HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19750421Mayor Stacy Standley, City Manager Mahoney, City Attorney Stuller and Councilmembers
Behrendt, Breasted, Walls, Markalunas, Pedersen, and De Gregorio were present.
City Manager Mahoney described past negotiations with the Post Office and Aspen One to
the Council. The Post Office has agreed to mail delivery within a month or so.
In the interim, Aspen One entered into negotiatiOns for a land trade. In a letter dated
4-11-75 addressed to the Mayor, Aspen One offered to trade a parcel of land 106,000 square
feet for parcels designated A&B. In this letter, Aspen One agreed to escrow $227,000 for
parcel B. It was their understanding they had fairly decent title to the land. Aspen
One offered the City, beside the escrow amount, $200,000 cash.
Councilman Behrendt asked what the costs to the City for street improvements, etc., would
be. Mahoney said it would cost $90,000 to bring Rio Grande drive to grade not including
blacktop.
City Attorney Stuller advised Council of legal problems and risks involved in this trade
with regard to Parcel B. If title was not resolved in their favor, an access road would
have to be maintained, which would bifurcate parcel A. The County would like to acquire
Parcel B and trade with the City in the future. City Attorney Stuller told Council if
the City were to engage in land trade, we could protect our interests. WE could get the
monies for the City but lose Parcel B.
City Manager Mahoney pointed out the letter from Ron Austin about the Aspen One V. Pitkin
County. City Manager Mahoney told Council the Planning Office and Engineering Department
had re-designed the lines. The tract had been changed from 106,000 square feet to
104 square feet to square the lines up.
City Manager Mahoney said it was up to Council to decide whether they wanted to trade for
Parcels A&B and $200,000 cash plus escrow or to sell directly to the Post Office for
approximately $800,000.
Councilman Breasted asked about the title to Parcel A. City Attorney Stuller told Council
the Northeast corner of the tract used to be an island, but was land filled to extent
the boundaries. This risk of extended acreage is not covered by title insurance. The
City could get waives from adjoining property owners that they will not contest the
change in boundaries.
Councilman Breasted asked what action is required to remove the lis pendens. City Attorney
Stuller told Council she would probably go to Court as soon as possible with a motion
of summary judgement.
Councilman Behrendt asked if there was an established price for Parcels A&B; City Manager
Mahoney said the price indicated for both pieces was $650,000.
Mayor Standley told Council Aspen One wanted to get rid of A&B by trading with cash and
then sell directly to the Post Office themselves. But Parcel B has a disputed title and
is landlocked.
City Attorney Stuller told Council she could attempt to get a summary judgement and sell
directly to the Post Office and negotiate for Parcles A and leave Parcel B wherever it
might be. Mahoney told Council that Parcel A contained 58,936 square feet and Parcel B
contained either 36,735 or 37,462. There had been two different appraisals on this
property. Councilman Behrendt asked if there were time constraints with regard to the
Post Office. City Manager Mahoney said they were ready to go.
Robert Grueter, representing Aspen One, told Council the law suit had occurred because of
the referendum election in October 1974. He also told Council that there was no question
of the title for Parcel A because of the landfill. When the Council zoned Grueter's
client's land from C-2 to R-6, the land lost a lot of value.
Councilman Breasted told Council he did not understand why the old alignment of the
extension of Spring Street was changed. Planner John Stanford said the alignment was
developed at the request of Council and developed by working with the Post Office. City
Engineer Dave Ellis told Council the original alignment had Post Office on the Southwest
side of the roadway. The Post Office didn't like that arrangement. City Manager Mahoney
said Council did not want them to have access to Mill Street.
Councilman Breasted pointed out the positive side, that the City existing building there
which fronts on a public street; the negative side is that this building and the parking
for the Post Office building cuts the public right of way off from the river. Breasted
said the concept as the Planning Office developed it was the road was to have parkway
character on the river side so that any future development that went on in the Rio Grande
property would be to the southwest of the extension of Spring street. Everything to the
river side was to be left open. Breasted said he saw fragmentation of the property going
on and didn't like it.
City Engineer Ellis pointed out that the Post Office is a municipal building and was put
on the civic center side~ The road was moved closer to the river due to problems with
reasonable alignment and grade problems. This particular alignment except for minor
revision was developed in mid-July 1974 by working with Dick King, the architects and
engineers based on the site area requirements.
Breasted asked if there would be problems with the parking around the building. City
Engineer Ellis said there were two different alignments, one goes closer to the river.
This alignment is a very undesirable. It was rejected basically because the Post Office
did not accept the location, access, nor area. Councilwoman Markalunas asked why the
road went between the Post Office site and the river. Mayor Standley told Council that
they had developed this plan in a work session. Planner John Stanford reminded Council
they had reconu~ended this be a specially planned area; the sale would be contingent upon
a master plan for the entire Rio Grande. Ellis told Council there had been no other
drawings for this project made between July 1974 and March 1975. Councilman Breasted said
he didn't agree with the site plan. City Manager Mahoney said the Post Office was
planning a 20,000 square foot building on 104~000 square feet of land which would allow
adquate parking spaces and open space.
Councilwoman Markalunas said the extension of Spring street had always been between the
Post Office site and the ri~er and how it has been flipped. Markalunas said that this
was the City's property and the City should be allowed to plan the specially planned
area, not the Post Office. If they don't like it the way the City wants it, they can
figure out another place for the Post Office. Councilwoman Markalunas asked what the
planning concepts behind cutting open space instead of going around so that a large tract
is left. Councilwoman Markalunas wondered why this plan instead of Adam Kravatsky's.
Councilman Breasted pointed out this is planning according to tradition, bargain and
negotiate things away.
Mayor Standley told Council they had three options, to decide upon: (1) land trade with
Aspen One (2) sell directly to the Post Office (3) neither. Councilman Breasted said
he felt whether the City sold or traded was not as important as where the road went.
City Engineer Dave Ellis showed Council three drawings of different alignments for the
road and explained the problems with each. One objection was that the entrance at Galena
Street would conflict with a future City-County center. There were grade problems with th~
alignment that went to close to the stream bank. Another consideration was the fact that
Galena street might be closed and the City would have to provide alternate access to the
RBH building and other businesses in the area.
Councilman Breasted said his vote was in favor of keeping very extensive river frontage
that could be developed someday into a frontage park. City Manager Mahoney recommended
to Council that if they value parcel A extremely highly and wanted to risk parcel B,
then the City should make the land trade, but if the City doesn't want to get into a law
suit with the County or adjoining with Aspen One against the County, then Mahoney
recommended direct sale to the Post Office.
COuncilwoman Markalunas asked if the City could deal directly with the Post Office and
with Aspen One on the same basis that has already been established. Mayor Standley asked
Council to resolve two questions for the April 28 agenda. (1) who favors a different
alignment or different location, or does the majority of Council agree with what is
proposed here (as is, red or yellow roads). De Gregorio, as is; Pedersen, land tess
bifurcated by road; Markalunas, road closer to the river; Breasted, red alignment;
Behrendt, stick with alignment as is; Standley, agree with alignment as is. Walls,
abstaining.
Mayor Standley suggested the Planning Department work up a new alignment on the road for
Monday's Council meeting. (2) does the City want to trade land or sell directly to the
Post Office; Breasted, sale; Pedersen, direct sale; De Gregorio~ trade; Markalunas, we
can deal directly with the Post Office for $800,000 cash or trade for A and B and
$200,000and they will escrow an additional $227,000 until such time as they prove they
have a merchantable title to B; Behrendt, direct sale; Markalunas, directly with both
groups; Standley, direct sale.
Is direct sale contingent on consummating negotiations with Aspen One and City Attorney
Stuller said those can be lateral .~egotiations.
ZONING CODE
The Planning Office presented four concerns with reference to the proposed zoning code
for Council's consideration.
1) The Oden Property, behind the First National Bank Building. They have asked to be
zoned C-l, t~he Planning office recommended that this be zoned Office to present too
much development along Mill street which would generat a considerable amount of traffic
in the vicinity of Mill and Main.
2) The Centre building at the base of Little Nell. This property is zoned Commercial/
Lodge with an F.A.R. of 2:1. The Planning Office is recommend~ing that this be zoned
C-C, specially planned area as an interim measure until an appropriate zone is decided
upon.
3) Specially Planned Area around the Rio Grande. This indicates that any development
on this property has to be according to a master plan.
4) 2:1 F.A.F. in the commercial core. As a trade-off for not having to provide off-
street parking, an additional 10% open space had been requested. The Planning Office
feels this additional open space would decrese potential leverage in the future for
having businesses join a parking district. The Planning Office also feels that the re-
quirement for 10% additional open space will tend to make buildings higher.
Councilman Walls pointed out 25% open space requirement was written when there were no
Malls to provide open space. Perhaps this requirement ought to be revised for buildings
on present or proposed mall. The 25% open space requirement seems excessive on top of
the mall.
Mayor Standley suggested 35% open space with 35 foot heighth restriction or 25% open
space with 28 feet building heighth as an alternative.
Yank Mojo, planning department, pointed out to Council that the 10 foot setback required
for trash and access should not be counted as open space.
Mayor Standley asked if the City had any leverage to make people join a parking district.
City Attoreny Stuller opinioned the City could have people sign an agreement to join
a parking district but could not require payments when the intent is not to construct a
parking facility.
Mayor Standley polled Council whether they want to go with 35% open space or 25% open
space plus parking district. Behrendt, 35% open space; Markalunas, 25% with no parking
district; Breasted, 25% and no parking district; Walls, 25% and no parking district;
Pedersen, 35% and open space; De Gregorio 25% and no parking district; Mayor Standley
35% and open space.
Question two; should the 10 foot setback be counted as open space? Behrendt, no;
Markalunas, no; Breasted, no; Pedersen, no; De Gregorio, no; Walls, yes; Mayor Standley,
no.
Should the 102 block be changed from Commercial/lodge to Commercial Core-specially
planned are? Behrendt, special district; Walls, specially planned; Breasted, specially
planned; Markalunas, specially planned; Pedersen, specially planned; De Gregorlo, speciall
planned; Mayor Standley, specially planned.
The Oden building north of the alley behind the Vroom building proposed zoning is Office.
Council recommended change to C-l; Planning Office would like to have this zoned Office
and allow the handball court as an exceptional use. The planning office feels Office
zone would be more compatible with the area and the F.A.R. would not be so dense. Under
Office the building could be 26,000 square feet; under C-1 the building could be
38,000 square feet. John Stanford pointed out the Planning Office tried to establish
a break between CC district and Neighborhood/Commercial.
Mayor Standley polled Council. De Gregorio, C-l; Pedersen, Office; Walls, C-l; Breasted,
Office; Markalunas, C-l; Behrendt, Office; Mayor Standley, Office.
Mayor Standley asked Council if there were any objections to allowing the athletic
club as a conditional use. There were none.
Mayor Standley asked if there were objections to waiving the parking. Only Councilman
Behrendt objected.
Planner Stanford addressed the Council on short term leasing in the residential zones.
The Planning Office supports the ~limination of this requirement as they feel this
provision is not appropriate in a zoning code. The Planning Office does ~agree with the
intent to limit tourist accommodations to the base of the hill. There was no disagree-
ment on Council to remove this restriction.
Yank Mojo explained to Council the Planning Office had changed the definition of parking
space in residential district so that one could stack cars in a driveway. Cars cannot
be stacked cars in M/~or Office district.
Councilwoman Markalunas asked what the justification was to remove off-street parking
in the C-C district and then impose a parking regulation in the residential areas. Mojo
answered the C-C district had many people using many parking places throughout the day.
The residential area is where the car lives, and it should be off the street where it
lives. Councilwoman Markalunas questioned the rational of a parking space for every
bedroom. Mojo said a four-bedroom house will easily generate four cars.
Mojo pointed out to Council this provision was only for new houses. If a remodel
increases the capactiy of the house, adequate parking will have to be provided.
Councilwoman Pedersen said this requirement needed to be clarified as many people feel
this requirement would be retroactive. This is only for new construction or if the
capacity of the house is enlarged. City Attornley Stuller mentioned the code allowed
the garage, driveway, parking apron or parking strip to be counted as parking spaces.
Mayor Standley asked Council their choices (1) accept requirement as is, (2) cancel
out parking requirement totally, (3) revise by Friday. Behrendt, accept as is;
Markalunas, pull it; Breasted, accept it; Walls, pull it; Pedersen, revise by Friday;
De Gregorio, accept as is; Mayor Standley, accept as is.
Main Street - Planner Stanford traced the history of the zoning of Main Street. Planning
Office feels the most rational approach would be zoning to existing uses; however, this
would be a spo~ zoning type concept. Councilman Breasted pointed out that Main Street
was an exceptional area and its characteristic should be retained. Councilman Breasted
drew a parallel between Main Street and block 102 and the special relationships they
each have to the entrance to town and the mountain. Councilman Bre~d said he would
like to see some kind of review procedure. If the change in building or use is not
justifiable or alters the character of the street, it should not be allowed. Mojo said
a specially planned area zoning on Main Street would create an Ordinance ~19, Series
of 1974, type situation.
John Stanford reminded Council if a Victorian house asked for a historic desgination
they would be allowed to put in offices.
Councilman Walls suggested allowing new and remodeled structures on Main Street as long
as they retain a residential character.
Mayor Standley pointed out the goals and objectives for Main Street were to maintain the
image and historic character and keep Main Street viable as a major thoroughfare for
east/west traffic. Us~s that generate traffic need to be eliminated. Councilman Breasted
suggestedamiddle ground for Main Street to combine dwelling units, restaurants and
Offices which would address the special character of Main Street.
Councilman Behrendt indicated he favored light office use with historic desgination for
Main Street. Councilwoman Markalunas said she didn't like Main Street tied strictly
to residential, the area should be mixed.
Councilman Walls agreed with mixed uses for Main Street but said there should be no
retail uses on this street. Councilwoman Pedersen also wanted to keep the scale of
Main Street with mixed uses and absolutely no retail uses. Councilman Breasted indicated
that height and bulk restrictions should be placed on Main Street, which would fit in
with review procedures. Mayor Standley affirmed that Council agreed to a commercial
service area without retail and with a special review procedure.
Councilwoman Markalunas brought up the R-15 zone strip on the~W~st end of town
along the Midland right-of-way. Planner Stanford pointed out the P & Z recommended
R-6. The property is basically in large ownership and is adjacent to the county
which is zoned R-15. Councilwoman Markalunas asked about the four lots. You cannot
create non-conforming lot in half block along that strip. Under R-15 these nine
lots cannot be used and the small lot provision is for land undar individual
ownership. Councilman De Gregorlo directed that this land be re-zoned R-6; Councilman
Behrendt, no; Councilwoman Markalunas, would be more restrictive zoning; Councilman
Breasted, yes; Councilman Walls, yes; Councilwoman Pedersen, yes; Mayor Standley,
yes.
Councilwoman Markalunas brought up the zoning for the Koch lumber property which is
presently zoned R-6. The Koch lumber property is zoned R-6; the Council recommended
it be zoned R-15. Councilwoman Markalunas pointed out that all area around this
property is zoned multi-family and lodge and questioned why R-15 for this sliver of
land. Mayor Standley asked Council if they objected to R-6 zoning; De Gregorio,
nQ; Pedersen, no; Walls, make it what is across the street; Breasted, no; Markalunas,
multi-family; Behrendt, R-6; Standley, R-6.
Planner John Stanford told Council that the Rio Grande property had been recommended
as a specially planned area which required that the property be developed only on
adoption of a master plan for the entire proposed site. Councilman Breasted said
he was in favor of the area being planned and sell to the post office provided some
plan reviewed and approved by the P & Z and that the ciruculation problem is worked
out. Mayor Standley asked if what the Council had asked the staff to do in regard
to the p~st office alignment wouldsatisfy these requirements. Breasted said the
entire area should be completely looked at and planned before selling directly to
the post office. Sale to the post office shouldnot jeopardize specially planned area
and vice versa. Councilman De Gregorio asked if the Council zoned this SPA, didn't
it prohibit selling to the Post Office. City Attorney Stuller told council in an
SPA, a building permit could not be issued until the entire area was master planned
to Council's satisfaction. Councilwoman Markalunas asked what other options there
were for this area. John Stanford said it could be zoned Public and Park. Mayor
Standley told Council if the City got going, they should be able to come up with a
master plan. Councilman Breasted said he felt planning for this area should be
done without this kind of pressure ...........
John Stanford told Council the planning process would be going back and looking at
the Adam Kravatsky plan and identifying the problems within that plan and revising
it, and then presenting it to P & Z. Stanford suggested a study session with the
P & Z to get some consistency with regard to the future development of the Rio
Grande property.
Mayor Standley asked Council for their feelings on the zoning of this property.
Everyone said it should be zoned specially planned district.
John Stanford brought up the F.A.R. in the Service/Commercial/Industrial area.
· he Planning Office intially recommended a F.A.R. of 2:1; the Council had recommended
it be reduced to 1:1. Councilman Behrendt, 1:1; Councilwoman Markalunas 1.5:1;
Councilman Walls, 2:1; Councilwoman Pedersen, 2:1; Councilman De Gregorio 2:1;
Councilman Breasted 2:1; Mayor Standley 2:1.
Councilman Breasted suggested asking the post office to work with the City to the
extent that they can in this specially planned area. Councilman Walls said the
post office is prepared to do this but there were some time restraints on the post
-'office.
K ~hryn S~ Ha~te~/ City C~ierk