Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19891219Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 ORDINANCE #69, SERIES OF 1989 - Aspen Mountain PUD 1 RESOLUTION #55, SERIES OF 1989 - Aspen Mountain Lodge Non-com- pliance 9 BALLOT ISSUES 10 ORDINANCE #80, SERIES OF 1989 - Charter amendment; disposition of city-owned property 11 Graduated Real Estate Transfer Tax 12 ORDINANCE #81, SERIES OF 1989 - Sales Tax Increase of .45 Percent 12 Sale or disposition of Red Butte Lots. 13 AFFORDABLE HOUSING REPORT 14 AFFORDABLE HOUSING MITIGATION CONDITION 14 ENCROACHMENT REQUEST - Sportstalker 15 RESPONSE TO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS DRAFT EIS 15 17 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Mayor Stirling called the continued meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Tuite, Gassman, Peters and Crockett present. ORDINANCE #69l SERIES OF 1989 - Aspen Mountain PUD Mayor Stirling moved to amend the motion on the floor; a motion to approve Ordinance #69 for final consideration going to the electorate February 13, 1990 to amend the part going to the electorate to read: Shall Ordinance #69 be adopted by the City? with (a) without additional conditions or (b) with the following conditions to be added in during the discussion tonight; seconded by Councilman Peters. Mayor Stirling said the change is to not require the 90 affordable housing units in (a) that were required at the meeting last night. Mayor Stirling said those 90 units are not part of Hadid's proposal. Councilman Peters said this puts the question of what is on the table to the voters. Councilman Gassman stated he would like the question as simple as possible. Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, told Council the ordinance has to be in the ballot question because it is definitive about the scope of the application and what the project is. All in favor, motion carried. Bob Hughes, representing the applicant, introduced into the record a list of 300 individuals who signed a newspaper advertisement indicating they were interested in Council accepting the offer of the Bavarian Inn and in approving Ordinance #69. Hughes entered into the record the June 12 , 1989 , letter from Hadid Aspen Holdings to the Council proposing employee housing. R. J. Gallagher told Council the ACRA recently conducted a survey of their membership and received 32 percent or 210 surveys. One question on the survey was, "Should the Ritz Carlton hotel be allowed at its presently permitted size", 69 percent were in favor of building the Ritz at its presently permitted size and 60 percent of the responses believe the ACRA should get involved in the issue. Gallagher said there is also a summary of what the ACRA members feel are the most important issues facing Aspen today; highway 82, housing, allowing the building of the Ritz, using the Meadows for non-profit groups and permitting reasonable development, continuing ACRA marketing efforts. This survey was submitted to the record. Amy Margerum, planning director, told Council when the staff came up with recommendation, they relied upon the purpose section of planned unit development review which gives 4 general areas to consider; (1) the proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan; (2) the proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in surround- ing areas; (3) the proposed development shall not adversely affect 1 Continued Meeting __ Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 the future development of the surrounding areas; and (4) final development shall only be granted to development to which GMQS allotments have been obtained by the applicant. Ms. Margerum cited a section of the code that addresses amendments to final PUD applications which states that during the review of the proposed amendment the Council may require such conditions of approval as are necessary to insure that the development will be compatible with current community conditions which shall include but not be limited to applying for portions of development which have not obtained a building permit, any new community policies or regulations that have been implemented since the original approval or take into consideration changing community circumstances as they affect the original representations and commitments. Ms. Margerum said these concerns are mitigation of employee housing, scale and massing of the hotel, pedestrian access and open space, transportation impacts, and process issues dealing with the level of detail and the timing for the PUD. Ms. Margerum told Council the housing authority and planning office have looked at what they feel the overall impacts of the project on employee housing will be. Ms. Margerum said staff used the current housing guidelines and the code requirement which require that 60 percent of the estimated full time employees be mitigated. Ms. Margerum pointed out the applicant agreed in the previous PUD to provide housing for 73.4 percent of their employees. Ms. Margerum said staff has some concerns with how that commitment was made. Ms. Margerum said the housing authority has estimated the project needs to mitigate an additional 139.45 employees. The planning office feels the overall mitigation falls short of about 19 employees. Ms. Margerum said staff feels the original commitment of 43 employees at the Copper Horse is unrealistic causing a shortfall of 27 employees. This is a range of 46 to 166 total employees staff feels the project falls short of mitigating. Ms. Margerum said the original mitigation package included a credit for 69 employees due to a fact that a no interest loan was made to the housing authority for the Hunter Longhouse project. This loan enabled the housing authority to build 5 two-bedroom units adjacent to Hunter Longhouse. Ms. Margerum said staff tried to put a present day value on the loan to put it in perspective. Staff came up with a value of that money of $750, 917, the value over a 10 year period assuming 15 percent per year minus a 4 percent inflation rate. Ms. Margerum told Council staff looked at whether the city would require a project today to mitigate impacts via a loan or whether they should be paying that money. Ms. Margerum said generally staff requires applicants to pay fees rather than accepting a loan. Ms. Margerum recommended Council look at this as a loan rather than a payment. 2 Continued Meetinq___ Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Ms. Margerum noted it was asked how this relates to the in-lieu fee that other applicants are charged for housing. Ms. Margerum pointed out the PUD agreement states 56 percent will be moderate and 44 will be low income category. The low income in-lieu fee is $20,000 per employee. Ms. Margerum said she divided 59 employees (the credit minus 10 employees housing in the new part of Hunter Longhouse) into $750,917 to come up with a total in-lieu fee of $12,727 per employee. Ms. Margerum said there is a shortfall of what would be required today of over $500,000. Ms. Margerum told Council the external floor area ratio for the whole project is in excess of about 60,413 square feet. Ms. Margerum said this is not allowed under the current code. Tom Baker, planning office, told Council the staff was trying to grapple with the fact this PUD is in excess of close to 3 times the FAR required in the underlying zone district with a larger and massive structure on lot 1. Baker said the bulk of the development happens on the front of the PUD, most of the open space is one the back of the parcels. The open space and development are connected by a 50 foot wide easement. Baker pointed out the 200,000 square feet open space is quite far removed from the intense development. Baker said this functions more like a transfer of development rights than a PUD because of the fragile continuity between Top of Mill and lots 1 and 5. Baker said staff looked at the hotel both from a pedestrian point of view and from other areas in the community. Baker said at street level staff was concerned with the massiveness of the wall on the perimeter of the site. Most of these walls are between 40 and 50 feet high, 200 feet plus in length. Baker said the designer has articulated the building in several areas; however, the articulation has been in the 6, 8, 10 foot range. This loses something when there is a wall over 200 feet long. Baker said staff is concerned about the environment being projected on the outside of the hotel and the encouragement of pedestrian movement. Baker said one of the community's goals is to preclude use of the automobile whenever possible. Baker said by providing attractive pedestrian walkways, people would be inclined to walk rather than drive. In order to achieve that, a combination of landscaping, materials for the building and interesting spaces are needed. The articulation is lacking because of the scale. Baker said another perspective is to view the building from neighborhoods like the west end or Smuggler. Baker said what will be exposed because the site is moving up the mountain is the upper level of the structure and the roof. Baker the building has dormers to break up the view at street level but what is not broken up is the area behind the dormer roof area. Baker said from other areas in the community people will see unbroken roof lines which 3 Continued Meeting Aspen City. Council December 19, 1989 will give an appearance of massiveness. Baker said the design should articulate in both the facade and the roof line in a scale that's appropriate to break up the massiveness of these buildings. Baker said in the issue of scale, there is nothing in the community that resembles this structure. From that point of view, the building is out of scale with the rest of the community. Glenn Horn reminded Council that height has been discussed quite a bit. Horn said staff looked at a lot of buildings in the city to see where people felt comfortable with the heights. Horn said where the roof line starts on a building significantly affects the perception of height. Horn pointed out the North of Nell building is four stories straight up with a flat roof, which affects the perception of height. There is no relief for a pedestrian looking at the building. Horn said the Little Nell hotel has two stories below the eave line and two stories built into the eave line of the roof, which design does a lot to reduce the perception of the height of the building. Horn pointed out in this building there are three stories below the eave line of the roof and one story built into the roof. This design does a lot to create the perception of height on the building. Horn said this part of Aspen has never really been pedestrian oriented. Horn said the construction of this facility presents an opportunity to the city to increase the pedestrian movement in this area. The design of the Ritz has also helped to attract pedestr- ians into this area. Horn said too much of the front facade of the hotel is devoted to automobiles. Horn said there are some conflicts between automobiles and pedestrians in the design. Horn said he feels the service entrance is misplaced and conflicts with the pedestrian activity in the front of the hotel. Baker said the applicant has technically met the obligations of providing affordable housing; however, the reality is as a result of this development there will be more people on the highway. Baker encouraged the applicant to work with the city to further solutions for transportation and for affordable housing. Ms. Margerum said the intent of a planned unit development is to be able to see the entire development at one time to see how it fits together. Ms. Margerum suggested staff should have a conceptual understanding of what is proposed for the Top of Mill site at the same time as the plans for phase two. Harvey said the applicants have 47 units between lots 3 and 5. Harvey said the applicants feel the majority of the units should be located on lot 5. Harvey said the applicants will have to go through a process with the city for the location of these 47 units. Ms. Margerum said the planning office does not accept applications if they do not know what the total picture is. 4 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Ms. Margerum passed out some suggested conditions for the Aspen Mountain PUD. Condition #1 relates to affordable housing. Ms. Margerum said depending on what factor is used the deficit for affordable housing is between 46 and 166 employees. Ms. Margerum took an average of those two numbers and put in the condition that the project would provide off-site housing for a minimum of 106 additional employees in order to mitigate the impacts of the hotel phase one. The breakout should be the same as the PUD agreement, 56 percent low income and 44 percent moderate. Condition #2 is that the applicant shall forgive the outstanding balance of the loan to the housing authority in return for ratification of the 69 employee credits taken for mitigation of housing for phase one. Condition #3 is that the applicants shall pay $501,809 as partial fulfillment of the mitigation of the 69 employees credited to the applicant for the impacts of phase one. Condition number 4 does not limit the density of the project or the number of hotel rooms but speaks to the issue of external floor area for the entire PUD. Ms. Margerum said it is staff's feeling that in a reduction of FAR a little over 61,000 square feet should come from lot 1 so that it will be consistent with the underlying zone district. Ms. Margerum said the argument can be made that although the entire PUD is over that which is allowed by underlying zoning, that the applicant could vary the density on some of the other sites and leave lot 1 as it is. Ms. Margerum said the shape of the PUD in terms of the separation of the site does not lend itself to normal tradeoff in increasing density on various sites. Ms. Margerum said reducing density on some of the other sites would not get to the concerns expressed by the community on this project and would not satisfy the intent of the PUD review because the lots are too far removed from each other. Ms. Margerum said this is discretionary by Council. Ms. Margerum told Council condition #5 has to do with height. Ms. Margerum said the perceived massing of the project is a concern to staff and to the community. The condition tries to simplify the height issue by quantifying it with a number. The condition suggests that the maximum height of the hotel be no more than 160 percent of that allowed in the LTR zone district by code; this would be 44.8 feet. Condition #6 speaks to the process that when the application for final approval of phase two is submitted that it be accompanied by conceptual approval with the Top of Mill. Councilman Tuite said if there is a problem with the copper Horse, why isn't the Council discussing this. Councilman Tuite asked if it were a misrepresentation or what. Ms. Margerum said staff does 5 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 not feel credit should be given for 43 employees when the building cannot house more than 16 employees. Ms. Margerum said this should be made up through some other mechanism. Ms. Margerum said there are 15 people living at the Copper Horse now and if it could handle more there would probably be more living there. Mayor Stirling suggested Council try to make their recommended changes as simple as possible so the voters know what Council has in mind. Mayor Stirling said if Council recommends reduction of the external FAR on lot 1 by X percent, it will result in open space, height being addressing by making a bulk reduction. Mayor Stirling suggested Council address housing with a specific number of new workers to be housed. Mayor Stirling moved as two conditions of the second choice on the ballot there be #1 housing of 100 new workers; #2 that the bulk and mass of floor area on lot 1 be reduced by 25 percent which would bring it to 142,500. Motion DIES for lack of a second. Mayor Stirling said he is looking for above ground visual change. The number of units would be left up to the applicants. Councilman Peters moved to include amendments #1, 4, 5, and 6 as recommended amendment to the Aspen Mountain PUD, 106 additional employees is the combination of the average of the low end and the high end range plus the units that the city does think will be provided at the Copper Horse; seconded by Councilman Gassman. Councilman Gassman said he would be willing to delete condition #5 because he feels that will be addressed by lowering the external FAR. Councilman Gassman said conditions #1 and 4 could be accomplished without designing a new hotel. Councilman Crockett asked if Council dropped the height condition (#5), what assurance would Council offer the community in a critical issue. Councilman Peters said Council has heard a lot of complaints about the hotel that they are not addressing. Councilman Peters said condition #5 about reducing the height is important because it is one of the primary concerns of a lot of citizens. Councilman Crockett agreed he wants condition #5 left in the motion as the community has identified this as a great concern. Councilman Peters said condition it would bring this project into zoning of the new code, which is zoning of the old code, which is this project will create between community and the taxpayers are impacts. #4 has tremendous logic because conformance with the underlying more liberal than the underlying .75:1. Councilman Crockett said 1,000 and 2,000 people in this going to have to pay for the Councilmembers Crockett, Gassman and Peters in favor; Councilman Tuite and Mayor Stirling opposed. Motion carried. 6 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Ms. Stuller said this language will have to be approved with the ballot language resolution on January 8, 1990. Council took a 5 minutes recess. Councilman Peters said he feel condition #6 might be confusing to the voters and it may not have a lot of bearing on lot 1. Councilman Peters moved to remove #6 as one of the amendments to the Aspen Mountain PUD; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. Roger Tomasch, counsel for Savanah, asked what authority Council is working under in going to the voters with a proposed ordinance that is different from Ordinance #69. Mayor Stirling said this is part of Ordinance #69. Ms. Stuller answered Section 5.7 of the Charter. Tomasch said this section of the Charter allows Council to go to the electorate either with a proposed ordinance or a question. Ms. Stuller said the ballot question is, "Shall this ordinance be adopted". Tomasch said Council will enact an ordinance but will have to wait to see what form it will be in. Ms. Stuller said this ordinance will not be effective until voter ratification. Tomasch said it has become clear to him that this is moving inexorably towards extremely serious litigation. Tomasch said the proceedings Council has been through the last two nights are not what the judge charged Council to do. Tomasch said the Council seems to be moving towards a preordained decision. Tomasch said Judge Ossola ruled the Council was to take appropriate action. Tomasch said the Council has only two alternatives; to deny Ordinance #69, or to enact Ordinance #69. Tomasch said the only appropriate action of these two is to enact the ordinance. The applicant has spent $13,000,000 on improvements on reliance on a contract it had with the city. Tomasch said for Council to say they did not know what they were doing and are going to reconsider leads to a breech of promise, violation of equitable reliance, estoppel and a law suit that will take a long time and cost a lot of money. Tomasch said Council does not have the alternative of sending Ordinance #69 as it stands to the electorate because it is an abdication of Council's responsibilities. Council is supposed to make a decision. Tomasch said for Council to introduce new legislation to redesign the hotel ius unwarranted and unlawful. Tomasch said the applicants are very sensitive to the employee housing situation. Tomasch reminded Council at their last meeting there was a discus- sion whether or not the Bavarian Inn would be a part of any employee housing. Tomasch said the applicant is willing to add to 7 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Ordinance #69 an agreement that the Bavarian Inn will be used for employee housing. Tomasch said the applicants will need an opinion from the city that it is permissible to change the ordinance to add this. Tomasch said if the city goes forward with the irrational course of action to redesign the hotel on the spur of the moment, the offer is off the table and this is on the road to litigation. Tomasch said the city risks ending up with the Roberts design because if this amendment is not is not in effect, the city is back to what they are amending. Tomasch said Council should vote tonight on Ordinance #69 with the Bavarian Inn. Ms. Stuller told Council the Hadid representatives have brought forward the issues of estoppel and vested rights before Judge Ossola in their motion for reconsideration. Ms. Stuller said the judge wil l tell whether previous actions of both Hadid and the city preclude anything other than rubber stamping the approval given earlier. Ms. Stuller told Council there is case law to the effect that once legislation is invalidated it need not be merely ratified and approved on the second go round; it does create an opportunity for reconsideration based on changed circumstances. Ms. Stuller said she disagreed that the PUD agreement was a contract that binds the city to take certain action. Ms. Stuller said Council must always preserve their legislative prerogatives; they are a representative body. Ms. Stuller said there is a lot of history which indicates that the applicant has proceeded at risk; each building permit so indicated and they were fast tracked and partial. There were no guarantees that ultimate building permits would ever be issued. The applicant proceeded in the face of extensive litigation and arguably at risk. Ms. Stuller said there is also the contention that the applicant did not comply with the conditions of approval previously given. Ms. Stuller said the contention has been made that millions of dollars has been spent on infrastructure or on employee housing. Ms . Stuller said a response would be that all of those expenditures could be used toward a hotel that was in compliance with present zoning. Mayor Stirling said Judge Ossola's ruling did not preclude a vote, which is a public hearing. John Sarpa said if the city attorney is willing to say the applicants can amend the ordinance and include the Bavarian Inn, Sarpa said they are willing to work with the city. Mayor Stirling asked if the applicants are proposing ordinance be part of Ordinance #69 only if it is passed tonight. Sarpa said they feel this is redundant from what the community has already said and is a waste of effort. Sarpa said they are confident that the community will support this project. Sarpa said the Bavarian Inn will be included in Ordinance #69 if the Council were to vote on it at this meeting. Sarpa said the applicants feel Council should make their mind up and take the vote at this meeting. Ms. Stuller 8 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 said Council would like to posit to the public what they feel is appropriate and at the same time present an opportunity to ratify the applicant's proposal. Ms. Stuller suggested Council amend the motion to allow Hadid representatives an opportunity to present language for Council's consideration on January 8. This would constitute their statement of how they would like their issue presented to the public. Council agreed. Tuite, no; Peters, yes; Crockett, yes; Gassman, yes; Mayor Stirling, yes. Motion carried. Sarpa said the configuration that the city came up with cannot and will not be built by the applicants; it is not possible. RESOLUTION #55, SERIES OF 1989 - Aspen Mountain Lodge Non-com- pliance Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, reminded Council the city in the form of Resolution #39 found that Savanah had failed to comply with certain conditions of approval contained in the PUD agreement of September 1988. Ms. Stuller told Council copies of this resolution were served on the necessary parties; responses were filed, which precipitated the need for a public hearing, which was held November 28, 1989. Ms. Stuller said at the conclusion of that public hearing, Council requested she review the record and summarize the evidence given. Ms. Stuller said Resolution #55 is her best efforts at summarizing and concluding the substance of the November 28th hearing. Ms. Stuller said she feels it fair that in two areas Savanah's objections were substantiated. Ms. Stuller reminded Council there were two types of concerns; complying with time tables for continued construction under the uniform building code, which tied into the development approval as well as a series of construction schedules which related to construction of major elements of the Ritz Carlton approval as well as other developments on the PUD. Bob Hughes, representing the applicant, told Council they were only presented with the resolu- tion yesterday and do not agree with a lot of it. Hughes requested they have a chance to rebut these findings and to present them to Council in writing. Hughes said he feels the city and the applicant can come to an agreement where they comply, where they may not have technically complied, and how this can be remedied. Ms. Stuller pointed out the resolution does not recommend a remedy. Given the fact the approval of the hotel is being submitted to the electorate the enforcement would not be of much interest at this time. Ms. Stuller said if the project is approved by the public, new construction schedules will be brought forward. Ms. Stuller said she would like to have these proceedings concluded and a record made of the conclusion. John Sarpa said the applicants 9 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council December 19__1989 disagree with a lot of the conclusions and would like a chance to go through this. Ms. Stuller said Council comes to a conclusion when they have before them findings of fact that represent their understanding of what the evidence is. Councilman Peters said he has reviewed the findings and does not have a problem with them. Councilman Peters said he can also agree to continuing this to give the applicants a chance to respond. Mayor Stirling moved to hear a report from the applicants January 4, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. at a work session; seconded by Councilman Peters. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling said Resolution #55, 1989, will be put on Council's January 8, 1990 agenda. Amy Margerum, planning director, entered into the record a memorandum on the inspection of the Copper Horse and a memorandum from Bob Gish on the construction schedule. BALLOT ISSUES Mayor Stirling said the issues presently on the ballot are the prohibition against the sale of fur, the entrances to the city of Aspen, Ordinance #69, and the general obligation bonds for the Marolt property. Mayor Stirling said Resolution #54 is a proposed amendment to the sixth penny ordinance limiting use of these revenues to parks, open space and trails. Mayor Stirling said the original sixth penny ordinance was very broad sweeping and was not a pure open space fund. The other purposes were a renewal of existing city proper- ties, payment and construction of capital improvements and acquisition of real property. Councilman Crockett asked if a certain percentage of this fund goes toward retiring the Wheeler debt. Mayor Stirling said this is addressed in the resolution and was a clear aspect of the original ordinance. Councilman Crockett said he would like to reinforce the Wheeler before this amendment is addressed. Councilman Tuite said he has been working with the arts groups and with the Parks Association on the real estate transfer tax and the funds taken out for the Wheeler. Councilman Tuite said he would like to raise the RETT from 1/2 percent to 1 percent to keep this out of the land fund as much as possible. Councilman Tuite said the debt service in the past has run from $225,000 to $500,000 to support the Wheeler. Councilman Tuite said he is not ready to propose to change the RETT to 1 percent at this election. Hal Clark, Parks Association, told Council they are trying to create a land fund for the city. Councilman Gassman said the reason there is not much money in the land fund is that the city is using the funds to pay off bonds with which the city purchased 10 Continued Meetina Aspen Citv Council December 19. 1989 land. Councilman Crockett said he supports the concept of an autonomous land fund. Councilman Crockett said he is concerned about how the city achieves that in a comprehensive fashion incorporating the other financial issues that are facing the city. Councilman Crockett said he is concerned about restricting the use of a fund without replenishing it someplace else. Clark said there are about 6 properties that the city ought to be looking at for open space which they are not because there is no money in the fund. Councilman Peters said this is a great argument for having a funding source for capital improvements. Councilman Peters said he would rather not have to debate where the line is drawn between capital improvements and land. Al Blomquist pointed out that the 7th penny made transportation whole and made it so the city can plan for transportation needs. Blomquist said the parks association has recommended an 8th penny allocated to public buildings. Councilman Gassman said the city needs a capital fund, a housing fund and a land fund. Councilman Gassman said he is having difficulty allocating money to each of those respective things to make a comprehensive recommendation. Councilman Tuite moved to place the sixth penny amendment on the February 13 ballot; and to adopt Resolution #54, 1989; seconded by Councilman Crockett. Bill Efting, acting city manager, told Council he would like some time between now and January 8 to make sure this does not affect the parks and open space maintenance. Mayor Stirling said he is concerned about the mall, the limitations on existing revenues in the fund, and obligations to existing bonds. Councilman Tuite withdrew his motion. Councilman Tuite said he would like bond counsel and the finance department to review this. Mayor Stirling moved to direct staff to place this on the January 8 agenda; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #80, SERIES OF 1989 - Charter amendment; disposition of city-owned property Hal Clark, parks association, told Council this amendment makes it more difficult to dispose of city-owned property. The amendment would require 2/3 majority of the voters voting to approve the sale, exchange or disposition of property that was owned, acquired or used for parks, trails and open space. Clark said this amendment requires the receipt of fair market values for all properties sold that were previously used for parks, trails or open space, requires the money to go back into the sixth penny and to be used for parks, open space and trails purposes. The amendment 11 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 also requires that in exchange of properties, the new property be used for open space. This amendment also requires that the city cannot change the use of property without a 2/3 vote. Councilman Gassman pointed out this would prohibit the city from selling some property and putting the money into housing. Clark said that is correct. Councilman Peters said he is not interested in putting this on the ballot. Councilman Peters said a simple majority can put this Charter amendment into effect; a simple majority can also repeal it. Councilman Peters said he feels this ties Council's hands in the future. Council is not interested in putting this on the ballot. Graduated Real Estate Transfer Tax Councilman Peters noted the city currently has a GRETT which is supposed to be anti-speculative and to raise funds for affordable housing. Councilman Peters said this is not acting as an anti-speculative tax and is causing some problems to administer. Councilman Peters said Council has had a work session on the exemptions, the holding period, and when the tax should not be applied. Councilman Peters said the easiest way to deal with this is to make it a straight real estate transfer tax. This will raise more money for affordable housing and will save the city time. Councilman Peters suggested a 1 percent RETT take the place of the GRETT for 5 years. Councilman Gassman said he does not feel the graduation is large enough to stop specula- tion. Councilman Gassman agreed with simplifying this. Councilman Peters moved to direct staff to prepare a ballot question for the February 13 election to give voters the oppor- tunity to chose to replace the GRETT with a 1 percent flat RETT that would have the same time expiration date as the original GRETT; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Tuite and Gassman. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #81, SERIES OF 1989 - Sales Tax Increase of .45 Percent Councilman Peters said the purpose of raising sales tax revenues is to spread around the burden of affordable housing. Councilman Peters said this is an attempt to extend that burden to the retail community that sell goods and services to tourists, and that requires employees to take care of their needs. Councilman Peters said this funding source may give the city a way to capitalize on alternatives for affordable housing. Councilman Peters said if the sales tax is raised, he would like the city to raise the food tax rebate. Sandy Stuller, city attorney's office, told Council this will take effect July 1, 1990. It is provided this will have an automatic 12 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 termination date of 10 years. The revenues will be earmarked for public or private affordable housing opportunities. Councilman Peters moved to read Ordinance #81, Series of 1989; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Stirling. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #81 (Series of 1989) AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN ADDITIONAL POINT FORTY-FIVE (. 45 0 ) PERCENT SALES TAX IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, UPON THE SELLING OF TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY AT RETAIL OR FURNISHING OF SERVICES IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, OPERATIVE AND EFFECTIVE ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 1990 PROVIDING THAT THE ADDITIONAL REVENUES RECEIVED BY SAID INCREASE SHALL BE EXPENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ONLY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, INCLUDING (BUT NOT LIMITED TO) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, LAND ACQUISI- TION, CONVERSION COSTS, PAYMENT OF INDEBTEDNESS INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXPENDITURE, RESERVES, AND FOR EXPENDITURES NECESSARY TO PROTECT ANY SUCH PROPERTY AGAINST LOSS, DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL EXPIRE IN TEN YEARS BY ITS OWN TERMS; PROVIDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY AMEND, ALTER OR CHANGE SAID ORDINANCE EXCEPT AS THE PERCENTAGE OF TAX AND THE EARMARKING OF REVENUES THERE- FROM, AND MAY REPEAL SAID TAX IF ALL INDEBTEDNESS SECURED HEREBY IS PAID OR PROVIDED FOR; AND PROVIDING DETAILS IN RELATION TO THE FOREGOING was read by the city clerk Councilman Peters moved to adopt Ordinance #81, Series of 1989, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Crockett. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Crockett, yes; Gassman, yes; Tuite, yes; Peters, yes; Mayor Stirling, no. Motion carried. Sale or disposition of Red Butte Lots. Dave Myler, city attorney's office, said according to Charter the city has to ask the voters in order to change the use of land or to sell or dispose of such land. Myler said he will prepare a map for the ballot question so that people will know where the property is. Councilman Crockett moved to put on the ballot the change in use and sale of 5 acres of city-owned property in the Red Butte area; seconded by Councilman Peters. Mayor Stirling asked if this land was purchased with sixth penny funds. Myler said it was not; however, it requires voters approval irrespective of the manner of acquisition. Myler said this land was gifted to the city and has been zoned and used as open space. 13 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 There is no deed restriction on this land. Councilman Crockett said this is a result of the inventory the staff has recently conducted in examining the available city lands for affordable housing. Mayor Stirling said he would like to have the position of the Parks Association board by January 8th meeting. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Crockett moved to place on the ballot the disposition of the lots adjacent to the golf course; seconded by Councilman Peters. Mayor Stirling said these were purchased with the sixth penny when the golf course was purchased. Councilman Crockett said he feels this will use up the last bit of inventory of land the city has available for employee housing. Mayor Stirling said this is an extension of the open space for the golf course. Councilman Gassman said there are a lot of issues on the ballot and this question will detract from some of the other things the city is trying to do. Councilman Gassman said this issue will generate a lot of controversy. Councilman Crockett said he would like to explore every avenue for affordable housing. Councilman Peters withdrew his second. Motion DIES for lack of a second. AFFORDABLE HOUSING REPORT David Myler, city attorney's office, told Council he has inspected the Madsen Chalets and has concern about the condition of the buildings. Myler said before Council enters into a deed restric- tion proposal, they should make sure the building is in good shape and will last for the term of the redevelopment. Myler told Council he is also discussing a redevelopment with Mrs. Madsen. Myler said he would like Council's approval to proceed with the list of all other available properties that have been identified as possible affordable housing along the lines Council has dis- cussed. Myler said he would like to be able to bring Council a contract for their first discussion. Council agreed. AFFORDABLE HOUSING MITIGATION CONDITION Councilman Gassman moved to approve the recommended housing mitigation condition language; seconded by Councilman Crockett. Councilman Peters said the Council could direct the planning office to require one kind of change or another depending on where they want to focus the housing efforts. Mayor Stirling said it will be left for the housing office and planning department to deal with this. Amy Margerum, planning director, pointed out the language 14 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 is structured so that Council still has the discretion to require the housing be provided on site. Councilman Tuite said he does not want several developers negotiating for buy down of units and creating competition. Ms. Margerum said the purpose of this language is to allow applicants to go around bureaucracy and come up with a good deal that staff would approve. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Tuite and Peters. Motion carried. ENCROACHMENT REQUEST - Sportstalker Jim Gibbard, engineering department, told Council this request is for the existing north wall of the Sportstalker and for the proposed second story addition of the north wall. Gibbard told Council the planning office recommended some architectural relief projections on the north wall. One on the north wall will project 8 inches and be 11 feet long. One on the west wall will project out 8 inches and be 13 feet long. Gibbard recommended approval of these encroachments. Councilman Peters moved to approve the encroachment license based on staff's recommendations; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. RESPONSE TO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS DRAFT EIS Tom Baker, planning office, gave Council a proposed change to broaden the scope of #10, the three lane alternative. Baker said this emphasizes the city's concerns about alternatives to the highway while giving assurances to the highway department the situation is different than it was in the early 70's; that the city is serious about mass transit. Baker suggested that "Council is concerned that adequate fund for maintenance be made available" be added to #3 Maroon Creek to Castle Creek. Councilman Tuite said he would like to change "concerned" to "insure" to make it stronger. Baker said in #4, Commuter Rail/Mitigation Plan he changed it to read "Whatever mitigation plans are implemented, Council request that they be in place prior to construction of the highway". Baker pointed out a change in #12 Landscaping/Design, "Therefore the Council urges the CDOH to entertain creative design solutions whenever possible" instead of deviate from typical highway stan- dards. Councilman Gassman moved to send signature as edited and revised; All in favor, motion carried. the letter under the Mayor's seconded by Councilman Peters. 15 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council December 19, 1989 Mayor Stirling suggested an additional paragraph stating there are a series of community groups that have an interest in participating on some formal basis in this decision making process. Councilman Peters said there are elected officials and staff to deal with the alternate transportation corridor. Councilman Peters said he would prefer the city and county do this and not have a citizens advisory panel. Mayor Stirling agreed and said he would encourage full participation of the community in the public hearing process. Councilman Peters told Council there has been some discussion with the CDOH about funding the Kaiser study. Councilman Peters said this is a great political opening with the department of highways. Councilman Tuite said this has also been discussed at RFTA, who has not made a decision. Mayor Stirling moved to direct Councilman Peters to research and find out about this Kaiser study so Council can make an intelligent financial decision about it, coupled with tying it in with the RFTA; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Peters said he would like Council to consider a consul- tant agreement with Jim Kent on the NEPA mitigation. Councilman Peters said he has a proposal from Kent, which he will circulate to Council. Council adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. r~ ~ (4~ ~. Kathryn S` Koch, City Clerk 16