Home
News
ENLARGE
Infill lives.
The controversial package of zoning amendments that stymied the Aspen City Council and riled elements of the community for the better part of a year quietly passed into being last week, albeit in amended form.
With the City Council's adoption last week of three mundane-sounding zoning code amendments, a broad overhaul of the city's zoning regulations was completed. The action came a month shy of infill's genesis five years ago, when a citizen task force convened to study what was dubbed "infill" because it focused development inward - filling in the town, rather than outward sprawl.
As originally proposed, it aimed to foster higher-density, mixed-use development in the downtown core, redevelopment of commercial properties, rejuvenation of lodges and more in-town affordable housing. It also allowed taller buildings in most of the city's zone districts and eliminated most of the protected views in the city's current land-use code.
The prospect of taller buildings and lost views alarmed a vocal group of locals; there were hints that the legislation would be challenged through a referendum if the council adopted it. Instead, the council let infill, the 141-page ordinance, die in October 2003, concluding it was too difficult to swallow en masse. It has been adopting infill in bite-sized pieces ever since.
"I think for many - including the council - it was too much to comprehend and digest at one time," said Mayor Helen Klanderud after the final piece won approval last week.
While the various elements were subjected to sometimes arduous council scrutiny - changes to the lodging zone, for one - much of infill fell off the public's radar screen once it was no longer one single, all-encompassing rewrite of the rules.
Asked if she believes the general citizenry is aware that infill was ultimately adopted, Klanderud said, "No, I don't think they do know that."
While the council has enacted changes to every zoning district in town, many of the initial infill proposals were softened. Building heights, a highly charged issue in the original infill proposal, have come down from what was initially proposed. Taller buildings, however, are now allowed in most districts, often if a project meets certain other criteria.
At one point, members of the city Planning and Zoning Commission chastised the council for watering down the infill ordinance they endorsed, but in the end, commission member Ruth Kruger said council members were good stewards of the community.
The zoning changes are close to what the P&Z endorsed and will provide effective land-use tools for redeveloping properties where the old zoning regulations proved prohibitive to change, she predicted.
"I really hope we have some projects come in that conform to the new zoning, that prove it actually works," said Chris Bendon, head of the city's Community Development Department and the staffer who has massaged the zoning ordinances countless times.
<b>Infill, as it stands now</b>
Virtually all of Aspen's zone districts have been tweaked with respect to height and floor area. Some of the most closely watched changes came in the commercial core and lodging zones.
In the core, the height limit was bumped from 40 to 42 feet with the ability to reach 46 feet with an upper story that is recessed at least 15 feet back from the front facade of the building. Allowable floor area was bumped a bit if the project includes housing. Downtown parking requirements were eased. Retaining one-quarter of a property as a pedestrian amenity is still a requirement, but a fee in lieu of the space is now possible, or a pedestrian improvement can be provided off-site.
"Before, the city was going to get 25 percent of that lot whether it was a good idea or a bad idea. Now, we get to choose," Bendon said.
Incentives for lodging redevelopment constitute not only a significant change from the former regulations, but from the original infill proposal, as well. Instead of allowing growth of 11 lodge units per year, the city has set a ceiling on lodge development - 11,160 pillows, up from an estimated 8,583 currently. The allowable floor area has been bumped up and the affordable housing requirement has been halved. In addition, 25 percent of the square footage of a project can be developed as free-market residences to help finance a lodge redevelopment. The height can reach 42 feet for a flat roof.
The kicker is what the city wants in return - an average of 500-square-foot lodge units for every 500 square feet of property, with the ability to go to a 550/550 or 600/600 standard in certain circumstances. The goal is maintaining small, moderately priced lodge rooms.
Margaret Paas, whose family is pursuing a redevelopment plan for the Limelite Lodge, praised the council for adopting the new regulations.
"We could not redevelop without these changes," she said.
"The ability of the small lodges to redevelop speaks to the future of our community," said Molly Campbell, general manager of The Gant and a member of the Aspen Chamber Resort Association board of directors. "I think it's the right transition at the right time."
The new lodging rules are intriguing, according to developer Scott Writer.
"Prior to this code, you could figure out on a napkin that it [a redevelopment] wasn't going to work," he said.
Also emerging from infill was the ability to transfer "historic TDRs" or transferable development rights off of historically designated properties. The owner of a historic home can sell development rights in 250-square-foot increments rather than compromising the historic property with the added development. Nonhistoric homes are eligible for a boost in size with a TDR.
The city's seven protected view planes remain intact. The infill proposal would have eliminated all but one, from the second floor of the Wheeler Opera House looking south toward Aspen Mountain.
The Growth Management Quota System, Aspen's formula for controlling growth, remains, but the competition and scoring of projects has been dropped. The overall cap on growth is still 2 percent, except in the realm of new free-market residential construction. That growth is now capped at 1 percent annually.
Janet Urquhart's e-mail address is janet@aspentimes.com
The controversial package of zoning amendments that stymied the Aspen City Council and riled elements of the community for the better part of a year quietly passed into being last week, albeit in amended form.
With the City Council's adoption last week of three mundane-sounding zoning code amendments, a broad overhaul of the city's zoning regulations was completed. The action came a month shy of infill's genesis five years ago, when a citizen task force convened to study what was dubbed "infill" because it focused development inward - filling in the town, rather than outward sprawl.
As originally proposed, it aimed to foster higher-density, mixed-use development in the downtown core, redevelopment of commercial properties, rejuvenation of lodges and more in-town affordable housing. It also allowed taller buildings in most of the city's zone districts and eliminated most of the protected views in the city's current land-use code.
The prospect of taller buildings and lost views alarmed a vocal group of locals; there were hints that the legislation would be challenged through a referendum if the council adopted it. Instead, the council let infill, the 141-page ordinance, die in October 2003, concluding it was too difficult to swallow en masse. It has been adopting infill in bite-sized pieces ever since.
"I think for many - including the council - it was too much to comprehend and digest at one time," said Mayor Helen Klanderud after the final piece won approval last week.
While the various elements were subjected to sometimes arduous council scrutiny - changes to the lodging zone, for one - much of infill fell off the public's radar screen once it was no longer one single, all-encompassing rewrite of the rules.
Asked if she believes the general citizenry is aware that infill was ultimately adopted, Klanderud said, "No, I don't think they do know that."
While the council has enacted changes to every zoning district in town, many of the initial infill proposals were softened. Building heights, a highly charged issue in the original infill proposal, have come down from what was initially proposed. Taller buildings, however, are now allowed in most districts, often if a project meets certain other criteria.
At one point, members of the city Planning and Zoning Commission chastised the council for watering down the infill ordinance they endorsed, but in the end, commission member Ruth Kruger said council members were good stewards of the community.
The zoning changes are close to what the P&Z endorsed and will provide effective land-use tools for redeveloping properties where the old zoning regulations proved prohibitive to change, she predicted.
"I really hope we have some projects come in that conform to the new zoning, that prove it actually works," said Chris Bendon, head of the city's Community Development Department and the staffer who has massaged the zoning ordinances countless times.
<b>Infill, as it stands now</b>
Virtually all of Aspen's zone districts have been tweaked with respect to height and floor area. Some of the most closely watched changes came in the commercial core and lodging zones.
In the core, the height limit was bumped from 40 to 42 feet with the ability to reach 46 feet with an upper story that is recessed at least 15 feet back from the front facade of the building. Allowable floor area was bumped a bit if the project includes housing. Downtown parking requirements were eased. Retaining one-quarter of a property as a pedestrian amenity is still a requirement, but a fee in lieu of the space is now possible, or a pedestrian improvement can be provided off-site.
"Before, the city was going to get 25 percent of that lot whether it was a good idea or a bad idea. Now, we get to choose," Bendon said.
Incentives for lodging redevelopment constitute not only a significant change from the former regulations, but from the original infill proposal, as well. Instead of allowing growth of 11 lodge units per year, the city has set a ceiling on lodge development - 11,160 pillows, up from an estimated 8,583 currently. The allowable floor area has been bumped up and the affordable housing requirement has been halved. In addition, 25 percent of the square footage of a project can be developed as free-market residences to help finance a lodge redevelopment. The height can reach 42 feet for a flat roof.
The kicker is what the city wants in return - an average of 500-square-foot lodge units for every 500 square feet of property, with the ability to go to a 550/550 or 600/600 standard in certain circumstances. The goal is maintaining small, moderately priced lodge rooms.
Margaret Paas, whose family is pursuing a redevelopment plan for the Limelite Lodge, praised the council for adopting the new regulations.
"We could not redevelop without these changes," she said.
"The ability of the small lodges to redevelop speaks to the future of our community," said Molly Campbell, general manager of The Gant and a member of the Aspen Chamber Resort Association board of directors. "I think it's the right transition at the right time."
The new lodging rules are intriguing, according to developer Scott Writer.
"Prior to this code, you could figure out on a napkin that it [a redevelopment] wasn't going to work," he said.
Also emerging from infill was the ability to transfer "historic TDRs" or transferable development rights off of historically designated properties. The owner of a historic home can sell development rights in 250-square-foot increments rather than compromising the historic property with the added development. Nonhistoric homes are eligible for a boost in size with a TDR.
The city's seven protected view planes remain intact. The infill proposal would have eliminated all but one, from the second floor of the Wheeler Opera House looking south toward Aspen Mountain.
The Growth Management Quota System, Aspen's formula for controlling growth, remains, but the competition and scoring of projects has been dropped. The overall cap on growth is still 2 percent, except in the realm of new free-market residential construction. That growth is now capped at 1 percent annually.
Janet Urquhart's e-mail address is janet@aspentimes.com
