HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20050711Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
GREEN LEAVES AND GREEN TREE AWARDS .......................................................... 2
CITIZEN COMMENTS ..................................................................................................... 2
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ....................................................................................... 2
CONSENT CALENDAR ................................................................................................... 3
RESOLUTION #48, SERIES OF 2005 - Adopting National Incident Management
System ................................................................................................................................. 3
RESOLUTION #49, SER1ES OF 2005 - Fleet Replacement Front End Loader and Motor
Grader ................................................................................................................................. 3
REAPPO1NTMENT OF MEAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS ............................................ 3
ORDiNANCE #33, SERIES OF 2005 - 604 West Main Street Historic Lot Split ............ 3
ORDiNANCE #32, SERIES OF 2005 - Chart House final PUD ......................................4
RESOLUTION #50, SERIES OF 2005 - Limelite Lodge Conceptual PUD ..................... 4
ORDINANCE #31. SERIES OF 2005 - Adoption of Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan ......... 4
APPEAL OF CODE INTERPRETATION - HISTORIC LOT SPLIT FAR ..................... 6
BURLiNGAME RANCH CHANGE ORDERS ................................................................ 6
Regular Meetin~ Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
Mayor Pro Tem Torre called the meeting to order at 5:05 with Councilmembers Richards,
Johnson and DeVilbiss present.
GREEN LEAVES AND GREEN TREE AWARDS
Lacey Gaechter, environmental health department, told Council the Green Tree and
Green Leaves program is designed to award local businesses for environmental practices.
Ms. Gaechter announced CCY Architects earned 11 green leaves. They have inspiring
programs for the entire office and also practice green design. The Green Tree winner is
the Aspen Alps who received 14 green leaves. The Alps has 95% participation in
alternative transportation; they have energy and water conservation; they have a
composting program and use native landscaping. Ms. Gaechter presented the award to
Pam Cunningham, general manager Aspen Alps. Ms Gaechter told Council all
employees at the Aspen Alps will receive a free day at the Aspen Recreation Center.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
1. Tim Anderson, recreation director, announced the Aspen Recreation Center pool
recently hosted the largest swim meet on the western slope. Anderson noted the Aspen
Speedos did a fabulous job running the swim meet. The ARC handled the event well; the
event stayed on time; there was enough seating and enough deck space; the timing system
worked perfectly.
2. Toni Kronberg thanked the recreation department and Council for the
improvements to the pool. Ms. Kronberg said one of her goals is to build an outdoor
pool. Ms. Kronberg said the 4th of July parade was a huge success. Ms. Kronberg said
her Popsicle float handed out 6,000 popsicles and was a big success. Ms. Kronberg
suggested Council open up an EIS to expand highway 82 out of town where there are
bottlenecks.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Mayor Pro Tem Torre noted Mayor Klanderud is representing Aspen in Sundance
for a nationwide Mayor's meeting on climate change. Mayor Pro Tem Torre said the last
2 weeks has been full of happenings. Mayor Pro Tem Torte said the Aspen Ideas
festival, sponsored by the Aspen Institute, was an amazing discussion on many topics.
Mayor Pro Tem thanked ACRA and the Aspen Music Festival for their events. Mayor
Pro Tem thanked the city staff for their work on the last two weeks. Mayor Pro Tem said
the Taste of Aspen, put on by Rob Ittner, was a wonderful event.
2. Councilwoman Richards commended the Annabell Lodge for opening a true
lodge and not a fractional ownership project.
3. Mayor Pro Tem Torre said he will be attending RFTA this Thursday and will
distribute the agenda for comments prior to the meeting.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
CONSENTCALENDAR
Councilman DeVilbiss requested items a, b, and c be pulled from the consent calendar.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt the minutes of June 27, 2005; seconded by
Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION #48~ SERIES OF 2005 - Adopting National Incident Management
System
Councilman DeVilbiss asked if adopting this costs the city any money. Ellen Anderson,
emergency management coordinator, told Council there are no financial implications in
adopting this document. Ms. Anderson said this process was paid for by a grant from
FEMA. The financial implications of passing this and pre-disaster mitigation planning
makes the city and county eligible for funds if there is a declared disaster that could be
covered by federal funds.
Councilman DeVilbiss moved to adopt Resolution #48, Series of 2005; seconded by
Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carded.
RESOLUTION #49~ SERIES OF 2005 - Fleet Replacement Front End Loader and
Motor Grader
Councilman DeVilbiss said this language implies the city buys this equipment, it lasts 7
years and then it is bought back. Jerry Nye, streets department, said that is correct. The
machines the city is trading in now are 7 years old.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Resolution #49, Series of 2005; seconded by
Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
REAPPOINTMENT OF MEAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Phil Overeynder, water department, told Council the Municipal Energy Agency of
Nebraska is the city's utility provider for energies that the city does not own. The MEAN
Board of Directors votes on new sources of energy, sets rates, sets the budget and looks at
new projects. Overeynder said Nebraska has excess energy to provide in the winter when
Aspen most needs it; the fit works well.
Councilwoman Richards moved to reappoint Overeynder and Cox to the MEAN Board of
Directors; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #33, SERIES OF 2005 - 604 West Main Street Historic Lot Split
Councilwoman Richards moved to read Ordinance #33, Series of 2005; seconded by
Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 33
(SERIES OF 2005)
3
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11~ 2005
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR A HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 604
W. MAIN STREET, LOTS Q, R, AND S, BLOCK 24 CITY AND TOWNSITE OF
ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #33, Series of 2005, on first reading;
seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #32~ SERIES OF 2005 - Chart House Final PUD
Councilman Johnson stated he voted on this project as a P&Z member and has prejudged
the project so he will recuse himself.
Councilwoman Richards moved to read Ordinance #32, Series of 2005; seconded by
Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 32
(SERIES OF 2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE CHART
HOUSE LODGE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
INCLUDING SUBDIVISION, TIMESHARE, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION (GMQS) FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 6-9,
BLOCK 3, OF THE EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF
ASPEN, PITI{IN COUNTY, COLORADO
Parcel No. 2735-182-19-002
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #32, Series of 2005, on first reading;
seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Cotmcilmembers Richards, yes;
DeVilbiss, yes; Torre, yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #50~ SERIES OF 2005 - Limelite Lodge Conceptual PUD
Councilwoman Richards moved to continue this to July 25; seconded by Councilman
DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #31. SERIES OF 2005 - Adoption of Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan
Ellen Anderson, emergency management coordinator, told Council the item passed
earlier, National Incident Management System, is the over-riding agreement with the
federal government indicating that Aspen will adopt certain standards for incident
management. The pre-disaster mitigation plan is more specific to mitigation, which is to
try and prevent those things that are preventable. There are the response and recovery
phases.
4
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July lit 2005
Ms. Anderson said this process involved input from staffand from the public. Those
involved with the process came up with 6 hazards that are the most likely in Pitkin and
Eagle counties, like wild land fires, avalanches, flooding, mudslide and hazardous
materials. The planners came up with strategies to mitigate these hazards, like early
detection and warning devices for mudslides or warning devices for flooding. Each
hazard has strategies and these are ranked as high, medium or low. The strategy costs
range from inexpensive to hugely expensive. Adoption of this pre-disaster mitigation
plan will allow for the county to apply for FEMA funds in case of a disaster.
Councilwoman Richards asked if Council will see grants to the federal government
before they are submitted. Ms. Anderson said this document is necessary in order to
apply for grants but it does not obligate the governments to apply. Each grant can be
examined on its worth. Steve Barwick, city manager, noted when there is no obligation,
grants are submitted without Council approval. Any obligation on the part of the city
requires Council approval.
Councilwoman Richards asked if adopting this will create more liability for the city if
there were to be a disaster, which has not been mitigated for. John Worcester, city
attorney, said if the city got sued it might be. Worcester said he does not think this is a
reason not to adopt the plan. Councilman Johnson asked if this type of plan was in place
before. Ms. Anderson said this type of plan was mandated in 2000. There is nothing that
says the city has to adopt this plan; its adoption is required only if one wants to apply for
federal funds.
Mayor Pro Tem Torre opened the public hearing.
Tom McCabe said this exercise was very useful. McCabe said not identified in the plan
is the Castle Creek bridge, traffic and difficulty of response to emergencies on the other
side of the river. Ms. Anderson said this should be considered in the next go around.
Toni Kronberg said she was impressed that the Aspen Country Inn incident was listed in
this report. Ms. Kronberg said incidents like that at the Country Inn are affected by
wages, living conditions and rents. Ms. Kronberg suggested Council is going to have to
address subjects like that. Ms. Kronberg noted the plan addresses disasters caused by
nature, and there are disasters caused by humans, like terrorists. Ms. Kronberg said the
roundabout causes gridlock. Ms. Kronberg suggested the city work with CDOT on
widening the shoulder of the highway to let emergency vehicles get through the
roundabout. Ms. Anderson stated this plan addresses both human-caused and natural
disasters. Ms. Anderson told Council staff will revisit this document annually and solicit
public and staff input.
Mayor Pro Tem Torre closed the public heating.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #31, Series of 2005, on second
reading; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers DeVilbiss,
yes; Johnson, yes; Richards, yes; Torre, yes. Motion carried.
5
Regular Meeting Aspen Cit~ Council July 11, 2005
APPEAL OF CODE INTERPRETATION - HISTORIC LOT SPLIT FAR
Councilman DeVilbiss moved to continue the Appeal of Code Interpretation to July 25;
seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carded.
BURLINGAME RANCH CHANGE ORDERS
Ed Sadler, asset manager, reminded Council when they approved the first contract in
June, it was the original proposal and change orders already addressed by Council. This
is changes from the original approval and design change orders on which there were no
firm prices. Also included are additions Council may want to consider. The largest item
is adding basements in buildings D-2 and G-2; however, G-2 is not as large as D-2. The
basic issue is that staff relied on surveys already done. The design teams were asked to
respond in 3 months and no one had time to resurvey the property. These areas are lower
than anticipated. There are other design and construction issues with the basements.
Sadler suggested these units could be sold for more money. This would be a total of 7
units with basements.
Sadler said another option is not to build these two buildings, which would be lessen the
cost of the project and also provide less revenue. The scheme would be to move a 5 unit
building from phase II into phase I, which would be a net loss of 2 units in phase I. If
Council is interested in retaining 236 units in total build out of 3 phases, add building D-3
from phase II, drop D-2 and G-2 buildings in phase I. Sadler said another option not to
locate the topsoil and to sell these as lots, which would add two units. There are two lots
in phase II that could hold a 5 unit building. This would result in a net loss of 2 units
through phase II. Another option is that the dirt could be used at the golf course.
Councilwoman Richards asked if the survey information and the amount of topsoil to be
dealt with is information provided by the city and relied upon by the developer. Sadler
answered staff provided survey data obtained from other sources and provided the scant
soils information available. John Worcester, city attorney, pointed out the contract stated
the developer could not rely upon any information provided to them. They had to verify
all information. Councilman Johnson said he would like copies of the contracts and the
proposal submitted during the design contract.
Tim Semrau noted the contract states the developers are to submit change orders, to
include specifics like calculations, measurements, costs, equipment types, and labor
costs. Semrau asked why the developer is not submitting the request with all information
so that Council can make a reasoned decision. Sadler said what Semrau is quoting from
is an excerpt from the part two of the contract. This is not design related. Staff was
attempting to give Council options. Councilman Johnson said there are two different
types of change orders; one is smaller countertops, doors, etc. This is a physical site or
design change order and it seems to be radically different. Councilman Johnson said he
has difficulty looking at a change order for $141/square foot without any background
information. Councilman Johnson asked the proposed above grade square footage costs
at Burlingame. Sadler said these are over $200. Councilman Johnson asked the industry
6
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
standard for finished basement square footage costs. Sadler said about $120 depending
on other issues like drainages, water proofing, soils, etc.
Councilman DeVilbiss stated during the election he worked hard to make sure the Bar/X
annexation was approved and he thought he had a handle on Burlingame. Councilman
DeVilbiss said everyday the project costs more money. Councilman DeVilbiss said he
does not accept the statement that no one had the opportunity to do a top soil study.
Councilwoman Richards noted originally the developers planned to move all dirt on site
for all 3 phases and doing all grading at one time. Council chose to put offphase II for 3
to 6 years for several reasons.
David Guthrie said the voters were told phase I would be built and then the housing need
would be determined before phase II is built. Councilman Johnson said he would like to
see the contract language regarding the dirt management plan and also the other two
proposals regarding the dirt management plan. Councilman Johnson said he is 100%
behind Burlingame but does not want to get rushed into a $4 million decision without the
proper information. Councilman DeVilbiss said he wants Council to keep control of this
project. Councilman Johnson said he does not want to make decisions on any of these
change order requests without more information. Councilwoman Richards said Council
has chosen a design team and may not get quotes on every single thing. Steve Bar~vick,
city manager, said Council is looking for comparison pricing on these items. Councilman
Johnson agreed he wants surety and wants to see backing information.
Clark Atkinson, Shaw Construction, said there was some discussion about the developer
assuming the risk of the documents provided under the RFP from the city. Atkinson
stated his development team qualified the risks they were assuming. During the RFP
process his team noted the city's survey had a grade bust, a difference in elevation of 10
feet. This grade bust occurred where the 2 buildings under discussion are to be located.
Atkinson said his team requested a geotechnical investigation report for the site as this
would be essential in developing the site. The development team was told there was no
geotechnical investigation available and that they should make certain assumptions.
These assumptions are noted in the original proposal submitted to the city. The
developers assumed that the bearing capacity of the dirt on site would be 3500
pounds/square foot and there would be on average 6" of topsoil across the site.
Atkinson told Council when his team was selected by the city, they initiated a
geotechnical investigation which cost over $50,000. They also initiated a resurvey of the
entire site to verify where the discrepancy in the grades might lie. Atkinson said the
original costs submitted to the city included a resurvey of the entire site. Atkinson told
Council his design team spent over $300,000 in pursuit of this project; the other teams
spent a like amount of money. The geotechnical investigation and resurvey took months
and there was not time during the RFP process nor was it realistic to require 3 design
teams to have surveys done.
Atkinson said the grade elevation problems are at the confluence of buildings D-2 and G-
2 and in January the design team wrote city staff and identified 4 options for dealing with
7
Regular Meeting Aspen City, Council July 1 Iq 2005
buildings D-2 and G-2. These options are to delete building G-2 and add a type D
building from phase II into phase I. The problem with adding 2 units would eliminate the
handicap visit ability because the grades are too steep. The second option is to build
walkout basements in the unfinished shell space. The third option is to add 2 walkout
units under D-2 and 2 walkout units under G-2 to add a net unit count of 4 units but these
would not be accessible to handicap. The fourth option is to add 4 units under building
D-2 and eliminate two units on the north end of building G-2. These options were
discussed with the design team and with staff. Atkinson said the challenges are time,
controlling costs, maintaining a sustainable project and minimizing site impacts.
Atkinson said they also had to make sure there was not unsuitable settlement underneath
the buildings.
Atkinson pointed out their proposal targeted starting this project in Spring 2005 so they
could be under cover before winter. The design team is two months behind the
anticipated time line. Utilities started for these 2 buildings last week. Structural
excavation for those buildings will be started in the next 2 months. Atkinson said the
$880,000 change orders submitted includes all soft costs, design, civil, electrical and
heating systems. The actual cost of the unfinished basement space is $109/square foot
including the construction of the elevated decks. Atkinson pointed out the development
schedule contains deadlines the design team needed to meet and they have met all the
deadlines and staff has worked hard to help the team meet these deadlines.
Atkinson told Council there are issues related to the dirt management plan. The design
team assumed they would be able to balance the dirt on site; they would not haul dirt off
site nor haul dirt onto the site. This was based on the fact that dirt on site was adequate
beating capacity 3500 pounds/square foot; that there was an average of 6 inches of top
soil. When the geotechnical investigation was done, holes were drilled at the site of
every single building in all 3 phases as well as in road areas. The geotesting was done in
February 2005. There was no indication of an excess of unsuitable soils. Out of 25 or 30
holes, only a few indicated 2 to 3' of topsoil.
Atkinson told Council they found out through Gould Construction, who was installing the
road, that there was lots of unsuitable topsoil. Atkinson said at that time they went out
and dug more inspection holes on a grid and they found 2 to 3 to 5 feet of unsuitable
topsoil. Unsuitable topsoil means it cannot be used as structural fill underneath
buildings. This unsuitable material needs to be removed and replaced with something
more suitable. The geotechnical engineer stated all the materials should be "processed"
on site. The rock will have to be crushed and unsuitable material will have to be moved.
Atkinson said the contract states the design team will assume the risk of any pockets of
unsuitable soil to a cumulative magnitude of 1,000 cubic yards.
Steve Aiken, golf course, said there is 3 acres of soil 8 feet deep or 80 trucks/day for 6
weeks. Aiken said there was a golf course master plan done 10 years ago and when any
improvements are contemplated, staff checks with the master plan to make sure they are
in compliance. Council has approved a new irrigation system. Staff would like to create
separation between the 7th and 9th holes. Staff would like to eliminate the service road
8
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July lit 2005
through the golf course and take the soil from Burlingame and create mounding and
incorporate a water feature. Aiken told Council if the top soil from Burlingame were not
available, they would have to bring dirt on. Mayor Pro Tem Torre said Council received
a letter from Steve Fallender concerned about moving the soil to the golf course and how
that would affect the golf conditions, about the storage of dirt, not using it. Aiken agreed
he is not in favor of a stockpile of dirt on the golf course.
Mayor Pro Tem Torre asked if staffhas estimated all costs to the golf course. Jeff
Woods, parks department, said Gould would pay to move the dirt. Putting native seeding
on the dirt will be covered by Shaw construction. The irrigation is part of an already
planned city project. There are no additional costs. Woods said this is a good solution to
the excess dirt at Burlingame. Woods said staff is working on a reclaimed water project,
approved by Council, and a large pond to hold this water is needed. Dirt will be taken
out of the pond to increase its size. This dirt will also be used on the golf course.
Tim Semrau suggested Council take time to consider these change orders. Semrau said
the only time sensitive issue is the basements. Semrau said it is essential that Council
make sure the public knows their money is not being wasted. Semrau agreed Shaw's
contract states they are only liable for 6" of topsoil and the city is responsible for the rest
of it. The city will have to figure out the best way to remove this topsoil. Semrau noted
the contract spells out how change orders are supposed to work. Semrau said change
orders are supposed to show the hard costs, the soft costs, the 9% profit to Shaw and
exactly what is involved.
Toni Kronberg showed a photograph, which she is donating to Chris Bendon. Ms.
Kronberg pointed out Burlingame Ranch, Maroon Creek Club, and the highway. Ms.
Kronberg said the city needs to have a project that works and Council should not rush this
decision. Ms. Kronberg suggested Council go out to Burlingame and listen to the sound
pollution. The city could take this excess dirt and raise the berm along Highway 82
between that and seasonal Burlingame.
Councilwoman Richards said one issue before Council is whether to move one building
from phase II to phase I so as not to impact future residents. Councilwoman Richards
stated she supports this. Atkinson said the design team is trying to respond to requests
from staff and from Council to make this a great project and also to respond to
unforeseen conditions. Atkinson said for the excess dirt, a win/win solution is to haul the
dirt to the golf course. Atkinson said the design teams needs a decision on the dirt
management by the end of the week. Atkinson said Council has time to study the options
for basements in the D-2 and G-2 buildings. Atkinson noted there is a production
schedule and it could be modified to accommodate that decision.
Councilman DeVilbiss asked for a better budget number on the lift station. Atkinson said
a lift station is not needed for this site. If sewage ejection from those two buildings needs
to be accommodated, the cost would be at most $15,000. This is not a $500,000 issue.
Councilwoman Richards said the issue is to put in basements into D-2 and G-2, a lift
station would not be needed, and accessibility would be maintained versus not putting in
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
basements, having the buildings lower with no accessibility. The cost would be $880,000
for an additional 7,300 square feet of unfinished basement space. The third option would
be to fill it up and build on top with a different foundation. Atkinson told Council to get
to native bearing capacity soils, the foundation would have to be 12 or 13 feet deep.
Councilman Johnson asked under what conditions lift stations are required in the choices
outlined above, and what is the cost of lift stations. Mayor Pro Tem Torre said lift
stations are not being recommended for the unfinished basements. This would be an
individual homeowner's responsibility. Atkinson said a lift station would cost about
$7,000/building. Laura Kirk, DHM Design, told Council the buildings can be lowered,
they will not be accessible, injector pumps can be installed. This is not an ideal site and
the designers will have to create a way to get down 10 feet to these buildings. Ms. Kirk
noted when the project was originally designed, it had a lift station for the entire project,
which was very expensive. The design team found the lift station could be eliminated by
redesigning the sanitary sewer line from the Zoline project to this project. Atkinson
noted their proposal included $50,000 for the modification of the off-site sewer line.
Mayor Pro Tem Torre, Councilmembers DeVilbiss and Johnson agreed on moving
building D-3 into phase I.
Councilwoman Richards reiterated the contract states Shaw is only responsible for 6" of
topsoil, and earlier site work confirmed there was little top soil. The amount of topsoil
found to exist on the site has to be dealt with. Councilwoman Richards supports using
the topsoil on the golf course. Councilwoman Richards said she would like complete
nun~bers of moving topsoil to the golf course including seeding it. Councilwoman
Richards said she would prefer to make a decision on the basements at a continued
meeting. Councilwoman Richards stated she does not want to eliminate those 2
buildings.
Councilman Johnson said for the topsoil discussion, his choices would be trucking it to
the golf course or leaving it on phase III. Councilman Johnson requested any background
information to help with that decision. Councilman Johnson said the basement decision
is the most important one for Council. Councilman Johnson said he would like a cost
break down on not building the two buildings, installing a basement, or just installing a
foundation. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to know how many square feet
each unit will get out of the basement addition. Councilwoman Richards said she would
also like the pros and cons for each choice regarding basements. Councilwoman
Richards requested the relevant language from the contracts about change orders.
Council indicated they are not interested in adding units that would not be accessible.
Sadler said them is a decision about delaying phase II. Doing phases I and II almost
together could save money. Mayor Pro Tem Torre said the impacts of that decision are
community-wide and it is a very large discussion. Councilwoman Richards suggested
looking at the costs of storing the dirt on site rather than trucking it off site.
10
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 11, 2005
Councilman Johnson moved to go into executive session for the purpose of conferring
with their counsel and negotiations pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(a) and (e); seconded
by Councilwoman Richards. Council went into executive session at 8:50 p.m.
Council continued the Burlingame change order to Tuesday, July 11, 2005 at 5 p.m.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
11