TC Minutes 09-13-19940 0
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 - 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 Albert Reynolds at
7:50PM. A roll call was taken with Councilors Jack Fawcett, Tom
Hines, Celeste C. Nottingham, Jim Roof, and Judy Yoder.
Councilor John Hazard was absent. Also present were Town Manager
Bill James, Town Attorney John Dunn, Town Clerk Patty Neyhart,
Community Service Officer Steve Hodges, Planner Mary Holden, Town
Engineer Norm Wood, Director of Municipal Services Larry Brooks,
Fire Chief Charlie Moore, Police Chief Gary Thomas, as well as
members of the press and public.
First item on the Agenda under Citizen Input was the Drawing of
Candidates' Names for Positions on the Election Ballot.
Town Clerk Patty Neyhart presented the names in a red, white, and
blue basket. Judge Buck Allen drew the names from the basket, in
the order to be placed on the ballot. The names will appear on
the ballot in the following order: Judy Yoder, George "Coop"
Cooper, Jim Roof, John Hazard, Jim Benson,,,John "Jack" Grimes,
Jack Fawcett, Suzanne Railton, Richard Carnes.
Next item on the Agenda under Citizen Input-was the Elementary
School Design.
Ms. Suzanne Railton, representing the Planning & Zoning
Commission (P & Z),'updated the Council on the refusal of final
design for the elementary school design. Ms. Railton stated the
main concern of the design was the roof form, which happened to
be like a butterfly shaped roof with flat roofs. Ms. Railton
added that another concern was the lack of detail in the
building. Also, the colors were not very exciting for an
elementary school. In general, the architects were reluctant to
incorporate P & Z's comments in the design. As a result of all
that, P & Z did not grant a final design review, but, the School
District seemed to think that is not a problem anyway.
Mayor Reynolds questioned if someone from P & Z went before the
School Board. Ms. Railton stated no, we thought we would come
before Council first and seek Council's thoughts. P & Z's
deciding vote was 4 to 3. Ms. Railton added the modern building
was not very well received, but there were little details on it
that could have been worked out and they might have had a better
vote.
Councilor Fawcett thanked Ms. Railton for coming before Council
and explaining P & Z's decision. Councilor Fawcett asked if we
have any right to determine what the school district builds or
are they outside our zoning laws. Attorney Dunn stated the
school district statutes exempts school buildings from compliance
with local zoning. Councilor Fawcett stated, so we are mainly in
an advisory capacity. Attorney Dunn added as far as
consultation; but there is language in the statute that provides
the school district may do as they wish. Ms. Railton felt that
it is a shame they didn't take notice of P & Z's input; that
building is going to be standing longer than us.
Councilor Fawcett stated the 4 to 3 vote concerns him a little,
because it is so close. If P & Z believes that strongly in their
decision, they should go forward and meet with the School Board.
Ms. Railton telephoned Mr. Don Marks, the President of the School
Board, and informed him of the P & Z's feelings. Ms. Railton
stated Mr. Marks reserved comments.
Mr. Bill James stated he was told.by our.Town Planner Mary Holden
that the School District had received criticism for over
designing the Gypsum and Edwards Schools. So, they were
concerned about that and didn't want to over design the Avon
elementary school. This comment was from their architect.
Councilor Hines asked if the school district incorporated any
suggested items between conceptual and final design review. Ms.
Railton stated yes. They improved the landscaping, they changed
the car parking, and the accent colors were changed. Planner
Mary Holden made comments away from the microphone, thus unable
to transcribe. P & Z asked them about energy conservation
measures and none were incorporated.
Councilor Nottingham expressed her concern. She felt the school
district built gorgeous buildings in Gypsum and Edwards.
Councilor Nottingham does not want Avon to be short changed.
Discussion followed as to what direction Council should take.
Attorney Dunn noted that statutes provide the Planning Commission
or governing body may request a public hearing before the Board
of Education relating to proposed site location or site
development plan. The Board of Education shall thereafter
promptly schedule the hearing, publish at least one notice in
advance of the hearing and provide written notice of the hearing
to the requesting Planning Commission or governing body.
Discussion followed as to what direction Council should take.
Council's consensus was that P & Z should attend a school board
meeting to express the Town's desires and to work with the school
district. Councilor Yoder volunteered to go to the school board
meeting with P & Z.
Mayor Reynolds thanked Ms. Railton for her presentation.
Next item on the Agenda under Citizen Input was the Eagle Valley
Cycling Coalition.
Ms. Gaye Steinke and Mr. Paul Gothelf were the presenters. Ms.
Steinke stated this is a newly formed Eagle County citizen
coalition. Ms. Steinke discussed the seven objectives of the
group. They are; 1.) completion of Dowd Jct./Hwy 6 recreational
path, 2.) support in asking for a full time Eagle County Bicycle
and Recreational Planner, 3.) making Hwy 6 a safe thoroughfare
for bicycle and recreational traffic, 4.) support in seeking
grant money, 5.) encouraging Eagle County to provide general fund
money for construction of recreational trails and highway
shoulders, 6.) better maintenance of established trails, paths,
and road shoulders, and 7.) continued observance of the Eagle
County Trails plan. Ms. Steinke discussed the reasons for
seeking Avon's help. They were; 1.) safety of the Valley's
citizens, 2.) economics of bicycling, 3.) bicycling is not a fad,
it's here to stay, 4.) the Vail Valley needs to have the goods to
back up the world wide exposure, and 5.) Eagle Valley has a
burgeoning traffic problem.
2
Mayor Reynolds informed that earlier this afternoon Council met
with the County Commissioners for approximately one hour. Most
of that hour was spent on bike paths. Financial issues were
mainly discussed. Bicycle licensing was mentioned.
Mr. Gothelf stated financing is a concern. Perhaps the Town of
Avon would contribute during the budget time. We need a group
effort; Town of Avon, Vail, Eagle County.- Financing options were
discussed; bicycle licensing, easement grants, contributions,
percent added to rentals, inclusion in transportation tax to be
put on ballot, and perhaps a professional fund raiser.
Mayor Reynolds stated the spirit is everyone wants to work
together. Mayor Reynolds thanked Ms. Steinke and Mr. Gothelf for
coming before Council.
Next item on the Agenda under Citizen Input was Animal Control
Discussion.
Mr. Ken Holzman,'a resident in Wildridge, expressed concern of
the newly adopted Animal Control Ordinance. Mr. Holzman felt'
townhome and condominium owners are treated differently than
single family duplex owners, in cases where a dog might be
classified as a potentially dangerous animal and tethering.- Mr.
Holzman informed he tethers his,dog outside his townhome. And,
should my dog be involved in an incident, it can be classified as
a potentially dangerous'dog. A duplex or':single family owner
doesn't face the potential of not being able to tether that dog
any longer. Because of the common areas in townhomes the policy
says that, if it is classified as a potentially dangerous animal,
it can not be tethered out there anymore; I'll be in violation of
the Ordinance. I don't see what the difference is; other than a
duplex owner has a house attached to it - I have a house attached
to mine on either side. The area where I do tether my dog is a
parking area that is for my exclusive use. I just don't think
that it is fair to be treated differently, because I am in-a
townhome situation, rather than a duplex or single family home.
The Ordinance says common area, period. It does not say general
common area; limited common area.
Councilor Roof asked as the owner, you don't really own property
outside. Mr. Holzman stated he owns 20% of that property
outside. Councilor Roof asked if it was defined as this is your
20t. Mr. Holzman stated but my parking area, my decks and patios
are considered limited common area. That area is maintained by
the Association, but for my exclusive use.
Discussion followed on public versus private property and the
differences in the animal control ordinance versus the open
container ordinance.
Mr. Holzman informed that he has his dog as a watch dog,•as well
as a pet. Mr. Holzman feels he has less of a right to protect
his home than a duplex or single family home owner. The dog is
there to protect that property and some one comes on the property
and gets bitten and now my dog is classified as a potentially
dangerous animal and I can't have her there anymore. I have no
place to put her.
Mr. James explained that Mr. Holzman's dog was tethered outside
his common area. I understand that a child was on the premise
and the dog inflicted a bite on the child.
3
Community Service Office Steve Hodges informed that there are
different control requirements that have been deemed dangerous.
In Mr. Holzman's case, it was an 8 year old boy; his complex is.
right next to the park in Wildridge; the 8 year old boy came into
the parking lot or the tarmac area of his condominium unit; his
condominium unit makes a face towards the road in a zig zag
manner and the outside line is a straight line; so there are
points where the tarmac is much narrower than at other points.
In this particular instance, the boy came over and he was bitten.
We don't have a report on that, because that was handled by Eagle
County. They didn't have witness reports or a report from the
victim. So, the dog was not deemed anything. As far as common
area goes, a dog that has been deemed dangerous has to be kept in
- has to be confined on the owner's property. The Ordinance does
not describe common areas as being the owner's,property. The boy
received 4 stitches. The dog is a malamute, which is a fairly
large dog and is probably about the size of the boy. The reason
for it is that everybody in a commons area has access or
generally needs access to that area. If it is just simply that
it is a delivery man that isn't sure which unit and parks and
walks in front of the unit, if the dog is a dangerous dog, then
he has the potential to be bitten by a dog that has a history of
biting people. If the dog doesn't have a history of biting
people, then there is no problem with tying the dog in the
commons area. Our ordinance does not allow a dog to run at large,
in a common area.
Councilor Nottingham confirmed, it is OK for a dog to be tethered
outside a multi-unit'dwelling, as long as'the dog has no history
of having any issues and problems and biting, etc. But, once
there is an incidence, then it puts the dog and owner into
another set of consequences; another classification. And, that
is the unfortunate situation that Mr. Holzman and his dog sit in.
Mr. Hodges stated the dog was not deemed dangerous because of the
lack of documentation. Mr. Holzman added I am in the clear for
now, but suppose it'happens again, I face that potential.
Open discussion and items mentioned were; fencing and kennels and
the fact they are not allowed in Wildridge, tethering and
tethering lengths, biting dogs, common area - public and private
property, kennel fees and hours of operation.
Council's consensus was to uphold the Ordinance as it stands.
Next item on the Agenda under Citizen Input was Animal Control
Regulations,.Violations, & Fines.
Judge Buck Allen entered the.Council Chambers; he excused himself
from the room, from the previous discussion. If there is any
possible way it might come before court, Judge Allen felt it was
not appropriate,for'him to be"hearing it.
Judge Allen reviewed the order of the court indicating what the
penalty assessment amounts.will be for the first offense on the
new.dog'and cat ordinance violations and.then setting out what
bond will be on'the other matters. The first offense is a
penalty assessment, which means a mail in fine. For the second
and any thereafter, this is not just a mail in fine. Offenses
are accrued during a one year period, not a calendar year.
Mr. Hodges clarified that dogs do not receive tickets; people do.
It can be a different dog with the same owner.
Judge Allen stated only cats at large are addressed in the
ordinance, thus the penalty for cats at large.
4
Council recessed at 9:34PM and reconvened at 9:42PM.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 94-18, Series of 1994, AN
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO,
SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1994B; PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF THE BONDS, THE MANNER AND.TERMS OF ISSUANCE,
THE MANNER OF EXECUTION, THE METHOD OF PAYMENT AND THE SECURITY
THEREFOR; PLEDGING SALES TAX REVENUES OF THE,TOWN FOR THE PAYMENT
OF THE BONDS; PROVIDING,CERTAIN COVENANTS AND OTHER DETAILS AND
MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE BONDS AND THE SALES TAX
REVENUES; RATIFYING ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AND APPERTAINING
THERETO; AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH
Mayor Reynolds announced this is a public hearing.
Mr. James stated this Ordinance will allow the Town to issue $1.7
million in bonds for the purposes of paying the issuance cost'and
setting up bond reserve and purchasing Swift Gulch in the amount
of $1.5 million to be used as our Public Works Facility.
Mr: David Bell, from Coughlin & Co., stated the bonds were
offered last Thursday. On Friday, the market received some
inflationary news,.which always means the bond market goes bad.
It was just plain.luck,on.the timing: Mr. Bell is please to
present this offer to purchase the bonds from the Town. Bonds
have been sold, subject to Council approval this evening and a
closing date set for'October 13th.. Mr. Bell added that the Town
of Avon's credit has never been a difficulty for Coughlin & Co.
Councilor Nottingham motioned to approve Ordinance No. 94-18,
Series of 1994 on second reading. Councilor Fawcett seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
First Reading of Ordinance No. 94-19, Series of 1994, AN
ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PARCELS 1 AND 2,
TRACTS C AND Y, AND SWIFT GULCH ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, SWIFT GULCH
SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Mr. James stated Swift Gulch originally had a PUD that has
expired. Since this is first reading on the Ordinance, it is
recommended that Council refer this matter to Planning & Zoning
Commission. There is a scheduled public hearing for next
Tuesday's P & Z meeting. After they hold their public hearing,
it will come back to Council with their findings and facts to
have for second reading of the Ordinance and public hearing on
September 27th. So, we should be able to put the zoning in place
well before the closing of the property, which is scheduled for
October 14th.
Councilor Yoder motioned to approve Ordinance No. 94-19, Series
of 1994 on first reading. Councilor Hines seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
First Reading of Ordinance No. 94-20, Series of 1994, AN
ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR LOT 1, RIVERSIDE
SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Planner Mary Holden informed this is a request for reestablishing
the PUD. Attached to the Ordinance is the Staff report that was
given to the Planning & Zoning Commission (P & Z the PUD
proposal outlining the specific guidelines and P & Z's
Resolution No. 94-16 specifying the development guidelines.
5
0 0
Planner Holden noted development guidelines as; 54 units is the
density and permitted uses, the minimum building set backs will
be 30' from the River, 35' from Highway 6, 15' from interior
building to building, and 7 1/2' at the sides, maximum building
height is 481, maximum site coverage is 60% including asphalt.
Findings for approval basically state that the PUD is consistent
with the development patterns and locations set forth.in the Town
of Avon Comprehensive Plan, that the PUD is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives related to the Town's
role, as a principal year-round residential center in the Vail
Valley, related to an_appropriate mix of residential dwelling
unit types for permanent residents,-related to open space
dedication along the Eagle River corridor, related to sensitivity
to the natural riparian environment along the Eagle River
corridor, and related to the Riverfront District (Subarea 10).
The conditiohs'stated that the PUD Guidelines and Standards be
incorporated,into and binding upon the PUD zone district
designation, no site disturbance be allowed within the 30' mean
annual high water mark, with the exception of an area within a
12' radius of-the northwest corner of'Building A, and the
developer agrees to restore that area to a level acceptable to
Staff, that a protective and erosion control fence be installed
along the 30' setback, the pedestrian trail way, consistent with
out Town Recreation Master Plan, be shown on the PUD and the
developer construct the pathway prior to any temporary or
permanent certificates of occupancy, the drainage plan be
submitted to Staff and approved by Staff prior to an application
for building permit, the landscape plan be adequate to mitigate
the removal of existing trees and vegetation on site which also
must be brought back for P & Z review and approval, and the
dumpster location be brought back for P & Z review and approval.
Mr. Jeff Spanel presented a model of Riverside. Council
discussed this model with Mr. Spanel and there were too many
people talking at once and away from microphones to transcribe.
Mr. James asked if Mr. Spanel was going to use the same financing
approach that was used with Eaglebend. Mr. Spanel stated
presently that is what we are working towards. Mr. James asked,
when this project is paid off, are you anticipating that it will
revert back to the Town of Avon and we will be the sponsoring
agent. Mr. Spanel stated presently we are doing it as an
expansion of Eaglebend, this would be Phase III, as far as
financing.
Councilor Hines motioned to approve Ordinance No. 94-20, Series
of 1994 on first reading. Councilor Yoder seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
Resolution No. 94-28, Series of 1994, A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
1994 BUDGET (This Resolution was pulled from the Consent Agenda
for further discussion).
Mr. James stated this Resolution was included on the Agenda by
mistake. Council wished to discuss this when all members are
present and Councilor Hazard is absent. Mr. James suggested to
table this to discuss later when everyone is present.
Councilor Yoder motioned to table Resolution No. 94-28, Series of
1994. Councilor Hines seconded the motion and the motion carried
unanimously.
6
The next item on the Agenda under New Business was the Holy Cross
Easement.
Ms. Holden stated Holy Cross is requesting this easement,to
relocate a section of their 115 KV transmission lineup on
Mountain Star. P & Z has approved this as.a special review use.
Staff recommends approval of this requested easement.
Councilor Nottingham motioned approval of the.Holy Cross
Association, Inc. right of way Easement. Councilor Roof seconded
the motion.
Councilor Fawcett motioned to amend the motion to identify the
Right of Way Easement as an Easement for Tract B, Benchmark at
Beaver Creek Subdivision in Section 1, Township 5 South, Range 82
West of the 6th P.M. Eagle County, Colorado as shown as Exhibit A
as attached to this Easement. Councilor Yoder seconded the
amendment.
The motion and the amendment carried unanimously.
Next on the Agenda was the Town Attorney Report.
Attorney Dunn informed the complaint has been filed to enforce
the Town's Ordinances with respect to the incomplete Allen
residence in Wildridge. Mr. Allen was served with the papers on
September 7th, which means he will have until October 7th to file
an answer.
Next on the Agenda was the Mayor Report.
Mayor Reynolds complimented Mr. Norm Wood and Staff for the work
done on the retention pond. It looks very nice . . . a good job
done.
Next on the Agenda was Other Business.
Councilor Nottingham announced there was a meeting last night to
network and consolidate some of the non-profit groups so as to
eliminate duplication.
Councilor Fawcett announced the Eagle County Recreation Authority
meeting will be held in Avon on Friday at 8:00am.
Councilor Nottingham questioned when the next Lindholm land
exchange meeting will be held at Eagle County.,
Next-on the Agenda was the Consent Agenda:
a.) Resolution No. 94-28, Series of 1994, A RESOLUTION AMENDING
THE,1994 BUDGET.-,(This Resolution was taken from the Consent
Agenda and dealt with earlier in the meeting - See
"Resolutions").
b.) Resolution No. 94-29, Series of 1994, A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT NO. 8, LOT 19 AND RESUBDIVISION OF TRACT
B, BLOCK 1, AMENDMENT NO. 7, EAGLEBEND FILING 2, TOWN OF AVON,
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
c.) Resolution No. 94-30, Series of 1994, A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE FINAL PLAT FOR LOTS 38A AND 38B, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE
SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
7
d.) Financial Matters _
e:) Approval of the"September 6, 1994 Council"Meeting Minutes.
Councilor Hines motioned to approve the Consent Agenda.
Councilor,Yoder'-seconded the motion and the motion carried
unanimously.
There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor.
Reynolds called for a motion to adjourn. Councilor Hines moved.
to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Councilor Yoder. The
meeting was adjourned by Mayor Reynolds at 10:25PM
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Patty Ney rt T wn Clerk
8