HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20000214Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
Mayor Richards called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. with
Councilmembers Hershey, Paulson, Markalunas and McCabe present.
Councilman Hershey moved to go into executive session at 4:05 p.m. to
discuss possible land acquisition; seconded by Councilman McCabe. All in
favor, motion carried.
Councilman Hershey moved to come out of executive session at 4:55 p.m.;
seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
Council took a 10-minute recess and reconvened at 5:05 p.m.
OUTSTANDING EMPLOYEE BONUS AWARDS
Mayor and Council presented outstanding employee bonus awards to Amy
Guthrie and Stephen Kanipe, community development department, and
Glenn Schaffer, Aspen Police Department.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Tom Lankering said there are different po ints of view on fluoride
being added to the water supply; however, the real issue deals with freedom
of choice. Adding fluoride to the water supply is medicating people against
their will. Lankering said it is very expensive to take fluoride out of the
water. Lankering asked Council to consider not adding fluoride to the city’s
water.
2. David Peterson said adding fluoride to water is introducing
carcinogenic matters. The issue is about choice. Peterson said there are
medical studies indicating fluoride is dangerous.
3. Sloan Shoemaker, Aspen Wilderness Workshop, brought up
Resolution #15, the forest service plan comments. Shoemaker said there is a
sub-committee on Natural Resources hearing on the White River forest plan
rd
February 23 . Shoemaker said it appears from the list of scheduled speakers
there are no locally interested persons and neither representatives of Aspen
or Pitkin Council were invited into the process. Shoemaker invited Council
to submit a letter to the subcommittee stating that Pitkin County’s opinions
are not reflected in the list of speakers. Mayor Richards suggested Council
send letters and these comments to the persons who contributed to the
1
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
report. Mayor Richards said maybe Council could get a representative to
testify.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilman Hershey said he is concerned about topics discussed at
brown bag lunches. These meetings are not official meetings nor are there
any minute taken. Councilman Hershey said the purpose of brown bag
lunches is not to discuss controversial issues. Mayor Richards suggested
Council discuss brown bag lunch policies at Council retreat.
2. Councilman Paulson said instead of passing a resolution of support for
the BOCC and the building moratorium, everyone should try and make this
work. The community needs to support the BOCC as well as the contractors
to get the best out of this moratorium.
3. Councilman Hershey presented Council with a Valentine’s box of
candy. Councilman Markalunas said everyone should practice love, and not
just on Valentine’s day.
4. Councilman McCabe moved to continue 6(b) Resolution #6, Series of
2000, Sales Tax and Business License Software Contract to February 28;
seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Markalunas said he would like to have an outline of how much
is budgeted and at what salaries for the new employees in the housing office.
Councilman McCabe moved to adopt the consent calendar as amended;
seconded by Councilman Markalunas. The consent calendar is:
2
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
·
Authorization for New Positions in Housing Office
·
HVAC Upgrades at Wheeler
·
Resolution #14, 2000 – Wagner – Streets Equipment Purchase
·
Resolution #15, 2000 – Approving Forest Service Plan Comments
·
Resolution #13, 2000 – Contract Ajax Towing and Recovery
·
Resolution #16, 2000 - DEPP Construction Management
·
Minutes – January 24, 2000
All in favor, motion carried.
APPEAL OF CODE INTERPRETATION “LODGE”
Chris Bendon. community development department, said there are two types
of subdivision for lodges; physical subdivision like condominiumization,
and dividing the property into time increments. During the lodge
preservation code amendments, short-term rentals were discussed. As an
incentive to small lodges, they were allowed to rent to a single individual for
6 months as long as the lodge rooms were available to the “general public”
for at least 6 months. Bendon said during that code amendment,
condominiumization was removed as a land use as it is not a land use but is
allowed as a practice.
The applicant has applied for a code interpretation of what “general public”
means and whether each lodge room was divided into increments of time,
which were sold to individual owners, would they still be in compliance
with general public. Staff answered that the lodge would not be in
compliance as “general public” implies people without proprietary interest.
Bendon said the interpretation also states all units within a lodge have to
comply with the 6-month provisions.
Bendon told Council the purpose of the code interpretation section is to
clarify ambiguities. There is a process to amend the code, which involves P
& Z, staff analysis and public hearings. Bendon reminded Council if
Council overturns the interpretation, they must find there was a denial of due
3
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
process, that the community development director exceeded her jurisdiction
or abused her authority.
Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, told Council this request is from the
Boomerang lodge in order to continue upgrading the lodge as well as to
provide stability with a steady income stream. The applicants participated in
the lodge preservation code amendments and the exemption from growth
management for lodge units. The applicants have purchased 19,000 square
feet, zoned R-15, across from their lodge. The applicants would like to
rezone it LP, go through the process and expand their lodge with 7 new units
and 2 affordable units on this parcel.
The applicant proposes to condominiumize and sell these units in an interval
ownership arrangement. Each of the 7 units will be sold to 10 separate
owners; each owner would be entitled to 5 weeks per year. If an owner were
not to use his unit, it would be available for rental. The owners will not own
a specific units but own the right to use of a unit for 5 weeks a year.
Vann said this arrangement may not fit with the definitions in the land use
code. A new definition of a lodge was adopted in connection with the
GMQS regulations that states “the lodge must be available for overnight
lodging to the general public on a short term basis for at least 6 months per
year”. Vann said this means each lodge must be available 26 weeks per year
to the general public; however it is consistent with the requirement that a
lodge unit be available on a short-term basis. However, it would not be
available to the public a minimum of 26 weeks a year. If the interval owners
are construed to be members of the general public, their use of these units
would not violate the 26-week limitation.
Vann questioned whether each and every unit in a lodge must meet the 6
month availability requirement. The community development department
concluded that interval owners are not members of the general public. Staff
also stated that all of the lodge units must be available to the general public
6 months a year. Vann said a person could guarantee a reservation in
advance for 2 weeks in the summer, 2 weeks in the winter and 1 week on off
season. Vann said if the intent of the regulation is to provide assurance that
units are occupied and increase the occupancy of the town and the viability
of the lodge, then interval owners should be part of the general public. If the
reason is to insure that anyone can drive up to a lodge and be assured a unit,
then interval ownership may preclude that. Vann noted that the regulation
4
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
does not state specifically lodge but just says the lodge, there may be room
to make an interpretation.
Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, illustrated mathematically with 41
units that there would be 1,066 unit weeks available to the general public.
Haas said there will be more unit weeks available under the applicant’s
proposal as under current regulations all units could be sold for 26 weeks,
leaving 1,066 available to the general public. Under the proposal, 716 more
unit weeks would be available to the general public. Vann said the purpose
of selling 50 weeks for the 7 new units is to finance the project and to
guarantee an income stream.
Vann said there is timeshare legislation and it is not known whether this
request would fit within those regulations. The purpose of this hearing is to
see whether there is support for the concept that the 6 months limitation does
not need to apply on a unit by unit basis.
John Worcester, city attorney, reminded Council in this hearing Council has
to decide whether the applicant was denied due process, staff exceeded their
jurisdiction or abused their authority. Worcester said this sounds more like a
request for a code amendment and if Council is interested in changing the
code, there is a public process by which to do that.
Vann said the issue is whether Council interprets the 26 week limitation as
pertaining to each and every unit. If that was not Council’s intent, this
request is not inconsistent with the land use regulations. Charlie Patterson,
applicant, said during the hearings on the lodge preservation amendment, he
understood the 6 month rule to be designed to eliminate someone from
staying in a hotel room more than 6 months. Patterson said he is proposing
7 new units, with 34 units staying as a lodge, and to finance the new portion
with time interval ownership.
Mayor Richards said the community is concerned about saving the small
lodges and that is why the change in lodge regulations. Mayor Richards said
the intention of the 6 month rule was so that a block of time could be
available for the MAA or construction workers but that the integrity of the
place would remain a lodge. Mayor Richards said she feels staff did not
abuse their discretion in this interpretation.
5
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
Mayor Richards opened the public hearing. There were no comments.
Mayor Richards closed the public hearing.
Mayor Richards said she would be willing to look at a code amendment to
allow interval ownership in the LP zone. Mayor Richards said at this point
she will uphold the planning director’s interpretation. Councilman Hershey
agreed this is not the proper forum for this request.
Councilman Hershey moved to uphold the community development
director’s interpretation of the land use code; seconded by Councilman
Markalunas. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Paulson, yes; Markalunas, yes;
McCabe, yes; Hershey, yes; Mayor Richards, yes. Motion carried.
ASPEN CLUB COMPLAINCE WITH PUD CONDITIONS
Melissa, assistant general manager, presented a copy of the Aspen Club’s
transportation management plan. Melissa explained the owner is out of
town. Julie Ann Woods, community development director, told Council
there are two issues; the tennis bubble and transportation. Claude Morelli,
transportation planner, pointed out the transportation requirements from
Ordinance #20, Series of 1996, the ordinance approving the PUD
amendment for the Aspen Club. Council agreed to continue this until the
owner can be present. Council requested staff review the Aspen Club’s
transportation management plan report before that meeting.
Councilman Paulson moved to continue this to February 28, 2000; seconded
by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, motion carried.
th
ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2000
– 7 and Main Conceptual/Final PUD
Councilman Hershey moved to read Ordinance #2, Series of 2000; seconded
by Councilman McCabe. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE N0. 2
(SERIES OF 2000)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
APPROVING THE CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT, THE CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL SPECIALLY
PLANNED AREA, REZONING TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
6
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
(AH-PUD-SPA) ZONE DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION, EXEMPTIONS
FROM THE SCORING AND COMPETITION PROCEDURES OF
GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND AN
ACCESSORY COMMERCIAL STORE FOR THE 7TH AND MAIN
STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND CORNER STORE PROJECT,
LOTS A, B, AND C, BLOCK 19, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN.
Parcel No. 2735.024.09.851
Chris Bendon, community development department, disclosed that the
housing authority has retained his girlfriend to work on a landscape plan for
this project. Bendon told Council neither he nor Ms. Sanzone has a financial
interest in this project. Bendon said this project is 10 one-bedroom AH
units, 1 two-bedroom unit and 650 square feet of commercial area. This site
is within the historic district. The architecture reflects that of the Main street
historic district. The project has received conceptual architectural approval
from HPC.
The commercial space is envisioned to be a gathering space for residents and
a place to add vitality to the area. There is concern about the entrance to
Aspen, the closure of side streets and parking on Main street, whether the
ultimate transportation will be rail or bus. There is concern about delivery
th
for the commercial space. There will be delivery access on 7 street. There
are 8 parking spaces on site. The code suggests 1 space per bedroom and the
3 other spaces could be provided off-site. There is an issue of parking
versus density. The planning philosophy is to encourage density where the
services are available.
P & Z has recommended denial of the project by a vote of 6 to 1. The
growth management commission looked at this and recommended against
the commercial store space. The housing board recommended in favor of
the project with the condition they would rather see the commercial space
converted to residential space.
Lee Novak, housing office, told Council this project is trying to balance
competing interests, density versus parking, green design versus
affordability, number versus size of units. Novak said the units mix is due to
the demonstrated need for one bedrooms and that the location may not be
appropriate for families with small children. Novak said the housing office
feels people will be willing to purchase housing where there is no parking
on-site.
7
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
Novak said a commercial tenant would be selected through an RFP process
on how they meet community goals. Novak said they feels the benefits of
the store are automobile trip reduction, a neighborhood gathering space, and
affordable commercial space for a locally-serving business and this
particular location is not great for a residential units. Mark Mahoney
showed the model and rendering of the design of the project. Mahoney said
the contract will require using green building materials.
Dan Martineau told Council he supports employee housing; however, he
hates cars. Martineau said this project will have a large parking and traffic
impact on an already overcrowded neighborhood. Martineau said the
commercial use will create even more traffic. Martineau said he does not
want this neighborhood to be an experiment for local commercial for 5
years. Martineau suggested the city put in underground parking rather than
have spillover parking in this area. Martineau noted if Council is
considering a coffee shop, there is one already right across the street.
Martineau said the project next door, West Hopkins affordable housing, has
23 cars for 11 parking spaces so there are already 12 cars parking on the
streets.
Danny Abbott, adjacent property owner, told Council there are many
th
children in the neighborhood. The plan is to close 7 street in the future.
th
Abbott suggested 7 street be closed off an made into a park. This will net
more parking along the curb on Main street and give the children in the
neighborhood a place to play. Abbott said the bedrooms face on the alley
and the city should be careful about adding too much delivery traffic in that
alley.
Fonda Patterson, adjacent property owner, said this project will put more
cars in a neighborhood that is already out of control. Ms. Patterson
encouraged Council to consider the extra expense of underground parking in
order to make affordable housing fit in with the neighborhood. Ms.
Patterson told Council the city should be careful about adding any traffic to
the alley; it is already very busy. Ms. Patterson said she, too favors, the park
th
on a closed 7 street.
Mayor Richards noted this will be 75 units/acre, which is a dense project.
Councilman Paulson said he feels this project should have no parking on-site
and no residential permits, which would take away the parking problem.
8
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
th
Councilman Paulson agreed closing 7 street is a good idea. Councilman
Paulson suggested restricting deliveries and have them be made on Main
street in front of the project, not in the alley. Councilman Paulson support
the commercial space especially as it will reduce cars trips.
Councilman Hershey supports the project; however, not with the commercial
space. Mayor Richards said she would like staff to take a look at a park
th
space to the west of this project in a closed 7 street. Mayor Richards said
the parking plan with using spaces at Benedict Commons is fine with her.
Mayor Richards said for second reading she would like to know the financial
effect of taking 3 units and making them rental units. Mayor Richards said
she feels the commercial space has the potential to create character for this
area. Mayor Richards said staff should continue to work on the operational
plan for a commercial space before second reading. Mayor Richards noted
this site was purchased with multi-uses in mind.
Councilman Markalunas said he like the concept of neighborhood shopping.
Councilman Markalunas said he has some problems with the architectural
th
detailing. Councilman Markalunas said he likes the idea of closing 7 street.
Councilman McCabe said he supports one parking space/unit as a minimum
and it seems discriminatory to do any less. Councilman McCabe said the
th
idea of a park on 7 street should be looked at very carefully because of the
precedent it may set for other neighborhoods. Councilman McCabe said he
favors more density in affordable housing projects; however, he would not
hold this project up at this point. Councilman McCabe said he is willing to
give the commercial space a try.
Councilman McCabe moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of 2000, on first
reading; seconded by Councilman Hershey. Roll call vote; Councilmembers
Markalunas, yes; McCabe, yes; Hershey, yes; Paulson, yes; Mayor Richards,
yes. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #17, SERIES OF 2000
– Fluoride
Lee Cassin, environmental health department, reminded Council citizens
have recently asked the city to look at discontinuing adding fluoride to the
city’s water. Ms. Cassin said staff has looked at dozens of studies and
recommendations and the consensus is the benefits outweigh the risks. Ms.
9
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
Cassin said she drafted a resolution indicating Council’s feelings and the
weight of scientific evidence.
Councilman Hershey moved to adopt Resolution #17, Series of 2000;
seconded by Councilman Markalunas.
Councilman Paulson said he would like the city to consider taking fluoride
out of the water and to pursue more updated scientific studies. Councilman
Paulson said with better health habits, fluoride in the water is not so
important to the populace. Councilman Hershey said he feels this is an
important issue to the health of this community. Councilman Hershey said
he does not want to jeopardize the health of anyone in the community.
Councilman Hershey said if there was any proof fluoride was dangerous, he
would be willing to take it out of the water. Mayor Richards agreed it is
important to raise issues like this for public consideration. Mayor Richards
said she has not seen an outpouring of letters and comments on this issue.
Councilman Markalunas said this has been debated many times and the
benefits of fluoride outweigh the risks.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Markalunas, yes; McCabe, yes; Hershey,
yes; Paulson, no; Mayor Richards, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Hershey moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to
9:20 p.m.; seconded by Councilman McCabe. All in favor, motion carried.
SCHEDULE BOARD INTERVIEWS
Council scheduled interview for Monday March 6 at 5 p.m., 10 minutes
interviews.
Councilman Markalunas moved to go into executive session at 9:05 p.m. for
the purpose of discussion litigation; seconded by Councilman McCabe. All
in favor, motion carried.
Councilman McCabe moved to come out of executive session at 9:30 p.m.;
seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Markalunas moved to continue the meeting to February 15 at 3
p.m.; seconded by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, motion carried.
Council left chambers at 9:30 p.m.
10
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
11
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 14, 2000
OUTSTANDING EMPLOYEE BONUS AWARDS ................................ ... 1
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ................................ ................................ ....... 1
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS ................................ ........................... 2
CONSENT CALENDAR ................................ ................................ ............. 2
·
Authorization for New Positions in Housing Office ............................. 3
·
HVAC Upgrades at Wheeler ................................ ................................ 3
·
Resolution #14, 2000 – Wagner – Streets Equipment Purchase ............ 3
·
Resolution #15, 2000 – Approving Forest Service Plan Comments ...... 3
·
Resolution #13, 2000 – Contract Ajax Towing and Recovery .............. 3
·
Resolution #16, 2000 - DE PP Construction Management .................... 3
·
Minutes – January 24, 2000 ................................ ................................ . 3
APPEAL OF CODE INTERPRETATION “LODGE” ................................ . 3
ASPEN CLUB COMPLAINCE WITH PUD CONDITIONS ...................... 6
th
ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2000 – 7 and Main Conceptual/Final PUD 6
RESOLUTION #17, SERIES OF 2000 – Fluoride ................................ ....... 9
SCHEDULE BOARD INTERVIEWS ................................ ........................ 10
12