Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19780911 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 11, 1978 Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. with Commissioners Child, Kinsley, and Edwards, Councilmembers Behrendt, Isaac, and Parry. Also present City Manager Mahoney County Manager Ochs and City Attorney Stock. 1. Resolution Amending Joint Communications Center Agreement. Mayor Standley noted this resolution makes the Communications Board consistent with the state guidelines so that Amending Joint the Communications Center can continue to receive state funding. There are still 3 City C~lL~nications and 3 County officials. George Ochs said this expands the Board so that 4 of the 6 are Agre~ent police officers; more than 50 per cent of the Board is law enforcement. Commissioner Child moved to approve the resolution; seconded by Commissioner Edwards. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Resolution; seconded by Councilman Parry. Mayor Sta~dley read the Resolution in title. All in favor, motion carried. 2. Sales Tax Redistribution Plan for Pitkin County. Ochs told the Boards three plans were submitted; one of the plans was unacceptable as it did damage to Aspen in terms of Sales Tax revenues. The Schuss plan works equally against the County in that the County was Redistribution receiving the brunt of the loss. The bottom line is the basic premise that in Snowmass for Pitkin ~.' Village and Basalt there is county sales tax collected and transferred to the City of · County Aspen. Presently of the 53 per cent of the county-wide 2 cents, which now goes to Aspen, 2/3 is collected within Aspen; 12.7 in Snowmass and 20.9 in Pitkin County, including Basalt. The proposal, plan 3, will take out the portion of sales tax which is collected in Snow- mass Village and send 50 per cent of the 53 per cent or $94,000 to Snowmass Village in 1979. In 1980 this will convert to 100 per cent. (Councilman Van Ness came into the meeting). The County has prepared a resolution for the ballot this fall stating the above proposal. Ochs noted this remains a county-wide sales tax. 53 per cent of the sa~$ tax collected within the unincorporated area would still go to the City of Aspen; 3/4 of the sales tax is collected between the Airport Business Center and town. Ochs told the Boards the County is not in support of the Schuss plan, which is 75 per cent rebate back to the cities and 25 per cent retained by the County. This is a drastic loss of revenue to the County and provides the incentive for towns to annex. As towns grow, the County's portion remains very small. Jack Schuss, Mayor of Snowraass Village, pointed out that as the county becomes incorpor- ated, these areas are picking up expenses the County previously picked up. Schuss stated he did not see anything inequitable in that. Schuss said this plan 3 is not clean and arbitrarily picks 69 per cent of the revenues to Aspen and 53 to Snowmass~ Schuss said using a County study of 1976, $394,527 of direct costs to the County were dropped as a result of the ihco~oration of snowmass. Many direct ! costs are now being done by Snowmass for Snowmass, thus reducing the County's burden. Ochs pointed out the activities mentioned by Schuss that the County provides are activities that are generated by property tax and provided for out of the general fund. The county-wide sales tax resolution calls for certain expenditures; it is committed to open space, airport, recreation and trails. Schuss reiterated that the County looses certain direct and overhead costs by Snowmass coming into existence. Stafford said the study for costs was done by allocating popula- tion and costs to certain areas. Built into those costs are a number of benefits Snowmass receives from county-wide services. Ochs asked why Snowmass objected to plan 3, under which the City of Aspen would get 53 per cent of everything generated within Aspen and theuni~corporated parts of Pitkin County. Three-fourths of the tax is generated between the Airport and Aspen and this is really the service area of Aspen. The City of Aspen provides bus and water service. Finance Director Lois Butterbaugh stated that on plan #3, the cost to the county is zero; they share no part of the cost going to Snowmass. The City of Aspen shares the whole burden, and should Basalt come in, the City would have the burden. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out under the Schuss plan, incorporated municipalities are to receive 75 per cent of the 2 cent county sales tax generated within their boundaries; the County would have a loss of $199,634 and the City $89,065. Ms. Butterbaugh figured using a 70 per cent ratio, and the City would lose $187,082 and the County $82,370. The staff used a figure of 72.5 per cent and then the City and County would equally share the losses. Ms. Butterbaugh shared the County's concern that future erosion in revenue is a threat to the County as well as the City. Ms. Butterbaugh did not agree with the statement that because certain costs are! paid out of County mill levies in the County general fund, that there is no substitution between that and sales tax money. aspen ~lty councl± September 11, 1978 Mayor Schuss said he felt the charts were not showing the true impacts of this. A city's Sales Tax budget could go from $1,000,000 to $1,160,000 and there is no negative decline, as these cont'd charts imply. Ms. Butterbaugh agreed, stating these figures are calculated on a 14.5 per cent increase in the County revenues and 15.5 per cent within the City. Compared to 1978, the City will have additional revenues; but the inflation level is close to 10 per cent. City Manager Mahoney said he was leaning towards plan #3 and that the present method is totally unfair, taxation without representation. Mahoney said there is no way the Citycan adjust their budget $200,000 during budget months. Mahoney's modification of plan ~3 would be a phasing plan so the City is not hit with 100 per cent loss the first year, and then have the County participate in funding the City's recreation plan. Mayor Standtey pointed out this has to be negotiated every year during budqet time. Mayor Standley stated he felt some elements of the Schuss plan are absolutely and totally equitable. At 72.5 per cent split, the City and County are splitting equally and takes care of Snowmass's problem. Stafford responded the County finds almost any percentage distribution unacceptable because of erosion through potential annexations and incorporation. The way the plan ~s structured, the County would lose $224,000; and this money is earmarked to County responsibilities, which will remain their responsibilities. The sales tax money is earmarked to County dump. airport, recreation/parks program, open space and advertising. The County's ability to generate new revenues to offset a loss remain limited. The Basalt problem remains unsolved with the Schuss plan. Basalt needs to have additional revenues from their incorporated section in Pitkin County. Stafford stated the County would be g~v~ng up a greater percent- age of its sales tax to the municipalities and thereby subsidizing them more. Each time a new area is incorporated or annexed, the County would loose a greater per cent of its sales tax base. The Schuss plan would have a continued erosion of the County tax base. Stafford stated using the per capita figures shows an inequity by using county-wide sales tax money, which is supposed to have a county-wide benefit, and funneling it into the municipalities. Stafford had recommended that any kind of a percentage allocation would be unfair. The plan ~3 was based on the historical 47/53 split, looked at the services, and felt this was the most fair. Ms. Butterbaugh suggested, to solve Basalt's problem, the Schuss plan could be written for "municipalities" rather than specific places. (Councilman Wishart came into the meeting) Mayor Schuss pointed out as far as erosion of the County tax base, the newly incorporated areas are not a drain because they pick up services. (Councilwoman Johnston came into the meeting). City Attorney Stock said the City has a fear under plan ~3 of erosion of amount of tax money given to the City because of incorporation; the County has the same fear under the Schuss plan. Stock suggested either proposal could be drafted and refer to the communities specifically. Councilman Isaac pointed out if the County territory is made smaller, their costs and services diminish. Ochs stated as towns grow, the County is impacted just as the towns are. The services funded by property taxes still continue, such as roads. Things designated by sales tax, like open space, the County will still purchase open space, will still operate the airport. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out another problem with plan 3 is that the City of Aspen would be open to challenge on why they are getting 69 per cent of the tax. This would be a sore spot forever with any municipality within the County. Ms. Butterbaugh aske~ Ochs if the County expenditures are broken out as sales tax versus the property tax in the general fund. Councilman Parry pointed out if no funds were given to Snowmass, the County has to continue to support Snowmass to some degree. The City does not understand why they have to pay Snowmass. The City would be paying $204,000 and the County would be paying nothing. Councilman Isaac brought up annexation of the entire metro ~rea with urban impact; they have City services and water and bus. Mayor Standley pointed out that everyone is going into budgeting; this is an election year; there is not time to annex. No one disagrees Snowmass is entitled to some resolution of their problem. Mayor Standley said with the County funding some City programs, this becomes a negotiated item every year; Councils change, Commissioners change, priorities change. That~ is not a clean system; The Schuss plan is a clean system. Plan ~3 would automatically build in an adversary position between all the governments in the County. Ochs stated with the Schuss plan, the County would gravitate towards having a very small portlon of their own tax; they are trying to defend one of their few sources of income. CouDcil and the Commissioners scheduled a special meeting for the next night as the ballot question had to be decided by tomorrow. Peter Craven, representing the Town of Basalt, told the Boards that Basalt supports the Schuss plan. Craven pointed out any decision made of the sales tax distribution will have ramifications on long term fiscal planning for the town of Basalt. Mayor Standley directed the staff to work on a program to be presented tomorrow night at the special meeting. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Councilman Isaac moved to approve the minutes of the August 28, 1978, meeting; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Councilman Isaac asked who Richard and Oscar Haberman were. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council they had worked on the Hunter Creek dam and the employee housing at the water plant. They had contracted with Marky to do services. ~ Councilman Isaac moved to approve the accounts payable for August; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. CITIZENS PARTICIPATION Mayor Standley announced that comments relative to the rezoning of Lots 12 and 13, West Aspen Subdivision, would be heard at the public hearing October 9, 1978. Aspen C~e 1. Raymond Auger, Pitkin County Parks Association, wanted to address a ballot question property relating to these lots being traded for Aspen One property. Mayor Standley said there trade would be a ballot resolution for Council to consider at the September 25 meeting. Comments on this would be heard at that meeting. 2. Connie Harvey, Aspen Wilderness Workshop, asked Council for their endorsement of the Roadless Area RARE II, Roadless Area Review and Evaluation plan. The AWW was asked for input from by Review and Forest Service by October 1. Ms. Harvey told the Council they had had 30 people out in Evaluation the field looking into the areas, and are recommending certain areas remain wilderness. Ms. Harvey presented a map with the areas recommended for wilderness and roadless. The plan will not close any roads to Lincoln Creek or Taylor pass. Dottle Fox said the pro- posal will let ranchers and farmers get to their headgates with mechanized vehicles. Mayor Standley scheduled this for September 25 to give Council a chance to look at the proposal. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Isaac asked how the housing study was progressing. Karen Smith said the Housing study planning office is trying to schedule this for the September 25 meeting. At that time progress they will bring a draft of the condominiumization ordinance to replaCe ordinance #53. 2. Councilman Isaac said he felt strongly about annexation and would like to see the Aspen metro area become part of the City. These people have City services but are not allowed Annexation of to vote. Councilman Isaac said he would like to see it done within the next year. metro area Mayor Standley suggested putting this on the next agenda as Council needs an up-date on the background information, the cost of annexation. Street signs 3. Mayor Standley gave City Manager Mahoney a letter to the editor listing all the places missing where street signs are missing. 4. Mayor Standtey submitted a letter from Mabel MacDonald saying she was not allowed to use the drive-up window on her bicycle. 5. A letter from the University of Colorado was submitted commending Ted Armstrong on the internship program he provided for a graduate student. CLOUDSEEDING Councilman Behrendt told Council the Water Conservation District 'has put together a cloud- seeding program for $137,000, which is a bit of an overkill. Councilman Behrendt pointed Request for out if this is a good snow year, the Aspen area will not need cloudseeding. If it is a donation to bad year, Councilman Behrendt said he Would like to have the equipment in position. The cloudseeding Chamber has voted $1,000; Councilman Behrendt is asking the City to donate $1,000. This ilwo~l~3t~ strictly an insurance policy, and the program would only be from November to January program · Councilman Van Ness stated he had voted for this previously with the assumption it would be shut off it not needed. The Council got no report back on the program and has no con- trol Whatsoever. Councilman Behrendt moved to spend $1,000 on this year's cloudseeding program to set up the equipment in preparation for cloudseeding; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilwoman Johnston said she had problems with the credibility of the program; it was supposed to be monitored. Tom Blake, Snowmass Resort Association, told Council he was on the committee and did review the program. The report on cloudseeding is still in Fort Collins. Councilman Isaac agreed the success of the program is somewhat unknown and said he could not agree to $1,000. Councilman Behrendt withdrew his motion; Councilman Parry withdrew his second. APPLICATION FOR A 3.2 BEER LICENSE - Clark's Market Application Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. The city clerk reported the posting, publication for 3.2 beer and file were in order. Ron Austin, representing Clarks' Market, told Council this appli- Clark's cation is for a 3.2 retail beer license for J. Thomas Clark ~nc. located in the Trueman Market Commercial center at 300 Puppy Smith Road. Austin stated Clark's Market was approved as part of the development of the commercial center. This is an application for a typical i~ grocery application with a cooler for beer. Thomas Clark and his wife are the shareholders of the corporation; neither have an arrest record. Weste~hGrocers Wholesale Company has guaranteed the loans for Clarks' Market, and is a sub-lease situation. Austin presented petitions with 550 signatures in support of this application. There are ~ only two other 3.2 beer outlets, which are the other two markets in the community. Neither of the other two outlets are in the near vicinity of this market. Austin stated there is a need for Clark's Market to have a 3.2 beer license in order to compete with the other markets. Council had made the determination another market is necessary to meet the community's needs. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the beer area would be the normal per- centage of space. Clark answered if was 12 feet with 5 shelves, very average size. Mayor Standley asked for opponents. There were none. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. ~ Councilman Behrendt moved having found the needs of the neighborhood have not been met and the desires of the inhabitants of the community would include the issuance of this license, and finding the applicants character is satisfactory, the Council approve the issuance of a 3.2 retail beer license; Seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. Reqular Meeting Aspen City Council Sept~_e~_3~l, 1978 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN INTERPRETATION - 925 Durant Project There was submitted a memorandum from City Attorney Stock and a letter from Ashley !GMP Interpre- Anderson requesting clarification and perhaps a change in size if the employee units at itation - 925 925 Durant Project. Anderson said his interpretation of the section was it only applies ~Dursnt to things listed in the residential section; size of units is not listed. Anderson pointed out these are all employee units; they want to enlarge the units and put more people in them. Mayor Standley asked what the change in configuration was. Anderson said these would go from 425 square feet to 1000 square feet studios. Councilman Behrendt asked why this was not in the original proposal ~o compete with the other proposals. Anderson reiterated the size of a unit was not listed as a criteria; when the project was planned they did not give a lot of thought to the size of the unit because they did not think they would be locked in. Councilwoman Johnston said the Council had to make the determination whether this falls under Sec. 24-10.4(a), and she feels this is a very definite modification of the applica- tion. Councilman Isaac agreed he understood the applications were binding. Councilman Van Ness pointed out there were no points assigned to size; Council would not have approve~ or disapproved the application is the units were smaller or larger. City Attorney Stock said he felt Council was trying to get at two items in that section; (1) to allow for ease in review, that it is impossible for the planning office to review applications that change daily, and (2) to protect the applicants when they make application. Housing Director Mark Danielsen told Council the change in the proposal in terms of size is one that substantially impact employees and the amount of employees that could be housed. If this application is approved for larger size units, sometime in the future an application could be changed to smaller units. Larry Yaw said he felt the benefits do accrue to overall employee housing. This request has come from people specifically hous- ing their own employees, in the restaurant and hotel market. This request is within the FARs and zoning laws. Mayor Standley pointed out there is not yet a finite time for these units to be under PMH; if this is as long as perpetuity, would the owner agree to the length of time of the agreement. Anderson answered his client would be willing to put the restriction on as long as everybody else does. Stock said he would recommend the restriction be the life of the applicant plus 21 years. Councilman Isaac said he felt the issue was whether an applicant can change his application as anytime. Councilman Isaac stated it is not fair to the other applicants who have been turned down; this would set a bad precedent. Councilman Behrendt said he was concerned this would be doubling the density. Councilwoman Johnston asked if these would be condo- miniumized; Anderson answered these are totally rentals. Councilman Van Ness said one question the Council had to answer is whether this is a beneficial change towards Council's stated objectives. Perhaps a solution would be if anyone wanted to change their applica- ~ tion, they had to come to Council for a determination on whether the change is beneficial or detrimental. Councilman Parry agreed, and stated if they had come in originally with ~_~ larger units, they would have scored higher. This is a chance to get more employee hous- ing. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out Council does not know what kind of doors they are opening by allowing this to go through. Karen Smith noted the GMP does not have any criteria in it affecting the design; if there were, this application could not go through because it would change the design parameters. Ms. Smith said she looked at this application as to whether it would change any of the points. The only criteria possibly affected would be water, sewer service and parking. Points on open space or quality of design might have changed, but these were not on the list of points~ Councilman Parry pointed out everyone on Council has been committed to providing employee units; if one or two bedroom units were allowed, this would be up-grad- ing employee housing. Mayor Standley said he was totally in favor of the concept, but did not see an increase employee density by crea~ng 1,000 square foot studioes. Two-bedroom units would violate the zoning laws. Stock told Council under current density, there could be two people in 425 square feet, and under 1,000 square feet, there could be four individuals. Stock suggested there ought to be a price for low income housing based on square feet, not the number of people inside. Councilwoman Johnston moved to deny the request to amend the application by Hans Cantrup; seconded by Councilman Isaac. Councilmembers Behrendt, Johnston, Isaac and Mayor Standley in favor, Councilmembers Wishart, Parry and Van Ness against. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #34, SERIES OF 1978 - Annexing and Rezoning Aspen Club property Ord. 34, 1978 Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #34, Series of 1978; seconded by Councilwoman Annexing and Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. RezoningAspen Club ORDINANCE #34 (Series of 1978) AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; AND FOR THE ZONING OF SAID TERRITORY was read by the city clerk Planner Karen Smith showed Council where this property is located, across Ute Avenue from the current recreation building of the Aspen Club. Ms. Smith stated in terms of zoning, this will go out of~ AF-1 in the County and be RR with a PUD in the City. Any development has to go through a PUD process before Council. Density in RR is less than in AF-1. There are 3.7 acres in the parcel. Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance 934, Series of 1978, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Isaac. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Van Ness, aye; Isaac, aye; Parry, aye; Wishart, aye; Johnston, nay; Behrendt, nay; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. ~egu±ar Meeting Aspen City Council September 11, 1978 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION Goldsmith Mayor Standley told Council this application was substantially through the process before Council imposed the moratorium. Richard Grice, planning office, told Council both the Subdivision engineering department and housing director recommended approval. Danielsen recommended Exemption - Goldsmith approval subject to the six month minimum lease require. P & Z agreed and recommended approval. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the Goldsmith subdivision exemption with a condition of a six month minimum lease and a deed restriction; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - A & L Subdivision Mayor Standley stated this parcel is 30,000 square feet, zoned R-15. Grice explained that Ex~nption - Independence Subdivision is on the east side of the Roaring Fork river, off East Hopkins. A & L Mahoney asked if the ditch problem had been resolved. Ms. Smith stated that was on another zoning application. Councilman Isaac asked if this applicant was responsible for ripping up the bike path. Ms. Smith stated there may be problems with the trails, but they do not know if it is this particular applicant. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption for A & L with a six month minimum lease and deed restriction for this and approval contingent upon Mahoney and the engineering department that the trail and ditch are fixed; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION 430 West Hopkins Mayor Standley told Council this is part of the Scott's property onFourt~ and Hopkins, Subdivision and is recommended for approval with the six month minimum lease restriction. Exemption 430 W. Hopkinsll Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption for 430 West Hopkins with a six month minimum lease and deed restriction to that; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM CONTRACT APPROVAL TDP Contract Mayor Standley reminded Council they had reviewed this and agreed upon P,B,D,&Q to do the overall transportation program funded by UMTA. The City and County will each fund $3,000. This will be done by September 18 to provide information to the public for the mall expan- sion election. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the contract; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilman Van Ness said this seemed to be a parking study in the off-season. Curt Stewart, transportation planner, told Council they are counting right now with respect to how long people park, where they go, and how far they will walk. These studies have been done for a number of years, and will be up-dated again an February. The consultant is taking all the studies that have been done prior to now, looking into costs of construction of a parking facility as Rubey park, and different policies Council could take to alleviate parking problems. Councilwoman Johnston said she felt the study was limited to looking into a garage construction only at Rubey Park. This study should look at garages mn other locations. Stewart stated the intention of the study is not to limit the scope to Rubey park. Stewart said he would amend the contract so that it does not limit it to Rubey park. Councilman Isaac amended his motion to amend the contract so as not to limit it to Rubey Park; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. VOLUME/FLOOR AREA RATIO CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL Volt, ne/FAR Joe Wells, planning officel, told Council the problem with size of structures in the resi- dential areas results from the fact the only limitations on sites are established by set- proposal backs and heighth limitations. The planning office is proposing some form of volume ratio to deal with the impact on the site. If Council wishes to deal with overall square foot- age, that would have to be in the form of a FAR to run with the volume ratio and would establish the limit of construction. The volume ratio proposed was arrived at by using the FAR figures recommended for one and a half years, multiplying the FAR times the size of the lot times an average height of 18 feet. The zone allows 25 foot maximum heicht. Wells stated the volume ratio seems equitable as it establishes a maximum building impact on the site and allows developer to decide whether to utilize square footage or take advantage of two-story spaces. Wells told Council the volume ratio was arrived at by calculating, generally 5.4:1 in R-6; 2.9:1 in R-15, single; 3.6:1 R-15, duplex; and 2.34:1 in R-30. The planning office would still encourage establishment of a FAR to encourage garages and basement construction, not necessarily living space. Wells said Council could establish an FAR which would fluctuate based on square footage of the lot, which would adopted in Snowmass. The concern about the flat roof building, the volume ratio does not penalize a flat roof over a peaked roof. Administering this proposal is significant; Wells suggested ~his could be dealt with by requesting an isometric drawing. Councilman Behrendt said this was less rigorous than he had hoped, and suggested including basements and not be concerned with with they are used for. Wells said the 25 per cent requirement encourages bringing part of the basement up to the first level and causes a more significant visual impact. If the FAR and volume proposal were hand-in-hand, the problem would not arise. Wells said he felt the volume ratio proposed was more liberal than the FAR. Councilman Behrendt said he felt the proposal would encourage one more complete floor with partial windows. Basements needs to be included as living space and be included in the total package. Wells said by only allowing basement space that is 25 per cent above grade, windows would not be extensive enough to make it adequate living space. Wells told Council he would like to find a way to deal with this question and still encourage basements. Jeff Sachs, representing Hildur Anderson who will be developing property and presenting it to GMP, told Council the Anderson lot is a sloping lot. There must b~ a provision in a ratio proposal for a sloping lot. Structures to be built into the slope will have a smaller footprint and leave more open space. This structure will not impede anyone's view, and is lower than anything around it. Sachs suggested modifying the proposal for the few sloping lots around the City can be developed sensibly with smaller footprints and more open space, and not impede the view. Wells said that space that is clearly living space should be included in the FAR. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the best way to control ~ass would be to use a volume and FAR ratio. Wells said it difficult to decide what is a reasonable volume ratio; their formula was arrived at with experience of too-large structures. Wells said he would feel more comfortable with both ratios. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like to see a draft of an ordinance drawn up combining the two, volume ratio and FAR. Councilman Behrendt asked the staff to draw up the ordinances, changing only the living areas in basements and leaving out garages, and to work out additional height guidelines based on slope; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Councilman Van Ness said he would like to have the benefit of P & Z's comments on this problem. Wells stated they felt volume ratio was inappropriate and urged Council to establish an historic overlay district. Councilwoman Johnston suggested the staff draw up the ordinance and take it to P & Z; something specific for them to comment on. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #31, SERIES OF 1978 - Amending Notice Provisions in Sec. 5-45 Ord. 31,1978 Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed Amending Animal the public hearing. ~Notice provisions Councilwoman Johnston moved to read Ordinance ~31, Series of 1978; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~31 Series of 1978) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-45 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE DELETING THE PROVISION WHICH REQUIRES THE MAILING OF A NOTICE OF IMPOUNDMENT TO THE OWNER OF A~Y LICENSED DOG was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Johnston moved to adopt Ordinance ~31, Series of 1978, on second reading; ~-~ seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Toll call vote; Councilmembers Van Ness, aye; Isaac, aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. ORDINANCE ~32, SERIES OF 1978 - Creating a Temporary Moratorium Qrd. 32,1978 Mayor ~tandley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed Creating a the public hearing. Temporary Moratorium Councilman Behrendt moved to read Ordinance #32, Series of 1978; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~32 (Series of 1978) AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY AND THE APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION EXCEPTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDOMINIUMI- ZATION was read by the city clerk Councilwoman Johnston moved to adopt Ordinance ~32, Series of 1978, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Isaac, aye; Parry, nay; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; Van Ness, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. CITY MANAGER 1. Budget Work Sessions. City Manager Mahoney told Council he and Ms. Butterbaugh would Budget work have the budget ready to go over Monday, September 18. Council will look at the total sessions budget and discuss it. At the 18th meeting, they can then set up the work sessions with the departments they want and do the Council contribution and joint contribution sessions. Council scheduled the work session for Monday, September 18, at 5:00 p.m. 2. Golf Course Lots - Rezoning. Mahoney told Council he Needed direction from them on the procedures for this trade. Mahoney had met with the owners of Aspen One this morning, Rezoning Golf and he feels confident a bargain will be struck within a week. This will be a land trade course lots plus an undetermined amount of money. The mechanics for determining this amount will be an appraisal and appraiser to act an as arbitrator. The staff will then be in a place where Stock can draw up a contract. Mahoney said he wanted to know whether Council wants to continue to to place to take this to the people. Stock told Council he had drafted a sample resolution to place this ouestion on the ballot. To be fair to the voters, the City has to advise of the entire concept of the deal. The staff is working toward getting a signed option purchase contingent upon the voter's and Council's approval. The resolution will be brought up September 25, and Council can fill in the amount of money at that time. 2471 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 11, 1978 Stock pointed out the question, as drafted, states the City is giving 30,000 square feet for 59,000 feet plus money. Aspen One actually has 62,000 plus square feet under deed. Part of this land is underneath water, and in the flood plain. Only 59,000 square feet can be used to build upon. Mayor Standley noted in all the discussion with Aspen One, the City has told them they are not interested in paying for land under water, and a' land- fill project. Mahoney stated what is relevant is building sites, and that should be the question. Councilman Behrendt stated the City has dawdled over this question, and he is guessing the value of the property has gone up during the negotiating period. Councilman Behrendt asked if the City should proceed with condemnation proceedings. Mahoney said Aspen One is planning to develop this, if the land deal does not go through. Councilman Behrendt said he felt the public wants the City to get Aspen One; the debatable question is whether to trade the lots for Aspen'One. Councilwoman Johnston said she felt the City should just go ahead and acquire Aspen One. Councilman Parry pointed out there is opposition to the particular lots being used for the trade; the City has other alterna- tives that were not explored. There are lots on the other side of the golf course and by the skating rink. Councilman Wishart stated the City has heard from people who are directly affected by the trade. The majority of people in town, considering the general benefit of Aspen One to the whole town, do not oppose the trading of the lots. Council- woman Johnston suggested whatever the dollar amount is could be used as a downpayment for outright acquisition of Aspen One. Councilwoman Johnston said she felt this is strange ground because these lots were purchased for open space. Councilwoman Johnston stated to her mind this could not be traded without a vote. Stock told Council the City does have the right to trade this without a vote. The Courts would uphold this position. As to creating a pattern of jeopardizing the other lots, the P & Z specifically made the condition on rezoning of lots 12 and 13, the.remaining lots are part of and integral to the golf course, and the City should dedicate them in perpetuity to that use. Jeff Sachs told Council they should have the appraiser check on the use of lots 12 and 13, whether they can be used as single family or duplex. Stock told Council at the time of the Second and Third filing of West Aspen Subdivision, there were covenants against the property, one of which was the use as single family. Since that time, more than 50 per cent of the lots are now duplexes, and the home owners association has not challenged this. Mahoney said the City is only recommending single family. ORDINANCE ~33, SERIES OF 1978 - Rezoning Lots 12 and 13, West Aspen Subdivision' Ord. 33, 1978 Councilman Van Ness moved to read Ordinance ~33, Series of 1978; seconded b~ Councilm~n Rezoning lots Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried. 12 and 13, West Aspen ORDINANCE #33 subdivision (Series of 1978) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, SECTION 24-2.2 BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF LOTS 12 AND 13, WEST ASPEN SUBDIVISION FILING #2, FROM P-PARK TO R-15 was read by the city clerk Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance ~33, Series of 1978, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Johnston, nay; Behrendt, nay; Van Ness, aye; Isaac, aye; Parry, nay; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. Councilwoman Johnston stated she was strongly in favor of taking this issue to the voters. Councilman Behrendt said he would like to see two questions offered, obtain the land by trade or by taxation. Stock told Council there could be a second question, authorizing the City to issue G.O. bonds for the purchase of the property. This would allow people to vote for or against the first proposition, to vote for or against the last one. They do have the opportunity they could vote down both of them. If both were passed, Council would have to accept the one passed by the greater vote. Councilman Isaac moved to have City Attorney Stock draft a resolution for the September 25 meeting putting the other options of a general obligation bond to buy the Aspen One property on the ballot; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Behrendt moved to adjourn at 7:30 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. Kathry~S. Koch, City Clerk