HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19800310Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 10, 1980
JOINT MEETING WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Kinsley called the meeting to order at 4:20 p.m. with Councilmembers Isaac,
Michael, Parry, Behrendt and Mayor Edel and Commissioner Child present.
1. Overall Economic Development Plan. Brian Stafford told the Boards they have been
working on this program for 3 years. Stafford said this document will hopefully serve Overall
as a guide for political organizations, business people, private sector to help make Econc~ic
decisions with respect to economic development in Pitkin County. Stafford asked the Development
Boards to spend time, read the reports and note any problems. Volume 1 is data and is Plan
a factual book; most of the data is non-controversial. The second volume is a policy
oriented document and covers goals and objectives, prQgram recommendations, has a
program ranking system. The ranking was done by Stafford and submitted to the OEDP
committee. Councilman Isaac asked why the town of Snowmass Village found this plan
unacceptable. Stafford said they felt it would compromise their goals. Councilman
Behrendt said he would like to have comments from the Chamber on this plan. Mayor Edel
said he felt this was intruding the government in areas that is not their function.
Councilman Isaac noted in order to get Some government programs, the county has to have
this document.
Stafford told the Boards after he had received input on the reports from the elected
officials, he will have the changes made and will print more copies. Councilman Isaac
said he would like to add and delete from the ranking system. The Boards decided to
meet individually and list their comments, changes and problems and then submit them to
Stafford.
2. Community Garden - Request for Board Appointment. Mary Sue Kennington, extension
Ccnmunity agent, told the Board they were requesting approval as a citizens board to be approved
Gardens request~ and appointed by City Council and County Commissioners. Ms. Kennington said they needed
some type of structure to manage the day to day activities of the garden. Councilwoman
Board Michael asked why this board had to be a publicly constituted body. Councilwoman Michael
approval said she perceived the public sector would provide a certain level of support but that
the board would be privately constituted. Ms. Kennington said she felt it would be
beneficial to have government backing for purposes of fund raising, and .people would stay
with the board. Councilman Behrendt suggested they incorporate privately with a non-
profit status. Mayor Edel agreed it would be better for them to incorporate privately.
Commissioner Child favored acknowledging the board and their program.
Commiccioner Child moved to endorse the activities of the Board; seconded by Commissioner
Kinsley. All in favor, motion carried.
COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
Councilman Parry moved to approve the minutes of January 28, 1980; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Councilman Isaac asked why there were no unauthorized purchases. Ms. Butterbaugh told
Council this accounts payable is for last year's bills.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve accounts payable; seconded by Councilman Van Ness.
All in favor, motion carried.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Francis Whitaker addressed the Council on approval of a subdivision of a tract of
land on Cemetery Lane into two 20,000 square foot lots for the purpose of building and
City subdivis~ selling two condominium duplexes. Whitaker told Council that the entire 230 acres of
on C~etery
Lane/~nployee land for the golf course was purchased at one time with open space funds for open
space. .~The parcel in question was not a subdivided lot and there was no back lot line.
housing Wh~taker stated the Council should research the zoning immediately following the
purchase of this property. Whitaker told Council the attempt to use open space for
housing will be opposed. Mayor Edel said the Council was told the land was zoned
residential. Whitaker said in his opinion it was part of the unsubdivided acreage.
Mayor Edel said the city staff would research this.
2. Ann Knowlton, director of the Visiting Nurses Association told Council they are
funding the AVVNA at $20,000. The Visiting Nurses work very had and Ms. Knowlton
invited Council to visit and find out about the facilities and what they do.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Mayor Edel told Council a downtown businessman came to him annoyed because he had
Cleaning to clean his own sidewalk while there are areas in town that are cleaned by the City.
sidewalks The businessman felt this was unfair for him as a taxpayer and a resident. City Attorne~
Stock told Council at the time Council proposed the mall, they stated they would take ~
care of the mall. It was felt that the bricks and width created a burden upon businesses
in the mall not put upon anyone else in town.
SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT - Visual Arts Center
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the special event permit; seconded by Councilman
Special Event Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
permit VAC
RIO GRANDE TASK FORCE - Selection Process
Rio Grande Council decided to review all applications before interviews. Council set a meeting
Task Force for Wednesday, March 26, at noon.
selection ·
MOUNTAIN RESCUE - Formal Introduction of Officers
Dick Arnold told Council Mountain Rescue has undergone a change of Fred Braun retiring
after 25 years. Arnold introduced the new president, Greg Mace; himself as vice-
president. The other officers are Scott Bowie as treasurer and Dave Rumsberger as
secretary. Mace stated they hope to continue to serve the city and the citizens as
they have in the past.
CITY MANAGER
1. Lift ~1 Building/Central Reservations - Sewer Problem. City Manager Chapman told
Council there is a problem with the sewer line which remedial action seems not to have
Lift ~1 helped. The employees of Central Reservations has to run to lodges to go to the bath-
Building room. Chapman said his thought is to replace the sewer line. The lease is unclear as
sewer probl~ to whose responsibility this maintenance is. The cost will be about $3100 to replace.
Chapman pointed out the city is giving the building as a donation and in that philosophy,
they will either have to find a different facility or replace the sewer line.
Councilman Parry agreed it is the city's responsibility to replace the sewer line.
Councilwoman Michael asked where the money would come from. Councilman Isaac suggested
getting the lodging association to split it with the city. Council directed Chapman to
pursue a solution with the end result the city pays for it.
2. Recreation fees. Chapman submitted a list of reacreation fees for 1980 which is Increase
recommended by himself and the recreation director. Adoption of this fee schedule will recreation
increase revenues $15,000 enabling the gymnastics program to purchase their mat. Council- feeS
man Van Ness opposed raising recreation fees and stated he felt this is the wrong place
to get money.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the recreation fees as presented; seconded by
Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Van Ness. Motion
carried.
3. Water Department Truck Lease. Chapman told Council he will be bringing a lease and Truck lease
ordinance for a truck for the water department. There is money in the budget for this water Dept.
lease, and there is a definite need for the truck.
Councilman Van Ness moved to go ahead with this; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in
favor, motion carried.
4. House Donation. Chapman told Council the city has been offered a donation of a house! Donatic~ of
on east Hyman; they are making the donation for tax purposes. Chapman estimated the
Of moving and relocating the house to Herron park for employee housing would be between ii house - not
$19,000 and $24,000. Aspen Center for Environmental Studies is also willing to take il taken
the house right away. Chapman asked Council whether they wanted to pursue the donation of
the house. Council consensus was to let ACES have the house.
REQUEST FOR LIQUOR LICENSE - Arthur's Chinese Restaurant
Councilwoman Michael left the room due to a conflict of interest. Charles Fagan reminded
Council it has been many months since the original proposal There was a question from Liquor License
Arthur's
Council on the legality of the way the statute was being used. Fagan traced the history
of the state legislation and found the state senator who introduced the language and Chinese
submitted a letter. Ashley Anderson submitted the letter is a new development and states Restaurant
the local authorities can decide, on the 500 foot rule on a case by case basis. The
letter is explicit in saying this is the type of situation the legislation was made for.
Anderson said they have discussed this with the state liquor authorities, who have said
it is a City decision; they do not want to pre-judge the situation nor to give a legal
opinion.
Anderson read from a letter from Senator Paul Sandoval, "If the landowner is willing to
donate land to the municipality and if the municipality decides, after reviewing the
operation and the location of the premises, that the issuace of a liquor license would
pose no reasonable threat to the safety and morality of the school children, then the
municipality would have the authority the accept the gift of land, lease the premises
and authorize the issu~ce of the liquor license" Anderson said the Council has to
decide if this is a threat to school kids. Arthur's is only open at night. Anderson
said public opinion is in favor of this license; they have petitions with 3500 signature:
Arthur's is willing to pay to the city a reasonable rent. Fagan said the city will get
an income on the property to cover any administrative problems. The lease contains
indemnities to the city and that the lessee carry insurance to the city's tort limit.
Councilman Behrendt said he liked the mechanism; however, is it proper for the city to
accept income from this property. Fagan said additionally, Arthur's will be paying the
city whatever the city is looSing by this property going off the tax roles. City
Attorney Stock said one of the concerns of the state was that there was no monetary
rent. Stock said he felt it was proper:!for the city to accept rent and to determine
what the value might be. Councilman Van Ness stated he did not agree with the conclusion
that the only issue was that this operation would be hazardous to school kids. The law
has prohibited liquor outlets within 500 feet of schools for 50 years. Councilman Van
Ness noted this loophole requires the city to go into partnership with a private business
for them to gain an advantage. Councilman Van Ness stated the city should be very
careful to not establish a preCedent. Councilman Van Ness said if there is any hardship
it is caused by the applicant moving their business where they are. Mayor Edel said he
felt this was subverting the basic law, and it is a mistake for the city to get involved
in this operation. Anderson stated the city is not setting a precedent because this is
a case by case decision.
Mayor Edel asked what happens if this operation sells out in 10 years. Anderson said
he would be willing to condition this approval on the operation continuing the same way.
Fagan told Council he could construct the option to sublet so that the city will have the
right to refuse the proposed operation. Fagan showed a rendering of the proposed build
out for the expanded Arthur's on 4-1/2 lots on Main street. There is a stated city
policy to preserve the historic quality of Main street. This proposed expansion will be
a contribution to the Victorian character of Main street.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the lease submitted by June Cantrup subject to
further discussions by the administration concerning the amounts of additional rental
and work on the assignment of the lease; seconded by Councilman Parry.
City Attorney Stock said there will have to be approval of the agreement and the lease
by ordinance. Stock said this document is drafted to protect the city's interest.
Councilman Behrendt amended his motion to include this is subject to final review and
approval by the city attorney; seconded by Councilman Parry. C°uncilmembers Parry, Isaaci~
and Behrendt in favor; Mayor Edel and Councilman Van Ness opposed. Motion carried.
aspen ulty ~ouncli March 10, 1980
CHAMBER AD HOC COMMITTEE RE: ASPEN INSTITUTE
Representing the committee were Tom Richardson, Gideon Kaufman, Edgar Stern, Kris Marsh,
Whip Jones and Mike Strang. Mayor Edel said the city's legal counsel has said it would
Aspen be more appropriate if the presentation were made to the City's staff and worked on by
Institute them. Council will hear the presentation and will pass it on to staff.
Kris Marsh said the Ad Hoc Committee of the Chamber was formed in an attempt to seek a
resolution of the unresolved issues between the city and the Institute, feeling such a
resolution is in the best interests of all parties and for the community of Aspen. In
that spirit, the committee offered to act as an intermediary. At the last meeting,
the Committee proposed some issues and suggested a method to help forge a settlement.
Ms. Marsh said the committee would like to propose an agreement on general principles.
This document is based on substantial input from both sides. Ms. Marsh read from the
document. "In order to facilitate the process of resolving the differences between the
city and the institute, the following principles informally accepted by both parties
should formally be agreed to by both parties. The Institute desires to reassure the city
of its intent to maintain a significant presence in Aspen, continuing to uphold the high
standards of operation, which have been established for 30 years." This issue has
concerned the Council, and the committee feels the Institute does desire to reassure the
city they will maintain a significant presence. "The Institute agrees to assure the city
that any new operator of the facility will give first priority to Institute programs and
high level corporate professional groups and will cooperate with the Chamber to achieve
primary quality conference use."
The Institute has indicated that any sale of the property will generate funds to be given
development of an endowment. The endowment issue has needed clarification, and the
committee has investigated exactly what an endowment would do and what purpose it would
service for the Institute. The committee learned the sale of the property would begin
to establish an endowment fund; the Institute hopes to achieve a goal of $25,000,000.
An endowment serves to create a means of independence for a non-profit organization and
recreates unrestricted funds for their operational use. "The Institute shall improve
and good faith to remain as a presence in the City of Aspen without
specifically restricting the endowment."
The second po£nt relates to the number of rooms, and the committee feels they have
achieved significant compromise. This is 173 new bedrooms, in addition to the 92 existing
for a total of 265 bedrooms. This city did give conceptual appro~at to 356 rooms about
1-1/2 years ago. The Institute does feel that 300 rooms is a minimum operation; however,
the Institute is willing to accept 265 rooms and are willing to build sufficient employee
housing based on the final housing overlay.
Another area relates to tourist uses. The committee had proposed 40 per cent tourist
usage, which was acceptable to the Institute. The Council talked about 92 bedrooms, which
would help accomplish exemption from the growth management plan. This is an important
point for agreement, and both sides have participated in coming up with a solution.
The zoning issue is very important, and the Institute is willing to commit themselves to
being zoned 1/3 conservation, 1/3 academic, and 1/3 suitable for lodging and restaurant
facilities. This zoning provides the best assurance the Council can have for the
Institute remaining in the same configuration.
The next point relates to the Institute's willingness to work with the Physics Institute
and the M.A.A. in order to satisfy their reasonable future needs. Ms. Marsh said the
Institute will be relating directly to the Physics Institute and the MoA.A. to determine
what specifically their needs are in order to accommodate these groups. MS. Marsh said
if both parties could agree to the general principles as outlined, they can move to the
next step which is specific implementation and details. Until the committee knows that
both the city and the Institute agree on the general principles, there is no reason to
proceed. If there is a written agreement satisfactory to both parties, it has been agreed
the Court will be requested to shelve the law suit until the provisions of the agreement
were carried out, and the law suit will be dismissed with prej!udice.
Mike Strang said the committee has spent seven months working on this. They would like to
decide on a process. Strang said he felt the Institute has had to yield on some points.
Strang said he hoped a way can be found for the city to decide whether they do or do not
agree. Alan Merson, city's co-counsel, pointed out the Council is asking that this be
handled the way the city generally does business, by giving the staff an opportunity to
examine the proposal and make recommendations. The concern here is that the planning
staff be given an opportunity to evaluate the impact of the proposal. Tom Richardson
suggested it might be possible to have councilmembers participate in the sessions with
the staff. Mayor Edel left Council Chambers.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Weaver
Sunny Vann, planning office, told Council this is an application at 422 West Bleeker
Subdivision requesting s~bdivision exemption to condominiumize two units and to create a new 6,000
Exemption square foot lot on the property. The engineering department has recommended approval
Weaver subject to improvement survey revisions, owner-applicant agreeing to enter into a side-
walk improvement district, provision of a utility easement, water meter installed and
an encroachment agreement for the fence. For the new 6,000 square foot lot, the
engineering department denies this and requires subdivision execption. Vann said the
attorney requires approval conditioned upon 6 month minimum leases. There is no rental
history as the two units have been owner-occupied?
Vann told Council the planning office recommends approval with the engineering comments
and the subdivision exception for the 6,000 square feet. P & Z concurred with this with
the stipulation that the detached parking structure be included in the condominiumization
agreement. Vann noted that the new 6,000 square foot lot will be exemptsd from the
growth management plan for the creation of a single family dwelling.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the subdivision exemption concurring with the P & Z
recommendation including the engineering comments and the detached garage be included in
the condominiumization declaration; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion
carried.
TROLLEY DISCUSSION
Jon Busch showed slides of the trolley cars in Lisbon, Detroit and the Isle of Man. These
slides showed examples of overhead wires, tracks, grades, possible cars to purchase that Trolley -
hold 100 passengers. Michael Hernstadt said the city had given a vote of interest to offer gift
proceed with developing this system and to implement it; however, there were some financial to City
problems and unanswered questions. Hernstadt told Council he had taken over the entire
financial obligations of the company and possess the titles to all the car~s~ Hernstadt
stated he was prepared to donate the cars to the city, 3 in 1980 and 3 the following
year. Hernstadt asked for a vote for non-binding indication of interest. Hernstadt
said he wanted the community to be aware of this and to look for a method to go on
with the process. There might be legislation in Denver of state funding for railroad
projects. Hernstadt said the entire cost of the project is less than 6 of the city buses
and the project may serve to eliminate some of the bus transportation costs.
Jon Busch told Council S.B. 43 establishes a railway bonding authority and there will be
a funding agency which Could give construction grants for projects such as this. Busch
said trolleysare cheaper because you do not have to replace the rolling stock. There
is an inflationary factor in the cost of fuel. It is conceivable the cost of fuel could
double in a year. The trolley then becomes extremely practical as well as the fact they
do not pollute. Busch said it takes about $1 per day to run a street car electrically.
Busch presented a map of the proposed routes, a loop connecting the North Mill Plaza with
parking and with Rubey park. There is a suggested route to run the trolley to Little
Annie and Lift i#A. If the trolley served the east end, it could increase the density.
Councilman Isaac moved to have the staff look at the feasibility of receiving 6 trolley
cars from the Aspen Trolley:Cbmpany; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. Hernstadt said
he wanted a tax expert to look at this so it can be a tax write off. Councilman Behrendt
asked staff to look at where these would be kept. All in favor, with the exception of
Councilwoman Michael. Motion carried.
REQUEST TO INITIATE REZONING - Law Enforcement Facility
Joe Wells, planning office, reminded Council they had had a work session to consider the P~zoning request
county's request to initiate rezoning on the site known as the Oden property from O, law enforce-
office to public. The county is only asking to initiate the rezoning; if the Council and ment facility
the P & Z do not chose to do so, the issue cannot be considered until October. This does
not commit Council to approve the rezoning request but simply gets the process started.
Wells told Council the public zone establishes permitted uses, one of which is govern-
mental facility, but it does not establish area and bulk requirements, these will be
considered under an SPA procedure.
City Attorney Stock stated it is important for Council to make a determination of what
documents they want presented and what details they want. The SPA process will be used
to create the area and bulk requirements. In past, Council has wanted documents generall
presented in subdivision or PUD application, as conceptual was not sufficient for final
approval. Stock indicated to the Council the zoning code, Article 11, gives them the
right!' to have their hearing in a two-step process, once before P&Z and once before
Council. The Council had some concern regarding the amount of expenditure necessary wit~
out a commitment from Council. Stock presented an alternative to allow a conceptual
presentation before P & Z and Council in which they would receive some commitments in
size, setbacks, area and bulk requirements, etc., and a commitment as to the particular
use.
Stock told Council there would be a condition on the zoning the site public; if a law
enforcement facility was not built within one year, the land would revert back to O,
office district. At the time of final rezoning, the County will have to determine finan-
cing of the structure and to determine whether the Aspen police department will be
included. When those decisions are completed, the county would begin, the expenditure
of the larger funds necessary for final approval. This would create a four-step process
despite they~.'have the right to a two-step process, in order to recognzie the financial
implications of the detail of the type of documents Council will need to make the final
decision.
George Ochs, county manager, said he felt the city code was clear that was is necessary
are the area and bulk requirements. Stock feels more is needed, and rather than go
through the entire process of designing the building and spending a large amount of
money, the county would rather go through conceptual level. The county can make some
headway without investing large sums of dollars. Ochs stated he is willing to go along
with the four-step process as suggested. Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt said the city is just
inagurating a major planning effort with the Rio Grande Task Force. Mayor Pro Tem
Behrendt said it is a shame to go ahead and do a single structure where there is the
possibility that a combination of structures might do the whole community more benefit.
Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt said he preferred to wait until the Task Force goes ahead and that
Mayor Edel agreed.
Councilwoman Michael asked how the building would be financed. Ochs said the county
plans to do a general obligation bond, pOssibly in June. Councilwoman Michael said the
problem with waiting is that the county is willing to build a jail, which is needed.
Also if the city waits for the Rio Grande Taske Force to get organized, it will be 9
months before they have any specific sense of what they are proposing. Councilman Parry
noted the site for the jail is right below the bank and it does not need to be involved
in the Rio Grande Task Force at all.
~eguiar ~eetlng Aspen City Council March 10, 1980
Councilwoman Michael moved to request the staff to initiate rezoning for the law enforce-
ment facility and that the request take the form of conceptual approval and a four-Step
process; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
TIME SHARING DISCUSSION
Jerry Hewey, manager of Aspen Alps, told Council he has followed senate bills and house
Time sharing bills of interest which pertain to the condominium industry. S.B. 132 discusses time
sharing and would have allowed owners to time share on individual units. This would
make it difficult for condominium managers; this was struck from the bill. Hewey told
~. Council this bill did restrict municipalities from legislating time sharing. Hewey
said people in the condominium business have told legislators they would like to work
on the bills and have bills that are handleable for condominium managers and communities
both. Hewey stated he was of the opinion that if time sharing is done right, it is a
good thing. Stock said he felt it is important that this group has taken on some of the
responsibility in front of the legislature. This group was instrumental in testifying
on the bill and having it modified. Council thanked Hewey for his time and interest.
HOUSING OVERLAY - Follow up, review ordinance outlines
Karen Smith, planning director, reminded Council they have had study sessions on this
Housing and the planning office would like some direction in drafting ordinances. The planning
Overlay office has recommended that bandit units and mandatory employee housing not be discussed
at this time but will be discussed with growth management plan amendments and code
streamlining. The first ordinance regards caretaker units which is basically applicable
to single family lots and would involve a small, limited in size, attached unit. If
there are existing detached structures, these would be grandfathered. Ms. Smith pointed
out there are existing structures all over town that could be converted to employee units
with little impact. For new construction, attached structures would be less impacting
both visually and land use-wise. The process decided upon for caretaker units would be
the conditional use process; the review criteria would be that existing in the conditiona~
use section. Council may want to add that for detached structures no F.A.R increase woul~
be allowed, but substantial remodelling could be done. A criteria that should be added
is that these be deed restricted.
Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt said he felt the approach on this was to take each area and Work
it through slowly to get public input and not attempt to redesign the community in 30
days. Ms. Smith pointed out she had broken the various recommendations into separate
ordinances and did not see any problems in proceeding with the first 3 ordinances at
once. These 3 got high consensus out of the community housing workshop. Councilman Van
Ness asked if these proposed ordinances are talking about density increases. Ms. Smith
said yes, this would now allow two units on a parcel which previously alloWed one.
Ms. Smith noted in ordinance 1 (caretaker units) the area and bulk requirements would
be the same as the zone requirements. A~ unresolved question is whether to allow caretaker!i
units on duplex lots; the planning office recommendation is not to allow these at this
point. The planning office is trying to identify all the proposed techniques for
increasing employee housing and project how many units the city will get. Councilman Van
Ness said he did not see what the incentive on this was. MS. Smith said the theory is
some people may not wish to have someone else living in the house, using the facilities,
but may allow someone to live in a separate unit and keep watch on the house. Ms. Smith
said the city will have to look at the impact on facilities on services; this will be
monitored and the Council could put top set limits on the number of units to be enter-
tained in one year.
The second proposed ordinance is a density bonus for one acre and larger in single
f~aity_~ites in R-6 zone through R-40. Ms. Smith said there may be 10 to 15 in the city;
however, this will come into play when annexing land to the city. The permitted uses
will be single familY, duplex, multi-family, and townhouses if 70 per cent or more of
units are deed restricted. The review procedure would be rezoning with subdivision or
subdivision exception where applicable. The review criteria would be the same as origina
proposed in ordinance ~78. The planning office recommends adding new criteria to somehow.
encourage creation of ownership units. Council asked that criteria be dropped. The
area and bulk will be varied as in the original ordinance. A difference from the originaI
ordinance is that the minimum lot area per dwelling unit would be subject to a maximum
50 per cent reduotion, which means a potential 50 per cent increase in density. The
variation in lot width, setbacks, open space, etc. would be varied as they now are in
planned unit development. Each unit cannot be setback under the guidelines of the zone
district or there will not be clustering. Ms. Smith said this ordinance does not touch
the R/MF zone. A question came up whether to allow redevelopment of non-vacant land,
and the planning office recommended no; it is not worth getting into the unknown right
now. The ordinance will only be allowed on vacant land. Another question was whether
to allow dorms, and the planning office again recommended no.
The third ordinance is proposed density bonuses in CC, S/C/I, N/C, C-l, C-L, L-l, L-2
Public, O, and R/MF to allow single family, duplex, multi-family, townhouses and dorms
if 70 per cent deed restricted. The review process would be the same as ordinance 2
as would be the review criteria. The area and bulk requirements could be varied as in
the original housing overlay ordinance, and the minimum lot area per dwelling unit would
be subject to a 100 per cent reduction, which would allow twice as many units. However,
the FAR is only subject to a 25 per cent increase. This means a doubling of the number
of unitS with only 25 per cent increase in bulk. Ms. Smith asked if Council wanted to
consider this in academic and park zone. Council said to delete it in both. Ms. Smith
told Council she would like to draft the ordinances as discussed and clarify the points
brought out in discussion. Councilwoman Michael said she would like people to identify
with these as separate ordinances and would like them presented separately. Councilman
Behrendt said he would like the second two to go together.
Councilman Van Nessmoved~ to consider all three proposed ordinances at once; seconded
by Councilman Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt.
Motion carried.
Regular Meet lng
REQUEST FOR BUILDING PERMIT - 925 Durant Employee Housing Project
Sunny Vann, planning office, told Council that 925 Durant is the employee housing portion
of a project which received residential GMP allocation in 1978. Their allocation is Request for
about to expire and they submitted construction drawings in order to secure a building building permit
permit. In reviewing the request for a buitding permit, the building departmentnotice~i' 925 Durant
differences from the original submission; held back on the permit and referred the project ~ployee
to the planning offices. Vann stated the code reads that any applicant awarded developmen housing
allotment deviating in essential elements from the original~l.prop0sal, the planning offic~
shall be'inotified and shall notify Council. Vann said the question is what is an essentia
element; the Code is not specific. The planning office has agreed that those items scored
or received points constitute essential elements. The building department identified
various essential elements. The areas that have changed are parking, energy, handicapped;
the entire building has changed as far as overall design.
City staff met with the applicant to discuss these changes, they asked for an opportunity
to mitigate some of the changes. The planning office has no real problem with some of
the changes as long as the end result would not have changed the score and a detriment to
the process itself. The planning office does have some problem with the fact this is a
completely different building. Vann pointed out that design itself is not scored as part
of the residential process; however, he is of the opinion that it cannot be separated from
that process. Vann told Council that originally the applicant did not receive sufficient
points; they appealed to Council and in the appeal process the score was raised in certail
areas to kick them over the minimum. Vann told Council there was not another applicant
close enough.
Ashley Anderson, representing the applicant, told Council they have been trying to maxi-
mize the number of units for two years. They wanted to preserve the ability to build 12
additional units under the housing overlay. Anderson stated they were not before Council
for an extension; they are ready to start digging. It was suggested they move the huildin
on the site; this caused some changes which they do not feel are important. Anderson
told Council these are not free market units. Councilman Van Ness said he felt two things
are important; (1) the reason for the changes, and (2) whether the changes in terms of
GMP scoring criteria are beneficial or detrimental - whether the project would get more
or less points. Councilman Van Ness said he felt that putting half the parking undergroun
would have a different visual impact but would be a beneficial change. Anderson told
Council on the energy change, when the building department reveiwed the plans, the units
were facing east and west. Now the units are all facing south like they are supposed to.
Councilman Van Ness concluded unless someone could claim this would get less the score on
GMP grading, these changes are beneficial. Ms. Smith stated Council has to decide in
each circumstance whether it isa beneficial change and whether it would have affected
how the applicant scored. Councilman Van Ness asked if these changes would have decrease(
or increased the GMP score. Vann told Council the planning office is of the opinion in
working with the applicant that the changes can be mitigated such that, to their satis-
faction, the applicant's score would not be changed to the detriment of another applicant~
Vann said the broader question is the code does not address design of the project in the
scoring process. The original building occupied all the site; the new building is on
one corner of the site allowing for another building which would accommodate 12 more unit~
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the changes; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in
favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~80, SERIES OF 1979 _ W.H.O.P. Annexation and Rezoning
Drd. 80, 1980
City Attorney Stock told Council this could not be addressed until the Opal Marolt
annexation is completed as there is a problems with contiguity. W.H.O.P.
Annexation
Councilman Van Ness moved to continue the second reading until April 14, 1980; seconded b5
Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~7, SERIES OF 1980 - Water Plant Housing SPA
Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Pro Tem
Behrendt closed the public hearing. Ord. 7, 1980
Water Plant
Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance ~7, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Parry.~ SPA
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #7
(Series of 1980)
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE WATER PLANT SITE ACCORDING TO AN APPROVALED
SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA MASTER PLAN FOR THE SITE, THE ELEMENTS OF WHICH
MASTER PLAN WILL CONSTITUTE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE ~REA ALL
AS PROVIDED BY ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE was
read by the city clerk
Housing Director Jim Reents told Council this is an application by the city for 80 units
of rental housing on city-owned property adjacent to the hospital. The SPA as approved
allows for the R/MF area to cover the site proposed for the housing. The rest of the
site will be Public for the water plant and open space.
Councilwoman Michael moved to adopt Ordinance #7, Series of 1980 on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Isaac, aye; Michael, aye
Parry, aye; Van Ness, aye; Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt, aye. Motion carried.
Reents requested Council approve subidivision exemption for the project with the conditio
that if at any point in the future the project comes in for condominiUmization, it be
required to meet the full subdivision requirements.
Councilman Parry moved to approve subidivision exemption with the condition as outlined;
seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Reents told Council because of the response from Meadowood homeowners, the P & Z felt
it was important, because of feared impact on wildlife in the area, to restrict dogs.
Councilman Isaac moved to prohibit dogs from water plant housing project; seconded by ~.
Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Isaac moved for special review approval making a finding this is deed restricted
employee housing; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
WATER PLANT HOUSING PROJECT BONDING
City Manager Chapman told Council with the condition of the bond market, the staff feels
Bonds, Water there is a need to move ahead with the general obligation bonds for the water plant
Plant housing housing because it may not be any better in two weeks. Don Diones, Kirchner/Moore,
recommended to Council they authorize him to sell the bond issue at 8-1/2 per cent. There
are section of the statutes that allow to extend maturities. If in the next 5 to 7 years,
there is an improvements in interest rates, the bonds could be refinanced. Diones said
it is approaching a time period where 8-1/2 limitation may not be attainable. Dions said
he felt reasonably confident there will be an imporvement in interest rantes in the future.
Chapman told Council the alternative is to wait for interest rate to get better before
going ahead with the bonds. Reents told Council that base construction costs will be
$75/square foot in 1981 which is 50 per cent over expected costs for the spring of 1980.
Reents said if the city shelves the project waiting for a better market, the project
will not be buildable. Diones told Council the way he planned on financing the bonds
would cost approximately $35 per month per unit.
Councilman Isaac moved to read Resolution ~9, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION ~9
Reso. 9, 1980 (Series of 1980)
Bond issuance A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
Water Plant HOUSING BONDS FOR WATER PLANT HOUSING PROJECT
Housing WHEREAS, The City of Aspen submitted the question of issuing $4,000,000
General Obligation Bonds to the electors of the City for the purpose of construct-
ing employee rental housing on the Water Plant property; and
WHEREAS, it is determined that it is necessary to issue said Bond in an
expeditious manner due to erractic and uncertain circumstances of money and
financial markets; and
WHEREAS, the City deems it necessary and advisable for the promotion of
the public health, welfare, safety, convenience and prosperity of the citizens
of Aspen that the City issue its bonds for the purpose providing funds for the
housing project; and
WHEREAS, the City deems it necessary, appropriate and advisable to authorize
the Finance Director and City Manager to arrange for the sale of such bonds with
final sale approval to be vested with the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO:
Section 1
The issuance of up to $4,000,000 General Obligation Housing Bonds is to be
commenced and completed as soon as legally possible. Section 2
The City Finance Director and City Manager are authorized to implement the
sale of the Bonds for the Water Plant Housing Project. Section 3
Kirchner, Moore and Company, Denver, Colorado, is hereby authorized to
continue their investment banking authorization of the bond sale. Their purchase
of the bonds is to be in cooperation with the Finance Director and City Manager.
The City Council will have final approval as to term, interest rate and other
bond details.
Section 4
The officials and employees of the City be, and hereby are, authorized to
cooperate with the underwriter and are further authorized to take such additional
steps as may be required and necessary in order to cause the City to issue the
Bonds.
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Resolution #9, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Van
Ness. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Michael, aye; Isaac, aye; Van Ness, aye; Parry,
aye; Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt, aye. Motion Carried.
ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 1980 - Emergency Alarm Systems
City Attorney Stock told Council he had met with PSI and their attorney, Lennie Oates,
Ord. 5, 1980 and is planning some modifications to the ordinance before second reading. Police Chief
~mergency Rob McClung told Countll the need for this ordinance is in terms of collection for
Alarm systems services rendered. The City presently has an ordinance on alarms which is poorly con,
structed; there is no clout for levying collection. McClung told Council the police
department is answering 40 to 50 alarms per month; none of these are valid alarms and are
caused by many things. McClung told Council the alarms are answered immediately as you
cannot predict what it is, and at least two officers are sent on an alarm call. Stock
told Council that PSI and Oates have presented some very thoughtful changes which he will Ii
incorporate in the ordinance. /~
Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #5, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Van
Ness. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~5
(Series of 1980)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
BY REPEALING AND REEANCTING CHAPTER 8 1/2 THERETO ENTITLED "EMERGENCY
ALARM SYSTEME" AND REQUIRING A PERMIT TO INSTALL, OPERATE OR MAINTAIN
THE SAME; REQUIRING THE LICENSING OF THOSE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING PROTECTIVE
SERVICES; AND, ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR FALSE ALARMS TO WHICH THE POLICE
RESPOND was read by the city clerk
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt ordinance 95, series of 1980, on first reading; seconded
by Councilman Van Ness. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Isaac,
aye; Van Ness, aye; Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~11, SERIES OF 1980 - Celia Marolt Annexation and Rezoning
Karen Smith, planning director, told Council this property is a triangle of land at the
southern end of the Opal Marolt property and across from the city's water plant property. Ord. 11, 1980
The parcel is 36,000 square feet in size. This annexation would round out the boundary Celia Marolt
of the city. The recommended zoning R-15A would be compatible with the zoning of the Opal Ann~ation
Marolt property. Both the planning office and P & Z recommended that the annexation
would not be of benefit to the city if the result were two single family lots; however, it
would be beneficial if it resulted in a duplex with one-half deed restricted. The P & Z
did not recommend a limitation in FAR because the only additional density would b~ half
a duplex deed restricted.
Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance ~11, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~11
(Series of 1980)
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING A TRACT OF LAND KNOWN AS THE CELIA MAROLT PROPERTY
LOCATED IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH ANNEXATION IS ACCOMPLISHED PHRSUANT
TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION ACT was read by the city
clerk
Lennie Oates, representing the applicant, indicated they were happy with the R-15A zoning;
however, they object to deed restriction. Oates stated the city has plenty of land use
restrictions, and they disagree with the condition of deed restriction or prohibiting a
lot split to two single family home sites. Oates stated the ~equest for annexation was
precipitated by an earlier administration of the city. Ms. Smith told Council the reason
she recommended that zoning is that in the county tye property is currently zoned AF-2 ~
and AF-1, which is 2 and 10 minimum acre sites. This is a non-conforming lot in the
county and could not have any additional density. The planning office would be willing
to annex and rezone if one half of a duplex is deed restricted. Councilmembers Behrendt
and Isaac agreed with planning as otherwise there is no benefit to the city.
Councilwoman Michael moved to adopt Ordinance 911, Series of 1980, on first r~ading;
seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Van Ness, aye; Parry, aye;
ORDINANCE ~12, SERIES OF 1980 - Little Annie Ski Area Rezoning
Joe Wells, planning office, reminded Council they had recently had a work session on this
and he will present the conceptual subidivision and PUD at the second reading. Ord. 12, 1980
Little Annie
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance 912, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Rezoning
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #12
(Series of 1980)
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBITS "A" AND "B" ATTACHED HERETO FOR THE PURPOSE OF AND
CONDITIONED UPON THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SKI AREA WITH A BASE LIST FACILITY
ON THE SITE REZONED was read by the city jerk
Councilwoman Michael moved to adopt Ordinance #12, Series of 1980, on first reading;
seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Isaac, aye; Michael, aye;
Parry, aye; Van Ness, aye; Mayor Pro Tem Behrendt, aye~ Motion carried
RESOLUTION 7, 8, SERIES OF 1980 - Bond Inducement Resolutions
City Attorney Stock told Council the city's bond attorneys have told the staff if the
city adopts inducement resolution, the Ullman bill is likely to be amended to take into Resos. 7,8,9
consideration these resolutions. This is a statement by Council that they intend to issue Bonds Inducement
bonds and authoriZe the underwriters to go forward. Resolution #7 is to Kirchner, Moore for employee
for $15,000,000 the funds to be used by the city in contracting with local lending housing
institutions for the purposes of issuing low interest home mortgages. City Manager
Chapman told Council if they take action like this prior to adoption of final legislation
there is a chance they may be able to do some mortgage revenue bond activity. Resolution
~8 is for $10,000,000 to Boettcher for employee housing on the Opal Marolt property.
Council suggested having a third resolution to Dain & Bosworth for the $15,000,000 pool
since they once expressed interest in dealing with the city.
Councilman Parry moved to read Resolutions ~7, 8, and 10, Series of 1980; seconded by
Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
~egu£ar Meeting Aspen City Council March 10, 1980
RESOLUTION NO.S 7,8,&10 (Series of 1980)
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FINANCING OF CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL
HOUSING FACILITIES FOR FAMILIES OR PERSONS OR LOW AND MIDDLE
INCOME IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, INCLUDING THE ISSUANCE OF
ITS REVENUE BONDS
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen, Colorado (the "City"), is
authorized by the County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond
Act, constituting Title 29, Article 3 of the Colorado Revised
Statutes 1973, as amended (the "Act"), to issue its revenue bonds
to finance in whole or in part the cost of the acquisition of
residential housing facilities for families or persons who lack
financial ability, as determined by the City, to induce private
enterprise to build such facilities and which are intended for use
as the sole place of residence by the owners or intended occupants
("Residential Facilities"); and
WHEREAS, it is deemed necessary and advisable for the promo-
tion of the public health, welfare, safety, convenience and
prosperity of the citizens of the City that the City issue its
revenue bonds for the purpose of financing the costs of acquisi-
tion of Residential Facilities by purchasing from approved mort-
gage lending institutions new mortgage loans for Residential
Facilities originated by such mortgage lending institutions; and
WHEREAS, the City deems it necessary and advisable to appoint
a managing underwriter to assist the City in issuing its revenue
bonds for such purposes and to authorize the taking of such fur-
ther steps by its officials and employees as may from time to time
be required and necesary.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
The issuance of revenue bonds by the City to finance the
making of mortgage loans by approved mortgage lending institutions
to low- and middle-income families or persons for Residential
Facilities will serve the purposes of the Act by providing more
adequate residential housing facilities for low- and middle-income
families or persons (as defined in the Act), thereby promoting the
public health, welfare, safety, convenience and prosperity of the
people of the City. Section 2
There is hereby authorized to be issued and this City Council
hereby determines to issue and sell its revenue bonds in an aggre-
gate principal amount not to exceed $15-$10-$15 million (the
"Bonds"), the proceeds of which will be used to purchase mortgage
loans from approved mortgage lending institutions for Residential
Facilities and provide funds for mortgage and debt service
reserves and cost of issuance expenses related thereto. Bonds so
issued by the City shall be special limited obligations of the
City, payable solely out of the payments derived from mortgage
loan repayments and the reserves and income thereon and shall not
constitute, nor give rise to, a pecuniary Liability of the City of
a charge against its general credit or taxing powers. Section 3
Kirchner, Moore/Boettcher & Company/Dain,Bosworth Denver,
Colorado, be and hereby is appointed managing underwriter for the
issuance and sale of the Bonds. The underwriter shall employ such
experts and consultants as they deem necessary and shall take such
steps as may be required in issuing the Bonds in accordance with
and subject to Section 2 herein. All expenses are to be paid from
the proceeds of the Bonds. Section 4
The officials and employees of the City be, and hereby are,
authorized to cooperate with the underwriter and are further
authorized to take such additional steps as may be required and
necessary in order to cause the City to issue the Bonds in accord-
ance with and subject to Section 2 herein.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Resolutions 7, 8, and 10, Series of 1980; seconded by
Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilwoman Michael moved to adjourn at 10:00 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Parry. All
in favor, motion carried.
, City Clerk