Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19730625Meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Mayor Stacy Standley III, with Councilmen Jenifer ?edersen, James Breasted, Pete DeGregorio, Ramona Markalunas, Jack Walls, Michael Behrendt, City Attorney Sandra Stuller and City Manager RUss Campbell. Councilman Breasted moved to approve the minutes of June 4, 6, and llth as prepared and mailed by the City Clerk. Seconded by Councilman DeGregorio. Ail in favor, motion Mr. Wolfe ~rom Garmisch request a letter from Council indicating a welcome committee of Sister some sort will be on hand to receive visitors from Garmisch under the sister city program. City Also setting up travel arrangements for people from Aspen to visit Garmisch. Council Program agreed to have Mayor Standley send a letter to the Burgermeister of Garmisch inviting visitors to Aspen from Garmisch. Mr. James Grinnel submitted and read letter relating to Ordinance #19. (See full text Ord. #19 during public hearing in these minutes). Mountain Queen, Final Plat - City Engineer submitted a memorandum to Council stating a Mt. Queen request to table this item due to problem of fire protection for this subdivision. Subdiv. Councilwoman Markalunas moved to table this item. Seconded by Councilman Walls. Ail in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #19, SERIES OF 1973 - City / County Planner Herb Barrel stated at the last Ord. #19 meeting, the intent of the ordinance was discussed. Since that time, the Planning and Bldg. Permit Zoning Co~ission has reviewed the criteria which is now before the Council for approval. Review Further pointed out that in addition to the criteria, the Planning and Zoning Commission will be using the interim land use plan. Within the next couple of weeks will be working at getting copies of the map out and then will proceed with the up-dating of the criteria. Will be asking for mar~ket feasibility studies for offices to find how large an activity this is. Further need to relate second home market to professional offices. Planning and Zoning will be continually amending the criteria as time goes on. List of building permits pending now before the Building Inspector was submitted; list not including single family dwellings. Councilwoman Markalunas moved to re-open the public hearing on Ordinance #19, seconded by Councilman Walls. Ail in favor, motion carried. Councilman Walls read the following correspondence and requested they be made a part of record: "Dear Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council: The Aspen Board of Realtors is deeply concerned about the pending enactment of Ordinance No. 19. While we are generally in favor of the proposed revisions to the Master Plan and corresponding zoning changes as required to implement the revised Plan, we believe that Ordinance No. 19 is not a well advised step toward the accomplishment of community goals. Our concern may be summarized as follows: Enforcement of the ordinance is keyed to planning and zoning commission (P&Z) approval or disapproval ~f proposed development "in accordance with the amended general land use map and accompanying text". Although the map has been available for inspection in the Planning Office, the text of the review criteria remains, by and large, a mystery to the general public. Neither the map~-n~he[~es~J~Ras~been widely disseminated. As a result, the public has been "short~Jchanged'~ of any real opportunity to give thoughtful analysis and reflection to this comment to the City Council. The so-called "review criteria" that we have recently seen do not contain objective standards for ~&Z to apply. Instead P & Z is clothed with almost absolute discretion to make subjective decisions. Finally, we doubt very much that restricting tourist accommodations by rezoning from AR-1 to residential will in fa~t "provide residential areas for permanent residents, (and) broaden the economic base of the community" as~stated in the preamble to the ordinance. It is unwise to merely assume that these desired social and economic benefits will result from the amended general land use map now proposed. Without definitive studies to guide and justify both Council and the community in their efforts to enhance the quality of life in Aspen, wholesale rezoning on nothing more than a hope and a prayer approaches irresponsibility. We would now~like to expand on each of the ~hree points made in the foregoing sumnmry. A. The public has not been adequately informed. Ordinance No. 19 was first read on May 14 and was published two days later. It was not until May 21 that Council got its first look at the amended map. On that occasion Mayor Homeyer was ,uoted as saying that she "had a terrible feeling there's a lot we don't know about this map so we really don't know what questions to ask." City Planner Barrel said the new plan was as significant as the original general plan and added "It's just too big to try and soft pedal," By the time the public hearing came along on June 11, P & Z had still not decided on specif: review criteria and it was reported that only one member of the general public appeared to comment on the ordinance. This should not be read as an indication of apathy. On the contrary~ it truly reveals the almost total lack of public information as to the significan~ and far reaching effects of the ordinance. Simply making the map 8vailMble for inspection in City Hall is less than the full and adequate public disclosure that a change of this significance should warrant. There is a substantial difference between not keeping it a secret and really taking it to the public on a full information basis. We sincerely believe that the public has been "short changed"; that Council should rectify that situatio~ and should not enact Ordinance No. 19 in the absence of informed public discussion and c ommen t. B. There are no objective review criteria. The scheme of Ordinance No. 19 calls for P & Z review of practically all building permits. The really significant language of the ordinance is as follows: "Approval or disapproval shall be in accordance with the amended g~meral land use map and accompanying text which, for purposes of the review procedure, are hereby m~de m part of this ordinance." "The Planning & Zoning Commission is further authorized to establish additional review criteria for application in the review procedure. Provided, however, that such excepted uses and review criteria must, prior to their application, be approved by the City Council. Until the review criteria are established, the ordinance is incomplete and no one knows how it will be applied. Within the last week sc-called review criteria have been mmde available but unfortunately they shed no light on what is going to happen. Such basic things as building bulk and height, parking and density are committed to the total discretion of P & Z without any objective legislative.s~andards. Take density for examDle~ The "Criterion" is: "Density set by Planning and Zoning Commission at the time of building permit review, based on site plan review physical conditions of site, impact resulting from the development." This standard, if it is a standard, is so vague that neither the.landowner nor P & Z can know what it means. How does one measure "impact" unless there are some objective stand- ards. It is difficult to imagine a grant of more arbitrary and unlimited discretion. How can the landowner have any plans drawn if he hasn't the slightest idea of permitted density or of acceptable building bulk and height? Moreover, P & Z customarily relies heavily on the recommendations of the Planning Staff. We cannot believe that Council would willingly abdicate its responsibilities to provide adefluate legislative standards for this community. Yet Ordinance No. 19 in its present form does exactly that by concentrating absolute discretion in P & Z and, through it, in the Planning Department. Until objective criteria ~ are developed and adopted, Ordinance No. 19 is defective from every standpoint. Small wonder the general public has been unable to air its views to the City Counci~. C. The social and economic conse~uence~ of Ordinance No. 19 are unknown. Ordinance No. 19 seems premised on the notion that reducing the proportion of tourist accommodations to total capacity will necessarily increase permanent resident housing, benefit the economy by broadening its base, and alleviate Certain transportation problems. We seriously question this premise and strongly suggest that there is an almost total absence of reliabIe study information to underpin this thesis. Tourism is the basis of this community. Ail business activity is dependent upon securing tourists. The wide variety of housing available to tourists i~ an integral part of the community. Future concentration in a "holding pen" enclave is ~ot in keeping with our own or the tourists' best interest. Concentration will have a deteriorating affect on the tourist and the City. The tradition- al (3-6 month) summer visitors ~ent condominiums as lodges and private homes cannot handle this type of semi-resident. Summer visitor growth is increasing at a greater r~te than winter visitor growth. They do not use the mountain and the proposed future concentration of summer visitors would suit neither visitor nor resident as a large majority of summer activities are located at the Music Tent and Institute. There is a continuing myth that we have an employee housing shortage. We do have a cheap housing shortage, but the proposed rezoning will not alleviate that nroblem. The " current land cost in the AR-1 District is approximately $7 per s~uare foot, or $10,500 per building unit for apartments. In the existing R-6 District the going price is about $40,000 for 6,000 s~uare feet of sihgle family or duplex building lot. No amount of re- zoning or density reduction will reduce these prices. They may falter in their infla- ~-~ tionary trend but they won't reverse the trend. Three years ~go the density in AR-1 wms cut in half, at that time AR-1 land was selling for ~4.50-$5.00 per smuare·fooC and the average land cost per apartment unit was S3500-S3700. Reducing density and encouraging permanent type housing building activity in the manner proposed will have the following affect if recent history is our guide~to the future: The average land cost per apartment unit will be approximately S20,000 in two-three years in the Mixed-Residential area-about 6 times the cost in the 1968-69 era. This will encourage permanent housing construction? Even if land costs per unit stayed the same as today, simple economics would show that it is not feasible to build rental units for permmnent housing unless the rental charges were in the $600-S800 per month range if the developer were to get an average return on his investment. How many units of this type have been buil~ in the AR-1 District and how many single family homes have been built in the AR-1 District in recent years? Very few! Changing to a Mixed-Residential classification and reducing density will not accomplish the proposed objective. The fine balance that exists between higher income visitors (a 1970 Chamber survey indicate that 49% of the winter tourists had incomes of $25,000 a year or higherI and medium income residents and the continuing inter-relationship between the two deserves very cautious study before any major changes are executed. The economic quality of life of the average resident is a major consideration. Until we know for sure what social and economic consequences will flow from the proposed transition in land use and zoning it is unwise to institute a major change. We need to know and, by proper studies can ascertain, whether or not the proposed change in zoning density and use would destroy tourist ~uality; would increase the residential base only for the very wealthy; might decrease the economic quality of life for the average resident We believe that social and economic studies should be undertaken immediately to give us the answers to these questions and that Ordinance No. 19 should not be enacted until the results of such studies are available. /s/ The Aspen Board of Realtors William Mason President" "Dear Mr. Mayor & Members of City Council: The Pitkin County Construction Association offers this letter as an endorsement to the document prepared by the Aspen Board of Realtors. Further, we feel, as we think most residents do, that an improved, up-dated zoning ordinance is necessary. However, we feel that Ordinance No. 19 is inadequate, if not dangerous. Will Ordinance No. 19, as written, stand up under subsequent attack? Was it properly presented to the public, or can it be broken by some technicality. Can it be broken by some legality? Is it sound constitutionality? If it can be broken, what are the implications to the community? We strongly urge delaying passage of Ordinance No. 19 if any of these ~uestions are unanswered and until presentations are made to the various community groups and organizatJ /s/ Pitkin County Contractors Association President." Mr. Amos Jordan, representing the Aspen Institute, request an exemption from the building permit review based on the following reason: Aspen Institute filed a master olan for their holdings in the west end of the City in April of 1971. The Planning and Zoning Commission did approve the master plan. Within the master plan is a chalet and a work shop building~ application for building permit will be filed within the.next two weeks. Further there is a lack of guidance since institutional zoning has not come to pass at this time. Mr. Bartel stated the Planning and Zoning Commission and Planning office feel this would qualify as an exception since a master plan was approved some time ago, as long as the buildings are in compliance with the plan as filed. Council agreed wit.h the exemption. Letter from Mr. William Kirwin, Jr. was read by Mayor Stan~tey as follows: "Dear Mr. Mayor and Ladies and Gentlemen~of the Council: I refer to the letter o~ this date written to you by the Aspen Board of Realtors concernin Ordinance No. 19. The Aspen Board of Realtors opposes the ordinance and states, in that letter, the reasons. I am a real estate broker and a member of the Aspen Board of Realtors. I did not, however vote to support the position taken by the Board, and by this letter I would like to register my dissent. I believe in the intent of the Ordinance No. 19. I also believe that the ordinance contains serious flaws which must be corrected. However, I would rather work from the basi of the philosophy of land use presented in the ordinance, and to try by study and adjusting and modifying the methodology or the mechanics of implementing the ordinance, than to see it delayed or defeated. We have had the Oppor'tunity for the past five years to do volun- tarily what is proposed in the ordinance, and we have failed so far to do it. I favor the passage of the Ordinance NO. 19 but strongly urge that the City planners invite the advice of the Realtors, the architects, and the builders in the area in a joint effort to refine many of the vague and seemingly unnecessarily arbitrary sections of the ordinance I would encourage the City to iL~L~ediately appoint a representative group to work, on a "crash project" basis (at this llth hour), with the planning office, to refine and define, so that the ordinance can be used as a firm and positive guide rather than a statement of arbitrary concept. /s/ William H. Kirwin, Jr., Broker" "Dear Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council: This letter is to express my agreement with the letter to the Council from the Aspen Board of Realtors dated June 25, 1973 with respect to Ordinance No. 19. As a concerned citizen and professional involved daily with problems of planning and environmental design I feel the most effective way of arriving at solutions to Aspen's planning problems i~ through careful study by qualified individuals. Decisions made with undue haste tend 'to cultivate problems for the future without solving the problems of the present. /s/ Larry Windes" Robin Molny questioned Page 3, 4(c) as to whether it relates to building area or lot area. Mr. Barrel reported this section me. lares to building bulk and ~the reason for that section was to eliminate building bulk as you progress up the mountain, it re.lares to llving arena. Further questioned review by the P & Z being at the time of obtaining a building permit. This would require the individual to have complete drawings prior to review by the P & Z and c. ould~e exp~nsive. Suggest sketch or pr~elimimarydrawing.s be acceptable at the time of review. Mr.~Bartel stated he ~ould agree to that. Mr. Molny further stated he did not feel Ordinance ~19 goes far enough, feel a moritorium should be called. Also pe,o~le should realize this is only a one ~year.~pr.opoaal.. Feel the community is passed the point of committees and studiea. Impact zoning is a new .and modern method and this ordinance empowers the P & Z to do that. Each project is reviewed a it relates to impact on the community. Feel it is an important step forward. Mr. Donald Helmich, Realtor, stated a lot of the realtors in the community are in agreement with what the City is trying to do. By changing the zoning and the uses, this will not affect the real estate values. Realtors are close to the problem as every day are in contact with the individual looking for an $150.00 apartment to the mill~0naire who wants to make an investment. This ordinance envisions taking certain areas and making them tourist. The ordinance does not take into account supply and demand. This zoning actuall~ makes the area more desirable, you can't drive out of town people with money out. The guy from Texas will be the only one who can afford to buy and live here,y~n6redriving the local people out. Within. the next five years would guarantee the surmmer business will be over what the winter business is. Already the summer rates at lodges are going up. Councilman Walls stated people in the community are acared and that is the reason for the big rush on building permits. Do not feel the result desired is attainable within one year Mayor Standley stated he did not feel the ordinance was strong enough or d~finitive enough. Feel,~ma=ket feasibility~studies should be required for the tourist zones as well The_City should be lookimg at the demands from the. tourists rather than from the developers. Water will be a big problem, alzeady.is to serve south of purant,Street, if the summer buainess exceeds winter business. Feel.it is imperative that Ordinance ~19 be passed today and the studies begin. Councilman Walls ~uestioned what .studies will be:done over the next year. Mr. Barrel stated there are two areas - environmental and planned investment fee. The legislature says air quality shall be preserved and one of the considerations in the plan is to estab- lish a land use pattern that compliments the transpoztation plan. Hnder ~the plant inves? tm~t~sc, hedule must consider that the City is in a position with durrent growth rates to find itself at a deficit to provide service. Will s~imply not be able to ~fford to provide the services. Councilman Behrendt stated the 1970 census had Aspen as the number one in the country with the fastest.r~te o~,~0wth. Councilman Walls suggested the. ordinance be tabled at th~ time for second reading and a ~o~k session with the Planning and Zoning Commission be held along with the public so that people will understand what the c ~zterza zs sayzng. Mr. Bartel explained ~the criteria is separate from the ozdinance and it ~can be changed and will be as the studies go on throughout the year. Councilwoman Markalunas pointed out the ordinance is only the framework, the meat of the ordinance is the criteria. Discussed attendance by the citizens of the previous meetings held by the P & Z and CoUncil when Ordinance #19 was being considered. Mr. Whitiney Miller of the Aspen Valley Improvement Association stated citizens are unin~ formed as to what Ordinance ==19 is all about. Everyone is asking for planning and an ex- planation of the ordinance should be tgiven that the citizens can understand. Mr. Don Piper stated he has made efforts over the last few weeks to see and obtain copies of the map and criteria amd they were not available~. It was Thursday of last week before this material was available. As relates to the figures mentioned earlier relating to the census, the rate of growth of permanent residents vs tourist beds should be considered. Pat Maddalone questioned if it were possible to call a two-week moritorium while the cri- teria is put into shape so that it can be understood. Mayor Standley stated the additional time will not solve the problem, people react only in a crisis situation. Ms. Harland stated many people present this evening are involved on different boards and commissions and cannot make every single meeting, sometimes its only when there is a crisis and you make time. Dunaway suggested cOUncil adopt the ordinance, the criteria can be changed. Attorney Jim Moran stated to Council, the Council is passing the buch to the P & Z. The real problem is the Council does not know how to restate bulk, heights, etc., If the City wants to be honest they should call a moritorium. The ordinance in its present state is a bad ordinance and fear that some developer, who has a lot of money tied up, will X Ordinance ~19 because it is incomplete. The criteria is the key to the ordinance and is a part of the ordinance as well as the map. If they were not publicshed, the citizens don't really know what the ordinance is all about. The view plane ordinance is very dis- tressing in that' the plane is established and the only time the neighboms know about it is when they read about it in the newspaper. There is no provision fo notify the people who are located adjacent or in a view plane or dorridor. City Attorney Stuller stated the ordinance do~ refer to the map but does not refer to the criteria. The criteria comes into paly after the ordinance is adopted. The criteria re- lates to standards and they will be c~anging although this yaar of review. The end result will be a new zoning ordinance and zning map which will follow the standard.procedures for adoption. Mr. Moran further stated the P & Z ~1 be going on with what should be taking place with the Council, the ordinance is not definitive enough i.e. density shall be established by the P & Z based on physical examination, character, its impact etc. Attorney Ralph Brendes pointed out the Council retains the final approval of the criteria. Attorney stuller pointed out the mm p and criteria are not definitive at this time, the map is only an interim zoning map to be utilized, changed, etc.,~during this yar of review and the same holds true for the criteria as well. Mr. Barrel stated due to the expense, it will take a month to get the map in reproducable ~rm. Did not want to spend the money ($1500) until it was found the ordinance would pass. It was pointed out by Jim Grinnell that lots purchased by the City in the west Aspen Sub- ~vison should be coded as open space. Councilman DeGregorio moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Breasted. Ail in favor, motzoncarrze Councilman Walls moved that the reading of Ordinance #19 Series of 1973 be tabled till next Monday at 5:00 and during the week a public work session be held with the Planning and Zoning so that ihe ordinance is understood on all aspect of the ordinance and the criteria that goes with the ordinance. Se~nded by Councilwoman Markalunas.Roll call vote - Councilmen Behrendt, aye; Walls, aye; Markaunas, aye; Pedersen, aye; Breasted, aye; DeGregorio, nay; Mayor Standley, may. Mtion carried. Council agreed tohold a study session with P & Z and citizens on Thursday at 5:00 p.m. Councilwoman Markalunas moved to read, Ordinance #21, Series of 1973. Seconded by Councilm ORDINANCE Breasted. Ail in favor, motion carried #21, SERIES OF ORDINANCE ~21, SERIES OF 1973, "AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ARTI'C~g II OF CHAPTER 21 OF THE 1973 MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED 'CIGARETTE TAX' AND DECLARING THAT AN EMERGENCY EXISTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ENACTMENT" was read by title by the City Clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 1973. Seconded by Council- man Breasted. Roll call vote - Councilmen DeGregorio, aye; Markalunas, aye; Breasted, aye Walls, aye; pedersen, aye; Behrendt, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. Deed submitted by the City CLerk and reported by the City ~ttorney to be in order. Thomas Mayor's O'Brien and Diana Ellsworth for east ~ of Lot p, all of Lots Q, R, & S, Block 69, City Deed amd Townsite of Aspen. Councilman Behrendt moved to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the deed. Seconded by Councilwoman Markalunas. Ail in favor, motion carried. P&Z Appt. Appointments ~- Mayor Standley reported the Council met with the applicants for interviews & prior to the meeting. City Clerk reported the tally of Council votes for appointment to HPC the P & Z were as follows: Barbara Lewis, Charles Vidal, Bryan Johnson, Jack Jenkins and to fill the vacancy of Anthos Jordan, Bill Gaudino. Highest number of votes for the Histor- ic Preservation Commission were for Robert Marsh. Pitco Pitkin County Commissioners, Liaison member - Mayor Standley stated he felt there was a Commissione~ .need for better communication with the Commissioners and suggest a member of the Council Liaison serve as an ex-officio member of the Commissioners and a Commissioner act in the same capacity with the City. Skated Councilwoman Pedersen has agreed to this assignment. Councilman DeGregorio moved to establish a liaison member to the Pitkin County Commissioners Seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Ail in favor, motion carried. Councilman DeGregorio moved to nominate Councilwoman Pedersen as the liaison member. Seconded by Councilman Behrendt. No further nominations. Councilwoman Pedersen elected by unanimous vote. RCDC Resource Conservation and Development Counsel-- City Manager Campbell stated the meetings are held monthly in Glenwood Springs. Do not know what the objectives of the Counsel are, presently they are doing a physical inventory of about a four county area. Believe at this time the administrative staff should attend the meetings. Council concurred. Appt. P&Z Appointments, Boards & Commissions -~Councilman Behrendt moved that a vote be taken on the HPC appointments. Seconded by Councilman Breasted. Roll call vote Councilmen Pedersen aye; Breasted ale; DeGregorio aye; Markalunas aye; Walls aye; Behrendt aye; Mayor Standley aye. Motion carried.- Councilman DeGregorio moved to appoint Bill Gaudino to fill the vacancy of Jordan on the P & Z. Seconded by Councilwoman PederSen~ Roll call vote - Councilmen Behrendt nay; Walls nay; Markalunas nay; DeGregorio aye; Breasted nay; Pedersen nay; Mayor Standley aye. Motion not carried. Councilman Breasted moved to appoint Judy Ferrenberg to fill the vacancy of Jordan on the P & Z. Seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Roll call vote - Councilmen Pedersen aye; Breasted aye; DeGr~gorio nay; Markalunas nay; Walls nay; Behrendt nay; Mayor Standley nay. Motion not carried. CoDncil request further applications be taken and interviews be scheduled. Historic Preservation Commission - Councilman Walls.moved to nominate Barbara McLaughlin, Seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to nominate Robert Marsh. Seconded by Councilman Behrendt. CoUncilman Walls moved to close the nominations. Seconded by Councilman DeGregorio~ Ail in favor, motion carried. McLaughlin Roll call vote - Councilmen Pedersen nay; Breasted nay; DeGregorio nay; Markalunas nay; Walls aye; Behrendt aye; Mayor Standley nay. Motion not carried. Marsh - Roll call vote Councilmen Behrendt aye; Walls aye; Markalunas aye; DeGregorio aye Breasted aye; Pedersen aye; Mayor Stahdley aye. Motion~carried. Mall Recom- Mall Commission Recommendations - Mr. Jon Hicken, Chairman of the Commission, outlined mendations briefly the recommendations of the Commission at this time as follows: 1. Parking permit, Mall permit; 2. Alley 89; 3. Restaurants; 4. Merchants; 5. Music and Special Events; 6. Bicycles; 7.~'Dogs; 8. Pedicabs and Hors~'Carts. Mr. Hicken stated to Council, the feeling of the Commission at this time is to follow the existing laws and make no drastic changes, i.e., dog control, etc. As relates to vendors, have recommended they not be allowed at tkis time. Suggestion~was made by Councilman Behrendt that if merchandise is not allowed on the- - sidewalk~ this will eliminate some ~f the activity that was anticipated. Mr. Hicken reported there are not'that many shops Willing to move out into the mall ~nd it was felt ~ ~-~ it should be limited to restaurants at this time. Changes can be made at a later date. City Attorney Stuller questioned Council as to how long the leases should be and at what price for restaurants to lease the streets. Mayor Standley stated he would hate to see the City give away their streets, thus increas- ing the businesses square footage which would be added to the price of the business. ~ Representative from The Circuit stated thai'if they are not able to get out into the street ~_~ within the next 10 days, economically it would be impossible to do it this year. Suggestion was made the City lease the areas at a $1.00 per lease for the season or the next 90 days as has been done in the past. Councilman Behrendt moved that the recommendations of the Mall Commission be adopted and approve of 3 month leases at $50.00 for restaurants extending into the public right-of-way. Seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Ail in favor, motion carried. It was explained that merchandise could be brought out into the right-of-way under special events. Revenue sharing - City Manager Campbell stated the City will be receiving this year approx- Revenue imately $64,000 and request guidance from Council in order to fill out the federal form as Sharing to how it is generally felt the City will be spending this money. Mr. Campbell outlined to Council items which the Administrative staff felt were important and how the money might be spent: street improvements, downtown; City shops; third floor City Hall; restoration of the Ope=a House;~.fund information bureau run by the City; golf course improvements; footbridges, bikepaths, tennis courts. Councilman Behrendt moved the City state in general terms the money will be directed toward community development and historic preservation. Seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Ail in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #19, SERIES OF 1973 - Councilman Breasted moved to read Resolution =c19. Resolution Seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried. #19; Bonds, Railroad RESOLUTION #19, SERIES OF 1973 (see bond issue) was read in full by the City Clerk. Property Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Resolution ~19. Seconded by Councilman Walls. Roll call vote - Councilmen Pedersen aye; Breasted aye; DeGregorio aye; Markalunas aye; Walls aye; Behrendt aye; Mayor Standley aye. Motion carried. American Management Seminar - Councilwoman Pedersen moved that the City take advantage of AM this seminar. Seconded by Councilman Walls. Ail in favor, motion carried. Seminar Manager Campbell stated this would be on July 12th and 13th. Stock Transfer, Heliogabalus, Inc. Forms-required by the State and City were submitted Heliogaba- and reported by the City Clerk to be all in order, lus stock transfer Councilman Walls moved to approve the stock transfer as submitted. Seconded by Councilman Breasted. Ail in favor, motion carried. Suggestion was made to Council, they consider a liquor review board as authorized under the Code. Extension of Liquor Licensed Premises (Mall) Forms were submitted by the City Clerk for Red Onion the Red Onion and The Circuit. The Circuit Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve~the extension of liquor premises as submitted. Seconded by Councilman Breasted. Ail in favor, motion carried. City Manager Campbell left Council Chambers. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 1973 - Councilman Walls moved to read the ordinance by title. Ord. m22 Seconded by Councilman Breasted. Ail in favor', motion carried. Trails ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 1973 - MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS PROVIDI~ FOR DEDICATION OF LAND DMSIGNATED ON ANY ADOPTED TRAIL PLAN AND EXCLUDING SUCH DEDICATED LAND FROM ANY OTHER REQUIRED DEDICATIONS was read by title by the City C~rk. Councilman Walls moved to adopt Ordinance #22, Series of 1973. Seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Roll call vote~- Councilmen Behrendt aye; Walls aye; Markalunas nay; DeGregorio aye; Breasted aye; Pedersen aye; Mayor Standley aye. Motion carried. Forest Service - Mayor Standley stated the Forest Service is requesting a letter of support Forest from the City relating to their negotiations of tiing employee housing into the Snowmass Service area and setting up limits for development of the ski areas, mt. density Council request the Forest Service send a letter to the City specifically outlining their request and the approach they will be using. 1459 Chamber Opera House Space, Chamber and Aspen Reservations, Inc. - Mr. George Madsen representing Space the ski corporations was present and stated it is felt by the Chamber and the ski corpor- ations the two faciIi~ies should be under 'the same roof. Further stated this is not commercial thing and to ask for a large price f~the space feel is unfair. If a large rent is to be charged would rather find another lodation that iS more desirable. In the past this service has been available in this location but under different associations. Mayor Standley stated he had had Mr. Fleischer appraise the space and he stated $3.00 a square foot. Councilman Breasted stated'that if the City'is to give something away, it should benefit everyone. Mr. Freff Smith stated the two ski corporations are now working together on a package plan which services all guests and it Wodld be a savings on communications. Mr. Jim Grinnell, representing the Chamber, stated they are asking for the following: (1)-right ~0 sublease; (2) permiss~o~ to 2e~bdeI~; (3) eXten~lo~ ~of the Chamber lease so the remodeling is an econ~icaI~thing. ' Ms. Eve Homeyer stated the Chamber should submit a plan of the remodeling before it is approved.~'i~ CouncilWoman Markal~nas md~ed"t'o authorize ~he chamber to sub lease to the Aspen Reserva- tions, inc. Seconded ~by Cb~ncilman Walls; Roll ea'll vote - CouncilMen Pedersen nay; Breasted nay; DeGregorio aye; Markalunas aye; Walls aye'; Behrendt aye; Mayor Standley aye. Motion carried'. Councilman Walls moved to continue~this meeting to Monday July 2nd, at 5:00 p.m., for consideration of second reading or'Ordinance ~19. Seconded by Councilman Breaste'd. Ail in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:00'p.m.