Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners, staff and applicant clarify RO definition and growth‑management rules
Summary
At the Aspen hearing staff and the applicant clarified that RO (resident‑occupied) is treated as an affordable housing category under City of Aspen/APHA practices for replacement rules; commissioners discussed GMQS allotments and the commission's role versus the aspirational Aspen Area Community Plan.
During the Aug. 6 hearing on Aspen Hills, planning staff and the applicant detailed how Aspen’s code treats demolished multifamily units and replacement requirements. Staff said the code allows replacement with RO or a lower category and that, if there is evidence units were used by local employees, they must be replaced with deed‑restricted employee housing.
An applicant representative explained the arithmetic behind replacement units and mitigation credits: demolishing eight existing free‑market units would trigger replacement with eight affordable units (RO category), plus additional mitigation for newly added free‑market allotments; the project requests three GMQS allotments. The applicant also explained there are both price‑capped/rent‑capped category 4 units in the proposal and RO units that have employment restrictions but may not have the same price cap on initial sale.
Legal counsel advised commissioners that the Aspen Area Community Plan is aspirational and not a regulatory instrument; the growth management quota system language references the AACP but the commission must ground a denial in the code and record because decisions can be appealed. Commissioners said the record contains staff findings that the application is consistent with code and GMQS guidance; one commissioner nevertheless noted concern about relying solely on aspirational plan language to reach a denial.
