening closely to what the community is saying. They are putting
forward an alternative to something very black and white and the charter may not be the right place for
this. It would be awkward if we pass something then had to overturn it. It may provide a choice for the
voters in a more appropriate way. Councilman Romero said there is some strength in that. It is a
proactive measure to move it much closer to what is being asked.
Councilman Frisch said it is a fairly small downside to reverse. A charter amendment might be going too
far. This is an alternate. Voting no on an amendment may not mean we don’t want a higher level of
control. We can use this to start the dialogue.
Councilman Daily said he agrees with Councilwoman Mullins. He does not mind the idea of a charter
amendment if that is the way the community wants to go. If we can provide alternatives it may be worth
exploring.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
7
Mayor Skadron said he is not interested in the politics around this. He is concerned that this community
is cared for. The charter is no place for land use decisions. That is the decision before the Council. What
is being built is the result of infill and a porous land use application. This council has addressed that. It is
based on the failed attempt of the previous council to issue a building moratorium. We will be arguing
against a defacto moratorium that argues against development. There are some times when development
requires a variation. A charter amendment will result in this town becoming Vail. Monotonous building.
Is the charter the right place for a land use amendment.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Phyllis Bronson stated her colleagues have been collecting a lot of signatures and have more than
enough to get on the ballot. The anger in the community did not happen for no reason. She is
tired of having to walk by buildings that make us feel crazy. To say the home rule charter is a
bad idea I disagree with that. It would supersede anything Council would try to do at the last
minute. The fact is we have been asking for rational discourse as to what is happening
downtown. She is tired of seeing bad decisions get made by lawsuits and watching this town
disintegrate into poor buildings. Mayor Skadron said a charter amendment has ramifications that
will happen far beyond this. Ms. Bronson said she is tired of it. Now it has become stricter and it
does not mean good projects can’t happen. Get good projects happening that don’t mess with
what town should look like. Mayor Skadron said the art museum could not be built today. Ms.
Bronson said she is tired of seeing everything slip through the cracks. Mayor Skadron said he is
concerned ultimately with the health of the community. This eliminates possibility. Ms. Bronson
said we are not at a point where we can say let’s have a careless community. Don’t think you can
propose to make exceptions when the reality is economy lodges will bring cars in to town. Mayor
Skadron said we are seeing a pattern of applications abiding to the land use code and Council is
enforcing it. Ms. Bronson said people don’t blame this council but it was a turning point when
we lost the sense of what Aspen is supposed to look like. Mayor Skadron said he doesn’t need a
charter amendment to stand for that.
2. Mitch Hass said a charter amendment does not change for a little while but permanently. It is a
simply awful public policy. Council should adopt some code amendments that get vetted through
a public process. The public needs something to compare what they are voting on. Just getting
signatures does not mean there is an overwhelming sense of support. How did this happen. Ask
the guy circulating the petition who was in charge.
3. Marcia Goshorn said she does not see the charter amendment as a threat. If it goes through it
means it should be able to streamline applications. It is not to the advantage of the developer
when everything is a moving target. A charter amendment does not take away the right to do a
variance but if there is one it needs to be justified to the community. Through the years more and
more developments come in with 100 percent more than they want. It makes no sense it takes as
long as it does to get approval. Council has the ability to change the code.
4. Basil Falcone said he has been a resident for 42 years. When you live in towns with 150 and 200
years of historic preservation new developers are bringing an architecturally contemporary look
that is not fit for this town. Towns like this have ordinances that comply with strict HP codes. It
is in Council’s hands to sense what is happening in the town relating to contemporizing the town.
5. Ziska Childs said it is a tough one but she looks at a larger picture. I like a republic. Democratic
republic works for me. The proposed charter amendment slices every one of council’s head off.
It is a vote of no confidence. It leads down the road of making everything a public vote. It is a
horrible idea. Keep Aspen Aspen sounds good. People forget that if you take a snapshot of
Aspen in the past it did not stay in a bottle. It changes a lot. It is a tricky thing of growth and
community. A charter amendment is not the way to go. Shooting something else in on the same
ballot will confuse the issue. We have to have a good frank honest and open this is what this
really means conversation.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comments.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
8
Councilman Frisch asked about the next steps and timing. Mr. Bendon said they will come back with an
ordinance for first and second reading. First reading at the end of February and March ninth for the
public hearing. Councilman Frisch said it is not about being an elitist elected official but a democracy.
He would rather repeal something six weeks after it passed but allow for a healthy discussion. He
welcomes the process of seeing what Staff can come up with.
Councilman Romero said Councilwoman Mullins made the best appeal and he’s willing to support it. It
is the proper and proactive choice. There will be a question on the ballot regarding the charter. The best
thing is to give a good qualified choice. He supports going forward with the policy resolution.
Mayor Skadron stated he concurs with Ziska’s comments.
Councilman Frisch asked if there is a way to have a public dialog besides one or two meetings. He would
support it if there are forums to talk about this. Mayor Skadron said it has to be someone outside Council.
Councilwoman Mullins stated she feel strongly about this that it is not appropriate for the charter. The
charter is defining a representative government and this is counter to that. She thinks we need to proceed
and is willing to see what staff comes up with. She agrees with Councilman Frisch that we need to
educate and get it out there what it means if it is part of the charter or part of the land use code.
Councilman Daily said he agrees with Council. Council should see if we can’t explore or develop some
proposed changes we feel are long past due. If it doesn’t go far enough that’s fine. It is an opportunity to
look at things.
Mayor Skadron thank the public for the comments. It is a principle of representative democracy and a
degree of intolerance here of other views. We should never be intolerant of other views. The current
process preserves these values and small town character.
Phyllis’s comments asking to have perspective about growth heard and the result of not being listened to
is the result of what has happened in the core. They are asking for four criteria and the pendulum has
swung so far the other way there needs to be a way for people to be heard.
Councilman Romero move to approve Resolution 13, Series of 2015; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
All in favor, motion carried.
Resolution #20, Series of 2015 – 305 S Mill Street, Temporary Use
Sara Nadolny, community development, stated this is a 180 days temporary use permit for the Grey Lady
restaurant to allow for a custom fabric tent until April 15. It is approximately 800 square feet and covers
the public amenity space. They received a tent permit earlier this year and the tent has not been removed.
The request is inconsistence with the criteria. The restaurant is located in the historic commercial core
district. The code no longer permits fabric or plastic structures. In the past Council has had limited
tolerance for these requests. The applicant would avoid going through design review and mitigation fees
to increase the commercial space. It is not about liking or disliking the tent but going through the process.
Staff approved a seven day tent permit. In 2013 HPC gave approval for the trellis over the amenity space
that did allow for a retractable awning. That might provide a more permanent solution. As proposed,
Staff is recommend denial. If Council chooses to approve, Staff has provided options.
Ryan Chadwick, owner, showed photos of the space. Before the tent structure he showed a photo of lots
of snow. Then one of them removing snow by hand since equipment can’t go under trellis space. He
showed a photo during the tent permit process. The tent has removable sides that zip and roll up with a
cover across the top. There are heaters inside but they have not been on since January first or second.
They are asking if they can continue to use the space and are open to suggestions. Ian Perry, manager,
said they look for Councils comments to come up with a solution to have usable space instead of a snowy
lot. They suspended use after the tent permit was up. They are looking to only use the space for a limited
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
9
time of the day. They have patio seating during the summer. They are looking to keep the business alive
and it is very small inside the restaurant.
Avery Nelson, attorney, said in the original HPC memo from Amy it was contemplated that the trellis
should not have a roof but a comment that the trellis does not provide any shelter from the weather. They
are hoping for a temporary solution and work to develop a more permanent solution. They do not know
the destiny of the space.
Councilman Frisch said in the summer it will not be a problem. Any restaurant would like some summer
rain protection. What about the mitigated space. Mr. Bendon said they expect applicants to go through
full HP review including parking and affordable housing mitigation. Putting up a plastic building is a
way around it and an inappropriate use of the temporary use code. They are certainly able to go to HPC
for approval. The mitigation is something everyone else is expected to provide. Councilman Frisch
asked if it has not operated since January first. Mr. Perry said they suspended use and put up the public
notice. Councilman Frisch asked if it was approved are we expecting to see more restaurants showing up
here. Mr. Bendon said there are a lot of folks in town who would like more space for patrons. Given the
location and size this is hard not to see. In the past Council has had a smaller tolerance for these things.
Mr. Perry stated this is leased restaurant space. It is a waste that a corner of Aspen remains snow storage.
Councilman Frisch asked has anyone come up with an aesthetic solution. Mr. Bendon said he is not
concerned about the aesthetics but HPC does not like going through the rigors of development and having
plastic do dads stuck to them seven months of the year.
Mr. Perry said they have no intention of using it on a daily basis but for overflow. The grey fabric
matches the paint on the trim. Councilman Romero asked what the seat count is absent the tent. Mr. Perry
replied 68. They could accommodate 20 to 30 with it but it is more for large format parties. Councilman
Romero asked when the lease ends. Mr. Perry replied September.
Councilwoman Mullins asked what the next step is if it is denied. Mr. Bendon said to remove the
structure and go back to the trellis or go to HPC. Councilwoman Mullins said having been on HPC she is
very sensitive to things that would show up without their approval. HPC is the proper way to get
approved and that is what you need to do.
Mayor Skadron said should Council allow this is there a degree of injustice to the previous operator who
was not allowed this benefit. Mr. Bendon replied maybe, but you could say that about anyone who came
up with an idea. Councilman Frisch said he is worried about the other restaurants showing up here with
good ideas. Mr. Bendon said you need to consider how other people might have the same idea.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Peter Fornell stated he supports the temporary use of the structure through the end of the ski
season. There is a tremendous burden on this community to feed all the tourist here. It is critical
to the tourist experience they are able to have a meal. He has lots of friends who have remarked
on the difficulty on getting a reservation. It is short sided to be concern more with the physical
aspect for the near term over servicing of our tourist base. We should be thinking about having
the properties within the commercial core be profit centers. The stand point of concern about the
requirements for parking and housing would be good if we were talking about allowing this to
occur for another five years. The benefit of 30 or 40 places for someone to eat and generate sales
tax is more important than if it should exist for a few months. Hard to ask them to make a
dramatic step forward in improvement when the future use is potentially questionable.
2. Marcia Goshorn said she would like to see it improved. If they did not come in there would be an
empty space. Ryan is a young entrepreneur who stepped up to the plate and did it. It did go
through HPC. This looks better than any of the construction sites we currently have. All they put
on was the roof. Mayor Skadron said this request is inconsistent with the review criteria and
Council should waive it. You just sat here in support of the most stringent charter amendment.
Ms. Goshorn said this is temporary and the charter amendment will affect this town forever.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
10
3. Andrew Sandler stated Ian and Ryan are innovative. He owns Grey Lady in New York City. He
is constantly returning to Aspen to do something innovative. There is not a lot of profit in what
they are doing. To take it away limits sales tax revenue and them to be good at what they are
good at. Give it to everybody else. We are losing the town to Vail. The same people keep
coming here. 18 to 35 year olds can’t afford to come here. All the money of operators go to rent.
Councilman Frisch said it is a fair comment to do it to everyone else. He has a hard time
supporting this and not all of it. Mr. Sandler said it is not allowing the private sector to thrive but
making things harder to do. Trust the citizens. The private sector does a great job of regulating
itself. If it’s not good people won’t go. There are so many wonderful restaurants we miss. Why
aren’t they here. We can’t afford to keep them going and should be allowed to make money.
Mr. Perry said they don’t want to be non-compliant.
Councilman Frisch asked how the temporary use came about. Ms. Nadolny said she met with Mr.
Chadwick in November and initially discussed a longer use solution. At the time he decided on seven
days. Councilman Frisch asked if Staff sees a solution to turn this into a more permanent thing. Mr.
Bendon said they could go down the path of a policy discussion but that would not help them tonight.
Frankly, to get approvals is not a small task. We see this as a way to get around that. It is tough for Staff
to answer questions from other folks as to why can’t we do that. Mr. Perry said the lease is only till
September and he could understand this concern if they ask for this again. Mr. Chadwick stated after the
seven days tent permit they said they would like to revisit the temporary use permit. Ms. Nadolny said
she pre-apped the applicant for a longer use permit and was told they did not want to go longer. Mr.
Chadwick said he would have done the temporary use right away.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilwoman Mullins said they recently spent over an hour discussing land use regulations. There was
quite a bit of public comment on eliminating any kind of variance. She can’t support the request because
it goes against the process. They applied for and received a seven day temporary use permit. There is a
whole process to extend that. Mr. Bendon said they applied for a temporary use and council can grant
that for 180 days. It is a work around of the code.
Councilman Romero said he is sincerely empathetic to the situation of making it work. It is tough in
Aspen. He is compelled to consider the extension of the new temporary request. There is a danger of
precedence. The flip side is it might be a good problem. That corner has not performed that well. He
could support this. This is a shiny example of a temporary use and not life alternating to Aspen. What
happened to creativity.
Councilman Daily said he agrees with Councilman Romero. It is not consistent with the code. He trusts
their intention and is good with it through April.
Councilwoman Mullins said she stands by what she said.
Councilman Frisch said as much as I want you to succeed the amount of people who are going to come
forward and cry foul is big. He appreciate everyone’s heart but this will be opening up a can of worms.
If we want to allow 15 to 20 other restaurants to come forward it might be a way to keep the town small.
Mayor Skadron said the request is an extended temporary use to maintain the fabric through April 15th.
What happens when the permit expires. Mr. Bendon said they would expect all the materials come down.
Mayor Skadron said he will support it if it is conditioned that it comes down April 15th and adhere to the
approval process from this point on. This is one time for the temporary use. He said he takes offense to
Mr. Sandler’s aggressive comments. This town is a success for committed people who believe in
standards.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
11
Mr. Bendon added one additional condition that it be inspected and the snow removal practices reviewed
by the chief building official.
Councilman Romero moved to approve Resolution #20, series of 2015 with conditions; seconded by
Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Mullis, no; Romero, yes; Frisch, no; Daily, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 – 101 W Main Street (Molly Gibson Lodge) – Planned Development,
GMQS, and Design Review
Sara Adams, community development, told the council they are reviewing planned development,
subdivision and growth management. The applicant has been responsive to Staff and HPC and she
thanked them. The lodge is located on Main Street and occupies two lots. The lodge is zoned mixed use
and a portion is R6 and located on Hopkins. There is a proposal to merge the lot. It is a landmark that
was created through a historic lot split. Staff is excited about the project. It is a lodging project. It will
move all the lodge use onto Main Street. There will be two single family homes on Hopkins. It was
approved five to one at HPC. The lodge will be 68 rooms with 15 new. The rooms will be approximately
300 square feet. There will be one affordable housing unit on the ground floor. With the merge, the Main
Street parcel will be around 18,000 square feet. Staff is supportive of the architectural style and it meets
the design guidelines. They are meeting the allowable height. Staff is also supportive of the setback
variations requested along the alley and Main Street. The applicant is requesting some floor area
variations including one for cumulative floor area. With the mixed use zone it allows for 18,000 to
22,500 through special review. The request is just under 27,000. If the request was considered as a
whole they would be allowed 27,000 square feet floor area for lodging. Staff feels it is the most
appropriate design and they are supportive of the floor area variances. HPC and Staff fell it will be
exciting and contribute to the context. Along Hopkins it is a 9,000 square foot lot. Staff is supportive of
the change to residential use and the architectural style. Staff supports the requested variances. Looking
at the project as a whole they would be allowed 12,700 for the free market residential. Using the
underlying zone district it is about 4,000. There is a big difference with the underlying zone district.
There are some historic landmarks and larger single family homes nearby. They are allowed to maintain
a deficit of parking. There is currently no onsite parking. All of the parking is in the right of way and
they don’t count as spaces they would have to replace. The lodge is required to have 7.5 spaces and they
are providing 12. They are meeting the single family home requirement with two spaces each. Staff is
supportive of the planned development, project review, lot merger and growth management amendment
to remove the free market residential unit in the lodge building. The applicant is mitigating through
housing credits. Because the vacant lot was a landmark and zoned historic Staff would like the landmark
status to go away when the plat is filed.
Mr. Bendon said the applicants approach to this project and their experience has been a 180 degree
difference to the Hotel Aspen project. It has been a positive responsive approach with Staff and the
review boards.
Councilman Frisch said taking off the historic aspect is serious and fairly rare and asked if it happens
often. Ms. Adams replied this type of scenario does not happen often. It is typically seen in the west end.
HPC has prevue over what happens on this vacant lot.
Councilwoman Mullins asked to clarify the FAR calculations. Ms. Adams said the floor area variances
are within the allowances if the project came in as mixed use lodging on both lots. The cumulative max
would be 27,000 if using the mixed use underlying zoning. Councilwoman Mullins asked if we are
counting some of the FAR twice. Councilman Frisch said if this was one lot regardless it could be 39,000
of bulk and mass. Ms. Adams said it is mixed use and R6. If using mixed use it is a 1 to 1 or 27,000
max. Councilman Frisch said he is happy to look at it as one lot. They could allow up to 27,000 in
lodging and up to 12,000 in residential when they are only asking for 8,000. It is 4,000 less than the
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
12
maximum. Ms. Adams said there is a cumulative maximum of the total amount on the parcel and within
that the categories of uses. It does not mean adding up all the maximums to get to the cumulative.
Mayor Skadron said we are dealing with R6, mixed use, lodge and free market residential. Ms. Adams
stated she applied the lodge preservation allowances and applied the different aspects of the code and
what they are asking for is less than what they could do if they did it as a whole. Mayor Skadron asked
how does staff prioritize what category to use. Ms. Adams said the lodge preservation overlay provides
some flexibility and they are required to go through a planned development. They are required to go
through the planned development because of the lodge. Mayor Skadron asked what district is applied to
the free market. Ms. Adams said along Hopkins it is R6. Using the LP overlay the free market is a
percentage of the lodging. It is 60 percent for this project or 12,700 square feet. The underlying is 4,000
and the LP says 12,700 and they are at 8,000.
Councilman Daily asked what your interpretation of the neighborhood context is. Ms. Adams said they
did a great job architecturally. The increase in the side yard set backs and the reduction in site coverage
were positive changes. They are great additions to what is currently there. HPC varied two residential
design standards for each house. Councilman Romero said the LP overlay is what allows those variances
to be entertained in exchange for preserving the lodge. Councilwoman Mullins said the residential for
that neighborhood are too large and too tall. The site coverage is too great. It is a neighborhood of very
small modest homes with generous front and side yards. The two proposed houses are quite a bit larger
than the surrounding residential units. They probably don’t have to go down to 4,000 but need decreased
in size. They meet the height limit but are squeezed into the lots.
Michael Brown, owner, stated he is excited about this project. It is a plan that is sensitive to the
community and surroundings. It will be an asset to the community for years to come. He thanked staff
for working closely with him. The enhancements benefited the project. They incorporate community
sensibilities into the plan. It is a locally owned hotel. He has been doing business here for 15 years. He
owned the Molly since 2007 and lived there briefly. It is a very special place. He has continually
invested back in to the hotel.
The density is consistent with the small town character while revitalizing the community. Currently there
are 53 50 year old lodging units to be replaced with 68 rooms. Rooms will be between 302 to 360 square
feet. It will be affordable for Aspen. There will be exceptional community space. There was a
residential unit in the lodge building that was approved by HPC but it was removed and replaced with
four lodging units. The two residential homes on Hopkins enhance the neighborhood. They meet the
onsite affordable housing requirement. The Main Street corridor is exciting. The current hotel is on the
lot line and this will provide a set back and landscape buffer off of Main Street. There are no request for
fee, affordable housing or parking waivers. It fully conforms to the height of the zone districts. They
have done the most they can with the hotel. They hear from their guests that they like congregating
together in a shared communal space. The key design driver is to respect the rich history of the hotel. It
is a showcase for local artists and businesses. They have a great relationship with the historical society.
They like to do locally sourced products in the hotel. They were an early adopter of their own bike fleet
before we-cycle. There is a station across the street. They agreed to purchase a we-cycle station and
provide guests with passes. They give employees bus passes to encourage them not to drive. They have
an airport shuttle.
John Cottle said he wanted to take Michael’s experience and community and embody it in the
architecture. The guest rooms are small and smart. The key to being affordable is the building needs to be
efficient. There are a variety of room sizes and community space. Other public areas include the front
porch. There will be seven tables and residential in scale. There is a meeting space down stairs that will
seat 60. There will be a Molly Gibson history corner. The vision is to connect the guest to the rich Aspen
history. It will create vitality off of Main Street. They will work with the historical society to curate it. It
will enrich the guest experience and greater visitation to the historical society. They are pulling the hotel
back to make room for the sidewalk. It will be replaced with a landscape buffer and eight foot wide walk
way. They worked with parks on this. They pulled back the building from 5 to 15 feet.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
13
The proposed materials are a vertical wood siding and paneled metal siding. The residences are
improving upon the existing and do fit the neighborhood. The houses are comprised of four elements
including the bedroom, stair tower, entry and gabled roof. The houses comply with the residential design
standards. Changing from a hotel to a residence is a big deal. Hopkins has a varied context of buildings.
The new Victorian next door is big and dense. The Holiday House is 65 feet wide and three stories.
Stan Clauson said the entire area is covered by a LP PUD and it is important to consider. Even though
there is underlying zoning the LP determines what is possible. Questions from first reading include what
are the variances requested. There are minor reductions of side yard setbacks for residential on both
sides. The LP specifies 60 percent free market as an incentive. The applicant is only requesting 38
percent. The existing setbacks are being increased. They did public outreach door to door. The next
question was about the nature of the relationship of hotels and cars. He said some guests will bring cars.
The current lodge use accommodates vehicles. There is access to parking within the neighboring blocks
and 12 proposed spaces more than meet the requirement. The Molly encourages being car free in Aspen.
It is walking distance to the commercial core and there is a bus stop in front. Bikes and a shuttle service
are provided.
The single family residential fits well into the neighborhood. They are providing the largest set backs on
the block for both faces. The gabled heights are no taller than those of adjacent residences. They made
modifications during the HPC review and followed staff recommendation. They decreased the floor area
of the single family by 1,000 square feet. It allowed for the additional width of the setbacks. They go to
the AACP often for guidance. There is a City of Aspen top ten goal to implement an incentive program
and they have not taken advantage of the full incentives. They voluntarily reduced the amounts. During a
clicker session after the withdrawal of the incentive ordinance 80 percent agreed the city should allow
free market residential and 65 percent said the city should be aggressive in replacing lost units.
The LP zone district purpose statement encourage development that is compatible with the neighborhood.
Mayor Skadron asked why they replaced the free market residential with additional rooms. Mr. Brown
said to create a pure lodge. Mayor Skadron asked what is the business advantage of a pure lodge. Mr.
Brown said they see the value of not having an owner in there. It is also important to the community.
Mayor Skadron said in terms of numbers, a penthouse would get four to five million dollars. Why walk
away from that. Mr. Brown said they went with volume of rooms. As proposed it will return a profit.
The two single family homes are important. A stand-alone lodge on its own would never work. Mayor
Skadron asked about the side yard set backs for the residential component. Mr. Clauson said they are
required to have a ten foot setback. There is seven feet between each unit and the property line. That is a
greater setback than any that exists on that block face. On a 6,000 square foot lot the minimum is five
feet. For this size lot it is ten feet. If you were to do ten it would create a building that is too narrow for
an appropriate interior design.
Councilman Frisch said if they were looking at one lot it would be 12,000 residential and 27,000 lodge.
How does site coverage work. Ms. Adams replied only in R6 not mixed use. The set backs are different
in mixed use than R6.
Mayor Skadron said the justification for the side yard setback is it is not as bad as the neighbors.
Councilman Romero said they are getting closer back to the original intent of set backs. They need to
look at the totality of the circumstances. The guidance of the LP encourages and ties back to the AACP
to provide some mechanism for lodge operators to enhance or increase lodge rooms.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Sonja McCarthy stated she has lived here for 15 years and is a neighbor to the Molly. She
appreciates all the hard work and thoughtful planning. It is a marked improvement. They have
been a pleasure to work with and she is pleasantly surprised with the plans. She is excited for the
potential changes and they are long overdue. She read a comment from Kristi Cavanaugh who
said the charm and soul of the community is what makes us tick and a healthy vibrant place to
live. The Moll Gibson encompasses all the right pieces of a successful build.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
14
2. Kelly Murphy from the historical society said they typically don’t take a position. She is not here
to do that. The Molly is a terrific community member and partner. They care very much about
the community. They are very forthcoming and have been very active about seeking input.
3. Nicole Gogolak, historical society board, said she is an artist, educator and mom. She is on the
board of the Wyly art center. She appreciates they are showcasing local artists in the hotel. She
is a hockey, lacrosse, dance and ski mom. They are always inviting people to this community to
compete and a new hotel would be a great place for parents to come in with their kids. It is an
asset to our community.
4. Roberto Soria said he is a 40 year resident and has seen many changes in hotels and the town. He
is excited for the new hotel and supports the new project. It will better serve the guests and a
newer place to work. It is an old hotel and there is only so much you can do to make it work and
be affordable.
5. Tom Brinkmeyer said he walks Main Street all the time. It is the worst side walk on Main Street.
He was sold on the new sidewalk.
6. Lex Tarumianz said he is a 19 year local. This new project with 63 new rooms will be a great
thing for town. He wants council to think long and hard about the two homes in back. It will be
very well done and in character with the neighborhood. It is a great thing for the neighborhood.
7. Courtney Shore, Michael’s fiancé said she is a school teacher and artist. The lodge is not the
concern but the two houses. You can’t make everyone happy. She would like to have this project
approved tonight. It is great for the community.
Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing.
Councilman Daily said it is a very thoughtful proposal. He appreciates the balance and hard work that
has gone in to it. I can feel it. It is a very successful evolution. It is important to the community. He
likes the balance. The single family homes don’t bother him. They fit the context of the neighborhood.
He is quite comfortable with the way the homes are designed. He thanked them for the special effort. It
is a benefit to the entire town.
Councilman Romero said the process is exemplary. It is a testimony to have half a dozen positive
comments. It is a critical aspect and is refreshing. He recognizes the amount of heavy lifting and work.
They are building relationships that don’t occur over night. There is clearly a lot of thought in the design
product. It is conforming to the community values but meets the investment criteria. The LP overlay
affords this broader conversation where we can find a way to meet our goals while being respectful of
yours. I think your goals are the same as ours. Coming in this evening I had a negative bias around the
houses but now have a better understanding of the context and fit. He is willing to support it this evening.
He asked about the commitment to We-Cycle. Mr. Brown said they are purchasing an additional station
to be located at the discretion of We-Cycle. Their guests will receive passes and can utilize the station
across the street. Councilman Romero said he is reminded of the broader community conversation over
the magnitude of cars. There is going to be a broader policy level discussion about this. All of us need to
pitch in. The tone and tenor is refreshing and it compels him to respond in the same manner.
Councilman Frisch said the houses fit right in. He appreciates some of Councilwoman Mullins concerns.
The houses do fit and the lodging component is great without any free market. They can operate a
moderate lodge with not as much parking as what one thinks. There were not a lot of neighbor
complaints and no letters with concern. He is taking that as broad community support to see the
application approved. Mayor Skadron asked if he has any concern over the excess floor area.
Councilman Frisch said this is one unit of land that is part of lodge, free market and affordable housing.
In context of that there is an extra 4,000 square feet of residential that could be put there. It is a good
ratio of free market to lodging. The neighbors appreciate that. It is a healthy, fair and balanced way to
look at it.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
15
Mayor Skadron stated he wants Council to look at the review criteria. Councilman Frisch said he
supports Staff point of view.
Councilwoman Mullins said she has been on HPC and Council and has never heard such overwhelming
support of a project. It is well deserved. She completely supports the parcel one development. The
sidewalk is scary. She has reservations with the residential. The applicant did make a good case for the
diversity and range of set backs. It is a really compelling reason to approve private residents to support
the lodge. Floor area is a good example of how to use that incentive to make the lodge work. She wishes
the residential was a bit smaller but the tradeoff and public support she can support.
Mayor Skadron said regarding excess lodge floor area, 18,000 is allowable 26,000 is proposed. 18,000 is
based on parcel one not the entire parcel. Ms. Adams said the 60 percent is the incentive for the free
market residential which is an incentive of the LP.
Mayor Skadron said the application needs to require three sets of criteria including PUD, subdivision and
growth management. He can’t find that the application fails to satisfy those. He is supportive since it
satisfies the criteria.
Ms. Adams said there is a typo in exhibit A. She would like to amend exhibit A with tables one and two
of the staff memo.
Councilman Daily move to adopt Ordinance #3, Series of 2015 with amendments; Seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Romero, yes; Mullins, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Ordinance #2, Series of 2015 – 730 E. Cooper St. (Base 1 aka Domino’s) Planned Development, GMQS
and Design Review
Sara Adams told the Council the property is located on the corner or Cooper and Original and is zoned
commercial lodge with a planned development overlay. The project is required to go through the planned
development process to establish dimensional requirements using the commercial lodge zone district as
the underlying zone. The reviews include planned development, growth management and commercial
design. The proposal is to redevelop the existing site with a three story lodge building with commercial
on the ground level and accessory commercial in the basement. It will have 44 lodge rooms that average
177 square feet. There are also plans for a publicly accessible roof top deck. The maximum height for a
commercial building in this zone is 40 feet. The proposed height is 35.5. The code allows exemptions to
height for elevators and stairs. The bathrooms fall into the roof top amenity height exemptions. The
applicant is requesting a variation of two feet for the bathrooms. They meet the floor area requirements,
set backs, lodge floor area and commercial floor area. Council is asked to establish the parking
requirements through the planned development process. The applicant proposes offsite parking. The
parking requirement is based on the number of lodge rooms. The proposal is for 44 rooms and the code
does not provide incentives for high density lodges. The requirement is half a space per lodge room. The
code does not differentiate between luxury lodge or economy lodge as it does in other sections. The
applicant is committed to offsite parking. The requirement is 25.5 spaces. The applicant is comfortable
with 13. There is a proposal for a valet service and a request to possibly use the Rio Grande garage. The
ordinance specifies the parking is to be off site. Since first reading the applicant has been working with
We-cycle. The applicant is proposing to purchase the station near the site as well as one at the Rio
Grande garage.
The affordable housing mitigation is between .099 and 1 FTE’s. Based on average size of room it brings
the mitigation down. Council is asked to establish the generation rate. In this zone it is .6 employees
generated per lodge room. This is based on the level of service provided. For LP lodges it is half or .3
employees per room. The code recognizes the level of service differentiation. The mitigation would be
for .099 or 1 FTE. The applicant is requesting a waiver of that.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
16
Staff is supportive of the commercial design. The large windows seem to make a lot of sense when
talking about a small room. They feel comfortable the design adds to the character of the town. It is
based on traditional structures and is an appropriate transition between commercial and residential areas.
For the public amenity space it is a complicated corner. It is required in the commercial lodge zone
district. It is at the corner of highway 82 and faces the city market loading dock. The purpose of public
amenity is to create a vital pedestrian environment. The code recognizes not all properties can meet the
requirement on site at grade. It provides for other options including off site, cash in lieu or an alternative
method. You can meet the intent but do it in a different way. The applicant has proposed an interior
court yard. They change the design through the P&Z process to include a takeout window. Staff is
supportive of the commercial design. There was a tree removal permit that was denied. There is a
cottonwood tree in right of way and the root system would not survive the construction. The permit was
denied by parks and is in Councils lap with the appeal. There are impact fee waivers requested totaling
$40,000 for parks and transportation. P&Z heard the project over three meetings and voted four to two
for the planned development and growth management. They recommended denial for the commercial
design. They struggled with the architecture and public amenity space. Staff is supportive of the
proposal. It is a small lodge room project with no free market residential. There is a huge community
benefit here and clear areas of the AACP that are met. Staff is very excited about the project and what it
contributes to the neighborhood. The review criteria are met and staff recommends approval.
Mark Hunt, owner, thank Council for the opportunity to present. He said he raised a lot of eyebrows
when he started buying properties downtown. He made a commitment that it was not just the portfolio.
He wanted to make a difference and give something back. What better place to start than affordable
lodging. He thought they are going to love this. It squeaked through even to present it. This need to
benefit all of us. It is not the highest or best use. It is not the reason why he bought these sites. He is not
looking at it as a developer but part of the solution. He is focused on providing rooms, making them
affordable and marketed towards the next gen. Specifically for affordability, the next gen and being in
town. Base 1 is almost double the amount of rooms of the other applications combined.
Base – the name made sense for base of the mountain and base camp. It was inspired from the mining
culture. Aspen is year round. This opens the door to the community. It wants to be different by design.
It is a very small space designed to be very social and communal. People don’t come to Aspen to spend
time in their room. The food and beverage component is communal and social. It is rustic authentic
space. There is a court yard area and restaurant with local operators. It is not catered towards the visitors
but to the community. He is keeping Sammy the barber there. He used a historical society photo as
inspiration.
The design is bold. It is at the gateway coming in. He likes the story behind it that mining created Aspen.
This location is where coal was sold and a lumber yard. It is a contemporary approach yet authentic.
Parking is an issue and is important. He has been clear that he’s never said he is not providing parking he
is just not doing so on site unless he does something different with the building. He asks Council and the
community to look at parking as anything else, an elevator or HVAC. He has to provide a viable option
to park cars and asked for a chance to provide it. He suggested using the rio grande parking garage. It is
a City asset subsidized by the community. The lodge benefits the entire community by using the parking
structure. He would like council to keep an open mind. He is not asking for a parking waiver. He has
confidence he can find another solution. As for number of spots, by code he needs 26 spots. The
practicality of that number is hard to understand. If he were over a block it would be zero. There are 44
rooms and a 60 percent market for occupancy. At any given time there are 26 rooms leased. The market
is 30 to 35 percent of people who will drive. He agrees more people drive to an affordable lodge, 50
percent or 13 spots. He would like Council to consider 13 spots. It is more appropriate and more
realistic.
He stated he owes justification for asking for fee waivers. The fees are approximately 200,000. It will
not make or break the lodge. Affordable lodging is difficult to build. You are already penalizing yourself
for building. Affordable lodging and housing are pretty similar. The difference is there is an affordable
housing program but not an affordable lodging one. He believes in the affordable housing program and
has participated in it. From an investment standpoint it is compelling and a real issue a 200,000 one time
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
17
waiver. It would bring in 500,000 to the community a year in tax base. It is significant and a great
investment but he leaves the decision up to council.
We keep talking about the public amenity space and if we can use the roof. We kept going back to P&Z.
We couldn’t imagine why anyone would want to spend time on the corner. That is the language that was
in the book. We reached out to the neighbors. He asked if he were to agree to redesign the corner with a
picnic table would anyone use it. The neighbors thought it sounded silly. He does not care if the roof is
counted. The entire building is the public amenity space. There will be a restaurant, bowling alley, and
lounge. The limelight is Aspen’s living room. It is a public amenity. He believes Base is a public
amenity. There is a need to bring the public inside and wants it to be part of our everyday lives. It should
be Aspens spare bedroom, kitchen and game room. He is excited about it and is not here as a developer.
It does not make the most business sense. He believes he is giving something back. There are better
things he can do with the properties than affordable lodging.
Mitch Hass said he is happy to talk to the code but does not want that to get in the way of Mark’s story.
If the community doesn’t want it, Mark will not provide it. If everyone can embrace it it is fantastic.
Mayor Skadron asked for a comment on highest and best use. Mr. Hunt said dollars and sense wise a
small commercial building with one to three stories. Commercial on grade with free market.
Mayor Skadron asked what is the height for commercial. Ms. Adams replied 40 feet.
Councilwoman Mullins asked if the current set up for parking is unfair to this type of development. Is
there a sliding scale based on development type. Ms. Adams said parking is addressed in the lodging
studies and something to look at. Councilwoman Mullins said he is asking for 200,000 in waivers but
only see 39,000 in the memo. Ms. Adams stated Mr. Hunt included cash in lieu for affordable housing.
Councilwoman Mullins asked about the public amenity space. Mr. Hass said three areas are counted.
Councilman Frisch said the code requires 12,000 square feet. Mr. Hass said the bowling alley didn’t
make it. There will be a public access easement with access through the front doors and straight up the
elevators. Elevators go down to basement with the lounge and the bowling alley.
Councilman Daily asked for more on the rooftop amenity concept and said the views are spectacular. Mr.
Hunt said there would be a bar with tables. They would show silent movies or movies with headphones.
It is a hotel in the business of selling sleep. It would be a social gathering space. Councilman Daily
asked how much use or availability of use. Mr. Hunt replied it would be open most of the day with a
curfew for noise. You could walk up anytime you want.
Councilman Frisch said going back to Mick’s article where is everyone going to stay. He is concern this
town has become not 80-50 but 95-5. Partly due to a lack of diversity of lodging. There is not a lot going
on for young people. We should look at the whole building as a public amenity. What is written and
what works are way off. How a bowling alley in town does not make it is crazy. There is a picture of
land use zones in packet. He counts 6 zones in 1 block (p 452) no wonder why it is a horrible process.
It’s crazy if a project moves five feet away the rules change. He wants to put away the nonphysical
aspects, they aren’t a deal breaker. The community is saying cheap small rooms with no free market. He
agrees that the highest and best use for the community is not the highest and best for the developer. This
is not a gun to the puppy situation. He does not know if we need more commercial space but we certainly
need more lodging. It would be nice if we can get around the variances. The design works for him but it
is contemporary for this town. He received the most emails about parking. He appreciate the sliding
scale for affordable housing. The fancier the hotel the more employees and bigger rooms. He does not
expect this lodge to be operating at the same staff ratio of other hotels. Parking is the inverse. As the
price goes down the chances of someone flying in and taking a shuttle drop. There will be more people
from the front range. It is a valid issue of cars and parking. More or less affordable housing does not
affect the neighbors but where to put the cars does. He is not opposed to off site or cash in lieu parking.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
18
There will be times when there will be 40 cars for 40 rooms. Those are all two hour zones unless you
have a sticker. Parking should be able to keep track of cars that have been there longer than two hours.
The vast majority will drive here and leave their car for five days. He does not see people needing their
cars after they drop them off. He is glad we are talking about an affordable lodge with no free market
component.
Councilman Romero thank Mr. Hunt for listening so far. There was a clear message from him two weeks
ago. He appreciated the prologue. He does not like all the responses but at least you recognized the core
issues. He appreciates what you are intending to do and have shown some willingness to move on some
things. He is very skeptical of the parking plan and does not see it as the same way. He is struggling to
see how to conditionally approve this without solving that piece. He would prefer to see a solution up
front and an agreement up front. He is willing to consider the opportunity to lower that number based on
the justifications but is not there yet this evening.
Mayor Skadron said the applicant is asking Council to consider 13 spots not 26. Mr. Hunt replied yes. 26
assumes everyone drives. Mayor Skadron asked if the hotel includes commercial spaces. Mr. Hunt
replied yes, a restaurant and barber shop.
Mayor Skadron asked if they considered the light emitting design through the glass. Mr. Hunt said yes
that this also came up in the P&Z meetings. They are looking at glazing technologies.
Mayor Skadron said if this goes forward a condition is necessary around affordability. The entire project
is a public amenity the community needs to have confidence this will remain affordable. He said he
cannot ignore the commercial design and the recommendation of denial by P&Z.
Councilman Daily said whatever the parking number is let’s be careful the spaces proposed are not
existing spaces that are already parking cars and we are just displacing cars for other cars.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Yvonne Klika said when she first heard they were going to build something on the corner she was
excited. She lives in back of City Market but what it looks like is too modern and too
contemporary with the surrounding properties. Valet parking is a problem. Where will you find
a space to do valet parking. People cannot afford to roll out the tips. Council should be ashamed
of themselves. They should have an equal amount of affordable housing. Rio grande is forever
away. Lodgers will be parking in my parking and city market. Parking is an extreme issue. The
design is something I will look at all the time and I don’t like it.
2. Joey Stokes said he lives here works here. He supports the project. He has played the game with
trying to get people up here and relying on friend’s floor space. This offers a pretty good
alternative. The public amenity is pretty cool. It will be a well-used community space. This
project is giving back more than it is asking for.
3. Rubin Sadowsky said he was born and raised here. Aspen is a huge part of who he is. He thinks
of himself as an ambassador for Aspen. He wants more people to come here and experience our
environment. This is a place to do that. Not only for guest to enjoy but us to as well. He
appreciates that Mark will talk with us and how open he is with what is important to us. He
supports the project and is glad we are talking about it.
4. Phyllis Bronson said Mark isn’t asking for a lot of variances. She got a call from Carolyn
Sackariason asking if she will meet with Hunt. She met with Mark and Carolyn and it was an
opportunity to open a conversation. She found the interior beautiful. It’s compelling and has
tremendous potential. She has trouble with the exterior and understands his passion. It could be
worked into something that is not so in your face. So much about the project is appealing and she
would like to see it come forward. He is close. She said to get rid of bowling alley and build a
parking garage.
5. Nicolette Kantas stated she has lives in benedict commons for 19 years. The concept is fantastic
but it is the wrong space. The amount of congestion and lighting is a concern. She asked about
the open roof and noise and where will the valet parking pull up.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
19
6. Lance Larry said he is a 22 year local. He is commenting about the January 13th article in paper.
Our parking that was assigned in 2001 was involved in the negotiations here and he is upset by
that. The 7th and Main units have parking at benedict commons.
7. Rob Coleski said he is excited about this to be able to have friends and family come visit. It
would be the spare bedroom. He is looking forward to this and the youthful energy it will bring
to town.
8. Eric Allen said he lives in valley and is excited about this project. One of the best attractions for
his generation is the belly up. He was compelled to go to a show but has to drive to get to
Carbondale. It is too expensive to get a room here. We have a great bus system. Someone who
is willing to pay for a room that cheap may be willing to park at brush creek and ride the bus.
This is absolutely the type of project we need to attract people his age. It’s not perfect but some
picture of this is. He hopes that Council can see that and make it happen.
9. Marcia Goshorn said she does think we need lower cost hotel rooms. It is also why we need low
category rental units built. Parking is an issue. It shouldn’t have the same requirement as a high
end hotel. These users would drive in. Parking needs to be solved. She loves the idea of an
affordable hotel. The location is not bad and she does not mind the design.
10. Mack Keeling said he has a passion for affordable lodging and it is something this community
lacks. He hopes this goes forward. It is not just winter and summer seasons but spring and fall.
We are a four season community. There are 20 percent fewer beds in Aspen between 1995 and
2006. The Molly Gibson added 18 beds and this is another 50. The cons are parking. Mark is
capable of finding parking spaces and putting together a valet program. You can’t put the whole
Aspen parking program on one project.
11. Mark Campisi said he is the owner of Dominos and has been there since 1989. He thinks the
transition from residential to commercial is appropriate. They are attempting an innovative
parking plan and he supports the project.
12. Andrew Sandler said the unique thing of Aspen is the town is built on community and friendship.
What Mark has built is a self contained eco system, barber shop, café and to go window. The
Little Nell, Hyatt and St. Regis all have a lot of parking and he might find some there. Most
people walk everywhere. A lot of people are not fans of the art museum and this is a different
look. It is Feng shui, circulation and presentation. The windows face aspen mountain and will
create more heat in the rooms. The glass will be tinted. He does not think noise will be a
problem. Creating 40 rooms in aspen is a wonderful start. Things change and evolve and this is a
healthy start.
13. Sid Devine stated he lives at benedict commons. He came here for 3 weeks 26 years ago. The
mountains are why he is here. As far as affordable lodging this is fantastic but the building does
not fit into any of the reason why I stay here. People are looking for quaint. Parking is a big
problem. This project should not go forward until there is a parking solution in place. How do
people find out about the public amenity spaces. As a community we need more affordable
lodging.
14. Lex Tarumianz stated he supports the project. Affordable lodging is something we have been
asking for for a long time. The location will deem it affordable. We have to be forward thinking
and start working on initiatives that provide incentives for people to fly, use CME, free bus passes
and give the opportunity to come here and leave the cars at home. The architecture is interesting.
It is exactly what we need in town and he urged Council to strongly consider.
15. Rich Carey stated he lives at 7th and Main. Commenting on the January 15 Times article, Hass
said it would be possible to shuffle parking. To relocate 5 spaces beneath benedict commons to
the public garage. It is inconsiderate and offensive to the residents. He opposes the relocation of
the spaces.
16. Mike Kashinski also lives in benedict commons. He is in favor of affordable lodging but not sure
it is the right answer for the situation. His major concern is parking. Please don’t make your
problem our problem with the parking. The bowling alley is not necessary and we don’t need
amenities like that.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
20
17. Sam Hewins, said he lives in benedict and stated he can’t wait till the buckhorn is gone. The
neighborhood will be clean. There is a grease trap in the alley. Taking the parking lot out will
make the intersection so much better. This project is incredible.
18. Karen Ryman said she understand about the elevator on roof. If they are going to serve food it
will need some type of cover and storage. The bathroom will be the beginning of what goes on
the roof. The design is too big for the lot. The amount of traffic needed to support the hotel and
restaurant will add a lot of traffic and noise. It is an over use of a very small area. She likes the
idea of finding a scale of variances for affordable lodging. The owner still needs to be
responsible for employee housing for commercial uses. Parking in the garage is not appropriate
and it should not go to private enterprises. Glass is a problem and glare is a problem. The
amenities are great but they need to be right for the location.
19. John Haley said he manage city market and said he knows what the traffic is like. Everybody
need the spaces at the same time. Christmas and New Year’s is a circus. It will be directly
competing with those spaces as well as in the lot. Conceptually he agrees with the project. The
town needs it.
20. Scott, owner of aspen laundry said he is all for the project. What you see in 10-15 years is not
what you see here today. We are building for the next generation and the future.
21. Ruth Carver said this is the east entrance to Aspen. It is the opportunity to do something right.
She would love to see a building that is cut back. Parking is a huge issue and not this developers
fault. Light rail is the only solution. She suggested a discount on the hotel room if you don’t
bring a car.
22. Tom Brinkmeyer a 7th and Main resident said parking sucks in Aspen. What I like about my
space is in the winter it is nice to get into a warm car. I like the project. The design is fine. I
don’t want to give up my parking space.
23. Tom McCabe a 43 year resident and said he walks the neighborhood a lot. Mountain House is a
low cost lodge and you see a lot of cars parked there but also see a lot of taxi’s. You are likely to
see a representative mix. Neighborhoods vary by night and day. I like the project. It is necessary
and needed and hope you find a creative solution to it. If there is going to be a bar up on the roof
what are you going to do with the snow.
24. Jamie Greenles said he is a visitor to Aspen and is looking to move here. There are no perfect
buildings. This is so close to having everything you need in this town. The parking can be fixed.
You can’t forget how much this will bring to the town.
25. Jim Farey said he followed this through HPC and P&Z. Architecture, public amenity space,
parking and mitigation are hot buttons. It is a handsome building. 200,000 is a small one time
price to pay for the taxation revenue. The public amenity space options are outstanding. Parking
is real. The applicant has never said anything other than he will find parking. The benefit of 40
bedrooms is huge.
26. Cynthia Andrews said she really supports and encourages this project. She loves the architecture
it is extraordinary. Paying homage to mining is great. The entire building is a public amenity.
There is a solution for the parking. It should not fall on one developer to solve the problem.
27. Ziska Childs said she lives in a glass house. There are things to consider and high tec solutions.
How many employees working in the hotel have nothing to do with room size but bathrooms.
28. Joel Ryerson lives at Benedict Commons and said he likes the corner as it. It is comfortable with
small businesses. They are an amenity for the neighborhood. Leave it as is. If it will be built it
needs a pull in driveway to get to the front door. Snow is the issue for the roof. People will be
looking down into his court yard. He prefers if the Benedict spaces were not allocated to a hotel.
Hold off and come up with a better plan.
29. Dana Horton said at this point he would be looking for a room in town. Council is one of our best
checks and balances. Our transportation culture is coming to a dead end. The town is ready for a
change. Aspen is known for being progressive. We are at the tipping point and need to take a
risk. Something will be built here. A retail or restaurant will increase traffic. He is urging
council to consider this.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
21
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilwoman Mullins stated she would like to make this project work. It is a great use for the location.
If the public amenity works she would like to hear more about it. How will you control the noise. Light
pollution is an issue. We should look at if there is another way to calculate a fair parking requirement. It
needs to be onsite or a really great idea. She does not want to displace other cars. She does not support
the affordable housing waiver. The design is interesting but it needs work. It needs to be pulled back.
She is not sure there is enough room for everything.
Councilman Daily asked where the valet will park and how they will get back.
Councilman Frisch said the next meeting needs to start with a parking idea. The waivers will get solved.
It is important to get a diversity of lodging. He appreciate the conversation of how do we know it will
stay affordable. He thinks it will only do harm to regulate pricing. He does not have a problem with
offsite parking and it is more of trying to find a cohesive plan that will work.
Councilman Romero said for parking he is willing to consider a reduced number in exchange for a plan.
With the original intend of the design speaking to the mining heritage is sound and he likes it a lot. The
mass and scale and materials needs to be more balance. He does not like the overall mass and scale. He
understands what they are attempting to achieve admires and respects it but he wants them to take in the
concerns they heard this evening. They need to demonstrate a solution for parking and not with a trust
me.
Mayor Skadron is concerned about the look being out of context with the neighborhood. They need to
tone down the exterior. He asked where the valet access is. There is a quaintness to the architecture. He
asked them to touch on snow melt at the next meeting. Is the roof top a winter public amenity.
Councilwoman Mullins asked what the room rate will be. Mr. Hunt replied 150 to 200 dollars.
Councilman Frisch moved to continue to February 9th; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor,
motion carried.
Mayor Skadron said one of the first applications he heard was the limelight. It would not pass today
because they asked for variances. It is exactly what we are hearing tonight. It failed. The recession hit
and the only reason it is here today is ski co stepped up.
Councilman Frisch moved to continue the tree removal appeal to February 9th; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to continue the meeting to Tuesday the 27th at 4:00 p.m.; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Mayor Skadron called the continued meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. with Councilmembers Frisch, Mullins,
Romero and Daily present.
Action Items
229 W. Smuggler/426 N. Second
202 N. Monarch
232 E Bleeker
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council January 26, 2015
22
Councilman Frisch asked if HPC voted unanimous. Amy Simon, community development, stated 232 E
Bleeker was three to one but the other two were unanimous.
Councilwoman Mullins said 229 E Smuggler and 202 N Monarch are great projects that enhance the
historic resource but 232 E Bleeker is not nearly as successful as the other projects. She asked Ms. Simon
to tell HPC to keep scrutinizing these projects and keep their standards high.
Mr. True stated Staff recommends Council go into executive session pursuant to 24.6.402.4(a) for the
purpose of the purchase or acquisition of property. Councilman Romero moved to go into executive
session at 5:40 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to come out of executive session at 6:00 pm; seconded by Councilwoman
Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 6:00p.m.; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion
carried.
Linda Manning
City Clerk