TC Minutes 07-09-1991• i
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
HELD JULY 9, 1991 - 7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Avon Town Council of the Town of Avon,
Colorado, was-held in the Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road,
Avon, Colorado, in the Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jerry Davis at 7:30 p.m.
A roll call was taken with Albert Reynolds, Mike Bennett, Gloria
McRory, Jim Stovall,:Tom Ptach and David Garton. Also present were
Town Attorney John Dunn, Town Manager Bill James, Director of
Engineering Norm Wood, Director of Municipal Services Larry Brooks,
Fire Chief Charlie Moore, Police Chief Art Dalton, Planner Jim
Curnutte, Director of Recreation Meryl Jacobs, Public Relations
Officer---Teresa Albertson, Town Clerk Patricia J. Doyle, as well as
members of the press and public..,-
The Mayor called for Citizen Input.
Sandy Blaha with the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments approached
the Council. Ms. Blaha updated the Council on the various programs
that were taking place. Some of the programs were:
Seniors Housing; Water Quality/Quantity; Weatherization, childcare;
Solid Weste Planning, etc. Ms. Blaha reviewed each of the.-above.
The Mayor stated that Avon, Vail and VA were dealing with Regional
Transportation. He stated that one of the communities concerned about
was the petition with Minturn and Red Cliff. He stated that they
were not sure thay'had budget money to join'.with the other communities.
He asked if any of those monies would be available to those communities
to provide rolling stock for operation of a bus system.
Ms. Blaha stated that Larry Kallenberger, Executive Director of Local
Affairs, had proposed that any region that would like to take their
allocation of Minerial Impact Funds, to make those decisions, to
disperse.those funds may do,so. She stated that-a meeting was.scheduled
for July 25th to discuss this issue. She stated the difficult part was
to establish a criteria for those funds and how those funds would be
used.
The Mayor thanked Ms. Blaha for her presentation.
i 0
The next discussion was in respect to duplex-subdivision in Wildridge.
Hen Gubler approached the Council. He wanted to express his opinions
of the issue of the subdivision of lots in Wildridge.
He stated that his goal was to have a single family home and two car
garage:. He believed-and hoped the opportunity would surface in'
Wildridge with some of the re-zoning of'some of the multi-family
lots, down-zoning and building of single family homes, that those
would provide a range that his budget could afford.
Joe Peplinski, a Real Estate Broker and who was also involved in the
Claivin Project in Wildridge. This project had a lot-of focus in
respect to this issue. The project was a six unit detached townhomes.
He stated that their group had purchased another lot in'Wildridge,.
Lot 17, Block 1, which was zoned for four units. He stated that
their main concern was whether those units could be detached. They
were not going to change the density or the zoning. The Claivin was
six detached Townhomes. He stated that in appearance they looked like
single.family homes.
Councilman Stovall stated that the resolution that was adopted would
not preclude the developer from developing the lot as requested. He
stated that the developer bought the lot with the knowledge of the
restrictive covenants of Wildridge. He stated that those restrictive
covenants could be amended. He stated that there was an alternative
process that could come into the Town-'which-probably would be more
appropriate and that was to amend the covenants to allow what was,
wanted to be accomplished.
Councilman Ptach stated.that the intent,of the resolution was not to
restrict conventional attached duplexes,or multi=family subdivisions.
The intent was to restrict subdivision or resubdivision of undeveloped
land to allow for additional single family housing to be constructed.
Mr. Peplinski stated that there was a market`,for detached units verses
.attached units.
Paul Jeppson a property owner in Wildridge stated that he had bought
in Wildridge three yeara ago because that was the only undeveloped
property in the area. He stated that he like the open space. He stated
that it was important to take a look of what would be built-in Wildridge.
Mike*Bruen owner of a lot in Wildridge and, also a real estate agent.
He agreed with the above comments. He stated that they were ready to
break ground for a fractionalized project that would allow six units
on a four-plex lot. This was approved in June of this year. He stated
that there seemed to be a wide variety of lot sizes, square footage
acreage, some lots had multi-entrances off of different roads. He
stated that there were a lot of gray areas, nothing was written in stone.
He stated that. the variety was much more attractive than having
buildings all the same.
-2-
1 1
•
Michael Rick, property owner in Wildridge,and owner of a duplex in
Wildridge approached, the'Council. The original intent of what
the building was to be in Wildridge when he bought his lot now seemed
to be changing. He stated that if you let one developer have approval
for subdividing, then you would have to let all developers have their
wish.
Ken Sortland property owner and developer in Wildridge approached,the
Council. He felt that there have been too many changes in the laws
in Avon. He stated that Council wanted to encourage building in Avon;
then they dempen that encouragement by changing the laws. He stated
that the lenders would not loan any funds on four-plex units unless
all the units-were,pre-sold. He sug,gested'that the requests should
be on a case.by.case basis.
Peter Monroe, property owner in Wildridge and structural engineer
approached the Council, He stated that the'resolution was excellent.
He stated that the guidelines have,to be'.specific: He stated,that a
more simplified language in the resolution could have read, "Undeveloped
property cannot be subdivided and sold".
Jack Hunn.,:resident of Wildridge approached the.-Council. He served on
the,Plahning and Zoning Commission for two years and dealt, with
these issues of for and against of these types of projects. He stated
that for two years he had been encouraging the Planning staff to come
up with a criteria on which you could consider these types bf.projects.
There was, no process to notify owners of what was going on. People
that own property-in Wildridge that do not live in the area, do not'
know what is being proposed in Wildridge, and how their property
value may be greatly effected. He stated that there are covenants
in Wildridge, they,were legal and binding. The people that bought
in Wildridge had confidence that the laws of the covenants would stand.,
Celeste Nottingham approached the Council. She also was a property
owner in Wildridge. She stated that she also supported the resolution.
She felt that the Wildridge covenants was there to protect the intent
of openance, which was very attractive. The Council should not be
moving as a reaction to the market or, chasing the market. She
stated that Council should not loose site of the big picture. Those
people were looking toward the Council to preserve that confidence
for them.
Councilman Bennett asked if the resolution precluded anyone from
appealing.to the Council to allow subdivision of a lot. He was under
the impression that the request could be heard.
-3-
i
Mr. Dunn stated that there was nothing in the resolution that stated
that a developer could not ask. He stated that what was really being
talked about was the SPA for Wildridge. The provision of the resolution
was for the Planning and Zoning Commission to enforce the regulations
as they were written for Wildridge.
Councilman Garton stated that it had always been his understanding
that protective covenants ran with the land. He stated that he did not
feel that Council could override protective covenants. He did not think
it was the right group of people to be discussing changes in the
covenants that govern the building in Wildridge. He stated that
there was a provision in the covenants that would set forth how
amendments could be made to those covenants. He stated that 75% of
property owners would have to get together in order to change the zoning
in Wildridge.
Councilman Ptach stated that one observation was that people who live
in Wildridge support the resolution, and those who do not live in
Wildridge, do not support the resolution.
Mayor Davis stated that the Town of Avon did not have the obligation
or responsibility to amend the covenants, but the Council did control
Design Review and zoning and what can and cannot be built in Wildridge.
The Planning Commission did not have an ordinance that would enforce
the covenants, and that the resolution did not enforce the covenants.
He stated that he objected to the process last time. There was a
market out there now for single family homes. There are not any single
family lots in the valley. He stated that Avon could continue to build
row townhomes. Single family homes would add to the variety. He stated
that there was an article in the Planning Issue of July, 1991 in which
they were describing a new idea called "Co-Communities". He stated
that things change, new ideas come along and he did not know why
Avon should resist. Perhaps staff could look at a study then, come
up with something that would be acceptable. His concern was that the
Council had cut off all requests, when probably an ordinance needed
to be established to clarify what was and what was not proper to define
a SPA. He felt it was a very unstable situation. He stated that he would
like to see Avon grow, and having a few more single family homes would
do that. He had hoped that this Council could look at that somewhere
in the future and solve the problem. He stated that he was not sure that
the problem was solved with this resolution.
Councilwoman McRory stated that there were more duplex lots than there
were multi-family lots. She felt that was a great concern. She
suggested that a open hearing or work session be scheduled to discuss this
issue and set a criteria for two single families on a duplex lot
provided the lot was large enough and flat enough.
-4-
•
•
Councilman Reynolds stated that two weeks ago the Council had
requested that Rick Pylman research this issue. He stated that he
voted unfavorably of the resolution because there was not a public
hearing on this issue. He requested that Mr. Pylman do the research
and return to the Council. He ,.stated that possibly some lots were
feasible. He felt that the resolution needed to be in writing so it
would not be interpreted differently each time it was discussed.
Mr. Dunn stated that the resolution was written into the minutes
therefore, a resolution was not needed.
Being there was no further discussion on this matter, the Mayor stated
that the resolution would stand as is.
The Council recessed at 9:30 p.m. and reconvened at 9:35 p.m.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 91-11, Series of 1991, AN ORDINANCE
REGULATING FIREPLACES AND OTHER SIMILAR DEVICES WITHIN THE TOWN OF
AVON AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION HEREOF.
Bill James stated that there were three parts to the proposed Air
Quality Program.
1. Was the ordinance regulating fireplaces and other similar devices.
2. Was the resolution in respect to an Incentive Program to encourage
people to convert from Solid Fuel Devices to Certified Solid Fuel
Devices.
3. A request for a purchase of a street sweeper. He stated that
approximately 40% of the air problems were created by dust. The Town
was looking at using a different type of material in the winter months
to reduce the dust. Mr. James reviewed the ordinance with the Council.
If the Council approved the resolution in respect to the Incentive
Program then Section 15.40.070-could be deleted from the ordinance.
The resolution outlined conditions that staff suggested for
consideration. Staff made an extensive study of costs that would make
conversions. The Certified Solid Fuel Devices range in price from
$750.00 to $1,500. Mr. James recommended that the Town pay 50% of the
actual cost not to exceed $750.00 for the conversion of any existing
Solid Fuel burning device to any Certified sold fuel burning device,
gas log fireplaces or gas appliance. The program would be limited
to only two units of condominiums complex within any given year.
The ordinance did allow a wood burning fireplace in the areas of hotel
lobbies and lodges and recommended that a fee of $3,000 be applied
to the Construction Fund.
There were some modifications to the ordinance.
15.40.030, add to the sentence, "provided, a fee in the amount of $3,000
is paid at the time of application for building permit".
-5-
u
Councilman Bennett moved approval of
on second reading, with the deletion
was unanimously carried.
•
Ordinance No. 91-11, Series of 1991,
of Section 15.40.070. The motion
Councilman Bennett moved to amend the motion to include the additional
wording in Section 15.40.030 "that a fee in the amount of $3,000 is
paid at the time of application for building permit to allow for wood
burning fireplaces in hotel lobbies or lodges. The amended motion
was seconded by Councilman Reynolds and was unanimously carried.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing.
Ken Sortland approached the Council. He asked if a project had
already been approved and was designed for a wood fireplace, did the
project have to be changed, if they wanted to eliminate the fireplace,
would the developer have to still build the chimney chase on the outside
of the building. How would this ordinance effect the already approved
projects.
After some discussion, Councilman Ptach moved to amend the motion
to grandfather in for a period of six months, a project that had been
approved or in the process that they fall under the old rules. If a
building permit was pulled within the period of six months, the new
fees would apply. The amended motion was seconded by Councilwoman
McRory and was unanimously carried.
The Mayor then closed the public hearing and entertained a roll call.
At that point the Council asked for clarification of Councilman
Ptach's motion.
If the plans had entered the Planning and Zoning Commission and Design
Review process and paid their fees, those plans would have six months
from the effective date of this ordinance to pull their closing permit
and not pay any of the fees covered by this ordinance. At such time,
if they do not pull a building permit within the effective date of this
ordinance, then the fees would apply to this ordinance.
The Mayor again asked for a roll call.
Those Councilmembers voting aye were: David Garton, Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett, Gloria McRory, Jim Stovall and Tom Ptach. There were no
nay votes. The motion-was unanimously carried.
The Council then discussed Resolution No. 91-18, A RESOLUTION REGARDING
A INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THE PURPOSE OF AIR QUALITY.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of Resolution No. 91-18, Series of
1991. The motion was seconded by Councilman Reynolds.
Councilman Ptach suggested that a fund be established and not allow
any payment except out of the specific fund.
-6-
•
0
Mayor Davis agreed that there should be a fund established and that
a designated amount should be applied to that fund.
Discussion followed.
Councilman Bennett moved approval to table Resolution No., 91-18.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Ptach.
It was suggested that this matter be discussed at the budget process.
First reading of Ordinance No. 91-12, Series of 1991, AN ORDINANCE
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE BY THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, OF TAXABLE
LOCAL ASSESSMENT REFUNDING BONDS IN THE MAXIMUM AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT OF $1,085,000 FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1990-1;
PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF THE BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE
BONDS AND'THE INTEREST THEREON; AND PROVIDING OTHER DETAILS IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH.
Mr. James stated that last year the Town issued Bonds to provide for
Wildridge to install natural gas and cablevision. He stated that at that
time the interest rates were 11 1/2%. He stated that since interest
rates have gone down, Caughlin and Company were looking at this program
to see if there was an opportunity to refund those Bonds.
David'Bell stated that they had prepared all the docomentation to present
to the Council. They were going to try and sell the Bonds next week.'
He stated that they felt comfortable with the rates. The opportunity
existed to reduce the interest on the Assessment from the current
rate of 10% to 10 1/2%. This would benefit the property owners, would
benefit the Town for the obligation that the Town contributed to the
Bond.Issue. The.interest rate of'the_old-Bonds were from ".9 1/2% to
12%01 the rate on the-,new Bonds were projected somewhere between 8 1/2%
to 10=10 .25%.,'He-stated the net sadi.ngs-was somewhere over $100,000
over the life of the Bond Issue.
Councilman Bennett moved approval of Ordinance No. 91-12, Series of
1991 on'first-reading. The'motion was seconded by Councilman Garton.
The Mayor called for a roll call.
Those,Councilmembers voting.'aye.weie:.*David Garton,"'-,Albert Reynolds,
Mike Bennett,,.:Gloria McRo'ry,' Jim Stovall and Tom Ptach. There were no
nay votes. The motion was unanimously"carried.
Next on the agenda was the discussion of the Assumption of,the Service
Agreement.
-7-
•
This Agreement was previously-approved by the Town of Avon, Avon
Metropolitan District, the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority and
the Eagle-Vail Metropolitan District. A condition of the Eagle-Vail
approval was an Agreement that would allow them to also transfer
their rights and responsibilities for water storage in Nottingham Lake
to the water authority or a consolidated district at some future date.
These were the last approval required for implementation of the
Agreement and the assumption of water services by the Town of Avon.
Mr. Wood stated that all that was needed was to execute the Agreement.
The Coyncil agreed and was the consensus that the Mayor execute the
Agreement.
Next on the agenda was a recommendation that Council consider a
purchase of a street sweeper under the 1991 budget revision.
The Johnson Street Sweeper that has been specified has been further
reviewed and used in the Town for two days.
Mr. Brooks stated that the demonstrator could be purchased for
$92,830 and would be available now with no guarantee of future
availability. He stated that this could be acquired by lease purchase
over a period of 60 months.
Councilman Bennett moved to authorize the lease purchase of the Johnson
Street Sweeper demonstrator in the amount of $92,830. The motion
was seconded by Councilwoman McRory. The interest rate would be 7.9%.
Note: An ordinance would be before the Council in respect to this
lease purchase.(See memorandum attached to these minutes).
Teresa Albertson updated the Council on the Avon Merchants Association
and their regular meetings.
The Town Attorney reported that the Town Manager would be taking
Deposition on the Ted Bendalow Litigation Case. The Deposition would
take place, Thursday in Denver.
The Mayor reported on the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments
Transportation Study Draft Report. COG failed to mention the Avon
Interchange. He suggested that Avon respond to the report.
-8-
• •
There would be a COG Water Quality/Quantity meeting Thursday, July 11,
1991.
The Mayor read the letter of resignation of Councilman Stovall.
The resignation would be effective thirty days from the date of
this letter(July 9, 1991)or, until he was replaced, which was provided
for by the Charter.
At that point, Councilman Garton resigned his position as Councilman
for Avon. He has now made his residency in the Edwards area.
Bill James stated that the Avon had applied to- the State for
reimbursement of 1.8 million dollars for the Separated Grade Crossing.
Councilwoman McRory noted that the 4th of July fireworks were very
impressive. It was coordinated very well.
The Mayor indicated that there may be some support of combining some
funds for next year's fireworks celebration with Vail.
The Mayor requested that the Council complete the W-4 forms and return
to the Town Clerk.
Councilman Reynolds commended the police department of doing a good
job with the detour.
The Financial Matters were next presented to the Council.
Councilwoman McRory moved to receive items #1 through #15. The motion
was secmfided by Councilman Bennett and was unanimously carried.
-9-
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of the General Fund of Accounts
Payable for July 9, 1991. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Bennett and was unanimously carried.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of the Reconciliation Sheet of
Accounts Payable for July 9, 1991. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Bennett and was unanimously carried.
Councilwoman McRory moved approval of the June 25, 1991 Council
Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Bennett and was unanimously carried.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilman
Reynolds moved to adjourn into executive session to discuss the Town
Clerk's position and to discuss pension plan litigation.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Bennett. The Mayor adjourned
the meeting at 10:40 p.m.
The Council then retired into executive session.
-10-
0. -0
MEMO
TO: Bill James, Town Manager
FROM: Larry Brooks, Director of Municipal Services
DATE: June 27, 1991
RE: Street Sweeper
Recommended Action:
Consider demonstrator purchase under 1991 budget revision.
The Johnston street sweeper that has been specified has been further reviewed
and used in the town for 2-days.
We find as follows:
1. Purchase price
New sweeper - $109,312 (current price)
114,778.(1992 price)
Demonstrator- 92,830
The demonstrator is available now, with no guarantee of future availability.
2. Finance package
Power motive (the supplier) can offer financing for lease purchase
packages.. The multiplier is .020248. Monthly payments on the above
purchases are as follows:
a. $109,312 : $2213.35 for 60 months
b. $114,778 : $2324.02 for 60 months
c. $92,830 : $1879.62 for 60 months
3. Availability
a: New sweeper - 90 days
b. Demonstrator - 14 days
Memo to Bill James
June 27, 1991
Street Sweeper
Page 2 of 2
To purchaae a new sweeper this year, and wait 90 days to receive it, is not
recommended. This leaves the current demonstrator, or the 1992, purchase as
remaining options.
A. Lease purchase demonstrator in 1991
1991 1992
Lease $7,518.48 $22,553.76
Parts 500.00 2,500.00
Total - $8,018.48 $25,053.76
B. Lease purchase new machine in 1992
1991 1992 1993
March Purchase
Lease N/A $20,912 $27;888.24
Parts N/A 2,000 2,500.00
Total $22,912 $30,388.24.
If feasible, the current demonstrator unit will clearly save money and
satisfies the towns sweeping requirements completely.
LB/mml