Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19900226Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 1 COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1 CONSENT CALENDAR 3 ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 1990 - Affordable Housing 3 ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement/Maroon Creek Deve 1 opment 8 ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement/Leslie Wex- ner 9 ORDINANCE #7, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement West Reds Road 9 RESOLUTION #10, SERIES OF 199 0 - Repealing Resolution #46, 19 8 9 -Aspen Mountain Lodge 9 ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE NEW CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES 10 HARVARD STUDY 16 MAROLT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 17 ASPEN SANITATION DISTRICT CLAIMS SETTLEMENT 17 UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT ENGINEERING AWARD 18 STORM WATER RUNOFF ENGINEERING SCOPE 18 ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 1990 - Employee Housing Water Tap Fee Deferral . 20 ORDINANCE #9, SERIES OF 1990 - Corkscrew Employee Housing Trade 2 0 ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 1990 - Kraut Vested Rights 21 ORDINANCE #11, SERIES OF 1990 - Sportstalker Vested Rights 21 ORDINANCE #12, SERIES OF 1990 - Collins Block Lot Line 21 ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 1990 - Repealing GRETT; Enacting RETT 22 REQUEST FOR FUNDS - CAST 2 2 25 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26r 1990 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENTS 23 REQUEST FOR FUNDS - KAJX Public Radio 24 RESOLUTION #11, SERIES OF 1990 - Kona Post Settlement 24 26 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Mayor Stirling called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Crockett, Peters, Tuite, and Gassman present. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 1. Phoebe Ryerson reminded Council she filmed Council and the BOCC for years with no pay. 2. Si Coleman, representing KAJX, Aspen's public radio station,. asked Council add to the agenda a request for supplementary funds. Coleman told Council KAJX is within a close margin of the $32,000 they need for a matching federal grant, which produces $3 for every local dollar. This grant needs to be submitted by February 28. Coleman also requested an additional $5, 000 for a structure for the new transmitter. Councilman Peters moved to add this to the agenda; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. 3. Ray Patch, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, presented Council with a franchise check for 1989, $75,416. Patch said RMNG would like to commend the staff for their work and their courtesy. 4. Bill Martin said there is no work being done on a structure at Third and Gillespie. He would like a response from the city manager. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Peters brought up speed bumps on Snowbunny Lane. Councilman Peters reminded Council residents have complained about traffic through their street. Councilman Peters said he would like staff to look into this. Councilman Crockett asked if the police department has been consulted. Councilman Peters moved to direct the public works department to call on Howie Mallory and discuss the possibility of installing speed bumps; seconded by Councilman Gassman.. Councilman Crockett said he is not sure that speed bumps are the most appropriate way to accomplish this goal. All in favor, motion carried. 2. Councilman Peters requested the public works department investigate monthly permit parking for the garage. 3. Mayor Stirling pointed out local musicians were honored recently at the Grammie awards. Mayor Stirling said this signals Aspen's close association with music of all kinds. 1 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 4. Mayor Stirling said there is an election forum March 5 at the hotel Jerome. Council also has a work session for that night. Council cancelled that work session and rescheduled it to March 19. This will be financial guidelines and the budget process. 5. Mayor Stirling noted that the process outlined in the school district buildings suggested a committee with 2 members of the BOCC, 2 Councilmembers and 2 school board members. Amy Margerum, planning director, told Council there is a joint meeting with the BOCC March 6; this is on the agenda. Council can make the appointments now or then. Councilman Gassman moved to appoint Councilman Peters and Mayor Stirling to the school properties committee master plan process for the school property; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, motion carried. 6. Mayor Stirling asked if Council would consider writing a letter to Judge DeVilbiss regarding the sentencing of Jessie Baron. Councilman Gassman said he does not know enough about the issue. Councilman Crockett said he does not feel it is appropriate for Council to take action in this case. Councilman Tuite agreed. 7. Amy Margerum, planning director, said the planning office would like a work session to follow up on the housing production plan and needs assessments presented to Council recently. Councilman Crockett moved to schedule a work session March 7 at 5 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Tuite and Mayor Stirling. Motion carried. 8. Mayor Stirling said the Council will be interviewing 5 City Manager candidates March 2 at 1 p.m. and March 3 at 9 a.m. There will be no final selection until after the March 13 election. 9. Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, requested that Resolution #11, regarding the Kona Post lawsuit, be added to the agenda. Councilman Gassman moved to add Resolution ##11, Series of 1990, as item (q) to the agenda; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. 10. David Myler requested an executive session to discuss land acquisition he has been negotiating. This requires some fast action if Council is interested. Myler said it would be in the city's best interest to keep the terms of the acquisition confiden- tial. Under city's ordinance, Council is entitled to discuss contract negotiations in executive session. 2 Regular Meetinct Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Councilman Crockett moved to have an executive session at the end of this meeting; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilman Gassman moved to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Peters. The consent calendar is: A. Resolution #8, 1990 - Approving WAPA Agreement B. Liquor License Renewals - Cantina; La Cadeau; Crystal Palace; Hickory House C. Marolt Ranch: (1) cash-in-lieu; (2) cafeteria size; (3) stub-in for kitchens D. Resolution #9, 1990 - Setting Polling Places All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 1990 - Affordable Housing Tom Baker, planning office, read into the record all the items which constitute the record for this ordinance including the city code, the housing element and needs assessment, the various consultants studies by Glenn Horn, Alice David and Chuck Vidal, 1973 land use plan, P & Z resolution 89-16, public comments, staff analysis, planning studies that look and the quantity and type of housing, and staff's analysis regarding employee generation for developments. Baker reminded Council at the last meeting there were 4 issues that remained unresolved. The first issue is cash-in-lieu. The ordinance currently reads that cash-in-lieu for single family and duplex dwellings be at the discretion of the property owners. Councilman Peters had brought up the idea of making it discretion- ary at P & Z with the policy statement that if one was a working resident rebuilding their primary residence they would qualify for cash-in-lieu. Baker recommended the ordinance be left as is; at the discretion of the property owner. Baker said the reason is that it should be as equitable and palatable as possible. Amy Margerum, planning director, told Council different areas and different persons have different needs. Ms. Margerum said there will be incentives for accessory dwelling units. Staff feels the incentives will be great enough so that people will choose the accessory dwelling units. The one incentive in the ordinance now is an FAR bonus of up to 50 percent of the attached dwelling unit. Councilman Peters said he is willing to take the planning office recommendation on the cash-in-lieu. Councilman Gassman agreed. Baker suggested this ordinance should be in effect 5 days after publication, which will be March 8, 1990. Baker said staff will return to Council by April 23 with the incentives package. Baker 3 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 said there will be a provision in the ordinance which says if someone has a completed building permit application in the building department by March 16, 1990, they will be exempt from this regulation. Council agreed. Baker said at an earlier hearing someone made the comment a property owner could end up with three 1600 square foot structures . Staff has put a cap on the maximum size of the accessory dwelling units of 850 square feet. Baker said this can be reviewed in the informal review at the end of one year. Councilman Peters said he feels the cap on units may be superfluous. Councilman Peters said he has walked the Cemetery Lane area and the concerns are the bulks, setbacks and the fact the whole neighborhood could be duplexes. Councilman Peters said he would like to delete the two free market and one accessory dwelling unit option. Council agreed not to remove that option. Councilman Gassman said he feels the 850 square foot cap is a good solution and should be left in. Baker said staff has been concerned about a tight definition of demolition. Baker said in the past staff has found that the definition of demolition has been used against the city for people who want to do extraordinary demolition to get around impact mitigation. Baker said staff has discussed if there is a point is expanding a unit where there ordinance and the mitigation should take effect. Ms. Margerum said the definition of demolition in the code currently is very broad. Right now staff has to make the call if a demolition will change the character of the structure. Ms. Margerum said staff is trying to clarify the definition. Ms. Margerum said the definition to be exempt from this ordinance states that expansion shall mean 50 percent of what is in place or 1,000 square feet, whichever is greater. Baker said this would read, "the remodeling, restoration or expansion of an existing single family or duplex dwelling up to 50 percent of existing floor area of 1,000 square feet, whichever is greater". Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. Gene Hyder asked how the city is looking at the triplex, 2 free market dwelling units with one ADU. Mayor Stirling said this is still in the ordinance and the ADU has a cap of 850 square feet. This is a conditional use approved by P & Z. Phoebe Ryerson asked i f this ordinance is set up to prevent further major displacements . Mayor Stirling said that is one of the purposes of this ordinance. Baker explained the conditional use approval is something left in place because of a concern over density. This gives the P & Z the ability to review every ADU on a case by case basis to determine if it is appropriate. Clem Cleveland asked if the city has defined how they will monitor "working resident" and has the city taken a profile of the people 4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 that will be affected by this ordinance. Baker said the monitoring comes in through the housing authority. They will qualify all the residents. The housing authority has an enforcement program which does random checks to verify that the occupants are qualified and paying the appropriate amount of rent. Baker said once a property owner demolishes, they are required to mitigate for the new square footage that has been built. Sally Roach said she has problems with one person demolishes and adds 1,000 square feet and the person who just adds 1, 000 square feet; the first person has to mitigate for that 1,000 square feet. Baker said staff had to draw the line somewhere and felt that demolition was the place to draw that line. Penney Evans said she feels this ordinance places an unfair, unreasonable burden upon the single family home owners. Ms. Evans said with the exemption back in the ordinance, the only people left are new or reconstructed single family and duplex owners. Ms. Evans said ordinance is more burdensome on a smaller group of people. Ms. Evans suggested making this part of the ordinance voluntary with the incentive package staff is working on. Ms. Evans said at the end of the sunset provision time, Council can reconsider the ordinance. Gideon Kaufman pointed out that "restoration" is referred to in the ordinance but is not defined in the ordinance or in the code. Kaufman said "remodel" is only defined in the historic section of the code. There is no definition of "expansion" in the code or ordinance. Kaufman said if one is a qualified working resident, the payment is deferred; if one is a second home owner who rents his property to locals yet tears this down, rebuilds and continues to rent to locals, this person does not get a deferral. Kaufman said this ordinance puts the burden on a small segment of property owners. The fair way to do it is put an across the board tax. Boots Ferguson pointed out that on page 8 of the ordinance there is a reference to the definition section that was left blank. Ferguson said he feels expansions should be exempt. The person with more open space on their lot can only expand a certain amount of square footage. Someone who has already built out can also expand. Baker said the issue of expansion is one that staff has been working with; limiting the expansion does affect smaller units. Baker told Council staff tried to be as equitable as they could. Ms. Margerum pointed out the large structures usually do not have much FAR to build out to. Ms. Margerum pointed out the speculative value of small homes is what is creating displacement and demolition. The expansion is to allow some enlargement of the structure but not change the speculative value as much. Mary Martin said the Council should be asking the county to rezone so there would be land available for employee housing. Ms. Martin 5 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 asked why the demolition definition in this ordinance is different from that in the historic section. Baker said the reason the definition is different is that staff wanted to make sure they had a restrictive enough definition so that someone would not just leave one wall up and the spirit of the ordinance would be circumvented. Baker pointed out Ordinance #1 is only one piece of the solution for affordable housing. Other parts are production like the Marolt ranch, and rezoning properties. Baker said the housing from this ordinance will only provide a certain type of housing for a certain type of resident. Baker said family-style housing will be provided in other ways. Baker said in an accessory dwelling unit, the owner decides who, if anyone, rents the property. Marcia Goshorn asked if the ordinance will apply to people on the lease or people actually living in the structure. David Myler, city attorney' s office, said the staf f is interested in knowing the number of tenants being housed, not necessarily who signed the lease. The mitigation is on square footage and number of bedrooms. Myler said as this ordinance has evolved, this information is not necessary. Page 9 under the replacement requirement (a)(2) is superfluous. Sally Roach said Council and staff have been respon- sive about citizens complaints about not having to rent one's accessory dwelling unit. Roberta Allen asked if staff has studied how many people this ordinance will house and how much staff time it will take to administer this. Mayor Stirling said in looking at the 5 years plan, this will provide 25 to 40 units, which seems to be worth the effort. Myler said this system will be relatively painless to operate. Myler said staff is projecting $225,000 to $275,000 per year in fees, which will then house about 20 employees. Rachel Richards said it is vital residential affordable housing is maintained throughout the community. Ms. Richards said to back away from this ordinance now or to make it voluntary would unleash an unprecedented torrent of demolition and development. Mark Tye said this ordinance is unfair to RMF property owners. Clem Cleveland asked how the city will monitor if people are working residents. Baker said this will be part of the procedure in getting a deferral for the impact mitigation. The property owner will have to prove they are a working resident, a senior or handicapped. Wainwright Dawson said if the city wants to stimulate the community to build houses, they should not create confusion and administrative nightmares, like this ordinance. Dawson said the city should talk about more incentives to get housing. Bruce Kerr asked if the ordinance contains a definition of resident or non- resident as there may be ways to get around mitigating these impacts. Baker pointed out on page 13, the definition of "working 6 Regular Meetinu Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 person" to insert "works in Pitkin County a minimum of 3 0 hours per week nine months per year". Baker pointed out the definition of demolition drives what has to be mitigated. If Council amends the ordinance to 50 percent or 1000 square foot for expansion, that is self-explanatory. Ms. Margerum told Council by explaining expansion, renovation and remodelling will follow that definition. Mary Martin asked how this fits in with the HPC definition of demolition. Mayor Stirling said there are incentives in the historic regulations which would allow increases bonuses for density and floor area. Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing. Councilman Peters moved to adopt Ordinance ##1, Series of 1990, as amended with the expansion provision; seconded by Mayor Stirling. Councilman Gassman said he is willing to approve this ordinance but without the expansion provision. Councilman Gassman said this ordinance has gotten simpler in this process. Councilman Gassman said he would like to try it the way it is, keeping it more simple and taking a step toward making this voluntary with more options before any mitigation takes effect. Ms. Margerum said the issue came up with the original intent of the ordinance; that there were very small homes in town that were being demolished and replaced by very large homes and displacing working residents. Ms. Margerum said one concern was to be able to exempt structures for people who live here and just wanted to add on or remodel their home. Ms. Margerum said staff was not sure they wanted to exempt a structure that was 800 square feet and was going to be expanded to 4,000 square feet. Councilman Crockett said 1,000 square feet is a large increase. Councilman Crockett said he likes the way the ordinance is currently worded. Councilman Peters said if people have been content living in small houses, they should not be penalized for having larger ambitions. Councilman Peters pointed out whenever the city leaves a window in an ordinance, that is where the development pressure goes and people may be using that provision to expand houses. Councilman Peters said the cash-in-lieu is not so onerous that people will not go ahead and demolish. Councilman Peters said he is not sure the expansion language has to be in the ordinance. Councilman Gassman said taking a step and asking people to start contributing to the affordable housing problem is enough at first. Councilman Gassman said there will be a review to see if this is a mistake. Councilman Gassman said it is worth the risk taking the first step to ask single family and duplex owners to help solve the problem. This is a big change in the city's land use regulations. 7 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Councilman Peters withdrew his motion. Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #1, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Peters. The amendments are to add "Pitkin County" on page 13 and on page 9 to delete 1(a)(2); add the appropriate reference in the definition section. Baker said without the expansion, the limiting factor would be the definition of demolition and as long as less than 50 percent of the existing residential structure is demolished, one can expand as much as they like without coming under Ordinance #l. Councilman Peters said substantial compromises have been made in this ordinance process. There will be an incentive package coming, and there are burdens in the ordinance. Together these are a com- prehensive attempt to limit speculative development. In the next year Council can see whether this ordinance is effective or not or if it is too onerous. Councilman Crockett asked that the community approach this ordinance with a certain amount of trust that the Council, too, is putting into it. Mayor Stirling said the single family and duplex market has become an intense commercial and economic arena, producing enormous amount of workers. Mayor Stirling said he was worried about this ordinance in that it would put the homeful people versus the homeless. Mayor Stirling said there will be a stabilization of units in town; there will be the allowance for expansion without penalty or fee, this will avert the attrition of affordable units, this will take away the threat of demolition which removes more affordable housing. Mayor Stirling said this ordinance is only one of many efforts being done as part of the 5 year plan and is just one part of making up the housing shortfall. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Crockett, yes; Tuite, yes; Gassman, yes; Peters, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement/Maroon Creek Development John Musick, city's water counsel, told Council the agreements were circulated among staff and the applicants. There were very minor changes. The agreements all comply with the policy adopted in July 1989 by Council. Musick said no capital construction will occur without prepayment of the costs of the construction. This will provide additional water service to these areas. Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing. 8 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #4, Series of 1990, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Peters. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Gassman, yes; Tuite, yes; Peters, yes; Crockett, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement/Leslie Wexner John Musick, city's water counsel, told Council Wexner will pay for the cost of landscaping and will also be paying $75,000 for the cost of burying the tank. Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing. Councilman Peters moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 1990, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Tuite. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Tuite, yes; Peters, yes; Crockett, yes; Gassman, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #7, SERIES OF 1990 - Water Agreement West Reds Road John Musick, city's water counsel, told Council this is servicing 15 lots where people have been suffering inadequate water service. This will provide looping for the existing customers. Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing. Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #7, Series of 1990, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Peters. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Crockett, yes; Gassman, yes; tuite, yes; Peters, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #10, SERIES OF 1990 - Repealing Resolution #46, 1989 - Aspen Mountain Lodge Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, told Council this resolution was initiated by her office. Ms. Stuller reminded Council in the fall of 1989 in response to the decision of 33CV321, Council adopted Resolution #46, authorizing continuation of work on the permits that were issued but directing city staff not to process additional permits or approvals. Ms. Stuller said with the election February 13, it is appropriate to repeal resolution ##46 and to authorize development approvals and permits authorized by the PUD amendment ratified by the voters. Mayor Stirling said there was a recent lawsuit filed by Hadid Aspen Holdings against the city. Ms. Stuller told Council this lawsuit was in response to Resolution #55; this lawsuit will remain intact. Ms. Stuller told Council she has been advised by Hadid that with 9 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 the adoption of Resolution #10, they will agree to the stipulation for dismissal of 89CV348, which was the lawsuit initiated in December which challenged Council's ability to submit the question to the voters in the alternative. Ms. Stuller said the dismissal is without condition except for the right to contest Councilman Peters participation in any actions. Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Resolution #10, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Peters. Ms. Stuller told Council there were 3 lawsuits are 88CV174, which was a challenge to Resolution #11; 88CV321 which challenged Resolution #29, in which Judge Ossola rendered an opinion, and 88CV355, which is the referendum. Ms. Stuller said the first one was subsumed in the second lawsuit. The referendum case was not processed after Ossola's decision. It seems superfluous that if the resolution were invalid, the question of its referral was moot also. Ms. Stuller said these three lawsuits are not the city's lawsuits to dispose of. Ms. Stuller said these lawsuits are stagnant and if the plaintiffs and Hadid representatives care to stipulate for dismissal under terms which do not lay the foundation for damage claims against the city in the future, she would be happy to cooperate. This is not part of Resolution #10. Ms. Stuller said the election more than Resolution #10 moots 89CV348. All in favor, motion carried. ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE NEW CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES The first issue is a phased building permit and fast tracking John Sarpa, representing the applicant, said the applicants would like to do everything to clear the decks and get on with this project. Sarpa said with Resolution #55 there is some disagreement on non-compliance. Bob Hughes, representing the applicant, told Council the city attorney's office has already been given a signed stipulation by the applicant conditioned upon adoption of Resolu- tion #10, which takes care of the lawsuit filed in December 1989. The Smith litigations deals mainly with Hadid Aspen Holdings. Hughes said this leaves only one lawsuit filed by Hadid which is directed at Council's adoption of Resolution #55, 1989, the finding of non-compliance. Hughes said the applicants feel Resolution 55 was predicated on Resolution #29, 1988, the resolution which approved the agreement which essentially found the applicants in non-compliance. Hughes said to the extent Judge Ossola ruled Resolution #29, 1988, a nullity, the applicants feel that Resolu- tion #55 also falls, and to that extent, the applicants can stipulate to the dismissal of the latest lawsuit. Mayor Stirling said he did not see the non-compliance related to resolution #29 at all. Hughes said Resolution #29 was the act by which an 10 Regular Meetincr Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 agreement was adopted; if that act was a nullity, so was the agreement. Ms. Stuller recommended against that and pointed out the city took resolution #55 through the process because the applicants kept the question of the validity of that resolution alive by both their motion to reconsider and the subsequent appeal to it. There has never been a time when the applicants have acknowledged that Resolution #29 was invalid. The voters have adopted the ordinance, which ratified the approval given in Resolution #29. The non-compliances exist without regard to that approval. Ms. Stuller said if it is the position of the applicants that the PUD agreement is now in effect, then they have got to acknowledge non-compliance with that agreement. Ms. Stuller said it is not her intention to give the applicants difficulty about this. Ms. Stuller said her solution is that the applicants file the lawsuit and not serve the city; let the city take this through the remedial procedures the Council agreed they would initiate after the election. If it goes to the satisfaction of the applicants, they can dismiss the lawsuit. Ms. Stuller told Council it does not bother her that the lawsuit was filed. Mayor Stirling asked what effect does the non-compliance decision have. Ms. Stuller pointed out there are two steps to the process; the first is to establish non-compliance, the second is to establish remedies. Ms. Stuller said if the remedies are accept- able to everyone, it does not matter if they have been in non- compliance. Ms. Stuller said she is not willing to back off and take the position that all the city's actions were invalidated; the city's action were appropriate. Councilman Peters said all through the non-compliance hearing the applicant expressed the willingness to correct the issues of non- compliance. Councilman Peters said there are two issues; the rezoning of the ice rink and park to public zone, and the construc- tion schedule. Councilman Peters said rather than forgetting about non-compliance in order to have a lawsuit dismissed, the city and the applicant should correct non-compliance, which is getting the rezoning accomplished and creating a construction schedule. Hughes said the applicants were trying to figure out a way to end all pending litigation. Ms. Stuller said the applicants can leave the lawsuit where it is. Perry Harvey,. representing the applicant, told Council the rezoning application is in the planning office and has been there since November. Harvey said Resolution #46, 1989, stopped this applica- tion. Councilman Peters said one of the things that may have convinced the voters in favor of this project are the ice rink and park, which are the jewel in the crown. Councilman Peters said he would like to see this amenity locked in right, away. Harvey said the applicants are on record with the submission of the applica- tion. Hughes said it is his understanding that to the extent that 11 Regular Meeting Asoen City Council February 26, 1990 Resolution #46 required some affirmative action, Resolution #10, 1990, is that affirmative action. Ms. Stuller agreed. Councilman Crockett said when Council went through the non- compliance hearing, they found the applicants in non-compliance on several issues. Councilman Crockett asked what process will be gone through to bring the applicants into compliance. Ms. Stuller said once Council resolves how the applicants will be brought into compliance, they will have to amend the schedules in the PUD agreement, section M amendment. Gary Lyman, chief building official, told Council both Hadid and PCL representatives have been advised that there is a new policy. Lyman said the applicants were advised in written form September 1989 that final complete permit process would be required. Lyman told Council since he has been chief building official, he has not allowed one single fast track process. Lyman said that process is problematic. The Colorado chapter of the ICBO has been putting on classes addressing the problems of the fast track process. The ICBO is basically recommending that all chief building officials abandon that process. Lyman told Council typically the city has had poor flow of information with the Ritz . The fast track process is designed around a free flow of information between the city and the applicant. Lyman told Council since he has been chief building official there have been no submittals from the architect's office. Lyman recommended Council to allow the building department to carry on its policy that no fast track permits are processes. Lyman told Council he has met with representatives of Hadid and has assured them he will do everything possible to expedite an application. It is apparent the community does not want this project to be delayed, and the building department is willing to deal with this to get a complete building permit. John Sarpa, representing the applicant, said when this project was started the applicants went to the staff and discussed how to process the project. The response was for a fast track process, which was used by the building department at the time. Sarpa said the applicants went into that process, which has 5 steps. The applicants have gone through 3 steps, excavation, foundation, super-structure. Sarpa pointed out there are 2 phases left and for the city to say at this point the applicants have to go to a new system is not appropriate. Sarpa said the applicants have schedules based on this phasing process. Sarpa told Council the applicants have gone to every extent to communicate with the city staff. Sarpa requested Council instruct the staff to giving the applicants the last two phases of their 5 step phase. Councilman Peters said the building department wants a complete set of building documents for the hotel. The purpose of the fast track process is to allow an applicant time to develop those documents 12 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 and to undergo construction. Councilman Peters said it is already 2 years since the applicant has broken round. g The building department is requesting completed plans and specifications for the building before they issue the c/o. Councilman Peters said the Council is looking for a date certain to get those documents . Anna Goodrich said complete plans have to be submitted before a c/o. What the applicants are talking about are timing issues. Ms. Goodrich said she has been working with the building department to try and answer concerns about issuing a facade permit. Ms. Goodrich said this is a permit that will allow the brick exterior to come up concurrently with the structure, allow the openings for the windows to be put in place and allow the precast to be put in place. Ms. Goodrich told Council complete elevations of those details have already been approved by planning. The concern of the building department in the fast track proces centered around the super-structure. This project is beyond that point and is to the facade. Sarpa said to do what the building department is asking would require the applicant to shut the job down for about six weeks, catch up, do all the drawings at once, and then submit. Sarpa questioned why the applicants should be asked to come into a new system. Councilman Peters said the applicants are assuming the date certain has already passed; he is assuming that date certain is in the future. Ms. Goodrich told Council within 30 days the city will have a complete schedule outlining when the documents will be submitted, when the construction and completion dates will be. Ms. Goodrich said she has already given the building department a preliminary schedule that the architect has confirmed. Mayor Stirling said he does not want to delay construction, but the city should have an idea of when the documents will be available. Lyman told Council the cure he has proposed to the applicants is fairly simple, which is the building department would consider less than what is expected for a ##1 permit but want to corral the majority of the risks so the staff knows they have a complete and total picture of the project. Lyman said the city and applicant can do an addendum agreement to that #1 permit. Lyman told Council this is stepping out as far as he is comfortable with and does put the applicant under the gun to produce some documents. Sarpa said the applicants have had a lot of instances with this project where the rules have changed mid-stream. Sarpa said he is asking to be able to stick to the rules. Sarpa said if they cannot stick with the rules, the ,applicants will face a 30 to 45 day delay, which is not appropriate. Councilman Peters said he would like the applicants to give a date when the documents will be submitted. Councilman Gassman said the applicants have some basis for what they are saying. Councilman Gassman said the city and the 13 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 applicants ought to be able to come up with a schedule for when they are going to get what the building department needs for the last two phases of a building permit. Councilman Gassman said there is some sense in the logic this has been a tortuous project for everyone involved, and maybe it does not conform absolutely to getting in every drawing before a permit is issued. Councilman Gassman said it was his intent in putting this on the ballot to leave it up to the public as to what they wanted to do with this project. Councilman Gassman said it is clear what the electorate has said. Councilman Gassman said this may involve continuing the building permit process in some format that has been done. Mayor Stirling said he would support that. Councilman Gassman said there should be a schedule of what drawings are required when. Council- man Peters agreed. Councilman Crockett said he is very concerned that the city get what the building department is asking for. Mayor Stirling moved to direct Hadid Aspen Holdings to produce a schedule within 30 days to the building department that will designate all the specific dates of all the plans that are required and have it available in a report back to Council to keep them apprised; Mayor Stirling said the applicants will continue working under the current way they have been working; they have a maximum of 30 days to give a full schedule, which will designate precisely what the dates are; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling said the construction schedules were embraced in the above motion and should have a section M amendment to clarify them. Bob Gish, city engineer, told Council the development schedule is very important and will enable the staff to look from project to project. Gish said a 90 day construction schedule does not do that. Gish told Council he discussed with the applicant a development schedule that will give the contractors enough lead time to get all the approvals needed. Gish said after that, he would like to see actual construction dates in the development schedule. Harvey said when the applicants and the city originally went through the schedules, there was a lot of discussion about changes in market conditions; therefore, the schedules were left loose. Harvey said the language was that prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicants would go in with a schedule on that project. Harvey said that language should be firmed out. Harvey told Council he would hate to predict a build out on the Top of Mill property at this point. Harvey said the applicants can give the city a sequence of processing of the parcels within the PUD; can give firm begin and end dates on Summit Place; some language about the ice rink and phase two. Harvey said it is the intention of the applicants to process the Top of Mill as soon as phase two is through the process. 14 Regular Meetinq Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Ms. Margerum said the existing PUD agreement requires the appli- cants to submit development schedules for the project. The Top of Mill is not included in the PUD agreement so a schedule would not be required. Harvey said he can do the rest of the project but not the Top of Mill. Ms. Goodrich said one thing in the development schedule that is critical is that durations are identified. Mayor Stirling suggested the applicants bring everything but the Top of Mill to Council. Council agreed. Harvey said the concern with the ice rink is that he does not think he can get through the city process in time to draw plans and get a building permit before the middle of next winter. Harvey said the applicants do not want to pour that much concrete in the winter nor do they want to tear up a whole block across from Rubey park in the middle of the winter. Harvey said he is been discussing with staff to try and get through the process this year and construct in the summer. Councilman Peters suggested the appli- cants pull the rezoning out, proceed, in good faith as soon as possible with that rezoning separately and be allowed to keep the housing on that block as a non-conforming use. Councilman Peters said the applicants give the city a date certain for finishing the ice rink; if it is not before the c/o tell the city when it will be and give some financial assurances. Ms. Margerum agreed the best way to approach this is to bifurcate the process and that staff and the applicant work on language so there is assurances if they separate out the applicant that in the future the city will not reduce the FAR on the rest of the project. Sandy Stuller told Council the UBC requires 10 percent of the value of the work be completed each 60 days. Gary Lyman, building department, suggested the Board of Appeals can grant a variance to this and that the applicant apply to them. Mayor Stirling suggested the applicants work with the building department or appeal to the Board. Sarpa brought up the Blue Spruce project. Ms. Margerum told Council the Blue Spruce super-structure permit was submitted in November and the freeze on processing permits came about a week late. Staff will start processing this immediately. Ms. Goodrich told Council there has been some earlier discussion whether Blue Spruce was a separate building. The contractor was issued the directive he should submit for the super-structure permit all 3 buildings in one application. The applicant submitted for all 3 buildings at once; all 3 went through the review process, the process was complete and all 3 buildings were signed off on. Ms. Goodrich told Council the comments back from staff reflect that. Ms. Goodrich said when they took the plans to the building depart- ment they were asked to break the submittals out and have 2 buildings. Ms. Goodrich told Council the second card was signed 15 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 off by Bob Gish for Alan Richman, who was out of town. Ms. Goodrich told Council she is now being told that planning has never looked at the Blue Spruce building and they are not due a super structure permit. Gary Lyman, building department, told Council he does not have reasons to dispute this. Lyman said he was not the chief building inspector during this. Lyman said his file indicates that a separate permit application will be provided for the Blue Spruce building. Lyman said he cannot find any proof that the items have been addressed. Lyman submitted a new set of plans back through the process for signatures. Shaun Yancey, PCL, told Council the plans were submitted in June 1989, long before there was a moratorium put on the Ritz Carlton. Ms. Margerum told Council the city can either accept the signatures on the plans or have the planning office go through the plans to make sure they are all right. Ms. Margerum said there has been a change in the plans since the planning office looked at it earlier. Gish told Council he spent several hours going over the plans with Alan Richman, looking at how this compared to the PUD agrement, height, elevations, etc. Councilman Peters asked if the plans are identical to what is being built. Ms. Goodrich said yes. Councilman Peters suggested the permit be issued and that the planning office go over the documents to make sure the plan complies with FAR, setbacks and the PUD agreement. Council agreed. HARVARD STUDY Councilman Gassman said the Harvard group is not asking the city to do anything. Councilman Peters said they will work for the AVIA and a citizens panel. Councilman Peters said he does not oppose the panel but does not want to create another political entity to enter the transportation arena. Mark Friedberg told Council he has had discussions with the highway department as well as Harvard. Friedberg advocated the citizens committee to work with the highway department, who is enthused about having a committee representative of the community. Friedberg told Council Harvey Atchison of the Highway Department has given assurance that they will stand up to the $10,000, which should be enough to take care of the city and county. No money is being asked of the city and county. Friedberg gave a list of suggestions for people to be on the committee to help with the design process. From the city, Bill Tuite, Tom Baker, Amy Margerum; Pitkin County, Wayne Ethridge, Bud Eylar; Snowmass Carol O'Dowd; RFTA Spence Videon or Dan Blanken- ship; Ski Company, Bob Maynard; Adjacent property owners, sur- veyors, and parks association representatives. 16 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Councilman Peters moved to approve the process; seconded by Mayor Stirling. Amy Margerum, planning director, said her concern is that there is no clearinghouse for this and there are a lot of pieces going on in different directions. Ms. Margerum said she would like to lend a coordinating role for the city and county. Phoebe Ryerson asked if there are any citizens at large on the committee. Council agreed this is a good idea and urged a couple of regular commuters to the committee. Councilman Gassman agreed with the planning office having a coordinating role. Councilman Gassman said the presentation seems to consist of one to the committee and it should be made public. Dan Blankenship, RFTA, said he is concerned that this study not duplicate work that has already been done. Councilman Tuite said he is not sure he will have the time to be on this committee and will let the Council know. Ms. Margerum reminded Council they discussed last week beginning the Aspen vision process, and this ties in beautifully in terms of how transportation fits in and how the area from Brush Creek to Aspen will look. All in favor, motion carried. MAROLT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, told Council her office recommends approval of the contract with one minor change. Mayor Stirling asked if this will use up the balance of the cash-in-lieu funds. Jim Adamski, housing office, said they will be using all but $63,000 and will reimburse the city $248,000 upon the issuance of bonds this summer. Councilman Peters moved to enter into a contract with Colorado First Construction; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. Adamski told Council the M.A.A. is satisfied with the size of the cafeteria and they will be building practice rooms. ASPEN SANITATION DISTRICT CLAIMS SETTLEMENT Fred Gannett, city attorney's office, told Council this is a two year old claim from the Sanitation District on behalf of one of their contractors. Gannett said the original claim was $45,000 in which the San District and Western Slope engineering allege that the city staff erred in location of city-owned utility lines. As a consequence of those errors, the contractor incurred $42,000 additional costs. Gannett told Council this has been whittled down to about $17,000. Gannett recommended Council adopt the settlement and authorize payment of $14,848 and CIRSA will supply $6,870. 17 Reaular Meeting. Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Bob Gish, city engineer, told Council staff has taken appropriate internals controls to make sure this does not happen again. Mayor Stirling moved to take $14,828 from the contingency fund and to make the settlement; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT ENGINEERING AWARD Chuck Roth, engineering department, told Council staff advertised for engineering services for the formation of improvement district number 2 for burying service connections in Cemetery Lane, Black Birch estates, Ute Avenue and the base of the mountain. Roth told Council 4 bids were received and the low bid was submitted by Schmeuser, Gordon Meyer. Staff is recommending Council award the contract to Schmeuser estimated at $136,000. Roth pointed out in the previous undergrounding district, they city was working off of $3,000,000 electric improvement bond which paid for the phone company to go underground and for the up front costs in the formation of the district. There is $132,000 remaining from those bond proceeds, which can be used to pay for the telephone company to put their primary system underground or to pay part of the formation costs. Roth said in this improvement district, the homeowners will be paying a little more because of the additional burden. Councilman Peters asked if the staff is going to specify conduit for the undergrounding. Roth said this is in Holy Cross area and staff will probably not do that. Councilman Peters said he feels conduit is more efficient and lasts longer than direct burying. Roth said they will use the money left over from the previous bond and will use the rest of the money when the district is formed. Councilman Peters moved to award the contract to Schmeuser for aerial utility undergrounding improvement district No. 2 using the available funds of about $132,000 until bonds are issued; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. STORM WATER RUNOFF ENGINEERING SCOPE Chuck Roth, engineering department, told Council this project started after the landslides on Aspen mountain. Roth said the original conception was that $100,000 was funded in 1989 in the capital budget for preparing construction drawings and acquiring easements for dealing with storm runoff out of Spar Gulch. Roth said Council and staff have questioned whether the city should be using taxpayers funds for paying for problems coming from outside the city. Based on this reassessment, staff is proposing to use that $100,000 in a different fashion at the same time working with Aspen Skiing Company to help solve some of the Aspen mountain drainage problems. 18 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Roth suggested staff use the $100,000 to update the existing 1973 urban runoff management plan. This plan did not go on the north side of the river and did not include any annexed areas. Roth said as well as updating the plan, they will also get an itemized list with costs of constructing storm water sewage facilities. Roth said the Sanitation District is willing to deal with the city as anything the city does above stream to the stream affects how much they can pollute the stream. Roth pointed out that the 1973 urban runoff plan identifies various sedimentation ponds throughout the city. Bob Gish, city engineer, reminded Council in the capital budget he requested $250,000 each in 1991 and 1992 as a continuation of this project. At those hearings Council asked for specifics. Gish proposed staff be allowed to broaden the use of the $100,000 to look at the total runoff off the mountain and off the streets. Gish noted Council directed him not to spend the $250, 000 in escrow from Aspen Mountain lodge until there are some direct benefit for that $250,000. Gish told Council he has had a preliminary meeting with all the affected agencies getting their support. Gish said the city needs to make sure that if the Aspen Ski Company does something on the mountain that they pay for the possible damage in creating additional runoff. Roth told Council Schmeuser came up with a conceptual cost of $100,000 to do the first two phases. Councilman Peters asked what Schmeuser would be concentrating on. There is a broad range of objectives from Aspen mountain runoff, the streets, water quality, designing the system. Roth said that is an outline of the first two phases of Schmeuser's work. Councilman Peters said he is concerned that the money is in search of the project. Councilman Peters said the Council's goals that this should be addressing are environmental quality, urbanization of Aspen, and protect the in- frastructure. Councilman Peters said for the money he wants to be putting the cleanest water possible into the river. Councilman Tuite said he is not too enthusiastic about this. Gish said staff is trying to address the whole mountain and to look at everything that is affected by it. Mayor Stirling moved to give direction to the engineering depart- ment to utilize the remaining part of the carry over from 1989 to prepare an updated urban runoff management plan and to perform water quality testing, and to bring it back to Council as quickly as possible, at which time Council will hear further about possible utilization of Hadid escrow of $250,000; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Tuite. Motion carried. 19 Reaular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Mayor Stirling moved to suspend the rules and meet to 9:45 p.,m.; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Gassman and Crockett. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 1990 - Employee Housing Water Tap Fee Deferral Councilman Peters moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #8 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED 1990 WATER SYSTEM EMPLOYEE HOUSING WATER FEE EXEMPTIONS AND SENIOR CITIZEN WATER CHARGE REBATE; AMENDING DIVISION 2, ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 23 AS FOLLOWS, AMENDING SECTION 23-71 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELIMINATING FEES FOR CONNECTING QUALIFYING EMPLOYEE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ONTO THE WATER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 23-111 TO PROVIDE A REBATE FOR RESIDENT SENIOR CITIZENS was read by the city clerk Councilman Peters moved to adopt Ordinance #8, Series of 1990, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Tuite. Councilman Crockett requested that the ordinance be amended before second reading to show this applies to 100 percent employee housing projects. Council agreed. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Crockett, yes; Tuite, yes; Gassman, yes; Peters, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #9, SERIES OF 1990 - Corkscrew Employee Housing Trade Councilman Gassman moved to read Ordinance #9, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #9 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE RELEASING ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY DEED RESTRICTIONS AS THEY RELATE TO UNIT #2, CORKSCREW CONDOMINIUMS, 118 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO, AND SUBSTITUTING AFOREMENTIONED RESTRICTIONS ON ASPEN WEST CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT #5, 104 WEST COOPER AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO, AS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN was read by the city clerk 20 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #9, Series of 1990, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Peters. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Tuite, yes; Peters, yes; Gassman, yes; Crockett, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #10, SERIES OF 1990 - Kraut Vested Rights Councilman Tuite moved to read Ordinance #10, Series of 1990; seconded by Mayor Stirling. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #10 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN VESTING THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE KRAUT LOT SPLIT - LOTS E-I, BLOCK 105 was read by the city clerk Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #10, Series of 1990, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Peters. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Peters, yes; Gassman, yes; Crockett, yes; Tuite, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #11, SERIES OF 1990 - Sportstalker Vested Rights Councilman Tuite moved to read Ordinance #11, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #11 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN VESTING THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR SUBDIVISION, GMQS EXEMPTION, AND ONE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENT FOR LOTS A, B, C, BLOCK 94 THE SPORTSTALKER BUILDING IN THE SITE SPECIFIC PLAN/FINAL PLAT was read by the city clerk Councilman Peters moved to adopt Ordinance #11, Series of 1990, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Tuite. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Crockett, yes; Tuite, yes; Gassman, yes; Peters, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #12, SERIES OF 1990 - Collins Block Lot Line Councilman Gassman moved to read Ordinance #12, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #12 (Series of 1990) 21 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUB- DIVISION EXEMPTION FOR THE CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE COLLINS BLOCK AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR TWO AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS was read by the city clerk Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #12, Series of 1990, on first reading with the conditions in staff's memo; seconded by Councilman Peters. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Peters, yes; Crockett, yes; Gassman, yes; Tuite, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #13, SERIES OF 1990 - Repealing GRETT; Enacting RETT Councilman Gassman moved to read Ordinance #13, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #13 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 14 (SERIES OF 1989) EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 1990; IMPOSING AN ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX UPON THE TRANSFER OF INTEREST IN ALL REAL PROPERTY AND PAYABLE BY THE GRANTEE ; REQUIRING THE COLLECTION OF SUCH TAX BY THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE OF HER AGENTS; EXEMPTING CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS FROM THE TAX IMPOSED AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR ACQUIRING A CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION; PROVIDING FOR THE APPLICATION OF FUNDS TO LIMITED USES; ESTABLISHING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY TRANSFERRED FOR THE AMOUNT OF THE TAX UNPAID; AND MAKING THIS ORDINANCE EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 1, 1990 was read by the city clerk Councilman Gassman moved to adopt Ordinance #13, Series of 1990, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Tuite. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Mayor Stirling, yes; Peters, yes; Gassman, yes; Tuite, yes; Crockett, yes. Motion carried. REQUEST FOR FUNDS - CAST Mayor Stirling said this is a request for a grant of $3,000 to $5,000 to be part of a bicycling magazine enclosure that all other member cities of CAST are participating in. Mayor Stirling said this is a way to emphasize the bicycling aspects of all resorts in Colorado and to get a critical mass by participating with everyone else. Mayor Stirling said participating would show a spirit of cooperation with resorts towns in CAST. 22 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26, 1990 Mayor Stirling moved to grant $3,000 for this joint effort through the Colorado Association of Ski Town; seconded by Councilman Peters. Councilman Gassman asked if this has been discussed with the ARA. Mayor Stirling said he has not, and in this case each municipality agreed to contribute. Councilman Crockett said this should be funded by the ACRA rather by the city. Councilman Peters asked if this was a one time expense. Mayor Stirling said he is not sure. Mayor Stirling said Aspen is the last town to act on this request. Councilman Peters said if the city were to promote anything it would be summer tourism and local impact people. Councilman Gassman said he does not feel that the city needs to spend public money advertising; however, he would support it as a one time request through CAST. Councilman Peters agreed the issue is whether Aspen is a team player in CAST. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Tuite and Crockett. Motion carried. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENTS Councilman Gassman moved to reappoint Dwight Shellman to RFTA; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Peters moved to reappoint Ted Mularz to the Board of Appeals; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Peters moved to appoint Fred Alderfer as an alternate to the Board of Appeals; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. Council directed City Clerk Kathryn Koch to publish for two vacancies on the HPC as alternates and a regular member on the Board of Appeals. Councilman Gassman moved to appoint Bob Wade as a regular member to the Clean Air Advisory Board; seconded by Councilman Peters.. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Peters moved to appoint Suzy Ellison as an alternate to the Clean Air Advisory Board; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Gassman moved to reappoint Jon Busch and to appoint Howard Gunther to the CCLC; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. 23 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 26,.1990 Council directed City Clerk Kathryn Koch to publish for one alternate member to the CCLC. RE UEST FOR FUNDS - KAJX Public Radio Si Coleman requested $5,000 for the 3:1 matching grant to meet a February 28 deadline for transmitting equipment for the STL to put the transmitter at a more favorable location and improve the signal in town. Coleman also asked for $5,000 more for a containment structure for the transmitter. Coleman told Council they have already raised $27,000 from the community for this grant. Coleman said there appears to be money available because of the federal courts and the telephone company. Councilman Gassman asked if the city knows they-are getting money from the Mountain Bell settlement and can it be used for something like this. Councilman Tuite said Council backed off some funding requests from KAJX and Dance Aspen. Councilman Gassman said he would like to support this; the radio station is doing well and programming is improving. Councilman Gassman moved to grant $10,000 to KAJX to come out of the contingency fund to be repaid from the Mountain Bell litigation settlement; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #il, SERIES OF 1990 - Kona Post Settlement Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, told Council this -was prepared by special counsel, Paul Taddune, authorizing execution of the documents to settle the Kona Post case which was filed in 198. Councilman Gassman moved to approve Resolution #11, Series of 1990; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. Council went into executive session at 9:40 p.m. Council came out of executive session at 9:55 and adjourned. ,/~ , -/ ~ Kathryn S.i`, och, City Clerk t„ 24