Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Aspen Valley Health's Beaumont housing project after accepting transportation and parking measures
Summary
After extensive questions from neighbors and councilors about density, unit size and neighborhood impact, Aspen City Council approved Aspen Valley Health's plan to redevelop the Beaumont into 60 affordable units and accepted a package of transportation demand measures and off-site posted parking in lieu of a cash payment.
Aspen City Council voted April 14 to approve Aspen Valley Health's redevelopment of the Beaumont site at 1301 East Cooper Avenue, authorizing a rezoning and special reviews that allow 60 affordable housing units aimed at AVH employees. The motion passed by roll call with Councilors Benedetti, Doyle, Guth, Rose and Mayor Mary Richards voting yes.
Tom Macaulay, chief human resources officer at Aspen Valley Health, told the council the project is part of a 10-year strategy to build up to 256 employee housing units and that the Beaumont proposal would add a net 40 units (60 proposed, 20 existing) to the hospital's portfolio. "A great employee experience starts at home," Macaulay said, arguing that proximate employee housing improves retention and patient care.
Applicant Chris Benden and project architect and staff explained the design includes five buildings with a majority of one-bedroom units (57 one-bedrooms and 3 two-bedrooms), 58 on-site parking spaces and proposed off-site posted spaces at the AVH campus for the remaining requirement. The applicant proposed multiple transportation demand measures including a small electric-bike fleet for residents, a shuttle van timed to shift changes, enhanced bike parking and a proposed rapid-flash beacon at the Highway 82 crossing to improve bus-stop safety.
Several neighbors urged the council to reduce density and increase setbacks; they raised concerns about headlights, site landscaping, community character and the small size of some units. "Tripling that amount seems to me disingenuous," one neighbor said, contrasting current site plans with earlier reports that showed a smaller rebuild. Supporters, including a former county commissioner and nearby property owners who favor employee housing, said the project is a necessary part of keeping essential workers in the valley.
Council deliberations focused on whether the applicant's proposed off-site parking and TDM measures sufficiently mitigate the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) findings. The final motion approved Ordinance 8, Series of 2026, and included council direction that city staff and the city attorney coordinate with AVH so that the applicant's described transportation and off-site parking commitments be treated as acceptable mitigation in lieu of a cash-in-lieu payment for remaining trips. The motion was carried by a 5-0 roll-call vote.
The approved ordinance requires deed restrictions and unit category designations consistent with APHA guidance for the reduced-size units and includes conditions described in the ordinance text about parking, shuttle service and safety improvements to the nearby bus stop. Council and staff also noted that some site-plan and landscape adjustments (screening walls, additional plantings) can be resolved through building-permit and landscape-permit review.
