***F O L L O W – U P*** CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS AGENDA REGULAR MEETING NO. 2008-11 TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008 5:30 P.M. Antonucci called the meeting to order at 5:24pm. A. ROLL CALL (5:30 P.M.) City Council Members present: Loui Antonucci, Cari Hermacinski, Meg Bentley, Steve Ivancie, Walter Magill, Scott Myller, and Jon Quinn. City Staff Members present: Alan Lanning, City Manager; Wendy DuBord, Deputy City Manager; Anthony B. Lettunich, City Attorney; Julie Jordan, City Clerk; Julie Franklin, Deputy City Clerk; Anja Tribble, City Clerk Staff Assistant; Lisa Rolan, Director of Financial Services; Jonathan Flint, Transit Manager; John Eastman, Planning Services Manager; Jason Peasley, City Planner; Tom Leeson, Director of Planning Services; Philo Shelton, Director of Public Works; Joel Rae, Police Captain; and Chris Wilson, Director of Parks, Recreation and Open Space. The Follow-Up Agenda is work product only, and is subject to change. For final approved information, please refer to the official City Council minutes. All documents distributed at the City Council meeting are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. B. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW TOPIC 1. Alternatives study-Airport Steering Committee. Michael Turner and Jack Dysart were present representing the Airport Steering Committee. It was noted that the Committee will not make a recommendation on an alternative. Tim Greece, Matrix Design Group, provided a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the following: major components of the study. Frank Tyboroski, Matrix Design Group, continued with: land development considerations. Dan Reimer, attorney with Kaplan, Kirsch, Rockwell, continued with: legal implications and considerations. Dan Guimond, Economic & Planning Systems, continued with: economic and social impacts; Steamboat Springs market conditions; redevelopment concepts; and summary of potential redevelopment costs and benefits. Discussion took place relative, but not limited to: how the terminal was funded; personnel costs at the Airport; repaying the FAA. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mike Forney, Yampa Valley Airport Commission, acknowledged the efforts of the study. He would like to “take a cloud off the top of the airport,” that cloud being the question of whether the airport will survive. He feels that once this question is answered there will be increased investment and activity at the airport. Jim Barrows voiced concern with the increased time required to get places if pilots have to fly out of Hayden. He stated that it is not realistic to think that all the hangar tenants at the Steamboat Springs Airport will transfer to Hayden. Eric Morris encouraged City Council to make a stand on the airport by passing a resolution supporting the airport, or putting it up for sale. Dave McDonald, pilot, suggested that the City spend money on different piece of ground rather than spending money to close the airport. Antonucci stated that the majority of City Council members are in support of the airport, however the next Council may be different. 2. Armstrong draft Airport Master Plan. Dennis Corsi, Armstrong Consultants, provided a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the following: project tasks; purpose of Airport Master Plan; Airport Reference Code; existing Airport Reference Code; conclusions; recommended development concepts; key deliverables; Airport Layout Plan; off Airport Land Use Drawing; Airport Development Plan; Airport Financial Plan/20 year Financial Proforma; and next steps. Discussion took place relative, but not limited to: what funds can be used for maintenance; the airport influence area; potential taxi or charter service/no commercial service in the future; private owned land for future acquisition by the City; avigation easements; and compatibility with the West Steamboat Springs Area Plan. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bob Weiss, representing Steamboat 700 and West Acres, stated that his clients are supportive of the Airport and the Airport Master Plan. He stated that a large part of Steamboat 700 is in the Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ) and voiced concern with the language “marginally acceptable” that is used on one if the attachments. He suggested using the language “conditionally acceptable” considering that there is recommended disclosure. He also cautioned against including the draft Overlay Zone Ordinance because it implies that it is approved. Lettunich stated that this item is included as an attachment and he feels that there is no suggestion that we are adopting it. Lettunich also added his reluctance to change any language “on the fly” noting that if Council adopts the plan they can agree to revisit it, or ask the consultant try to work with the language between now and the adoption date. Corsi stated that he has no problem with terminology proposed (conditionally acceptable). Antonucci would rather adopt the plan with the changes proposed at the next regular meeting. Corsi stated that the changes will only be provided at adoption. Danny Mulcahy questioned if the TPZ can be shifted. Corsi did not recommend this due to the serious concerns with flying in mountainous terrain. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Sasha Nelson, Colorado Environmental Coalition, asked that Council sign a letter to the Congressional Delegation requesting support of funding the limitation on oil shale commercial development due to the massive impacts to all surrounding communities. Antonucci asked that staff review and make recommendations. He noted that City Council needs to discuss what or if it will take stance on issues outside of local jurisdiction. Return to Airport Master Plan. Norbert Turek, representing Overlook Park, voiced concern with the language that references creating a Board of Adjustment. He questioned of a risk analysis of development in the flight pattern zone done has been done. Al Choy supports the Steamboat Springs Airport Master Plan. He felt that people buy real estate in the Yampa Valley because of the airport. 3. RESOLUTION: A resolution adopting an Airport Master Plan/ Airport Layout Plan for the Steamboat Springs Airport. Antonucci read the resolution title into the record. PUBLIC COMMENT: No one appeared for public comment. MOTION: To table this resolution to May 6, 2008; Ivancie/Hermacinski; APPROVED; Vote 7/0. All Council stated that they support the Steamboat Springs Airport. DIRECTION: Staff to add a resolution of support for the airport to the May 6, 2008 agenda. 4. City facilities plan. Wilson reviewed the expansion of Ice arena for Youth and Teen programs. Ivancie supports this project and feels this is an unmeet need that Council needs to prioritize. All Council agreed with this statement. Skate Park: All City Council supported this project. Robichaud reviewed the City Hall expansion. Discussion took place relative to underground parking and records storage. Hermacinski prefers new construction rather than renovation, and prefers Option 3. Bentley noted the need to ensure that the space can be expanded again, or make sure that it is large enough to last. Quinn agrees with Hermacinski and also likes Option 3. Myller also likes Option 3, but not sure about having a 3 story building on Lincoln Avenue. Antonucci noted that the City Hall parking lot on Lincoln Avenue was intended for expansion and feels this space would be better used as a building on the streetscape, than a parking lot. He likes Option 3 and would like to have Finance staff look into bonds that are retiring from the airport in 2009. Ivancie also agrees that consolidation is the way to go and would like staff to see if this can be started sooner than 2010. Rehder Building: Discussion commenced on the master lease with the Steamboat Art Museum. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bill Jameson supports Option 3, however feels that the project budget needs to reflect the need for structure parking downtown. 5. Vacation Home Rentals: timeline deadline discussion only. Suzie Spiro stated that there are issues that need to be ironed out, specifically grandfathering and the access agreement, and would like the timeline extended. She also stated that there is a question as to whether vacation/destination clubs are included in the VHR permit; and voiced concern that the site plan requirement is over burdensome. Hermacinski questioned the justification for extending the timeframe. Spiro voiced concern that if homes apply under current ordinance, they will lose rights from the original ordinance. Lettunich stated that grandfathering is a vested right under the Colorado Revised Statutes, and can’t be terminated or amortized out of existence. However, he does not feel that this is what the City is doing; rather the City is just coming up with a new regulatory, administrative scheme. He stated that the April 30 deadline that the VHR Alliance is referring to is a deadline for them to file a lawsuit. He stated that if there is an applicant that can’t get a Vacation Home Rental (VHR) permit due to the requirements, that is where the problem will be; however the vast majority of VHR’s should be able to conform to the new application. Lettunich also noted that the access agreement can be altered so that the responsibility is put on the adjacent property owner to respond to a letter with concerns, rather than the VHR owner needing a notarized document. Quinn would like to push the deadline to avoid legal costs and have the opportunity to discuss the issues. Hermacinski does not feel there is any strong argument for extending the deadline. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bill Jameson does not support the extension, feeling that the issues will not be simply resolved. Bill Moser feels this will open the door to the same issues and arguments as before. He stated that these homes are not residences and it is within the City’s purview to regulate them. He does not support grandfathering and supports the VHR fees going toward enforcing the ordinance. Jim Funk stated that he supports the extension because he has been too busy to comply with the ordinance. Al Choy feels that it is not “riff raff” renting these homes. He feels that something can be added to the rental agreements that speak to respecting the neighborhood or the renters can be fined. Leeson stated that the access agreement can be tweaked and the site plan issue has already been addressed. He stated that if a “destination club” meets the definition of a VHR, it needs a license. He noted that the City now has a Code Enforcement Officer mostly dedicated to enforcing the VHR ordinance. He noted that if Council decides to extend the deadline it will require an ordinance, which will not happen before the expiration date. Hermacinski supports “tweaking” the ordinance, but feels that no matter what the deadline is, there will always be issues and legal challenge. She is not in support of extending the deadline, supports future tweaking of the ordinance because she feels that the current ordinance penalizes the people that are trying to comply. Bentley supports extending the deadline so that the people that are trying to comply will have a chance to do so with new “tweaked” ordinance. Myller supports extending the deadline to deal with the issues. Antonucci suggested extending for 90 days so that staff, the Alliance, and the opposition can get together. Ivancie feels that there is no compelling reason for an extension, but does feel that the ordinance needs to be revisited. MOTION: To extend the deadline to July 30, 2008 in order to address the access issue, as well as other issues; Myller/Quinn; APPROVED; Vote 4/3. Magill, Ivancie and Hermacinski opposed. Council Member Reports: Bentley: 1. Stated that she took part in the Yampa Valley Partners and Vision 2030 updates; noted that Fueling Thoughts will be in Craig on May 16-17; and Challenges to Our Water will be June 6, 2008. She asked that Council fund $200 to Vision 2030 for a U-tube clip. Magill: 1. Attended a CDOT Region 3 meeting on April 2, 2008. EXECUTIVE SESSION: To discuss the topics set forth below. The specific citation to the provision or provisions of C.R.S. §24-6-402, subsection (4) that authorize(s) the City Council to meet in an executive session are also set forth below. The stated topic identifies the particular matter to be discussed in as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the executive session is authorized. a. A discussion regarding: a parcel in the City limits. Triple Crown Contract positions to be discussed in future negotiations. This discussion is authorized under the following provisions: §26-4-402(4)(a), which permits an executive session to discuss “[t]he purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest;” §26-4-402(4)(b). “Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. Mere presence or participation of an attorney at an executive session of the local public body is not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of this subsection (4).” §26-4-402(4)(e), which permits an executive session for the purpose of “[d]etermining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators;” MOTION: To adjourn Regular Meeting No. 2008-11 at approximately 9:15pm to go into Executive Session for the reason set forth above; Ivancie/Bentley; APPROVED; Vote 7/0. MOTION: To come out of Executive Session and reconvene the Regular Meeting 2008-11 at approximately 10:05pm; Ivancie/Myller; APPROVED; Vote 7/0. Persons attending the Executive Session: Loui Antonucci, Cari Hermacinski, Meg Bentley, Steve Ivancie, Walter Magill, Scott Myller, Jon Quinn, Tony Lettunich, and Wendy DuBord. City Council President Antonucci noted for the record, that if any person who participated in the executive session believes that any substantial discussion of matters not included in the motion to go into the executive session occurred during the executive session, or that any improper action occurred during the executive session in violation of the Open Meetings Law, that person should state his/her concerns for the record. No concerns were indicated. C. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: To adjourn Regular Meeting 2008-11 at approximately 10:06pm; Ivancie/Myller; APPROVED; Vote 7/0. 8