Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19800811Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 11, 1980 JOINT MEETING WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mayor Edel called the meeting to order with Commissioners Kinsley and Child present; Councilmembers Michael, Isaac, Collins and Parry also present. 1. Bus Washer Facility. Mayor Edel pointed Out the disparity of the figures for the two Bus Washer Facility different types of equipment and asked if the cheaper one would do the job. Duane Fengel, transportation director, said the different is in the application. Fengel pointed out this piece of equipment could be used in two years for road and bridge, Saabs, etc. When there is a joint maintenance ficility, transportation will only be allowed to do the work for transportation. Fengel said with the more~a expensive equipment, a bus can be washed in less than 15 minutes. Councilwoman Michael asked about the equipment in the less expensive category. Pat Dobie, county engineer, told the Boards this is an overhead hand operating washer with a high pressure pump. Dobie said another option would be to use the equipment at Dillingham's on the side of the building. Commissioner Kinsley said if a full-blown equipment were installed, it would have to be moved in two years. $37,000 per year is too high for a temporary facility. Chapman said the bus washer facility could be moved; the improvements to the building would be lost. Stewart said he felt it would be better to wait two years; then UMTA will pay for 80 per cent of the bus washer. The city and county should develop an interim solution. Chapman said the interim solution would only allow the city fleet to be washed once a week. Commissioner Child said he would be uncomfortable spending $74,000 for a short term solu- tion. Councilman Isaac said spending $100,000 for a washing facility is too much for two or three years. Councilwoman Michael said this should be approached as a city problem; she would like to see the buses clean. Councilman Isaac moved to go with alternative 2; seconded by Councilman Collins. council- man Isaac clarified the motion to split the cost half and half. Commissioner Kinsley said besides splitting the cost 50/50, another view would be to spli~ the cost by the number of vehicles involved. Since the county has 29 buses and the city has 71, the cost could be split $3074 and $7526 respectively. Mayor Edel said this questJ)n should be voted on by each body separately. 2. Paid Treasurer - Roaring Fork Employees Credit Union. Paid Treasurer Roaring Fork Lynn Dunlop, finance department, told the Boards the credit union was conceived three yeal ~Employees Credi ago as en employee benefit. The city, county and hospital contributed manpower, computer Union time, office space and telephone. Over the three years, it seems that a treasurer should II be hired and paid as this position takes the most time. They would like to have someone highly qualified and trained as a treasurer, rather than an employee of one of the entltl~ who has their own job. Lynn Dunlop said the credit union does not have enough money to pay a treasurer and they would like to keep the savings interest rate as high as possible.~ Lynn Dunlop told the Council and Commissioners that the hospital board has approved a commitment of $300 per month to fund a treasurer. Glenn Scott, hospital administrator, said it is a pain to have key personnel spending 3 days a week on the credit union and they would rather pay for the service. Scott urged the boards to look favorably on this request. Ms. Butterbaugh said the Boards originally gave support to this benefit because banks would not loan to new people, nor give loans under a certain amount. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out this is alos a benefit in drawing the employees together and making a cohesive group. Ms. Butterbaugh said the city and county are paying for this service now in labor hours. Councilwoman Michael suggested ~t'~ the credit union solicit support from the Town of Snowmass and from the Sanitation distri Commissioner Child said someone indicated the credit union could pay up to $150 per month for this treasurer. Lynn Dunlop said that much would strain the credit union and would preclude a benefit package. ~ Councilwoman Michael moved the city, county and hospital and credit union donate $900 a month with the staff figuring out the shares and $100 a month coming from the credit union; seconded by Commissioner Child. All in favor, motion carried. 3. Open Space Advisory Board Appointments. Jolene Vrchota, planning office, told the ~ Open Space Boards there are five two-year terms expiring on the OSAB. Jon Mulford and Fritz Benedic~ Advisory Board both asked to remain on the board; both are PCPA members, and the PCPA recommends their I! Appointments appointment. Ben Rawlins, nominated to fill a term representing Snowmass, has been recommended for reappointment. Ms. Vrchota said she would like to keep George Stranahan on the OSAB, especially since he is from down valley. Ms. Vrchota recommended for appointments Jon Mulford, ~Fritz Benedict, Ben Rawlins and George Stranahan; in addition switching Jim Breasted from an alternate to a regular member~ Also, Trout Unlimited would like a representative and Ivar Eidsmo would like to be on the OSAB. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the appointments of Jon Mulford, Jim Breasted, Fritz Benedict, Ben Rawlins, George Stranahan and Ivar Eidsmo to the OSAB; seconded by Commiss- ioner Kinsley. All in favor, motion carried. Solid Waste 4. Solid Waste Center - Requirement to cover trucks. Tom Dunlop told Council there is Requirements a problem with litter blowing from trucks. It is difficult to enforce the ordinance to cover trucks because the driver of the vehicle has to be identified as well as the license plates. A policy could be made to not allow vehicles to enter the dump unless they are covered. Councilman Parry pointed out if someone was turned away at the dump, it would double the problem. Councilman Parry said he would rather fine people. Dunlop agreed~this is another option and asked if this would be taking legal action or just chargin more to dump. Commissioner Edwards said this is probably most workable as a fee. Commissioner Kinsley moved to have a flat charge of $20 per truck when they come into the dump not covered; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. Communications 5. Communications Center Report. Nick Pasquarella said the Boards had approved a proposal Center Report to reallocate communication funds of $37,000; $20,000 6f that was for a new console. Thi~ has been purchased and they are in the process of finding a place to install it. They saved $4200 by purchasing it in 1979. $2,000 went for a power line to Red Mountain and also purchased batteries for emergency power supply. Another $15,000 was for the Aspen Mountain relocation; the building was completed about a week ago and was built within 2 per cent of the estimate. They are ready to move their radio equipment to the new building.~ The move and an antenna platform will cost $2100. City Manager Chapman said these costs can be met within the current budgets of transportation and communications. Commissioner Kinsley moved to approve funds for this; seconded by Commissioner Child. All in favor, motion carried. Joint Resolutic 6. Joint Resolution - Burnt Mountain. Someone told the Boards that the trustees of Burnt Mountain Snowmass Village had approved this resolution with the Change that the language in section 10 of the work program was repeated in the resolution. This provides the study will be completed by January 9, 1981. Snowmass has been in contact with the state divisi®n of planning, who indicated they were willing to abide by and support any agreement that can be reached by the three governmental entities. Councilman Isaac asked if the Ski Corp had agreed with this. Dave Mylar, town attorney, said they have indicated they are willing to sign the addendum. The forest service has not made a commitment. Ron Garfield, representing Little Annie, said this study indirectly affects Little Annie. Little Annie supports this study. There is an addendum with a date, not filled in, which says if the forest service receives the study by a certain date, it will be included in the alternative study for Little Annie. Garfield asked if the assumption was if the forest service does not have the study by:that date, then it will not appear in the ES for Little Annie. Mylar said the assumption is correct; the date is left blank for the forest service to fill in as they are the ones to determine the latest date to be inclUde~ in the ES. Garfield said the concern is that the implementation of this agreement does not result in any more delays for Little Annie. The Little Annie studies took a year to finish; this is a 5 month time period. Garfield said they hoped the studies would get done in this period; however, he does not want someone to say in eight months that Little Annie has to wait for the studies to get done and hold their application. Garfield asked how to reconcile not delaying Little Annie for 6 months to a year and at the same time get the Burnt Mountain study done. Commissioner Kinsley said the county has the same concern; he stated the elk study could not be done between now and January. Garfield said he supported this and hoped the studies comein with adequate information to make a decision. Commissioner Edwards said the county has a fundamental problem with the way this is proceeding. Edwards said the issue is that by virtue of a Little Annie agreement and others with the forest service, the county had a contractual understanding in writing with the forest service that ski areas in this county would proceed on alternatives ~ analysis under the joint review process. Ski areas would be looked at in one big picture and the alternatives compared. Subsequent to that agreement, the forest service has reneged on the contractual agreements and are now proposing to break those agreements, i Regular Meeting Aspen Clty (~ouncl± August ££, Edwards stated the forest service is now proposing to consider Burnt Mountain not in substance of an alternatives analysis but considering it an already permitted area and ~ just go through the motions of complying with NEPA to accumulate data to meet the minimum ' standards. Edwards said that Burnt Mountain will go from the point of view of the Snowmass Skiing Corporation is an already decided decision which is not open for discussic whether Little Annie should go instead or not at all. The forest service, in violation o~ its contract with the county, is appearing to take the same position. Edwards said the ~ county sees the forest service's position as a switch and a breech of agreements with the county. The forest service proposes to enter into an agreement outside of the joint revie process, not including the state, and not including the forest service in a formal way. Edwards said the way this process is evolving is that Burnt Mountain will not be looked at as an alternative; this study will produce the data to allow the permit for Burnt Mountai~ to start construction. The Little Annie decision gets left off to the side to be made separately and not as a comparison or alternative. Edwards stated because of the change in the forest service's position, the county is not willing nor inclined to participate in t~is process which the county sees as a subversion and a breech of contract between the forest service and the county. The county has not decided exactly what to do; they are very dissatisfied with the forest service. Edwards said they are looking at this question from county-wide impacts as this is their respon- sibility. The county feels they cannot look at the county-wide impacts unless there is a proper and comprehensive alternatives analysis as was originally set forth. Commissioner Child said he would like time to investigate this to see if there is a way to handle the County's concerns. Edwards said the argument could be made in court that if the county were to sign this agreement, it would be a waiver of the original agreement rights with the forest service. Mylar said Snowmass intends to proceed with the study for the benefit of their own planning process and local decisions. Council and Commissioners decided to discuss this at their next meeting. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES There were none ACCOUNTS PAYABLE There were none 1. Councilman Isaac brought up a letter from Ron Austin about the baseball program. Mayor Edel said he had discussed this with Ted Armstrong and John Hart. Mayor Edel said ~ he felt the incident was over-stated. The baseball program is a very good program; the recreation department did goof on this incident. Mayor Edet said he would set up a meetin with the recreation department and Ron Austin. 2. Councilman Isaac asked where the ordinance to reduce the number of council was. City Attorney Stock said it would be presented at the next Council meeting. 3. Mayor Edel asked Council to put on the agenda the approval of Dick Moore applying for grants for the Wheeler Opera House. Councilwoman Michael moved to put Dick Moore on the agenda; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. 4. Councilman Collins requested the city attorney to look into the waiver of park dedi- cation fees. Councilman Collins said he did not see in the Code where Council had the authority to reduce or waive these fees. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There were no comments. CONCEPTUAL PUD/SUBDIVISION REVIEW - Castlewood/Headgate Conceptual PUD/ Subdivisio~ Review Sunny Vann, planning office, reminded Council earlier this year they had approved annexa- Castlewood/ tion and rezoning for the Opal Marolt property from AF-2 to R-15A/SPA/PUD with the stipu- Headgate lation that 70 per cent of the project be deed restricted for employee housing. R-15A was recommended to be consister~with the surrounding land and does allow for 50 per cent employee deed restricted units. This zone category would allow 150 units on the site; however, given the existence of site constraints a mandatory PUD designation was attached. The PUD density reduction criteria results in reducing the overall property to 20 or 25 acres from the original 35, and allows density from 90 to 110 units. The applicant has indicated a density of 125 units is necessary to make the project economically viable. Vann said the PUD review process will provide a mechanism to determine the appropriateness of the density for this project. SPA was added to provide a mechanism to accommodate the increase in density as well as a mechanism for a potential mixed use project. Vann told Council now that the city has adopted an residential bonus ordinance and this land will have to be rezoned to residential bonus if there is an increase in density over the allowable units. There have been meetings on this project and some design parameters ' have evolved. One is vehicular access should be restricted to Highway 82; no access shou] be provided to Castle Creek. Second, the open space should not be fragmented. There should be a significant parcel contiguous to Thomas property and Castle Creek corridor~ ~ Third, the employee housing should be confined to the area north of the Main street extension and south of Highway 82. After a site inspection, P & Z recommended the employ~ housing be restricted to the area east of the Cemetery lane/Castle Creek connector. The applicant has incorporated these ideas, with the exception of restricting the employee housing to the area east of the Cemetery Lane connector. aspen ~lty ~ouncll August 11, 1980 Vann presented the applicant's alternate 2, which can be broken down into four areas; the area north of Main street extension with 88 employee housing units; a parcel south of the Main street extension which would contain 37 free market units and 10 or 11 acres of open space. There is a small parcel across Castle Creek, and the Castle Creek corridor. The applicant has proposed splitting off the employee housing site and selling it to a city housing authority; these units could be sold or rented depending upon conditions. The free market units will be individual sale and possible short term rental through a common management. The applicant has requested exemption from the six month minimum lease restriction to allow short term tourist-related use. Vann said the planning office and P & Z feel ~that alternate 2 comes closest to meeting all criteria. The planning office and P & Z feel the employee housing units should be restricted to the area east of the proposed Cemetery Lane connector to maintain open space vistas and reduce the bulk and size of the development. The applicant has argued this site is insufficient to construct 88 employee units. The planning office and P & Z both ~ecommended the exemption from six month minimum lease be denied. The Aspen land use plan establishes the base of Aspen mountain and the area south of Main street as the appropriate location for short term use. Vann said to support short term or tourist use would be .inconsistent ~ith the land use plan, the 1975 rezoning of the city, and subsequent attempts to strengthen the land use policies. Tourist growth is strictly regulated by the growth~ management plan. P & Z and the planning office feel the city's residential zone should be limited to permanent residential usage. Vann said the issues of development west of the proposed Cemetery Lane extension, overall project density, and short term use are some major concerns. P & Z raised the issue of desirability of restricting development of the proposed Midland right-of-way, which is immediately south of the free market units and is being considered by the state highway department. Vann said they would be remiss to recommend development in a potential right- of-way. Another concern raised was land trade for part of the Thomas property. The planning office recommendation to P & Z was to informally approve alternate 92 and withhol~ formal conceptual PUD/subdivision approval pending resubmission of a revised site plan consistent with the criteria established by the Open Space Advisory Board, engineering department, planning office and P & Z. P & Z decided to approve the application subject to certain stipulations; (1) the develop- ment of employee housing be confined to that portion of the Marolt property located north of the proposed Main street right-of-way, south of Highway 82, and east of a mutually agreed upon right-of-way for the proposed Cemetery Lane/Castle Creek connector, (2) the development of the project's free market housing be confined to the area immediately south of the proposed Main street extension right-of-way; (3) that site constraints within the development envelopes outlined above determine development densitites; (4) that no indica- tion as to the appropriateness of an overall density of 125 dwelling units be given at this time, but, rather deferred until preliminary plat review; (5) recommendations with respect to parking requirements; Midland right-of-way, open space, trails and road dedica- tions also be deferred until preliminary plat; and (6) all free market development be subject to the six-month minimum lease requirements of Section 20-22 of the Aspen Code. In a plan, a portion of the parking is west of Cemetery lane extension; both the planning office and engineering department have problems with the location of parking in that area. The staff feels the building envelope should determine the appropriate site density. An attempt to force a predetermined number of units in that envelope represents a backward approach. The recommendation of P & Z is that the resulting density would be determined by the ability of the development envelope to carry the units. The applicants have revise~ their plan. The planning office recommends that the development envelopes be determined by open space and right-of-way constraints; that the densities within the envelopes be determined by sound.site planning principles; no indicate of appropriate density be given at this time but deferred to preliminary plat; the additional issues also be addressed at preliminary plat time; free market development be subject to six month minimum lease restrictions of the City's code. Councilman Isaac asked if it were ever considered to have the employee un~ts on the southern most portion of the property. Vann said this was considered but raised problems with OSAB planning office and engineering department. This would create access problems and Would create a small open space parcel in the center of the property. The OSAB wanted a larger parcel contiguous to the Thomas property. Councilman Parry said he would rather see . units that are more liveable than all stacked up so there can be some open space. Karen Smith, planning director, told Council this plan evolved from site inspections by both P & Z and the OSAB and agreeing on alternate 92. Councilwoman Michael asked what the advantages or disadvantages are to employee living on the site. Ms. Smlth sa~d the advan- tages come from access standpoint, the employee will have a better v~ew. Thls dlsadvantag~s are increased density. Vann pointed out there would have to be an access road all the way through the project to pick uP the traffic. Mayor Edel said he felt 125 was too many units; using 100 would be better, less dense, it would increase the open space corridor. Jim Mulligan, representing the Marolt family, pointed out the applicants agreed to maximum 125 units even though the zoning would allow more. The applicants have met often with the staff and referral agencies to deal with all the constraints in the property. Mulligan said they want to let the envelopes they are requesting dictate the densities via proper site planning. Ms. Smith said this site has opportunities to cluster the development to maximize the employee housing benefits and minimize environmental impacts. The planning office did say they felt the appropriate density is between 70 and 100 units and compromi~sed at a development cap of 125. Mayor Edel asked about selling the employee units or land to the City. Mulligan said they have discussed various concepts, one of which is to transfer the land for the employee units and transfer it to the city housing authority. The housing authority could either lease it back to the developer or enter into a development contract. I~f ~the city were the owner they could enter into municipal revenue bonds which would reduce the costs of the units. Mulligan requested that the six month minimum lease restriction be waived relating to Section 20-22. Mulligan pointed out they had researched the records on why this was passed, and the discussion dealt with displacement of existing people through condominium- ization. This project will not displace people but will add new employee units. Don Ensign told Council the economics of a 70/30 split are very delicate; they do not know if less than 125 units will work, nor do they know if they can get that many units on the property in a.way that will work. Carly Wood went through plans showing the site constraints. This is a 35 acre parcel; Ms. Wood showed the right-of-ways they have been requested to maintain for road changes. There are water main easements through the site. Another concern is the steep slopes and the riparian vegetation area along the river; this is a 12 acre parcel which should not be developed. Ms. Wood pointed out the open space requested by all the Boards, leaving a parcel for the free market units and 2.9 acres for the employee units plus an extension into the Thomas property to the Cemetery Lane alignment. Vann said the discussions regarding the Thomas property were in the spirit of cooperation. The Cemetery Lane alignment can be moved; however, whether it should be moved to allow all 88 units is not known. Stock told Council the Thomas property is currently in use for a public purpose, and it will require a vote of the public in order to authorize a sale or trade. Stock told Council the six month rental restrictions come about because the free market houses will be developed as town houses and condominiumized, which brings in Section 20-22. This section states that all condominiumized units must be deed restricted to six month minimum lease; there is no provision in that law to allow Council to exempt property. Council would have to modify the Code if they desired to exempt the units. Mulligan said he envisioned the developer deeding the employee parcel to the city and have the city issue the bonds and have the developer turn-key it; there never would be a sale of the land. The project could be structured under a cooperative ownership, and the city could retain some as rentals units and sell some. The project also could be put under a long-term leasehold. Stock pointed out the land was purchased with sixth penny funds. The ordinance is rather broad and it maybe interpreted that the land could be used for employee housing. Vann told Council if they do not wish to address the number of units, they could make a determination of the Cemetery Lane/Castle Creek alignment, which determines the size of the employee lot. Council could approve this with the same conditions P & Z gave it; this gives the applicant the opportunity to go to detailed site design and determine how many units will in fact be on the property. The additional concerns that have been raised will be brought to P & Z with preliminary plat. Dunaway questioned the legality'of a road in the city-owned open space. Stock said it is legal for the city to put a road on this property; if the realignment fOr the purposes of safety, the land may be used. Councilwoman Michael asked what the status of Midland right-of-way is. Vann answered it is being reviewed by the state. Mulligan said they have been in contact with the county and the state may soon send a letter stating this right-of-way is no longer needed. Karen Smith said the public reaction to having Main street come right into town has not been tested yet. However, from the standpoint of land acquistion and crossing the river, this alternate seems preferable. Vann said his recommendation came from allowing the application to build in a right-of-way which has not been determined. It could be the Midland right-of-way becomes a reality. Mayor Edel said his big hang up is the density, and he would be willing to go with 100 units and perhaps changing the six month rental restriction ordinance. Mayor Edel pointe~ out the recommendation was betWeen 90 and 100 originally. Councilman Parry said he would like to see the drawings to see what the density should be comfortably. Vann suggested Council approve conceptual submission subject to the stipulations imposed by P & Z with an indication to the applicant what Council considers an appropriate alignment for the Castle Creek/Cemetery Lane and provide the applicant do the detailed site planning and let P & Z review it. The six month minimum lease restrictions are still in this. Karen Smith pointed out single-family zones have never been construed as the kinds of zones which would have tourist reception facilities that are being proposed for this developmen~ Councilman Parry moved to recommend approval for conceptual PUD subdivision review subjec~ to the following conditions; (1) development of employee housing be confined to that portion of the Marolt property located north of the proposed Main street right-of-way, sought of Highway 82, and east of a mutuall agreed upon right-of-way for the proposed Cemetery Lane/Castle Creek connector, (2) that the development of the project's free market housing be confined to the area immediately south of the proposed Main street extension right-of-way, (3) that site constraints within the development envelopes outlin( above determine development densities~ (4) that no indication as to the appropriateness of an overall density of 125 dwelling units be given at this time, but, rather, deferred until prliminary plat review, (5) that recommendations with respect to parking require- ments; the Midland right-of-way; and open space, trails and road dedications also be deferred to preliminary plat review, and (6) that all free market development be subject to the six-month minimum lease requirements of Section 20-22 of the Aspen Code; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. Karen Smith told Council the Cemetery Lane alignment is not satisfactory and needs more work~ moving it to the east. The planning office is asking for the minimum intrusion into the Thomas property as possible. Councilman Isaac asked that the covenants on the Thomas property be investigated. Ms. Smith also asked Council give the applicant a sense of which alignment they are leaning toward. Councilman Isaac asked for an amendment to the motion to say the new alignment of Castle Creek road will minimally intrude on the Thomas Property and will meet the concerns of the planning office and engineering depart- ment. Councilman Parry accepted the amendment; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Collins. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #44 ORDINANCE 944, SERIES OF 1980 - Lease Agreement with Pyramid Management for the Plum Tree Lease Agreemenl withPyramid Wayne Chapman told Council said this lease will allow Pyramid to manage the Plum Tree for anagement for the city, which came about because the city cannot be an applicant for a liquor license the Plum Tree and Pyramid had to have a lease for the liquor license. The basic lease agreement is it will run from May 1980 through April 1981; the city will receive rent minimum $6,000 per year plus net profit of the operation; 84 per cent of the rooms, 95 per cent of food, 92 per cent beverage, 96 per cent monthly house profit and 6 per cent of gross receipts. Chapman estimated this will produce a cash flos of $60,000 per year. The landlord does have an option to extend the lease 4 months. Councilman Isaac said the Plum Tree had not signed up with central reservations. Chapman said he would follow up on this. Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance ~44, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE 944 (Series of 1980) AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PYRAMID MANAGEMENT INC. PROVIDING FOR THE LEASING OF THE PLUM TREE INN BY THE CITY OF ASPEN TO PYRAMID MANAGEMENT INC. was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #44, Series of 1980, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Isaac. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Isaac, aye; Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Law Enforcemen LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY - Conceptual Approval Facility - Conceptual Joe Wells, planning office, told Council they had asked the Rio Grande Task Force to Approval consider the site alternatives for a law enforcement facility. The RGTF considered this request and stated they preferred the site generally behind the Courthouse. At the same meeting, the task force considered a list of 52 identified uses for this property; they have narrowed the list to 20 uses to consider in their site planning effort. The RGTF has not considered a final resolution, but do prefer the site behind the Courthouse. The task force would like to see what other options are available for the county-owned land. Councilwoman Michael moved that the Council indicate to the County that as eastern a portion as is negotiable is the preferable site for the law enforcement facility, by eastern this is something generally behind the Courthouse; second, ask the city manager to institute whatever land trade options to get this rolling; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Proposal to PROPOSAL TO CLOSE LAKE AVENUE close Lake Ave Monroe Summers told Council he had been contacted by Elizabeth Holkemp to close Lake Avenue during concerts and make it a pedestrian access. Fritz Benedict said both Pitkin County Parks Association and the M.A.A. would like to do this for weekend concerts. This would start at Gillespie and Third, goes to Lake, down First and on Garmisch for a block and Hallam for a block. Benedict said they would have signs prohibiting traffic except resident vehicles. Benedict had a petition With 17 signatures from people on Lake and in the immediate area. Parry said he would be interested in trying this but would need more traffic sign. Mayor Edel agreed he would be interested in trying this. Councilwomar Michael said she would like more residents in this area contacted. Councilwoman Michael said it is too late to try it this year with only one concert left and would like City Manager Chapman look into this and report back for next concert season. Summers told Council he has done some research on this and people seem to be in favor of it. One negative aspect is the cost of producing the signs is about $500 total. Benedict said the PCPA might go half. Summers also ~aid the traffic division doss not have enough people to enforce this. Mayor Edel suggested conctacting the M.A.A. to see if they had people who could help. Councilman Collins asked that the next two concerts be surveyed to see exactly how much traffic was in this area. RESOLUTION #15 RESOLUTION ~15, SERIES OF 1980 - Approving Contract Agreement for Wheeler Opera House Approving Ccntract Councilman Collins stated he had been retained to do the structural work and would abstain Agreement for from any discussion. Mayor Edel reported the Wheeler Opera House Commission is working Wheeler Opera hard and moving along. The architect is coming to meeting with the CommiSsion to go over House the plans. The Commission will come to Council with the plans for a decision. Councilman Isaac asked if there were any problems with the agreement. Dick Moore, chairman of the Commission, said there were not. Moore said the architects will have completed the schematic phase this time. The architects will complete the design development on the complete master plan, the construction drawings will just include the first phase. Mayor Edel asked if Council was committing itself to the entire $400,000. Moore said the city would only commit through schematic phase, which is only $62,000. Mayor Edel said it looked they were committed to the first two phases or $154,000. Moore said the Council could put in some language to only commit to the first phase. Moore told Council they had agreed to stop at the end of the first phase to determine if they can get funds to build and to buy the property next door. Chapman said this agreement can be terminated for non-performance; if the project is abandoned. Chapman said Council is entering into a basic agreement with the architect which pertains to all four phases; this is just saying what phase Council is going to. Councilwoman Michael moved to read Resolution ~15, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #15 (Series of 1980) WHEREAS, the City Council has approved plans for the addition to and ~ renovation of the Wheeler Opera House, and WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a proposed agreement between the City of Aspen and William Kessler and Associates, Inc. providing for the addition to and renovation of the Wheeler Opera House, -~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section t That it does approve an agreement between the City of Aspen and-William Kessler and Associates, Inc. attached hereto and incorporated by this reference; and does further authorize the Mayor on the effective date of this resolution, to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen was read by the city cler Councilwoman Michael moved to approve Resolution #15, Series of 1980,.with the following proviso; that the cost to the city for the architect in the schematic design phase not exceed $62,000; that the design development phase not exceed $92,500; the construction document phase not exceed $173,000; the bidding or negotiation phase not exceed $15,250; and the construction phase not exceed $56,500 all subject to an appropriate ordinance providing the money is available; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, Councilman Collins abstained. Motion carried. Mayor Edel said because it has been a bad year for the RETT, which is below what was expected and costs attendant to the type of theatre are beyond what was estimated, Dick Moo~eoffered to take on the task of trying to get grants and money for the Wheeler Opera House. Mayor Edel said Moore would have to be compensated for this to some extent. Dick Moore told Council if he spent more than one day a week on the Wheeler, he would need $100 a day plus expenses. Moore said he could find out in a month working full time if he could generate monies for the Wheeler. Moore stated he felt strongly he could get some money. Lois Butterbaugh said this money could come out of the RETT. Councilman Parry moved to approve $5,000 appropriate from the RETT; seconded by Council- woman Michael. All in favor, Councilman Collins abstained. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #20, SERIES OF 1980 - 70/30 Growth Management Exception; Density Bonus ORDINANCE #20 Reconciliation Growth Nanagement Exception: Densit Karen Smith, planning director, told Council this ordinances changes the current growth Bonus Recon. management plan exemptions to provide an exemption when 70 per cent of the units in a project are deed restrictied as opposed to bedrooms. This ordinance has the condition .-- that the specific mix of bedrooms and floor area ratio be negotiated through a special review process. There are certain guidelines for projects to achieve a mix of 1-1/2 to 2 bedrooms and a 60/40 mix in floor area. CounCilman Isaac moved'to read Ordinance #20, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Parr, All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #20 (Series of 1980) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EXCEPTION PROVISIONS OF THE GROWTH ~-ANAGE~ENT PLAN AND ALLOWING FOR THE EXCEPTION OF PROJECTS WHICH ARE DIVIDED SUCH THAT 70% OF THE HOUSING CONSTRUCTED IS DEED RESTRICTED WITHIN THE TERMS OF SECTION 24-10.4(b) (3) was read by the city clerk Jim Reents, housing director, recommended deleting the percentage of floor area ratio and still have the average number of-bedrooms. Councilman Isaac asked if there was a term for deed restricted units. Reents said any unit exempted through growth management has a 50 year restriction. Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #20, Series of 1980, on second reading; seconde by Councilwoman Michael. Roll Call vote; Councilmembers Isaac, aye; Collins, nay; Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 1980 - Maximum Densit~ RE: Residential Bonus Overlay ORDINANCE #26 Maximum Density MS. Smith told Council this is a clean up amendment intended to eliminate the conflict RE: Residential between the housing overlay and Section 24-3~7(k) which limits maximum density in the Bonus Overlay R/MF zone. That limitation will be lifted when the housing overlaY is applied. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #26, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilwoman Nichael. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 1980) AN O~INANCE AMENDING SECTION 24-3.7(k) OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE BY PROVIDING THAT THE N3~XI~UM DENSITY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS DO NOT APPLY TO SITES OR AREAS WHICH ARE INCLUDED IN THE RESIDENTIAL BONUS OVERLAY DISTRICT was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #26, Series of 1980, on first reading~ seconded by Councilwoman Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay~ Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Isaac, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Notion carrie~. ORDINANCE #45, SERI~S OF 1980 - Off-street parking space size reduction ORDINANCE #45 Off-street Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #45, Series of 1980, seconded by Councilman parking space Isaac. All in favor, motion carried, size reduction ~r meeuzng aspen cl~y councl± August~ ~11' ~1980 ORDINANCE ~45 (Series of 1980) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 24-4.2(a) OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE REDUCING THE REQUIRED WIDTH OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES FROM NINE (9) FEET TO EIGHT AND ONE-HALF (8-1/2) FEET was read by the city clerk Mayor Edel asked if this would allow a bigger building on the same lot. Jelene Vrchota said the intent was to have less area covered by asphalt; the effect will be to get one extra space for 17 spaces. Ms. Vrchota said in the residential area there will not be a bigger building. On 6,000 square feet, or two city lots, you could get a larger building by 333 square feet. Sunny Vann, planning office, told Council reducing the size of parking space does allow a larger building, but 8-1/2 feet for parking is consistent with building and engineering codes. Mayor Edel said he was not opposed to cutting the size of the parking, but he did not see any benefit from this. Mayor Edel said he would like to take the extra footage and make it open space. City Manager Chapman said the staff Will have specific language for this amendment at second reading. Councilwoman Michael moved to adopt Ordinance #45, Series of 1980, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Collins, aye; Isaac, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. SUEDIVISION SUBDIVISION RESUBMISSION - Herndon RESUBMISSION Herndon Sunny Vann told Council this subdivision was approved in December 1979 and the 90 day recording requirement lapsed. This must be reapproved by CounCil. The engineering depart ment said all stipulations and conditions on original approval have been met, P & Z recommended reapproval. Councilwoman Michael moved to reapprove the final plat subject to the recording of twO quit claim deeds on the Western boundary with the final subdivision agreement; seconded by Councilman Parry. Jeff Sachs said the staff should have the mortgagee consent to the zoning or platting of a property. This should be considered to be a requirement of the process. Mayor Edel asked staff to pursue the thought of this. All in favor, motion carried. CONDOF,'INIUM- CONDOMINIUMIZATION PROCEDURES IZATION PROCEDURES Ms. Vrchota told Council there has been extensive staff discussion between engineering, planning and the attorney, who felt the procedure for subdivision exemption for condomini- umization was inappropriate. The staff feels that the exception procedure should be followed rather than exemption. The exception procedure will have the applicant present a plat for recording at the county; this provides consumer protection by specifying common areas and specific areas to purchase. Gideon Kaufman said he had no problem with this procedure; however, wanted some concern so that the applicant does not have to put of $5,000 on a map and then get turned down. Kaufman suggested the engineering depart- ment sign on the plat after Council passes the subdivision to make sure all concerns have been taken care of. Kaufman said if Council does go with the exception procedure, he would like to have the 90 day recording requirement exempted from this process. SUBDIVISION SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Hopkins EXCEPTION - Hopkins Jolene Vrchota told Council this is an existing duplex in the west Aspen subdivision; one unit is owner occupied, the other was rented at $900 per month for a three bedroom unit, which falls within the middle income category. However, the unit has not been rented for 18 months. The hoUsing director wanted to make the recommendation that the unit be price restricted; however, Ms. Vrchota said she felt that would be setting a precedent that has not been done previously. The engineering department made a site inspection and recommended approval subject to the owner agreeing to enter a sidewalk improvement district. The attorney requests a notice and option provision and the six month minimum lease. The planning office recommends approval including the engineering department requests and that the applicant should record a condominium plat meeting the engineering department approval prior to sale of any units. The planning office would not recon~aend price restrictions. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve subdivision exception of the Hopkins property subject to owner/applicant required to join a sidewalk district if and when one is formed recording condominium~plat which has ~pproval of the engineering department prior to sale of either unit; six month minimum lease on each units, and the notice and option to current tenants; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Reese EXCEPTION - Reese Ms. Vrchota told Council this is a single family residence which is being converted to a dupleX and have been owner occupied. The existing structure will be divided into two units. The engineering department recommends apporval with a sidewalk improvement district agreement. The attorney comments the units should fall with the six month minimum lease restriction. The P & Z agrees with the planning office recommendation for approval of the subdivision exception with the conditions of the engineering department and the attorney. There has been no history of employee rental. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Reese=subdivision exception with the condition that the owner/applicant agree to join a sidewalk improvement district, six month minimum lease restriction; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen ~l~y ~uunu±~ ~u~u~u ~, SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Okie . SUBDIVISION Jolene Vrchota told Council this is a 7 unit apartment building existing in the office EXCEPTION - zone; one of the three-bedroom units does fall withint the low income price uidelines 0kie The housing director feels it is appropriate to restrict one studio an~ 1 on~-bedroom ' units to facilitate some renovations which will improve the units within the building. The planning office concurs with P & Z. This structure is located at 719 E. Hopkins. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the subdivision exception with the following conditions (1) the owner shall revise and resubmit the improvement survey and floor plans/cross sections and the plat shall be recorded prior to the sale of the units; (2) the owner/ application shall agree to enter into a sidewalk improvement district in the event one is formed; (3) the owner/application shall adhere to notice and option provisions for current tenants according to Section 20-22(a) of the Municipal Code; (4) owner/applicant shall provide adequate on-site trash facilities for all seven units; (5) each unit shall be deed restricted to six-month minimum leases with no more than two shorter tenancies in a calendar year according to section 20-22(b) of the Municipal Code; (6) one studio and one 1-bedroom unit shall be deed restricted under the City's low-incom price guidelines, as are from time to time amended, for five years; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Grindlay SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Ms. Vrchota told Council this was tabled last February to await a reanalysls of the condo- Grindla¥ miniumization policy with the possibility of dropping portions of Section 20-22. The applicant has a duplex which has been renter-occupied since 1976 and rents for $750 and S800 and falls within the middle~ income housing price guidelines. The engineering department recommends three conditions on the approval; the attorney requested notice and option provisions and slx month minimum leases. While two units fall within the housing price guidelines, there has been a precedent to require only 50 per cent of the units be deed restricted. There is a recommendation only the east unit be restricted for five years in the middle income guidelines. P & Z concurred with the planning office recommendation. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Grindlay subdivision exemption with the following conditions; (1) revision and resubmlssio~ of the owner/applicant's survey plat to include the items in the engineering memo; (2) owner/applicant agreeing to enter into a sidewalk improvement district in the event one is formed; (3) the provisions of a maintenance easement which is described in the engineering memo; (4) notice and option provisions of Section 20-22(a); (5) six month minimum lease restrictions; (6) o~ner/applicant agree to deed restrict the east side of the duplex for a period of 5 years in the middle price guidelines; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. REQUEST FOR FUNDS Ballet West REQUEST FOR FUNDS - City Manager Chapman recommended to Council they refer this to him for a report at the Ballet West next Council meeting. Council agreed. MALL LEASE - Red Onion MALL LEASE - Red Onion Council said they had problems with this extension because the Red Onion went ahead and expanded to 900 square feet from the approved 300 square feet without Council's permissio~ Council felt the applicant should be present to discuss this with Council. Council set a hearing for Wednesday, August 13. CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Edel opened the public hearing on the consent agenda; these items are Freddie's liquor license renewal; Special Event Permit for the Visual Arts Center, and second reading on Ordinance ~30, Series of 1980 - Ski Corp bus agreement. There were no comments Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve all items on the consent agenda; seconded by Council man Parry. Ail in favor, motion carried. Councilman Isaac mOved to continue the meeting to Wednesday, August 13; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried. Council left chambers at 9:40 p.m. Continued Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 1980 Council reconvened at 5:20 p.m. with Councilmembers Isaac, Parry, Michael and Mayor Edel RED ONION present. EXPANSIC~ Mayor Edel said he was very annoyed when the Red Onion went ahead and expanded without any permission from Council. Ashley Anderson said this is a very high-pressure operation and is being managed by Larry Sands, who spent 3 years on the Mall Commission. The owners asked that Anderson apologize to Council. The owners got carried away and hope this does not preclude their ability to go through the actual process of getting approval. Councilman Parry pointed out the Council had tried to maintain a standard for restaurant expansions into the mall; that is why they are reviewed by Council. Councilwoman Michael said she agreed with the Mayor, and that she is tired of passing laws and having them considered to be something of a joke. Councilwoman Michael suggested as a reprimand, the Red Onion go through the process that was required by the M. all Commission through the city manager. 2941 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 1980 Anderson said:he had no problem doing this with the expansion; however, he requested the mall lease the Red Onion has always had be allowed to remain. City Clerk Koch told Council she had allowed them to go ahead because all the other restaurants in the mall had gone ahead and expanded. This is the fourth year for all restaurants. Mayor Edel said he did not want to allow any expansion this year. Councilman Isaac said they have a right to come in and make an application; he sees no problem opening 'the old part. Councilman Isaac moved to issue the license for the old area and they pay rent from the I first of the month; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councllmembers Parry and Isaac in favor,!i Councilwoman Michael and Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carried. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the mall lease agreement with the Red Onion for 380 square feet at $1.19 per foot and ask the City Manager to send a city representative to make sure the current service area has a conforming fence and standards set for mall restaurants and no further expansion for the year 1980; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Isaac moved to adjourn at 5:45 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn ~ Koch, City Clerk