HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20161114Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
1
CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 3
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS .......................................................................................................... 3
BOARD REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................... 3
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS .............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
BOARD REPORTS .................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 4
Resolution #148, Series of 2016 – Contract for Ney Year’s Eve Fireworks ........................................ 5
Resolution #153, Series of 2016 – FIS World Cup Finals Banner and Construction Request ............. 5
Resolution #157, Series of 2016 – Grant Agreement-Replacement Shuttle Vehicles .......................... 5
Resolution #156, Series of 2016 – Grant Agreement-Replacement Bus .............................................. 5
Resolution #163, Series of 2016 –Adopting the Pitkin County Emergency Plan ................................. 5
Resolution #166, Series of 2016 – Downtown Pedestrian Mall Improvement Project – Professional
Architecture Services Contract ..................................................................................................................... 5
Resolution #167, Series of 2016 – Aspen Country Inn Renovation and Repair – Change Order #004 5
Resolution #165, Series of 2016 – Summary of Agreement Terms for Affordable Housing
Development between the City of Aspen and Aspen Housing Partners ....................................................... 5
Resolution #158, Series of 2016 – Infrastructure Inspection Camera ................................................... 5
Resolution #162, Series of 2016 – 2017 APCHA and Component Unit Funds .................................... 5
Resolution #164, Series of 2016 – 2016 Budget – Aspen Country Inn Affordable Housing Fund ...... 5
Resolution #161, Series of 2016 – 2017 Budget – Aspen Country Inn Affordable Housing Fund ...... 5
Minutes – October 24, 2016 .................................................................................................................. 5
NOTICE OF CALL UP – Notice of HPC approval of Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual
Commercial Design and Special Review for 500 W. Main Street, HPC Resolution #32, Series of 2016 .... 5
ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Supplemental Budget .......................................................... 6
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Supplemental for the APCHA and Component Unit
Budgets ......................................................................................................................................................... 6
ORDINANCE #36, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Fee Ordinance ..................................................................... 7
ORDINANCE #38, SERIES OF 2016 – Title 25 of the Municipal Code – Utilities ................................... 7
LAND USE CODE – AACP COORDINATION: ORDINANCES 29,30,31,32 AND 33, SERIES OF
2016 .............................................................................................................................................................. 8
ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2016 – Ranger Station Subdivision – Subdivision Minor Amendment
and associated reviews ................................................................................................................................ 11
ORDINANCE #27, SERIES OF 2016 – 834 W. Hallam Street, Ordinance Amendment .......................... 14
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
2
ORDINANCE #24, SERIES OF 2016 – Transferable Development Rights, Public Hearing Continued
From September 26, 2016 ........................................................................................................................... 16
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
3
At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Myrin, Daily,
Mullins and Frisch and present.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
1. Emzy Veazy III said Council needs to tighten up. He mentioned the book Anatomy of a City and
said that Riley in community development also read it. He talked about recycling in Colorado
and suggested hiring a private business to buy the recycled items from the public and give the
proceeds back to the people.
2. Toni Kronberg passed out handout to Council. The Pitkin County airport terminal remodel is not
approved and there is no funding in place. It will be 5 to 10 years before it will be completed. In
November the BOCC approved the expansion then Aspen became a connecting city and home to
9 new flights this year. The BOCC approved the funding to expand space for 10 planes. They
also approved the funding for a new baggage handling system and TSA equipment. She is
requested Council thank the BOCC for improving the airport at the joint BOCC meeting this
week. The funding for the boarding area has been increased but the size hasn’t. She is concerned
there will be an issue. She would like Council to open the discussion how that will be dealt with.
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS
Councilman Myrin thanked Council for putting the charter amendment on the ballot for the comdev and
police chief and thanks to the voters for passing it. He has another charter amendment for next May. The
end of January is the last time to do it for May. It has not been drafted yet. He would like the voters to
have input on the construction of 100 foot dams on Castle and Maroon Creek when Council makes the
decision to start construction. Approved by Council, the community at the time, would have the ultimate
decision, if they circulate a petition. He is asking for Council support to put it on the ballot for May.
Councilwoman Mullins said she is happy that the RETT and charter amendment passed. They were both
good ballot issues.
Councilman Frisch gave a congrats to Greg Poshman and Scott Writer for winning their seats. Hats off to
Tom Good and Alyssa Shenk in Snowmass and Mick did a lot of work as well trying to get the vote out.
The trails and Wheeler opera house if there is a discussion of reapportion of that. He is happy that we live
in a diverse multi-cultural community. It is one of the great things that makes this community sustainable
and livable.
Mayor Skadron gave a congrats to Greg Poshman and a thanks to Michael Owsley for his 12 years of
service. And to Markey Butler and Tom and Alyssa as Well. We went through an election last week. It
is evident that we are living in a divided country. We have had the same values we have always had;
inclusiveness, non-discrimination, prioritizing the environment and health and human services. Local
leadership is alive and well. Everyone is always welcome in Aspen Colorado.
BOARD REPORTS
Mayor Skadron said RFTA passed the 2017 budget. There is 31 million in the general fund total and a
total budget of 54 million.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
4
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolution #163 – Pitkin County emergency plan
Bill Linn, police, stated the plan complies with federal regulations and involves interoperations between
all agencies in the county to insure we work on the same wave length.
Councilwoman Mullins said it is quite impressive and very compressive. She had a chance to visit
Mountain Rescue last winter when they had the exercise. There is a lot of emphasis on the role of elected
officials. Will there be some type of workshop.
Valerie McDonald, Pitkin County Emergency Manager, said it is a multi-jurisdictional plan and a
document structure and guidelines from day to day to a full scale emergency. They are planning a
workshop in the next two months for what you do and how you get information.
Resolution #166 – pedestrian malls
Councilwoman Mullins said you are pushing hard to get something done. Looking at the contract it is
one of the bigger ones. The scope of work has a number of firms that are over 50,000 dollars. She asked
for the responsibilities of the firms.
Kevin Dunn- planning, design and construction manager
Pete Rice – engineering department
Nathan Torres – NV5
Mike Albert – Design Workshop
Tim Thompson – Asset department said the RFP asked for specific criteria to be met. The public
relations requirement is being met by PR Studio. They are reaching out to business owners. JBA,
engineering firm, is obtaining existing information of the utilities and infrastructure and design concept.
Councilwoman Mullins asked who will be working on the ADA solutions. Mr. Rice replied the entire
design team will. Councilwoman Mullins asked about the private and public spaces and programming.
She said the mall seems to be working well as it is. Mr. Albert said we wanted to bring them in to add
the additional layer of how to make the mall as vibrant as possible. Councilwoman Mullins said she has
one hesitation, we have plenty of vitality on the mall and she is not sure how much more programming it
can absorb. Managing programming, perhaps. What we have now works extremely well. We need to
fine tune it as far as infrastructure and ADA. We want to improve what we have and not move towards a
new entity.
Resolution #158 – camera
Councilwoman Mullins said this is extremely expensive, is it cost effective over hiring.
Aaron Reed and April Barker, engineering, said we have had little success to the point of having no bids.
The responses we have hired have not been able to complete the scope of work. This is a small remote
operated camera that allows us to inspect inside infrastructure in color.
Resolution #167 – ACI Renovation and Repair
Tim Thompson said they have completed 10 units that have been moved out and back in. 50 percent
scope completion of the project. They are on track with the budget. APCHA has been involved every
step of the way with the move.
Resolution #148 – NYE Fireworks
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
5
Mayor Skadron said there will be two shows; one at 8pm for 20 minutes and one at midnight for 5
minutes.
Mayor Skadron said regarding the FIS world cup banners, this is a March event. We are hosting the
world cup finals. We need snow to make sure the event works.
Resolution #148, Series of 2016 – Contract for Ney Year’s Eve Fireworks
Resolution #153, Series of 2016 – FIS World Cup Finals Banner and Construction Request
Resolution #157, Series of 2016 – Grant Agreement-Replacement Shuttle Vehicles
Resolution #156, Series of 2016 – Grant Agreement-Replacement Bus
Resolution #163, Series of 2016 –Adopting the Pitkin County Emergency Plan
Resolution #166, Series of 2016 – Downtown Pedestrian Mall Improvement Project –
Professional Architecture Services Contract
Resolution #167, Series of 2016 – Aspen Country Inn Renovation and Repair – Change Order
#004
Resolution #165, Series of 2016 – Summary of Agreement Terms for Affordable Housing
Development between the City of Aspen and Aspen Housing Partners
Resolution #158, Series of 2016 – Infrastructure Inspection Camera
Resolution #162, Series of 2016 – 2017 APCHA and Component Unit Funds
Resolution #164, Series of 2016 – 2016 Budget – Aspen Country Inn Affordable Housing Fund
Resolution #161, Series of 2016 – 2017 Budget – Aspen Country Inn Affordable Housing Fund
Minutes – October 24, 2016
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt the rest of the consent calendar, seconded by Councilman Daily. All
in favor, motion carried.
NOTICE OF CALL UP – Notice of HPC approval of Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual
Commercial Design and Special Review for 500 W. Main Street, HPC Resolution #32, Series of 2016
Amy Simon, community development, told the Council this project was approved by HPC on October
second by a 4 to 0 vote. It is the largest false front building in Aspen. There is an addition proposed on
the west side. It is below the allowed square feet. Three variations are requested. The first it is within
the floor area allocation for residential and commercial but they asked to alter the floor area distribution.
They would like more for commercial and less for residential. HPC granted set back variations for the
historic portions only. The third variation is for parking. The commercial addition required more
parking. HPC gave a waiver for three of the spaces as well as the cash in lieu. At final they will look at
restoring more of the historic building. Some of the members were ill and some had conflicts because
they live nearby.
Councilman Myrin asked if there was an HPC bonus. Ms. Simon replied no, usually they are just for
residential. Councilman Myrin asked how often is parking cash in lieu waived. Ms. Simon said they
have the choice to pay. It was waived with the expectation that the restoration happen. Councilman
Myrin said we are trading transportation for preservation. Both are important to council.
Councilman Daily asked how much is added to residential and taken from commercial. Ms. Simon
replied 300 square feet. It is under the total cap for the property.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
6
Mayor Skadron said they have exercise appropriate caution. He is finding that based on HPCs comments
it meets the commercial design criteria. The historic component remains unchanged, the building is not
moved and it complies with the zoning. He is not desirous of a call up.
ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Supplemental Budget
Pete Strecker, finance, said this is the fall supplemental totaling 8.7 million dollars in requests. 5 million
has already been seen by Council through the year. There has been a heavy focus on affordable housing
with 2.6 million in city contribution to Aspen Country Inn and 900,000 to city owned affordable housing
units and 600,000 to develop four single family home sites at Burlingame and 400,000 for upgrades.
There is 2.7 million in new requests. 1 million in design on the pedestrian mall. 860,000 for city
administration office work, 266,000 for higher purchase power cost; produced less and greater demand,
500,000 for new permitting software for comdev, 27,000 for the moratorium and a radon grant of 6,000.
The rest is technical authority and transfers between funds.
Councilman Myrin said he would like to see a line item for someone on staff to look in to alternative
locations and sizes for water storage early in the six year renewal rather than later. For the grant for the
Historical Society, he would prefer they go to their voters. He would also like to see the Wheeler not
donate RETT money to the Art Museum. He spoke before about the knowledge transfer funding for
water employees. Would it be possible to buy the housing back and what it would cost to unwind that.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #28, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 28
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $94,230, AN
INCREASE IN THE PARKS AN OPEN SPACE FUND OF $367,610, AN INCREASE IN THE
TRANSPORTATION FUND OF $83,440, AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING DEVLEOPMENT
FUND OF $3,188,060, AN INCREASE IN THE STORMWATER FUND OF $198,380, AN INCREASE
IN THE ASSET MANAGEMENT FUND OF $2,760,770, AN INCREASE IN THE WATER UTILITY
FUND OF $337,640, AN INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY FUND OF $266,000, AN
INCREASE IN THE TRUSCOTT HOUSING FUND OF $364,460, AN INCREASE IN THE MAROLT
HOUSING FUND OF $95,760, AN INCREASE IN THE EMPLOYEE HOUSIG FUND OF $998,000.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #28, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Supplemental for the APCHA and Component Unit
Budgets
Mr. Strecker said these funds include the APCHA housing fund, Truscott II and Smuggler. There are no
changes to the old ACI and the old APCHA development funds. There is a total of 73,000 dollars being
requested. 21,000 is new and relates to a special assessment at the office building where APCHA is
housed at. It is a onetime assessment of 15,000. 5,400 dollars is for smoke detectors at Truscott II.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
7
Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #37, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Frisch.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 37
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING ADMINISTRATION
FUND OF $32,080 AND AN INCREASE IN THE TRUSCOTT PHASE II AFFORDABLE HOUSING
FUND OF $41,010.
Councilman Daily moved to adopt Ordinance #37, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Mullins, yes; Frisch,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #36, SERIES OF 2016 – 2016 Fee Ordinance
Mr. Strecker told the Council most of the fees have held constant. There were slight changes to some
areas. One area is based on cost recovery. Another area was to increase to influence consumer behavior.
An example is the parking fees with construction and lodging programs. There were also some State
driven fees with environmental health and comdev.
Councilman Frisch said overall it is nice if we would incrementally add on. He appreciates it and there is
a tremendous amount of subsidy in this town. He is glad we are balancing in the cost recovery from
participation.
Councilwoman Mullins said there has been some discussion on how the fees are increased. It is
sometimes difficult to have these jumps. She would hesitate to impose an annual increase and there is a
danger to have it on autopilot. She supports the way we are looking at it now.
Councilman Myrin said we do look at staff time increases each year and what our staff budget is. It
seems appropriate to increase the fees the same as what our overhead is. All of these represent staff time
in some regard.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #36, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO.36
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO ADJUST CERTAIN MUNICIPAL FEES
INCLUDED UNDER SECTION 2 AND 26 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #36, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #38, SERIES OF 2016 – Title 25 of the Municipal Code – Utilities
Lee Ledesma, utilities, stated there are four main changes. The first is the water and electric rates have
been updated with minor changes. They added a collection ordinance that focuses on notifying customers
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
8
before any action is taken as well as parameters around discontinuation of services. The third change is
moving the utilities development fees from title 2 to title 25. The last change is the addition of a
backflow prevention and cross connection control regulation. The Colorado Department of Health and
Environment adopted a new mandate to water providers that we need to have an adopted policy around
this.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #38, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 38
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING
AND ADDING TO TITLE 25 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN-
UTILITIES123-SPECIFICALLY CHAPTERS 25.04 ELECTRICITY; 25.08 WATER SERVICES, 25.12
UTILITY CONNECTIONS, 25.16 WATER RATES AND CHARGES, 25.18 STORMWATER
SYSTEMS, 25.20 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS, 25.24 SUPPLY OF MUNICIPAL WATER FOR
SNOWMAKING PURPOSES, AND 25.28 WATER SHORTAGES.
Councilman Daily moved to adopt Ordinance #38, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Daily,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
LAND USE CODE – AACP COORDINATION: ORDINANCES 29,30,31,32 AND 33, SERIES OF
2016
Jessica Garrow and Philip Supino, community development, told the Council, all these topics work
together and are coming from the community plan.
Ordinance #29 – Use Mix and Dimensions
Update and clarify the allowed uses in the commercial zone districts.
Establish an essential business overlay.
Limit new free market residential units.
Reduce building heights and associated floor areas.
Ordinance #30- Definitions and Miscellaneous Regulations
Create detailed definitions for all land use types.
Update miscellaneous code sections to reflect other code changes.
Ordinance #31- Growth Management
Establish requirements for second tier commercial replacement, alley, mid-block, sub grade.
Increase housing mitigation for non-second tier commercial spaces.
Explore mitigation requirements for existing spaces that have not previously mitigated.
Ordinance #32 – Parking and Mobility
Integrates parking and transportation impact analysis requirements into a mobility requirement.
Maintain existing parking requirement while implementing a soft maximum.
Require cash in lieu payments in certain areas to encourage mobility options over parking.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
9
Ordinance #33 – Commercial Design
Require meaningful accessible and usable amenity spaces.
Create design standards for second tier commercial space.
Update character areas.
Reinforce historic districts and neighborhoods.
Next steps
Ord 29 and 30 set for public hearing at the November 28th Council meeting.
Ord 31 and 32 public hearing on Dec 5th. First reading on view planes at December 5th meeting.
Ordinance #33 public hearing at the December 12th meeting.
Councilwoman Mullins said they did a fantastic job organizing this. Council could reconsider the
program for legacy businesses. This is a valid program and very successful in other cities. Section 5
number 2, minimal impact to a view plane needs to be expanded to fore, middle and background. You are
now calling public amenity pedestrian amenity. She does not recall when that change was made and
would like more detail on why that term works better. Pedestrian versus public is quite a big distinction.
On Growth management, she needs more discussion about increasing mitigation to 80%. It seems
arbitrary at this point. For parking, she does not remember seeing how many spaces are required per 100
square feet of commercial. Page 1271, public amenity again, should it be one or the other.
Councilman Myrin said he will be out of town for the November 28th meeting. He would like to not have
use mix and dimensional standards on this agenda. The lodging zone can overlay any these. Ms. Garrow
said there are a number of properties that have the overlay. They are not proposing any changes but there
are some changes to the commercial design piece.
Councilman Myrin sad there is no free market in the core, yet we have a multifamily replacement
program that requires free market in the core. His suggestion is to allow at the discretion of the developer
to switch it out for credits. It would not be competing against multi family. If our goal is to have second
tier commercial the multifamily replacement requirement is to continue it as the use we don’t want. Ms.
Garrow said we can provide information on how multifamily replacement works. There are about 210
free market units in the CC and C1 zones. Multifamily replacement requires a unit that has ever housed a
worker to be replaced with an affordable housing unit. Part is it is meant to provide housing for folks that
have been displaced. Councilman Myrin said the big goal is to have discussion as to whether to have
residential in the core as to whether to have residential and commercial with the residential through
credits. Councilman Frisch said definitely some free market units in the core that are operating as
undeeded affordable housing. I can’t imagine the incentive to buy and tear down with exactly the same
configuration. So we want to have as much commercial retail downtown as possible. It is worthy of a
discussion. Councilwoman Mullins said we need to understand what the multi-family replacement is.
Councilman Frisch said if we have room to tackle it during the moratorium that’s fine. It is a worthy
discussion.
Councilwoman Mullins stated it might move in to a bigger discussion of the multifamily replacement
program. Ms. Garrow said it is on the list for 2017.
Councilman Myrin said some of the St. Mary’s conversation was around commercial design. He is
hoping the moratorium will do things that we want. He wants to see a path that enables those that move
forward with the better things and less of those we don’t want. He would like to ask to have an
unintended consequences report. Is there a way to have that analysis. Ms. Garrow said we are continuing
to reach out to the development community to do just that. We don’t have the budget to do a report.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
10
Councilman Myrin said it might make sense to run the financial numbers on what we are asking for. On a
policy level we have asked to not allow the hosing numbers to be created in the commercial zones. We
might want to allow housing credits to exchange within the zones they are in or a certain distance. He
does not want it to cross zones but he is not opposed to seeing credits exchanged within zones. Might get
more of a Benedict commons space with consolidated affordable housing. Tring to do everything in one
small space loses efficiencies. Mayor Skadron said it provides developers consolidated commercial
spaces and what the community wants. Councilman Myrin said we have a handful of landlords here and
they could consolidate housing within the zone. Ms. Garrow said it would be more difficult for individual
property owners to do this. There is potential that it is used. We can look in to it.
Councilman Frisch said at a macro level we are trying to get some buildings to be smaller. The part we
are struggling with is what is inside these buildings. He is still scratching his head about what the locally
serving business part is. He needs more clarity about that. He supports the diversity of retail options.
Anything that brings that, he is supportive of. Overall the goal of nook and cranny spaces and supporting
the nook and cranny businesses. Legacy businesses, on the Main Street Bakery, it was run for 30 years,
his understanding is someone wants to open a new restaurant there. Businesses should add to the
diversification than keeping them around. If it is a restaurant what do I tell the other 25 that the city
wants to give a rent break for this one to stick around. Councilwoman Mullins said she is just asking for
a discussion on how did they put it together and is it successful. Does it only work in a large city.
Councilman Frisch said say we end up with a ban on chain stores. When would it take effect. Jim True,
city attorney, replied he is not sure I can answer that right now. There are a lot of issues associated with
that. Councilman Frisch said getting to buildings that are the right size for Aspen is the right direction.
Councilman Daily said he is looking forward to the public hearings.
Councilman Daily moved to read Ordinance #29, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 29
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO
CHAPTER 26.710 – ZONE DISTRICTS
Councilman Myrin asked about buildings that previously haven’t been mitigated. Ms. Garrow replied the
direction from council is to continue to explore that and it is part of Ordinance 31 to be discussed on
December 5th.
Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Daily, yes; Myrin,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #30, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 30
(SERIES OF 2016)
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
11
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO SECITON 26.100.104, DEFINITIONS AND CHAPTER 26.575, MISCELLANEOUS
REGULATIONS.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #30, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Daily, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #31, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 31
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO LAND
USE CODE CHAPTER 26.470 – GROWTH MANGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #31, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Daily. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Daily moved to read Ordinance #32, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 32
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO THE REVIEW CRITERIA FOR OFF-STREET PARKING: 26.515 OFF-STREET PARKING.
Councilman Daily moved to adopt Ordinance #32, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Myrin, yes; Daily, yes;
Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #33, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 33
(SERIES OF 2016)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO LAND USE CODE CHAPTER 26.412 – COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW.
Councilman Daily moved to adopt Ordinance #33, Series of 2016 on first reading; seconded by
Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins,
yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2016 – Ranger Station Subdivision – Subdivision Minor Amendment
and associated reviews
Councilman Frisch recused himself.
Councilman Myrin stated the packet contains the email from Chris Bendon to himself.
Curtis Sanders, representing the applicant, said he formally objects to Councilman’s Myrins participation.
He has questions about what was discussed. It was taking further testimony about what was discussed
and he was unable to cross examine the witness. Mr. True said he take exception to that. You don’t cross
examine anyone. Mr. Sanders said he didn’t have the opportunity to speak to Chris. Mr. True said it is
no different than anyone who speaks in public comment. Mr. Sanders said he did not reach out to Chris.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
12
Mr. True asked Councilman Myrin if you can objectively hear the application before you. Councilman
Myrin replied yes I can.
Jennifer Phelan, community development, stated this is a continued public hearing on five lots known as
the Ranger Station Subdivision. In 2013 the US Forest Service recorded a survey that created five lots
from a larger parcel. They must meet city standards including development allotment prior to being
issued a building permit. In May and September of 2015 the lot owners requested individual
development allotments. The approvals included calculations for affordable housing mitigation noting
that a fee or calculation change would be what would be in place when a building permit was submitted.
The fee in lieu amount has increased. This request is to record an amended plat with the council
approval. This would provide additional clarity around the subdivision. It will also require an
improvement agreement to outline what type of improvements are required for the subdivision as well as
an easement for the SI Johnson ditch. The second request is to remove the PD overlay on the lots. The
benefit is that no variations can be requested during development. The third request is to lock in the 2015
cash in lieu rate. This rate has increased. The difference per FTE is 78,000 dollars. In September we had
a public hearing. Council asked staff to meet and further discuss options. We had multiple meeting and
were not able to resolve the issues. Staff supports the first and second requests. We do not support the
third request. The city requires mitigation be calculated at the time of building permit. No permits have
been submitted. On a practical level staff recognizes the lesser amount was in place when the allotments
were granted and were at the table at the time and locking in the lower rate for the vesting is a reasonable
solution. This is a very unique circumstance and the Forest Service left this mess.
Mr. Sanders said he agrees with a lot that Jennifer said. The take away from the September 12th meeting
was try to find a middle ground. This has come down to middle ground between the old category 4 rate
and the new rate. Our approach was one possibility is split the difference. The applicants position is they
are not willing to do that because there needs to be something behind it. There is an October 6th letter that
I prepared to reiterate our position that there is a disconnect between the fee in lieu methodology. What is
frustrating is the RCC study was performed and the applicants agree with the results in the study. The
frustration is when you take the results and apply them to the ranger station you end up with 5 times the
mitigation then anywhere else. It does not reflect what the city asked RCC to do when they
commissioned the study. The ranger station lots are a different situation because we are dealing with
inclusionary zoning. This is an impact fee. Our position is we are paying 5 times what a scrape and
replace would. The best solution is we can move on and be satisfied with what we got in 2015. Our
request is you approve the ordinance with the 2015 rate.
Councilman Myrin said the staff memo sets the three issues out; recording the plat, the PD and mitigation
rate. Staff recommends approval of the first two and denial of the third. The Bendon email basically says
the same thing. The housing to me, gets back to inclusionary zoning. If Aspen is surrounded by federal
land and has a different set of rules, we potentially set free market rates and that is why we have the
zoning that we have. Because it went through a different process to get to this point I am not supportive
of this.
Councilman Daily said at the last meeting it was my hope the parties could find a middle ground. That
couldn’t be achieved. I am not comfortable or persuaded that the city’s position is not correct. It is
consistent to how it is being applied to other lot owners. I support the staff recommendation.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
13
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. George Baker, owner of Lot 3, said he is fully supportive of Aspen’s affordable housing
programs. He has lived here for 15 years and his kids go to school here. Our community
wouldn’t be as vibrant without it. Inclusionary zoning is meant to combat exclusionary
zoning. It is to provide for communities that are diverse. He is all in favor of inclusionary
zoning. He has concluded that a few things need to happen to make these viable. These need
to be legislatively adopted and broadly applicable. He does not understand the logic. There
is the matter of equity. This does not seem to comply with Colorado law. He has worked
with Curt and the other two lot owners. It is hard to get people on the same page. If we were
under a different section of the code the mitigation number would be much lower.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Councilwoman Mullins said we have looked at this several times. It has not been a clean process. The
fault lies mostly with the Forest Service for not following the city process. There is close to 2 million in
affordable housing mitigation that is on the table. If we continue this discussion, we are just delaying
using that mitigation. She would like to see it stop tonight and allow the 2015 mitigation figures to stand.
Councilman Myrin said page 1394 clearly shows it should have gone through the normal process.
Mayor Skadron said regarding the RCC study it came back saying the mitigation should be x. This says it
should be 5x. Ms. Phelan replied when new lots are created it is at a larger rate than a scrape and replace.
Mr. True said the inclusionary zoning concept is you can’t get the land that you would have otherwise
been provided through this process. Prior to 77 it is recognized as different. That does result in a higher
amount. We believe it is fair. Staff has recognized that part of the problem has been generated by the
Forest Service. They created these 5 lots. We have asked the applicant to do certain things to clean up
some of the difficult things they created. Including the survey, SI ditch, curb and gutters. They have
made some offers to us. I recognize the 5x does seem to be a lot. We can defend that. There is a lot here
that was not these applicants own doing. This has been complicated since day one.
Councilman Myrin said the last sentence on page 1398 – 30 percent would have been affordable housing.
Above that is payment in lieu fee with rates that every other developer has to go through. Ms. Phelan said
typically the requirement is physical square feet. The end result would probably not be 5 lots. It is a
certain percent of floor area that needs to be located in the subdivision. We do have a conversion of
square feet for FTEs. Onsite is difficult due to the number of lots that were created.
Mayor Skadron said passing the ordinance as written is reasonable. The city is getting something in the
exchange including the SI Johnson ditch, curb and gutters and alley access. We recognize the Forest
Service has left us a mess. It has been subdivided in a nontraditional way. He will uphold the deal the
property owners have got and will vote with Ann.
Mr. True said a two to two vote means changing a Council vote or continuing the matter until another
day. Ms. Phelan said there is a sunset clause for the lower rate. In 2018 if they don’t build they are going
back to the fee in lieu rate that was on the books when the ordinance was adopted.
Mr. Sanders said he does not want Council to think we dug in our heels and have done nothing. The only
reason we did not monkey around with the rate is we felt it was a nonstarter with Council. If there were a
creative solution, we would have pitched it. He does not think splitting the difference on the dollars is the
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
14
way to go. He would not have filed the application if he didn’t think the city was getting a good deal out
of it.
Councilman Daily said there is a certain value from cleaning up the left over pieces. He does not see the
value of cleaning those up is as high as giving up what is being proposed. He would consider adjusting
the total number down. The difference is too large today for me.
Mr. Sanders said if the motion doesn’t include everything the applicant will not pursue the plat.
Councilman Myrin moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Daily, no; Myrin, no; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Failed Action.
Mr. True said it is a failed action so the ordinance does not pass at this time. It is still on the table and
does not mean that it is denied. There is the choice to formulate a different motion to amend the
ordinance. Councilman Myrin said he could amend the ordinance to a cash in lieu rate of 183,733 to what
the city is proposing and would support the ordinance.
Mr. Sanders said he does not have support for that right now and his clients would not support it.
Mr. True said the issues like the ditch and curb and gutter have to be put forth in a subdivision
amendment and if we can’t get that agreement done within 180 days the ordinance and those conditions
are void. If all the terms are completed within the 180 days, the ordinance stands if not it becomes void.
Councilman Myrin asked if it is passed and the applicant wants to change it then they have a starting
point. Mr. Sanders said they would then have to come back and amend the ordinance and he knows his
clients are not in for that.
Mr. True said if it is tabled it would have to be renoticed if it is continued they can just come back.
Councilman Myrin moved to continue to December 5, 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #27, SERIES OF 2016 – 834 W. Hallam Street, Ordinance Amendment
Justin Barker, community development, stated this is a 6,000 square foot lot located on Hallam and 8th
Street in the Mixed Use zone. It is a historic landmark miners cabin with non-historic additions. This is a
100 percent affordable housing project with restoration and relocation. Prior to 1994 it was zoned R6 it
was then rezoned to Office then to Mixed Use. Ordinance 34 of 1994 rezoned the property to office and
imparted the floor area limitation of 4,000 square feet. Council was concerned the rezoning would allow
an increase in floor area and was not comfortable with that. The applicant voluntarily suggested the floor
area limitation. That is not typical of rezoning. This request is to amend that ordinance to increa se the
floor area from 4,000 to 5,400 square feet. The allowable floor area in the MU zone has two caps. It is 1
to 1 for Main Street and 2 to 1 everywhere else. The surrounding properties are R6 and RMF. R6 allows
3,600 for duplexes and RMF 9,000. Staff beliefs the increase to 5,400 is not significant and well within
what MU would typically allow. At the September 26th meeting HPC approval was presented to Council
for call up. HPC saw it multiple times. They determined the original 7,000 square foot project was too
big. The applicant reduced the project. As part of the approval there are two variances. One for the east
side yard setback and one for the minimal distance between two structures. HPC also granted a parking
reduction. Seven parking spaces are required and the applicant is proposing six. In terms of design HPC
granted some residential design variances including a reduction in the minimum size requirement for front
porch. They also requested the applicant to look further at the 8th Street porch. The SI Johnson ditch cuts
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
15
across the north west of the property. HPC allowed them to further study the ditch at final review.
Overall staff supports the increase in floor area only for an affordable housing project. Staff supports the
proposed design and not to remand it back to HPC. In addition to the public comment letter there was an
additional letter requesting the clause in the 5th and 8th whereas clauses regarding the development
proposal be removed.
Councilwoman Mullins asked what is the advantage of treating it separately not just this project. Mr.
Barker replied it should be for any affordable housing project not just this one. Councilwoman Mullins
asked what would keep someone from changing it to 6,000. Mr. Barker said they would have to amend
the ordinance. Councilwoman Mullins said she does not object to the 5,400 but she would rather see it
tied to a particular project. Councilman Frisch said he appreciates not wanting to tie it to rezoning but to
a particular project. What is the downside to tying the increase to affordable housing. If it is a different
team we still get the affordable housing.
Councilman Myrin said the HPC minutes say it is .86 to 1 and 518 Main was .92 to 1. Ms. Garrow said
that is correct. Councilman Myrin asked about the 500 square foot bonus. Mr. Barker replied they did
not request the bonus. They would have to go back to HPC to amend it and request the bonus. Matt
Brown, applicant, said they were told they couldn’t get it. That the ordinance supersedes it.
Councilwoman Mullins asked about the ditch. Mr. Brown said it currently goes under the parking lot,
that it is culverted.
Councilman Frisch said staffs review of the meeting minutes indicated Council may not have imposed a
cap if affordable housing was provided. Mr. Barker said it is hard to say. The 4,000 number was never
brought up until the applicant proposed it. All comments from Council expressed concern over expansion
of a free market residence.
Patrick Rawley, representing the applicant Matt Brown along with Stephen May from Forum Phi.
Mr. Rawley said they are comfortable with 5,400 square feet. This is an appropriate location for
affordable housing. They are proposing 7 units with 18 bedrooms. The property has resident gathering
areas, an onsite water feature, opportunities for small scale gardens, Victorian inspired landscapes, and is
adjacent to parks and amenities. He showed images of the design and elevations.
As far as the SI Johnson ditch, they have worked with the attorney, engineering, water and utilities. There
is a 10 foot easement, full culvert replacement in the alley and maximize separation of the ditch from the
structure. There are six parking spaces on site where seven are required. They will pay cash in lieu for
the remainder. They have proposed to screen of the parking from 8th Street. Two of the affordable
housing units will be in the existing Victorian and five will be in the new detached structures. There will
be decks on four of the seven units.
Mr. Brown said he thinks the program is good and wants to bring that part of town to life. He is happy to
have unanimous support from HPC and APCHA. The location is ideally situated for employees.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Bill Schafer, lives at 814 W Bleeker, said to take a look at what we are doing with historic
properties. This is a facility to pack in affordable housing. We will no longer have that historic
site. Part of a historic building is the lot it sits on. Historic sites are historic sites. This is a
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
16
beautiful site that should be redone. Putting affordable housing on it flies in the face of historic
preservation.
2. Kim Kaylin said her concern with the design is the lack of parking. She manages Centennial and
this should have 18 parking spaces not 6. There is limited parking there already.
3. Bob Bowden said he is a minority partner in this project. He has seen very few projects that are
as a win as this one. We need housing. We have satisfied HPC with this. We met 6 of the 7
parking space requirements. If not now, when. If not here, where.
Councilman Frisch asked what is the code as far as parking. Mr. Barker replied one parking space per
unit. It doesn’t matter the size. Seven are required they are meeting six and paying cash for one.
Councilwoman Mullins said there is a seven unit affordable housing development just down the street
from my house. At the time they were only going to provide four spaces and ended up with six. It has
been no problem. One of the guidelines is a distinction between new and old. There doesn’t seem to be a
lot of distinction. Mr. May said when we originally started it was in a different spot. HPC wanted to see
a more similar form. The plan is to differentiate with materials as we move towards final. Mr. Rawley
said the historic resource will occupy a prominent spot on the site and giving it its due. Mr. May said we
did try to get more modern with the building along 8tth Street.
Councilwoman Mullins said it would be great to have each of these historic building restored on large
lots. Unfortunately, that does not happen anymore. At this point there are two options, affordable
housing or a private residence. I’ve seen private residence much more detrimental to the resource than
this type of development. It is a compromise we have to make to save these resources.
Councilman Frisch said to go back to the historic building, when it is done in real life the building on the
corner will stand out more than in the drawing. Mr. May replied yes.
Councilman Myrin said as you come in to town the first thing you see are the Victorians of Aspen. I will
support this because the comments from Peter in the minutes. What concerns me is this is .86 FAR and
what is on Main is significantly more. Ideally we have a code that starts at 50 percent. Will this be
designed so there will be no snowmelt needed. Mr. May said we will take it into consideration.
Mayor Skadron said on parking the code requires seven. Kim suggested we think of it in terms of
bedrooms. Mr. Brown said Peter has two building and one had a full waiver of parking the other had a
three waiver of parking. Mayor Skadron said this brings loads of community values and furthers the
maturation of the credit program and activates this critical location in town. The square feet is not a
signification increase. He accepts HPC comments. It appears to be high quality and livable and meets
many of our community needs.
Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 2016; seconded by Councilman Daily.
Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes, Frisch, yes, Daily, yes; Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes.
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #24, SERIES OF 2016 – Transferable Development Rights, Public Hearing Continued
From September 26, 2016
Mr. True stated for the record Art Daily has left.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
17
Amy Simon, community development said the applicant would like to create three TDRs to be removed
from 119 Neale Avenue. Jeff Shoaf has been the owner of the property for some time. He came and
asked for a subdivision and created two lots. In the 90s he had the opportunity to buy a historic cabin
from Fritz Benedict and move it to the site. In 2011 he came to the planning office and asked to
participate in the historic program. Through the landmark program it was approved. He sold off one of
the lots and some TDRs were created. During the lot split Council decided to limit some of the density.
Council made the decision to limit it to a single family home. A year ago he asked to amend the
ordinance to allow a duplex and create more TDRs. In 2015 at second reading, partly due to public input,
he told Council he already had a duplex and partly hid it from inspectors. That brought the project to a
halt. The building department did an inspection and found some deficiencies. They did not find two
kitchens. A CO was issued recently for a single family home. The zoning allows a duplex on the site.
Recently the applicant hired Mitch Haas as his representative. They withdrew the duplex request. We
can just talk about TDRs. Staff still feels there is a violation. There is discussion about public comment
from the neighbors. There is a property line dispute. We see it as an issue between the neighbors. Even
if it is reallocated it still leaves the applicants property big enough for the lot split to occur and the TDRs
to be requested. We support the creation of the TDRs.
Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, said he started working with Mr. Shoaf three weeks ago. The
original approval for the lot split allowed for the TDRs. Even with the disputed property there would still
be enough lot area for the TDRs to happen. We are still attempting to work through the duplex issue with
staff. He is not sure why the neighbors are opposed to this.
Councilwoman Mullins asked if the 785 square feet was lost and the three TDRs are sold does it affect the
ability to do a duplex. Ms. Simon replied no, the fathering parcel is big enough for this amount of
density.
Councilman Myrin asked is it typical that TDRs be taken off one at a time or all together. Ms. Simon said
there is no requirement. There is no limit.
Councilman Frisch said he was a little hot under the collar the last time this applicant was here. I kind of
feel the same way now. We have someone violating some part of the city code and I would feel better if
he figured out his past transgressions before asking for more. Mr. True said our code does not have a
provision at this time that prohibits someone from moving forward with something. Enforcement of the
other issue is up to staff and the court. At this point the only thing you can do is review this application
under the provision of the code. Ms. Garrow said staff shares your frustration and as part of the
moratorium code amendments there is language in there that would address this going forward. The
request in front of us is for TDRs. Councilman Frisch said usually there is an applicant that sits in front
of Council that needs something by right. Mr. True said your flexibility is set forth by a reasonable
manner.
Mayor Skadron opened the public comment.
1. Kelsey Nichols, attorney representing David Fuente, stated that they oppose this application
because the owner does not have clear title. 26.304.030b2 states an applicant has to provide a
legal description. The title issues go back to 1977. The 785 square feet is a limited common
element of Urban Blight Condominiums. Land cannot be transferred separately from a
condominium unit. It would be a mistake to rely on the title report to determine this type of issue.
The 1995 deed shows more clearly the sliver of land. If he doesn’t own this land, we can’t
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
18
determine the maximum square footage or the total number of TDRs. Is he complying with
Ordinance number 2. She showed an image of the plat that was submitted with the application.
She requests that the application be denied. He has not met the minimum requirement of showing
clear title. It is my legal opinion there is a clear legal title issue. Without knowing the size of the
lot you just don’t know. Combined with the numerous enforcement issues there are too many
problems for council to be able to proceed. Mr. True said you don’t challenge his title to the
15,000 square feet that does not include the sliver. Ms. Nichols replied including the 785, lot one
is 12,765 and lot 2 is 340. We disagree it includes the 785.
2. George Benninghoff, owner of unit 2 of Urban Blight, said they have not been able to arrive at a
satisfactorily conclusion or quiet title action. He does not wish to stand in the way of Mr. Shoafs
use of his own property but do wish to stand in the way of the use of his property. The entity
itself made no such transfer of property. This is a fairly valuable little slice of property. It
prevents Urban Blights access to the roaring fork river.
3. David Harris said he does not want to deny Mr. Shoaf any of his legal rights. This has been
wrong, wrong wrong. He is asking council to get it right and go forward. He disputes the amount
of square feet on the plat. The fathering parcel is under 15,000 square feet. Even without the 785
square feet this lot does not qualify for 3 TDRs. He just wants it to be right. He would like staff
to redo the calculations. No progress has been made. The building is still being used illegally.
The CO was issues in September. Give us some certainty. He is not sure how you can hand out
TDRs when you don’t know what someone owns.
Councilman Frisch asked are you saying in 2015 there was a lack of clear title and he was going to work
on it and nothing was done. Mr. Harris replied my professional agreement is that strip of land is owned
by Urban Blight Condominium Association.
Mr. True said that Mr. Harris pointed out that lot 2 has 1.344 acres. We have struggled over this today.
This subdivision started with 30,001 square feet. It was divided that gave one lot 15,000 and ¼ square
feet. To say that .344 acres is a rounding issue. What you are forgetting is you started with 30,000 and
divided in half. If you didn’t have a 15,000 lot you couldn’t do the lot split. Even without the 785 of the
sliver that have over 15,000 that would translate into 3 TDRs.
Mayor Skadron closed the public comment.
Mr. Haas said there is a lot of dispute going on here. Council is being asked to play the court of law here.
My client has title to the property and a recorded plat. The plat is signed by a title examiner as well. We
know the size of the lot. It is on the plat. We are not asking you to decide on the size of the lot or the
duplex issue. We are asking you about the TDRs.
Councilman Frisch said in 5 years this is the second time ever there is a base agreement on some facts.
I’m not happy we are even having this discussion until some basic facts are even figured out. In this
situation like before it is a self-inflicted wound from the applicant. I’m not sure why we were forced to
take this up now in the midst of a moratorium. I’m not going to support the TDR thing. He also said on
the record that he was going to work on clean title and he has done zilch, zippo, nada. I’ve heard three
people say that he has done nothing. The applicant should come back when the bare minimum has been
met. Ms. Simon replied all we ask of the applicant is for a bare minimum title fact. That is what they
provided. Councilman Frisch said I’m not picking sides about who owns the sliver. Ms. Garrow stated
she is not sure there is much more analysis staff can do. There are often rounding errors to be some
clarity of who owns the property before he starts asking for more from the community.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
19
Councilwoman Mullins said if there is enough dispute should we go for another title search. Based on the
requirements and what you presented should go on plats. As Amy said the applicant updated their title
commitment, that is why we are here. If there is a dispute it is a private matter at this point.
Mr. True said a lot of this turns in to unraveling ordinance #2, which I don’t know how we do. If council
wishes to continuing the matter it would be under a further analysis of B and C. I agree with Jessica that
the arithmetic is arithmetic. It is a difficult situation. I’m not sure how we change anything by evaluating
it further.
Mayor Skadron said he wants to apply the criteria but I find myself unable to sufficiently apply B and C.
My suggestion would be to continue the matter for clarity. Mr. True said staff feels the criteria have been
met, despite the sliver. I support that position. We can see if there is anything that would change that
position. Ms. Garrow said we don’t have the resources or funding to do that. Mr. True said that may
resolve the whole thing. He does not know what additional work staff can do on it. You can ask the
applicant to do another full title search.
Councilwoman Mullins said too many questions have come up. She would support asking the applicant
to update the survey.
Ms. Garrow said Council is struggling with criteria C. She does not see Council making a decision
tonight. She recommends tabling or continuing to a date certain and have the applicant provide more
information either through a title search or a survey.
Mayor Skadron said he will not be bullied into an outcome that is unsatisfactory.
Ms. Garrow recommend tabling to provide time for the applicant to do that.
Councilman Myrin moved to table Ordinance #24, Series of 2016; second by Councilman Frisch. All in
favor, motion carried.
Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 10:50 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor,
motion carried.
Linda Manning, City Clerk
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 14, 2016
20