HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19950410Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Mayor Bennett called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. with Councilmembers
Paulson, Richards, Reno and Waggaman present.
PROCLAMATION - Child Protection Awareness
Mayor Bennett and Council proclaimed April 10 through April 15th as Child
Protection Awareness Week and encouraged the support of all local merchants and
citizens. Council presented the proclamation to Pat Hall, Health and Human
Services. Pat Hall told Council there are two programs in the Roaring Fork Valley
to promote this awareness week. There are 700 dolls around the valley with
stories attached. There is also a blue ribbon campaign to bring awareness to
children’s abuse and neglect.
PROCLAMATION - National Telecommunicators Week
Mayor Bennett and Council proclaimed the week of April 9 to 15 to be National
Telecommunicators week in honor and recognition of the country’s
telecommicators and the vital contributions they make to the safety and well-being
,
of our citizens. Linda Kimmel and Ginny Bultman communications department,
accepted the proclamation and told Council there is a banner on Main street
celebrating the week.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
There were none.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Mayor Bennett said years ago citizen suggested a free bicycle program which
was discussed but never implemented. Mayor Bennett suggested reviving the
discussion of this program. Portland, Oregon, has a free bicycle program and
is sending Aspen information on how it works.
2. Councilman Reno thanked the community for support of the shows at the
Aspen Skating Club. The participation was 100 percent local. The kids put the
show on and it will be shown on Grassroots.
3. Councilman Paulson moved to continue the water discussion which was
brought up recently with the BOCC until after the election; seconded by Mayor
Bennett. Councilwoman Richards said after the city implements water
conservation measures and makes repairs to the system, she would be willing
to revisit this issue. Councilwoman Richards said the Council has a lot of work
to do on the entrance to Aspen and transportation and she would rather
concentrate on that. Councilman Reno said he would be willing to look at this
water issue if Council drops some other issue. Councilwoman Waggaman said
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
she feels it would be more appropriate for Snowmass to come to Aspen’s
Council if they are interested in the issue.
Councilman Paulson, Mayor Bennett in favor; Councilmembers Waggaman, Reno
and Richards opposed. Motion NOT carried.
4. Acting City Manager Bill Efting reminded Council there is a Roaring Fork
Forum meeting in Glenwood Thursday, April 13. Staff will be attending. At the
brown bag lunch April 24, Council will take a walk to look at trail alignments.
5. Acting City Manager told Council Wednesday April 12 Hopkins street
between Galena and Mill will go back to two-way.
6. Stan Clauson, community development director, told Council a group of
small lodge owners have been meeting to work ways of improving their condition.
They have requested a work session to review suggested changes to the zoning
code, changes in use, etc. Council scheduled this for April 17 at 5 p.m.
Councilman Reno requested an outline of suggestions so Council can digest it
before the meeting. Clauson told Council staff has been working with a group on
this issue. Their attorney has summarized things the small lodge owners feel they
need. Councilwoman Richards suggested including the ACRA and Ski Company
as the loss of small lodges would affect them.
7. Councilwoman Richards announced the Governor’s growth seminar in Vail
April 26th. Councilwoman Richards suggested the Aspen Council invite Basalt,
Carbondale, Glenwood Springs to join them on a bus.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Reno moved to read Ordinances #19 and #20, Series of 1995;
seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #19
(Series of 1995)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
AMENDING CHAPTER 24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, LAND USE
REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION 24-5-213(C) CONDITIONAL
USES IN THE (O) OFFICE ZONE DISTRICT
ORDINANCE #20
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
(Series of 1995)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, TO AMEND THE SALES TAX CODE BY THE ADDITION OF
A NEW SECTION 21-10.9(a)13 RELATING TO TELECOMMUNICATION
SERVICES INADVERTENTLY OMITTED IN THE TAX SIMPLIFICATION
CODE OF 1992 were read by the city clerk
Councilwoman Waggaman moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by
Councilman Paulson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Waggaman, yes; Reno, yes;
Richards, yes; Paulson, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. motion carried.
The consent calendar is:
·
Minutes - March 13, 27, 30, 1995
·
Ordinance #19, 1995 - Code Amendment - Office Zone
·
Ordinance #20, 1995 - Amendment to Sales Tax Code
·
CDOT Agreement on EIS Objectives
Councilwoman Waggaman moved to table Ordinance #18, Series of 1995, to April
24; seconded by Councilman Reno. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #3, 1995 - Aspen Youth Center SPA Amendment
Leslie Lamont, planning office, reminded Council they had directed staff to come
back with more information. The land lease between the city and Youth Center
has been included as well as the sub-lease between the Youth Center and the
prospective operator of any diner operation. The sub-lease contains language
about the goal and operation of the diner. Ms. Lamont said the diner has been
identified as an accessory use to the Youth Center. Ms. Lamont pointed out the
Rio Grande property was zoned public with an SPA overlay on the property. Any
changes in use or proposed development must go through a full SPA review
process.
Ms. Lamont reminded Council the question was raised as the last meeting about
the fact that every zone district has accessory uses as permitted uses and could
restaurants be proposed in any zone district in the city. Ms. Lamont said an
accessory use is allowed in a building as long as that use is currently permitted in
the zone district. In the public zone district, restaurants are not permitted. It is the
SPA overlay that allows an applicant to vary the uses within a zone district
through the land use process. Ms. Lamont said the uses can be varied in a zone
district with an SPA overlay. The Rio Grande has an SPA overlay as does the
Aspen Meadows and Clark’s Market area.
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Ms. Lamont reminded Council the applicant is requesting a fee waiver for the
planning fee. The planning review fee will be $3241. The Youth Center received
a grant for 1995 of $2700.
Ms. Lamont pointed out a new condition of approval in the ordinance that restricts
the type of advertising and how anyone operating the diner may be able to
advertise. Mayor Bennett asked about the annual review by P & Z and whether
this is reflected in the lease. Perry Harvey, representing the Youth Center, said the
intent of the annual review, which is in the ordinance, was for this amended
programming and restaurant use. Harvey said this should be in the lease with the
operator of the diner, too. Harvey said the SPA requires the Council to make
findings that this use is appropriate for this location.
Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing.
Eric Bredlinger, director of the Aspen Youth Center, said kids need to eat. This is
a drug and alcohol free environment and a good place for kids to hang out. Beth
Miller, Board member, said it costs a lot of money to keep the Youth Center
operating. Any means to offset this costs is a big positive.
Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Richards said the changes since first reading take care of her
concerns.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #3, Series of 1995, on second
reading including a $2,000 allocation from contingency toward the fee waiver and
to invite the applicant to come back during the budget cycle in the fall to request
the balance; seconded by Councilman Reno. Roll call vote; Councilmembers
Paulson, yes; Reno, yes; Waggaman, yes; Richards, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes.
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #15, SERIES OF 1995 - Bell Mountain Lodge GMQS
Extension
Leslie Lamont, planning office, told Council this request is to extend both vested
rights and GMQS allocation for the Bell Mountain Lodge. Ms. Lamont noted in
1992 Council approved a GM allocation for the lodge. The lodge’s proposal is to
demolish the existing lodge and to build back the existing rooms and add 22 new
lodge rooms. Ms. Lamont reminded Council the code only allows an extension for
growth management allocation for up to 6 months. In 1994, Bell Mountain Lodge
requested a growth management allocation for 6 months. This request will take
the growth management allocation and the vested rights up to February 22, 1997.
Ms. Lamont reminded Council the applicants have been working with the city and
with other property owners on a larger redevelopment, known as superblock.
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor
Bennett closed the public hearing.
Councilman Paulson asked the status of the superblock project; articles keep
cropping up in the paper about the superblock project. Councilwoman Richards
said Council met with the contractor to hear what the status is, carpeting,
appliances, wood framing contracts have been let. The city has not been
approached by City Market to delay the Kraut project. There is a fee for not
completing the project on time. There is no delay of the Kraut project. Stan
Clauson, community development project, told Council staff is considering
alternatives for a revised form of the superblock project. The Kraut project and
the superblock project are entirely decoupled; there is no relationship between the
two projects.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #15, Series of 1995, on
second reading; seconded by Councilman Reno.
Councilwoman Richards said she strongly hopes this is the last 6 month extension.
Councilwoman Richards said she feels these 2 extensions make up for the year lost
in pursuing the superblock. Councilwoman Rciahrds said at this point the
negotiations are with the public, the neighbors and the business community which
happens through P & Z and the planning process.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Waggaman, yes; Paulson, no; Reno, yes; Richards,
yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #15, SERIES OF 1995 - Carish Lot Split
Mary Lackner, planning office, told Council this project was submitted right before
the deadline for the GMQS changes. This is a 12,000 square foot lot in the west
end and the proposal is to split it into two 6,000 square foot lots. Staff
recommends approval.
Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor
Bennett closed the public hearing.
Councilman Reno told Council he previously did work for the applicant. Council
said this was not a conflict of interest. Councilwoman Waggaman noted there is a
letter opposed to this project. Mayor Bennett said what is being requested is
absolutely legal.
Councilman Reno moved to adopt Ordinance #15, Series of 1995, on second
reading; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote; Councilmembers
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Paulson, yes; Waggaman, yes; Reno, yes; Richards, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes.
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #9, SERIES OF 1995 Parks Master Plan
-
Rebecca Baker, assistant parks director, passed out the preface. Council thanked
the parks department for making changes suggested at a previous meeting.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Resolution #9, Series of 1995; seconded
by Councilman Reno. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 1995 - Code Amendments Historic
Preservation
Councilman Reno moved to read Ordinance #21, Series of 1995; seconded by
Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #21
(Series of 1995)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO AMEND THE
FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE:
24-7-601, GENERAL APPLICABILITY AND REQUIREMENTS
( DEVELOPMENT IN A H, HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT OR
INVOLVING A HISTORIC LANDMARK)
24-7-602, DEMOLITION, PARTIAL DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION
24-7-603, INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ORDER
24-7-604, APPEAL AND CALL UP
24-7-606, MINIMUM MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
24-7-703, PROCEDURE FOR DESIGNATION, AMENDMENT, RESCINDING
24-7-704, APPLICATION
24-7-706, PLACEMENT ON THE CITY’S OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP
24-7-709, ESTABLISHMENT OF INVENTORY OF HISTORIC
STRUCTURES was read by the city clerk
Amy Amidon, planning office, told Council there are both substantial and non-
substantial changes in this ordinance. Ms. Amidon pointed out the standards used
by HPC in review are character based, is the project compatible in character with
the neighborhood. Ms. Amidon said the ordinance tries to give the HPC more
specific direction in what they are looking for in a review. Ms. Amidon noted this
ordinance allows the HPC to give a site coverage variance of 5 percent. This
would allow a large addition on a small building to spread out rather than up.
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Ms. Amidon said HPC has reviewed relocation of buildings under one standard;
however, there are several ways a building can be relocated, off site, on site,
temporarily off site. This ordinance has standards for each of these relocations.
The application has included a visual diagram of the neighborhood and the
ordinance states for as little cost as possible.
Ms. Amidon reminded Council in 1991 “demolition” was redefined to mean a
building was demolished if half of it was left standing. This affected HPC review;
this ordinance separates this into partial and total demolition. Ms. Amidon said if
something is on the inventory but is not a historic landmark, HPC only reviews
demolition and relocation but not the design of the rest of the project. The Aspen
Area Community Plan recommends this should be changed to have HPC review
the general mass and scale of the new additions.
Ms. Amidon said the ordinance defines “historic structure” as opposed to historic
site. Ms. Amidon said the standard used to be anything built before 1910 was to
be listed on the inventory. This is changed to is anything that is at least 50 years
old. This is a standard for historic significance used nationally. Ms. Amidon told
Council being listed on the National Register of Historic Places is an honorary
listing and has no burden placed upon it. This ordinance adds the Secretary of
Interior’s for rehabilitation as required standards for those sites. Ms. Amidon said
this rules are meant to protect sites on the National Register.
Councilman Reno asked about partial demolition requiring review and what if one
was doing no demolition would that require review. Ms. Amidon said if it is
detached, this does not require review. Ms. Amidon said HPC feels if a mass and
scale review can be done of additions, there may be better solutions. Councilman
Reno said if something qualifies for “partial demolition” under the new definition,
then there is no need to review the proposed development for that. Councilwoman
Richards suggested for second reading, have HPC address the specific concerns
with some examples.
Councilman Reno said another concern is what are historic sites and structures.
Councilman Reno asked if the buildings that are becoming “historic”, being 50
years old rather than built in 1910, how they will be notified. Ms. Amidon told
Council every 5 years, staff re-evaluates the inventory. There is a public review
process. Councilman Reno suggested some public outreach about this change.
Stan Clauson, community development director, said the date is not so magic as a
structure or site that has something special about it and has stood the test of time
and now stands as an example of something that went on in the past. Councilman
Reno said on page 23, #6 he would like “wherever possible” to be clarified.
Mayor Bennett brought up the appeal to Council which says Council shall affirm
the decision of HPC unless Council shall determine there was an abuse of
discretion or denial of due process. Mayor Bennett said he would prefer that
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Council have the ability to say something is incorrect, not to prove an abuse of
discretion. John Worcester, city attorney, agreed Council ought to be able to
review things as if they are sitting as the original reviewer. Council agreed this
should be re-worded for second reading and not worded so encourage a lot of
frivolous appeals.
Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 1995, on first
reading; seconded by Councilman Reno. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Richards,
yes; Reno, yes; Paulson, yes; Waggaman, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion
carried.
RESOLUTION #21, SERIES OF 1995 - Contract Award Sidewalk
Project 1995
Staff presented a plan to install sidewalks in city parks. Section 19-98 of the
Municipal Code requires private property owners to construct sidewalks. The
Pedestrian Plan and Neighborhood Advisory Committee both identified the need to
complete sidewalks. There is $250,000 allocated for this plan. Council felt the
plan provided too much concrete in parks that should more rural, green and open.
On Paepcke Park Council agreed with a sidewalks on the east Hopkins side as it
connects with existing sidewalks. Council did not want to see sidewalks on all 4
sides of Paepcke Park.
Council was not in support of a sidewalk on the west side of Wagner park.
Councilwoman Waggaman felt a 5 foot wide sidewalk along Glory Hole park may
not be appropriate. Staff pointed out this sidewalk will connect to an existing 8
foot sidewalk along Ute avenue. Councilwoman Waggaman said she will go out
with staff and check the width and placement of the proposed sidewalk. The Neale
avenue sidewalk crosses the street twice. Council suggested staff see if they can
integrate the sidewalk with the existing trail along the south side of the street.
Councilwoman Richards said she will look at this with staff and will report back.
Staff proposed a sidewalk on the south side of Rio Grande park along Rio Grande
street. Chuck Roth, engineering department, told Council staff has committed to
prepare a streetscape plan for this area by the end of the summer. Council
suggested for the driveway into the recycle center rather than a sidewalk this be
graded, prepared and left graveled. Council agreed with the sidewalk plan for east
Cooper. This is a heavily traveled pedestrian area. Council said no sidewalks
should be installed in Koch park.
Councilwoman Richard moved to adopt Resolution #21 with amendments to the
sidewalk plan as listed; seconded by Councilman Reno. All in favor, motion
carried.
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting April 10, 1995
Councilwoman Waggaman moved to adjourn at 7:40 p.m.; seconded by
Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk