HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20160808Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
1
CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS .......................................................................................................... 2
AGENDA ADDITIONS ............................................................................................................................... 3
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 3
BOARD REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................... 3
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 3
Resolution #113, Series of 2016 – A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Aspen concerning
the Aspen Country Inn project and approving and authorizing the execution of a partnership agreement, a
financing agreement, and a loan agreement and authorizing the purchase by the city of the Colorado
housing and finance authority’s multifamily housing revenue bond (Aspen country inn project) ............... 4
Resolution #108, Series of 2016 – Revision to the EOTC 2016 ½ % Transit Sales and Use Tax
Budget ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Resolution #107, Series of 2016 – Vibroscreen Topsoil Screening Machine ....................................... 4
Resolution #102, Series of 2016 – Coordinate November 8, 2106 Election ........................................ 4
Resolution #103, Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – Wheeler RETT Extension ................................. 4
Resolution #104, Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – School tax Extension ........................................ 4
Resolution #105 – Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – Broadband Issue ............................................. 4
Minutes – July 25, 2016 ........................................................................................................................ 4
NOTICE OF CALL UP – 230 E Hopkins Ave. Mountain Forge Building .................................................. 4
ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Election Finance .......................................... 5
ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 2016 – Charter Amendment regarding appointment of Chief of Police
and Community Development Director ........................................................................................................ 6
ORDINANCE #20, SERIES OF 2016 – 404 Park Avenue – Rescind Planned Development ..................... 7
RESOLUTION #109, SERIES OF 2016 – Red Onion Annex Vested Rights Extension ............................. 9
ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Tree Mitigation Valuation ......................... 12
ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Administrative Hearing Officer ................ 12
RESOLUTION #109; SERIES OF 2016 – Red Onion annex Vested Rights Extension ............................ 12
EXECUTIVE SESSION ............................................................................................................................. 13
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
2
At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Myrin, Frisch,
Mullins and Daily present.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
1. Kristy Vetter stated she lives at Burlingame phase II in a lower level unit and she is commenting
on the noise levels between the upper unit and their unit. They live below a family. The City
brought in a sound engineer to do testing. The average decibel level when her husband did the
testing was 78. Her last letter to the City was July 26th. She would like this fixed. They have a
quote from a contractor to have this fixed. Mayor Skadron thanked her for coming down. Chris
Everson, asset, said Staff has been working directly with the homeowners. We have a letter from
DL Adams that states they did what they said they were going to do. Jack Wheeler, asset, said we
tested multiple units and they all passed. Some were better than the Vetter unit and some were
worse. Jim True, city attorney, said her complaints have not fallen on deaf ears. DL Adams is a
nationally recognized acoustic company. Our positions is it complies with the technical
standards. Ms. Vetter said it is a family of five. It is not acceptable. Mr. True stated we built it
to code. Mayor Skadron said the City says it was built to code you disagree. Scott Miller, public
works director, suggested bringing in a third party and do another test. Councilman Daily stated
he appreciates the effort you made. The comments from the HOA board president are serious and
I think this needs to be looked at further. Councilman Myrin said he is on the same page as Art.
Councilwoman Mullins said to have someone else test it, who is more credible to you.
Councilman Frisch said he is sorry for the situation you are in. His preference is to allow us to
get back to you by the end of the week. We strive to do not just the legal minimum. Mayor
Skadron said first we need to understand the problem.
2. Mike Maple commented on the Wheeler RETT ballot question. It has been tremendously
successful and intended to create an endowment. It is at a 30 million dollar endowment. The
challenge is to not just re-up a tax but to look at the fundamentals. On Ordinance #16, the tree
mitigation value, why do we have a complicated program. Maybe its time has come and gone
and the standard should be different. He encouraged council to take a look at the fundamental
and why we have the program.
3. Emzy Veazy III talked about restaurant grades. He would like to see restaurant grades visible to
the public.
4. Howie Mallory commented on the school tax extension ballot question and said he thinks the City
has made the right decision in the past. It has been beneficial to the school district. He asked for
a change to the approach in putting it on the ballot. The school is a major traffic generator in
clogging the round a bout. He asked that the extension be conditioned in a written traffic
reduction plan that is implemented starting this year in a meaningful reduction in traffic.
Councilman Frisch said that he and Councilman Myrin are meeting with the Traffic department
tomorrow at 2 to discuss how the school can reduce traffic. We will then set up a meeting with
the school district. Councilman Myrin asked the school board to do this and their first response
was is your support conditional. I said no but it is a genuine concern.
5. Chris Council, homeowner and board member at Burlingame II. Mr. Council submitted a memo
on July 27 about the deficiency of the stain product applied to the siding. They have been
working with staff for the past year. Staff had committed money to replace the siding if they
waived the liability. This is not a capital reserve issue but a design issue. Mr. True said we are
prepared to discuss this in executive session tonight.
6. Toni Kronberg requested that Resolution 108 be pulled from the consent agenda.
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS
Councilman Myrin said he attended the climate action plan meeting on the 27th and one of the goals is to
reduce carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. It will takes the community to
put together the steps to get there. We will needs support from the BOCC and the City to get there.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
3
Councilman Frisch thanked Chris for bringing the Burlingame siding issue up. On the Wheeler He
doesn’t think the language is for an endowment. Instead of looking at it as an endowment I think we look
at it for upkeep and programming.
Mayor Skadron said to go see one of the arts and culture events. The tent is wonderful. August is
wildfire season in the mountains. Be careful when you are in the back country.
AGENDA ADDITIONS
Mr. True stated he would like to add to the executive session C.R.S. 24.6.4.2 (a) and (e) negotiations
involving purchase, acquisitions, lease. etc.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
Steve Barwick reminded everyone the community picnic is on September 11th out at the golf course from
11a.m. to 2p.m. There will be food, refreshments and lots of family activities.
BOARD REPORTS
Councilwoman Mullins said a little over a years ago the Aspen board of public health was combined with
Pitkin County’s. During the last year they have taken a close look at changes. The consultant has been
looking at structure and governance and the recommendations have been accepted. They have been
separating public health from environmental health. We are establishing a new board of health who are
subject experts. It is a phased approach that will reinforce and help the board in its effort to maintain
environmental and public health in the county.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution 105 – Broadband ballot issue
Mr. True stated he submitted a modified resolution for the question for the Broadband that has Pitkin
County changed to the City of Aspen.
Resolution 104 – Ballot issue school tax
Councilwoman Mullins thanked Adam and Bert for pursuing this with the traffic and parking situation
and looks forward to that discussion. Mr. Barwick said we will do a staff report back to Council after we
meet with the school board.
Reso 112 – Burlingame single family home construction
Councilman Myrin when said when the three bedrooms turn into five is it a qualification change. Can
fewer people buy then add more empty bedrooms. Barry Crook, manager’s office, said people will
qualify for a three then they can customize it to be a five. Councilman Myrin said he is less comfortable
with that. The goal was to have the bedrooms filled up. He will support it tonight but he does not want to
build empty bedrooms.
Resolution 108 – EOTC
Randy Ready and John Krueger
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
4
Mr. Ready said this was approved at the Joint meeting for $414,000 for the entrance to Aspen study and
cell phone data collection.
Mayor Skadron said all this money is dedicated to up valley transit money. Snowmass has said they will
chip in a certain amount of money. It is one pool of money with two names on it. Councilman Myrin
said he is comfortable with that. His opposition is the fixed guideway transit alternative. He will support
the whole thing.
Councilwoman Mullins said she will support this as it has been 10 years since the last study. We need to
look at all alternatives. She supports the study as it has been described.
Councilman Frisch said when you look at the big picture you hope it matches with the time allocated. It
is long overdue and much needed. There is a direction from the community that we have not done a lot
with.
Toni Kronberg passed out a handout. She said the study only includes light rail versus the busses. If both
get voted down you are left with nothing. EOTC may also direct other modes for screening. She is
asking for 50,000 dollars for the aerial study or 15,000 from each jurisdiction.
Resolution #113, Series of 2016 – A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Aspen
concerning the Aspen Country Inn project and approving and authorizing the execution of a
partnership agreement, a financing agreement, and a loan agreement and authorizing the purchase
by the city of the Colorado housing and finance authority’s multifamily housing revenue bond
(Aspen Country Inn project)
Resolution #108, Series of 2016 – Revision to the EOTC 2016 ½ % Transit Sales and Use Tax
Budget
Resolution #107, Series of 2016 – Vibroscreen Topsoil Screening Machine
Resolution #102, Series of 2016 – Coordinate November 8, 2106 Election
Resolution #103, Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – Wheeler RETT Extension
Resolution #104, Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – School tax Extension
Resolution #105 – Series of 2016 – Ballot Question – Broadband Issue
Minutes – July 25, 2016
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor,
motion carried.
NOTICE OF CALL UP – 230 E Hopkins Ave. Mountain Forge Building
Jessica Garrow, community development, told the Council this was approved 6 to 1 by P&Z last month.
It is a remodel of the existing structure and includes a decrease of floor area, the addition of two free
market residential units and the demolition and replacement of a two bedroom affordable housing unit.
The remodel includes decreasing some existing legally non-conforming structures relating to the window
well and height of the structure. It was originally built in 1963 and had a significant remodel in the
1980s. Portion are built to the lot line, portions are in the right of way, and the height is currently at 34.8
feet and the maximum is 32. They are working to decrease it but they are able to maintain that non-
conformity. There is an increase to the onsite public amenity space. P&Z met three times to review the
project.
Councilwoman Mullins said they are replacing the affordable housing unit. Ms. Garrow replied yes. It
will be replaced on site and slightly larger.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
5
Councilwoman Mullins asked to see the image of the site plan and public amenity space. Ms. Garrow
said the requirement for offsite public amenity is for a parks and engineering review that they are
consistent for access and egress.
Councilman Myrin said he did not see the minutes from the June 21 vote. Ms. Garrow said there was a
lot of discussion on the affordable housing unit. Councilman Myrin said the recycle area should be 200
square feet and is reduced to 150. Can it be called up for that? Ms. Garrow said it is under the purview of
environmental health and not a commercial design issue. Councilman Myrin said the window wells that
extend past the property line are not review for Council either. Ms. Garrow said they don’t extend any
longer. They are pulling anything that is in the right of way out so it is all within the property.
Councilman Myrin said the height is measured by filling something up. Ms. Garrow said the height is
measured from the bottom of the light well. Councilman Myrin asked is the height changing. Ms.
Garrow said it is decreasing by two inches. There are some changes to the roof form. Councilman Myrin
said he is not excited about this building. He is concerned about the mass from the sidewalk and the
Monarch side. The mass and scale feels enormous. The offsite public amenity space is nice to have but
he is not sure why it is calculated. The recycling area has shrunk. It has a massive feel to it.
Councilman Frisch asked which concerns are in our bucket of review. Ms. Garrow stated the recycle is
not, mass, scale, roof and public amenity space are. Councilman Frisch said from a top level standpoint,
Hopkins sits well. He appreciates where Bert is coming from on Monarch.
Councilwoman Mullins said she agrees with Adam that the Hopkins side is very successful. Monarch is
boxy and massive. It is a large mass between the two more articulated bookends. She is not sure that you
could come up with a better alternative. The three different masses help quite a bit. It is acceptable and
she would not ask it to be called up.
Councilman Frisch said there is nothing in the guidelines that says a sloped roof needs to honor that. Ms.
Garrow replied no.
Mayor Skadron said he is curious about the massing between the two end units. The building today has a
more welcoming nature. He was going to suggest we take a look at this.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to call up 230 E Hopkins Avenue; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Election Finance
Mr. True stated this is a code amendment to Section 9.04.030 b – campaign finance report filing. The
City has adopted the Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act and has made various amendment to file
additional reports. One has made the requirement to file an additional report seven days prior to the
election. The city also amended the Act by stating that donations could not be accepted after seven days
prior to the election. There is a timeframe in the Act that would allow someone to make a donation Seven
days prior to the election but after that reporting period and not get picked up by the reporting period five
days in the Act that is then back dated another five days. We have proposed to fix that so there are three
reports prior to the election, 21 days, 10 days by this amendment and then five days prior to the election.
All of the reporting done pursuant to the act will be required to report as of the date of the report. This
will then allow that five days report to contain all donations to be made prior to the election.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
6
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #22, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO 22
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
SECTIONS 9.04.030 DEADLINES FOR AND PUBLICATION OF CONTRIBUTIONS AND
EXPENDITURES OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.
Mr. True said this does not go to the electorate. It is an ordinance. There was an error in the daily news.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #22, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 2016 – Charter Amendment regarding appointment of Chief of Police
and Community Development Director
Mr. True said this proposes a charter amendment regarding the appointment of police chief and
community development director. When the previous community development director resigned there
were questions raised about Council’s involvement. Under the charter at the present time, Council is
prohibited in that selection. Council asked about the possibility of amending that to be like the clerk and
finance director. During those discussions it was brought out if it might be appropriate for the chief of
police. We have proposed a charter amendment that would add Section 6.11 Community Development
Director and would set for the city manager with approval of council shall appoint a community
development director. The same language is used for 6.12 Chief of Police. This is proposing a charter
amendment and can only be amended by a vote of the electorate. This ordinance also sets out the ballot
language. A charter amendment has to be done by ordinance. The ballot issue is set forth in the
ordinance and will be submitted to the electorate on November 8th if passed at second reading.
Councilwoman Mullins said the clerk and finance director are both with the approval by Council. Are the
language for the clerk and finance director the same. Mr. True said they are slightly different.
Effectively they have the same effect but the language is slightly different.
Councilman Frisch said it is like a call up. Mr. Barwick said a resolution goes in front of you naming that
person. Mr. True said you are specifically prohibited from involvement in the selection process.
Mayor Skadron said we have a council manager form of government and charter changes like this start to
infringe on our form of government. I don’t want to get into a situation where a future council will use
this amendment to interfere. This is a signoff. Councilmembers are the only community members who
are not allowed to participate in the hiring process. I want to make sure what is done here has an eye on
the future.
Councilwoman Mullins said she was the one who suggested the police chief be added to this. They are
the people who act as council’s representatives with the community.
Mayor Skadron said he is not opposed to the general principal but I do want to raise the possibility for
future council’s possibility for interfering.
Councilman Myrin said the government structure we have in place now would allow us to replace the
manager who would then replace that person. This just puts at the same level as the finance director and
city clerk these two people. We don’t have the fire authority just the check point at the hire.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
7
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #21, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO 21
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO ADD PROVISIONS TO ARTICLE VI
REGARDING THE POSITION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND THE CHIEF
OF POLICE AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE POSITIONS ARE APPOINTED.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Daily, yes; Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #20, SERIES OF 2016 – 404 Park Avenue – Rescind Planned Development
Hillary Seminick, community development, passed out a new version of the ordinance. The request is to
rescind a planned development overlay. The underlying zoning is residents multi-family. The property
received the overlay sometime in the 1970s. Staff reviewed annexation documentations and can’t find
why the PD was placed on the property. The request does not propose additional development just to
remove the PD. If the approval is not granted any redevelopment would be subject to the planned
development. The applicant wants to redevelop as a 100 percent affordable housing project and would
need to undergo the three step review process. That includes P&Z, Council then back to P&Z for detail
review. If this were granted and the PD removed the property would be subject to the underlying
residential mutli family zoning. There would only be a P&Z review to create the credits. There is no call
up process to establish affordable housing certificates. The ordinance was revised today based on
discussions with the applicant. Staff is recommending approval of the overlay be conditioned with 100
percent affordable housing. Staff has provided language in Section 2 on page 2 that the PD be rescinded
upon the following conditions 1) review and approval of a 100 percent affordable housing project, 2) the
application to establish affordable housing certificates for the 100 percent affordable housing project be
reviewed pursuant to the land use code at the time of application, however the project will not be required
to undergo a planned development review. They can move forward with P&Z review. The PD overlay
would remain in effect and in place until the affordable housing project receives a CO.
Mayor Skadron asked why is this coming to us now. Ms. Seminick replied they had this conversation at
4:00 today. Mr. True said they talked about alternatives, go forward as recession or denial. We started
thinking that if there are material representations why shouldn’t they be set forth as conditions. We
weren’t sure where the applicant was. We are assuming the applicant is ok with the proposal. It doesn’t
require a variance or non-confirmatory. It is a little unusual and late. Given the fact it is memorializing
the material representations it is something that can be recognized by Council.
Councilwoman Mullins said it seems like a good solution to a difficult problem. If we rescind the PD
then it is a non-conformity. Is this a big non-conformity by bypassing the normal review process as long
as it is 100 percent affordable housing. Ms. Seminick said it is similar to a conditional rezoning. It is a
solution to achieve not granting any variances to the set back encroachments while speaking to the
applicants request to remove the PD. Councilwoman Mullins said with the PD overlay you can
customize, which seems to be what you are doing here. Ms. Garrow said you cannot amend the process.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
8
PD is a preset process. This is a conditional rescinding of the overlay. The PD would remain. If they do
anything other than a 100 percent affordable housing project it would go through the three step process.
Councilman Daily asked how Staff feels about the proposal with the current changes. Ms. Seminick said
Staff feels it is a legitimate way forward. Staff can’t support a hardship variance for a self-created
hardship. Councilman Daily said personally it is an elegant solution.
Councilman Frisch said he is always happy to see the private sector involved. There are two concerns
related but not completely; they are asking to get out of the PD and the set back variance. Peter is now
promising to deliver what he says he is going to. He appreciate what the applicant is doing. Is the main
reason you are changing you view is the applicant is promising to deliver what he said and there are no set
back variances. Ms. Seminick replied that Staff has reached a level of comfort that they are no longer
creating a situation where the removal of the planned development overlay would create a non-conformity
for which the setback variance would be required to allow the non-conforming aspects to continue. Mr.
True stated that is the current condition. Ms. Seminick said any redevelopment based on the revised
ordinance would need to rely on underlying zoning. The 100 percent affordable housing project will be
subject to all the requirements of residential multi –family and applicable reviews at the time of
application. Councilman Frisch said if we approve what Staff is supporting we will not see this project
again. Ms. Semnick replied correct. Councilman Frisch said then the whole PD waiver is null and void.
Ms. Garrow said if they move forward as represented the PD will be rescinded. Until that time the PD is
on the property. The other reason we are comfortable is Peter has done some projects but if it were to sell
we would like to have some of these conditions in place.
Councilman Frisch said doing this we will have a project that meets code and can go quicker.
Councilman Myrin said the downside to this is something going wrong at some point. What is the worse
you see happening. Ms. Garrow said that is why we want to tie this to a CO. Mr. True said he is having
trouble visualizing a worst case scenario in adopting this document. If this is adopted he can skip the
extra PD step but only if he stays with 100 percent affordable housing. Councilman Myrin said like
Dancing Bear it gets built and the building stops before it is finished. Ms. Garrow said if the project were
shuttered the PD would still be on the property.
Councilman Frisch said the residential multi family zone has the same dimensions whether it is affordable
housing or free market. They are not asking for any variances. Ms. Seminick replied correct.
Mayor Skadron asked why do the non-conformities go away. Ms. Seminick said it would be built to
code. Mayor Skadron asked why was that not the case prior to this. Ms. Seminick said the set backs
were requested to accommodate the existing structures.
Councilman Myrin asked can you keep the existing shell. Ms. Garrow replied no, it would go through the
PD because it does not meet the underlying zoning.
Sara Adams, representing the applicant, said the request is to remove the PD and have no variations. It is
100 percent affordable housing and complies with the residential multi family zone district. There are
four buildings from the late 60s and early 70s. The setbacks have existed this way for 40 years. They
want the existing condition recognized by Council.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
9
Peter Fornell, owner, said he will be creating a good project. As far as the concern with going to P&Z
and then the building department directly, Council’s primary job should not be reviewing land use
applications. Your primary job should be running our community.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public
comment.
Councilman Frisch said it is a great solution. His only frustration is the timing of the new ordinance. It is
a pretty simple solution. There are some affordable housing projects with elevators and underground
parking. Let’s make sure the capital reserves cover what is happening in the building.
Councilman Myrin said it is a good idea. Mr. True said if you look at the three alternatives; rescind, not
or with the condition. This gets us to the 100 percent affordable housing in the most likely scenario.
Councilman Myrin said there is no direction if it is 100 percent RO or sets the categories. Ms. Garrow
said ROs are not eligible for the certificates. It is up to the applicant to propose a use mix and APCHA to
make a recommendation and for P&Z to accept it. If there is a cash in lieu amount it can be used for the
credits. Mitigation is still required at a category 4 level. Mr. Fornell said if I build all at a category 2 I
can help more developers. I don’t know the exact category mix right now. There is no reason not to
create a mix of categories.
Councilwoman Mullins said because our land use code is so complicated it is important to be consistent
but you have to balance that with we are a smaller city. We have developers we trust and do you hold
them to something that was done 40 years ago.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #20, Series of 2016 with the conditions presented
tonight; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes;
Mullins, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #109, SERIES OF 2016 – Red Onion Annex Vested Rights Extension
Ben Anderson, community development, told the Council the request is for a two year extension of vested
rights. This is a one story commercial building east of the Red Onion Saloon. The original application
was submitted in August 2012 for HPC conceptual approval and received final approval in 2014.
Ordinance 25-2012 where Council made changes to the permitted uses and dimensions including the
prohibition of free market residential and non-lodging third stories. The development order was issued in
January 2014. The vested rights expire in January 2017. The HPC approval preserve the existing façade,
the demolition of the existing one story commercial building, and allow for the development of a mixed-
use building with commercial on the ground floor and residential on the second and third floors. The
maximum height is 38 feet. The ground floor remains commercial and the second floor steps back with
the third floor stepping back even further. Mr. Anderson showed renderings of the 2012 approval.
Council is asked to look at four review criteria; compliance with conditions requiring performance,
progress made to date, nature and extent of benefits received and needs of the City and applicant that
would be served by the extension.
The applicant has stated that the request would give them more time to explore the removal of the
residential unit and to develop more commercial space, coordinate this development with the Bidwell
building and to coordinate with the Cooper Street mall project.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
10
Staff has weighed these benefits buts views these benefits as speculative at this time and recommends
denial. We see this as a perpetuation of development rights for more than three and a half years now and
are unsure of the direction of the potential land use amendments going forward in the near future. If
Council is considering an extension there are two conditions in the resolution regarding the applicability
of building code and the preservation of the historic resource.
Staff received an email from Shirley Tipton representing the Elks Lodge with concerns about the impact
of the view plane and parking and access.
Councilman Myrin said section D has paragraphs 2 and 3 allowing more time. Can they happen if this is
not extended? Ms. Garrow said they would no longer have a vested approval and would have to start
from scratch. Our concern is extension perpetuates a proposal that is inconsistent with the code that is in
place today as well as potential future code amendments that we are currently contemplating.
Councilman Myrin said they could perpetuate what is no longer allowed. Ms. Garrow said the applicant
has vesting until mid January. They could apply for a building permit and move forward with that.
Chris Bendon, representing the applicant, said Mark bought the property with the approvals in place.
That is different than what he usually does. The value of the property is embedded in the vested property
rights. The approval is an important piece of the ownership. Mark is not convinced the existing approval
is the best thing to do with the property. He is more interested in purely commercial properties. He can’t
apply to start talking about anything else, he is stuck in the moratorium. The vested right allow for a
project taller than today, a penthouse. Extending the vested rights makes it less than 100 percent. It
makes sense to approve or it doesn’t. It is a simple ask and a reasonable request with the opportunity to
serve the needs of the community. What is the magic around two years. It is the time it takes for the
moratorium to fully unfold and the time to figure out the new regulations and put together a development
application and go through the process.
Councilman Frisch said of all the approved but unbuilt buildings in town this is the one I’m interested to
see how it plays out. Right now it is 28 feet and there is talk of seeing it go shorter. It is approved for the
second and third for residential and the bottom commercial. The community pickle is do you want to
hold someone’s feet to the fire because of no variances or do you want to see if something better can
come out. The problem with this is if the applicant wants to promise that the building were to come back
to meet code as today there might be a discussion. If you don’t want to build the building you bought
knowing what you bought is there some way we can structure it to partly honor the community’s desire.
If there is something the applicant wants to trade for two years that’s a discussion I’m willing to have.
Councilman Myrin said we are going to come up with a code hopefully with what we are looking for. I
see where Adam is coming from. If there is a way to gain a little to give a little. He is not super
supportive to doing this and is leaning toward the staff recommendation.
Councilwoman Mullins said she has never been a supporter of extending vesting. What I’m hearing is if
you don’t give us the extension we are going to build the thing. If you do we just might build it anyways.
It is a very valuable property. You have really put us in a tough spot. The interests of the city are not
perpetuated by the extension. There are no assurance if we give you the vesting you will not build it.
Mark Hunt, owner, said we are asking for time because we don’t want to build it. The rock is referendum
1 and the hard place is the moratorium.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
11
Councilman Daily said he is pretty close to Adam’s perspective on this. The fourth condition of allowing
an extension is what best serves the needs of the applicant and the city. What best serves our community
needs and the applicant’s needs is some more time. All this is guess work. We don’t know what Mark is
going to do. What we do know since he has been in our community has been to not apply for a lot of
residential uses in downtown commercial. I don’t think it really suits his overall plan for what he would
like to leave in this town. Our best chance of getting a use that is in the best interest for our community is
to allow a little more time for Mark to work it out. I would like to see it be lower. The best chance is to
support this application.
Councilman Myrin said one change is residential and one is height. If the third floor were not part of this
I would be comfortable extending this for two years. It would achieve the two goals that have changed
since this approval.
Councilman Frisch said if it meets the code of today I am really, really happy.
Councilman Myrin with the condition of 100 percent commercial and no third floor. Ms. Garrow said if
Council does want to move forward as approved it has free market. The applicant is prepared to provide
mitigation via credits.
Mr. Hunt said he does not want to build it and has other plans for it. Short term this is the best plan.
Long term it does more harm. There is a lot of friction and it takes the vitality out of town. He said he
would like to possibly combine and share some of the stairs and trash with the Bidwell building.
Councilman Myrin said he thinks that is what the community wants as well.
Mayor Skadron said he does not want Council to be led astray with the 100 percent commercial. We need
to remember what the commercial is.
Ms. Garrow said there is a third condition; limited to two stores, no free market residential, mitigation for
net leasable through credits at 60 percent, design review completed with the Bidwell for recycling, access
and the like.
Councilman Frisch said we would be crazy not to give it a college try.
Councilman Daily said he agrees. Worst case scenario when do the vested rights expire. Mr. Bendon said
Mark said we can do one year.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Jim Farey said my friend had the opportunity to put 38 feet on the Gap building and he didn’t’.
Walk the alley. Having one elevator and one trash area won’t be a tough trade. 28 feet on the
mall will be outstanding.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilman Frisch moved to table Resolution #109, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Myrin. All
in favor, motion carried.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
12
ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Tree Mitigation Valuation
Mr. True said Title 2 has one figure for tree mitigation. Title 13 defines the formula. We are trying to
coordinate the figures. The changes in Title 13 are to the formula and the description to the formulas.
Ben Carlson, City Forester, said it is a change in the language and a change to use the variable X.
Councilwoman Mullins asked where does the mitigation money go and how do you handle wildfire
mitigation to address Mike Maples questions from citizens comments be answered via email.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public
comment.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #16, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion
carried.
ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2016 – Code Amendment – Administrative Hearing Officer
Mr. True said this is fixing the restriction in who can be an administrative hearing officer.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public
comment.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #18, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion
carried.
RESOLUTION #109; SERIES OF 2016 – Red Onion annex Vested Rights Extension
Councilman Frisch oved to untable Resolution #109 Series of 2016; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
All in favor, motion carried.
Ms. Garrow said condition one would state the vested rights are extended by 1 year if the following
conditions are met; return to HPC for review of how to coordinate back of house functions between the
Red Onion building and the Bidwell building, vertical circulation may be relocated to the Red Onion
annex during the HPC review, remove the free market residential unit, remove the third story and allow
two stories at no more than 28 feet, housing mitigation is required at 60 percent of the new net leasable
square footage and may be mitigated through housing certificates, return to City Council for call up.
The applicant is also requesting that if the above conditions are not met the vesting rights be extended for
one year with the expectation to make an application to do their best to coordinate with the Bidwell
building. If that is not successful they still have the vested rights for one year.
Councilman Frisch said if it starts to go pear shape then the vested rights are still good till January. Now
the vested rights don’t move if that is off the table. It loses a lot of pressure points to negotiate in good
faith if you have that for one year. Mr. Romero said we went through the first seven or eight conditions
real fast. If Council will give the one year tonight what is the give back. We are asking for a period of
time tonight. The best way to look at this is to add some extension to the vesting. Mr. Bendon said the
key is it feels like there is a long time from now till January but it isn’t. To be able to prepare a full set of
drawings takes a good bit of time. We’re not here playing games.
Ms. Garrow suggested a four month extension. Councilman Myrin said he would not be comfortable
with anything longer than four months. He does not want this to carry on to another Council.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 8, 2016
13
Mr. Bendon said they will need to prepare an amendment to the Bidwell application to integrate the back
of house. Then the potential Council call up. If HPC can’t approve it or Council calls it up they have
until May 15th to pursue the original application.
Ms. Garrow said the vesting is extended for 3 years if the following conditions are met. The conditions
are going to HPC for coordination, removing the free market unit, removing the third story, housing
mitigation, call up. If the above conditions are not met, the vested rights are extended through May 15,
2017.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Resolution #109, Series of 2016 with amendments; seconded by
Councilman Myrin. All in favor, motion carried.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. True said staff is recommending executive session pursuant to C.R.S. 24.6.402(a)(b)(e) purchase,
acquisition, lease of property and conference with attorney. At 10:22 p.m. Councilman Frisch moved to
go in to executive session; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
At 11:20 p.m. Councilman Frisch moved to come out of executive session; seconded by Councilwoman
Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried.
Linda Manning
City Clerk