HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19760322 Kathryn~. Hauter, City Clerk
Regular Meetin~ .... Aspen ~ Council March 22, 1976
County Commissioner Edwards called the joint meeting together at 5:17 p.m.
UMTA UPDATE
George Ochs told the Commissioners and Council that he had received word from Washington
that the application for the planning grant was in the final stage of review. The three
UMTA report areas Ochs had received proposals for consulting work are auto disincentive, technical
support, and project management. Ochs is assembling review teams to check out the
adequacy of their proposals. The next step will be to go to the Conm/issioners for the
selection of the firms to do the work.
Ochs sai~ that Richard Procense of the State Highway Department had indicated his interest
in this study grant. Ochs said he intended to keep him informed and to invite his parti-
cipation.
Ochs reminded the Commissioners and Council that the funding portion and alternative
modes areas have already been selected. UMTA had mentioned that the light rail refinement
study might be part of the alternative mode study. Ochs said these would all be third
party contracts, and he would recommend that no work be started until all five consultants
had been selected and were ready to work.
Commissioners Edwards asked when the County might get the go ahead from U~T~. Ochs
answered two months for the application to get an okay, select the consulting teams, and
a final run through UMTA.
TRAILS CONSTRU~TI0~~ PROGRAM
John Stanford, City/County planning office, identified six trails in the construction
~ Trails program for 1976; four of these trails are within the City. Stanford illustrated these
Construction proposed trails on a map; (1) Melton ranch to the Conoco station at Snowmass, (2) Rio
Grande site to Silver King through the Holy Cross and Williams property, (3) Rio Grande
site to Herron park, (4) Rio Grande over to Aspen street, this is anticipation of the
development of a grocery store on the Trueman property, (5) Castle Creek bridge north to
the Rio Grande t~ail along the Roaring Fork river and through the Institute property,
(6]Maroon Creek bridge to the Airport.
Mayor Standley suggested running a trail along Mill street which is a ~high vehicles and
pedestrian area. Shellman said if they pulled the trail away from Mill street, people
Mill st. would still walk along the street. Kinsley agreed and stated the trail or path has to
sidewalk be convenient or people will not use it. Councilwoman Johnston asked about the joint
agreement between the City and County regarding trails and parks. Commissioner Edwards
said this should be resolved before the City and County go any farther. Edwards stated
that the Pitkin County Parks Association wanted to have some input in this process. The
Trails Caucus would also like to have some input. There has been a lot of interest in a
trail along Cemetery Lane.
Edwards said the County had not developed a program about plowing trails, but if the
County develops a high density network, it would be appropriate to plow these trails rathe~
than leave them for skiing. Edwards pointed out that to develop some of these trails, the
County would have to go through condemnation process. Up until now, the trails have been
constructed in a piecemeal fashion. Edwards said the planning office should prepare a
package to be circulated among the City Council and to be presented to the Trails Caucus.
A-95 REVIEW - HEALTH SYSTEMS AGENCY
Commissioner Shellman explained this program has been going on in COG for over a year.
Health COG will become the agency to fund monies under the National Health Planning Act. Shellma~
systems said nobody knows much about the program. Shellman said the problem with this is one can
agency COG never find the agencies when there ~s a consumer complaint. Shellman said it was his
feeling it would be appropriate to give an affirmative comment and re-express the above
reservation. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that there would be consumers on the board
as well as professionals. Council and Commissioners all felt that they would like more
information on this program.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to check the box that requests more information and to set up
a conference with the application; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston.
Mayor Standley pointed out there was a memorandum from COG saying that they do not like
this ~rant; their staff recommendation ~s for negative comment on this.
Councilman Behrendt made a substitute motion for a negative comment; seconded by Council-
woman Pedersen.
Commissioner Edwards suggested that the City and County send a cover letter with the
negative comment stating the problems of accountability and representation.
All in favor of the substitute motion. Motion carried.
WATER MAIN EASEMENT
City Attorney Stuller told Council that the engineer wanted one clarification, to exclude
lines less than six inches in diameter. City Attorney Stuller explained that when the
water program is completed, the County is obligated to convey easements and equipment to Water main
easement to
the City. County
Commissioner Shellman moved to authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement; seconded
by Commissioner Kinsley. All in favor, motion carried.
Mayor Standley moved that the City accept the agreement; seconded by Councilwoman Pederse]
All in favor, motion carried.
PUBLIC LAND ACQUISITION
City/County Planner Bill Kane had submitted to Council and Commissioners a form to try
to assess the preference of the Council and Commissioners for priorities of acquiring Priorities
public land. Mayor Standley said this memorandum should be integrated with the trail
proposal. Properties that have trail implications should be identified; properties that acquiring
tie into the greenway system should be identified. Mayor Standley requested more infor- public land
mation; this form should be reworked to define the categories and uses.
~ayor Standley said he had met with Dale Eubank and timing is of the essence on the Pride
of Aspen property. Mayor Standley said he had a feel for the price range and the City
and County need to make a decision within 24 hours.
Councilman Behrendt moved not to discuss this publicly but to support the best option,
and if necessary to hold a special meeting; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in
favor, motion carried.
Commissioner Edwards asked planning office to give a brief description of the properties,
their general thoughts on the land parcels as listed.
Commissioner Edwards said the bus situation should be discussed fairly soon. The Trans-
portation Department is having extensive problems with the minibuses. City Manager
Mahoney said he would schedule a work session. Councilman Wishart asked to see all the
options. Councilman Behrendt said he would like to see Mojo come up with a long range
plan. Edwards said it was appropriate for Mojo to make a first cut at developing a long
range acquisition plan. Mojo should have a conference with Mahoney and County Finance
Director Don Rogers on the availability of funding. The Council and Commissioners should
give this some priority and readjust their budgets to get this program off the ground.
Edwards said this should be the first phase.
Commissioner Shellman said the transportation department should address the 0perating
budget for this year. This requires some priorities. The Commissioners have some basic
service policy decisions to make; there are significant capital items such as housing
and equipment that go with any bus fleet. Edwards said the long range proposal should
include alternatives. Mojo should present these alternatives; purchasing new school
buses, buses like the one looked at today, whatever new equipment might be available.
Shellman said he wanted everyone to agree on an operating budget before Mojo puts any
work into a presentation of alternatives, etc. City Finance Director Lois Butterbaugh
said that she, Blomquist, and Don Rogers had the operating budget figures almost ready.
They planned to go through and show to Council and Commissioners all the levels of
service, how much they cost, and what can be accepted for what price. There will be a
joint study session Monday, March 29, 1976, at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 6:24 p.m. with Councilmembers Behrendt,
De Gregorio, Johnston, Pedersen, Wishart, City Manager Mahoney and City Attorney Stuller
present.
MINUTES
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve the minutes of March 8, 1976; seconded by Council-
man Wishart. All in favor, motion carried.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Mike Hunter said that the people had followed the racing career and accomplishments Sabich
of Spider Sabich both as a professional and an amateur. Sabich had given Aspen a lot of
stature. Hunter suggested that the City name a park or spot in the mall after Sabich memorial
as a kind of memorial gesture.
COUNCILMEMBER COMmeNTS
1. Councilman Behrendt introduced Helen Bondsey, the elected representative to Council
from the Country Day School.
2. Councilman Sehrendt said that the City is still dirty and he would like to see an Town dirty
all out effort to clean it up.
3. Councilwoman Pedersen told Council that Linda McCausland would like to give a gift
of crabapple trees for Glory Hole park to the City and asked how to do this technically. Gift of
City Attorney Stuller told Council just to accept the gift, unless Ms. McCausland wants crabapple
a tax write off. trees
4. Councilman Wishart told Planner Kane that Federal monies were available for bike paths.
Bike paths This money is specifically for bicycle paths. City Manager Mahoney said he had this
i~ information and would forward it to Kane.
5. Councilman De Gregorio said the traffic light at Cemetery Lane does not seem to be
Cemetery lan~ solving any problems. At certain times of the day, it is impossible to get into the City.
traffic, light Councilman De Gregorio said he would like to see the City make an effort to change this
somehow.
6. Councilman De Gregorio said the City had taken away parking for residents in the mall,
Permit park- and they have difficulty parking at night. Councilman De Gregorio said he would like to
ing in see the City eliminate the 3 to 7 a.m. ticket unless the City is going to tow.
central core
Councilman De Gregorio moved to make a permit available of residents that wish to park in
the downtown core area between the hours of 3 to 7 a.m.; seconded by Councilman Wishart.
Councilman De Gregorio suggested that the City will not ticket cars that park in the 3 - 7
a.m. area provided they have a permit unless the City is going to tow. City Attorney
Stuller pointed out that this would require a code change. Councilman Behrendt said he
would like to hears from some of the departments in terms of their feeling on maintaining
the streets, etc.
Councilman De Gregorio moved to instruct City Attorney Stuller to draft the necessary code
change to allow City Manager Mahoney to issue overnight parking permits in the downtown
area to residents of the downtown; seconded by Councilman Wishart.
Councilwoman Pede~sen suggested using Rubey Park for this purpose. Councilman Behrendt
pointed out this is only good for overnight, not daytime.
Councilmembers De Gregorio, Wishart and Mayor Standley for; Councilmembers Pedersen,
Johnston, and Behrendt against. Motion NOT carried.
7. Councilwoman Johnston asked that City Attorney Stuller draft a no smoking in public
buildings ordinance. Councilman Wishart said he felt this was a true infringement to
No smoking people to say they cannot smoke. Councilman Wishart said he agreed philosophically, but
in public that this is an area that government should not go.
Councilwoman Johnston moved to ask City Attorney Stuller to draft an ordinance to prevent
smoking in public buildings; seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. Councilmembers Johnston
and Standley for; Councilmembers Pedersen, Wishart, Behrendt, De Gregorio against. Motion
NOT carried.
8. Councilwoman Johnston said she was bothered by the sewer stench, which is disturbing
to everyong. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the City could write to the Aspen Sanitation
'Sewer stench District to see if they can take corrective measures. Tom Dunlop, City Sanitarian, told
Council he had inspected the plant with the State Health Department and representatives
of the Aspen Sanitation District. There are two problem areas; one of them is extremely
expensive to correct. Dunlop said there are no plans to correct this because the plant
will be phased out. \
Councilman Behrendt asked if it would be appropriate to come up with a resolution to the
sanitation district saying this is a critical problem.
Councilwoman Johnston moved that the Council have such a statement drafted; seconded by
Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor. Motion carried.
9. Councilman Wishart was appointed to go to the COG meeting in Keystone on March 26.
10. Mayor Standley said that Finance Director Butterbaugh needed a finance committee
meeting. This was set up for Monday, March 29 at 8:00 a.m.
STUDENT COMMENT
There were none.
LAND USE REGULATION - Institute Property
City Att~%'ney-Stuiler had~-s~bmitted a memorandum to Council outlining th~~ land~use~.regu-
Aspen Insti- ~ations for the Institute property Mayor Standley reminded Council Ghat various groups
tute land '
had been f~terested in purchasing the property an total or in part. DU is in there a~ a
use level of involvement. Mayor Standley said Council lhad been working under a directive
that they would work as a catalyst with the Institute to bring about".a solution to the land
use problems out there. The City has almost assumed the role of a broker, which has gotten
intense. There are two selling prices; private sector at 5.1 million dollars, and the
public sec%or at 3.5 million dollars. The Council had decided in January that they were
not interested in purchasing the property ...... ~
The planning office has worked out a program for effective land use at the Institute to
maximize the open space and preserve the things the City is interested in, and also give
reasonable use. Mayor Standley told Council the private sectors he had talked to had
established value of the property at 3.5 million dollars by working out what they think
the various pieces of the Institute are worth. The 5.1 million dollar figure is only if
drastic considerations are made available to the buyer. The West Side Improvement District,
Council, and P & Z have taken a strong stand against these as inappropriate land uses.
For a private sector to purchase this property for 3.5 million dollars, the City would have
to buy it and resell it. The Institute land ~s under SPA zoning. Fragmentation of the
land continues to be attempted. The Council needs to make a decision of what they want
to do at the Institute land, to formulate a posit~on on how to deal with the Institute
land.
Councilwoman Pedersen, Ms. Stuller, and City Manager Mahoney had attended a meeting with
R. O. Anderson and Joseph Slater about the Institute on Sunday, March 21. Councilwoman
Pedersen said the primary problem is Mr. Anderson's feeling that what is right and propel
for the town is not necessarily right and proper in his sphere. Anderson feels that
having to comply and understand the zoning, that he is being mistreated by the community
at large. Anderson was confused as to the nature of SPA zoning. The feeling at the
meeting was that it is now the Institute's ball, they have to go ahead with the arrange-
ments made last fall with the City. The Institute's request for rezoning was denied by
the P & Z. The Institute plans to resubmit the master plan which was denied. Council-
woman Pedersen said she felt the City made good progress at this meeting as far as the
community understanding of the problem, but not necessarily the Institute's comprehensio~
of the problem.
City Attorney Stuller told Council she had received a proposal from the Institute today.
The two elements of concern are; the substance of any plan and the use of the area, and
the approach taken to develop. Consistently the City has taken the position that the Institute
Institute gives the City one last opportunity to require master planning of a large proposal
piece of land. Slater called Ms. Stuller and said perhaps the City might give "sympathe-ic
consideration" to this particular proposal. Slater suggested if the City agreed to the
five basic development aspects of the tract, the Insititute would then submit a detailed
master plan. Slater asked for "sympathetic consideration'~ of this use of the entire
120 acres; (1) acknowledge that the race track and east subdivision accept density
comparable to R-15, at least 60 homesites, (2) Slater would admit to the designation
of 30 acres of the site as conservation, and agree to low density of that area, (3)
Slater would like the academic core to be acknowledged substantially as it is now;
however, the Institute may need an administration building and a library (4) Slater
said the Meadows should be enlarged to constitute "a major international complex for
conference use" with enlargement of the restaurant, the health center, the tennis courts
plus an additional 300 bedrooms. DU and the Institute would take primary use of that
facility. Ms. Stuller said it is aw~ard for the City to consider this in advance of a
formal presentation; this comes very close to being contract zoning.
Councilman Wishart moved that this proposal is inappropriate, the timing is wrong, and
the Council deny this proposal; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor with
the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried.
Mayor Standley said that the City should take an affirmative position stand to direct
the Institute or the City to do something. The City has treated the Institute separatel
and differently in terms of trying to negotiate a sale for them. Mayor Standley said
there are two problems; (1) the SPA and (2) a gift to the University, which requires
subdivision of the land.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved that the Institute proceed under their allowed zoning, which
is SPA designation, to work on and when finished submit a master plan for the entire
acreage to the City, both to the P & Z and Council, which under SPA designation has to
be approved by the P & Z and Council; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston.
Planner Kane had outlined what the position of the planning staff is regarding the
Institute, and subdivision for the DU. Kane said there are seven major points, which,
as advise, constitutes the planning office position.
"With an impending request for conveyance Of the 30 acre "academic core" of the
Institute land to Denver University the time seems appropriate to once again state the Planning office
Planning Office's recommendation regarding the entire site. recommendation
on Institute
1. We feel that the Specially Planned Area (SPA) requirement for the entire site
120 acres is justified and necessary in light of the unique site charac-
teristics described in the Planning and Zoning memo of 11/12/75.
2. The D.U. subdivision request highlights the need for a comprehensive
site development plan in that such a conveyance will separate the
operation of the program and accommodation elements of the plan. In
short the concern has always been that independent development of
the Meadows area would lead to excessive number of beds that would
appeal to skier tourists rather than provide housing needed to support
the program elements. On the other hand, should programs be expanded
beyond the housing capability of the Meadows, inevitable costs will
be forced on the community in the form of transportation cost and
competition for inflationary pressures on the housing supply.
Should Denver University pursue extensive undergraduate programs,
transportation and housing requirements will be hard if not impossible
to meet to say nothing of the exacerbation of the skiing season pass
problem.
3. We sympathize with the Institute's stated problem of excessive operation
cost and certainly understand their interest in attracting a partner
to share in such costs. However, we will advise Planning and Zoning
and Council that under no circumstances should the D.U. gift provide
an escape from the overall SPA requirement. Off hand, I would say
that we should support the subdivision only if a legal means can be
devised to totally subordinate D.U.'s planning and building rights to ]
the overall Institute SPA (120 acres).
4. It is an overall site planning goal to preserve the functional open
space in the interior of the site and transfer allowable single family
homesites to suitable lands at the periphery of the site. Such a
transfer would not be possible without overall site plan. The riding
ring, and surrounding area has been repeatedly recommended for open
space preservation.
5. It may Me in the interests of the City to accept a straight land dedi-
Institute cation in the event of subdivision. Such lands would be valuable for
cont. trail dedication and flood plain protection purposes. A comprehensive
development plan would allow the City to relate all potential dedications
as a whole.
6. The automobile impact on the neighborhood and concommitant requirements
for city street development can not be adequately evaluated on the piece-
meal basis that the Institute envisions.
7. Should the subdivision of 30 acres of the site be approved with the
above mentioned conditions no considerations should be given to an
additional fragmental conveyance of the Meadows property alone.
The Institute seems resolute in its avoidance of the SPA process. Various excuses for non-
compliance have been offered but the central reason suggested to date is cost. The high
cost for preparation of adequate plans has never been admitted as a basis for excluding
provisions of the subdivision ordinance in the past and we feel that it should not be
one now. Our Planning Commission and City Attorney have worked on this tedious problem
with the planning staff, Mr. Milhan of the Institute and their legal counsel. The
Institute was advised and agreed through the consent of Mr. Milhan and Mr. Levin that
Ordinance #71, 1975 (new three step PUD ordinance) would provide clear guidelines for
the preparations of plans necessary to fulfill the SPA requirements through this plan,
assurances could be given in three steps to allow a hierarchy of investment and specific
detail. This agreemen~ prevailed after two lengthy public heargins and innumerable work
sessaons with the Planning and Zoning Commission. To date, the Institute has responded
with several schemes to subdivide and further fragment the property in a fashion that is
totally anconslstent with the spirit and intent of the SPA requirement.
For these reasons and those planning concepts delineated in the Planning and Zoning
Commission Resolution of 11/18/75 the staff will doggedly adhere to the SPA requirement
for the entire 120 acre parcel of the Institute lands and advise all prospective developers
of the same. This will be our position unless otherwise directed by the City Council."
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to include the position paper in the motion; seconded by
Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried.
Mayor Standley directed City Manager Mahoney to send a copy of the position paper to
DU.
COLUMBINE CONDOMINIUMS - Final Subdivision Approval
Columbine Hal Clark, planning office, told Council this was the final subdivision plat for the
Conds. Columbine Condominiums, consasting of five one-bedroom units, located across from the
final Larkspur condomiums. The property is zoned R/MF which basically allows 1200 square feet
approval per unit; this project complies with the zonang. The subdivision improvement agreement
has been prepared. City engineer reviewed the plat and recommends approval. The City
Manager has reviewed the public use dedication fee and it is agreeable both to the City
Manager and the applicant.
At preliminary plat stage, the Council asked that the possibility of the "door game" be
checke'd. Clark explained that there are no specifica requirements for the building plans
to be prepared at this stage. Clark said there as no guarantee, at present, that these
will be one bedroom units. However, the building inspector will check the plans for
compliance with building code, zoning code, and the finally approved subdivision plat.
That as where the "door game" check will come an. The planning office recommends final
approval.
Dick Meeker, the applicant, told Council there is no market prace on these units; they will
be rental units. Councilwoman Johnston said her concern is that another subdivision is
going through without any employee housing provisions.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve final subdivision for Columbine; seconded by Council-
woman Pedersen.
Councilman De Gregorio asked about undergrounding the electricity and cable lines.
Councilwoman Johnston said that the City should ask in the agreemen~ for an easement for
the transformer in the event of undergrounding. Clark pointed out there was a utility
easement at the back of the building. City Attorney Stuller pointed out one of the
elements an the agreement is that the applicant will join in any improvement district.
Meeker said he would have no problem providing conduit from the building to the alley.
Councilman Behrendt amended his motion for approval subject to inclusion of undergrounding
in the subdivision amprovemen~ agreement; Councilwoman Pedersen seconded the amendment.
All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #7, ~IE~0~' ~76 - Consumer Protection
0rd.7,1976 Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. Geri Fox, Chamber of Commerce, told the Council
Consumer that she had come to the conclusion that the Chamber would continue to act as the Better
protection Business Bureau. This means that the Sheriff's office, Aspen Police, City and County
attorneys and D.A.s would refer people to the Chamber for screening of their complaints.
Ms. Fox said she felt this would simplify things, and anything she could not handle she
would sent to the District Attorney's office.
Ms. Fox said the ordinance was vague and that there was not sufficient criteria to
define what unfair business practices are. Ms. Fox said she did not feel this ordinance
would be enforceable. Ms. Fox said she would like to see these ideas formulated into
something that would help the Chamber do a better job as Better Business Bureau.
Ms. Fox said She would like to see the State law changed so that Municipal Courts could
handle business complaints more quickly. City Attorney Stuller stated that shbsection
(4) refers to a cross section that lists six areas. These are part of the business
licensing review. Ms. Stuller pointed oUt enforcing criminally specific complaints
is not in the City's purview. The City only comes into the process when a series of
filed. Ms. Stuller said the code now establishes the
bad
business
practices
are
Finance Committee as a revieWing agency. There is a real problem with enforcement;
consumer problems stand between civil and criminal. Ms. Stuller said the City's
involvement in the consumer protection is just a small element in the process.
Mayor Standley closed the public hearing.
Councilman Wishart moved to read Ordinance ~7, Series of 1976, seconded by Councilwoman
Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried,
ORDINANCE ~7
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 12-36 AND 12-11 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
SUCH AS TO REQUIRE BUSINESS LICENSEES TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN UNFAIR
TRADE PRACTICES; AND FURTHER PROVIDING THAT IN THE EVENT THERE IS CAUSE TO
BELIEVE THAT CITY LICENSES SHALL NOT ISSUE OR BE REVOKED, THAT THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE MAKE SUCH DETERMINATION ONLY AFTER CONDUCTING AN APPROPRIATE
HEARING ON THE MATTER was read by the city clerk.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance ~7~ Series of 1976, on second reading;
seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye;
Pedersen, aye; Johnston, aye; De Gregorio, aye; Behrendt, aye; Mayor Standley, aye.
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #9, SERIES QF 1976 - Increasing Dog Fines
Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. Bill Grikis, Animal Warden, told Council
that the section on notifying owners was fine, but they had only been notifying owners 0rd.9,1976
once a week. Mayor Standley said he felt once a week was fine. If someone has not Dog fines
contacted the pound about their dog after 20 days, they must not be very concerned.
Mayor Standley closed the public hearing.
Councilman Wishart moved to read Ordinance 99, Series of 1976; seconded by Councilman
Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~9
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE MAKING A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ASPEN
MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE LICENSING AND IMPOUNDING OF DOGS~ AMENDING
SECTIONS 5-28 AND 5-31 TO INCREASE FROM $1.50 TO $2.00 THE CHARGE FOR
ISSUING OR TRANSFERRING A DOG TAG; AMENDING SECTION 5-45 TO INCREASE FROM
$4.00 TO $5.00 THE CHARGE FOR IMPOUNDING DOGS, AND, IN THE SAME SECTION,
INCREASING FROM $4.00 TO $5.00 PER DAY THE CHARGE FOR MAINTAINING IMPOUNDED
DOGS; AND FURTHER AMENDING SECTION 5,45 TO REQUIRE THAT OWNERS OP LICENSED
DOGS BE NOTIFIED BY MAIL OF THE IMPOUNDMENT OF THEIR DOGS; AMENDING SECTION
5-68(c) SO AS TO ESTABLISH A NEW PENALTY ASSESSMENT FOR FAILURE TO DISPLAY
TAGS OF $5.00 AND INCREASING THE PENALTY ASSESSMENT FOR FAILURE TO HAVE
RABIES VACCINATION FROM $10.00 to $15.00 was read by the city clerk.
Councilman Behrendt moved to adopt Ordinance 99, Series of 1976, en second reading;
seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnston, aye;
De Gregorio, aye; Behrendt, aye; wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~12, SERIES OF 1976 - Swimming Pools covered
Mayor Standley opened the public hearing.
0rd.12,1976
Paul Anderson, owner of Aspen Pool Service, told Council he had done much in the field Swimming pools
of energy conservation and did not feel this ordinance was needed. Putting a cover on covered
a pool can save up to 75 per cent of a heating bill for a pool. If the City adopts
this ordinance, there will be a problem of enforcement. Anderson said if the City
did adopt the ordinance, they should look at the terminology of "insulated". Anderson
stated this was too general.
A Woman stated she objected to this ordinance because it gave one man, the superintend-
ent of the electric department, too much power by being able to terminate someone's
power for wasteful use. City Attorney Stuller stated that the City would continue to
send out a certified letter, indicating termination, their right of review and reason
for the shut off. These are the due process procedures the City applies to any
utility. The person has ten days to comply or there will be termination. If the
person appeals, the utility service will be continued.
Hans Gramiger told Council that over the years more and more swimming pools had been
covered, to preserve heat and to keep the dust out. Gramiger stated that private
enterprise is capable of watching their own pocketbooks. Gramiger said he felt to put
this ordinance on the books would create harrassment for lodge '~ners.
Barbara Fasching submitted a petition with the signatures of lodge owners who are against
this ordinance. Ms. Fasching stated almost 80 per cent of the lodge owners with swimming
pools signed this. Ms. Fasching said she had made a study of the natural gas supply.
Rocky Mountain said this area has an adequate continuing supply of gas, and that there is
Swimming no means of transporting this gas to other areas.
.pools to be
~covered - Ms. Fasching said the lodge owners feel they will cover their pools voluntarily for
cont. economic reasons. There are many guests who never go in the pools, but they enjoy looking
at a pool. Ms. Fasching requested that the Council not impose this unneeded, Gestapo
ordinance. The lodge owners know how to run their business. If they are willing to pay
the gas bills, then the guests should have the pleasure of looking at the pool.
City Manager Mahoney told Council that in the fall of 1974 he and the Urban Economist sat
with the PUC in the County Courthouse. Mahoney was told that the gas shortage was very
critical. In the fall of 1975, Mahoney asked if there was sufficisnt gas to get through
the year. The PUC had to impose interim service on large industrial services. An
engineering service presented evidence to the PUC that indicates in 1977-78-79, this
valley will have a gas shortage.
City Attorney Stuller said the PUC had revoked an earlier order prohibiting aesthetic
natural gas devices, and has reinforced this ~ another form. This will be effective the
end of March.
City Attorney Stuller stated that any violation in the Municipal Code is subject to as
much as $300 and/or 90 days in jail. This fine is at the discretion of the judge and the
degree of guilt comes into play here. The "intense use" Ks a matter of interpretation,
which will be within the purview of the Municipal Judge. Ms. Stuller reiterated that
termination of service is subject to the ~ight of review and appeal, and gives all utility
users the opportunity to contest it.
Paul Anderson told Council that he had found that with his type of pool covers, the
reduction figure on heating is around 75 per cent. In addition, there are benefits of
water not evaporating, and preserving the life of the chemicals.
Mayor Standley closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance ~12, Series of 1976; seconded by Councilman
Wishart. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #12
(Series of 1976)
\
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASPEN CRIMINAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 13-74
THERETO REQUIRING THAT ALL OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL HEATED SWIMMING AND THERAPY
POOLS BE COVERED WITH INSULATED 'COWERS BETWEEN THE MONTHS OF OCTOBER AND
MAY EXCEPT DURING THE HOURS OF 3:00 p.m. and 9%00 p.m. DAILY AND DURING
TIMES OF ACTUAL INTENSE USE; DECLARING THAT A CONVICTION FOR VIOLATION SUCH
SECTION WILL SUBJECT THE VIOLATOR TO A FINE NOT EXCEEDING THREE HUNDRED
($300.00) DOLLARS OR NINETY (90) DAYS IMRPISONMENT, OR BOTH SUCH FINE AND
IMPRISONEMENT; FURTHER AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF
SECTION 23-24 WHICH AUTHORIZES THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT
TO TERMINATE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO CUSTOMERS WHO HEAT SUCH POOLS WITH ELECTRIC
POWER AND FAIL TO ABIDE BY THE PROHIBITIONS OF SECTION 13-74 was read by the
city clerk.
Councilman Wishart moved to amend the ordinance to read "between the hours of 3:00 p.m.
and 11:00 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #12, Series of 1976, on second reading as
amended; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregor~o, aye;
Behrendt, aye; Wishart, aye; Pedersen, aye; Johnston, aye; Mayor Standley, aye.
Motion carried.
Councilman Behrendt left the Council Chambers.
ORDINANCE #13~,_ SERIES. Ow 1976 - Subdivision Dedication ~equirements
Ord.13, 1976
Subdivision Mayor Standley opened the public hearing.
Dedication
requirements Jon Seigle objected to Section 7-143(a) (1), the commercial development, a cash payment
of six per cent of the current market value of land proposed as the development site.
Seigle said the ordinance does not specify talking about the physical site; some attention
should be given to the definition of "development site". City Attorney Stuller answered
the development site is defined by the applicant with the subdivision plat; it is defined
by the applicant on his survey on the plat. Seigle stated the rationale of the ordinance
is to make the developer bear some of the burden that new members of the community will
cause. It does not make any sense to burden someone who is going to put up a commercial
building because he is not causing any influx of new members into the community. Seigle
said this is basically a revenue measure; the Municipal Charter says any tax has to be
approved by a majority of the vo~ers.
Brooke Petersen told Council he had no objection to the philosophy of the ordinance, but
rather to the method of extracting payment from the developer. Petersen said he would
like to see the dedication payment be amortized over a certain period with those provisions~
in the ordinance.
Hans Gramiger said that a developer pays his share to the municipality through real estate
taxes, through plant investment fees in water, sanitation, etc. Gramiger said if the
city is after generating revenue, then call it a tax and let the citizens vote.
Councilman De Gregorio closed the public hearing.
Councilman Wishart moved to read Ordinance ~13, Series of 1976; seconded by Councilwoman
Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~13
CSeries of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A PARK DEDICATION FEE ON ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN; WHICH FEE SHALL, IN THE
CASE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, EQUAL THE VALUE OF SIX (6%) PER CENT OF
THE LAND PROPOSED AS THE DEVELOPMENT SITE; AND IN THE CASE OF RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT BE CALCULATED ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF ANTICIPATED RESIDENTS;
PROVIDING THAT LAND SHALL BE VALUED IN ITS UNDEVELOPED STATE AND BE
APPRAISED BY A QUALIFIED APPRAISER IF THE CITY AND DEVELOPER CANNOT AGREE ON
VALUE: EARMARKING CASH PROCEEDS FOR ACQUISITION OF PARK AND RECREATION LANDS
AND THEIR IMPROVEMENT; WAIVING IMPOSITION OF THE FEE IF A SIMILAR DEDICATION
HAS BEEN MADE AT THE TIME OF THE SUBDIVISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SITE;
REPEALING AND REENACTING SECTION 20-18 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE (a)
DELETING THE EXEMPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS EARLIER
GIVEN TO DUPLEX, TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX DEVELOPMENTS, AND (b) PROVIDING
FOR APPRAISAL OF IMPROVED SITES ACCORDING TO THEIR HIGHEST AND BEST USES
INCLUDING USE OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES was read by the city clerk
Councilwoman Johnston asked about the promissory note or payments over a period of time.
City Attorney Stuller said she would rather have that addressed on an administrative
level.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance $13, Series of 1976, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregorio, aye;
Johnston, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye; motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~14, SERIES. OF .1.976 - Amending Criminal Code
Mayor Standley opened the public hearing, There were no comments. Mayor Standley close [0rd.14,1976
the public hearing, amending
criminal code
Councilwoman Johnston moved to read Ordinance $14, Series of 1976; seconded by Council-
woman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~14
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASPEN CRIMINAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 13-10
THERETO; ESTABLISHING THE CRIME OF CRIMINAL ATTEMPT WHICH OCCURS WHEN A
DEFENDANT INTENTIONALLY ENGAGES IN CONDUCT CONSTITUTING A SUBSTANTIAL STEP
TOWARD COMMISSION OF AN OFFENSE; DEFINIG WHAT CONSTITUTES A "SUBSTANTIAL
STEP"; DECLARING THAT FACTUAL OR LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE
AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE; MAKING A CRIME THE ATTEMPT TO ACT AS AN ACCESSORY
BEFORE THE FACT; DECLARING ABANDONMENT OF EFFORT TO COMMIT THE CRIME AN
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE; AND PROVIDING THAT VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION SHALL
BE PUNISHABLE BY A FINE NOT TO EXCEED THREE HUNDRED ($300.00) DOLLARS OR
IMPRISONMENT NOT TO EXCEED NINETY (90) DAYS, OR BOTH SUCH FINE AND IMPRISONMENT
was read by the city clerk.
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt O~dinance ~14, Series of 1976~ on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Pedersen,
aye; Johnston, aye; De Gregorio, aye; Mayor Standley, aye; Motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~15, SERIES OF 1976 - Juvenile Jurisdiction in
Municipal
Court
Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley 0rd.15,1976
closed the public hearing. Juvenile
Jurisdiction
Councilwomam Pedersen moved to read Ordinance $15, Series of 1976; seconded by Council- in Municipal
woman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. Court
ORDINANCE $15
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-8 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE CONTAINING
THE GENERAL PENALTY PROVISION OF THE CODE WHICH AMENDMENT PROVIDES THAT
THE CITY MUNICIPAL COURT, WHEN TRYING JUVENILE OFFENDERS, IS PRECLUDED FROM
IMPOSING A JAIL SENTENCE IN THE EVENT OF CONVICTION was read by the city clerk
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance $15, Series of 1976, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregorio, aye;
Johnston, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~6, SERIE~ 9~_ 1976 - Appropriations for ~i~ai~.cOnstructi~h~
Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley clos~
the public hearing.
Councilman De Gregorio moved to read Ordinance ~16, Series of 1976; seconded by Council-
w~man Johnston. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ~t6
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MALL CONSTRUCTION FUND AND TRANSFERRING TO AND
APPROPRIATING FROM SUCH FUND THE AMOUNT OF SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND (¢600,000)
DOLLARS FROM THE SEVENTH PENNY SALES TAX BOND PROCEEDS was read by the city
clerk.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 22, 1976
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #16, Series of 1976, on second reading;
seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnston, aye;
Pedersen, aye; De Gregorio, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE 917, SERIES 02. ~76 - Appropriations for electric undergrounding
Ord.17,1976 Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley
Appropria- closed the public hearing.
tions
electric Councilwoman Johnston moved to read. Ordinance #17, Series of 1976; seconded by Council-
underground- woman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried.
ing ORDINANCE #17
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING SEVEN !~HUNDRED THOUSAND ($700,000) DOLLARS
FROM ELECTRICAL REVENUE BOND PROCEEDS FOR UNDERGRAOUNDING OF THE CITY'S
OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL FACILITIES was read by the city clerk
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance 917, Series of 1976, on second reading;
seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnston, aye;
Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; De Gregorio, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried.
~ALL PRUGRHSS REPORT - City Manager
Mall City Manager Mahoney told Council he had established a process whereby decisions that
Progress are made for construction are considered by a Committee consisting of Lois Butterbaugh,
Bill Kane, Dave Ellis, Robin Molny, Tony Coleman and himself. Mahoney told Council he
had received clarification of the submittal of the bid by Hyder construction. Mahoney
said he felt that they will be selected for the City's management contractor.
City Manager Mahoney told Council the bricks selected for the mall had been tested by
an engineer who put them in water, froze them, and heated them.
Councilwoman Johnston moved that the City Council support the Citizens committee for
the extension of the mall by an appropriation of $1,000 to match the $1,000 the CCEM
was raising primarily for advertising, attending meetings, putting out literature;
seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen.
Councilwoman Pedersen said she felt that if public money was involved, there should be
ample opportunity for all sides. If the City.gives $1,000 for the mall campaign, it
should not go to an exclusive group. Councilman Wishart said the City may be putting
themselves in the same position the County did when the pushed the train. Councilman
Wishart said he supported the mall, but did not think the Council should commit any
funds to it.
Mayor Standley pointed out the City had already invested money in the mall and should
carry through with that investment to see fruition of something Council has almost
unanimously endorsed for three years. Mayor Standley said he felt Council should support
is'sues which represent the City. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that historically
the City has backed itself on projects. Councilman Wishart agreed to spend money for
the mall election, but not to put it into a special fund.
Councilmembers Wishart, Johnston and Mayor Standley for the motion; Councilmembers
Pedersen and De Gregorio opposed. Motion carried.
RE~ULATI.ON OF TRANSIEN~MERCHANTS
Transient City Attorney Stuller had submitted a memo~anaum to Council outlining state statutes
Merchants and municipal regulations regarding transcient merchants. Ms. Stuller said a direct
prohibition against transient merchants will cause a lot of controversy, not only in
trying to define what activity can be allowed, but would be heavy handed. There are
two alternative approaches; (1) licensing and bonding to make sure these people comply
with the laws of the city and (2) designate certain areas in the city that open area
vending will not be permitted.
City Attorney Stuller told Council she needed a good statement from them of what they
were trying to accomplish in order to draft a good, reasonable piece of legislation.
The Council decided that Councilman Wishart would meet with City Attorney Stuller to
work on this legislation.
EXEMP.TION F.ROM ~HE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION - Burrows
BURROWS- City Attorney Stuller told Council there were three areas of concern; (1) the listed
exemption conditions of the P & Z and their prohibition against any significant additions to
from either building, (2) Chuck Brandt, Burrows attorney, wants it made clear in the statement
Subdivision of exemption, that it Permits the condominiumization of the duplex site so that there
could be a possibility of three ownerships on that particular site and (3) what to do
about the dedication requirement. Brandt did present to the P & Z that there be a
double subdivision, both in the interests of the two different houses and in the condo-
miniumization of the duplex.
Ms. Stuller reminded Council that the Code now exempts the condominimization of duplexes
from imposition of the fee; this presents no problems. There should be no dedication
for that particular activity; however, is the parcelling of this site into two interests
an appropriate function to require imposition of the fee.
Chuck Brandt pointed out that in the exemption where it states that duplexes, triplexes,
and fourplexes shall not have to pay a dedication fee, it seems it is the intent of that
exemption to exclude everything below a five-plex. Single family dwellings are not
spelled out because no one contemplated condominiumizing a single family dwelling.
Ms. Stuller answered that they are taking a three lot area and authorizing conveyance
of the interest in the house and the duplex itself.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 22, 1976
It is that parcelling of the land that is at issue. City Attorney Stuller suggested that
the Council should apply the dedication fee for that particular parcelling interest.
Councilwoman Johnston said that the Council had imposed a dedication fee for parcelling
of land before. Brandt pointed out that if the duplex and house were connected, this
would be a triplex and would clearly be exempt. On this piece of property, there is what
amounts to three dwellings - what amounts to a triplex. City Attorney Stuller said the
point is they cannot parcel the lots because no lots would meet the code requirement.
The City is permitting diversity of ownership through a condominium or separate use agree-
ment. City Attorney Stuller said she could see no rationale for exemption in this case.
The separate interest in the three lots is another level of subdivision activity that is
not exempt at all.
Councilman De Gregorio moved to grant the exemption without the fee; seconded by Council-
man Wishart.
Councilman Wishart asked if the Council would not be setting a precedent by exempting the
fee. Ms. Stuller said the same argument applies here as to the conversion of 700 Hopkins
Brandt pointed out that 700 Hopkins contalns more than four units. Ms. Stuller said that
Burrows is getting the benefit of the exemption for the duplex, but that does not go for
the parcelling of the lots. Council discussed the price of the subdivision dedication
fee. City Manager Mahoney said he felt $3,000 would be maximum.
Councilman De Gregorio an favor of the motion; Councilmembers Wishart, Pedersen, Johnston
and Mayor Standley against. Motion NOT carried.
Councilwoman Johnston moved to grant the exemption with the prohibition against substanti~
increase in size, and authorizing the condominiumization of the duplex; seconded by
Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Wishart moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman
Pedersen. Ail in favor, motion carried.
Kathryn~Hauter, City Clerk