Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/25/1973 MI NUTES January 25, 1973 The one hundred and ninetieth regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City Council was cal18d to order at, 7 40 P m. at 7390 West 38 Avenue by Mayor Albert E. Anderson. Aldermen attending were Dr. Paul Abramson, Jack Bramble, Joseph Donaldson, Robert Howard, Calvin Hulsey and Ray Pepe. Also attending were Mayor Albert Anderson, City Treasurer James Malone, City Clerk Louise Turner, City Attorney Maurice Fox, hearing applicants, staff personnel and interested citizens. Mavor Anderson presented letters addressed to French Officials to Laurie Eckhardt of 7400 West 34 Avenue who with other students of Jefferson High School will leave for France on February 1, 1973. Alderman Jack Bramble stated that he will resign from his position on the City Council on March 1, 1973. He said he is resigning for personal business reasons and that he is moving out of the City. He expressed regret in leaving the Council and said he had a recommendation for a successor for Council to consider if it chooses Attornev Fox said the incoming Alderman must meet statutory requirements and will serve for the remainder of Mr. Bramble's term and that notice of the vacancy should be made by legal publication to the residents of Ward III. Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that we give notice to residents of Ward III to submit applications to fill a vacancy which will exist on the Council as of March 1st, 1973." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-0. Alderman Bramble abstained. The listing of an appearance of Benjamin Loye on the Agenda was noted, and it was clarified that on the request of Mr. Loye he would appear on February 8, 1973 to make a request for a rehearing of Garrison Gardens Subdivision. WZ-72-37 Rezoninq Case came up for decision. Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that Case WZ-72-37 be approved for the following reasons 1. It does not lie in the Flood Plain. 2 It will not cause undue traffic congestion 3 The Planning Commission recommended approval, and 4 I t complies with the Land Use Plan." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-0. Alderman Pepe abstained on this and the following case Motion because he had not been present at the hearing WZ-72-39 Industrial Development Plan came up for decision. The land was already zoned industrial, so no change of zoning was involved. Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that Case WZ-72-39, an Industrial Plan for Development be approved for the following reasons 1. The Planning Commission recommended approval. 2. It is not in the Flood Plain. 3. No one appeared in opposition, and 4. It will be an improvement to the area." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 4-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay" and Alderman Pepe abstained. A Public Hearing was held on a 3.2% beer on premises license request for Golden Cue Development Corporation dba Hiphugger at 5900 West 44 Avenue. An impartial poll conducted for the City by Edward Sullivan indicated that, out of 109 people contacted, 47 favored the outlet, 48 opposed it, and 14 didn't sign. MINUTES - January 25, 1973 - Continued -2- Applicant was repre5ented by Dwavne E. Reese an officer of the cor- por6tion who presented petitions which he and Robert Vandergriff who was also present had passed, which contained 694 signatures of those who either lived or worked in the one mile radius designated. Mr Vandergriff and one other person in favor were present. Thirteen people - three of whom spoke were present in opposition. A written police report submitted by Det. Ronald White indicated there were some questions as to the character of Lester and Rosalie Kirk who were the other officers of the corporation who reside in California. Complete proceedings were recorded by Court Reporter Harve Clements. Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that the application of a 3.2% beer on premises license in the name of Golden Cue Development Corp. dba Hiphugger be tabled for two weeks for a decision to be rendered at that time." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-0. Treasurer's Report was given by Treasurer James O. Malone. Report indicated that 104.4% of the anticipated revenue had been received and 98.1% of the appropriation had been expended, and that cash on hand as of this date was $483,322.50. Resolution No 209 pertaining to the reinvestment of funds into savings accounts was introduced and read. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Resolution No. 209 be passed." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. The continuation of Case WV-72-06 for the vacation of an alleyway was heard. Applicants in the case were George Henckel of 5645 West 27 Avenue, owner of Lots 13-17 and 43 and 44 of Prince's Resubdivision of Lakeside Subdivision, and Mrs. Maxine Parker of 5565 West 27 Avenue owner of property adjacent to that of Mr. Henckel but not identified by lot number. Applicants and other interested parties had signed and submitted a petition giving the following reasons for requesting a vacation of the alleyway 1. The alley is of no pertinent use. 2. Going east, one is unable to turn either south or north. 3 Neither the County nor the City of Wheat Ridge has maintained the alley so described 4. The alley has always been maintained by the residents from the time of existence - digging of ditches for irrigation, flood control, hauling in material and cutting of wheat. 5. It would be a public nuisance and people using the alley would invaribly hit the fence. 5. It would save the city taxpayers the cost of maintenance and repair. 7. It is also necessary for future construction. Mr Barr of the Planning Department in answer to questions, stated that the City Engineering Department felt the alleyway was needed for access to the rear of the properties, drainage, parking and services and should not be vacated. Also, that owners of all the parcels south of and downhill from the alley and owners of 20% of the property north of it were requesting its vacation. Mr. Henckel stated 1 Two registered letters had been sent to the Council. 2. The alleywav was formerly used for access for cle6ning the property. 3. Since June 1972, dirt has been stacked from the excavation so as to prohibit access. 4 He had at one point established that no permit had been issued for excavation. 5. He had at one point been flooded because a ditch had been blocked with excavation dirt. MINUTES - January 25, 1973 - Continued -3- 6. Formerly drainage was down 2B Avenue and down Depew. 7. No culverts had been put in and now water bottles up. B. Instead of getting answers from City Departments, he had been referred to other departments, and back 9. The alley had in his opinion not been an alley, but a 10 foot easement, it had never been maintained as public ROW. 10. If it were an alley, why was a builder allowed to cut off the access? 11. If it is a public alley, then the City should see that the dirt is removed from it and should maintain it 12. That Mr. Chambers, the builder of the 13 unit structure should be made to put in a retaining wall and restrict traffic to his own property 13. That vacating the land would allow Mr. Chambers enough land to make his buildings legal. 14 That if a variance had been made because of the alley, it was incorrect. 15. That vacating the strip would alleviate the problems. In answer to a question from Alderman Pepe, Mr. Henckel stated if the alleyway were vacated, he would build on his lots which backed up to it. Discussion between City Attornev Maurice Fox and Council indicated the dirt should be removed and that Mr. Chambers, unless he had been given authorization to put the dirt on city property, should remove it. If, however, he had been given this authority bV city personnel, the Public Works Department would remove the dirt and bring the alley down to grade. Jack Prose, Building Inspector said the excavation had been begun without a permit, and that the present permit is for 13 units and a recreation room, and that the Department will check to see if additional units are being constructed and whether or not there is sufficient ground. Mavor Anderson in answer to questions from Mr. Henckel and Mrs. Parker clarified that a public alley can probably be used for access and parking, unless it is posted with a no parking sign and that he would check on it. Ordinance No. 124 vacating the alleyway was introduced by Alderman Hulsey and read. Alderman Howard suggested that the matter be tabled because of information needed from the staff. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Ordinance No. 124 calling for the vacation of an alleyway be adopted on first reading and be ordered pub- lished and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 5-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay." Ordinance No. 125 correcting an error in a legal description in Ordinance No. 120 was introduced by Alderman Abramson and read. Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that Ordinance No. 125 be adopted on first reading and be published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donladson and passed 5-0. Ordinance No. 125 was introduced by Alderman Donaldson and read. Alderman Abramson questioned the wording "to a substantial degree" and asked what portion of the Flood Plain Ordinance this was being added into and if it might not bring up a problem that had arisen before because of terminology acceptable to lawyers that is not acceptable to engineers. Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that Ordinance No. 126 be passed on first reading and be published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 5-0 MINUTES - JANUARY 25, 1973 - Continued -4- Resolution No. 210 setting up a Citizen's Task Force was introduced by Mayor Anderson and read. Motion bV Alderman Abramson "I move its adoption." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey. Mayor Anderson said it would be valuable to have a Task Force to advise the City. Alderman Abramson agreed. Alderman HulseV agreed and said the staff assistant would be there to help the committee. Alderman Pepe stated he felt the Committee should be allowed to choose its own Chairman rather than having one appointed by the City. Also, that he was opposed to designating a new position, and in fact to the setting up of an additional department which would be permanent. In response to Alderman Abramson's comment that it would end August 31, 1973 Mayor Anderson clarified that the task force would complete its work on August 31, 1973, but that the Staff Assistant job would continue and he would be given other tasks. Alderman Howard indicated that he was opposed to spending $25,000.00 to find out what the people wanted and asked if there were not an existing staff person who was capable of assisting a Citizen's Task Force rather than creating a new staff assistant position according to Section 5. of the Resolution. Citizen Mrs. Pete Scoma of 2859 Gray Street commented that she was a member of a county citizenls committee which had just completed an "accountability" study and had covered the entire county in a budget of $500 DO. Also, that a committee might need information from all departments instead of just one person. Alderman Abramson asked if the objections would be eliminated if Section 5 calling for the Staff Assistant and funding ~reomitted Alderman Donaldson replied "yes" and Alderman Pepe said he would like to study it further. Alderman Hulsey said eliminating Section 5. would do away with the Resolution, and that the Resolution had been recommended by the staff. Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move to amend the Motion to adopt by amending No.5 by deleting the word 'assistant' and putting in the words 'member or members' and by deleting the word 'administer' and putting in the words 'work with.'" Motion died for lack of a second. Question was called on the Motion to approve Resolution No. 210 and the vote tied 3-3. Aldermen Howard, Pepe and Donaldson voted "nay." Mayor Anderson said he would not approve it when the Council was divided and voted "nay" to defeat the Motion. He said it was important and something acceptable would be worked out. City Attorney Fox clarified that a 3/4 vote was needed to pass the Motion. A Motion by Alderman Abramson to adopt Resolution No. 210 minus Section S. was ruled out of order. Purchase of a Park Building was discussed. City Attornev Fox statEd the low bidder had submitted a second, somewhat higher figure saying he had made a mistake the first time. His second bid was still lower than the next lowest bid. Also, that a ten week delay would result if the bid were accepted from the second lowest bidder Alternatives for Council choice according to Mr. Fox were 1. Informing the low bidder he was expected to honor his original bid of $7,791.00 in X number of days or it would be considered breach of contract. 2. Awarding contract of second low bidder at $9753.00. 3 Accepting renegotiated price from first bidder of $9,521 00 which was still lower than the second bidders price, and included a floor which the other did not. 4 Going out for bids again which would cause additional delay MINUTES - January 25, 1973 - Continued -5- Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move we use the low bidder for the difference of what he bid and what will pay to have it done." City Attornev Fox stated this might not be to the advantage of the City and the Motion was not accepted. Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move the matter be reopened for bidding." Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble. Walter Grande, Purchasing Agent said the building had been bid in 1972 to take aduantage of steel prices before the increase. Alderman Hulsey stated he wruld vote "nav" Motion was defeated 4-2. Aldermen Hulsey, Pepe, Donaldson, and Howard voted "nay." Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that the second bidder, Interstate Builders be given the contract." It was clarified the bid was $9,763.00 and did not include the floor. Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard. Alderman Abramson was defeated 4-2. voted "nay." stated the City would pay more and get less. Motion Aldermen Abramson, Bramble, Donaldson and Hulsey Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move we accept the renegotiated bid of $9,521.00 including the floor from Christiansen and Company." Motion was seconded by Alderman Abramson and tied 3-3. Aldermen Howard, Bramble and Pepe voted "nay", Mayor Anderson voted "aye" to break the tie and pass the Motion. However, City Attorney Fox stated it did not pass by the proper three-fourths majority. A request for Wheat Ridge to sand some of the streets in Mountain View was considered. Mayor Anderson stated 44 Avenue was not included for maintenance and that maintenance on other streets would be limited to an occasional chuckhole. There would be no sweeping. The work would be done on an overtime basis at "highway rental rates" set out in the Highway workbook. The City of Wheat Ridge could refuse service at any time it is unable to provide it, and either party could cancel the contract at any time. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move we approve the agreement with Mountain View." Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 6-0. In answer to a question from Alderman Howard, Public Works Director Glenn Taylor explained status of the signal at 47 Avenue and Harlan. He said he is waiting for the weather to break in order to install the signal posts. In answer to questions from Alderman Howard regarding the LEAA Grant for the Police Department, Mayor Anderson stated that money had been received and approval for a larger recording machine with twice the capacity had been received. Meeting was adjourned at 11 45 p.m. .~.I :.....-c L _ /___<::(_ Louise F. Turner City Clerk / -.0. '_ -.... ,......',