Loading...
08-01-05 Town Council Minutes SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2005 CALL TO ORDER AT 4:03 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Douglas Mercatoris, Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Sally Sparhawk, and Arnold Mordkin COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Segrest, Town Manager; Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner; John Dresser, Town Attorney; Chris Conrad, Planning Director; Susan Hamley, Marketing Director; Bob Nevins, Planning Technician; Jason Haber, Economic Resource Director; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director and Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Mel Blumenthal, Howard P. Foley, Sandy Stay, Stephen P. Stay, Bob Purvis, Carolyn Purvis, Lance Cote, Brian Olson, Robin Riggs, John O’Donnell, Marcia O’Donnell, Deb Fenton, Pat Fenton, Howard Rudge, Loie Rudge, Judi Burwell, Jeannie Woods, Rich Hooper, Edgell Pyles, Marty Pickett, Tim Fenton, Greg Woods, Randy Woods, Joe Lang, Valerie Alexander, Colleen Doyle and other members of the Public interested in today’s Agenda items. DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 2: POOL DISCUSSION ITEM REZONING TO ‘RECREATION’ AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TOWN ENTRYWAY POOL PROJECT Jim Wahlstrom Senior Planner stated that Town is the applicant for the Pool Project that includes a special review application and rezoning to recreation for this particular site. Town Council will be the decision making body for the community. We will begin a review of staff recommendations and Planning Commission recommendations and if Town Council agrees with either or both, staff will prepare an ordinance and schedule th the first reading on August 15 and Public Hearing and second reading on September th 6 Town Council meetings. At this time Valerie Alexander with Blue Green representing the Town reviewed a PowerPoint Presentation with the Town Council. Alexander stated the ilestones for this project to date, which included the following: 08-01-05tc Page 2 of 18 November 2004 - March 2005 - Community Workshops Schematic Design/Design Development April 2005 - Town Council client approval of designs April – August 2005 - Construction Documents/Detail Design July 20, 2005 - Planning Commission approval with conditions August 1, 2005 - Town Council Initial Presentation August 15, 2005 - Town Council – 1st Reading September 6, 2005 nd - Town Council – 2 Reading August 2005 - Work Begins June 2006 - POOL OPENS! Alexander reviewed the current programming for Phase 1 pool, Phase 1 building, Phase II pool and Phase II building. She also the reviewed the amenities such as bicycle racks, benches, outside seating area, water caves, water bucket features, the site plan, architectural plan, character elevations, glazing elevations, and precedent images. Town Council agreed that the leisure pool and the lap lanes should be extended to five and a half feet. In response to question by Town Council regarding parking for the winter season Public Works Director Hunt Walker stated that the grading will be extended through the bus depot to the edge of the basketball court towards Highway 82 or the east will become temporary parking for the winter season. Town Manager Segrest stated that once the parking is paved and stripped for next winter we will end up with the same amount of parking spaces as we have today. Town Council requested a mock board of materials, which does not have to be wood but needs to look like wood cedar. Council Member Wilkinson voiced concern about the wave ball not being available and Alexander reviewed the water features that are currently scheduled for the pool which include a tunnel arc which is a series of seven sprays which arc five feet in the air and then drops into the water, another feature is a series of buckets which fill and the empty into the leisure pool, a rubber rock to play on, water fall, water caves and the water slide. Council Member Wilkinson asked that the trails and pool area be ADA accessible and that staff investigate thoroughly the fee programming to be sure it is affordable. There was a suggestion in the newspaper recently that Town Hall be located on top of the Recreation Center and Town Council consensus is that the Town Hall is to large of a building to be placed on the Recreation Center and the building was not designed to be three stories. 08-01-05tc Page 3 of 18 Senior Planner Jim Wahlstrom stated page 4 and page 5 of the development land use parameters from the applicants note book will be exhibits to the Ordinance approving this project. I was Town Council consensus to discuss zoning issues in more detail during the entryway discussions. Item No. 3: JAZZ ASPEN SNOWMASS LABOR DAY FESTIVAL DISCUSSION Planner Bob Nevins stated that the 2005 Labor Day Festival is scheduled from Sep 1-5 the same venue that has been used for the last two years with the site capacity of 12,000 and the site layout is still the same. The major change in this year’s application is the addition of a day and earlier closure of Brush Creek Road. Representing JAZZ Aspen at Snowmass Joe Lang noted some improved commitments by Jas Aspen such and a third transportation partner to handle to the Two Creeks route which should alleviate some of the pressure on RFTA and some improvements to the Village routes by way of equipment, barricades and personnel. Chief of Police Art Smythe stated at this time he has a very good comfort level with the current plan. Town Council discussed the after dark series, road closure hours and the concert hours of operation. Lang discussed another improvement the mobile mash unit developed to provide a detoxification and command center to the local police with phone lines as well as hand radios. This is just another way of being prepared by beefing up all the support systems including the EMT units. Mayor Mercatoris stated for the benefit of the public and TV viewers camping is prohibited in Snowmass Village and there will be security patrolling areas that may attract campers. After disclosing that he is the insurance agent for Jas Aspen, Town Council Member Wilkinson asked that some consideration be made for those wanting to use the playground and pedestrian access to the playground when the road is closed. In response to Council Member Wilkinson, Lang stated that the VIP patron section is very safe and made of steel and security will monitor the number of people inside for capacity concerns. Lang informed Council that the there will not be a VIP seating area for Thursday, Friday or on Monday this will allow for more general admission seating on those days. Mayor Mercatoris disclosed he is involved with JAZZ After Dark at his liquor establishment. In response to an inquiry made by Council Member Mercatoris, Lang stated that there would be additional bartenders and coffee and food vendors open extended hours to help with the egress of 10,000 people all at once. Mayor Mercatoris directed staff to proceed with the temporary use permit administratively. NOTE: Town Council took a fifteen-minute break at this time. REGULAR AGENDA – 5:45 P.M. Item No. 4: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items for discussion. Item No. 5: COUNCIL UPDATES 08-01-05tc Page 4 of 18 NORBA Bike Race Council Member Wilkinson thanked the Aspen Skiing Company, Snowmass Village Police Department and Marketing and Special Events Department for a very successful event. Joint Meeting The Marketing and Special Events Board and Town Council Meeting will be meeting on Monday, 8:30 a.m. in the Town Council Chambers. Community Forum Mayor Mercatoris thanked all those that attend the Community Forum and reminded the th Public and TV viewers that on August 15 Regular Town Council Meeting the Town Council will again be discussing the two preferred sites for Town Hall and the ballot language for Town Hall and the Recreation Center. Council Member Mordkin asked that some additional advertising be considered for this meeting and possibly Public Service Announcements. ESPN Mayor Mercatoris request that Public Relations Office Kathleen Milbrath contact ESPN about filming live from Snowmass Village yet announcing live from Aspen. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 30, SERIES OF 2005 – DONATION OF 137 ACRES CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT A DONATION OF VACANT LAND Council Member Mordkin Sparhawk made a motion to approve Resolution No. 30, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Mordkin. In the previous Town Council Meeting Mayor Mercatoris read the letter from Norman Perlmutter donating 137 acres of land in the Divide to the Town of Snowmass Village for open space. This Resolution authorized the Town Manager to consummate the transaction of the land to the Town of Snowmass Village and encumbers a ski easement for the Aspen Skiing Company. The conditions of the acceptance of this land are included in Exhibit “B” and the restrictions of use are listed. Council Member Mordkin expressed concerns with the restrictions and would like to see these restrictions removed. Council Member Wilkinson stated that there are existing trails being used today for NORBA that may be on private land and the restrictions would not longer allow a current use. Town Manager Mike Segrest will contact Mr. Perlmutter for clarification. Lance Cote representing the Two Creeks Homeowners Association inquired if this land was given in exchange for the release of the Golf Course Reservation, Mayor Mercatoris responded this has nothing to do with the Golf Course Reservation, There being no further discussion the motion was approve by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 7: RESOLUTION NO. 31, SERIES OF 2005 – 7 STAR 08-01-05tc Page 5 of 18 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY AND TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT Council Member Mordkin made a motion to approve Resolution 31, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Boineau. Town Manger Mike Segrest explained that the negotiated price for the acquisition is $1,000,000 and the funding sources are commitments from Snowmass Land Company (SLC) and the Aspen Skiing Company (Skico) as part of the Two Creeks development approval. The parcel would include from the creek to the Brush Creek road for the anticipated purpose of a new entry station, welcome center and open space/recreation. The owner would retain the conservation easement north of the creek and proposes to annex to the Town as an SF 150 residential lot, which would be subject to design standards and landscape screening from Brush Creek Road. He noted that the Town would grant to the residential lot an easement across Town property for access to the lot via the access road to the proposed employee housing subdivision, and a landscape easement between the lot and the employee housing subdivision. Mayor Mercatoris noted that the negotiations for acquiring this triangle have been on going for some time and is being bought through mitigations monies. Council Member Wilkinson asked the word “horse” is stricken from “horse trail”. Council Member Mordkin asked where the terms of the conservation easement would be written, Town Attorney John Dresser state these terms will be in the annexation agreement and defined by Town Council. There being no further discussion the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 8: FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 7, SERIES OF 2005 FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE V, CHAPTER 2, SECTION 2-97(a) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE CODE OF ETHICS Town Attorney John Dresser noted this was discussed at length in a Regular Town Council Meeting in May and this ordinance is the product of that discussion. Council Member Wilkinson made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Sparhawk. There being no further discussion the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. At this time Mayor Mercatoris introduced the new Economic Resource Director, Jason Haber and welcomed him. Item No. 9: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 11, SERIES OF 2005 PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE PORTION OF THE SNOWMASS CHAPEL PRELIMINARY PLAN RELATED TO ARCHITECTURE, MASS, SCALE AND HEIGHT VARIATION ISSUES 08-01-05tc Page 6 of 18 Mayor Mercatoris opened the Public Hearing at 6:30 p.m. Senior Planner Jim Wahlstrom noted that this is the official published Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005. He also noted that all posting and publishing requirements have been met by the applicant. The changes request by Town Council at the July 18, 2005 have been made in this ordinance. Council Member Boineau made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Mercatoris. Council Member Mordkin made a motion to continue the Public Hearing and move the Ordinance to a future meeting. Mordkin stated this ordinance provides little direction and is not binding it will have little effect on what the ultimate result will be. After listening to the community and the threat that if not passed this issues will be taken to the vote of community, which is not a bad idea. It is always nice to know the position of the citizens is however, that will have no effect on what ultimately comes down the pike when the Preliminary Plan is present to the Town Council and we go through this process all over again. The Chapel was hoping for closure on these issues and will not bring closure it ad another process. Mordkin would like to know how the Community feels about the height mass and scale and the Town Council would like to know also. th He proposed the following continue this process to the September 19 and the Town conducts an election by a mail in ballot as follows; The Town would provide postage a cover letter and a ballot with a design by watermark or numbering. The Town will permit the Applicant two weeks to provide two 8 ½ x 11 pieces of paper with pro comments and the opponents with opposing statements of true statements. This is non-binding result but I will follow the results of this. The voters will have two weeks to get the ballot th back to the Town and the results will be brought forward at the September 19 meeting. Council Member Boineau would like a binding election or a vote today. Council Member Wilkinson would like to go through the process before and election and would like a presentation of the entire application first. Council Member Sparhawk would like to see a survey of the community. Mayor Mercatoris took comments from the Public at this time: Bob Purvis Snowmass Village Resident Noted is not familiar with a non-binding ordinance and he asked what is it how it works and do we have any examples of how it has worked in the past. Mayor Mercatoris stated staff put the Ordinance together for the proponents and opponents for Town Council to obtain a sense of direction regarding the issues of height mass and scale by the Town Council. No matter what happens with this ordinance the application can move forward and the resolution from preliminary to final will require a ¾’s vote by Town Council. Brian Olson Snowmass Village Fairway Three Resident He is in favor of the survey coming from the Town not the proponent. He does not feel this is waste of time and we could put this in front of mass of registered voters this potential fatal flaw height mass and scale which could get lost in the information for the final. He appreciates the Town coming up with ordinance and the vote of the peoples 08-01-05tc Page 7 of 18 John Donnell Second Homeowner If this is a non-binding survey why not take the interest of the entire community not just the register voters. Michael Waters Snowmass Village Villas Resident Agrees for the second homeowners to have a voice. At the same time applauds Council Member Mordkin idea. It appears that one of the largest and pretentious item is being discussed first. I don’t know of this is feasible or not but perhaps instead of doing this ballot this vote be tabled and move to vote on the other things first and give the community the ability to become more aware of this major issues so you may get the benefit of both the time of allowing people to become more involved and aware of the big issue. Perhaps this would be a compromise. Loie Rudge Snowmass Second Homeowner We have had a presence here since 1988 and are second homeowners for a variety of reason. Everybody knows Arnie and the good citizen he is but we have never shopped in his store, we know Sally from the Chapel but have never used her services, we know Merc because he owned a condo next door to our daughter but we don’t frequent your establishment, Bill we haven’t needed you to put out fires except for in our computer and we thank you for that, John you may not know but we are neighbors right down the road in Meadow Ranch. You all need second homeowners and especially hot beds to stay in business and we feel we contribute because we own a hot bed in Stonebridge and we own a home and we own a second home because we feel we are better stewards of our money than the government can so we chosen to reside in a state that treats us better tax wise and money wise and I think that is a Colorado issue and a resort issue. We are in a resort, this Chapel is to support not just the residents but the visitors which includes second homeowners. I’m speaking obviously in behalf of the work of the Chapel and that is how we support this community through the work of the Chapel. We are active in the community on a couple of boards and are not this active in the state we reside. Tom Yokum Snowmass Village Fairway Drive Resident I’m a surveyor in the Town of Snowmass Village and I watch with dismay as regulations get extend and extend for instance in Lot 36 at the Pines there are 30 per cent slopes inside the building envelope so now the building guys are saying you can’t build inside 30% slopes well its inside a building envelop. These causes undo costs to the buyers of the lot and to the people involved in this. If we continue along path to build an out house is going to cost several hundred thousand dollar at some point we have to say we have a set of rules and we must abide buy them when becomes time to vote you have to stand up and say your vote and if we go through more referendums and semi referendums and non-binding agreements is two or four years out and a hundred thousand dollars a year is not and unspeakable amount of money to keep a project on the table guys please show some mercy for the developers. I am totally support this project and at some point we got to stop some of the regulations that are going on its involved in everything in our live and building around here is a big part of Snowmass so stand up and make your vote I think the time has come. 08-01-05tc Page 8 of 18 Steve Stay Snowmass Village Resident I have lived here for many years and I am a registered voter concern relating to this type of building and because it is related to religious beliefs in the community we are talking about giving variances that we would never give to another organization. Robin Riggs Snowmass Village Resident I concur and while public opinion is not a community purpose listed in the Municipal Code community is owed the respect to take to a vote of some kind. The reason that a lot of us want to have a vote is strictly in response to some people responses as to why they voted in favor of this. Arnie has publicly said on tape he does not like this does not like this but he had a sense of what the community wanted and therefore voted yes and again not a Municipal Code community purpose if that is the road the Council is going to go down then I think we should get a real sense not peoples perception that can be misguided it can be people can say what ever they want to stay friends whatever it is. I don’t know that I would ever want this vote to happen every time there is a group of people that doesn’t like something but if you guys are not going to in a really judicious way follow the Municipal Code in a way that is apparent to all of us and make statements that there vote is based on there feelings, Sally was worried about persuasion from her public so this is in response to Arnie’s question and whether or not we agree with Arnie’s question my concern is that this is very important we are making big changes and granting big variances here and if it’s taken to a vote I would personally rather see it in November coupled with other important votes versus it being a little survey and I also understand that this kind of vote is not binding and I think that if you are going to make your vote based on your perception of the community you might as well get it accurately. That’s all I have but I am sure I will have something later. Marsha Darnell Second Homeowner Second homeowner for 13 years I do consider myself an important part of the community. I applaud what the Council has recently done appointing a board to represent second homeowners but do not feel much comfort in that because those second homeowners represent me because I did not have any choice in the matter the were just appointed and I am disturbed by what’s coming out of that group of second homeowners that don’t represent me. I was looking through a file I had the other day and came across a couple of very fair articles written by Carolyn Sakirison four years ago and this process started two years before that so we have been in this process for six and a half years now I thought she wrote some very fair things about the Chapel then four and a half years ago and I have not sensing the same from the current Snowmass Sun and that disturbs me a great deal also but I hope you do not delay this we have been delayed years already we have gone to tremendous expense every time the design is changed is costs us a hundred thousand dollars I would personally would rather putting that money into the community than changing the plans. I think we have a good plan and I think we have complied with what people have told us what we needed to do and it’s really not fair to people concerned about what happens in the community even though we cannot participate in a vote. Doug Dotson Representing the Applicant Introduced Edgel Pyles who passed out some information in response to some question asked at an earlier meeting. Edgel stated, “we have been in this process for over five years if your we going to do a vote we wish you done it before we spent $7000,000 on 08-01-05tc Page 9 of 18 the process but I guess that is your call and your leadership style”. Indeed we have tried to respond to the questions people have asked why this height and why this volume and this is the acquisition and these are his reasons and why we cannot make it smaller, I don’t think any of us decided were going make this big just to rouse the neighbors and the people who dislike a church in Snowmass Village that was not our intent and we tried to respond to a purpose a purpose of a wonderful worship place a purpose that would enhance the cultural life of Snowmass Village, but your are the Town leaders you are the ones that have to decide if you want to go that direction or another direction and we are at your mercy. Our concern is you can choke us down just by postponing this very time you postpone it, we wrote checks in the month of June for $100,000 and the month of July for $100,000 for this process it is now over $700,000 for this process and a lot of our time and a lot of our energy we loose momentum every time it is postponed we loose momentum from our second homeowners and we do have a large group of second homeowners and we do have a large group of second homeowners who are funding this, if you eliminate them and cut this group out of the process your are disenfranchising a serious part of the community which is disenfranchised in many ways and we try not to do that at the Snowmass Chapel we try to bring them in and make them part of the community. We try not to bite the hand that feeds us and I think by pushing this to a vote your going to do that we will live with that because that is your leadership style but what we want to say the longer your postpone this we loose momentum and fund raising as we met with the construction company we need to raise over five million dollar yet to get this done and that is not an easy project to do it is not easy to go out and raise five million dollars when you have hanging out here is may be we will let you do it maybe we won’t may be we will let it be this big may be we won’t oh now we will leave it up to a community vote that does not give great confidence to our funders and to the people that are stepping forward with money they could give to their own church they could give it to their University they can give it to their grandkids but the have made a commitment to give it to Snowmass Village in the form of the Snowmass Chapel and performance hall so that would be my concerns. The information that was passed out at trying appropriately and respectively and professionally to some of the serious questions that were raised so you have those before you. Dotson agreed with a statement made by Arnie that some point we need to find the level of acceptability he stated he would like to talk about the line and whether we think that we have successfully provide a project that will be workable for the community. There was discussion regarding an article in Forbes magazine regarding a Fisk organ. The Snowmass Chapel hired Kirkegaard Associates who are specialist in Chicago that deal with acoustics to review this mentioned article and report what this article was about and how it compared to the Snowmass Chapel organ. The organ describe in the article was a theatre organ not a chapel organ and Kirkegaard reported that the space volume related to uses not size of the organ. This facility is designed to accommodate various performance types and the article dose not list the number of people and the Chapel is designed for 300 people. Over all Kirkegaard feels this is comparing apples to oranges. Dotson also discussed the length of the interior; the design of the sanctuary and stated this design is best possible design for this organ. The Town Council has been given two letters from Kirkegaard regarding 08-01-05tc Page 10 of 18 Acoustic Volume/Building Height and Exterior Sound Estimates that will better explain these points. During the Sketch Plan the Town Council and Planning Commission discussed the design things height mass and scale variations – lower valley area and over all this is the best design for the community, provided view simulations from sketch plan – the steeper roof pitch was also incorporated from sketch – achieved the direction from the Town Council per the comp plan regarding monumental. Working with the P&Z with the landscaping to break some of the mass up and has also worked with Mike Waters from the Blue Roofs also some landscaping off Brush Creek road. Dotson read reason of sustainability in regards to the code. He noted it does make contribution to the community and is a facility that is meeting the needs of the community and the future of Snowmass Village. The programs will contribute to the sustainability of the village, who uses this facility; it is not being built for the 10 percent that use the Chapel but for the people of the community, day visitor, weekly visitor. This facility provides an amenity to the Community through public services and programs. He stated that the PUD guide will state the uses of the facility. He stated that the applicant believes that the variance is consistent with the granting of the variance. Council Member Wilkinson stated he agrees with Arnie’s suggestion and would like to get the input of the community; this is an extraordinary building and request for extraordinary request for variances. He is also concerned with the not seeing the entire project before making this important decision. Council Member Boineau is not in favor of tabling this Ordinance; he is in favor of voting tonight. Mayor Mercatoris stated there is nothing in the code regarding the approval of a variance having to go to a vote of the people the opponents and proponents asked to look at height mass and scale separate and that’s why we are where we are. We have heard the arguments and now its time to vote. He also mentioned this Ordinance only needs a majority vote to pass. Council Member Sparhawk thinks this Ordinance should be tabled to get a better read from the Community th Council Member Mordkin made a motion to table this Ordinance to September 19, 2005, seconded by Council member Sparhawk. The motion to table was approved by a vote of 3 in favor Council Member Mordkin, Wilkinson and Sparhawk to 2 opposed Council Member Boineau and Mayor Mercatoris. Council Member Mordkin made a motion that the Town conduct a non-binding vote of the registered voters to be conducted as follows; within the next two weeks the proponents and opponents submit to the Town Clerk no more that two pages of 8 ½ by 11 printed at their expense material they wish to be sent out with the ballot. A cover page will be mailed with the watermarked ballot with a self-addressed envelope. The voter will mail the ballot to the Town Clerk within two weeks of receipt, the Town Clerk 08-01-05tc Page 11 of 18 th will present the results at the September 19 2005 Regular Meeting, This motion was seconded by Council Member Sparhawk. Town Manager Mike Segrest stated that when using the terms “Election” and “Ballot” we would need to follow the Municipal Election Law and the Fair Campaign Practices Act. He is also concerned with the turn around time. Segrest continued by saying that this is slippery slope to go down that every time a difficult issue faces Town Council that you need to put it to the electorate who will not have time to digest this issues and I personally and professionally question the validity of the feedback that you are going to get from a limited amount of information and a limited amount of time for the Public to consider this and that is why we have a representative form of government for you to make these kinds of decisions. Segrest noted he will respect Town Councils decision and staff will do what ever they need to do to comply with Council’s request. Town Attorney John Dresser stated that the Municipal Code provides for the Town of Snowmass Village to be governed by the Municipal Election Law and the Fair Campaign Practices Act and we would comply given the time frame requested by Town Council. Howard Foley Snowmass Village Second Homeowner Very disappointed to see the turn in events in this process he had hoped that the Town Council would vote on the Ordinance and continue on to the Planning Commission. Unless you are a registered voter you will not have an opportunity to express opinion, and will not have sense of the entire community. What will this ultimately accomplish and slippery slopes Mike said is a good way to characterize this and I for one am very disappointed that you appear to be going down that road. Mike Waters Snowmass Village Seasons Four Resident Respects the desire to get it done, I think with the amount of squirming that is going on speaks for its self, and I think this is a lot of discomfort from both sides. Also a referendum will not allow votes from second homeowners. I think you have made a th good start tabling to September 19 to allow for a greater sense and for the community to emerge take your vote and we will move on from there. Robin Riggs Snowmass Village Resident We don’t speak as a group and I know for myself I am disappointed we came to this in whatever form it takes and I have to agree with that slippery slope, when Council Member uses the community’s input vocal not vocal money or not, the circles you run in that is a scary way to vote on something out of the box and so large. I am disappointed as well but I don’t because of how Council is doing this and frankly the planning and zoning that made the recommendations but I don’t see another way of doing this but I am concerned about the particulars of how this will be done. Do people have to come in and deliver this ballot or how the particulars will be worked our or if you can comply with Colorado election law. The other thing that I am shocked by and I know that Chapel people are our neighbors and part of this community whether they can vote or not but I have never seen group of people get and walk out because it was not going their way, a lot of would have gotten up and walked out many times but we have respect for Town Council and respect for the process we just asked that is goes in a verifiable diligent way. I don’t mind a little bit of time to the Council say it is not just for the voters but more time to due diligences. I’m heart broken and sadden I don’t want to keep 08-01-05tc Page 12 of 18 going though this every time we have a divided community and I have never see this kind of anger from one community member to another. We keep responding to statements that are not correct and the applicant can keep talking and repeating themselves and we are not allowed to do that. I wish we would start using words not community benefit its not in the Municipal Code, this does not block view that’s not in the Municipal Code what is in the Municipal Code is views from surrounding properties will not be substantially and adversely effected not blocked. The surrounding properties to be considered will include the immediate adjacent and I know they do not consider us immediately adjacent but it also goes on to say and those that are identified by the Planning Commission and the Town Council during there special review and commentary’s. So here is validity to us talking about our views it’s in the Municipal Code. I keep feeling like there are hundreds of people represented by the homeowners we took one name per homeowner there are not motivated by their personal views they are motivated and other people in this community because they feel its inappropriate for that neighborhood for what ever reasons. All this has been repeated before but it is so hard to let the applicant have the final word with out some kind of response to it. One of the things I wanted to remind the Council is that the delay was the choice of the applicant, they put aside their applicant during the Base Village application that was not your decision it was their decision. When talking about the money that was spent on this process that was a gamble that you take when you want to put a building two times the height of what is in the PUD. I just don’t want you to feel pressure, which I don’t feel you are but I don’t think the Public knows that the delay has been their choice and the difficult application. Mike Waters Snowmass Village Seasons Four Resident Referred to the view simulation that was submitted for the record and question if the 50- millimeter lens was used for these view simulations, which is required by the code. He went on to comment about all the things the applicant “couldn’t do” maybe this not the right site for this building. Robin Riggs Snowmass Village Resident Commented on the view simulations that should be done from Brush Creek road and this to date has not been done. It appears to be a lack of concern of the citizens of Snowmass Village. The view simulation in this application is from the old application and they need to be updated to the new building and shown to the public so they can see the size of this building. Bob Purvis Snowmass Village Resident Bob would like to ask two questions does this Ordinance need to be passed by a ¾ vote and the Town Attorney stated the Preliminary Resolution needs a ¾ but simple majority can pass this Ordinance. The other question had to with view simulations and wanted to clarify the view simulations submitted to date are not current, Town Council responded that was correct. Town Manager Mike Segrest reminded Town Council that the electorate looks to the Town Council to be the parties that understands the entire land use application and process, which is a quasi-judicial proceeding. He feels that you are taking this quasi- judicial proceeding and putting it up to a popularity vote and he personally and professionally feels very uncomfortable with that decision. Mayor Mercatoris is in 08-01-05tc Page 13 of 18 agreement with the Town Manager and feels this is trying to recreate democracy due to a tough decision is not the way to proceed. Council Member Mordkin feels that three of the Council Member feel they do not know what the Public is feeling but the question of this building being to big needs to brought before electorate. Rather than call an Election, Council Member Mordkin would like to amend his motion to seek a non-binding sense of the community by written response of a question posed to the registered voters of Snowmass Village. Seconded by Council Member Sparhawk. Council Member Wilkinson willing to say lets put it on a ballot and make it a binding vote. He would like to know about the parking issues and the traffic mitigation. It is not just about the size of the building, he would like to look at the entire project. The motion to table Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005 failed by a vote of 2 in favor to 3 opposed. Council Member Mordkin and Sparhawk were in favor and Council Member Mercatoris, Boineau and Wilkinson were opposed. Mayor Mercatoris took Public Comment at this time. Brian Olson Snowmass Village Fairway Three Resident This gets to be a more untypical process as we go along and is seems to be different standards applied and we look to you guys to study, know and decided well informed and most of us don’t believe that is happening here. The applicant continues to respond to newspaper articles and it would really be nice to take this process up to a level we know you are capable of and some independent review of the applicant’s testimony as was done in Base Village review. If you guys would get well informed we could gain some ground and would be happy with your informed decision. Robin Riggs Snowmass Village Resident Were tired and we feel like we have to ride heard to have people vote according to some real viable parts of the Municipal Code. I personally don’t agree with Arnie to say how interruptive this Municipal Code is, yes there is room but to just go is doesn’t effect views it doesn’t do this or that or it fits in with the neighborhood when you have a two or three story building and an eight story building. I think what the people that have called me on this have said that the reasons for voting for this never appear to be part of the Municipal Code it appears to be personal preference it appears to be peer pressure it just felt rubber stamped. If we are reading that wrong I apologize but I do know that is what I am hearing on the street. We certainly took issue with Arnie saying he had sense of the community when the one person who got the most amounts of votes and is the most representative of the community is John Wilkinson and Arnie was appointed. To say who has a sense of the community and that this is a representative government I take issue with that. Nobody is taking a look at who was elected here and just wanted you to know what it looks like from this side. Bob Purvis Snowmass Village Resident He thinks there has been a lot of rich discussion this evening. I would suggest that the time is getting quite late and my observation is that probably allowed to think about this 08-01-05tc Page 14 of 18 overnight what ever you do our notions about how to proceed from here forward would probably be a little bit clearer. I would concur with Mike and Merc from my observation of these issue I a little bit concerned that surveys are election and if we are going to do that I think we would need to be able to think about with a clearer head and I don’t think we have room right now. I think there are people that are passionate about this project those pro and con I think we know that I think there is another group that is becoming somewhat passionate about their involvement and that’s about the process and you folks received a letter from Mel Blumenthal today. I thought it was something you should study and consider seriously and I think that should be a part of any lessons learned through this process so far that could enable us today with you to proceed forward. Perhaps the site that we won’t quote a non-binding sense of the community perhaps deciding no we are not going to go back there again but one way or another I know each of you will try to get your own non-binding sense of the community and I think it is fair for you to have that frame work. If Robin is right then the code is pretty specific about the basis of support that you have available by authority for granting a variation actually you are taking about not a variance but while it does have some judgment of course which is yours to apply it is fairly specific in some areas. It is also somewhat difficult to understand the first time you read through the great book and so I would suggest that it is not unusual that there are people that struggle a bit to get this through concept but to me your have done more than a days’ work on this issue and I for one wouldn’t feel that your were running away from it if you thought now probably you wanted to step back and take some time to digest where you have got to and then you can have another marathon meeting to decide where you are going to go next. Mayor Mercatoris continued the Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005 th To September 19, 2005. Planning Director Chris Conrad noted that the Planning Commission is meeting reviewing the Chapel application this Wednesday and on August 31, 2005 and there will th be two more meetings prior to September 19. He also stated that this would be the time to add the directive for view simulations taken with a 50 millimeter lens from various areas along Brush Creek road be requested from the applicant and submitted to the Planning Department. Phillip Vaughan the project manager for the Snowmass Chapel project stated that there is some misinformation in regards to the view simulations. He stated that the pictures that have been submitted are of the new building and were taken with a 50 millimeter lens and the cost approximately $3,000 per picture. At this time the Town Council went to Item 10 on the Agenda Item No. 10: SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 14, SERIES OF 2005 SECOND READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AREAS CONTAINING THIRTY PERCENT (30%) SLOPES ON LOT 36, PARCEL G – THE PINES, EAST VILLAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Planner Bob Nevins stated that the East Village PUD was approved in 1994 and authorized the platting and sale of 51 single-family residential lots within Parcel G-The 08-01-05tc Page 15 of 18 Pines. The applicant is proposing to develop a single-family home on Lot 36 that according to the Site Characteristics Plan did not show 30% slopes within the designated envelop. Based on a more detailed survey it was revealed that the central portion of the building envelop does contain slopes 30 % or greater. Per the Land Use Code this requires a ¾ vote by the Town Council. Council Member Mordkin made a motion to approve Second Reading Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Wilkinson. Council Member Wilkinson inquired about moving the building envelop to the right or left. Nevins noted that the applicant does not have the option of relocating the envelope as the surrounding property also contains 30 %slopes. A roll-call vote was taken and the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 11: DISCUSSION AND FIRST READING – ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 2005 DISCUSSION AND FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE CONSIDERING AMENDMENTS TO SECTION B(3), COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED AREAS, AND SECTION B(4)A, ANNEXATION POLICY, OF CHAPTER SIX OF THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURSUANT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 2005 STATE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT Council Member Wilkinson made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Boineau, Planning Director Chris Conrad stated that the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 6, Series of 2005, on April 20, 2005 providing the Town Council the 2005 State of the Comprehensive Plan Report. The report was presented to Town Council on May 2, 2005 and a public hearing was conducted on May 23, 2005. The Town Council accepted the report and directed staff to proceed with developing proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan specific to the Upper Village area within the Town Core Comprehensively Planned Area (“CPA”) as well as work on a plan to encourage and facilitate the renovation, redevelopment and revitalization of the Snowmass Mall. Council Member Mordkin made a motion to amend the Ordinance to strike out “Annexation Policy” in the title and the sixth “Whereas” with the Ordinance relating to annexation. The amendment and First Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2005 was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 12: MANAGER’S REPORT Weed Walk Town Manager Mike Segrest reported that the Weed Walk Tour conducted by Pitkin County Weed Advisory Board was held on July 12, 2005. The Boards major concern was with “Escaped Orientals” and the Board would like to discourage suppliers from selling seed mix with this noxious weed. 08-01-05tc Page 16 of 18 Item No. 13: COMMITTEE REPORTS/CALENDARS MSEB Joint Meeting There will be a joint meeting of the Town Council and the Marketing and Special Events Board on Monday, August 8, 2005 at 8:30 a.m. Web Casting Council Member John Wilkinson is interested in the Web casting to make the Town Council Meeting available for the second homeowners. Town Council directed staff to research the costs. CORE Council Member Sally Sparhawk stated there is an opportunity for funding for employee housing if we choose to build them environmentally conscious. Trails Council Member Arnie Mordkin state that there are fallen tree on Anaerobic Trail between Tom Blake Trail and Government Trail. Ballot Language th Mayor Mercatoris reminded the public that August 15is a very important meeting concerning ballot language and revisiting the site location of town hall. At this time the Town Council continued discussion on Item 9 of the Agenda Council Member Mordkin stated that due the Town Council not being in agreement to obtain the sense of the community regarding height, mass and scale he made a motion to reconsider Second Reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005, seconded by Council Member Boineau the motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 1 opposed. Council Member Wilkinson was opposed to the reconsideration he would like to see the entire project. After a lengthily discussion involving the time table of the application through the Planning Commission and then to the Town Council the Town Council consensus was to vote on the Ordinance. Council Member Mordkin inquired if the Ordinance was back on the table and stated, “I tried to make myself clear as I would that I felt our process was improper and we were not properly informed and that through a whole series of Alice in Wonderland events we are back to where we were I feel the same way I do not feel able I can’t abstain I don’t feel able to make an informed decision and therefore recuse myself from further discussion on this issue”. Council Member Mercatoris made another motion to table the Second Reading of Ordinance No, 11, Series 2005, seconded by Council Member Wilkinson, the motion to table failed by a vote of 2 in favor to 2 opposed. Council Member Mercatoris and Wilkinson in favor and Council Member Sparhawk and Council Member Boineau opposed. Council Member Mordkin recused. Robin Riggs Snowmass Village Resident Robin reminded Town Council that this is only an Ordinance on height, mass and scale your are not saying anything about parking or anything else and I for one am tired of 08-01-05tc Page 17 of 18 coming to meetings that all for not. I went to the Planning and Zoning meeting they voted 3 to 1 against something and then we found after sitting hours there again that it didn’t matter and I really see this from my perspective people fearing what happened the last time and that was a huge deal a public outcry funny things in the paper and all kinds of things and agree with Bill that you know we are here for the second reading of height scale and mass it may not mean anything but you guys put this in motion the Chapel, I been at many meetings at Planning and Zoning when they wanted a straw vote to get a sense of things I just think you guys are going to have to step up to the plate at some point and I think you are just delaying it and this is only on height scale and mass John just to make you more comfortable it doesn’t mean you have approve the project or not approve the project. Phillip Vaughn Project Manager for the Chapel Representing the applicant stated that Doug Dotson went through all of the argument this evening that you have and in general how we have replied back to the issues of the circumstances around height mass and scale. Larry Yaw addressed the architectural issues two week ago. Obviously we have good group of professionals assembled here what we presented to you are factual, truthful information that you have sitting in front of you, reasonable people may disagree and that’s fine but what you find from us is a group of experts is correct accurate material. One observation that was brought up this evening was brought up that no experts were reviewing our applications I would like to tell you I just approved a bill for $17,000 plus from the Town of Snowmass for expert review not more than a week ago. I can assure you we getting reviewed by your experts quite well at a handsome rate I might ad. So please who ever made that statement that is absolutely incorrect we are being reviewed by all your consultants and all your Town staff to the tune of 17 plus grand up to about 60 days ago and that amount will increase I certain so with that I would like to let you all know we appreciate your consideration and we feel like we have done our best job, I will let you know that we have been meeting together up here quite a bit I am from Garfield County and I do th not live in your Community however I have served for this is my 16 year on the Planning and Zoning Commission in Garfield County and the last five as Chairman and about 8 years on the Board of Adjustment I have seen every variance and every application known to man up one side and down the other and I appreciated the fact that this evening you all are stepping forward and saying look were going to take a vote on the issue we are not going refer this back to the Public. We live in a republic that means this is not democracy folk think we live in a democracy but we live in a republic we elect elected official to represent us and we expect leader ship from elected officials. When I make a decision on Planning and Zoning Commission I don’t go out a pull a survey and hold my finger up in the air I know what my fellow citizens think about things whether I agree with that or not is up to my decision making process with the code I have before me and the law of the land and statues that are set forth and with that there is nothing else from our owners team. Howard Foley Snowmass Village Second Homeowner As I said in my earlier comments I have come here tonight hoping there would be a vote second reading and I was hoping it would be a favorable vote as it was when it was first reading and it looks like we might be getting there, I would agree with the young lady down here on the right this is the time to take that vote we are voting as I understand it the vote is this height, mass, scale and architectural whatever the language is that a 08-01-05tc Page 18 of 18 fatal flaw in this application I think that is all you are being asked to do and I hope that you will take the vote and it will be favorable. Town Manager Mike Segrest appreciates the difficulty in the decision that you have to make and believes all the information has been provided to you to make a decision on this particular question. He does not believe the community purposes are going change and the question is whether the community purposes that are being offered by the applicant in fact meet the test for the variation of height, mass and scale. Council Member Sally Sparhawk has studied the information with Planning Director Chris Conrad and understand that as a Town Council Member her responsibility is to act within the code and that what she is going to do. She stated concern with line 206 to 210, which is pursuant to the Municipal Code Section 16A-5-300 (c) (5-7) in regards to Community purpose. She believes that the applicant has responded without being specific to each exception and unique circumstances. She will vote no on this Ordinance. Council Member Wilkinson agreed with Council Member Sparhawk, Council Member Boineau and Mercatoris think the needs of the variance has been met. A roll-call vote was taken for Second Reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005, 2 were in favor and 2 were opposed. Council Member Mercatoris and Boineau were in favor and Council Member Wilkinson and Sparhawk were opposed. Council Member Mordkin recused. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2005 failed. Item No. 14: ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Council Member Boineau made a motion to adjourn the Regular Meeting, seconded by Council Member Mercatoris. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The Meeting adjourned 9:40 p.m. This set of minutes was approved by Town Council at the Regular Town Council Meeting on October 10, 2005.