Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Project Schedule And Costs topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council considers expedited land‑use timeline; staff flags $1M scope increase for turnkey delivery

Aspen City Council · January 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff proposed an expedited land‑use schedule (Feb application, April HPC, May council) to enable a mid‑2026 construction start and requested direction; they also outlined potential change orders—about $500,000 for added design scope and an additional $500,000 for FF&E—raising design/soft costs from $2.2M to $3.2M on the roughly $35M project.

Project staff asked the council whether to pursue an expedited, consolidated land‑use application and provided schedule scenarios tied to construction start dates. Jen Phelan said the team was looking to submit the land‑use application on February 3 with an April Historic Preservation Commission review and council consideration in May, which—if expedited—could allow a mid‑2026 construction start; without expedited review construction could more likely begin in 2027. Community Development Director Ben Anderson told council that planning staff believe the expedited land‑use timeline is achievable and would not unduly strain staff resources for the land‑use portion of the process.

Staff also disclosed scope evolution and potential change orders. Phelan and design team members described an approximately $500,000 change order to cover additional design work driven by the visitor center addition and expanded project complexity; they said furnishing, fixtures and equipment for a turnkey operator could add another $500,000, moving soft‑cost estimates from $2.2 million to $3.2 million—about 9.3% on a $35 million project. Council members generally supported expedited review to reduce future cost escalation but asked for further detail and for the city manager’s office to provide formal change‑order and financing recommendations ahead of any council authorization.