Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19771011Regular Meeting Aspen City Council October 11, 1977 Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Hershey, Johnston, Parry, Van Ness, Wishart, City Manager Mahoney and City Attorney Nuttall present. MINUTES Councilman Hershey moved to approve the minutes of September 26, 1977; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out a typographical error on page 2281; it should be M.A.A. instead of M.S.S. On page 2288 under Aspen One Property discussion, it is not the Aspen One property that the City is jointly condemning with the County. The property under discussion was the Midland/Park property. The County has nothing to do with the Aspen One property. All in favor, motion carried. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Mayor Standley told Council there were two checks he had refused to sign; they are on page 2 of the disbursement register. These are two checks tQ Lada Vrany that are Lada Vrany contract retainage. Mayor Standley said the reason he has refused to sign the checks Payment is that Vrany still has outstanding $14,000 in sub fees on the third floor and has not made any agreements or method of paying the subs off. This contract retainage, howeverf is for the police department work. Mayor Standley said if Vrany does not pay his subs for the third floor, they will lien the City next and the City becomes liable for the $14,000. Mayor Standley said that until Vrany comes up with a program to take care of the subs, the City should no~ pay Vrany the money that is due on the other part. In the end, the City will be stuck paying it all off. Councilman Van Ness said he had gotten allegations from people working on the job claiming there were a lot of extras, and that the amounts of the extras have yet to be determined. No payment has been made on these extras. Vrany is in effect in the middle of this. City Attorney Nuttall pointed out that the contract has Vrany being responsible for the whole project. Councilman Parry said that Carl Nutzhorn had been coming to City Hall and trying to talk this thing out. Somewhere there has to be some sor~ of negotiation on this. Mayor Standley said he understood that there are not a lot of change orders. City Manager Mahoney said he felt the City had as precise and complete control over this project of any project. Tom Jones managed the job day-to-day. Jones stated that the basic problem is that the City had a guaranteed, maximum price contract for approximately $65,000 to complete Vrany's phases of work upstairs, which was basically the general carpentry work. Vrany had the biggest contract of the four that were awarded. The problem with this contract was that the City had a $65.000 "not to exceed" contract and he went way over it. Vrany has billed the City for a total of $100 to $105,000. Vrany has been paid $3500 in legitimate extras; a negotiating session will be set up to cover the balance of whay Vrany considers extras from June 1 through mid-August. At the most there is $3,000 extras in that period. Lada Vrany Jones told Council that he had attempted to have Vrany endorse the back of the check that __~ond. this constituted full payment for all extras to that date. Jones said that Vrany did not seem to be willing to give any g~ound on his $105,000 billings. Carl Nutzhorn, representing Lada Vrany, told Council he had spent many hours going over the billings, the contract, the extras, the site and the punch list. Nutzhorn said that the job had begun with Vrany billing monthly for work under the contract and extras. These were paid without question until what is regarded at the topset of the contract. When this had been met, the picture changed with regards to reviewing billings. The two checks under question today are unrelated to the third floor renovation. They are for footings in the alley and modification in the police department space. Nutkhorn told Council that the Mayor had refused to sign these because one of the subcontractors has a dispute with Vrany. Nutzho~n said his position was these checks are unrelated to the dispute with the subcontractors. Nutzhorn said another City position is that because the retainages, somewhere in the neighborhood of $6,500, are exceeded by the unpaid subcontractors of Vrany, the City proposes to pay nothing. Another problem is the identification of the extras that should be paid. Nutzhorn said they had been able =o work through the punch list, which had been pending since July and had been able to eliminate a lot of matters which were at issue. Nutzhorn said he felt they could make substantial progress within a week or two with regards to the issues. City Attorney Nuttall pointed out that the statutes require that the City publish notice of final settlement in the paper for ten days before any final payments can be made. Ms. Nuttall said she would like to complete that legal technicality. Considering the problems with the contracts, the City ought to be following the statute, which is clear this should be done. Councilman Parry asked if this procedure was to satisfy subcontrac- tors. Ms. Nuttall said that was exactly the reason. The advertising procedure gives the City legal protection having.~given others a chance to make their claims. Councilwoman Johnston said she had a sense of injustice, that if the police department contract had been with anyone else it would have been paid without any question. Ms. Nuttall told Council that since the City may well end up in litigation on one or both of the contracts, she could like to see the City complete on its side to the letter of the law. Councilman Parry moved to approve accounts payable conditioned upon publication of the two final contract settlements on checks 5963 and 5964; seconded by Councilman Wishars. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Standley. Motion carried. Councilman Van Ness said the greater problem should not be forgotten. There are basically four contractors~ one of them told Councilman Van Ness he had more extras to bill. He has not billed them because his prior bill has not been paid. Councilman Van'Ness suggested that the administration get together with the contractors, find out what;~the total amount is and work from there. Jones told Council that the City had established a guaranteed maximum price contract and stuck to it. This is no~ the general practice around town. Councilman Parry said there are contractors that are very dissatisfied. The contractors had been told they would be paid for their extras. Somewhere there was a breakdown in communications. Jones pointed out the question is, what is an extra. So far the City has successfully demonstrated that in the specifications and in the plans, the items being billed as extras are indeed not extras. They were to be included in the contract. Ms. Nuttall stated that for negotiating purposes, the City will look at all extras. The City should not waive any legal defense it might have should the City go to litigation. Mayor Standley said this item will be dealt with by the administration for negotiation. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 1. Lary Groen represented the care center committee for use of the old hospital. The Old Hospital Community Facilities task force made a recommendation to the Commissioners to allocate~ 54 per cent of the total main floor of the old hospital building as a care center for the elderly. Groen asked the Council to consider endorsing this concept.. The committee feels this is an eminently suitable use for that facility. The committee is trying to get as much public support for this concept as possible. Groen said they are not asking for a nursing home, but a residential facility for the elderly and possibly an extended care facility. This will not require specialized nursing facilities. The committee is starting an endowment funding drive to help defray costs. Councilwoman Johnston asked if that kind of a facility,_required certification from the State. Groen answered that an extended care facility would. Councilwoman Johnston said with regard to the grant the County received, the recommendation was not for a residential care.¢enter.~bu~ a senior resident&al facility. Groen pointed out that the zoning was amended recently to take care of that. Groen told Council that the committee has 1450 signature requesting that the County con- sider this facility and requested that Council consider their endorsement. Mayor Standley said personally said he did not feel he could endorse cause specifics on any of the projects, especially one an the County. Councilwoman Johnston said the County was studying this, but the recommendation of the task force was that anything from intermediate care up was better as an adjunct of the hospital. Councilman Van Ness said he was in favor of supporting the idea and felt the old hospital was an appropriate place for putting a care facility. Councilman Parry pointed out this would be a care center where people are mobile and can travel in and out. Councilman Hershey agreed with the Mayor that it is not appropriate for the Council to endorse, this would be transferring the Council's authority over into~the County. If member.s of the Council want to sign the petition, uhat may be endorsement and support. 2. Billy Tomb, Aspen Rugby Club, told Council the rugby team was leaving for England Rugby Team the next day and thanked Council for their help this year. Tomb said the rugby~;team had donation come up short $1700 for their plane tickets. Tomb said the rugby club has been in Aspen 10 years, has done a lot for the town, and KS a town team. Tomb said as far as he knew the City had never contributed money to the rugby club; Tomb asked Council to donate the $1700. Councilwoman Johnston said there was some money freed up from the cloudseeding Regular Meeting Aspen ~lty ~ouncll uc~oDer ±~, program and she would be in favor of donating to the Aspen Rugby Club. Councilwoman Johnston moved that the City make up the deficit of $1700 after it is guaranteed through the finance department that this is the amount needed; seconded by Councilman Wishart. This is to be from the unanticipated reductiOn in cloudSeeding money.~ All in favor, motion carried. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Van~Ness thanked the staff for putting together information oni~electricity Utility Rates rates. Councilman Van~Ness said it was enlightening to know that the City rates are City/Holy Cross lower than Holy Cross for low users and slightly higher for people using more. 2. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like to have a work session on the housing authority and the definitions of low and moderate income housing. Housing Author. 3. CoUncilwoman Johnston asked if the employee housing at the water plant will require rezoning. City Manager Mahoney said the staff has been following that project. 4. Councilwoman Johnston said she was impressed by a letter that the Magic Pan had relinquished their liquor license, rather than selling or transferring it. Councilwoman Magic Pan Johnston said this seemed like a good way to control licenses rather than just have them travelling with the space. With transfers the Council looses a lot of control over how the businesses are used. This would have to be a legislative change. Council suggested this be pursued at the legislative level. 5. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like the Council and staff to start thinking of more positive steps the City can take for the elderly. 6. Mayor Standley told Council he had received a letter from Tom Blake~,Snowmass Resort, Snowmass funds stating that because of additional funds the City does not have to come up with as much money. The amount the City contributes will be $1124. Councilman Van Ness asked what happens to the $12,000 that was already raised. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out this has gone from a three month program to a six month program without the City having anyone on the board. The City is putting money into something they know nothing about. 7. Mayor Standley said that Council had bought three pieces of sculpture for the mall. There is no sculpture in the mall right now. Mayor Standley said he feeling was that Mall Sculpture the sculpture should be back in the mall. The Council appropriated funds for the purpose of having mall sculpture, not Rubey Park sculpture. Someone else decided to move the sculpture, not the Council. SOCCER PROGRAM/FUND REQUEST Mayor Standley told Council that the soccer program has gotten much bigger than it was and they don't have money to buy equipment. The coaching is all donated. Councilwoman Soccer Program Johnston asked if this should be part of the recreation. Mayor Standley answered this Donation request is fOr the rest of this year. It will be a budgeted item for next year. The soccer program is requesting $625, if the City prepares the goals, for 250 kids. Councilman Wishart moved to appropriate $625 and make the goals in-house; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. ~inance Director Butterbaugh said she would like Council to look at all needs at one time rather than committing this. There are other needs of higher priority that need additional funds and equipment. All in favor, motion carried. LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWAL - City Market 3.2 beer Councilman Van Ness moved to approve the renewal for City Market for 3.2 beer license; City Market seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried, renewal REQUEST FOR EXPANDED PREMISES - Copper Kettle Mayor Standley said this was an expansion request to serve liquor on the area of the Copper Kettle patio. The area will be fenced but not roofed. Councilman Hershey moved to approve the 18-E with regards to the Copper Kettle; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in favor, motion carried. THREE-WAY LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION - Casey's of Aspen Casey's of Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. The city clerk reported that the posting, Aspen publication and file were in order. Ashley Anderson, representing Casey White, told Liquor applic. Council this was an application for a three-way liquor license ~o?i'be located at 521 East Hyman, the old Benton studio. White went to college in New York, taught school in Colorado, ran White's Fish Market in Denver, and owns his own business. White told Council he would change the interior of the building very little. The decor on all three floors would be the same, couches and chairs of over-stuffed design. There would be no restaurant tables per se. White showed Council the plans for the building. There will be a dance floor on the first floor but it is very small. The second floor will be mostly dining areas with a small service bar. The third floor will have skylights. The proposed menu will be quick food service and also have a salad bar and soup. Food will be served from 12 to 12. White said he was trying to maintain a price range where everybody can afford to eat. White said he did not want to be in the disco business but wanted a unique bar/restaurant facility in Aspen. - n~F~ ~lu3 ~uunCl£ October 11, 1977 Casey's Mayor Standley asked the square footage. White answered 1800 on the first floor; 1900 on the second floor and 1000 on the third floor. Councilwoman Johnston said she found one restroom facility totally inadequate for the size of the building. Councilwoman Johnston asked about the elevator. Anderson answered they had been confused about this and were not sure where the ordinance was, but had talked to Dover and would be glad to put one in if it is required. Councilman Hershey said he had some reservations about ~ another bar in this neighborhood, pointing out that the Ute City Banque and Little Annie's were within 100 feet. Councilman Wishart asked the seating capacity; White answered about 295. Anderson told Council that Aspen population statistics, based on a study by Brian Stafford, indicate that in 1965 Aspen had 1500 people; in 1970, 2437 people and in 1977, 6100. Pitkin County had 1965, 3300; 1970 6185; and in 1977 approximately 14,000. At Christmas 1975 there were 19,200 visitors. Anderson introduced four different petitions. One signed by visitors, 30 signatures; by residents of the Roaring Fork Valley, 57 s£gnatures; by employees in the City of Aspen, 154 signatures, and by residents of the City of Aspen, 180 signatures. There are a total of 421 signatures for supporting the issuance of this license and demonstrating a need for this facility. Jean Ingham, owner of the Benton building, told Council he felt the building is one of the few unique new buildings in town and that the architecture is the desiqn. There is a very rich interior. Ingham said he had been approached by ski shops, retailers, Indian jewelery salemen to rent the building. Ingham said he felt the best use for the building would be a restaurant/bar facility. Ingham said he did not think what White envisions for the building exists in Aspen today; during the season everyone is crowded in the bars. There is no place to go and sit down quietly with friends and have a drink. Dave Streemen~ told Council he felt that the needs of Aspen had no~ been met for a quality, low key restaurant/bar due to the crowded and loud nature of the existing places. The Benton building could create such a quality place, and this would preserve the building. Abe- Siani, owner of Le Cabaret, told Council he felt that A%pen really needs what this ~$ planned for, a nice quite place with decent food and decent prices. Siani said he had customers looking for a place like this to go. Charlie Weaver told Council he had circulated one of the petitions and found that there is interest in the concept of a quiet room in Aspen for a drink and talk with somebody. Weaver said he felt there is a need for this, and supports the idea. Anderson said as far as the character of the applicant, White has no record, has been a school teacher and a good citizen. Anderson pointed out that C.R.S. 1973 12-47-137 says you must look at the type of application. This will be nothing like the Ute City Banque, which is an excellent, but very expensive, restaurant. This establishment will have a low key, casual atmosphere with a full service facility; eating, dancing, a place to talk; Aspen doesn't have anything like this. Anderson said he felt they had met the burden with respect to this application and requested Council grant the liquor license. Mayor Standley asked for opponents. There were none. Councilman Parry pointed out that the menu is really an hors d'oeurve menu. The Council is being asked to approve a three- story bar with minimal food. Councilman Hershey agreed he did not see this as a restau- rant facility. Councilman Hershey asked White about his restaurant experience. White told the Council that from 1966-68 he had his own facility in Denver. White ran it, did most of the food preparation and cooking at that facility. White said he did not want to do a Chart House type menu, but would have soup of the day, salad bar, steak sandwich, shrimp in beer, etc. White said he was looking for something where people could come in and ge~ service quickly. Anderson pointed out to Council that White will have to commit to 25 per cent of the gross revenue will be derived from the sale of food. This will not be a place to get just hors d'oeurves, but food on a much more simple level. This leads to the uniqueness of the operation. Councilman Parry said this building can accommodate almost 300 people and will be serving 100 people at a time. The kitchen looks inadequate to do this. White explained that the plans the Council had were preliminary and he planned to move a wall and expand the kitchen. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like to see this tried and to have it word. There are so many conditions at this point; perhaps the application should be tabled until the problems with sanitation and the fire marshal are worked out. These problems should be identified specifically. Mayor Standley said he did not feel that the evidence presented shows that the needs have not been met. Needs do not relate to population statistics, but seating capacity. There were 421 signatures presented on the petitions; this represents only 2.2 per cent of City population and 1.3 per cent of County population. Mayor Standley said looking at the menu, he did no5 see any way to come within the 25 per cent food service. Councilman Van Ness said his feeling is that the Council has to have some kind of standards by which to judge the needs of the neighborhood, which is the charge of the Council. The City cannot prove what the needs are; this is a bad statute. Councilman Van Ness said unless the City set absolute standards, in ~ddition to the needs and desires, the Council will find themselves in a situation where they are granting or denying all applications. Councilman Van Ness said as far as he was concerned, anybody that wan~s a license, if the operation is of some benefit for the ~own, he is for it. Councilwoman Johnston concurred with Councilman Van Ness, a license business is the applicant's risk. Council- woman Johnston added that by case law, the needs of the neighborhood have been defined as the needs of all people that come in, not just residents. Ingh.am told Council if there is going to be a license for this building, a lot of work will have to be done before an occupancy permit is issued. Councilman Wishart said he wanted the problems identified. Regular M~eting Aspen Councilman Wishart moved to table this license application for specified problems with the fire marshal and health department are listed, and the consideration of a tavern license, and reschedule the issue at the applicant's discretion; seconded by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Standley. Motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Merson Duplex Karen Smith, planning department, told Council this request involves an existing duplex. Duplex This was tabled from the last meeting because the attorney wanted to investigate if the park dedication fee had already been satisfied by the donation of land. They have not been able to find any substantiation to that effect. Ms. Smith told Council they are asking for approval with the payment of the park dedication fee, 90 day first right of refusal, and a six month lease restriction. Brooke Peterson said regarding the 90 day first right of refusal, there are no tenants, they are owners, and they are willing to accept the conditions. Councilwoman Jo~Ynston moved to approve the exemption from subdivision with the conditions of the payment of the park dedica~i0n fee, 90 day right of first refusal and six month minimum lease; seconded ~Y Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. RIO GRANDE SPA~ · John Stanford-,· pla~nning office, told Council that SPA's are adopted by ordinance and presented Ordinance ~.54 for consideration. The plan presented resulted from a study Rio Grande SPA session and includes (1) area dedicated to greenway area adjacent to the river, (2) SPA includes a recreational park with a future building zone, (3) SPA with a fraternal lodge which is involved in the Andre's trade. Councilwoman Johnston said she assumed that the recreation could in time be passive recreation. Councilman Hershey asked why the right-of-way road from Spring street d~d not go through. Planner Bill Kane told Council that a 60 foot right-of~ way was needed with 24 feet of paving, drainage system, etc., and there is not enough room without cutting off the ball field. Kane said there was nothing to prevent building a road in the future. Kane explained~that the playing field is 8 feet above grade, a berm is needed, and there is a 3 to 1 slope. Councilman Hershey moved to read Ordinance ~54, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Ordinance ~54 Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. Rio Grande ORDINANCE ~54 (Series of 1977) !AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE APPROXIMATELY 11.50 ACRES OF LAND 0WNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN AND KNOWN AS THE "RIO GRANDE" PROPERTY, ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA MASTER PLAN FOR THE SITE, THE ELEMENTS OF WHICH MASTER PLAN WILL CONSTITUTE THE DEVELOP~&ENT REGU- LATIONS FOR THE AREA ALL AS PROVIDED BY ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF ~.THE ASPBN MUNICIPAL CODE was read by the city clerk Councilwoman Johnston moved to adopt Ordinance ~54, S~ries of 1977, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Councilman Parry said he did not think this should be plan~ed without putting a street in there. G~ou~cilman Parry said he hated to see the street closed off. Councilman Parry asked if a road would be open to the parking lot. Kane said that access to Aspen One is a legal concept and a pencil concept to the parking lot. Councilman Hershey said he could not go along with this concept if there was no road at all. Councilman Parry pointed out the closure of the street would create traffic on Mill for people that live on that end of town. Kane told Council.that the City spent 1.75 million dollars for this piece of property. If there is to be a road there, that's all there will be, a road and a parking lot. The Council wants something other than just a parking lot. Mayor Standley pointed out that if the City built a road there, it woUld have to meet the same standards set for everyone. Kane said if this is adopted, it will enable the City to subdivide and trade land with Andre Ulrych. Councilman Hershey said he support a road being built through the property. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Van Ness, aye; Parry, aye; Johnston, aye; Hershey, aye~ Mayor Standley, aye. LITTLE ANNIE SKI, AREA - Joint Review Process Little Annie Mayor Standley said this is a request to ask the City to enter into the joint review process for Little Annie. Mayor Standley removed himself from the discussion; Councilman Hershey removed h~mself also as he might h~ve an interest in the matter as a law firm. Councilman Parry was appointed to run the meeting. Ron Garfield, representing the proposed Little Annie Ski Area, was asking Council to join in the joint review process to study the area to find out whether it has any merit as a ski area. This is not asking for approval, just asking to get the process going. '~ The joint process isa method of studying the ski area. Prior to this time there has been no coordination of governmental entities, which are 25 state agencies, Forest Service, and local governmental authorities. There will be a committee formed with representatives of each governmental agency. The planning office submitted a memorandum, which brings the Council up-to-date on this project. On September 19, Pitkin County agreed to go into the joint review process, and also agreed to act as the lead agency. The Forest Service has also agreed to enter the process. Little Armies 'Garfield told the Co6ncil that the. applicant has re-aligned the base facility so that it will be located east of the Gant; therefore, the City has a real concern about this area. Ga~rfield submitted a proposed agreement and a chart of what the process might look like. Garfield said he endorsed all the points in Kane's memorandum. The review process may take up to four years before any construction Will begin. Councilwoman Johnston asked about %'~ the conditions the County put on their approval. Kane told Council these conditions were duplicated in his list of issues on the memorandum submitted. Kane said the County will draft the agreement for signatures and identify the responsibility of the lead agnecy. There will be a meeting October 17 between City, County, Forest Service, and Little Annie's and the State to discuss the various terms of what local responsibility will be. Councilwoman Johnston said she was concerned about the role of the City and County and how much this is going to cost. Councilwoman Johnston said she felt this would be rather major in the planning office in terms of time and money. This should be part of the budgeting process. Councilwoman Johnston~pointed out that the Forest Service was asked to produce a priority list as to where new ski areas should be; they have not done this. Councilwoman Johnston said that under the new Federal laws the responsbility is shifting from the Forest S~rvice to the local governments. ~ The study should include a proposal that is comprehensive in terms of a ski area and be quantified in terms of community impact. This should be presented in terms of cost side, housing impact, how many employees, what the transportation characteristics will be. Kane recommended that $10,000 budget be ~set aside, split between the City and County. This will cover the responsbility of a lead agency and given the planning office an independent, outside advise on economic and social impacts. The right to unilaterally halt the process if the majority determins there is negative impacts should be reserved. Kane said there will be political determination, and a great impact assoicated with the area. The job of the planning office will be to try to quanitify what the community impa~ct will be. Kane recommended to proceed subject to the three conditions. Garfield said he shared the concerns of Council and the planning office. The concerns can all be dealt with in the joint review process. This is not a request for approval. Garfield has drafted an agreement to start the review process. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like to see that agreement. Councilman Wishart said it doesn't hurt to start the process; the City can drop out anytime. Approval now will get the process going. Councilman Van Ness agreed to get the ball rolling. Councilman Wishart moved to enter into the joint review process with the County, Forest Service, and State of Colorado; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. Kane reminded Council that $5,000 is involved as one of the conditions. Finance Director ! ' Butterbaugh told Council that there are no general fund monies a~ailable. Kane said this would be a next year budget, and he would like to create it as a separate line item. Councilmembers Parry, Wishart, Van Ness in favor, Councilwoman Johnston opposed. Motion carried. Mayor Standley said it would be appropirate for Councilmembers to sit in on the discussionS October 17th. ORDINANCE #47, SERIES OF 1977 Historic Designation of C. M. Clark residence Ordinance #47 C~ Clark Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilman Hershey moved to read Ordinance #47, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #47 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE STRUCTURE AND PROPERTY AT BLOCK 28, LOTS R & S, AS AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE AND SITE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IX OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE was read by the city clerk. Councilman Wishart moved to adopt Ordinance #47, Series of 1977, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Van Ness, aye; Wishart, aye; Hershey, aye; Johnston, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. Ordinance #48 ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 1977 - Growth Management Plan GMP Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. Planning Director Bill Kane entered the follow- ing items into the record; third draft of Aspen/Pitkin County growth management plan; minutes of the P & Z meetings for July 19, July 26, August 2, August 9, August 11, August 16, August 30, September 6, 1977; P & Z resolution regarding the adoption of Ordinance #489 Pitkin County P & Z resolution adoption the growth management plan; County Commissioners resolution recommending adoption of the third draft of the growth management plan; City Council Resolution July 11, 1977; Citizens Advisory Board of Transportation resolution recommending adoption of the growth management plan; all reports and studies which were ~ . used in the development of the growth management plan listed in the bibliography of that report. Ordinance #48 is the implementing ordinance for the growth management plan which boils down to establishment of a quota system for three types of development in the City; residential, lodging and commercial. The residential is 39 units per year; loding is 18 units; commercial is 24,000 square feet per year. Kane told Council there was some discussion concerning exemption of the Aspen Institute. City Attorney Nuttall and Kane discussed this and submitted a memorandum stating their reservations and recorm~endations. Regular Meeting Aspen City Councl± Kane told Council there is no language or procedure for achieving exemptions from this ordinance. The spirit for the Institute approval was that the facilities would be clearl~ justified as being educational with a city and community benefit being shown. To create an exemption without showing of how the facility would be used would put the Institute in Growth a position of coming forward with a plan without any connection to an educational facility. Management Kane stated he felt this exemption would be premature. Plan Councilman Hershey stated he had read the October 5 planning office memorandum and could not believe what was in it. Councilman Hershey said he felt that City Hall, and specifi- cally the Council, is inconsistent in dealing with the public. Councilman Hershey said that the legal consequences of giving approval to a group to proceed with a plan, spending time and money in the process, and then doing a complete turn about, far outstrips some vague and undefined "legal" support referred to as GMP. Councilman Hershey noted that the planning office had recommended that the Institute be zoned academic, which provided the substance~of the meeting with the Institute of August 22. At that meeting, guidelines and conditions were set down for conceptual approval, and both Council and the Institue accepted these. Councilman Hershey said the planning office memorandum with respect to Ordinance ~48 and the Institute goes back on established guidelines. Councilman Hershey stated he could not accept this procedure and would not vote in favor of this ordinance without certain corrections, including the promise to the Institute. Councilman Hershey said he was not philosophically opposed to growth management. He woul~ like a valve clause to give the City the opportunity to turn off and on the results of any effect upon the economy of the town. Without a valve clause, the City may be committed to something they cannot change without numerous study sessions and supplementing ordinances. Councilman Hershey pointed out that the City had not had a economic feasibili!ty study of what the effects of growth management would be on this town. Councilman Hershey said a study like this is essential and a necessity. Councilman Hershey asked that the Council approve of such a study. Councilman Hershey said a certain amount of this growth management plan has been promul- gated by Petaluma, California, which is a different area. Aspen is not vested with large open fields ~n which to build large apartment houses and commercial space. Councilman Hershey said this ordinance is a very complicated piece of legislation, which will lead to more administrative work and more bureaucracy. This will require the additmon of more employees. Councilman Hershey pointed out that under exceptions is "construction of all essential governmental pro~ects", and asked what that means. Councilman Hershey said that employee housing, again, is not defined. There is a very complicated formula in the review process, which would be a bureaucratic mess. The plan talks about many things; traffic count, type of fire protection, type of sewage system and water system, location relative to parks, playgrounds, hospitals, mass transit, etc., which are not the philosophy of growth manage- ment. The ordinance should deal with growth management. Councilman Hershey suggested this ordinance go back to the drawing board and back to the feasibility study to find out whether this community wants to be subjected to this type of legislation. Councilman Hershey stated that growth management is a goal to be realized and that Council should be able to control their destiny, but not in the present form of the ordinance. Councilman Hershey said he felt that the regulations of this ordinance would cause more difficulty than the City is attempting to subvert. Councilman Hershey said he would support a growth management plan which would enable Council to control growth and also at the same time control the economies of the community. Councilman Hershey pointed ou~ that at the August 22nd meeting, the Council approved certaln guidelines with SPA exception of the Institute property. The Council will do a complete change if Kane's October 5th memorandum is followed, and the Council will suffer from a lack of public confidence. Councilman Hershey said on page 17 there is something regarding public transportation. The solving of transportation problems is not viable through growth management. Transportation should be treated as transportation. Council- man Hershey said it seemed to him that growth management was being used as an elixir for all the City's problems, and may, in fact, solve none. Councilman Hershey stated that the emphasis should be on a down grading of the bureaucracy at this time. Councilman Hershey said that when dealing with something were the effect is upon every segment of the community, Council's concern should be with the smallest as well as the largest. The Council should do their homework and get the effec~ of what such actions shall have upon the community. Councilman Hershey stated that he did not believe that rushing pell mell through a cloud of indecision and ambivalence is the answer. Planner Kane said his ~memorand~m was a memorandum from a staff person. The Council takes it and accepts it if they want to; if there is no merit or viability to it, it is thrown in the trash. The Council is the decision maker. Kane stated his memorandum did not change anything. The Institue has been g~ven conceptual approval. Councilman Hershey read the motion from the August 22nd SPA approval. Councilman Hershey said that the growth management plan ought to include an academic area with respect to the Institute. Kane said there was a thread of the conversation which suggested that the planning office was'operating mn a vacuum and not following the policy directions. Kane said he had been bringing the growth management plan to Council for 18 months and had not heard a dispara- ging word. Councilman Hershey asked Kane if he had not felt or recommended that the Institute be exempted. Kane said he had recommended that to the P & Z, who handed down a majority vote not in support of this. Kane's recommendation for exemption for the Institute was predicated on academic zoning; there is a reluctance on the part of the owners of the Institute to have their land zoned academic. Kane said if the Institute brings in a detailed plan in conformance with all the conditions the Council pu~ on, they will be taken through the process. City Attorney Nuttall said, at this point, without plans, without any idea of what is going to happen, an exemption ms premature. Ms. Nuttall concurred with Kane's opinion. Ms. Nuttall said the City is bound that if the Institute proceeds as they said they would, the City has to give them an exemption. Aspen City Council October 11, 1977 Growth ManagemeRt ~lan cond. Kane said the process will reveal that the City followed all reasonable public hearing and due process notification procedures. The planning office has spent more time on this than any project in the last several years. There has been no dearth of opportunity for the 'public to comment. The P & Z has spent hundreds of hours considering this. This is a product that is the result of a policy direction of the City Council. Councilman %.~ Wishart took exception to Councilman Hershey's criticism of the plan. Councilman Wishart pointed out that Council has gone through this for 18 months; it has been very laborious. The public has been able to, and has, inputted. The plan has been re-done and re-done. Councilman Wishart said if this is not pass, Council will end up in an Ordinance 19 situation, and be allowing development in the void of any plan. Jeffrey Evans told Council he had been to 4 out of 5 public hearings. It became obvious that the overall concept of a quota system and the number arrived at, 3.4 per cent, was not open for public discussion at all. This decision was made long before. Evans said he did not feel there has been sufficient public input on the entire idea or concept. Evans said there are other alternatives to controlling growth other than the straight quota system. Evans said that the effects that this has after it has been implemented should be monitored. Bill Clark said he had some reservations about the area of dealing with HPC approval and the growth management or P & Z commission. Assuming the g~owth management plan is adopted, one is operating within time constraints. Each year the applications must be filed by January 1 each year; recommendations have to be forwarded to Council by March 1 each years. Council has until May ls~ to consider and make their allocations. Any project covered by the HPC must be submitted ~o and receive final approval by HPC pr~or to filing an application in accordance with this application. Thereafter, the application is forwarded b~y ~he P & Z to HPC for another review. Clark said the technical time sequence concerned him. Assuming an applicant spend a considerable amount of time with HPC prior to January 1 in any given year seeking their approval, obtain their approval, and then submit an application in accordance with this time, it is conceivable that getting approval from the HPC would not be acceptable under the growth management plan, and there- for the applicaht would be at an impasse. Under the 36 points maximum assigned to the commercial development, one has to receive 21.6 points in order to receive a recommend&tion from the P & Z. Clark recommended that where there is joint HPC and growth management commission approval, and the HPC has given final approval, that the necessity of HPC approval and obtaining 15 points is deleted; or the HPC approval is obtained, that 15 points are automatically assigned to the pro3ect. This would eliminate any possibility of conflicting assessment in the areas of review that are quite similar. Kane said his view of the process is that application would be made before HPC; they will look at application and given opportunity to improve the application so that points could be maximized. It will be set up so that applications do not have to be referred back to them. Questions that are the proper purview of HPC would not be addressed by the P & Z. Mayor Standley asked how the planning office saw the resolution of conflict of points between the HPC and P & Z on growth management. For example, if an applicant had a solar system in the commercial core and the HPC did not approve points. ~ane said in this example the planning office would recommend to the HPC not to detract points because it is a community benefit. The HPC has five separate areas to review and are somewhat limited. Mayor Standley asked about the 1977 and 1978 allocations and how they would be handled. Kane recommended that there be two separate allocations and that the ~97~ was to start November 1. Mayor Standley asked if the 1977 allocation is not fulfilled, do those accrue to 1978. Kane said the idea of a 1977 allotment was to deal with projects that had been held up by the administrative delay. These particular pro3ects have not been able to go before HPC because of the administrative delay. Kane said he had not planned on a ping pong effect with HPC and P & Z. The review areas done by HPC will not be considered by P & Z. Frank Woods said he shared some of the same concerns as Bill Clark. Woods pointed out that the time schedule is tought. Woods suggested that P & Z and HPC have a joint meeting to make the review process a little more simple. Woods said that if a project is started in January, receives an allotment in May, then starts working drawings, which takes about slx weeks. June 15th the ~ob can be bid out, materials ordered; this is looking at a start of August 1st. This is not geared for spring construction at all. Woods told Council the evaluation system does not take into account existing buildings. These are handicapped to comply with a lot of the point schedules. The growth management plan indicates the City would ra~her see the town become developed where it is already developed. This is a handicap if existing buildings can never meet the points. Councilman Parry asked why the application date had been set at January 1, why not submit the applications throughout the year. Kane told Council that Joe Porter had done a chart showing the development process for subdivisions. Councilman Parry pointed out when a January 1 deadline is used, there is a work load of 150 people coming in. Kane said the applications can be ~ubmitted anytime, but they have to all be looked at together. Mayor Standley suggested backing that date up to November 1. Kane said that the applications should get to Council so that Council can consider the build out of the previous lo~s. Mayor Standley said he felt this had to be backed up. Kane said the quota for residential s~ngle family dwellings is 39. That number will be decreased by the number of dwellings built on previously subdivided lots in the same year. The idea was to get th~ applications in May so that Council would have the first five months of the year when the building permit activity was taking place and Council would have an idea of what the build out would be. Mayor Standley suggested leaving it that was for the single family and backing up the touris~ and commercial so that they are done because they do not reflect previously sub- divided lots. An alternative is to deal with the building permit process, permits requested after February 1 on already approved subdivisions will be subject to the allocation available on growth management. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council uctoDei ~, ~,, Joe Porter told Council that the discussions on the time scheduling were very lengthy and very complicated. There are different schedules for lodge units, subdivision, and commercial. Porter said he did not see any problem in moving lodging units or co~Lmercial up to September or October because these don'~ need a count from the building inspector. Councilwoman Johnston said there are ways to handle the details. The City can start with the January allocation and by next May be able to see where the problems are and work on them. Councilman Wishart pointed out that this is not entirely an inflexible system. Councilman Van Ness said he found himself being pushed along by the flow of events here, and if this plan had come to him in the beginning, he would not have gone for it. Councilman Van Ness said he respected the amoung of work that has been done but did not feel that was a valid reason to go for the plan. Councilman Van Ness said he is not in favor of a quota system. Downzoning is restricting the supply of housing. In terms of supply and demand, the more downzoning, the more push on prices. Councilman Van Ness stated that no growth sounds good and quality of life sounds good, but there is a price to that and that is that the cost of things and the cost of living and the price of housing is inevitably pushed upwards. Councilman Van Ness said that building in this town is a complicated and expensive process. In a quota system there are arbitrary and subjective evaluations to be made; Councilman Van Ness said he did not like for government people to get into that position. Councilman Van Ness said he would be an favor of something that would prevent rampant growth. New construction has bought the City some good things; it has gotten a little competition going in a few areas. Councilman Van Ness said he would be in favor of a system whereby building permits were applied for at one time for the year. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that Council had already passed a growth management plan; this is an ~mplementing ordinance. The ordinance has built in some of the best guarantees of employee and moderate housing. Bill Dunaway said that both Councilmembers Hershey and Van Ness voted for the plan. As a spectator, Dunaway said he did not under- stand how people could vote for a plan with the numbers in it and then say the don't like the numbers. Mayor Standley stated that the plan and the nun~bers were unanimously supported by the Council. Now Councilman Van Ness wants to double or triple these. The City is using the tourist capacity at less than 50 per cent of the utilization now. In the commercial core the City is getting one liquor license every other City Council meeting. The only thing that has been pumped in the the whole growth management plan is residential. The plan will force employee housing. The highest and best use of any piece of property for residential application in Pitkin County in the last ten years has been for condominiums for absentee landowners. Every under zero growth, all that was built were tourist accommodations, net employee housing. This plan will give the emphasis to employee housing. Mayor Standley told Council he had studied the last fifteen years of economic and market data on everything from building permits to sewer connections to birth rate and negative impacts of growth, to retail sales, to bank deposits. Mayor Standley testified as an exper~ witness to what the impact of growth management; and these things are not related to construction permits. They are related to retail sales, which is the driver of Aspen's economy, not additional tourist capacity. This plan addresses itself to people who live here. Councilman Hershey stated he would pass any growth management plan that has the protection he has for; he is ~ot opposed to the concept, but does object to the numbers. Joe Porter said that from his calculations over the next five years nor more than one- third of the units built, 30 to 35, will be lower and moderate housing. That is not high enough. Porter suggested that the ordinance be changed to either exempt employee units from the growth management plan or to put a limit on the number of single family units carried forward every year. Mayor Standley said that Council had planned that any project that a bona fide PMH housing, the Council would exempt on a case by case basis. Mayor Standley pointed out there are concerns of Councilman Van Ness with the numbers and of Councilman Hershey with procedures and Councilman Behrendt is not present. The Council should schedule a work session no later than November 1. The administrative delay is to be continued; the two prelects in the commercial core that are waiting to go to HPC can go through the HPC approval process. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilman Hershey moved to table the discussion with respect to Ordinance 448 for a work session; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Parry moved to remove the administrative delay regarding the pending projects going through the HPC process; seconded by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE 452, SERIES OF 1977 - In-City PIF flor Employee Housing projects Ord. PIP -Empl. Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance ~52, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out ~hat this gives Council the option on a case by case basis to reduce the PIF but has removed the meter rates. Councilwoman Johnston said she would like to see that put back in. Mayor Standley said that if pro3ects was in- city meter rates, they can apply for annexation. Mayor Standley said that the investment · ~=~u~z m~lng Aspen City Council October 11, 1977 fees and the rate structure ought~to be dealt with in two separate ordinances. Council- Ord.. ~52 eond. man Hershey said he was in favor of subsidizing the construction costs but not of sub- sidizing the meter rates. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~52 (Series ~of 1977) AN tORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF SEC. 23-67 WHICH SECTION PROVIDES THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REDUCE PLANT INVESTMENT FEES FOR MODERATE INCOME EMPLOYEE HOUSING PROJECTS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS TO THE AMOUNT WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED HAD THE PROJECT BEEN LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS was read by the city clerk Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #52, Series of 1977, on second reading; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Hershey, aye; Johnston, aye; Van Ness, aye; Wishart, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. CITY MANAGER 1. Parking Permits. City Manager Mahoney reported to Council that he had located several Parking areas for long term parking for people that lived in the downtown core area. The Rio Permits Grande parking lot or Rubey Park are available. Councilman Wishart said he would like to see permits issued for Rio Grande. H. J. Stall told Council that security is a problem. Councilman Wishart said they would be parking at their own risk. Councilman Parry pointed out the City is spending money to transport people in buses. Allowing people to store their cars with a permit system would not be penalizing them and they could leave their cars and walk. Councilman Van Ness suggested that people sign a release when they apply for a permit. Mayor Standley said the termination date should be on the permit. Mayor Standley asked the administration to put together a program for permits with a 45 day period, any car issued a permit must have a current license and sticker, and the City should not charge for this. Councilwoman Johnston moved to have a permit parking system with the conditions that the cars have a current sticker, a current license, there is a 45-day limit, and this be arranged through the City Manager's office; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. 2. Mall Commission. Mahoney told Council the staff had discussed this and believed there Mall I Commission ~s production ou~ of the present mall commission. Mahoney recommended that the City retain the mall commission as advisory to the City Manager, and that the Council establish a mall expansion commission. Mayor Standley noted that this is increasing bureaucracy by making two committees. Mayor Standley said the City ought to have a mall commission like before that is charged with everything, management of the mall and expansion of the mall. These are the same and have to be tied together. The mall committee should be appointed by Council. This should be a temporary, seven member group with a termination date. Council asked City Attorney Nuttatl to draft an ordinance creating a mall commission. Annexation 3. Annexation Report. Mayor Standley asked that this be a work session at a later date. It is not critical, and the staff has given Council their recommendations. Budget 4. Final Budget Work Session. The work session was set for Tuesday, October 18 at 7:00. The public hearing on the budget will be at the next regular Council meeting. Aspen One proper~y 5. As~en One Property. City Manager Mahoney said he had asked the City Attorney to do whatever is necessary to go into condemnation proceedings. Mahoney said the appraisal was for $250,000 and asked if the funds are available that they go into escrow. Mahoney told Council he was recommending proceeding now because the prices continue to go up. Councilwoman Johnston moved to instruct Mahoney and City Attorney Nuttall to proceed with the condemnation process; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. Finance Director Butterbaugh explained that this would require putting $250,000 of cash flow into escrow. This money won't be pulled out until the matter is settled. When it is settled, Council will have to appropriate the proper funds to buy the property. All in favor, motion carried. 6. Audit Interviews. Ms. Butterbaugh told Council tha~ the City has to hire an audit Audit Interviews firm. The City has had Alexander Grant for 6 years. Now that the conversion to a new computer is done, it is a good time to hire a new firm. Mayor Standley and Councilmembers Hershey and Van Ness will interview the audit firms and bring back recommendations and a summary sheet to Council. The growth management plan work session was schedule for Tuesday, October 25 at 5:00 p.m. ~ Ord ~53 ORDINANCE #53, SERIES OF 1977 Condominiumization policy Condo Policy C~uncilman Parry moved to read Ordinance 953, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman ~ Hershey. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #53 (Se~r~ ies of 1977) AN ORDINANCE ~{ENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CiTY OF ASPEN BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION 20-22 WHICH SECTION IMPOSES THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS WHEN APPLICATION IS ~DE FOR SUBDIVISION OF A TRACT OF LAND TO BE USED FOR CONDOMINIUMS: (1) EXISTING TENANTS MUST BE GIVEN 90-DAY EXCLUSIVE NON-ASSIGNABLE RIGHT OF ~IRST REFUSAL TO PURCHASE THEIR UNITS; Regular Meeting Aspen City Council October 11, 1977 (2) ALL UNITS MUST BE RESTRICTED TO SIX (6) MONTH MINIMUM LEASES; AND (3) Ord. ~53 THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE THAT APPROVAL WILL NOT REDUCE THE SUPPLY OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING was read by the city clerk. Councilman Hershey moved to adopt Ordinance ~53, Series of 1977, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilwoman Johnston was concerned about some of the language and felt there should be an in-depth discussion. The ordinance speaks about a subdivision of a tract of land; that does not conjure a multi-family dwelling into condominiums. This should be exist- ing structure as well as a tract of land. Councilwoman Johnston corrected Sec. 20-22(c) (3) ".or when offered for sale, whichever is later" should be added to the first right of refusal after final council approval. Councilwoman Johnston said she had a problem with fair notice, which can mean different things to different people. Councilman Parry pointed out that evidence that illustrate there will be minimal tenant displacement should be "minimal rental tenant". People will be taking one tenant out and putting another tenant in; who is more worthy of being a tenant than another person. Number 2 and 4 mention "persons of moderate income"; the Council has to determine what Ks moderate income is. Right now numbers 2 and 4 don't mena anything. Councilman Parry pointed out that number 5 says the only one who can purchase has to be employer or group of employees. Mayor Standley said these are all criteria for evaluation. The Council does not have to accept or reject any of them. Gideon Kaufman told Council he had a real problem regarding condominiumization of duplexes. None of these sections but 3 will people buying duplexes apply to, they will not be able to meet the guidelines. Mayor,Standley asked Kaufman for a letter outlining his points on this ordinance. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Van Ness, aye; Parry, nay; Johnston, nay; Hershey, nay; Mayor Standley, nay. Motion NOT carried. Ord. 955 ORDINANCE #55, SERIES OF 1977 Water Extension to Queen Street Queen Street Extension Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance ~55, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE ~ 55 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINA~CE APPROVING A WATER ~AIN EXTENSION OUTSIDE THE ASPEN CITY LIMITS AND LOCATED ON THE ROADWAY KNOWN AS QUEEN STREET was read by the city clerk. Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance ~55, Series of 1977, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Hershey, aye; Johnston, aye; Parry, aye~ Van Ness, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Mot±on carried. Councilman Van Ness moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:55 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn/~/ Haut~r, City Clerk