Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19810713~egular Meeting Aspen City Council July 13, 1981 JQINT MEETING WITH COUNTY COM~SSI©N~R~ M~yo:v ]~de] cailed the meetinc to or~er at ~:20 ~,m. wi~:b Councilmember!; Knect, Parry, and Collins and Commiss'oners Kinsley, Klanderud, Child, Madsen and Blake present. 1. Consolidation of Police Functions. County Attorney Sandra Stuller presented a propose consolidation of city/county police function. There are two issues; whether the governmen are interested and, if so, how to go about this. The sheriff can continue in his existing capacity and negoation a contract an an annual basis. The city charter could be changed to establish the sheriff as a municipal officer. Another issue is whether the sher.iff would be appointed or elected. Another point is who pays for the law enforcement and how is it paid for. Don Davis, sheriff's department, said their department did not have a specific position other than if it is to be done, in what manner does the community want it done, i.e. appointment versus election. Davis said he did not think the consolidation approach would be a big money saver; all the police work could not be done by the sheriff's office without adding a force about the size of the present police department. In the long run, the savings could be significant in the administration end. Rob McClung, police chief, said he felt over time the consolidation will prove to'be more effective; it will provide more consistency in the style of law enforcement. McClung said he felt an appointed department head would be preferable. The Commissioners and Council are elected; they are responsible to the electorate. McClung pointed out an elected sheriff is politically autonomous from the people who are elected and who run his budget. Having a sheriff run for election every four years can change the person and the policy of. the department. Commissioner Kinsley stated the ~uestion is whether to submit this to the voters, a~d do the Boards th~.ng there is enough potention for benefit from this change. Mayor Ede]. saa'~e~ he ~ik~ th~ cotceT, t, but felt there ~ho'~ld ~e m~re '~ac~gr~un5 infor'~atio ~nd "?is:usTio- wi"th staf~ an,] wi":h the Bcar~s. The ?ep3rt:~ents O~ law enforcement s~*.ou!d compile %n±crmation on the cost effectiveness of eliminating the duplication and how to combine the two departments. Cliff Browning, FBI - Glenwood Springs, told the Boards he has had experience in consolidations. In Florida, Browning put together a city and county department, which became an effective law enforcement agency at considerable saving. B~owning stated it is his experience in law enforcement that there are conflicts with city police department and county sheriff's department; if these conflicts are taken away, there can be a more effective law enforcement.. Browning told the Boards that Craig, Colorado, tried consolidation for three years. They did separate because of political conflicts. Browning said he felt consolidation with one agency is much more effective. Mayor Edel said if the Boards created a joint department with an appointed head, does this become a reporting problem. County Manager Stewart noted an elected department head allows the public to determine every fours years what the politics of the department should be. City Manager Chapman said he felt strongly that law enforcement officials should be appointed; with elected law officials o~en there is no accountability'.. If thgre are appointed law enforcement officials responsible to elected officials, there is a clear line of accountability. Special Meeting Aspen City Council July 2, 1981 Councilman Collins said he likes the idea of a park where it is. Ms. Kashinski said in regards to leaving it a park, the Thrift Shop could work with the fire department for a new building. They need a basement and a first floor. It is conceivable they could build this building where it sits in the fire department plans; then when needed, the fire department could build a second story. They would still have a parking lot and a park in the front. Mayor Edel said there are a lot of problems, zoning, the building, working with the fire department. Today Council should say they are willing to realize that the Thrift Shop must go somewhere and this is an appropriate spot. Councilman Collins asked about the traffic and parking problems. Ms. Kashinski said they Could unload in the alley where the parking is. The Thrift Shop does not prefer the park east of city ahll; there would be public outcry if the huge spruce is moved. There is no parking with all the police cars. Next to the fire station, people can go through the alley and drop off their items; there would be parking for the Thrift Shop, Councilman Knight moved to instruct staff to proceed with the Thrift Shop proposal; seconde by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Taddune asked if Council was going to do anything with respect to Hecht. Ms. Butterbaugh said this is now up to the Thrift Shop ladies. ORDINANCE 935, SERIES OF 1981 - Issuance of general obligation water bonds Ms. Butterbaugh told Council this has been passed on first reading. The city needs the second reading to obtain money by next Monday to make initial payout on the contract. Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance 935, Series of 1981, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Collins. Roll call vote; Cou ncilmembers Parry, aye; Knecht, aye; Collins, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to adjourn at 5:15; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. R_egular Meeting. Aspen City Council July 13, 1981 ~QINT MEETING WITH C©UNTY CO~2~ISSI©N~]RS M~yc,~ L~el ca'%led the meetinc to ore, er at '~ :~0 '~.~mo wi~b Coun~;~lmember~: Knect, Parry, and Collins and Commiss'oners Kinsley, Kland~r~d, Child, Madsen and Blake present. 1. Consolidation of Police Functions. County'Attorney Sandra Stuller presented a propos~ consolidation of city/county police function. There are two issues; whether the governmen are interested and, if so, how to go about this. The sheriff can continue in his existing capacity and negoatlon a contract an an annual basis. The city charter could be changed to establish the sheriff as a municipal officer. Another issue is whether the sheriff would be appointed or elected. Another point is who pays for the law enforcement and how is it paid for. Don Davis, sheriff's department, said their department did not have a specific position other than if it is to be done, in what manner does the community want it done, ~.e. appointment versus election. Davis said he did not think the consolidation approach would be a big money saver; all the police work could not be done by the sheriff's office without adding a force about the size of the present police department. In the long run, the savings could be significant in the administration end. Rob McClung, police chief, said he felt over time the consolidation w~ll prove to' be more effective; it will provide more consistency in the style of law enforcement. McClung said he felt an appointed department head would be preferable. The Commissioners and Council are elected; they are responsible to the electorate. McClung pointed out an elected sheriff is politically autonomous from the people who are elected and who run his budget. Having a sheriff run for election every four years can change the person and the policy of~ the department. Commissioner Kinsley stated the ~uestion ~s whether to s'ubmit this to the voters, and do the Boards thing there i~ engugb potention for benefit from this change. Mayor Edel s~.~ he lik?~ th~ co'~.cey~t, but felt there ~hould ~e m~re ~,ac'~gr~unt infor;~atio ~nd '~isyus~io-. with staf5 and wi":h the B.ar~s. The ~ep,~rt~%en~s o. law e~rcc~.ent s .oL..d c'.~mpiie %nfcrmation on the cost effectiveness of eliminating the duplication and how to combine the two d~partments. Cliff Browning, FBI - Glenwood Springs, told the Boards he has had experience in consolidations. In Florida, Browning put together a city and county department, which became an effective law enforcement agency at considerable saving. Bt. owning stated it is his experience in law enforcement that there are conflicts with city police department and county sheriff's department; if these conflicts are taken away, there can be a more effective law enforcement.~. Browning told the Boards that Craig, Colorado, tried consolidation for three years. They did separate because of political conflicts. Browning said he felt consolidation with one agency ~s much more effective. Mayor Edel said if the Boards created a joint department with an appointed head, does this become a reporting problem. County Manager Stewart noted an elected department head allows the public to determine every fours years what the politics of the department should be. City Manager Chapman said he felt strongly that law enforcement officials ~egu±ar ~ee~lng ~spen ~lsy ~ouncl£ ~u£y ±J~ £~£ COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Knecht asked whose jurisdiction is it to keep clean the area from the last bridge to the dump. City Manager Chapman said beyond the bridge it is the responsibility of the County; Chapman said he was not sure what program the county has for cleaning along the roadsides. Councilman Knecht said he felt this was a problem that should be addressed. Tom Dunlop pointed out that the people administering the dump are not to allo~ anyone in who has trucks with lose debris; this is a $20 fine. Dunlop said to his knowledge this has been working. Dunlop told Council that highway clean up is one of the major programs of the Chamber of Commerce, they do it twice a year. 2. Councilman Parry moved to add to the agenda the industrial revenue bond question for Little Annie; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. 3. Councilman Parry brought up a request from P & Z for Council to, meet with them in a study session. Council requested staff to schedule this. 4. Councilman Parry commented on a letter from Monroe Summers regarding the Rubey Park transportation center. Councilman Parry said this is an excellent letter and requested a meeting with Summers to work on this important item. Mayor Edel agrees the subject of a transportation center deserves comment. The meeting was set for Wednesday, July 15. 5. Mayor Edel announced on July 24 there will be a CAST meeting at the Plum Tree. At this meeting there will be a member of Exxon to discuss the impact of oil shale on the Western Slope. 6. Mayor Edel said he would like on the agenda an appointment of special counsel in the case of People vs. Knecht. Councilman Parry moved to put this on the agenda; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. 7. Mayor Edel said he has had serious complaints from merchants on the mall that the mai1 is being neglected as far as cleanliness. Mayor Edet said he realized there have been problems with lack.of personnel. Mayor Edel said the city needs to do whatever possible to maintain the mall and asked for a report back from staff. 8. Mayor Edel said he has talked to golfers who are saying that the approach on the golf course is a little slovenly; people are getting in without getting their tickets punched or getting carts without paying for them. There have been complaints that the city is not supervising the golf course; it is sloppy and neglected. Mayor Edel said he would like a report on this. BMX TRACK REQUEST Ian Murray told Council this is becoming a very popular sport. The closest BMX track is in Grand Junction and the kids would like to have a track put in Aspen. Murray presented a drawing of a track located between the impound lot and the Roaring Fork river. Mayor Edel asked how much this would cost. Murray told Council that Dooger Digger has agreed to supply help moving the dirt and smoothing out the track. Councilman Parry said this area proposed for the track is completely bare and has no trees. Councilman Parry said he would work with the boys and that Monroe Summers had agreed to work and to supervise. Mayor Edel pointed out this entire area is under study and Benedict is doing a plan for it. This should be brought to Benedict's attention. Councilman Parry said this is a temporary track and could be graded off in an hour. This is just a place for kids to ride bicycles; there are no motorized vehicles. Murray brought in a BMX bicycle and showed the required padding and safety features. Councilman Knecht moved to approve the site for a temporary BMX track; seconded by Councilman Collins. Mayor Edel said he would agree to this temporary situation because it is important to the kids. Ms. Butterbaugh suggested the city draw up an agreement that the city would be held harmless. City Attorney Taddune said he did not know how this could be handled because the boys do not represent an organization. City Manager Chapman suggested giving this a try to see how it will work. Chapman said if the city or the kids are not satisfied, they can get back together. All in favor, motion carried. LITTLE ANNIE - INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS City Manager Chapman told Council this is an inducement resolution ~for the city to issue industrial revenue bonds for Little Annie Development. Chapman said there is a need to put this on the agenda because there is legislation in Washington concerning IRBs and what they may be issued for. Chapman told Council the concern of Little Annie is that the recreation area may be closed to IRBs. Little Annie would like the opportunity to remain open to have IRBs issued by the city. Ron Garfield, representing Little Annie, told Council they are working with a firm in Denver to help with the financing for the development and this is a phase they would like included. Mayor Edel said he was bothered by the rush and where Little Annie is in the approval process. Mayor Edel suggested this be put on the next agenda so that Council and staff will have an opportunity to look over this and report back. Chapman agreed staff has not reviewed this; however, ~he city's bond counsel prepared this resolution - at the expense of Little Annie. They have assured Chapman this inducement resolution has no reliance in the future. Chapman said he is comfortable that all this is doing is keeping the door open. <~ Garfield told Council he has reliable and accurate information from their consultants that there are changes coming from the legislature that may affect sports facilities in regards to IRBs. It is important for Little Annie in putting together its packaging for investors to identify IRBs as a potential element of financing. The total financing will be $35,000,000. Garfield said that Little Annie may not even avail themselves of this option for financing. By this resolution, Council is only indicating their intention. Little Annie must come back with ordinances to put out the bond documents. Garfield said Little Annie does not gain any more in approvals by this resolution. Rick Boothe, Sherman & Howard, told Council the bonds cannot be issued or sold until Little Annie comes back with financing documents and a formal ordinance. The Council asked for a statement on non-reliance. "This statement is being made in connection with City Council deliberations on a proposed resolution for Little Annie development revenue bond. My name is Ron Garfield and I am the attorney for Little Annie Limited Partnership and represent the Little Annie project. On behalf of my client who is sitting here with me this evening, we represent to the City, first, that no action under this resolution would be construed by us or relied upon by us an any additional approval of the Little Annie Ski Area or any other matters over which the City has jurisdiction of this application. This resolution is limited solely to an expression of intent on behalf of City Council with respect to the bonds. Number two, that should City Council act on the resolution this evening, this would not give rise to any reliance on our part nor would we ever assert that we could specifically enforce this resolution or compel the City to issue industrial revenue bonds should it decline at a future date to pass the enabling ordinances which are required for such bonds." Councilman Parry moved to read Resolution ~36, Series of 1981, by title; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION ~36 (Series of 1981) A RESOLUTION AGREEING TO ISSUE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE SPORTS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR LITTLE ANNIE, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DEVLIERY OF A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORAD, AND LITTLE ANNIE, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Resolution ~36, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Collins. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL Councilman Parry moved that Thomas T. Crumpacker be employed as special counsel in the matter of People vs Richard Knecht currently pending in Municipal Court as outlined in Paul Taddune's letter of July 9, 1981; seconded bY Councilman Collins, All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Knecht abstained. WATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCES Assistant City Manager Lois Butterbaugh told Council all ordinances have been reviewed by staff and John Musick, the city water counsel. These six ordinances are to implement the city's water management plan. Ordinance 39 is for general provisions and establishes the operation of the city's water utility. Ordinance 40 outlines the service districts of the city's water system; goes through the connection fees and gives the equivalent units for calculating water fees. Ordinance 41 is a housekeeping ordinance, changing titles and a determination of whether the service is inside or outside of the city. Ordinance 42 deals with procedures to be dealt with during water shortages. Ordinance 43 is the water plumbing and advisory ordinance. Tom Dunlop told Council Ordinance #44 deal more explicitly with water quality and specific violations and definition which did not exist before. Councilman Parry asked in Section 11-11 who determines what are weeds and rubbish. Dunlop told Council this has always been included in the ordinance; when there are complaints, either he or the fire chief inves- tigate. Dunlop said not once in 6 years had he asked someone to trim weeds because of a fire hazard. Ms. Butterbaugh explained the new approach to the connect charge dealt with in Ordinance 40. The city's water service has been divided into size areas because the cost of delivery of water to each area is quite different. The staff has taken the service areas, taken the new construction and allocated to each area the cost and how many EQRs are in the area and how many will be built and divided this up and came up with a charge that should be for new connects in each area. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council the water system Within the city of Aspen is in fairly good shape; the water system outside the city is not in as good shape. Ms. Butterbaugh showed a demonstration of comparative water rates and connect fees in the water service areas of Aspen. The city only increased their water rate 10 per cent. The table of equivalents was worked on with Rea, Cassens and John Musick. Some of these will have to be modified by Council. Ms. Butterbaugh pointed out in Section 23-59 that all monies for connects will go into special funds to be used for the district they are collected in. There will be a surcharge on connect fees for any place outside the city. The utility hookup charge is the same structure as present except it has been increased. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance ~39, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #39 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE WATER UTILITY CODE," REPEALING DIVISION 1 OF ARTICLE III OF CHAPTE ~ 23 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND ENACTING A NEW DIVISION 1 THEREOF IN ITS PL_ACE, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS:" PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISH MENT AND OPERATION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WATER UTILITY was read by the city clerk Councilman Knecht moved to adopt Ordinance #39, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Collins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Knecht, aye~ Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #40, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #40 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "THE UTILITY SERVICE CONNECTION ORDINANCE OF 1981, REPEALING DIVISION 2 OF ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 23 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENTITLED "TAP PERMITS AND PLANT INVESTMENT FEE", AND ENACTING A NEW DIVISION 2 THEREOF ENTITLED "UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE", PROVIDING FOR APPLICATION PROCEDURES FOR CONNECTION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN WATER UTILITY, CONNECTION CHARGES THERETO, SIZE OF CONNECTIONS, AND DISCONNECTIONS FROM THE UTILITY was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #40, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Knecht, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #41, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #41 (Series of 1981) U~N ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTIN, IN PART, DIVISION 4 OF ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 23 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENTITLED "MISCELLANEOUS PROVISONS", CHANGING THE TITLE OF THE "SUPEF/NTENDENT OF WATER WORKS" TO "DIRECTOR OF THE WATER TREATMENT AND SUPPLY" AND CHANGING THE TERM "WATER WORKS" TO "WATER UTILITY" AND AMENDING SECTION 23-156 THEREOF, ENTITLE "DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHE ] INSIDE OR OUTSIDE OF CITY" was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance ~41, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Knect, aye; Collins, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance ~42, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~42 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "THE COMPREHENSIVE WATER SHORTAGE ORDINANCE OF 1981", ENACTING A NEW DIVISION 5 TO ARTICLE III OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENTITLED "WATER SHORTAGE", PROVIDING FOR PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED DURING WATER' SHORTAGES was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #42, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, aye; Knecht, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #43, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #43 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "THE WATER CONSERVATION AND PLUMBING ADVISORY ORDINANCE OF 1981", ENACING' A NEW ARTICLE X TO CHAPTER 7 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENTITLED "WATER CONSERVATION AND PLUMBING ADVISORY CODE," PROVIDING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WATER CONSERVING FIXTURES, LAND SCAPING, AND IRRIGATION METHODS was read by the city clerk -- Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #43, Series of 1981, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Collins, aye; Knecht, aye;, Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #44, Series of 1981; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~44 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "THE WATER QUALITY ORDINANCE OF 1981," REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTE ~ 11 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ENTITLED "HEALTH", AND ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED "HEALTH AND WATER QUALITY", PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF ACTIVITIES IN AND AROUND THE CITY AND ITS VARIOUS SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY, IN ORDER TO PREVENT WATER QUALITY DEGRADATION, AND REGULATING ON-SITE INDIVIDUAL WASTER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL CARCASSES, REMOVAL OF RUBBUSH, WEEDS AND BRUSH AND OTHER SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES CAUSING POLLUTION was read by the city clerk Regular Meeting aspen umLy uuunux~ Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance ~44, Series of 1981, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Knecht, aye; Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edei, aye. Motion carried. COG TRANSPORTATION STUDY Mayor Edel reported to Council at the last CAST meeting it was noted they have most of their monies towards making COG's transportation study and implementation. They went to all cities on the wester slope for funds towards this study. This study is to develop and improve transportation between Denver and Aspen/Glenwood and Denver and the western slope and all Colorado. Moffatt Tunnel is funding $15,000. COG would like $2,000 from Aspen; $1,000 in 1981 and the rest in 1982. Councilman Knecht asked where the money woUl~ come from. Chapman told Council there are some monies in the general fund. Councilman Collins moved to approve an expenditure of $2,000; $1,000 in 1981 and $1,000 in 1982 for the purpose of a transporation study of alternate modes by NWCCOG: seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM PARK DEDICATION FEE - Aspen Sanitation District Employee Housing Councilman Parry moved to waive the park dedication fee for the Aspen Sanitation District Employee Housing. Motion DIES for lack of a second. City Manager Chapman reminded Council they have been dealing with this on a ease by case basis. Perhaps a stronger policy should be outlined. VENDING CONTRACT - Peppermint Pattie's Popsicle Palace Mayor Edel said last year Council requested the city publish to allow some sort of competition for this vending contract. Councilman Parry noted the city receives no revenue from this, nor do they have a guarantee on the kind of performance a vendor will give. City Manager Chapman suggested extending the term of this contract for one month so the staff can get the procedure in place and give notice. Councilman Collins said at this late date, the Council should approve the renewal of the agreement for one year and have the staff work on the procedure for next summer. Councilman Parry agreed. Councilman Collins moved that the contract between Patricia Holbrook and the City of Aspen be approved; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Collins moved to table the request for exemption from park dedication fee for Aspen Sanitation District employee hoUsing; there was no representative; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. Council took a 10 minute recess. SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION--¥~L~Q Colette Penne, planning office, explained to Council this is a duplex located a 1135 Cemetery Lane; it is zoned R-15 and is 15,000 plus square footlot. The first application for condominiumization was in May 1979; this did not go through the process. The structur. has since then been remodelled to 3138 square feet. The lower unit has been ownner- occupied for the past three years and neither has been offerred for rental. This condo- miniumization will not reduce the supply of housing and should not have price restrictions on the units. The planning office recommends approval with the condition the condominium plat be fully revised to meet the engineering departments request and that the six month minimum lease restriction applies. P & Z requested that the non-conformity be noted on the plat. Councilman~Collins moved to approve the condominiumization of the Valley duplex located on lot 11, block 1, Pitkin Mesa subdivision, with the following conditions; (1) full revision of the condominium plat to meet the requirements outlined by the engineering department, and recordation of this plat; (2) compliance with lease restriction of six= month minimum leases with no more than two shorter tenancies per year; (3) non-conformity to be noted on final plat. ORDINANCE ~37, SERIES OF 1981 - Lot line adjustment Alan Richman, planning office, told Council this code amendment came from the request from P & Z to review the procedure for lot line adjustments. P & Z recognized there is criteria to evaluate this but the code does not have specific criteria and also requested a clarification of the Overall intent. P & Z requested the staff outline more specific criteria for eligibility for a lot line adjustment. P & Z came UP with a resolution of approval defining the purpose of lot line adjustment; secondly, the adjustment will not directly or indirectly affect the development rights or permitted density on the property b~ providing the opportunity to create a new l°t. The third point the P & Z gave was that the parcels or lots will continue to conform to the underlying area and bulk requirements of the zone. Also the applicant for a lot line adjustment must comply with all applicable land use regulations of the Code. Councilman Parry said he felt two adjacent property owners should have a choice; they may Want to move the lot line for view purposes or mutual agreement. Riehman suggested adding language to the ordinance to the effect, "so that it does not result in additional development rights in either area". Councilman Collins moved to read Ordinance ~37, Serie~ of 1981, as amended; s~conded by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~37 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 20-19 AND 20-5(d) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY THE ADDITION OF CRITERIA FOR GRANTING EXCEPTION FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUSTING A LOT LINE BETWEEN ADJACENT PARCELS O~ LOTS WHICH MAY BE UNDER INDIVIDUAL OR SEPARATE OWNERSHIP was read by the city clerk Aspen ~lty ~ouncl£ Juiy 13, igS± i Councilman Collins moved to adopt Ordinance #37, Series of 1981, as amended; seconded by Councilman Knelt. Roll call vote; Councilmembers COllins, aye; Knecht, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Vicenti Alan Richman, planning office, told Council this is a request for condominiumization of a duplex which is next door to property which received a residential GMP allocation for 1981, located at 1015 East Hyman. This is in the R/MF zone on a 9000 square foot lot. This duplex'has not been occupied. The engineering department made comments about the resubmission of the plat. There are four bedrooms and only three parking spaces. The applicant should provide one parking space per bedroom, and therefore, should be required to regrade the space on the side of the building for parking, or add an additional space in the alley. Richman told Council a rental unit was located on this property; it has been revised and determined it was rented at a price,which exceeded the housing price guidelines. The house was donated and moved to ACES to be used as employee housing. The planning office recommends the six month minimum lease restriction be a condition. Council man Knecht said he felt this restriction was impossible to enforce. Councilman Knecht moved to approve the Vicenti Building Company subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumization, subject to the following conditions; (1) the applicant agreeing to revise the condominium plat to meet the specifications of the engineering department memoradnum of May 26, 1981, and resubmitting the plat prior to recordation; (2) the applicant providing four usable parking spaces for the four bedroom duplex by either regarding the space on the side of the building so that it is usable or providing a second space in the alley behind the building; (.3) the applicant agreeing to provide an electrical/communications easement at the southeast corner of the parcel; and (4) the applicant restricting all units to six month minimum leases with no more than two shorter tenancies per year; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Vicenzi/Goldstein Alan Richman told Council this is a request to condominiumize an office/commercial located at 300 South Spring in the O, office zone. This is on 6,000 square feet with nine Units and has been known as the Hanna-Dustin building. Since this is a commercial building most of the requirements of Section 20-22 do not apply. There are comments from the engineering department. The applicant should obtain an encroachment license for the intrusion of the building into the right-of-way; the appliCant shOuld construct a five foot wide sidewalk; the applicant should revise their plat. Richman told Council there are comments from the building inspector as to numerous life, health and safety violation at the building. Richman reminded Council a life, health and safety ordinance relating to condominiumization was enacted earlier this year requiring the building inspector to conduct inspections of structure prior to condominiumization to determine life, health and safety violations. Richman told Council the report from the building inspector to P & Z was complicated and two problems arose because of this. P & Z made a statement that they were looking, from this ordinance, to get a report; they were not looking to be a review body for building violations. The building inspector has his own mechanism for compliance. The planning office and P & Z feel for the staff to place compliance on the building inspector's report as an aspect of approval is redundant and is not as strong a mechanism as the building inspector has for code violations. Richman said the staff did not want to put the building inspector compliance as part of either the P & Z recommendation or the staff to Council. Richman said P & Z felt they did not have the expertise to say which violations were not life, health safety violations. Richman said P & Z did not want to put these as a conditions because if they are condition~ then the applicant has to sit and argue on a due process consideration and have the P & Z decide who is right and who is wrong. Paul Taddune told Council the P & Z did not want to act as an appeals board; there is one. P & Z's position is that they do not have jurisdiction to make rulings on determinations made by the building department; the buildin~ department has its own mechanism for this. Mayor Edel said one of the conditions for approval is to conform to the building code; if an applicant does not conform to it, they go to the Board of Appeals. Gideon Kaufman told Council he is concerned because the original intent of this was to look at life, health and safety violations was could cause serious problems, with the understanding that some old buildings cannot be brought up to Code. Kaufman pointed out that when the building inspector goes into a building he makes a list of all violations; the initial request for health and safety inspections has gotten to a larger degree. Kaufman said he felt the Council should listen if an applicant feels aggrieved because this has gotten outside of the intent of the ordinance. Ka~fman told Council this building went before the Board of Appeals in 1969 and received a variance. The building department is .now asking them to undo the variance they received. Mayor Edel said if an applicant gets the privilege of condominiumization, they should conform with the building code. The building codes are different in 1981 than they were in 1969. Kaufman said the only change when condominiumizing is the possible ownership, not the use of the building. Richman said the best avenue to determine whether or not these are life, health and safety issues is to appeal to the Board of Appeals. Councilman Collins suggested going to the Board of Appeals with this and then come back to Council. Councilman Collins moved to table this item; seconded by Councilman Knecht; All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Parry. Motion carried. ORDINANCE ~38, SERIES OF 1981 - Ut? City Place Rezoning to RBO Alan Richman told Council this project received a residential GMP allocation; it is located in the R/MF zone on 15,000 square feet on Cooper avenue east of West end street. One lot is vacant; one lot has a unit on it. Council heard this application in March at conceptual stage. P & Z has heard this at preliminary plat for rezoning to RBO; also for request from exemption from GMP for the employee units; for condominiumization. P & Z approved all requests. This presentation is only for rezoning to RBO as it is an ordinance process; the other requests will be heard at second reading of this ordinance. Richman told Council this request is for 22 units; 12 units deed restricted to low income guidelines, two units at moderate, and 8 free market units. In the RBO review criteria, there are underlying area and bulk requirements which are required by this ordinance. The lot meets the minimum required size; multi-family dwelling units are allowed in the R/MF- RBO if at least half of the units are deed restricted to employee housing. Richman said that basically all of the permitted density under the RBO is being requested. The applica! is meeting the requirements of yard width, heighth, etc. and not asking for any waiver of any of these requirements. There is no open space requirements. The FAR for the site under the RBO is 1:1 normally and is increasable to 1.25:1; this 15,000 square foot site has an allowable FAR of 18,750 square feet. The applicant is proposing an FAR of 15,876 square feet. The applicant has made a proposal for the price of the units based on the housing price guidelines and presented rent or sale prices for the units. Richman told Council he has found in the Code a section which states if an applicant exceeds the maximum square foot- age for employee housing, it can only be rented on the basis of the maximum size outlined in the Code. Another issue is exactly how the units get deed restricted. The normal procedure would be deed restriction on the units as new units under the housing price guidelines, existing when the units are approved. There is a two-tiered housing guideline: pricing for new units and pricing for existing units. These units would be deed restricted as new units. In October of each year, the housing price guidelines are revised. Richman told Council in 1979 the new units were increased by 17 per cent and for existing construction by 9 per cent; in 1980 new units were increased by 14.5 per cent and 8 per cent for existing structures. This applicant is being approved now but will.not be occupied until the new guidelines are in effect. The planning office is suggesting that the units be deed restricted as new units under the new unit guidelines and in October, they be eligible for an annual price increase as existing units despite the fact they are not occupied and not totally in existence yet; an unit is not normally increased as a new unit. Allowing an applicant to get increases for new units, rather than existing units, is encouraging them to hold the units down the line. John La Salle, representing the developers, understood the city would not want people to hold off units and keep getting increases. La Salle pointed out the review process is so lengthy; they started at the beginning of the year and have done everything they could to move this along. La Salle said the guidelines set in 1980 were set with what happened in the previous year in mind and should not apply to a project that may have occupancy in February 1982. By the time these units are occupied, the rents will be a year and four months out of date. La Salle told Council that .14 of these units are employee housing and of those 12 are low income. These units are larger than the guidelines and the developer can only charge for the maximum size of the guidelines. Richman pointed out the applicant that comes in for.a GMP allocation on January 1 of any year is aware of the existing price guidelines fo~?new and existing housing; that should be the year to which the deed restric- tion applies. 'La Salle suggested these should be established later in the year. La Salle requested that the 1981 price guidelines be applied to this project; the project is being built in 1981. Richman s~id the 1981 guidelines will be applied; however, they will be applied as existing units. ~ Councilman Knecht said w~at he liked about both this project and the Marolt project is that private~developers are building employee housing. The precedent for employee pricing was made w~h the Marolt project and the Council should stick with that. Councilman Parry said if the Council starts cutting people down, there won,t be any private sector building employee units. Mayor Edel said he wanted to adhere to the recommendation of the planning office as far as the pricing guidelines. Richman requested that the planning office conditions in the memorandum be included in the ordinance. Councilman Collins moved to read Ordinance 938, Series of 1981, with the amendment of adding conditions 1 and 2 from the planning office memorandum to the ordinance; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #38 (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE REZONING LOTS C, D, E, F, AND G, BLOCK 118, IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, FROM R/MF to R/MF/RBO was read by the city clerk Councilman Knecht moved to adopt Ordinance ~38, Series of 1981, as amended, on first read- ing; seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay; Parry, aye; Knecht, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Edel opened the public hearing on Ordinance ~34, Series of 1981, Appropriations; Ordinance #32, Adoption of the Uniform Building Code; Ordinance 933, Adoption of the Unifor Mechanical Code; Ordinance #36, water Rates; Lane Correction Deeds, and Special Event Permit Requests. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Councilman Parry moved to adopt the consent agenda; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Collins moved to adjourn at 8:20 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.