HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.Astor.19797,stor, Carla - Rezoning
a* 0
s,e
M � � Zv4.•,nyVy����}� . 1MD�. � pY�� Z��19�75 �+r11.11 � ��I�� — S�aWi
Ail VnJIJ - a 0�1- M4Yt�'Jj115-)4
All) hh�1a�'r,� �n, ,• �� d
Sh�Jy�h�tC �n�IYV� ��chh/1� \,O�-)fj I,
�`11t MAy,9
gYD
A -,Tors vi.4. LoT•l,z,a7 �d4°��r+,l n, A r- , i
I
qq
Astor RrZ on Jn7 _
�� �,�� iaee�r, al ► v ►' I
AhNxai l,�Y SDs—
Jac -
CA,
4p
NJ
NJ
-A
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Steve Burstein CC Glenn Horn
From: Alan Richman
Postmark: Mar 10,88 4:40 PM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Reply to: Astor Property R-6 Zoning Map Error
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply text:
From Alan Richman:
Glenn did the work on this. The rezoning was intended to correct a
prior mistake and should not have included Tom's land. I spoke to
Tom about this and suggested that if there is an error, I would
correct this during the adoption of the new maps. Please let me know
the result of talking with Glenn and show me the parcel we need to
change the zoning on.
Preceding message:
From Steve Burstein:
Tom Issac believes that his propoerty has been incorrectly included
in the R-6 zone district on the Map. In researching the 1982-83
rezoning of Carla Astor's property from R-15 to R-6 it appears that
only her property, which would correspond to the Astor Subdivision
(1980), was rezoned. Ord. 2 (1983) accomplished the rezoning and
refers to "Exhibit 'A'" which was not attached nor appears in case
file. In the absense of Exhibit A, its not totally clear, but it
appears Tom is right. Do you remember anything else about this?
--------------- ------
Ii •
.. _�-�.�.�'?(I..t':;-.+f°�''�qi'q•�;'L'ik':."f''r�*,,7r�%�`�e'�.'�{Yt��''i.'� .
�7
:Wed 11:0? Am may 14 1930 Reception# i
etta Banner Recorder MJK388 850
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS
�t
C. L. ASTOR 6 CO. a Colorado general partnership
(hereinafter reforred to as "covenantor") for itself and its
successors and assigns hereby covenants with the City of aspen,,
Pitkin County, Colorado, thac:
1. Covenantor is the owner of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Astor
Skilldivlaluri, situate in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Co lorad. .
The lower unit of the duplex situate on Lot 1, Astor
SuL�.!,rision, the lower unit of the duplex situate or. Lot 2,
Astor Subdivision, and the lower unit of the duplex to be
constructed on Lot 3, Astor Subdivision, shall be used and
occupied solely by low, moderate and middle income indi.viduars
as defined by Housing Income -Eligibility Guidelines estdblished
by City Council of City of Aspen within the provision of Section
24-10.-1 (b) (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen.
3. Tie covenants contained herein ..re to run with the
land and shall bind 6 bt specifically enforceable against all
present and subsequent owners .hereof, including the covenantor,
its successors and inte costs, grantees and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF; this Declaration has-been duly' '
executed this 13th day -of May, 1S80.
r
C. L. ASTOR & CO. a Colorado
general partnership
Carla L. Astor, general partn3r
t
IR,q i, 951
STATE OF COLORADO
) SS.
COUNTY OF PITKIN
Acknowledged,subscribe(I and sworn to berore me this 13th
day of May, 1330,
"ty CARLA L. -1,STOR, as general partner for
C. L. ASTOR & CO. a Colorado general partnership.
My conLm'.ssion expires: Z-
Witr,-Ss my hand and official seal.
Notary Public'
1W,
-2-
I!jy 854
STA7;: OF COLOFU%DO
ss-
COUNTY OF PITKrN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before 'ie this
day of May, 1980, by HERMAN EDEL, Mayor, and KATHRYN S.
v.
KOCH, Clerk of the City of sper, -
seal.
.1itnes-_ my hand an-7 -fficial. a!
My commission expires: .Jy ccznmis-:Gn apoi s h:uzzy 29, 1C.-
CL.
Notary Public
STATE OF COLORADO
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
, g
I day of May, 1980, by CARLA L. NSTORas eneral rartner
for C. L. ASTOR & CO. a Coj^rado general partnership.
d official seal.
Fitness mv hand in
My commission expires: 5,
Notary Public
:�A portion of Section 7, Township 10 mouth, Range 84 West
of the 6th Principal Meridian, Part of Lots 2, 3, 4, ar.t. 5,
Block 5 ana Dart of Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughes Add!tlon,
and a part- of Queen Street more fully,.deacribed as followst
Beginning at a point on the Southerly- line of King Street,
said point being S. 180331 E. 365.26 feet from Corner No. 11
Tract-40, East Aspen Additionj thence S. 24*309 W. 142.63 feet
thence S. 3802611 W. 76.76 feett thence N. 7302911 W. 149.21 feet
thence ff. 230391 Z. 142.87 feet? thence N. 66*216 W. 107.58 feety"'l-,
thence N. 34*450 E. 93.75 Leek to the Southerly. line of King
Streety thence S. 66*211 E. 255.32 feet along the Southerly
line of King Street to the point of beginning.
j
• it-
3 8 8 851
AT I E-&RADO
V.,
NHS
COUNTY OF PITKIN
Acknowledged,subs ibed ana s..;orn to;berore me this 13th
day Of may, 1530, by CARL. ASTOR, as general partner fc/r
C. L. ASTOR & Co. a C lorado general partnership.
My conan.:.ssion expires: r i -,j
witness my hand and official seal.
Notary Publid
-2-
�.t;i....f?r'=�ror�c,•.t�r1�ti'�f�':L�:t;..'M �.��� �IJlt�av,'.
7rded 11:00 AM may 14 1930 Reception! � !
!tta Banner Recorder?
uc,K 8 .:850
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS
C. L. ASTOR s CO. a Colorado general partnership
(hereinafter referred to as "covenantor") for itself and its
successors and assigns hereby covenants with the City of aspen, ;
Pitkin County, Colorado, that:
1, Covenantor is the owner of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Astor
tiut.l►vlatc�n, situate in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Co lorad• • .
:. The lower unit of the duplex situate on Lot 1, Astor
Su►.,:11fision, the lower unit of the duplex situate or. Lot 2,
Astor Subdivision, and the lower unit of the duplex to be
constructed on Lot 3, Astor Subdivision, shall be used and
Occupied solely by low, moderate and middle income indi.viduaft
as defined by Housing Income -Eligibility Guidelines
estdblished,-
by City Council of City of Aspen within the provision of Section
24-10.4 (b) (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen,
3• Tie covenants contained herein "re to run with :he
land and shall bind a bt specifically et,forceable
against all
present and subsequent owners '.hereof, including the covenantor,
its successors and inte costs, grantees and assigns.
IN WITNESS WPEREOF, this Declaration has-been duly ' . `
Y
executed this 13th day. -of May, 1.80.
:
C. L. ASTOR & CO. a Colorado
general partnership
Carla L. Astor, general partnei
'��
RECO110 OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Lv tvcs
.WM •� C t wnl rr ,�. rl. ! . 1. C,
ORDINANCE NO.
(Series of 1982)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 24-12.5 OF THE ASPEN
MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADOPTION OF CRITERIA FOR THE
EVALUATION OF REZONING APPLICr?TIONS
WHEREAS, Section 24-12.5 of the Aspen Municipal Code provides
that rezoning applications by private landowners may be heard only
during October of each year while rezoning applications initiated
by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council may be'heard
at any time during the year, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council believes that it will be
helpful to private applicants to be aware in advance of any poten-
tial application of a set of evaluation criteria which would com-
prise part of the review of any rezoning application, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen .City Council does wish to formalize these
criteria by including them in the Aspen Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission did con-
sider proposed amendments to Section 24-12.5 of the Municipal Code
at a public hearing on April 16, 1982, which would establish cri-
teria for evaluating rezoning applications and which make certain
other regulatory reforms, and did recommend in its Resolution 82-4
that City Council adopt said amendments, and
WHEREAS, the City Council does wish to accept the recommenda-
tions of the Planning and Zoning Commission by the adoption of
criteria for the evaluation of rezoning applications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLOP.ADO:
Section 1
That Sedtion 24-12.5 of the Aspen Municipal Code, entitled
"Application by Private Landowners" be repealed and reenacted as
follows:
/bl. •1 G. /. M,,-rKrl P. e.. 1. CO.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
Sec. 24-12.5. Application by private landowners.
(a) Rezoning applications by private applicants shall be
heard by the planning and zoning commission only durin<;
meetings scheduled by the commission for this purpose in
the months pf April and October of each year, provided,
however, that applications submitted pursuant to Article
VII of this chapter, concerning Specially Planned Areas
and Article X of this chapter, concerning Residential
Bonus Overlay, may be heard at any time during the year.
Public notice by one publication in a newspaper of
general circulation within the city that rezoning appli-
cations are being accepted shall be made not later than
January and July 15th of each year.
(b) Applic�abns to rezone shall be submitted prior to Feb-
ruary•cind August 15th of each year. Such application
shall4include an accurate survey map of the area in-
cluded in the proposed change, and, in addition, must
include:
(1) The names and addresses of all owners of real pro-
perty within the area of the proposed change;
(2) The names and addresses of all owners of real pro-
perty within three hundred feet (300') of the area
of the proposed change;
(3) The signature of the applicant, who shall be an
owner of real property in the area of the proposed
change;
(4) A petition in favor of the amendment, signed by
real property owners representing eighty (80) per-
cent of the land area included in the application,
if property other than that owned by the applicant
is affected.
(c) The planning and zoning commission shall hold a public
hearing on the rezoning application provided that notice
of such hearing shall be given as follows:
(1) Notice shall be published once in a newspaper of
general circulation in the city at least fifteen
(15) days prior to the hearing date.
(2) A written notice of said hearing shall be sent by
first class mail at least fifteen (15) days prior
to the hearing date to property owners within the
. area of the proposed change and within three hun-
dred feet (300') thereof. Owners of residential
multi -family condominium units may be served by
mailing sufficient copies of any such required
notice (one for Qach owner) to the record address
of their homeowners' association.
(d) In reviewing the rezoning application, the planning and
zoning commission hearing shall consider, but not be
limited to, the following evaluation criteria as they
may apply to the particular application under consider-
ation; although the Commission need not make findings
relative to each of these criteria:
2
0
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
(1 ) Compatibility of the rezoning proposal with the
surrounding zone districts and land use in the
vicinity of the site, considering the existing
neighborhood characteristics, the applicable area
and bulk requirements, and the suitability of the
site for development in terms of on -site charac-
teristics.
(2) Impacts of the rezoning upon expected traffic gen-
eration and road safety, availability of on- and
off-street parking and ability to provide utility
service in the vicinity of the site, including an
assessment of the fiscal impact upon the community
of the proposed rezoning.
(3) Impacts of the rezoning upon expected air and water
quality in the vicinity of the site.
(4) Analysis of the community need for the proposed
rezoning and an assessment of the relationship of
the rezoning proposal to the goal of overall com-
munity balance.
(5) Compatibility of the proposed rezoning with the
Aspen Area General Plan of 1966, as amended.
(6) Whether the proposed rezoning -will promote the
health, safety and general welfare of the residents
and visitors to the city of Aspen.
(e) Following the close of the public hearing, the planning
and zoning commission shall forward to the city council
a report and recommendation on the rezoning applica-
tion.
Section 2
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
Section 3
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the
day of , 1982, at 5:00 P.M. in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, 15 days
3
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Le .vt�s
prior to which hearing notice Of the game shall be published once _
in•a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND 012DERED published as provided by law by
the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular
-meeting held on the day CD 1982.
erman Ed el
Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch
City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, pasted and roved z>n th-e azy 'Of
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch
City Clerk
44
4Nezmzaln zi e-1
in�ffo�r
.,. 3
Astor Rezoning Vicinity Map
N
i K tea.
�1 t
1` b
19 9 0
0
j..
0
5 O�
4 p CCU$
es U cd Do s.e. I
Vq R p r11P1 �.----
--- 2--
Marc z t�
s e.
G1t3SU��
�oT 2 R 1 5 A ` Ib coNpps I'
PARK ��p 5RowNELL
P K/NG s.� loT I �E 4 I
�'
,-RE KTREE SU6 for 2 1 ASTO
•------- ---Z P 2
R6
QUEEN S'c'
HERRON PARK
s^U'H 1/4
\ j PARK CORNER, SECTION
`0�41 �amwwml
hmn,
ss-yn__�eTn
+
II' IE
NoFrt oEtAcf-
t � I
12
0 0 i
AVE. z
E. HYMANQ+
W
W NO
I11
,S n-
�r_
6 W
�6 3
V I I— - - f 001V�:.1cui
Astor Rezoning Vicinity Map
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 26, 1979
1979 Maroon Bells Bus Program
Curt Stewart reminded the Boards the County had put up $25,000 in return for certain
services from the city. Stewart said the Maroon Bells bus program started very slowly,
and he cut back on the level of service. A final accounting to the city for this service
was listed in a memorandum. Stewart requested the agreement be amended to -reflect the
actual costs and that the County pay the city $18,649 as opposed to the $25,000. I�
Councilman Isaac asked about the program for next year. Stewart answered there will be nol
bus service to Maroon Bells; it is not budgeted. Council said they had no problems with
the figures. Finance Director Butterbaugh said this figure met her approval and is best i
accounting figure. 11
Extension of Hiqhlands Bus Route
Duane Fengel, transportation director, told the Boards the Highlands Lodge owners and
residents had approached him about running an extension of the'Iselin Park route to High-
lands. This would be a way for people to get into town and home at night. Fengel pointed,
out that Highlands is out of the city limits; however, Silverking and Mountain Valley bus
routes are also out of the city limits. Fengel said the City is already running bus
service to the high school and Iselin Park. The additional cost is about $10 a shift.
Fengel said the reason he came to the joint Boards is that this is a county area, and the
county should thing about this as a future bus route.
Councilman Behrendt noted this is a big problem route in terms of inclement weather and
asked how it could be done for $10 a day. Fengel said the biggest problem they have had
is the amount of school kids; this would take place after school hours. It is only an
extension of 7/10 of a mile for a total of 8 miles per day. Councilman Isaac asked if
Fengel had asked the lodgeowners to pay the $1500 for this service as it would be less
expensive for them to pay $1500 than buy vans. Fengel told the Boards the lodgeowners
argument was that the city goes out of the city limits on nearly every route and these
people are not paying. Fengel said the people from Highlands would be riding the buses
into the city and spending money, in Aspen. Fengel said he felt the county ought to contri-
bute to this system.
Commissioner Kinsley noted the city is reluctant to charge for bus systems; however, when-
ever the route goes outside, the city could charge. Ochs asked if there were figures for
extending the route to T Lazy 7. Fengel said this had been tried before; the problem is
the road up there and it would cost a lot more money. Councilman Behrendt said the High-
lands Ski Area has not cooperated with the city, and if they want to pay, the city could
provide the service. Steve Pier, representing lodgeowners,.told the Boards they feel
because the bus does run outside the city limits to other place, they should not have to
^�•• F^- ^^ ^^ n4er said the ridership after 6 p.m. from the Highlands -to --town i. 41 i--
__-___� Mountain Valley route, arrd th�e-rou�te-igjustified. �I
Councilman Parry asked if the county would be willing to split the cost. Kinsley said he
did not have any problem with the $750; however, this is a beginning of splitting things
and Kinsley did not want to begin that. Tom Okin, county finance director, said the city
system is funded from 7 penny funds. The county system is funded from fares and property
taxes. The people staying at Highlands will come into Aspen and spend money; Aspen will
get money from the sales tax. Councilwoman Michael stated she did not have any problems
with the city picking up the route. If is the ski season, and if the city can find the
$1500, the city should do it. Ms. Butterbaugh said this could be added to the 1980 budget,
but for 1979 it will have to be squeezed out of the transportation budget. Councilman
Collins asked if this would also be for the summer. Fengel said his basic concern was this
winter season.
Councilman Behrendt moved that the city pick up the $1,500 for the after six o'clock run;J
seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried. II
A-95 Review: Congress of Senior organizations l
Budge Bingham explained to the joint Boards was this grant request would cover. Commissioner
Kinsley moved for favorable comment; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor,
motion carried.
COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES II
No minutes were submitted.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
f
There were no comments. I
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilman Isaac said he would like to set a meeting on the Wheeler Opera'House and to
get a task force together. Council scheduled a work session for Wednesday, November 28
at - noon. d
2. Councilman Isaac said he would also like to set a meeting on the water master plan.
Lois Butterbaugh told Council the staff is meeting with water attorney John Musick and
Jim Markalunas so that the staff can go through the draft before it is brought to Council.
Ms. Butterbaugh told Council they would be ready to discuss t^is ,;itCouncil in December.
II�i 3. Councilwoman Michael brought up the community housing workshop and asked that it be !;
well publicized and that Council should get people to attend.
II4. Councilman Parry said the tolley group is pursuing the possibilities of financing and !I
would like to ask Council for a franchise. Mayor Edel said this deserves some in-depth
study,
RPQ.,�ar M�pt�ng Aspen City Council November 12, 1979
Section 4
That the above -adopted rental price terms include the base
property tax assessment. Increases in property taxes above those,
assessed in the base year may be assessed, pro rata, in addition
� to the rental price adopted. For the purpoik�e 94cttbon the
property taxes assessed in the base year will be defined as the
property taxes due and payable on the third year following GMP
approval on the project or the property taxes due and payable on
the second year following the issuance of the .final certificate of
occupancy for the project, whichever is greater.
Section 5
That the housing price guidelines adopted in Section 1 shall
be modified from year-to-year in an amount equal to the increase
or decrease in the Denver Regional Consumer Price Index. Such
modification shall be made by the Council, or its- designated
administrative officer, on or before October 15 of each calendar
year. The provisions of this section notwithstanding, the rental
price of any unit may not fall below the rate established in the
I year in which the project application -received Growth Management
approval.
Section 6
That the housing price guidelines adopted in Section 2 shall
I be modified from year-to-year in an amount equal to he increase
ior decrease in the National [sousing Index averaged with the
increase or decrease in the Denver Regional Housing Index. Such
modification shall be made by the Council, or its designated
administrative officer, on or before October 15 of each calendar
year. The provisions of this section notwithstanding, the rental
Ilprice of any unit may not fall below the rate established in the
year in which the project application received Growth Management
approval. s
Section 7
As the price guidelines are modified from year-to-year within
the terms of Sections 5 and 6 above, they shall, as modified,
apply to low, moderate and middle income housing previously
approved, but separate guidelines shall be adopted for applica-
tions seeking approval under the Growth Management Plan.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Resolution 120, Series of-1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. Councilmembers Parry and Isaac in favor; Councilmembers Van Ness, Michael and
Collins opposed. Motion NOT carri^a _
Councilwoman Michael stated she is looking for a redraft and is not against price guide-
lines. Councilwoman Michael said she.wanted to know exactly where they go, and the
different guidelines.
Councilwoman Michael moved to reconsider Resolution #20, Series of 1979; seconded by
Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilwoman Michael moved to table Resolution #20, Series of 1979 to the next meeting;
seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Collins moved to adjourn at 9:02 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in
favor, motion carried.
Kathryn S Koch, City Clerk
Reqular Meetinq Aspen City Council
JOINT MEETING WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
November 26, 1979
Mayor Edel called the joint meeting together at 4:05 p.m. with Commissioners Kinsley and
Child, Councilmembers Collins, Isaac, Behrendt, Michael, and Parry present. Also present
were County Manager Ochs, County Attorney Stuller, and City Attorney Stock.
1. Waterwater Treatment Agency Management Agreement. Mayor Edel stated he had problems
signing this agreement as he reels the city is making a mistake if they give up control
over areas so vital to the growth of the city. Mayor Edel said the city has a good
working relationship with the current board and should continue that relationship. Council
man Isaac said the compromise is that municipalities within a county would have equal
vote with that county; the County gets as many votes as there are municipalities within it,
and the municipalities get one vote. Ms. Smith said she had problems with Snowmass or
Basalt voting on things that affect the Aspen area. Ms. Smith said she would prefer a
system where she municipality affected votes with the county.
Heiko Kuhn, representing the Sanitation District, told the Boards that the people on the
District Board know what they are doing; they feel with this agreement some of their
powers will be delineated. They are not going to sign the agreement. Kuhn said the
Districts operate the plants and do the work; they should have a say in this. Kuhn said
this is another level of bureaucfacy being put upon them. George Ochs said the history
has been alot cf rivalry in cther counties and this agreement may be a way to solve them.
Mayor Edel suggested some Councilmembers should attend the Sanitation District meeting
to present their approach and come up with one approach. Someone from the County should
also attend.
Special Meeting_ Aspen City Council November 5, 1979
transpires in between will not affect the court case, Michael seconded.
Butterbaugh noted that this process could be very costly and time consuming. Van Ness as
how much of their legal fee budget has been used to date. Stock could not estimate. He
guessed they have used at least 1/2 the hours alloted. Assuming there is no discovery,
they have used 30-45%, if there is a discovery, they have used 5% of the total time.
Dunaway noted the motion stated 60 days and he did not feel they could get a mediator in
60 days. Stalf noted the last mediator too], 1-2 years to get anything out of it. Van Ne
felt this was a subversion of the legislative process. He felt they have stretched their
laws as far as they would go and felt the court was the proper route to go. He felt it a
bad precedent to set.
Roll call vote: Councilmember Collins, nay; Councilmember Isaac; aye; Councilmember Van
Ness, nay; Michael, aye. Motion denied.
Councilmember Van Ness moved to adjourn the meeting, Councilmember Isaac seconded. All
in favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourned at 1:45 PM.
Sheryl Simmn, Deputy City Clerk
0
i
•
Special Meeting- Aspen City Council November 5,� 1979
The Aspen City Council held a special meeting on November 5, 1979, at 12:00 Noon in the Cit)�
Council Chambers. Members present were George Parry, John Van Ness, Thomas Isaac, Charles
Collins and Susan Michael. Also.present were City Manager Wayne Chapman, City Attornev
Ronald Stock, Karen Smith and Joe Wells of the Planning Office, Finance Director Lois
Butterbaugh and Assistant City Manager HJ Stalf. ;
H
Stock told the Council the Chamber wishes to put together an adhoc committee to mediate
between the City and the Institute. Stock met with the adhoc committee to explore the pos
oibility of a settlement. They ask that the Council take two steps today, recognition of
the adhoc committee and approve some form of a set of procedures for the mediation. After
Council recognition of the committee, they will.attempt to obtain a general. agreement.
This agreement will define location, footprints, open space, etc. Stock noted that the
Council could deliberate through their attorney who could negotiate in closed sessions and
then take formal action at public meetings. The committee would like to make a presenta-
tion to the Council at a public meeting. If a solution is reached, the stipulations would
be signed and recorded. He noted that anything settled out of court would go through the
processes set up in the code. He recommended that if there is a sign stipulation, the In-
stitute form the SPA plan and jointly submit it for approval. Once approved, there should
be a dismissal of the law suit. He warned that the adhoc committee may have as much trouble
as the Council did in obtaining such documentation as is necessary.
i
Councilmember Van Ness was afraid they would end up in the same stalemate as before. He
felt the bottom line was the question of whether the Institute's proposal is exempted from
the GMP or not. Iie saw no point in pursuing the question without this major point being
clarified. Smith said the question lay in whether the Institute was unique in terms of
land use and clearly distinguishable from the kinds of land uses controlled through the GMP.
She noted that when the GMP was -adopted, there was a discussion at that time whether the
Institute should be exempted; the question was deferred until the.application was submitted.
Parry noted they are now worried about losing lodging facilities and asked whether they were
in favor of letting the Institute be lodge use. Van Ness said it was a large precedent to
set. Parry did not agree with locating all the tourist accommodations next to Aspen Moun-
tain since most tourists do not ski Aspen Mountain. Smith said they located the tourists
near the mountain.to keep them near transportation, commercial usas, etc.
Chapman felt if the Council really wants to try to keep the Institute in Aspen, they should'
go with the adhoc committee for negotiation. He noted it is very difficult to mediate by
committee, he felt it should be a one man job. The mediator must also be impartial. Stock'
noted the adhoc committee is not impartial. Michael agreed with Chapman and felt one repre-
sentative was desirable. Isaac'was happy to negotiate but had a problem with an inexperi-
enced mediator. Chapman felt the mediator must define the process carefully to prevent the
negotiations from falling apart in the final stages. Van Ness felt his bargaining cupboard
was bare. He felt -the main question was whether they are exempt from the G11P or not. He
was not in favor of hiring a mediator to rehash rhP old was in favor of taking
the case through court and finding n114- if tho; ^ 4 -- ••-•--- ` itutional. Stock
updated the Council on the proceedings in court on this case. Chapman asked, if the Council
decides to pursue the suit and the judge rules in favor of the City and its GMP, is the
Council willing to lose the Institute to preserve the GMP. He wondered if the answer wasn't
somewhere in between. He felt if the Council is willing to compromise, within reason, they
should pursue some type of mediator. The Council could set a time limit on negotiation.
Stock noted that if they ask for a dismissal of the case, it can never be brought back to
court. They can ask for a suspension. Chapman felt they should pursue the suit as quickly
as possibly to a legal conclusion. Stock agreed they should push the suit quickly but also
felt they should explore the possibility of negotiation outside court. Chapman felt it
would be difficult to be successful in mediation when the same case is being pursued in
court. He felt it would adversely affect the mediation atmosphere. He suggested setting a
time limit for the mediation so the question would not hang over the Councilmembers heads.
Isaac noted that the Institute is suing the Council, not the other way around. The Council
voted 6-1 that the City's laws are legal. He asked Councilmember Michael how their appli-
cation had changed since the Council denial. Michael said their major request is the 40%
tourist use, calculated on a quarterly basis. They are proposing a gift of land to the City
around the parking area for a buffer to the West End, zoning the race track as greenbelt
and a few general statements of principle; one, a statement of Institute presence in the
valley and that the Institute would recognize the Chamber of Commerce as a broker to fill
their facilities with conferences in high ski season. She felt they were willing to discuss
limiting overnight tourist accommodations. She agreed that they need to decide which route
they are comfortable with. She was not comfortable with the legal route. Isaac felt they
needed a legal opinion on the GMP exemption. Michael asked Van Ness if he had the legal
answer to the GMP question, would he be willing to negotiate, Van Ness said yes. Chapman
felt if the Council was looking at amendments to the GMP, they should negotiate out of court.
Stock felt it necessary to pursue both negotiation and the trial. Chapman asked if it was
possible that the Institute would stay in Aspen even if the City won the suit. Van Ness
felt it was possible and felt they will build as much as possible on their land. „
Collins noted that the Council and P&Z have gone over the various Institute applications
for many years and he questioned the need for another committee to attempt a settlement. j
He was not in favor of this option. Van Ness felt they should consider how much the City 11'
want$ to compromise, he felt they had gone as far out on a limb as possible. Isaac felt
the Institute must be willing to compromise. He was agreeerle to the idea of a mediator !
but was not willing to go over the proposed 92 units. Chap,aan noted that the mediator muse
know how far each side will compromise. He asked the Council to consider how much time and
money they were willing to invest in the mediation. Isaac was, willing to try to settle out
of court but questioned the potential contribution of this group. He appreciated their
attempt to assist. Chapman noted if the Institute is not willing to suspend their law suit,
the mediation probably won't work. fsaac agreed with Chapman. Stock felt the suit has a
damaging affect on the City and the Council. He felt the motions that have been filed
should be heard and determined by the court. Chapman felt they should assian a time limit
to the mediation. He noted the money that would be spent on the suit would go to the nego
tiating. Van Ness felt they have been mediating all along, he,did not feel the Council
could stretch their laws much further. Stock noted they must get the Institute to agree to
a suspension and added that the Institute lawyers feel the Council is delaying the suit.
is
Councilmember Isaac moved to have a professional -mediator hired jointly by the City and the
Institute if the Institute suspends their court case for up to sixty days and if whatever
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 26, 1979
Councilman Parry moved to put this on the agenda; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All
in favor, motion carried.
5. Mayor Edel asked recreation director Ted Armstrom to tell Council about the money fcr
the purchase of the Moore property. Armstrong told Council he had followed through on
everything possible. The final appraisal came in September 11. The BOR has a problem
because part of the appraisal is missing and the person who did the appraisal is out of
town. Armstrong said the city will get the $100,000. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council that
the note is due December 18, and it will take 6 to 8 weeks to get the money from the
federal government. City Attorney Stock told Council that the note is not renewable; if
it is extended, it will be at a higher interest rate. Council needs to give the authority
to borrow longer. Staff will bring this to Council at their next meeting.
6. Mayor Edel said committee assignments need to be made for the next meeting. Mayor
Edel suggested councilmembers be assigned to COG, Wheeler Opera House task force,
Visual Arts Board, Board of Realtors, Chamber of Commerce, Lodgeowners Associations.
PUBLIC HEARING 1980 BUDGET
1. Candi Harper, representing Grassroots, asked Council to reconsider their donation
towards Grassroots for 1980. Grassroots is a unique resource, and the governing body of
the City of Aspen has a responsibility to that resource. Grassroots has been going through
a reorganization process; they are trying to make the activities pay for themselves but
do need money from donations. Ms. Harper told Council they appreciate the space in the
Wheeler. They had 350 volunteer hours over the summer and have received CETA grants for
employees. Councilman Behrendt said he had attended Grassroots organizational meetings
and it was apparent to him that they were going to organize in much the same manner and
he objected to that. Councilman Behrendt said Grassroots had been misorganized and run
down. Councilman Behrendt stated he had seen nothing to indicate that the community
should put further tax dollars into Grassroots. Councilman Behrendt said he would like
to know the Boards plans, the programs, what is going on.
Councilman Behrendt said Grassroots is asking for $4,000 and he would like justification
for that amount. Ms. Harper said they hoped to have public affairs programs, to do
morning programs and give public service information. Councilman Behrendt pointed out
there is no request in front of Council. Councilman Behrendt said he felt the program-
ming had been shabby. Councilman Behrendt said he wanted to see something in writing
before considering this. Grassroots presented a packet to Council. Mayor Edel said
Council would read this before the next budget hearing.
2. Bob Nuffer, representing Aspen Mental Health Clinic, requested the funding for the
AMHC bP reconsidp red. Nnffpr said they were looking at alternative funding sources, such
a- ,.t -A m=,-"_ }*,^ - " s. Councilwoman Michael pointed out the funding .
went from $8,000 to $9,000. Mayor Edel said the Council had used the axe on everybody
after many and long budget sessions. Councilman Behrendt pointed out by .statute this is
a county function, not a city function. AMHC is already being funded to a point of
$30,000 by local governments. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out there was a $1500 reduction in
the last session; however, there is a matching grant request that the city has not been
aware of that is $1400.
Councilman Collinq said he would like to see Council give full funding to this request.
Councilman Van Ness agreed. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out the Council had to have firm
figures on the budget tonight for publication. This request can only be funded out of
the general fund, and general fund monies are tight.
Councilman Behrendt moved to fund Colorado West (AMHC) at the level of $9,000 for this
budget period; seconded by Councilwoman Michael.
it
Councilman Van Ness said as far as donations, he had a hard time putting museums in the
same categories with ambulance, mental health and mountain rescue. Mayor Edel pointed
out the arts do not get funded if the city does not get the money from the real estate
transfer tax. Ms. Butterbaugh reaffirmed that general fund monies can be reallocated from
departments and line to line. Councilman Van Ness pointed out on the non -arts budqet
there are two museums, which he would consider to be in the arts budget. Mayor Edel
noted the Council's liberal interpretation.of the arts is being denied; this is a very
small and restricted view of what the arts are. This limits Council. Councilman Collins
agreed the Council had to define what those arts shall be or there will be these
questions every year. Councilman Collins said that the opinion that the transfer tax
cannot be used for capital costs but only for operating costs is a bad precedent. Council-
man Collins said he felt it would be appropriate to fund capital costs out of the $100,000
when an arts group needs some improvement.
All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Collins. Motion carried. Mayor Edel
closed the public hearing.
I
Mayor Edel said he would like to schedule a discussion on the limits and definitions of
the contributions to the arts area. Councilman Behrendt agreed Council should set up
how all the contributions will be done next year. Mayor Edel said Council had to decide
if they felt the strict limitation of the interpretation of the $100,000 is correct.
Councilman Van Ness pointed out what was objected to in the donations was using the money
for capital improvements to a city -owned buildings. Ms. Butterbaugh agreed there is no
restriction for a capital purpose.in support of the arts; the objection was the city
building. The transfer tax says "for support of" and makes no distinction.
Councilman Isaac moved to accept Ms. Butterbaugh's memorandum to accept the contributions
as they are set up; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. j
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 26, 1979
Councilman Behrendt asked Council to reconsider to contributions to the Visitor's
Bureau. Councilman Behrendt pointed out most of the funding for the city's budget comes
out of the Visitor's Bureau program, which is tourism. Councilman Behrendt said he felt
this was a place the city could put money into and get money out of. It seems short-
sighted to cut $15,000.
Councilman Behrendt moved to reinstate the monies for the Visitor's Bureau; seconded by
Councilwoman Michael. Councilmembers Behrendt and Parry in favor; Councilmembers Isaac,
Van Ness, Michael, Collins, Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carried.
Councilman Isaac moved to accept the budget and request it be published in the Aspen
Times as presented; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
OCCUPANCY LIMITS OF RESTAURANTS AND
Fire Marshal Bob Jacobs told Council he had been asked to measure the bars for occupancy
and to ask the owners if they were happy with his calculations for occupancy levels.
Jacobs told Council most of them came very close. The Uniform Fire Code requires 15 j
square feet per person for drinking and dining establishment. Jacobs said there have not
been many complaints. Councilman Van Ness said he"also wanted to know how the present
seating capacity compared with square footage calculations, and will places be required
to remove seating. Councilman Parry said Council wanted to know if places actually held
more than the square footage calculations, coulc the law be changed. Jacobs said he did
not feel it necessary to change the law; only on certain occasions are there problems.
'i
Bob Sproull, owner of Jake's, said he had contacted a number of restaurant owners who
were concerned about this. Sproull said there is a difference between restaurant spaces
with tables and places that are mainly bar/lounge areas. Mayor Ede! said this needs more
thought than categorically saying it should be 15 square feet per person. Mayor Edel
said he would like a committee formed to come up with a workable solution.
Councilman Behrendt moved to cable action on this until a committee made up of himself,
Councilman Parry, Bob Jacobs, Clayton Meyring and members from the business community
can meet; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman
Van Ness. Motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the renewals for the Wienerstube,.Country Road, Elk''s
Guido's, Meadows, Carl's Pharmacy, Jake's and the Shaft; seconded by Councilman Parry.
All in favor, motion carried. �I
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the renewals tor the Home Plate, Berkley/Aspen, and
Pablo's conditioned upon approval from Tom Dunlop; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in
favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFERS - Fireside Restaurant
Tom Dunlop told Council this establishment did not have a food service license and would
like final approval conditioned upon this. City Clerk Koch told Council this is a
request to transfer the license located at 130 West Cooper to Kurt Salvisberg with a
lease from Peter Mocklin for three years. �I
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the transfer contingent upon Dunlop issuing a food
service license; seconded by Councilman Parry. All'in favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - Rush Street
City Clerk Koch told Council when Casey's defaulted on the lease, the premise was
taken over by the Bank of Aspen, who paid the state sales taxes. The premise then went.
to District Court and was given in receivership There is a lease from the receiver to
John McQuire and purchase agreements with the bank. Tom Dunlop told Council he would
like approval conditioned upon his issuing the food service license. j
Councilman Parry moved to approve the liquor license transfer subject to Dunlop's approval;
seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried.
TRANSPORTATION ITEMS
1. Aspen Ski Corp Addendum. Duane Fengel, transportation director, told Council the
agreement will have to be changed because the buses ordered will not be available until
March, which would do no good for the ski season. The City will take delivery on the
buses in October 1980. Fengel said he felt the city would be able to provide the Ski
Corp with the two extra buses they need. Councilman Isaac asked if the city would get
them at the original cost. Fengel said he had not gotten an answer from Georgia.
Fengel told Council in the original contract for gasoline, everything over $.55 the Ski i
Corp was to.pay for. Ron Stock told Council the Ski Corp's attorney feels the city
should take all the gasoline received, average out the amount of the gas at different
prices, and work out a percentage for every gallon in the tank. Mayor Edel said his
reading from the Ski Corp wat that they agreed with Fengel. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council
the buses are not budgeted and are not on purchase orders; the city is not obligated to j
take them if the company is notified.
Councilman Isaac said he would.like to know the price and the price increase. Council-
man Isaac said he would li!:c to !:now what the penalty is for putting delivery off six i
months. Council asked Fengel to get firm figures. Mayor Edel asked that when this is ;)
resolved, the Ski Corp be informed in writing.
' II
t�
� 1�
.... ........__.
26. 197
Councilman Van Ness pointed out the Council's job is to get employee housing produced
that people can afford. Councilman Van Ness said he would like to know how to cut the
rent. Reents said the easiest way to do that 'is cut the size of the units. Mayor Edel
asked for the comparative costs per square feet for the modular approach versus the
Miller approach. Reents said there are two variables that cannot be tied down, the site
work on each one. Plugging in a square foot cost basis there is about $1 to $2 per square'
foot. Reents said it would cost the city money to get the kind of projection with site
work on each. To accommodate a modular project, the site work would have to be entirely
redone. Councilman Behrendt pointed out the Council'has gone over this design again and
again and asked the city to continue to pursue the program underway. Councilman Isaac
agreed he thought Council had accepted this design. Councilman Van Ness said these are
luxury penthouses that have been designed and are too big, and the rents will be ridiculous.
I.
Reents told Council presently the land wcrk will be $500,000. Reents said the easiest
way to accommodate the modular structures would be to join forces with the Oden group, and
to accommodate that design, the water plant site would have to be reworked. Reents pointed
out this project has units that do not meet the minimum size requirements. "Mayor Edel
agreed that if cutting the size of the units would cut the rents that.would be fine.
Mayor Edel said the city's plan seem more ambitious than the county project; it would seem!
the site work would be more expensive. Reents pointed out that $36.50 was quoted to the
city this fall as construction costs, including foundation everything up to the roof. In
addition, there was $7.50 per square foot for site work at $43.00 per square foot costs.
The modular construction costs are cuoted at $30 to $35; this does not include site work
and foundation.
Councilman Behrendt moved to proceed with the.Miller plan and move ahead to break ground
as soon as possible; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. i+
Ms. Butterbaugh said Council did not have enough information to make a decision, and a
$2,000 expenditure to determine if the site is appropriate on a $4,000,000 project is not
inappropriate. Councilman Collins said he would like the result of the last expenditure
that was authorized for this project. Reents said it was his understanding that the
expenditure was to firm up the Figure for the site work for the bond issue. Reents is
asking for an additional expenditure to produce a comparative figure between the two
designs. Councilman Van Ness said he wanted to go with the design that produced the
cheapest rents. II
I
Councilmembers Michael and Behrendt in favor; Councilmembers Van Ness, Isaac, Collins, and]
Parry opposed. Motion NOT carried.
Councilman Parry moved to authorize $2,000 to do the site work; seconded by Councilman
Behrendt. Ms. Butterbaugh requested sdme time for the staff to get more work to compare
the two designs _,...—wan Van .Ness moved to table the !
decision until la..,._ 1.. ..Y ..uuw;.L.Lman Isaac. All in favor, motion
carried.
SEars Building rezoning was tabled at the request of the applicant. --
ASTOR REZONING
Councilman Isaac stepped down from discussion. City Attorney Stock told Council this is
a request by Carla Astor to rezonL- from R-15 to R-6 51,000 s uare feet of ro ert'
lobated on Kin stree Presently, there are two up exes on the site. T e proposal is
to allow construction of a third duplex and then de—ed restrict 3 of e units to employee
housing. Stock told Council R-6 zoning would allow for 8 units in total. This item
was recommended by the housing director to get deed restricted units. The city attorney
recorinended denial based on the fact that to rezone individual pieces of property on a
case by case basis is inconsistent with the zoning code. This has some negative aspects
of spot zoning. Stock said he felt it might be difficult to stop R-6 from moving further.
Stock told Council the planning office feels it might be appropriate to wait for the
housing overlay. The P & Z recommended Council approve this rezoning 5 to 1 to obtain
employee housing. Stock stated the density is not inconsistent with the build out in the
neighborhood. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, told Council they are doing
exactly what Council has requested; creating permanent employee housing. Kaufman showed
Ccuncil the property on maps and pointed out the tremendous'buildout in the neighborhood.
Kaufman told Council the property used to be R-6 zone. The size of the lots will be
15,000 square feet; they are not creating smaller lots. Kaufman stated that he did not
feel this is spot zoning; it will be for the general welfare. Kaufman said he felt it
was important that this pass as someone will continue to provide employee housing. i
Three tenants of Ms. Astor's, Pete DeGregorio, Craig Landy, and Marilyn Keating, told
Council they supported this; that their rents had been very reasonable. Councilman Behrendt
pointed out Council had recommended the balance be 75/25 rather than the proposed 50/50.
Councilman Behrendt asked which units would be employee housing. Kaufman said there are
2 two -bedroom in front and 1 one -bedroom in back. I!
Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the zoning from R-15 to R-6 of the Astor property
as described in exhibit A; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried.
Stock -pointed out he would draft an ordinance for finalization of this. 1
TROLLEY FRANCHISE �� i' `
Councilman Parry told Council he believed they could get trolley financing. The next
step would be for the City to grant a franchise to someone to run the trolley. In order to
get financing, the oeoole have to know if this '_9 -C'_ng tc be pu sucd. StcC: told Council
the Charter requires the city to negotiate a franchise, adopt an ordinance and send it
to the voters. Councilman Parry said there are three more trolley cars in Portugal, and
they would like to try to get the cars over here. Councilman Behrendt said he would like
feedback from the highway department. l�
4
0 . 0
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council _ November 26, 1979_
2.' Energy Conservation and Savinqs. Fengel told Council he has come up with an energy
saving device to save oil when the oil is changed on the buses. The machine will pay for
itself in five months. The machine blends the existing crank case oil with the diesel
fuel. This will also refine the fuel. Fengel told Council he had not gotten the figures
together for the fuel farm.
3. Marketing and Advertising. Fengel told Council the transportation department has
hired Monroe Sommers to be involved in marketing the system in Aspen. Sommers told Council
he perceived his responsibilities to increase local- public awareness and use of the free
transit system; to develop and disseminate information to encourage the seasonal visitor
to use public transportation, and to develop.additional sources of revenue to the city;
to reduce the traffic congestion, and to improve the air quality. Sommers said he is
trying to develop programs to try to get tourists' attention before they get to town_. He
is trying to work on brochures for the lodge owners and condominiumization. Sommers
brought up a source of revenue may be advertising in the buses. Sommers has talked to
a company that would take care of sales, marketing and maintenance of the advertising
system in the buses. This company would reimburse the city on 30 per cent of the gross
receipts. Sommers has also contacted 7 other companies that may be interested. Council-
man Parry said the city may not be interested in national -type advertising, only local
advertising. Mayor Edel said he had no great objections to Coors, etc. advertising in the
buses. Councilman Van Ness said he felt an important consideration was the income that
would.be generated to the city. Councilmembers Michael,.Parry, Behrendt and Mayor Edel
all said they approved of the idea. Councilman Van Ness asked what the rates would be.
Sommers said they would be about $20-25 per sign.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Hoquet
Karen Smith, planning office, told Council there are no problems in recommending this
subdivision exemption for a duplex at 118 East Bleeker with the attorney's and engineering_
comments and subject to their conditions. City Engineer Dan McArthur told Council he had
recommended the parking be relocated and in order to do that some existing trees have to
be relocated. It is too late in the season to do that, and McArthur is allowing them
until next summar to do that. Chuck Brandt, representing the applicant, stated they did
not see any reason to relocate the parking unless sidewalks are installed. There is off
street parking with concrete parking within the city's right-of-way. Brandt told Council
that P & Z asked it be removed and put in off the alley for parking. Brandt requested it
be left the way it is. McArthur said P & Z wanted it relocated because they are parking
in the public right-of-way. Mayor Edel stated if the sidewalks were put in, he would
concur. Ms. Smith told Council one of the purposes of subdivision is to achieve the
dedications and improvements consistent with subdivision design standards. The Council
is granted a benefit to somebody; in return they have typical exacted commitments that
full subdivision procedures would provide. 'McArthur explained the engineer's request
that the parking area would be abandoned at.the owner's expensF •ham^ +ro ^�"
_red sidewalks to --be constructed. -- i
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption conditions upon the instal-
lation of a water meter; six month minimum lease provisions; owners shall agree to enter
into a sidewalk improvements district to be deed restricted, and agree to move the parking
in the right-of-way and relocate it in the event of the installation of sidewalks; seconder
by Councilman Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Somers
Dan McArthur told Council the planning office recommendation is for approval subject to
the six month minimum rental restrictions and the engineering conditions. The engineering
department has received the final plat and the owner has the parking located in the public
right-of-way. McArthur recommended the owner extend the existing parking spaces towards
the existing building to provide parking not in the public right-of-way; the owner
provide only one driveway, and the owners enter into an improvement agreement for side-
walks.
Jon Seigle showed Council the plat with the existing parking. There are six trees that
are in excess of 20 feet high; the owner of the property does not want to take the trees
out. McArthur stated the trees are not in the way of moving the parking. Seigle said
the engineering department wants one road cut and four parking places, stacked two and
two. The applicant would prefer four single places. McArthur said he could grant a
variance from the 18 foot driveway requirement if it were submitted in writing. McArthur
said this parking is in the public-right-of-wav; it should be allowed to remain there
until a sidewalk is installed. Then the applicant should deed restrict to relocate the
parking. Seigle said the applicant would agree to that condition.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Somers subdivision exemption with the six month
minimum rental lease restriction, with the parking and side cuts approved by Dan McArthur
as shown on the plat; applicant must remove the parking off the public right-of-way
when and if it becomes necessary, without protect, and include installation of water
meter; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried. �I
WATER PLANT HOUSING REPORT
Jim Reents reminded Council they had asked for comparison of cost figures from switching
to modular -type housing compared to the project currently designed for the water plant.
Reents told Council his analysis of the cost break down is that the costs are very
similar. The difference with the county project is that the one bedrooms units are the
size of a studio and are smaller than the current recommendation for employee units.
Reents recommended the Council proceed with the current project as designed by Jack
Miller. Reents asked for Council's direction to get tight cost figures together for
the election, whether to pursue an alternative design.
• . • 2 7.5
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 26, 1979
Dave Farney told Council he felt the voters would approve this. It is very charming and
a cost effective thing. Farney said it would be efficient to use electric power.
Councilman Behrendt said if this does go to the voters, he would like the routings as
part of it so that the people know where the cars will go.
Councilman Isaac moved to allow this to go to the voters for approval of franchise;
seconded by Councilman van Ness.
Councilwoman Michael said she felt if this goes for a franchise, Council should decide
if they feel it is a good idea. If it goes to the voters in an ambivalent way, it is
not fair. Councilman Collins asked what a franchise obligated the city to. Stock said
the city would be granting permission to operate on city streets, charge certain rates
and to construct and operate. Councilman Parry said the city should have an opportunity
to clean up the town and get pollution free vehicles. The city needs to be far-sighted
to see an alternate method of transportation.
Finance Director Butterbaugh asked Council to delay a vote on this so that the staff and
Council can go back through the information and make assessments on the impacts to the
city other than just the franchise. Mayor Edel agreed he did not have enough informa-
tion from staff and would like a written report.
Councilman Isaac withdrew his motion; Councilman van Ness withdrew his second. Council-
man Behrendt moved to ask for comment from staff, from the highway department; to address
the routes in question, the impacts on parking; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All
in favor, motion carried. ;
ORDINANCE #73, SERIES OF 1979 - Mobile Home Park Regulations
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. Stock told Council tie has not had an opportunity
to put in writing all the changes.
Councilwoman Michael moved to continue the public hearing; seconded by Councilman Isaac.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #76, SERIES OF 1979 - Annexation of Koch Lumber Property
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the
public hearing.
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance #76, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #76
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO was read by the city clerk
Stock told Council there is no zoning proposal at this point. This will be referred to ;!!
P & Z for their recommendation of what zoning is appropriate.
Councilman Collins .moved to adopt Ordinance #76, Series of.1979; seconded by Councilwoman'
Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Michael, aye; Isaac, aye; Collins, aye; van Ness,
aye; Behrendt, aye. Motion carried. j
I�
CITY MANAGER
1. Decorations in mall. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council that Interior Gardens has approache
the city about doing mall decorations for Christmas. Interior Gardens would coordinate
with the Chamber to do garlands, wreaths, and lights in the trees. If the city is
interested in making a contribution, this group would collect from the business community.
Ms. Butterbaugh said if the city would do the labor, the total cost would be about $3600.
Councilman Isaac said he did not mind supplying the labor if the city had it. Council-
woman Michael said -she felt the mall deserves some kind of decoration. Councilman
Behrendt said he would like to see the banner program increased this year. The majority
of Council said the city would supply the labor but not put any money into it.
2. Housing Seminar. Planning Director Karen Smith told Council 150 invitations to the
community housing workshop have been sent out. This is scheduled for December 3 and 4.
The Gant is donating the conference room in the name of employee housing. Ms. Smith
requested an appropriation for wine and cheese social after the first day. This will
cost about $200.
Councilman Behrendt moved to allocate $200; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor,
motion carried.
RESOLUTION #21, SERIES OF 1979 - GMP Commercial Allocations for 1980
Councilman Isaac moved to read Resolution #21, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION #21
(Series of 1979)
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977,
September 1, 1979, was established as a deadline for submission of 1979
applications for commercial and office development within the City of Aspen, and
2<76
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 26, 1979
iI
WHEREAS, in response to this ordinance six commercial projects were submitted
for a total of 28,719 square feet of commercial space within the 24,000 square feet
of commercial space available in 1979, and
i
WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearings were conducted before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission on October 4, 1979, and before the Planning and
Zoning Commission on October 23, 1979, to consider the Growth Management applications
and evaluate and score these applications in conformance with criteria established
in Ordinance No. 48•, Series of 1977, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commiss4on did evaluate, rank and score
the projects submitted in the following order:
P & Z HPC
Average Average Total
1. Epicure Plaza Building
(10,041 square feet) 18.6 14.0 32.6
2. La Cocina Addition
(1,300 square feet) 15.4 12.4 27.8
3. Bell Mountain.Sports Addition
(2,000 square feet) 16.4 11.3 27.7
4. Smith Building
(5,100 square feet) 14.3 13.0 27.3
5. Ajax Mountain Associate Building
(6,075 square feet) 15.7 9.0 24.7
6. First National Bank Addition
(4,203 square feet) 16.2 7.•9 24.1
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended, in accordance
with Section 24-10.3(a), that City Council authorize additional commercial
construction in the amount of 4,719 square feet so as to approve all six projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, hereby allocates commercial development allotment to the Epicure Plaza
Building in the amount of 10,041 square feet, to La Cocina in the amount of 1,300
square feet, to Bell Mountain Sports in the amount of 2,000 square feet, to the
Smith Building in the amount of 5,100 square feet, to the Ajax Mountain Assoc,
Building in the amount of 6,075 square feet, and to the First National Bank in
the amount of 4,203 square feet and that these projects are authorized to proceed
further with any additional approvals needed by the City of Aspen to secure
building permits.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT special review approval be secured for
the employee housing proposals contained in the Epicure, Bell Mountain Sports
and Smith projects.
Councilman Isaac movea to aaopr• resolution fz1, beries of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carriea.
Ordinance #77, Series of 1979. City Attorney Stock submitted an ordinance that would
authorize the lease of a van for recreation department. Council had approved this
previously. The ordinance was too late for the packet. The staff feels this van would
save money as the recreation department would not have to use a bus and bus driver for
many of their trips. This ordinance will be presented at the next Council meeting. i)
Ice Garden. Stock requested authorization for the Mayor to sign a consent to begin the
dissolution of the corporation.
i
Councilman Isaac moved to authorize Mayor Edel to sign the consent; seconded by Council- '!
man Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried. �!
Outside Counsel. Stock requested approval to hire Allan Schwartz at $50 an hour to work
on the Plum Tree Inn, Gideon Kaufman to work on the Mills case, and Marty Kahn. to work
on the Killam/Norton suit, and someone as an outside attorney to do work from time to
time on research. Stock said he would bring this back to Council before the actual work
began.
i
Councilwoman Michael moved to direc the city attorney to appoint Kaufman in the Mills,
suit; Schwartz to work as attorney on the Plum Tree litigation, and Kahn to worn on the
Killam/Norton case; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Hou land Suit. Stock asked for authorization to present an offer of settlement to
Houg and.
Councilman Behrendt moved that Stock go to Hougland or his attorney to pursue negotiating,
a settlement at $6,000; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
J
Councilman Collins moved to continue the meeting to November 29; seconded by Councilman
Parry. Council adjourned at 9:30 into an executive session on the Institute litigation.
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk i
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979 j
Mayor Edel called the meeting to order at 5:00 with Councilmembers Van Ness, Behrendt,
Parry and Isaac present.
MINUTES
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the minutes of October 22 and November 12; seconded
by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
m
• 211t
Regular Meeting
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Aspen City Council
December 10, 1979
Councilman Isaac questioned the payment to Father Leib. Finance Director Butterbaugh
said she would check on this. Councilman Isaac also asked for an explanation of payment
to Fothergill's.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve accounts payable; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All
in favor, motion. carried. •
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Jon Busch asked about appointments to the Wheeler Opera House Commission. Mayor Edel
said Council would announce the names later in the week when all Councilmembers have
voted on it.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilman Behrendt said he would like to put on the agenda'a report from the restau-
rant and bar committee recommending seating capacity in dining rooms and bars.
Councilman Behrendt moved to put this report on the agenda after the budget hearing;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
2. Mayor Edel read a letter into the record from A. L. Ware commenting on the city's
budget. This letter was in answer to a previous letter submitted to Council that was
answered by city manager Wayne. Chapman. Councilman Collins came into Council Chambers.
PUBLIC HEARING - 1980 BUDGET
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing.
1. Stacy Standley, representing Grassroots, told Council they had had an election and
put together a rfew Board of Directors. Standley told Council after 8 years of existence,
Grassroots is the longest enduring community access television station in the country.
Standley stated in the past Council has generally given Grassroots $3,000 as well as space
in the Wheeler. Grassroots has a staff of 5-1/2 people and 4 are partially funded by
CETA. The budget is not top heavy in terms of salary. Standley said Grassroots has put
together forums that politicians have participated in; they have run bus and transit
information; they have covered IDCA, BOLD programs, Ballet 'nest. Grassroots has been
contacted to provide snow and road reports, bus schedules, and airport conditions. They
would like to expand this into bigger public information for the viewers. Grassroots is 5
trying to fund $21,000 program for equipment to allow Grassroots to go live anywhere in
Aspen: Standley requested $1,00� Lur l7ou as well as wneeier upera House space. They
would like the money unencumberea to oe usea ror programs the city is specifically
interested in.
Ms. Butterbaugh told Council the state requires the city to file a budget no later than
December 31st. The dollar revenues projected are all earmarked now. If the Council wants
to move this money from another program, it could be done at a later point. Ms. Butter-
baugh said she was about to close the books and hopefully there will be $100,000 surplus
to go to the general fund surplus. The money can be available for following year
appropriations. Ms. Butterbaugh suggested if Council wants to fund Grassroots, after
January 1 come back with an appropriation ordinance. Councilman Isaac asked about fund-
ing this out of the real estate transfer tax. Ms. Butterbaugh said this could be done
only if Council determined this was a form of art. Mayor Edel said it is a form of
visual arts. If the transfer tax fund does have sufficient funds, it would be appropriate
Mayor Edel suggested waiting to see how the fund performs and how the new management of
Grassroots performs. Councilman Van Ness said Grassroots should come back after the
first of the year with a request.
Mayor Edel closed the public hearing.
Councilman Behrendt moved to adopt Resolution n22, Series of 1979, the 1980 Budget;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Collins.
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. ;2,2—
(Series of 1979)
WHEREAS, the City Manager, designated by Charter to prepare the budget,
has prepared and submitted to the Mayor and City Council the Annual Budget for
the City of Aspen, Colorado, for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 1980, and
ending December 31, 1980; and
WHEREAS, the budget as submitted sets forth the following estimated fiscal
data including anticipated revenues and expenditures for the year 1980:
Revenues Expenditures Transfers Surplus
General Services and
Operation
Land Acquisition Fund
including Park Dedica-
tion Expenditures, Open
Space, and Capital.Im-
provements Sales Tax
Transportation/Ma11
Sales Tax Fund
3,110,634 (3,527,189) ( 359,051) 11,277
786,883
1,329,500 ( 332,267) ( 923,057) 74,176
1,125,000 ( 30,000) (1,091,405) 3,595
2<<s 6 •
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
Water Fund
949,000
( 768,579)
(
100,000)
80,421
Electrical Fund
1,542,000
(1,323,916).
(
100,000)
118,084
Revenue Sharing Fund
95,000
0
(
95,000)
0
Police Pension Fund
53,500
( 13,500)
40,000
Employee Retirement Fund
127,000
( 60,000)
67,000
Transit Fund
833,824
(1,571,227)
737,403
0
Golf Course Fund
131,350
( 226,701)
95,351
0
Ice Rink Fund
117,000
( 216,570)
100,468
398
Wheeler Transfer Fund
531,328
( 144,944)
(
29,500)
356,884
1970 Public Purpose
Bond Fund
0
( 42,200)
42,200
0
1978 Sales Tax Ref.
Bond Fund
0
( 689,208)
689,208
0
Street Improvement -
Const. Fund
1,070,200
(1,241,700)
171,500
0
Sales Tax Bond Reserve
Fund
0
( 75,000)
75,000
U
Total 11,015,336 (10,263,001) 0 752,335
WHEREAS, the assessed valuation of taxable property for the year 1979 in
the City of Aspen returned by the County Assessor of Pitkin County is the sum
of Sixty-one Million Eight Hundred Forty-six Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars
($61,846,900); and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proper mill levy upon
each dollar of the assessed valuation on all.taxable property within the City
shall be that determined by the County Assessor sufficient to produce ad
valorem tax proceeds in the amount of $293,772.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO:
That the budget for the City of Aspen as submitted is hereby adopted,
which adoption shall constitute appropriations of the amounts specified therein
as expenditures from the funds indicated; and that the estimated budget revenue
requirements of $11,015,336 is declared to be the amount of revenue necessary
to be raised by the tax levy and income from all other sources, including
surplus at the beginning of the year, to pay the expenses and certain
indebtedness, and to provide a reasonable surplus at the close of the fiscal.
year beginning January 1, 1980, and ending December 31, 1980;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that for the purpose of defraying the expenses of
the City of Aspen, Colorado, during the fiscal year beginning January 1, 1980,
and ending December 31, 1980, there is hereby levied a tax on said dollar of
the assessed valuation of the taxable property in the City of Aspen, Colorado,
for the puij.van-Vi -r•bLL16 sue sum ui wnich, together with the
surplus aria revenue irum ail otner sources, is estimated to meet budget
expenditure requirements and provide a reasonable closing surplus for said
fiscal year.
RESTAURANT AND BAR COMMITTEE REPORT
Councilman Behrendt told Council the committee consists of himself, Jeri Fox, Jack
Little, Bob Jacobs, and Councilman Parry. The committee recommended there be two diff-
erent categories; dining rooms at 15 square feet per person, and lounge stand-up bars
at 9 square feet per person. Councilman Behrendt reported that enforcement is necessary
and is to be supported by the city. The establishments should be self -enforcing.
Councilman Behrendt said the committee had figures to back up the recommendations, and
that this is more stringent than many places. Fire Marshal Bob Jacobs told Council he
only has trouble in a couple of places; some bar owners are not enforcing the occupancy
load.
Councilman Behrendt said the fire marshal would like to see the square footage number as
high as possible; however, that causes some problems with some establishments in town.
Councilman Parry pointed out these figures are a compromise between various functions as
a dance floor is now 7 square feet per person. Jack Little, owner Captain's Anchorage,
told Council the National Restaurant Association sent him their guidelines. They allow
12 square feet per person for dining and 7.5 square feet per person for lounge -type
situation. In a lounge the tables are smaller and take up less space. Little said this
compromise seemed to fit all the restaurants. Jacobs stressed that it is up to the bar
owners to enforce this; the building department can bring up non -enforcement at renewal
time.
Councilman Behrendt moved that the committee's work be accepted by Council and the attorney
be directed to draw up the appropriate ordinance; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in
favor, motion carried.
Councilman Behrendt pointed out a city -owned property is one of the locations of the
biggest problems. Councilman Behrendt asked that the city manager look into the existing.;
problems as it is very dangerous.
LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS
Tom Dunlop requested a hold on the Hotel Jerome, Pub and Chisholm's Saloon. Bob Jacobs ;I
told Council he had no problems.
• I
Councilman Behrendt moved to renew the liquor licenses for Little Nell's; Little Kitchen, 'I
Ute City Banque, Golden Horn, Pinocchio's; Toro's; Mother Lodge, Captain's Anchorage,
*and Copper Kcttle; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Dunlop told Council the Hotel Jerome has an extensive list of violations from last March.
They are currently in litigation, and there is some question as to who is responsible
for the repairs. Dunlop is forcing the repairs through this method and suggested this
be approved conditionally. !
2'780
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
d
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Beer/Zanger
Grice told Council this is an existing duplex on Red Butte drive; unit 2 is owner -occupied,
and unit 1 is in excess of the price guidelines. The engineering department recommends
approval subject to conditions. The city attorney recommends approval with the six month
minimum lease restrictions. The planning office feels that unit 1 is part of the low,
moderate and middle income housing pool and there shcuid be a proposal submitted for
mitigation of the impacts. An additional.condition from the engineering department is
that the applicant enter into a curb, gutter and sidewalk agreement. The P & Z feels the
rental history is in excess of the price guidelines, and therefore, the unit is not part
of the housing pool. The P & Z recommended approval without• deed restrictions to PMH
guidelines but with the six month minimum lease provision and the 7 engineering comments.
Jon Mulford, representing the applicants, told Council for the past 2-1/2 years, the
property has been rented from six months to a year at $.62 per square foot, which is in �.
excess of the PMH guidelines. Mulford told Council the rent remained steady for that
time because the owner deferred on maintenance and did not do anything. !)
Councilman Parry moved to approve the subdivision exemption with the conditions as outlined
in the engineering memo, agree to enter into an agreement for sidewalks, curb and gutter,
and the six month minimum lease provisions; seconded'by Councilman Collins. All in favor,
motion carried.
ORDINANCE #73, SERIES OF 1979 - Mobile Home Park Regulations
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the j
public hearing.
Councilman Behrendt moved to read Ordinance #73, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE 473
(Series of 1979)
' I
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 14 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL
CODE BY THE ADOPTION OF A MOBILE HOME CODE AND PROVIDING FOR THE LICENSING
OF MOBILE HOME PARKS AND INDIVIDUAL MOBILE HOMES was read by the city clerk. I)
City Attorney Stock told Council he had made the requested changes; this eliminates the
licensing provision for individual mobile home and requires only first inspection.
i
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #73, Series of 1979, on second reading as amended;
seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Counciimemoers wiiins, aye; Isaac, aye;
Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. jI
CITY MANAGER II
• I
1. Set Study Session - Water Manaaement Plan. City Manager Wayne Chapman told Council the
staff will not be able to give Council the information of the impacts of the water rates
this week. Chapman said this will come back next agenda to be set.
2. Aspen Institute. Chapman told Council the Aspen Institute mediation Chamber Ad Hoc
Committee would like to make a presentation at the next Council meeting.• i)
3. Volunteer Fireman's Christmas Dinner. Finance Director Lois Butterbaugh told Council I:
over the years the city has contributed money to the volunteer fire department for their
Christmas party. It is a thanks for all the volunteer hours. Last year the city contri-
buted $800. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council that working through the remaining money in the
general fund, it appears there will be some surplus carried over. Ms. Butterbaugh said
if Council is in favor, she would move $800 to the Council's budget for -this contribution.
Mayor Edel said he felt the department deserves the city's support. j
Councilman Isaac moved to fund the firemen for $800; seconded by Councilman Parry. All
in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried.
4. Molly Gibson Condominiumization. Chapman told Council he had a letter from Jeff Sachsl
regarding the Molly Gibson condominiumization raising some legal questions and points of
information he felt Council should be aware of. Chapman has discussed this with City
Attorney Stock and was in concurrence that the legal points do not add significantly to
the discussion. Chapman said this with this additional information, Council may decide
to reopen the issue. Councilman Isaac asked how the discussions on condomiunizations of
lodges was progressing. Stock said Gideon Kaufman will have a proposal this month, and
based on the moratorium, staff must bring something to Council the first meeting of
January. Councilman Isaac said when the Council makes a policy, that would be the time
to reopen the discussion on the Molly Gibson.
Councilman van -Ness moved to suspend the rules for the limited purpose of allowing Mr.
Sachs to speak for 5 minutes; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried..:
Councilman Behrendt stepped down for conflict of interest. i
Jeffrey Sachs told Council P & Z had a hearing on this application for exemption from sub-!
division on September 18, 1979. City Council had a hearing on October 22, 1979. The key
issue in both hearings was whether or not a non -conforming use could be condomiumized.
Sachs told Council the city attorney and planning staff said no and represented that to
both bodies. In the previous Council meeting before this issue came up, Council approved
condominiumization of thh Tipple Lodgc. Cn the same agenda as Molly Gibson lodge, the
Council enacted a moratorium on condominiumization of lodges. Sachs stated it was clear
when Council looked at this application that the moratorium had nothing to do with this
application. I�
I
7
27719
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
Councilman Behrendt moved to conditionally approve the liquor license renewal for the
Hotel Jerome; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Behrendt moved to conditionally approve the renewal for the Jerome B. Wheeler
Public House; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Behrendt moved to conditionally approve the renewal for Chisholm's; seconded
by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - Michi's
This is a request by C. M. Clark and Michi Blake to take over the space formerly licensed
as Bandera and Chesire Cat. The file is complete.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the transfer conditioned upon approval by Tom
Dunlop and Bob Jacobs; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS - Grassroots '
Myrna , director of fund raising for Grassroots, told Council they were having
a concert at the Wheeler Opera House on December 26. There will be two bars at the
Wheeler, and alcoholic beverages will be sold only before the concert and during inter-
mission.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the special event permit; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT - Ballet West
Susie Knight told Council they are having a film at the Playhouse January 15 and a cash
bar at the Pitkin County bank after. The tickets will be for a combination of events.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the special event permit; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Rome
Richard Grice, planning office, told Council this is an existing duplex; one half owner -
occupied and the other half short -termed. After winter, the second unit was leased to
a local for six month. It was not intended to be a permanent lease. However, the city
attorney feels this constitutes prima facie evidence the unit is part of the low, moderate
and middle income pool. Engineering department recommends approval subject to water
meter being installed and agreement to entef into a sidewalk improvement agreement. The
housing director comments all condominiumizations.should receive -a
}+--. The planning office recommenda dania-1 unless there is a-prc-,--
mitigate the adverse impacts on the housing pool. Grice told Council the P & Z did not
agree as they felt the unit was only used as part of the housing pool for six months, and
that was enough to make them feel the argument was overturned. The P & Z recommended
approval subject to the engineering comments.and the six month minimum lease.
It
Grice told Council Section 20-22 addresses low, moderate and middle income housing. The
applicant did not subject a proposal to mitigate the impacts and for that reason, the
planning office recommended denial. Grice said this is an objective thing; for six
months the unit served the purpose of low, moderate and middle income housing. Rome told
Council that the rents were above the price guidelines at that time.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the subdivision exemption with the conditions of (1)
installation of a water meter; (2) agree to enter into a sidewalk improvement district, ane
(3) six month minimum lease restrictions; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor,
motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Joffee
Grice told Council there is only one unit in existence, and it is owner -occupied. The
second unit will be, constructed. There is no question of the housing pool being impacted.
The engineering department recommended approval with four conditions; the city attorney
recommended approval with the six month minimum lease provision; the planning office
recommends approval with the engineering comments.
Councilman Parry moved to approve subdivision exemption with the four engineering condi-
tions and six month minimum lease provision; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in
favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Patio Building
There was no one present representing the applicant. Council asked if it were not the
procedure to automatically call all applicants. Council asked city manager to look into
this and form a procedure. Councilman Van Ness stated under due process without notifica-
tion, a decision, if protested, would be void.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption for the Patio Building
with the conditions outlined; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilman Van Ness said in
the event the motion does not pass and if the applicant protests, this be put on the
next agenda for reconsideration. All in favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Kessler
Councilman Van Ness moved to table at request of the applicant; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. ,
281
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
Nevertheless, Council voted 3 to 2 against this application on the basis that a nonconform-
ing use cannot be condominiumized. Sachs sent a letter to the city pointing out that
other non -conforming structures.had, in fact, been condominiumized. Stock, answered, "I
have been aware in one or two cases wherein a non -conforming use has been subdivided. So,
too, has the planning office had such knowledge. However, we did not indicate in any way,
shape, or form to the Council that non -conforming uses had not been condominiumized in th
past." Sachs stated what happened here is basically withholding of information. What has
happened is that the staff did not represent it had and they did not represent it hadn't;
they knew it had been; they knew that.prior planning offices had permitted it; they knew
that prior city attorneys had permitted it, but they did not bring it to the attention of
P & Z or to Council's attention. Sachs said prior to the city attorney and planning office
practice in the past, there is a reversal of opinion. The staff is entitled to their
current opinions, but that relevant fact should have been known to Council so Council could
make their decision.
Sachs stated the issue is whether the planning staff and city attorney has the right to
withhold information that they have. Sachs pointed out a new development; the local
courts decided in the Silverking case that the County Commissioners has no authority
whatsoever to impede the condominiumization of existing structures. Sachs questioned
whether the city has that power either, except City Attorney Stock holds the opinion in a
home rule city, the city is in a different position than the County Commissioners. Sachs
stated this opinion is contrary to most city attorneys in home rule cities in the State of
Colorado. Sachs requested Council re -hear and vote again based on the information that
had Council known, might have been different. David Jones wants to condomiumize the
lodge and put $75,000 improvements in before selling the lodge and to abide by the same
conditions imposed on the approval of the Tipple Lodge condomiumization. Sachs stressed
there have been condominiumizations of non -conforming uses.
Councilman Van Ness commented he would hope this application would be resubmitted after
the moratorium is over. Sachs said they may or may not, but in the meantime Council has
done something wrong, and the applicant has to resolve what they have to do about it.
Councilman Van Ness said what is implied here in the failure of any of the prevailing
votes to say anyt�iing, is,that this information does not affect their vote. Jones said
as a citizen, taxpayer and businessman, he feels badly that he -is being jacked around by
his city government. Jones said he would through a lot of due process, a fact that was
so prime to the whole situation was withheld. Mayor Edel said the comment about being
"jacked around" is inappropriate, out of line and wrong. Mayor Edel said the Council
pursued this application, had meetings and followed it through.
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
Council made the following assignments to committees; Councilman Isaac - COG, with Council-
man Behrendt substitute: Councilman Isaac and Mayor Edel to Wheeler Opera House; Council-
woman Michael to Vis„al Arta RnA+ A. r-incilman Behrendt to -Board of Realtors;-Geu:eiiman
Parry - Chamber of Commerce; Councilman Behrendt - Lodge owner's; Councilman Van Ness -
Bar Association; Councilman Behrendt - transportation task force. Mayor Edel said he
would like to have more contact with the school board and with Snowmass Village. Mayor
Edel suggested the Council get with school board every other month, with Snowmass Village
every other month, and once a month with the county commissioners. Mayor Edel said he
would have the option of striking county meetings and substituting Snowmass, Basalt or
Board of Education.
ORDINANCE #77, SERIES OF 1979 - Recreation Van Lease
City Manager Chapman told Council this van will give the recreation department more flexi-
bility in terms of transportation. They will not have to use a bus driver.
Councilman Behrendt moved to read Ordinance #77, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #77
(Series of 1979)
li AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A VEHICLE LEASING
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND REY MOTORS, INC. WHICH LEASE IS
FOR A TERM OF THIRTY-SIX MONTHS AND.PROVIDES FOR A MONTHLY PAYMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $276.56 was read by the city clerk.
�I Councilman Parry moved to approve Ordinance #77, Series of 1979, on first reading; seconded
by Councilman Behrendt. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Isaac, aye; Van Ness,
aye; Collins, aye; Behrendt, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
DROSTE WATER RIGHTS EXCHANGE
City Attorney Stock told Council the city acquired water rights from Droste. In next
year's budget there are some funds•to transfer these water rights from Droste's name to
the city of Aspen as well as to change the use for which the water may be used from
agricultural to municipal with secondary use as minimum stream use. There is a proposal
for how much the city's water engineers would charge. Musick's firm recommends approval
of this proposal by Council.. They will provide four specific items; (1) determination of
historic point of return flow; (2) month by month breakdown of consumptive use; (3) month
by month breakdown of consumptive use as it would apply to municipal purposes; and (4)
month by month breakdown of transportation losses. The rate would be based on an hourly
*rate and will be completed at a cost of less than $1,000.
11 Councilman Behrendt moved to approve;
iicarried.
II
seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion
_w.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
FASCHING-SETTLEMENT (Christmas Inn)
Stock told Council this settlement was presented to past Council in June 1979; their
response was that this was not inappropriate, however, they wanted more information on
one item. The settlement is that Ms. Fasching would vacate the appeal of her criminal
conviction and pay the fine. She will dismiss with prejudice the civil action she brought
against the city's Municipal_ Court from trying to prevent it from hearing the criminal
case. By stipulation, the civil case of the city's would be dismissed but without prejud-,
ice to allow the parties to enforce by appropriate legal action the terms of the stipula-
tion. The stipulation would have the following terms: first, Ms. Fasching remodeled 2
units and actually created 7 units, for an increase of 5 units. Ms. Fasching will have to'
remove 5 units. Second; two units that exist today were carved out of public space. So
two of the units removed will have to be returned to some form of public use. In the past,
that use was a lounge. These units will be a type of sauna and bathrooms. Third, Ms.
Fasching will obtain a building permit for work previously completed or to be completed
at double the normal rate charge. All work must be in conformity with the existing UBC.
Fourth, Ms. Fasching will have to reveal the names of contractors, plumbers and electricians
assisting in the illegal construction. Finally, Stock told Council he felt it was impor-
tant that no one should be able to benefit by violating the laws of the City. By renting
out these units for three years, there must have been a profit. Stock wanted Ms. Fasching
to tell Council what that profit was and to donate to a local charity. The past Council
wanted to know how much that amount would be. Stock submitted a letter from a CPA firm
allowing only for normal depreciation, it is indicated Ms. Fasching actually had a loss
over that time. Ms. Fasching gave to the M.A.A. $1500 last summer. (Councilman Collins
left Chambers).
Councilman Behrendt said he was surprised that 5 rooms did not generate a profit in a
business that normally does. Councilman Behrendt said there is no penalty exacted. Stock
pointed out Ms. Fasching has to remove 5 rooms, and the city will not issue a building
permit until Council approves the settlement. Councilman Behrendt said he could not accept
that the extra money from those units did not benefit Ms. Fasching. Stock told Council
that Ms. Fasching has continued to use these rooms since the settlement discussion in June.
Mayor Ede1 said Council has approved all but one subsection and would like to see all
other enacted but this subsection. Chapman suggested Council make the dollar figure
inversely proportional to the length of time it takes Ms. Fasching to comply with the rest
of the agreement. Councilman Behrendt insisted these units not be occupied during this
ski season. Stock pointed out the fact this has not been resolved is the work load of his
office, not response on Ms. Fasching's part. Councilman Behrendt said he wanted the rooms,
signed no occupancy.
Stock said if Council is willing to accept the unaudited financial statement, he would
accept this and tell Ms. Fasching she cannot occupy the five rooms and they must be ripped
out and remodelled within a certain amount of tier r1 ^--4'--- -_.7 `_ :.-__ not
corn -or -table with the "snitch" route on the contrF_-'---'- " -_ ____ ____ ::__ __ _.._ -:.ould
be posted and Council approve the entire settlement. Councilman Parry asked Stock if he
would put a date on the settlement and then impose a.$300 per day fine after that. Stock
said he could put a liquidated damages clause into the stipulation. Stock said he felt
this was a strong settlement and is not enacted because this Council has not approved it.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the settlement; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in
favor, with the exception of Councilman Van Ness. Motion carried. Council directed staff'
to close down the extra units and mark them.
I
ORDINANCE #78, SERIES OF 1979 - Housing Overlay j!
Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #78, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman Van
Ness. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #78
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF BONA FIDE LOW, MODERATE, AND
MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING WITHIN A HOUSING OVERLY DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR MULTI-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE WITH INCREASED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY; AND PROVIDING
FOR THE DESIGNATION OF SUCH HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICTS was read by the city
clerk
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #78, Series of 1979, on first reading; seconded
by Councilman Van Ness. Councilman Behrendt said there will be an impact on the FAR and
bulking of structures due to this ordinance; there will be pressure back on the Council
for an FAR ordinance. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Van Ness,
aye; Isaac, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
'I
ORDINANCE #79, SERIES OF 1979 - Marolt Annexation and Rezoning
City Attorney Stock told Council the application for annexation was signed by 100 pest cent
of the property owners. This may go through two processes of annexation and then rezoning,.
or it can be dohe in one process. in this case, the property owners submitted a request
for zoning along with annexation. This was submitted to P & Z for their recommendation.
P & Z recommended something different than was was requested by the property owners. if
Council agrees with P & Z, the, property owners must state they approve the recommendation
or withdraw their request. The Council cannot adopt the P & Z recommendation without the
owners' approval and still annex the property. If.Council feels another zoning is appro-
priate, they must have the property owners' approval or their withdrawal. II
Karen Smith, planning director, told Council the City has not addressed a rezoning of this
size in 6 or 7 years. There are many factors the planning office and P & Z must consider
in making their recommendations. Ms. Smith pointed out this is the first employee housing
project of this size and requires some new thinking. There is no adopted housing overlay
and no technical way for accommodating what has been proposed. I
2T 5ej
Regular Meeting
Aspen City Council
December 10, 1979
Ms. Smith told Council that the consistency with the surrounding land use and zoning must
be looked at as well as the consistency with the master plan. Ms. Smith told Council
that changed conditions which might warrant rezoning have to be looked at, as well as the
advantages and disadvantaqes of alternative employee housing sites. Ms. Smith noted that
public input has suggested this is an inappropriate site for employee housing. There has
been substantial public input from county Commissioners, OSAB and neighbors. Planning
recommended R-15A zoning for this property to the P & Z as that zoning is consistent with
surrounding patterns and rezoning to higher density than is now permitted is appropriate
in view of changed conditions, which is a need for employee housing.
Ms. Smith showed a map illustrating the zoninq around the property. The master plan for
this area of 1973 recommends single family zoning with greenbelt following Castle Creek.
The R-15A zone suggests that 50 per cent of the units should be deed restricted to
employee housing price guidelines. This zone is recommended because there is not a housing
overlay. Ms. Smith recommended this be considered as a planned unit development (PUD)
because through this process one is able to cluster, achieve objectives of reducing
impacts, and fit the project to the site. The planning office also recommended SPA zoning
because it is the only zone to allow other than residential uses that have been suggested
in the conceptual plan. i
Ms. Smith told Council the crux of the issue before the P & Z is that this would open up
a new area for development across Castle Creek, an area which has served as a boundary
between urban and rural areas of the county. It has been argued that this is a high
priority piece of open space and key to the entrance to Aspen. It has been argued that
this property is a continuation of the open space begun with the golf' course purchase and
the Thomas property. Ms. Smith said a concern has been expressed about the speculative
value attached in a rezoning of this type, from 2 acres per unit to 10,000 or 15,000 per
unit. The planning office is considering the employee housing need, and leads to the
recommendation for higher density.
The opposite side of the issue is the need for employee housing and the opportunities of
this site for clustering the development and fitting the project to the surrounding
neighborhood. T.�e conclusion of the planning office is that there is no best site for
employee housing. If the city waits for the best site, it will likely not to be found.
Ms. Smith pointed out this site is well served by utilities and transportation and it M
disberses housing to other parts of the Aspen metro area. It is a medium -size project,
and it mixes types of housing which prevents a ghetto -type area.
Ms. Smith pointed out that conditions should be attached to the approval as outlined in
the planning office memorandum of December 3, 1979. This memo was written after much 1
public input. The P & Z agreed with the approach; however, recommended against R-15A
zoning and for SPA/PUD. P & Z felt the ultimate determination of actual numbers on the
site could hest ha made thrnuah the specially planned area/planned unit development process
Thi- Tian ,�-----vwith 40 to 45 free market units and the balance_
employee units.
The P & Z recommended conditions are: (1) 70 per cent of the units be devoted the employee
housing, consistent with the recommended housing overlay. If the housing overlay is
passed, the free market portion will be exempt from the GMP; (2) allow easier clustering,
maximize open space corridors, and reduce intrusion in environmentally sensitive areas,
a maximum 100 units be recommended. There are considerations for the density calculations
such as slope redugtion, Opal Marolt's house, etc. (3) If the housing overlay is passed,
application should be made under that procedure. This would benefit the city and the
applicant. It will allow for growth management exemption; 70 per cent deed restricted
units, and provides a shorter process. (4) The development plan shall assure in any
phased development, a proportionate share of employee units is built along with free
market. (5) The Elk's facility is not recommended; this is a commercial intrusion is a
residential area which has no benefit to the development or surrounding area. (6)
Adequate area for road and hiqhway realignment. (7) the rezoning is condition upon
application for building permits under a plan following the elements outlined in this
approval being submitted within 2 years of development plan approval. If no building
permits are applied within 2 years, the rezoning should revert to RR, rural residential.
The P & Z suggested another condition, that serious study and design work be formulated
in regard to acess to and from this property.
Ms. Smith told Council that the R-15A is a problem as they are not sure this will accomino-
date the proposed 125 units. The applicant feels R-6 zoning is appropriate and that is
the zone requested in their petition. Ms. Smith said the planning office prefers R-15
with a housing overlay. Bob Joyce, representing the applicant, said he felt the concep-
tual plan seems to be good for the site. Joyce said they are concerned that the recommen-
dations from the P & Z will lead to problems in terms of development. Employee housing
accelerated is an expensive proposition. The zoning recommendation does not constitute
zoning that would allow the applicant to finance the project any further. The SPA/PUD
leaves the land unzoned. The applicant has concerns under R-15 and R-15A zones on how
the numbers of density are calculated. Joyce told Council they understood the concerns
that have been brought up. If R-�6 zoning is allowed, the number of units that could be
built is astronomical; this is not the intent of the applicant. This project has been
designed to be a 70/30 split.
Joyce suggested the zoning be R-6 with a PUD; the R-6 would allow the necessary number of
units; the PUD would impose specific constraints as to timing and phasing. Joyce said
they would be willing to enter into an annexation agreement binding them to a maximum 125
units on the site and agree to a 70/30 split. Joyce said they would agree at the end of
the project to resubmit to the city for the designation of R-15, downzoning the property,
so there would not be one piece of R-6 surrounded by other zoning.
2784
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
Joyce told Council he had only had one conversation with the Elk's club. The zoning
criteria does not specifically provide for that use. Mayor Edel said he felt the top spot
near the highway has got to be open space to keep a corridor open. Mayor Edel also stated
he felt 125 units were too many. Councilman Parry noted in the past there have been
proposals and drawings for neighborhood shopping centers. This site has been kept in
reserve because it might be practical to have 'a shopping center there. Councilman Isaac
asked why the applicant did not want SPA. Joyce said this leaves the question of zoning i
open and does not leave one with something that is financeable. Ms. Smith said the SPA j
category may be necessary to accommodate multi -family structures as least until a housing '!
overlay is passed.
Councilman Behrendt asked how many units of development this property could have right
now in the county. Ms. Smith said it is zoned AF-2, which is one unit per acre and there
are 35 acres, there could be 17 units 50 per cent of which would be deed restricted to
employee housing. There would be some reductions to reduce it below 17 units. Councilman
Behrendt pointed out between transportation corridors and open space demands, there are
some very sensitive areas on this property. Mayor Edel asked Joyce what his problems
were with the planning office recommendations. Joyce said they had no problem with 70
per cent deed restricted units. The clustering of the units they have no problems with.
However, they do not want SPA designation. They will guarantee the maximum size in the
annexation agreement. Ms. Smith said the planning office arrived at 100 units using
R-15 density with PUD using the slope reduction, reducing for Opal Marolt's parcel, and
easement dedications. Joyce said he felt this determination is putting the cart before
the horse; they do not know unit configuration, unit mix, size, which comes out of the
planning process. They should zone first, set parameters, then fill in the details.
Joyce said they are will to commit to a cap of 125 units through the annexation agreement;
they feel this is a workable number.
Councilman Behrendt said he is for employee housing; however, he does not feel this area
can handle this density as proposed. Joyce told Council they have no problem or difficulty
of going with the housing overlay. Joyce said he has no problem with a schedule of insur-
ing these units are built with the PMH in line. They are not wedded to the Elk's facility.
They have agreed with a road reglignment and to make the largest amount of open space
would be in both parties interest. Joyce said they did have some concerns with the time
cap; one is when the clock starts ticking. Councilman Parry said he saw no reason for
having a two-year time period on this. The housing problem will get more complicated as
time goes on. Joyce pointed out PUD process requires phasing, and they will have to build
the units in tandem.
Hans Gramiger said he wanted it to be mandatory when Council acts on this application,
there is a dedicated right of way of 150 feet wide, which is the alignment on Main street
going west. Rich Cummins, representing neighboring property owners, said the city should
annex this and zone it RR/SPA to maintain control over valuable open space. ,Inn M„lford,
representing the Open -Space Board, said tffey favorect trying to preserve the property much
as it is. If the city is going to annex, they consider PUD with the dedication of large
portions of open space. Ed Zasacky pointed out the 9-15 zoning in the county is not
consistent with what is proposed; in the county R-15 is 1, 2, 3, acres lots. Zasacky said
the road will cut across the existing Thomas property, and will create another intersection
on highway 82. This will also be another obstacle to kids riding their bikes to school.
Zasacky said the CSU maps show this land to be in protected categories, frago-eco systems.
There is no portion of this land shown on the maps as land suitable for human occupancy.
Zasacky said an indication of zoning will be an indication of dollar value. If the city
gives more density than the county, this will decrease the chances of purchasing this for
open space. Zasacky said there may be no best sites for employee housing; however, fe
feels this is one of the worst sites for employee housing.
Ms. Smith said the planning office is recommending R-15 zoning category,
y, which does not
necessary lead to high density. It has specific limitations. They are also recommending
this be developed through PUD process in recognition that the project brings 70 per cent
employee housing. City Manager Chapman said it may be appropriate to wait until the
housing overlay is passed; by the time the project comes back in some of the questions
and answers should be forthcoming. Mayor Edel agreed this is rushing things. Mayor Edel
said the council should wait until they see what happens with the housing overlay.
ORDINANCE #80, SERIES OF 1979 - W.H.O.P. Annexation
City Attorney Stock told Council this property lies next to a house located uner the Castle
Creek bridge. There is no development on it. In the county, this lot is non -conforming
based on the zoning. They have the right to build a single family home; however, under
county regulations., the home would be small. Their annexation petition also requests zoning
of R-6, which would make it a conforming lot and would allow for a single family house of
a larger structure. P & Z considered this and recommended zoning of R-15A. With a 15,000
square foot minimum lot size, the parcel, if zoned R-15 A, would be a non -conforming site
but would have right to build single family structure. The difference in set backs would
change slightly the envelope of the structure. jj
Councilman Behrendt' asked what benefit to the city there is to take this parcel in; the
council would be giving them substantial advantage by annexing. Stock said there is no
gain. Bernie Pracko said this would not incur any expenses to the city as it is close to
streets, bus lines, police, etc. The city will get a tax gain. Sunny Vann, planning
office, told Council they are of the opinion the annexation is solely for the purposes of
economic benefit to the application. Vann indicated should the Council wish to approve
the annexation that R-15A would be an appropriate zDne. Right now, the applicant could
not build a duplex on that property; however, should land be acquired such that a duplex
could be build, the second unit would be an employee duplex.
Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #80, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Behrendt.
0
27S5
Regular Meeting
Aspen City Council December 10, 1979
Councilman Van Ness pointed out by being in the city rather than the county, he would be
allowed a building which is 2.8 times what is allowed in the county. Councilman Behrendt
asked the policy on insufficient size lots. Ms. Smith said they would get to develop
a single family house on a non?conforming lot. The difference is in the county, there is
an FAR which limits the size of the house. Councilman Isaac said he is not comfortable
with this and did not see why the city should take this in. Mayor Edel said this is
another unit going up which does not appeal to him.
Councilmembers Behrendt and Parry in favor, Councilmembers Isaac, Van Ness and Mayor Edel
opposed. Motion NOT carried.
Councilman Isaac moved to table the resolution for special election; seconded by Councilman
Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #81, SERIES OF 1979 - Appropriation
Stock said this ordinance will take $140,000 in excess revenues of the electric fund and
apply it to purchase power. Finance Director Butterbaugh noted that the city has not done
a rate increase; the expenditures for purchased power are up. There have been two rate
increases in the last year. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council the staff would like to come
back with a city electric rate increase proposal.
Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #81, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #81
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE MAKING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE ELECTRIC FUND IN THE
AMOUNT OF $140,277 FROM UNAPPROPRIATED REVENUES AND $55,723 FROM PRIOR YEAR
SURPLUS; APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES OF $196,000 FOR PURCHASED POWER; AND
DECLARING THAT AN EMERGENCY -EXISTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ENACTMENT was read by
the city clerk.
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #81, Series of 1979, on first reading; secondec:
by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Isaac, aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt,
aye; Van Ness, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Mction carried.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS
Ms. Smith told Council there are 14 units available for the 1980 GMP residential alloca-
tions and that Council has not approved that 14 units be made available and that subse-
quent units be subtracted from 1981. Applicants are wondering how many units are avail-
able for this.
Councilman Parry moved to approve 14 units available for 1980; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Van Ness moved to adjourn at 9:25 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Party. All in
favor, motion carried.
/Ji.�,-,✓ .li( i�'��$�-.cam
Kathryn S1 Koch, City Clerk
ar Meetinq Aspen City Council December 17, 1979
Mayor Edel call the joint meeting with County Commissioners together at 4:15 p.m. with
Commissioners Child, Edwards, and Kinsley, Councilmembers Michael and Isaac present.
Also present County Attorney Stuller, County Manager Ochs and City Manager Chapman.
1. Transportation Development Plan. Curt Stewart, Duane Fengel and Wes Frysztacki were
present to report on the TDP. Stewart told the Boards to be eligible for capital funding
assistance, UMTA requires that a continual planning process exist which should include
average ridership, routes, marketing, passenger amenities, a complete picture of the
overall system with recommendations of ways to make public transportation better in he
valley. Another reason for the TDP is so that the city and county can be thinking in
terms of 5 years years what their capital requirements might be. Stewart said the
transportation departments feel that P,B,Q,&D have done a good job on this document, it
was done professionally, and some of the recommendations have already been implemented.
Stewart told the Boards he is looking at the TDP as the last planning hurdle to a capital
grant application to UMTA for a maintenance facility and buses. Stewart said he would
like authorization from the Boards for him to prepare a capital grant application to
UMTA.
Wes Frysztacki, P,B,Q,&D, reminded the Boards he had begun work on this over a year ago.
Their efforts were not the first in transportation studies. Their objective in this
study was to develop strong data bases to develop solutions and prepare recommendations
for the Upper Roaring Fork Valley to refine projects. The technical work of this focused
on surveys; one was transit ridership survey. It was found many residents use the transit
system frequently. 50 per cent of the residents using the systems had used it 9 or more
times in the previous week; 40 per cent of those going to work. Also, it was found that
50 per cent using the system had access to a car, which is a complement to the transit
system. Frysztacki told the Board they looked at all services being offered in the
region. The different systems cater to different kinds of people, with the county
system primarily catering to downvailey residents and non-residents both. The city
system services local residents in the Aspen area primarily.
4.
2786
Regular Meeting Aspen City_ Council December_17,1979
Frysztacki said they did a parking survey, both in the winter and summer. This found that
75 per cent of the parkers had not used transit during the previous week. There are
reasons for this; about half of the people are carrying something that would make transit
difficult. P,B,Q,&D looked at the parking demand and supply and how it relates to the
transit situation. They found that parking supply and demand were in imbalance; 60 per
cent of the demand wanted to park for 1/2 hour or less, and only 4 percent of the parking'
supply was offered to that time constraint. P,B,Q&D had offered some solutions to that.
There are three major points from these surveys: (1) the existing systems are efficicent.!
The city and county systems are measured differently because they are offering different
kinds of service. The city system achieves about 5.2 riders per :Wile; the national aver-
age is 3.5 riders per mile. The county system, offering primarily.express downvalley
service, achieves 25.8 riders.per trip on an annual basis. This is an excellent measure
in terms of efficiency. National average is filling up 50 per cent is a good job. (2)
Local transit is heavily utilized. Over the past four years there has been a three -fold
ridership increase. In 1978 over 900,000 persons were riding the buses; over 25 per cent
of the people passing the Castle Creek bridge were riding some.sort of transit.
Frysztacki said that transit improvements are needed only because there is unmet ridership
demand, which will increase in the future. There should be a higher degree of coordination
between the two systems, city and county, both in operations and maintenance facilities.
There also need to be increases in levels of service, which is a function of money and
equipment. There are some system management marketing techniques that need to be imple-
mented, both within the region and some advance marketing techniques for tourists.
There is a definite need for a new maintenance facility. (Councilman van Ness came into
Chambers) i
I
Some of the recommendations are (1) transit system management strategies involving park-
ing, efficiency, better relationships with Garfield and Eagle county; (2) establish a
joint city/county agency; (3) minor capital improvements such as major terminals, 102
stops, shelters, etc., increase in the bus fleet. They feel 16 buses and 5 vans will be
needed in the next five years; however, the fleet requirements may change. Some traffic
engineering improvements need to be made. (4) finally, major capital improvements, once
again the maintenance facility, which estimated at $3,900,000 to have the entire fleet of
70 vehicles under roof. Another way is the busway, which carries a price tag of $8,000,000.
I
Frysztacki told the Board he felt this plan was is keeping with the policy of the high
level transit program. The recommendations are agressive. The program is very large for
an area such as Aspen, but is not unreasonable for the transit during the winter season.
Mayor Edel asked where the 20 per cent matching would come from on any grant to UMTA.
City Manager Chapman said they hoped to work out a system where the contribution from the
city and county will be in -kind, such as provision of the site. Chapman told the Boards
that commitment now is just the preparation of the grant application. i
Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the transportation develonmPnf n1a., ands'
to authorize Curt Stewart and Duane Fengel to apply for capital grants application subject
to approvals of Lois Butterbaugh and Tom Okin; seconded by Commissioner Child.
Councilwoman Michael suggested when the grant application is done to set a study session
so the Boards have some ideas of the financing. Karen Smith introduced the new town
planner for Snowmass Village, who stated they would like to be some part of the process j
for this and to generate a cohesive transportation plan for the county.
All in favor, motion carried.
2. A_-95 Review: Training for the City and Regional Planning Commission. Karen Smith,
planning director, recommended this program. Commissioner Kinsley moved to approve with
favorable comment; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. -All in favor, motion carried.
3. Rio Grande Proposal. Phobe Ryerson showed the Boards views of the Aspen area, des-
cribed the various pieces of property, pointed out various building, passed out drawings
and presented a model of a performing arts center with multiple facility wraparound. Ms.
Ryerson proposed the theatre will sit in the lowest segment of the valley floor, 65 feet
below Main street with a no larger footprint than Clark's Market. This facility should
have a major theatre with an enlarged more efficient library facility, a communications
center, underground parking lot, Olympic pool, bowling alley, disco. On an above floor,
bermed in, would be volleyball courts, cafeteria, banquet hall, and kitchen. A child
care center and play spaces would top the building. There can be the addition of a
floor devoted to theatre workshops and apartments or dorm room.
Ms. Ryerson said she would like to have a chance to work on this next year and would like
appointments with officials to nail down specific data from the city and county files.
Ms. Ryerson said before she presented this for a voters' referendum, she would like
official sponsorship or a public opinion poll. Ms. Ryerson said she would like a map
showing all the publicly owned land in Pitkin County. Councilman Behrendt pointed out
for the City the next six years will be devoted to energies for the Wheeler Opera House.
Three years will be the time to start on this; there are limits to time the staff has.
Mayor Edel said Council would refer this to City Manager Chapman and County Manager Ochs
for direction; Ms. Ryerson should start with staff and see where it goes from there.
Councilmembers Collins and Parry came into Chambers.
E COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
There were none.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATTON
1. Ellen Anderson pointed out that Colorado Revised Statutes 1978 has a paragraph saying
treatment of mobile homes is an exclusive matter of state concern. No home rule city
11
2787.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 17, 1979
can impose licenses that are not applied to regular homes. City Attorney stock told
Council said the city's regulations had been drawn from those of an expert that the
county commissioner hired. Stock said he would go over this, and would recommend the
$25 inspection fee be eliminated if there is no special provisions.
2. Esther Beamer notified the Council that last week was one of the worst weeks for
pollution in the City and was the deepest she had ever seen. Ms. Beamer invited Council.
to come to her home and check the pollution.
3. Bernie Pracko reminded Council he had come before Council to annex a lot into the
city and asked if there was any dissenting member of the Council who would vote to place
this issue on the next Council meeting to get more facts.
Councilman Isaac moved to have W.H.O.P. property rezoning and annexation put on the next
agenda; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
AD HOC COMMITTEE RE: ASPEN INSTITUTE
The Committee consisted of Jeri Fox, Kris Marsh, Howie Mallor, Edgar Stern, Gideon Kaufman,
Tom Richardson, Mike Strang, Si Smith, and Whip Jones. Also present was City's co -counsel
Alan Merson. l
Mayor Edel reminded the group that the day after Council acted, they went back to the
Institute for negotiations. Mayor Edel welcomed the new approach to resolve the problem.
The Council hoped the Institute would have come back to the city; they have not. Mayor
Edel stated the Council will listen to the proposal and discussion; this will be referred
back to staff. 1
Gideon Kaufman told Council this group has come to understand the nature of the problem
and to understand way a simple solution is impossible. Kaufman said this group was
formed without preconceptions and has not taken sides. The committee understand this is
a difficult issue. Kaufman pointed out because of the conflict, it is hard to look at
it directly. T16ey hoped that a group like this, representing a large segment of the
community,might be able to look at this from the outside and come up with ideas acceptable
to the city and Institute. Kaufman said the group attempted to look at both sides and
to identify the problem area and make the gaps smaller. The group has made progress;
however, there are some gaps left.
Kaufman asked the Council to give them some sort of direction. This group has worked very
hard. If the Council thinks the proposal has merit and want to work on it, the group
will do this. If the Council feels the group is wasting time, they would like to know
that. Kaufman emphasized this group is offering services not as a binding mediator or
arbitrators. ;
Tom Richardson told Council the group has tried to come up with a compromise acceptable
to both sides. The proposal is not new, but has been altered in hopes the city and
Insitute can get together. The seven parts to the proposal are; (1) density, (2) use,
(3) Chamber commitment, (4) zoning, (5) dedication of land, (6) intent of the Institute,
and (7) termination of the lawsuit. Richardson pointed out the Institute originally
requested 350 units; they are recommending total units of 299, of which 92 are existing
bedrooms, 135 new bedrooms, 38 new faculty bedroom and 34 new employee bedrooms. The
use will be primarily conference use only with two exceptions; employee housing, and
accessory use for tourists on a 40 per cent quarterly allocation.
i
Richardson told Council the Chamber would commit to booking conferences. They feel it
would be easy for the Chamber to keep the facility on a non -tourist type use. On the
zoning, they are suggesting 1/3 of the land be zoned conservation; 1/3 of land land be
academic, and 1/3 of the land conference -housing. For the dedication of land, the
Institute could dedicate lands around the Music tent area for parking and buffer, also
a buffer zone between the new facilities and the West end residences. As far as the
intent of the Institute, the group feels they want to remain in Aspen and to use the
facilities for Institute use. Richardson said regarding the lawsuit, even when you win
you lose. The city staff is busy; this will take hours of time and cost a lot of money.
Si Smith said the group realizes the solution is not just a proposal; it is now it is
communicated. The group feels it is important to take the burden off the Council and
the Institute. The Ad Hoc committee is willing to take the initiative to develop a paralle
timetable to talk to Council, to talk to the Institute. In the proposal, a suggested
timetable and process was submitted. The committee has met with representatives of the
Council, met with the city attorney and with Alan Merson. The committee has constantly
had conversations individually with representatives of the Institute. The next step was
to meet with each side and present the proposal. Smith told Council if they obtain
approval in principle of the proposal and procedure, they would obtain approval in princi-.
ple from the Institute. They would proceed to the next step.
Councilman Behrendt asked what would happen to the Physics Institute. Kris Marsh said they
would be part of the dedication of land like the M.A.A. Councilman Behrendt asked what
this proposal did to the M.A.A. Edgar Stern told Council the M.A.A. had a 99 year lease
and is a good lease. The lease does not afford the M.A.A any protection from the encroach-
ment from the community. The M.A.A. feels uneasy because of the building increasing on
the tent and the ambient noise level. Stern said the M.A.A. would like to make improve-
ments to the tent. Stern said he hoped for a declaration of open space sufficient to
protect the music. Kaufman said the proposal of 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 encumbent in that 1/3 was
the intention to make sure the open space is beneficial to the M.A.A. and the Physics
building. The committee would like to see to it that the M.A.A., Physics Institute and
West End are all taken care of.
U
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Glenn Horn, Planner
RE: Astor Rezoning - First Reading
DATE: December 22, 1982
Location: Queen Street, Part of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5
and part of Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughs Addition
(see attached map)
Zoning: R-15
Lot Size: 51,253 square feet
Background: On October 30, 1979, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended that the City Council rezone the Astor
parcel from R-15 to R-6. On November 26, 1979 the
City Council considered the Astor rezoning request.
The City Council unanimously approved the rezoning
request with Councilman Tom Issac abstaining due to
conflict of interest. Tom Issac owns the land adjacent
to the Astor parcel.
Based on the unanimous vote of the City Council., the
City Attorney, Ron Stock, stated that he would prepare
a rezoning ordinance. Due to an administrative over-
sight the ordinance was never prepared and the Astor
parcel has never been officially rezoned from R-15 to
R-6.
The Planning Office has consulted with the City Attorney
concerning this matter. The City Attorney has recom-
mended that the Planning Office prepare an ordinance
which rezones the subject parcel to R-6.
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation: The Planning Office recommends the approval of the
rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5 and part of
Lots 5 and 6, Block 6 Hughs Addition from R-15 to R-6.
If you concur with this recommendation, the proper
motion is:
"Move to read Ordinance
, Series of 1983.
"Move to approve Ordinance , Series of 1983."
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Glenn Horn, Planner
RE: Astor Rezoning - First Reading
DATE: December 22, 1982
Location: Queen Street, Part of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5
and part of Tots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughs Addition
(see attached map)
Zoning: R-15
Lot Size: 51,253 square feet
Background: On October 30, 1979, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended that the City Council rezone the Astor
parcel from R-15 to R-6. On November 26, 1979 the
City Council considered the Astor rezoning request.
The City Council unanimously approved the rezoning
request with Councilman Tom Issac abstaining due to
conflict of interest. Tom Issac owns the land adjacent
to the Astor parcel.
Based on the unanimous vote of the City Council, the
City Attorney, Ron Stock, stated that he would prepare
a rezoning ordinance. Due to an administrative over-
sight the ordinance was never prepared and the Astor
parcel has never been officially rezoned from R-15 to
R-6.
The Planning Office has consulted with the City Attorney
concerning this matter. The City Attorney has recom-
mended that the Planning Office prepare an ordinance
which rezones the subject parcel to R-6.
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation: The Planning Office recommends the approval of the
rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5 and part of
Lots 5 and 6, Block 6 Hughs Addition from R-15 to R-6.
If you concur with this recommendation, the proper
motion is:
"Move to read Ordinance
, Series of 1983.
"Move to approve Ordinance , Series of 1983."
• 0
MEMORANDUM
-
�Aspen�City Council ---_----
FROM: Glenn Horn, Planner t
111
RE: Astor Rezoning - First Reading
DATE: December 22, 1982
Location: Queen Street, Part of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5
and part of Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughs Addition
(see attached map)
Zoning: R-15
Lot Size: 51,253 square feet
Back -ground: On October 30, 1979, the Planning, and Zoning Commission
recommended that the City Council rezone the Astor
parcel from R-15 to R-6. On November 26, 1979 the
City Council considered the Astor rezoning request.
The City Council unanimously approved the rezoning
request with Councilman Tom Issac abstaining due to
conflict of interest. Tom Issac owns the land adjacent
to the Astor parcel.
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation:
Based on the unanimous vote of the City Council, the
City Attorney, Ron Stock, stated that he would prepare
a rezoning ordinance. Due to an administrative over-
sight the ordinance was never prepared and the Astor
parcel has never been officially rezoned from R-15 to
R-6.
The Planning Office has consulted with the City Attorney
concerning this matter. The City Attorney has -recom-
mended that the Planning Office prepare. an ordinance
which rezones the subject parcel to R-6.
The Planning Office recommends the approval of the
rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5 and part of
Lots 5 and 6, Block 6 Hughs Addition from R-15 to R-6.
If you concur with this recommendation, the proper
motion is:
"Move to read Ordinance
"Move to approve Ordinance
, Series of 1983.
, Series of 1983."
RE: Astor Rezoning - First Reading
DATE: December 22, 1982
Location: Queen Street, Part of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5
and part of Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughs Addition
(see attached map)
Zoning: R-15
Lot Size: 51,253 square feet
Back -ground: On October 30, 1979, the Planning, and Zoning Commission
recommended that the City Council rezone the Astor
parcel from R-15 to R-6. On November 26, 1979 the
City Council considered the Astor rezoning request.
The City Council unanimously approved the rezoning
request with Councilman Tom Issac abstaining due to
conflict of interest. Tom Issac owns the land adjacent
to the Astor parcel.
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation:
Based on the unanimous vote of the City Council, the
City Attorney, Ron Stock, stated that he would prepare
a rezoning ordinance. Due to an administrative over-
sight the ordinance was never prepared and the Astor
parcel has never been officially rezoned from R-15 to
R-6.
The Planning Office has consulted with the City Attorney
concerning this matter. The City Attorney has -recom-
mended that the Planning Office prepare. an ordinance
which rezones the subject parcel to R-6.
The Planning Office recommends the approval of the
rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 5 and part of
Lots 5 and 6, Block 6 Hughs Addition from R-15 to R-6.
If you concur with this recommendation, the proper
motion is:
"Move to read Ordinance
"Move to approve Ordinance
, Series of 1983.
, Series of 1983."
0
i
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
raw % C. E. MOECKEI .. !. 4 L. CO.
ORDINANCE NO.
(Series of 1982)
AN ORDINANCE REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
ALSO KNOWN AS THE ASTOR SUBDIVISION TO R-6
WHEREAS, Carla Astor, owner of real property described in
Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein, did file a
private application for rezoning on August 15, 1979, pursuant to
Section 24-12-.5(b) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen,
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the subject property described in Exhibit "A" is
currently located in the R-15 zone district and Ms. Carla Astor
did request a rezoning of the subject property to R-6; and
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held on October 30, 1979, the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission did review the requested
rezoning and then did recommend to the Aspen City Council the
rezoning of the subject property described in Exhibit "A" to R-6.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
That Section 24-2.2 of the Municipal Code entitled "Zoning
District Map" is hereby amended by rezoning the Astor Subdivision,
t more specifically described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
i
incorporated herein, as R-6 subject to those zoning regulations
applicable to the R-6 zone district as described in Chapter 24 of
the Aspen Municipal Code (as now exists or may hereafter be
amended).
Section 2
That the City Engineer be and hereby is directed to amend the
Zoning District Map consistent with the requirement of the Aspen
Municipal Code and as described in Section 1 above.
IF
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
f0ft M C. F. HOECKFL .. B.. L. CO.
,i Section 3
1
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
s unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
E
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
Section 4
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the
day of , 1982, at 5:00 P.M. in
the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, 15
days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published
once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of
Aspen.
INTRODUCED,
READ AND ORDERED published as
provided
by law by
the City Council
of the City of Aspen on the
day
of
. 1982.
Herman Edel, Mayor
ATTEST:
a
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of
1982.
Herman Edel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
f.
r_
9
9
G` Y1 ✓t c� Q 1�U Z 0 ✓1 l V2 a7 ►-� vz--� S S C�✓ 1 G
J
lot
oc, The re r �, l d,4u r -e 1)
1�
r' � �� � �✓1. � r�_ �`- � -e S -ram r C � , `<-.��- , J , _-, � � �? ,
T.L
t
•� 4�:. T1`G c �, � -e �� ICJ ea- n o1 � v� �o�cl/G� T�cf
C_�Q >•., ✓� _Q.,_� cJl � U-Tt c�✓T S --0._�O � , -Ct�� e- j-"c.� --- - _
C-
-e.sc r( b — rt G�•, _r - �-f _ /c Thy
S TS q lC1`�'l _ �e a m e
-� 4i!- rib—
f!
i a/-
�_-,v
- SQL t 3
t- err C 2 / C Ate. u S
1 S
n
I�
� ilff1t .
�1
b�7-1cD,-)
I
v'
---�.-
U
/ 1::�e_z
5 r yl ,
/ /,1 /-"?ellly- 2yems' (D
bl�sti��
s
t ..
T4 e c1 7-:1 (A
<f-)(- 4scce"
l
l
• 0
ORDINANCE NO.
(Series of 1982)
AN ORDNANCE REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY ALSO KNOWN
AS 918 SOUTH MILL STREET TO L-2/PUD
WHEREAS, Valdemar Mark, owner of the real property described
in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein, did file
a private application for a rezoning on August 15, 1982, pursuant
to Section 24-12.5(b) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen,
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the subject property described in Exhibit "A" is
currently bisected by a zone district boundary line between the
L-2 and R-15/PUD/L zone districts; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has a significant municipal inter-
est in seeing that its Zoning District Map is rational and con-
sistent and does not contain zone district boundaries bisecting
parcels historically in common ownershpi and uniform in use; and
WHEREAS, in the private rezoning application submitted by
Valdemar Mark, Mr. Mark did request a rezoning of the subject pro-
perty to L-2; and
WHEREAS, Valdemar Mark, as an inducement to the City to
accept his rezoning request, did amend his rezoning application to
include a voluntary deed restriction limiting the use of the sub-
ject property described in Exhibit "A" to a single-family or
duplex structure; and
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held on November 2, 1982, the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission did review the requested
rezoning and then did recommend to the Aspen City Council the
rezoning of the subject property described in Exhibit "A" to
L-2/PUD with the requested deed restriction on the property limit-
ing the use of the parcel to a single-family or duplex structure
and did further recommend that the following issues be .
r
• 0
reviewed during the mandatory PUD process if Council rezones the
property L-2/PUD: FAR, setbacks/building envelope, height, slope
and surrounding land uses; andM ,14 (� -�-'„�
A,,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the requested
f
rezoning be subject to certain below -described conditions, which
conditions the Applicant, Valdemar Mark, stipi,l _ to be rea-
sonable and relating directly to the subject property and valid
public policy goals.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE -
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That Secton 24-2.2 of the Municipal Code entitled "Zoning
District Map" is hereby amended by rezoning the Valdemar Mark par-
cel, more specifically described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto
and incorporated herein, as L-2 conditioned upon a deed restric-
tion to be filed by him as owner, or his successors and assigns,
limiting the use of said aprcel to either a single-family or
duplex structure and deed restricting the allowed floor area to
41�00 square feet and subject to those zoning regulations appli-
cable to the L-2 zone district as described in Chapter 24 of the
Aspen Municipal Code (as now exists or may hereafter be amended).
C „-� , -- I
That the City Engineer be and hereby is directed to amend the
Zoning District Map consistent with the requirement of the Aspen
Municipal Code and as described in Section 1 above.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado 81611
MRmnPAMMIM
DATE: November 9, 1981
TO. Glenn Horn _
FROM: Paul Taddune!;�')
RE. Carla Astor Rezoning
Rezonings are accomplished pursuant to the procedures
set forth in Article X11, Chapter 24, of the Municipai
Code. You will note that the P&Z is required to hold a
public hearing and forward a copy of its report to the
City Council, after which the City Council may or may
not adopt the necessary rezoning ordinance. if this
procedure Wins followed, and the P&Z has conducted a hear-
ing and forwarded its recommedation, the actual zoning
ordinance can be introduced without the necessity of
beginning at Step 1.
PJT:mc
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado `81611
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 22, 1979
TO: Richard Grice
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Carla Astor's Request for Rezoning
Although I support the project which Carla has proposed for her
property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method to allow
for increased density for the development of employee housing
should be the adoption of an employee housing overlay and the
application of that overlay to the property. To rezone individual
pieces of property on a case by case basis in the manner requested
by her is inconsistent with our zoning code. Her property is
zoned R-15 in a district completely surrounded by other property
which is zoned R-15 or R-15-A. Further, the zoning of one parcel
R-6 which is not adjacent to other property zoned R-6 is very
close to being spot zoning. For these reasons I recommend
denial.
RWS:mc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
FROM: Glenn Horn, Planning Office
RE: Astor Rezoning
DATE: November 11, 1982
During the last week of September, I forwarded a file regarding the
Carla Astor rezoning to your office requesting direction as to the
best way to remedy a zoning error. I will not go into a detailed
explanation of the error because Gary Esary is fully aware of the
events relating to the rezoning.
The Planning Office is anxiously awaiting a response from your office
so that we can proceed with the action necessary to correct the
official zoning map.
If you have any questions pertaining to this matter I will be glad
to meet with you and Gary to discuss it. Thank you.
cc: Gary Esary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Carla Astor's Rezoning Request
DATE: October 25, 1979
The attached letter of application from Gideon Kaufman on behalf of Ms.
Carla Astor requests rezoning of her King Street property to R-6. Ms. Astor's
property includes a total of 51,253 square feet and is presently improved with
two existing duplexes. The subject property is surrounded on two sides by other
property zoned R-15, on a third side by R-15-A and her final boundary adjoins
Park zoning. "It is the applicant's intention to develop a total of three
duplexes on the property to be rezoned and to see that 50% of these units are
deed restricted as employee units. Since two of the duplex buildings are already
constructed, the actual new impact on the area will be only the construction of
one new duplex."
The Planning Office as well as the Housing Director are highly desirable
of seeing guarantees made that three dwelling units will be available in
perpetuity on this property for employee housing. For this reason we are interested
in approving this rezoning in spite of the fact that it is clearly spot zoning.
Furthermore, we question the legality of requiring the deed covenant of three of
the units to employee housing under a simple rezoning request. The appropriate
method for accomplishing the goal would be to via the Housing Overlay zone.
However, we have no assurances that the City Council will adopt the Housing
Overlay and in fact suspect that they will not. Ron Stock is also of the opinion
that spot zoning would be a mistake and that the adoption of the Housing Overlay
zone would be the appropriate method. For these reasons Ron's recommendation is
denial of the zoning request. Ron's comments are attached in their entirety for
your review.
Traditional planning thought absolutely prohibits spot zoning. We are not
precisely sure what the legal ramifications of spot zoning would be. We find it
very hard to overlook the recommendation of denial made by the City Attorney.
At this time, the Planning Office reluctantly recommends denial.
u
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Carla Astor's Rezoning Request
DATE: November 20, 1979
The attached letter of application from Gideon Kaufman on behalf of Ms. Carla
Astor requests rezoning of her King Street property to R-6. Ms. Astor's property
includes a total of 51,253 square feet and is presently improved with two existing
duplexes. The subject property is surrounded on two sides by other property zoned
R-15, on a third side by R-15-A and her final boundary adjoins Park (P) zoning.
The Park zoned property serves as a good transition from the R-6 zoning on the one
side to the R-15 property owned by Ms. Astor. "It is the applicant's intention
to develop a total of three duplexes on the property to be rezoned and to see that
50% of these units are deed restricted as employee units. Since two of the duplex
buildings are already constructed, the actual new impact on the area will be only
the construction of one new duplex." The Planning Office as well as the Housing
Director are highly desirable of seeing guarantees made that three dwelling units
will be available in perpetuity on this property for employee housing. For this
reason we are interested in approving this rezoning in spite of the fact that it
appears to be spot zoning. If Council chooses to approve this rezoning, the
precedent established would be one of allowing spot zoning specifically for the
purpose of achieving the community goal of encouraging employee housing. At the
present time there are four free market units and if the rezoning were approved,
there would be three free market units and three PMH units. We are of the opinion
that a more appropriate method of accomplishing the goal would be via the Housing
Overlay Zone and suggest that Council consider tabling the matter until you have
adopted the Housing Overlay Zone.
Ron Stock comments as follows, "Although I support the project which Carla
has proposed for her property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method
to allow for increased density for the development of employee housing should be
the adoption of an employee housing overlay and the application of that overlay
to the property. To rezone individual pieces of property on a case by case basis
in the manner requested by her is inconsistent with our Zoning Code. Her property
is zoned R-15 in a district completely surrounded by other property which is
zoned R-15 and R-15-A. Further, the zoning of one parcel R-6 which is not adjacent
to other property zoned R-6 is very close to being spot zoning (emphasis added).
For these reasons I recommend denial."
Traditional planning thought absolutely prohibits spot zoning. We are not
precisely sure what the legal ramifications of spot zoning would be. We find
it very hard to overlook the recommendation of denial made by the City Attorney.
Before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Planning Office reluctantly
recommended denial for consistency purposes and out of respect for the City
Attorney's studied opinion.
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application at their last
regular meeting in October and recommended approval of the rezoning from R-15 to
R-6 as described in Exhibit A to the letter addressed to Jim Reents dated August
15, 1979, for the specific purpose of converting four free market units to three
free market and three PMH units, for the reason of the property's proximity to
existing R-6 zoning, and due to the highly developed nature of the other adjoining
properties. (The P and Z's vote was by a margin of 5 to 1.)
•
•
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
BOX 10001
611 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
DAVID G. EISENSTEIN August 15, 1979
Mr. Jim Reents
Planning Office
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Carla Astor - Rezoning
Dear Jim,
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
Please consider this letter an application for
rezoning by a private land owner pursuant to §24-115 of
The Aspen Municipal Code. Enclosed please find an applica-
tion fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00). This application
is being filed in a timely manner so that the P & Z might
consider this application at its October 15, 1979, meeting.
Also enclosed please find a survey of the area that is to be
rezoned. The legal description of the subject property is
attached to this letter as Exhibit A.
owners are:
The names and addresses of the adjacent property
The City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Richard "Bud" Brownell
Box 1477
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lois Brownell
Box 164
Woody Creek, Colorado 81656
Mr. Jim Reents
August 15, 1979
Page two
Marcella DeCray
Box 4895
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Thomas Isaac
975 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Ernst Kapelli
Box 1962
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Robert Zupancis
940 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Joseph Candreia
930 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
A petition is not required, since the applicant is the sole
owner of the land area included in the application.
As I explained in several prior conversations
with the City Attorney and planning staff, it is the appli-
cant's intention to develop a total of three (3) duplexes
on the property to be rezoned and to see that fifty percent
(50%) of these units are deed restricted as employee units.
Since two (2) of the duplex buildings are already constructed,
the actual new impact on the area will be only the construction
of one (1) new duplex.
If you have any questions on the application or
need any additional information, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
., 4,47_��
Gon Kaufma
GK ch
Attachment - Exhibit A
Enclosures
cc Planning Office
CISy 5,1 F9s,0,�,��
if
S1 y r9 im , ._. �� ,/ l
C
S T R E E T F'I'Y r4z-
,I� r
5 --------
66* 21' E 419.1 8'
14Zz. Q 3 83.80 102.0O
/ I _ ly' g•1 � ;
v al.•' Ic
' W w� DUPLEX ' r
D U P L E X q
LOT 4
132002. SC.FT. N m HJ NI Z OVERMANp IDS �,
4}� a I - - -- - - O
V
I \
LOT 8 I LOT 7 3 STATE.`1�'.T
774 R! gQ FT. I 15125t SO. FT•
M 'D
jQ I MI i N M��T 10N (♦/
S(J cts I _ J MI N` '1. T.A
N 66° cl''-V 4< r -- - s r- - - -N 66'21' W n al TvA
C-4---nth r. H P 6 3.8 C' h 2° i sit
3. TrA
n'u ' i I I I rLA
(�C �r /� 1I I_ � � s►1
O I
FRAME
I
/ NOuSE NEf`ZI''•J
CAR L_
f-OkT
I LU I STATE IF C-;I
(" NI COUNTY ,:r
Tug Asi
I ' �`. • I rA .� I
\ 1 , N I �� 3 THIS
+ ' I Z I h -0
LOT 6 ,tQ iq CV
IT —I LOT 5 I 15220± SO. FT.
�„
�a ^�i
� 165274 SO.FT. I
CERTIFICATt-
N 1, G[eI
I
GIrlstor, A
' •M896 MIT 8V
A S E M E N T��Huuii1
A04, T! L i T r
A 73` L,4'YJ l
CITY OFAll
ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado 81611
M E r4 0 R A id D U M
TO: Richard Grice, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Jim Reents, Housing Director
DATE: October 25, 1979
RE: Carta Astor Rezoning Petition
On the surface, this petition is for a zone change to
allow density increase. It could be considered a "spot zoning"
aid and as such should be denied.
But in reality, the issues involved are more complex.
Carla Astor, by her statements as well as those of her tenants, has
provided long term affordable employee housing. She currently has
three existing dwelling units on this property, two of which are
devoted to this use.
Ms. Astor has a desire to build a single family dwelling
on this property for her personal use. As condition of this
approval, the applicant is willing to deed restrict one-half of
the units as low, moderate or middle income housing.
Because of the community need for local housing, I
believe a rezoning of this type is both justified and desirable
from the City's point of view. As housing director, I recommend
approval of this rezoning request.
W9
I , �
I.
II APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
it 1
The request is hereby made on behalf of CARLA ASTOR
I
i licant") under Section 20-19
,I I
!(hereinafter referred to as "app
Hof the Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Regulations for exemption `
i
� respect ;'from the definition of the term "-subdivision with to j
I
i t described
t.the creation of three (3) lots from the real property
i,in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
it
1':reference. It is submitted that an exemption in this case
dwould be appropriate. The application involves subdividing a
l I
:current lot existing of approximately forty-five thousand I
�(45,000) square feet. The existing lot contains two (2) existing t
ilduplexes. The City has recently approved a zoning change for
-6. The subdivision of the land
the property from R-15 to R {
!I I
• 'was part of the overall plan which. included the rezoning. j
J111�;G� the suh� i v� s cn �z� l? create only two., (2 ) -- r—
# will be created, the subdivision is
three (3) employee units I
ilexempt from the GMP. The exemption process is appropriate as
Ilit is the contention of the applicant that the granting of the
exemption will not be detrimental to the public welfare or f
• linjurious to other property
in the area in which the subject
property is situate. The granting of this application will not
undermine any intent of the subdivision regulations, as it is
clearly within the area intended for exemption under Section 20-19.
It is necessary to accomplish this subdivision in an expeditious
manner to aid in -the creation of employee units; and, therefore,
the shorter exemption process is necessary. The applicant would
appreciate your consideration of this application at your next
regular meeting.
G deon .r;a:jin;a�i�
attorney for�"arla
.. , ` h:'`rL�•1�+!:�jrq':AT'";;'►�;-��i�'��w`t'�F�•��•1�T.l��v�7t����
I�e4�►�O•'ir:4yi�;,�.•:'r��.}tf,::.•�-!�x••ti+'-�=�:`:*�:.',t1f�:r'4*�c�..�-'�i�sli"�4i�,.t .
' 0 •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sunny Vann, Planning --office
FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Office �1J
DATE: January 15, 1980
RE: Astor Subdivision Exemption, Hughes Addition
Having reviewed the improvement survey for the above subdivi-
sion exemption and having made a site inspection, the Engineering
Department recommends the following:
1) We recommend denial of the Astor Subdivision Exemption and
recommend the owner/applicant be required to follow full
subdivision procedure as defined under Chapter 20 of the
Municipal Code.
2) We recommend the improvement survey as submitted by the
owner/applicant be accepted as a conceptual plat.
3) That the owner/applicant add the following information to
the improvement survey:
A) Indicate zoning on and adjacent to subdivision on the
vicinity map.
B) Indicate status of access easement across Isaac property
(book and page of recorded easement).
C) Disclosure of ownership in'the form of an attorney's
rertifica to or ti.tic irourance. -
The Engineering Department recommends conceptual approval of
the Astor Subdivision subject to the owner/applicant correcting the
above conditions.
t+ :::�!:J�;i.. �it�'+�
nf
t1J��: ,,�';rr`.,y., ,+�/�u,�,:•.,.�'k�.L�:� r'•,j� j',�:�v�•V4,:��
��!_'�r.:,�..k:•..•ial��jw
�'}:��••�-a�9r.�•�� �\•,�'�� � ,Tp V ( ✓�-�F���-�'�-1.�'t' ^�'��Y�,_,'v^�^'l: �!�'�,�q�l� 1♦'-a ��!!
V
��I '. r�.. �• .l�.�y�
..�1/�7`�•�..�•.�i!'7fAi'.
� l
♦ �
1YY
1. _i r
`�
0 0
EXHIBIT A
TO
LETTER TO JIM REENTS
DATED AUGUST 15, 1979
A r>ortion of Section 7, Township 10 Scuth, Range 84 West
of the 6th Principal Meridian, Part of Lois 21 31 and 51
Block 5 and part of Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, Hughes Addition,
and a part of Queen Street more fully described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of King Street,
said point being S. 18°331 E. 385.26 feet from Corner No. 11
Tract 401 East Aspen Addition; thence S. 24130t W. 142.63 feet;
thence S. 361261 W. 76.76 feet; thence N. 730291 W. 145.21 feet;
thence N. 230391 E. 142.87 feet; thence N. 660211 W. 107.58 feet;
thence N. 340458 E. 93.75 feet to the Southerly line of King
Street; thence S. 66021t E. 255.32 feet along the Southerly
line of King Street to the point of beginning.
• MEMORANDUM •
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Sunny Vann, Planning Office
RE: Astor Subdivision Exemption
DATE: January 18, 1980
The applicant is 'requesting an exemption from the definition of subdivision
in order to subdivide an approximately 45,000 square foot parcel located between
King Street and Queen Street in the Hughes Addition. The applicant wishes to
create three lots, two of which will contain existing duplexes. An additional
duplex is proposed for the third lot. The property was annexed and rezoned to
R-6 in November of 1979 with the understanding that only two new units would be
constructed and that three of the resulting six units would be deed restricted to
employee housing.
In view of the need for a plat, the Engineering Department recommends denial
of the applicant's request for subdivision exemption and requests that the
applicant be required to -follow full subdivision procedures. The Engineering
Deaprtment further recommends that the applicant's improvement survey be accepted
as a conceptual plat subject to the addition of several items outlined in their
memorandum dated January 15, 1980 which is attached for your review.
The City Attorney concurs with the Engineering Department's recommendation
and further recommends that subdivision approval be conditioned upon (1) the
deed restriction of three units to low, moderate and middle income guidelines,
(2) the construction of a duplex on the vacant lot, and (3) that any further
development of the property be subject to growth management approval (allotment
not exemption). The deed restriction of'three units is supported by the Housing
Director.
-- -Th- Planning Office recommends denial of_the Astor Subdivision Fxem^+ien
' • - '-s -that the applicant be required -to-- follow -#'-u1�—subdi vie
We further recommend that the applicant's improvement survey be granted conceptual
approval subject to the stipulations outlined in the Engineering Department's
memorandum and conditioned upon (1) the construction of a duplex on the
undeveloped lot, (2) the deed restriction of three units to low, moderate, and
middle income guidelines, and _(3) that further development of the property be
subject to the receipt of"a growth management allotment.
JCil�31•ilr•�f-1•�•�F••:-�i.i���'Iwr.',,.�.4.+•W.:c-,►-i%.i•.'-�R.?+'i•�'.i��r,�l'-a.►;•.s.�.;.,d•a.•:�••w'.L=�r.r...y.;�•.H+�Ar�.. •� •�.,i..•aJ�•�.:'• .••tw�.:'.t
�-L. M. 1�' L >•' i.�-I4--+..,1.v: �V-f+.{-J'y�-� `�'lL'''._" /�l!/`Y ►2'r��A ��a �..r ti. J-A11�li..r l•.a�. lLr c/�'1iw+�'�:l�i 'J
.�...�,1.r.S��rra�'`r:..`,n��:�i.�^•'�i`i..sw..••''a1`.. � -�-. - n �Lyiaa.lYc`.�": � .�i.�.'-i=i+.,Y�'�' �C"2'.-•-1..Ml.. ..
.�.�._u�__...-^ �.�.•._1.-1.�-. +.-+-_. u __ �►,.u.,,.•2�a1L' w•.•i�•'.+•wl :aA::J.M�w.�.. �..o.l^•'�lv�M��.�CC J�•.I�^^'•[�'yR`J �n •'e��'4r�+./!.'.•. �•%'[
CITYC)"FA
130 south galena street
aspens eolorado-'81611
MEMOi:ANDUM
DATE: October 22, 1979
TO: Richard Grice
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Carla Astor's Request for Rezoning
Although I support the project which Carla has proposed for her
property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method to allow
for increased density for the development of employee housing
should be the adoption of an employee housing overlay and the
application of that overlay to the property. To rezone individua'.
pieces of property on a case by case basis in the manner requested
by her is inconsistent with our zoning code. Her property is
zoned R-15 in a district completely surrounded by other property
which is zoned R-15 or R-15-A. Further, the zoning of one parcel
R-6 which is not adjacent to other property zoned R-6 is very
close to being spot zoning. For these reasons I recommend
denial.
RWS:mc
4
•
•
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
BOX 10001
611 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
DAVID G. EISENSTEIN
Mr. Jim Reents
Planning Office
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
August 15, 1979
Re: Carla Astor - Rezoning
Dear Jim,
Please consider this letter an application for
rezoning by a private land owner pursuant to §24-115 of
The Aspen Municipal Code. Enclosed please find an applica-
tion fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00). This application
is being filed in a timely manner so that the P & Z might
consider this application at its October 15, 1979, meeting.
Also enclosed please find a survey of the area that is to be
rezoned. The legal description of the subject property is
attached to this letter as Exhibit A.
owners are:
The names and addresses of the adjacent property
The City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Richard "Bud" Brownell
Box 1477
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lois Brownell
Box 164
Woody Creek,
Colorado 81656
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
825-81 66
Mr. Jim Reents
August 15, 1979
Page two
Marcella DeCray
Box 4895
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Thomas Isaac
975 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Ernst Kapelli
Box 1962
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Robert Zupancis
940 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Joseph Candreia
930 King Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
A petition is not required, since the applicant is the sole
owner of the land area included in the application.
A:; I explained in several prior conversations
with the City Attorney and planning stE-ff, it is the appli-
cant's intention to develop a total of three (3) duplexes
on the property to be rezoned and to see that fifty percent
(50%) of thesE+ units are deed restricted as employee units.
Since two (2) of the duplex buildings are already constructed,
the actual new impact on the area will be only the construction
of one (1) new duplex.
If you have any questions on the application or
need any additional information, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
G' on Kaufma�,�
GK ch
Attachment - Exhibit A
Enclosures
cc Planning Office
0
S T R E E T
143.
66' 21' E 419.1
o-e1,`t
LOT 4
i
)3GCO± SC.FT.
� -) U�v� �, t Itl r.....�/%%��,,,-��-•� .ram �nn/i/n• •. � �[li : -- - - - -
moo o� ,
i�r� �
•
�
ScuEl�
--
102.00
1 DUPLEX
1
61In
,
�-20'
' I LOT 8 I LOT 7
> 1
7708t S0. FT. I wl 151252SOFT.
I f
t � i
t m I e,
- � --- Nb6°cI,:N----cs )6----- 3S �----N6G'21'W „--J NI I
5.4F 63.6C' r. _ ZI n , n✓ /
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - •\ O I I
10 I
✓ / I s ` I - C6 I I
1'
Q
c /FRAME7t`
HOU
SE �\ I I NEr`LI'•�
CAR L-
!' PORT
I �I
I \v • I M .r I - _
,y s•, 1 � I , ��
\ `• ! 1 N I W� 3
I Z I ly
3 I LOT 6 !W N
0
n _) LOT 5 I I 152203 So. FT.
e o; l
16S2Ti SOFT.
N
I
E A S E W f N T
TYy 1
' 83.80•
I !
r -
I -----CIS. s•,
3 ,tq WI DUPLEX
Of -4m 0) I
0 0+ =Q,
M 0) W M 1 0) I 0!
N W''
NI I -
N a Z I LJVERMAwG — J I Q, 0'
3
STATE.Z%T (F
hwOV ALL
PsItTtow or ry
1. TMAY
.. TO A`
•Irle
j, THAT
PLAYrt
e SPEC
STATE LF CZL-
CCUNTT OF -!T
Tag AD#Vt
THIS
CCnTIFICAT: .i
I, GCORG[
atrtslar, A av
vwlta MY SWFE.
k N 73
S
_ --. __ .. ..-.. �. �/ o ...� '+n....=,.,,�...-ae..r �.-�+-s- .. __._.__._ --...-"____'_.._...++c...r.=..-+..��..--.w+...«�.....+w++-r. .r�.r..-.•.-4..-mom,-i..-,- r . w'xa.-. -
iP
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galena�treet
aspen, colorsdo„'81611
MEMORANDSM
DATE: October 22, 1979
TO: Richard Grice
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Carla Astor's Request for Rezoning
Although I support the roject which Carla has proposed for her
property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method to allow
for increased density for the development of employee housin
shou d be the a op ion of an employee housing overlay and the
application :)t thatoverlay to t e property. To rezone individual
pieces of proper=y on a case by case basis in the manner requester
by her is inc-ste onsnt with our zon'Her pro ing code. p erty is
zoned R-15 in a di'ssrict completely surrounded by other property
which is zoned R-15•or R-15-A. Further, the zoning of one parcel
R-6 which is not adjacent to other property zoned R-6 is very
close to being spot zoning. For these reasons I recommend
denial.
RWS:mc
•
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galenastreet
aspen, colorado-'81611
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 22, 1979
TO: Richard Grice
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Carla Astor's Request for Rezoning
Although I support the project which Carla has proposed for her
property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method to allow
for increased density for the development of employee housing
should be the adoption of an employee housing overlay and the
application of that overlay to the property. To rezone individual
pieces of property on a case by case basis in the manner requested
by her is inconsistent with our zoning code. Her property is
zoned R-15 in a district completely surrounded by other property
which is zoned R-15 or R-15-A. Further, the zoning.of one parcel
R-6 which is not adjacent to other property zoned R-6 is very
close to being spot zoning. For these reasons I recommend
denial.
RWS:mc
A
CITY19-F. ASPEN
130 south galena�treet
aspen, enlOrado➢81611
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 22, 1979
TO: Richard Grice
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Carla Astor's Request for Rezoning
Although I support the project which Carla has proposed for her
property, I am of the opinion that the appropriate method to allow
for increased density for the development of employee housing
should be the adoption of an employee housing overlay and the
application of that overlay to the property. To rezone individual
pieces of property on a case by case basis in the manner requeste6
by her is inconsistent with our zoning code. Her property is
zoned R-15 in a district completely surrounded by other property
which is zoned R--15-or R-15-A. Further, the zoning of one parcel
R-6 which is not adjacent to other property zoned R-6 is very
close to being spot zoning. For these reasons I recommend
denial.
RWS:mc
1
� 1
a ,
£ 1
1
� I
r 1
w a
d 0 m LOT 3 1 '
N ~ m 1 7 7961 SQ. FT. 1 3 I
° t0 z , 0)_ I
011 FRAME_
1 ° HUUSE
IT
K/ N G S I R E E T
� o
1
G G Sty / S 6 6° 21' E 419.18'
89.88, 143. _
I i 83.80 I 102.00
I I
I I
L
, 1
06CA1
t I
I �
.20 �'I 1 O) 1
1 , I
1 I I
1 I 1
1 , I
I 1 I
1 1 �
1 � 1
w
------ 76.09' ------------� -- 98_0
FRAME
HOUSE
LOT 2
178± SQ. FT.
_lu c
b in S 6s° 2- 1' E
M In 12 7. 75'
I
L 0 T
5 5',
viI
W wI DUPLEX I
(„ �v M(�
oM1
0)
DUPLEX
LOT 4Uj
Im I
13200 SQ.FT. , a 10) o
Z I OVERHANG — J 1 0) 01 NG l
\( w
\ I I OI pVE H'
20'
T LOT 8 I
LOT 7
7708± SQ. FT. I wl 15125± SQ. FT.
-1 O
I=o I ,;
0 l � z �I
I '� �W I ;��' 1 M`
� Q J
N 6-° 1' O NI6° �N 6V .
�_ rS.4F 0. 63.80' n ZIIr
[�
� 1 I
/ I
�15` 5' 1 I
�� I 11n I
FRAME
HOUSE \ I I I
/ CAR \ L- I N EF`
/ PORT I _
9 T. 93
ti N
W
I
5`I
ID y
EXN jT 1f on' FF0, if, (07
� m
vYEK l
ELODY
ACRES
SUBDIVISION
LOCATED IN
HUGHES ADDITION
81
TRACT 40 EAST ASPEN ADDITION
SEC. 7 —T. I O S. = R. 84 W. — 6T" R M.
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
_3 STATEMENTOF OWNERS AND DEED OF DED[CATION
0 M KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT THE UNDERSIcNEO B M �0 [IN{ 7yGO OWNERS OF A
O N \ PORTION OF HUGHES ADDITION AND TRACT 40, EAST ASPEN-OD%TION, $EDT ION 7, TOWNiMI►
( r 10 SOUTH RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6tb P.M. 00 HEREBY STA1[ A.O
N — S • CERTIFY AS F0lL0W3:
In 1. THAT THEY HAVE CAUSED THIS OFFICIAL PLAT TO BE MAOC.
2. THAT THEY HAVE CAUSED THE PROPERTY TO BE LAID OUT, PLATTED, AND 5110-
OIVIOEO INTO LOTS AS SHOWN HEREON.
3, TN AT TN[Y 00 MERE BY DEDICATE RICNTS-O/-MAY A►•D UTILITY EASEMENTS AS
PLATTED. DASHED LINES PARALLEL TO LOT LINES ARE VTI ITY EASEMENTS UNL SS
SPECIFIED AS R.O.W. ON PLA .
Lewis V I AKA Louis S MARl.[IIM1 PANOV •
S/ RO
MLHNIE —E[ S-AR0V19
CHARLES ;-NO DIRT 49*wERGl,L
MORILLA ANN FOTHERGS�u
3
LOT 6
Q
w
N
11732± SO. FT.
-
�
'�
l
— LOT 5
15220± SQ. FT.
/�
co
I �
• I
ao
I
/ ,� cD
h
N
FRAME
INtp
16527 SOFT.
DUPLEX
FOTHERGILL)
--
E EIV
//��EA
UE
N 73 Z wIT
I
W.
`��
Fqs,
'11.0
UTILITYc.° 6�
0
R O•'N•
i
I �\ " 'J
r
1
2
I
d
1
10.0
1 h
��\
n
� ��
ry•
I
1
I I
�
r I
II
�
��
�•
1
I z
1
�'
11
I
BOOK 204 PAGE 29/
I BOOK 202 PAGE 337
I
BOOK 198 PAGE 545
1
1
ID I
ICI
�
1
Im
IWI
I
Im I
I n
,
vA
wl
I
Lul
,m I
i I
I3 r
i
SCALE: 1 IH. ?O FT.
II
ICI
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
i
/
I BEEINMIMG AT A POINT ON THE SOUTMERLY LIME OF
KING STREET,
SAID
'
I POINT DEING S 18• 350 E 385.26 FEET FROM CORMtR
11 TRACT 40
EAST
11
I AiP[M ADDITION;
I
I
j TMEND[ S 24- 30' W 142.63 FEET;
I
TNENaE S 380 261 W 76.76 FEET;
I
LEGEND:
I
I
_ TMEMD[ N 73° 291 W 158.70 FEET;
BEARINGS ARE TRUE AND
ORIENTED TO U.S.C. &
G.S. BEARING
II
TMENCI S 13° 4,61 W 34-65 FEET;
FROM RED .BUTTE.
I I
THENCE N 430 430 W 119.73 F[[T;
---- ROW
TMtNCE N 850 22' W 121.36 FEET;
OR UTILITY EASEMENT
TNENCO: N 07' 070 W 43.21
0 2 FT. X #5 RE-BAR/CAP
.II
FEET;
I
'
THEN/t N 30° 17• E 132.20 FEET;
TMEMee M 150 24' E 96.70 Ft[T TO TM[ iOWTMERLT LIME
OF KING STREET;
I
THENCE S 66° 21' E 4
19.18 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LIME OF KIM{
STD[[, TO TM[ POINT OF D[{IMNIMO.
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF PITKIN
Tug ABOVE AND FOREGO :o STATEMENT OWNER WAS ACKNOWLEDGED [ ORE ME
THIS DAY wr 1967.
MY GO, MISSIOn [XPbnts
NOTARY PUp,.IO
CERTIFICATE OF .SURVEYOR
I, GEORGE W. NELSON, 00 HEREBY CERTIFY TWAT THIS PLAT OF MELODY ACRES SM B-
01VISION, A SUBDIVISION OF A PART OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, HAS Beek PREPARED
YNOER MY SUPERVISION AND ACCURATELY REPRESENTS A FIELD SURVEY OF THE SAME.
VOLD. Ge LAND SURVEYOR No. 7168
STATE OF COLORADO
COUIJTY OF P I TK B N
THE ABOVE FOREGOING CERTIFICATE OF SURVEYOR WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME
THIS l.� DAY Of 1967, eY GEORGE l . NELSON
.
.MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
Ci JLO
1
NOY A* IUBLIC=
COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMM ISS CEt ;ATE
APPROVED THIS DAY OF _ ! 1';� a COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY Of PwYKIN, OLORAC�
sY —
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CERT -Pt TE
APPROVED THIS DAY Of _ 196J. BOARD Of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Of THE COUNTY OF PATKIN, COLORADO.
By
ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE PITKIN COUNT► CLERK AND RECORDERS OFFICE tM';S_ *AT
of , 1967.
CLERK AND RECORDER
PLAT BOOK PACE RECEPTION No. .
I
I- - -., A
• ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
County
00100 — 63711 09009 — 00000
63712
63713
63714
63715
63716
63717
City
00100 — 63721 09009 — 00000
63722
63723
63724
63725
63726
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00100 — 63061 09009 — 00000
63062
63063
Name:—
Address: —
Check No._
Receipt No. P
Subdivision/PUD
Special Review
P&Z Review Only
Detailed Review
Final Plat
Special Approval
Specially Assigned
•
Conceptual Application
Preliminary Application
Final Application
Exemption
Rezoning
Conditional Use
County Land Use Sales
GMP Sales
Almanac Sales
Copy Fees
Other
Project:
925-1566
Phone:
Date:
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
BOX 10001
611 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Planning Office
HAND DELIVERY
•
•