Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.pz.min.11.03.2009COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2009 Commissioners Present: Jay Murphy, Acting Chairman Jacklohnson Mirte Mallory Michael Augello John Howard I. CALL TO ORDER: II. COMMENTS: A. COMMISSIONERS: COURTHOUSE CONFERENCE ROOM Staff Present: Mike Kraemer Lance Clarke Bonnie Waechtler Cindy Houben (for solar item) Ailing Chairman Murphy called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 5:00 P.M. None B. PLANNING STAFF: Mr. Clarke informed the Commissioners about the status of the Land Use Code Amendments concerning setting up a Special Review process for Snow Dumps and the miscellaneous group of amendments that affect four or five sections of the Land Use Code. The Board of County Commissioners approved both as written. Also, there is to be another joint meeting on the AABC with the City Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, November 10, 2009. C. PUBLIC: None III. MINUTES: June 16, 2009 P&Z Meeting September 15, 2009 P&Z Special Meeting Chairman Murphy moved that they approve the Planning and Zoning minutes. The question was called and motion passed 5 to 0. IV. NEW BUSINESS: • ASPEN SCHOOL DISTRICT-WEST RANCH 1 0-I STAFF PERSON: MIKE KRAEMER - Applicant: Aspen School District - Applicant's Representatives: Julie Ann Woods, Diana Sirko, Gilbert Sanchez `, - Summary of Request: Pursuant to C:R.S. 22 32-124 the Applicant is requesting "review and comment' by the Planning and zoning Commission forconstruction ofcarports and other minor improvements atthe West. Ranch School District property. ~ Mr. Kraemer proceeded with his presentation as outlined in his memorandum to the Commissioners. For clarification, CommissionerAugello asked about the rock fall report done by HP and if it had been written before any building was proposed. Ms. Woods stated that the report was .originally done to includethe future: proposedbuildingsand the carports; clarifying that only the' carports are under corisideration atthis time. Ms. Woods addressed the Commissioners with a short presentation. One thing that staff did not mention was that theSchool District would be adding six short term parking spaces to the front area of the property,. in response the needs of current tenants: Gilbert Sanchez the architect with Studio B, explained the constraints that the property has and where everything would beJocated, and how this proposal gave them the opportunity to mitigate the rock fall problem. Diana Sirko said a few words about improving the safety around the rock falthazard and. making the employee housing appealing to help keep current employees. Mrs Clarke brought up that the statute requires the School District to consult with the Colorado ; - Geologicaf Survey prior to construction, and asked if the School District had heard from Karen Berry: Ms. Woods said she had not heard from: the Colorado Geological Survey and had followed up with a phone call and ari'email, but still had not received any comments. Chairman Murphy gpened the meeting to public comment. Linda Luke with theWoody Creek Caucus asked about the additional possible units and when or ifthey will 6e building them anytime soon. Also asked if these units were only rented to'school district employees or when they are vacant does the school rent them to other Aspen employees. Ms. Sirko responded that, yes, the units have been occasionally rented short term. to other'qualified employees when there is not a school district employee to fill a uhit: They are deed restricted as a category 4 and must go through the housing office. Mike Owsley, Woody Creek resident and a Pitkin County Board of County Commissioner, said that the Commissioners have not conceded that the School District has the right to`proceedwith'- 2 building without going through the Land Use Code process, and this issue has not been resolved Owsley stated that he did not think housing cars is a priority, and that the County would not allow development in a rock fall hazard area. Chairman Murphy closed the meeting to the public, seeing no other public that desired to speak. Commissioner Johnson asked if the County is planning on addressing the issue of the School District having to comply with the Land Use Code. Clarke answered that that had not been determined, but regardless, the state statutes require that the School Board come before the Planning and Zoning Board in this process and for "review and comment". Commissioner Howard said he would like to see full compliance with the code and that the school district should try to find a better place for the carports, but, since there is already activity in this area that it is not going away, the School District should do as much mitigation as possible. Commissioner Augello said he felt that the activity is going to stay and that the school really needs tp do as much as possible to make this area safe. He said the back wall of the carports should be concrete. Chairman Murphy said he felt the rock fall area does need to be addressed, and the intensity of use is not appropriate. Commissioner Johnson also felt that the intensity of use is not appropriate, but felt that the issue of the school district not having to comply with the code needs to be addressed. Commissioner Mallory questioned using bond approved funds to build the garages but urged the school to look more at mitigation for safety reasons. Mallory asked if trail user parking could be provided on site. Mr. Clarke reminded the Commissioners that by state statute, if they desire, they can request that the school board hold a special public hearing on the project. Commissioners agreed they would not require a public hearing. • LENADO WINTER PARKING "LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW' STAFF PERSON: LANCE CLARKE - Applicant: Pitkin County Public Works - Applicant's RepreserKatives: Brian Pettet, Director of Public Works - Summary of Request: Pitkin County Public Works has slabmitted a request for a "location and extent" review under Colorado Revised Statutes 30-28-110 (d) for a proposed "change of use" of a portion of Woody Creek Road in Lenado to allow daily winter snowmobile user parking. 3 >Mr. Clarke: Introduced Brian Pettet, the Public Works Director, who will be presenting the application. Mr: Clarke .explained .that this application is another state statute issue that is not a Land Use Code issue pease. The Commissioners have not dealt with his typeof requesf before. This is a "location and extent review" regarding a.public project. Traditionally, the way hat Pitkin County has dealt with the use of its roads and improvementsthereto, has been through the BOCC andt4e adoption of the "Asset Management Plan", which is adopted and periodically updated by the Board of County Commissioners. Clarke continued, there is a provision in state statutes, 30-28 11Q Regional Planning , Commission. Approval, that states---when any road, park or other public way, ground or space, or public.building orstructure orpublic utility; shall be constructed or authorized in an'' unincorporated territory of"the County there first has to 6e an approval b'y the County br Regional Planning Commission. This is something that we have not traditionally been doing:; But this particular adjustment that is being proposed to the upper Woody Creek Road in'Lenado is something that seems to fall directly under the statute.. The County Attorney recommended that it go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for app~oval'or disapproval. or approval with conditions prior to the Board of County Commissioners making a final decision on the issue. The particular'provision of that state statute that seems relevant is thatthe accelptance, widening, removal, extension, relocation, narrowing; vacation, abandonment, change of use, or-sale or lease of, or acquisition of any land, for anyroad, park or public way,: ground, place, property; or structure shall be subject to similar submission and approval. This.:proposed'regulated parking was thought to be a change of use to the Woody Creek Road, and that therefore the Planning and Zoning Commission should review it and make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. `The waythe state statute reads is that the final decision falls within the province of the Board of County Commissioners and if the Planning-Commission were to disapprove it the disapproval, can be overruled by the Board of County Commissioners. Clarke added, this probably willbe a procedure that we undertake more and more often with public projects in Pitkin County:'With that,-Brian made his presentation." Mr. Pettet: I assume you have read the memo... This is one step in a serous of steps that has been undertaken forthe last several'months. Most recently it weritto the Woody Creek Caucus; I thinkThursday, where they considered this signing plan. That's really what it is, it's a change in the use of the road, and that's why you're reviewing it, but it's basically just putting signs up on ` .the road to change use. Back in April the Woody Creek Caucus talked to the Board of County • Commissioners. It really. stemmedfrom a quality of life use with regards tosnowmobile use in the Lenado area and concerns for safety on the road The Board of County Commissioners" directed staff to form a taskforce to come up with a series of alternatives to` address the parking .problem forthe upper Woody Creek Road. The task force came u'p with about nine alternatives: We vetted those with the. Forest Service and got it down to really three options. --(Pettet presented options)--Then the recommendation for the staff from the Board of County 4 Commissioners was to complete the signing plan down on the County road down below the bridge in an area that the County currently plows. Mr. Pettet continued, the Hannon Creek area kind of fell off the map, because it melts off quickly in the spring time, the topography really limits what snowmobiles can do there. It would be challenging for snowmobiles to access Kobey Park, and parking is also an issue there. On the parking idea just down below the Forest Service Kiosk, the County would have to plow the road and get permission from the Forest Service. There is also some avalanche danger. The Forest Service would want to look at it, and the Forest Service was reluctant at that time to provide the County with permission to plow further into the Forest. There needs to be some sort of study completed by the Forest Service to allow that to happen. And then on top of that the County would undergo additional expense to plow up to the Kiosk. So from a staff recommendation we looked at really where people have been parking over the last several years, which is just down below the bridge. And we looked at some wide spots that were just natural wide spots where we could provide parking. (Pettet referred to the map)-There is a corner here that you would want no parking because of site, distance and visibility, and then you have a stretch of road where you have considerable sight distance and people could pass effectively and safely beyond people that are parkingalong the road. This would make this a one lane road. This would just be in the winter time, the signs would be removed in the spring and so this would return back to a two lane road. Remember this is pretty much a dead end at this point during the winter time. Howard Wagner does have a commercial snowmobile operation here and he would continue to operate out of the site. We looked at on an average forty feet would be the needed area for a parking spot by the time someone needs space to off load their snowmobiles, then also pull out, get back on the road, turn around and do theirthing. Forty feet was an average for a parking spot, for an average size pickup truck and a trailer, and so we dedicated four hundred and seventy five feet to provide twelve parking places on the road just down below the bridge. That was the recommendation from the Board; it comes back to you now. Afteryour recommendation it will go back to the Board of County Commissioners with the P&Z comments and then also comments from the Woody Creek Caucus as well. I will be glad to answer any questions that you have about this alternative or any of the others. This has really been a struggle for staff to find a solution here because there are diverse interests. I think the people of Lenado would like to see snowmobiles really go away. And then we have an interest with the snowmobilers wanting to access public land up in Kobey Park. So there is passion on both sides, diametrically opposed passions on either side of the issue. Chairman Murphy: Thanks, it is an important issue and at this point we need any comments from the public. Frank Peters: Just a point of order before I make any comments, my partner David Delano and I own 175 acres. This parking lot is right in the middle of it, and will this commission recognize both of us to speak or just one? Chairman Murphy: This is a public comment section; anyone here can speak. Peters: The first point-I will make is you experienced a Tittle bit of this ability to not go through the County planning process with the School District. The`state actually requires the County doing. projects to consult a hotly like you. And in fact their asset management. plan says that they will coordinate regionally including the planning commissioners, that's a good thing. We didn't get any official notice of this evening, and tonight Daniel and l went over to the Commissioners meeting room where we were told to be, and therewas an election commissioner there who threw us out, unceremoniously.. Wewere sent overto the Sister Cities meeting room,, and there was a meeting over there, and it wasn't you. Then we were sent to the third floor and it was the Board of Adjustments and then we were sent here. And we didn't get any courtesy notice, we found out about the location, or at least the day of the meeting second hand from the Woody Creek Caucus Yet we are property owners and the County is planning to basically builder parkingiot, it's notjust the parking lot by the way, the cars are all in a row so you can argue it's not a lof it's a strip:. But it is not just parking, it is parking that has been designed for rigs that are pulling snowmobile trailers. IYs meant to provide a stage. for ' people to unload those trailers, and then drive their snowmobiles along the road. It isnot parking like you would pull off the side of the road and get slurpies, iYs a staging area for snowmobiles. The County and we in Lenado, that would be Daniel and I that own 175 acres, and I can't really speak for the Lenado eix, who are a group ofsix homeowners who own another 250 acres up there. Together we owo pretty much the entire old town site of Lenado. The people speak to regularly are dead set against this parking solution, because it is not a solution: We complained for almost eighteen years about the impacts of snowmobiles in this area, and they ' have grown every year. We complained when the Vagneur outfit up there was unpermitted and it took the County five years to read tag them, the Western Adventures operation, and bring them in for a hearing. To make the point tonight that this is historic parking that's gone on forever is disingenuous. Because the reason this has gone on forever is because the County has not enforcedstate law that says you cannot park along the road. The Forest Service has passively encouraged this kind of parking. So it isn't like nobody knew there were complaints and problems with this, everybody knew and we have been talking abouf it for eighteen years. In'the course of owning our property,which began in about 1991, and there was a hiatus when we lost title to our properly for a couple of years and then we got it back, we have taken seven refrigerators to fhe dump,. cleaned up tires, burned lots of o~...demolished lots of old cabins that have fallen down. We did a hundred thousand cubic yard mine recondition here, that was permitted by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. We have renovated historic structures; there are two that we are working on now, the third that we are going to get. to working with Suzannah Reid. We didn't evict anyone hat was living on the property when wegot there. Not that l want to-paint us as white hat guys, but we have a development'right fdr a house up here that we have never applied#or a permit, but we could apply#or a permit tomorrow. Ahd personally I feel it is an inappropriate place for a house, but the development' right came with the land when we got it. With our 175 acres we never'applied for a subdivision up there, we could do that, none of those things have happened from our side'. From the ..County side we have had repeated'damage by County equipmenf and Brian, t have to give him. 6 credit, takes this seriously and he has been very responsive to us. The fact remains that this mine reclamation along the road has been damaged several times and has cost us.... (Change of tape.) Peters: We most recently repaired the mine reclamation about a month ago, from damage done last winter. Including a bunch of road base that got plowed into one of the settling ponds that is a critical part of the water treatment up there. I expect my Pitkin County to be the tree huggers who are going to preserve the environment and keep us scaled down and keep us sort of the way they were for the last fifty or a hundred years to keep things the same. I expect people like me to be the barbarious land owner who are going to go and ruin it. Our roles have been reversed here. And we think that this is almost the ultimate insult, we asked Pitkin County last April to come up with a solution. The solution to parking here and the fact that snowmobiles are a public nuisance and they smell bad and they are noisy, and they block the road. The solution is after considering eight other solutions is to institutionalize it right where it is, with all the traffic that comes with it and with the use of the road up above. I will let it go there because I think my partner has a few things to say. Daniel Delano: I can wait until others speak. Chairman Murphy: Other comments? Mark Bedell: I own a 42 acre parcel of land seven miles above the area where we park our snowmobiles; I have a cabin up there on top of Larkspur Mountain. We have been going up for twenty years to Larkspur Mountain and there is a small group of long time locals who have all lived here thirty, forty years. We are very responsible, and this has been the perfect place to park. It is on the county right of way, it is plowed by the county, and it is at the end of the road. These guys bought this land nine years ago, they do not live on the land, by the way, and this is above where Dan lives by about a mile. And it has worked very well; we are only talking twelve snowmobiles for thousands of acres of land, that the Forest Service deems the best place for snowmobiles in Pitkin County. Ben Dodge from the Tenth Mountain says it's a perfect example of mixed use of the national forest. Lenado is a great little hamlet, but they chose to live at the mouth of the national forest and we should not be steam rolled by these guys just because they do not want to see a few snowmobiles up there. We are talking twelve snowmobiles, and normally on a week day there is one or two, and that is a busy weekend for twelve. This use has been in existence for at least twenty years and I don't see any reason it should not still exist. There is nowhere else to park, if the Forest Service were to build a parking lot we would move up to the National Forest, but there is no place to park. Chairman Murphy: Other comments? Carl Segal: I have been up here probably twenty two years. This whole thing is kind of like a "not in myback yard" deal, but they have also turned it into a road hazard situation. I went there sixty-four times last year, I have never seen anyone get hurt, killed or anything on the road. The 7 parking situationhas'always worked out. They°act like we have SOO cars up there. That parking lot has been overfilled once or twice per season, normally there are: about four or five cars up there: We try to respecfthe terrain and we would like access to our property up there, it is our national forest, we want to be able to ride and use it, and all of a sudden we'got problems. Chairman Murphy: Ok, no furtherpublic comment, oh, we do have more public comments. Gary Kelly: I have been skiing at Lenado on snowmobiles with these,guys for over twentyyears as-well. We are: a bunch of local powder hounds, and we are not'hoodlums~tearing up property or the forest. if you are not familiar with this parkingiofiit is aboufa mile above the town of - Lenado. We unload oursleds, we start them up, and we leave, we don't ride around-and raise hell'around the town of Lenado, we'are not a nuisance. 'I don't think theycan really hear us that much, when we`start our machines and we leave and we:go powder skiing and it is a national forest. The Forest Service supports-this parking, the County supports it. I really don't get why Frank and Mike'and Danny don't support it, they bought that land knowing snowmobilers use that property every winter, It is notsomething that is a new use and I really disagree that there is a problem,: because like these guys said, I have never seen an issue parking'in Lenado,: in wenty years of using it. It is a portal to the National Forest, and I want access to it, it is my National forest as well I thinkif is very unfair; the complaints being made, like these guys already said on a normal day, there are one or two sleds maybe, oH: he weekend. I agree with Carl, who has been up there on the weekend sixty four times, the guy should-know. And maybe. the-lot's full once or twice a season; but there is plentybfroom up'there if the County plows it. I - - think youridea of having one way road is great because there is room to pass;`park sleds, toturn around and make a turn-and head back dowhthe hill. It works rezlly well, everybody kriows howto do it; and everybody that goes up there knows how to park m Lenado. I have never seen an accident; f have neverseen an issue:' Howard Vagneurprovides,a great service for our tourists, giving them the option and-opportunity to see the beautiful area of Kobey Park: I can't. tell. you howmany touristsi have sent to Howard, and th"ey always rave abouEthe experience_ If you have not been to Kobey Park,you shouldgo up there, whether you go ori'snowmobiles orl have cross country skied'myselftoo: Our main access for Kobey Park is for powder skiing, we got ran out of Aspen Mountain in the 70's, and that is why we moved to Lenado, and we have "been there since, and we do not want our access going away, 1 want to be able to take my six and four year old powder skiirig: And we do it-in a responsible way,`5ve're young powder hounds.> We'are not hoodlums up there ripping up the forest; we are goodstewards ofthe forest frankly. Thank you`for your time. Chairman Murphy: and Dan? Daniel Delano: Frank and I own three parcels in upper Lenado, Lown property also below. We have a 35 acre parcel that crosses the creek, so it is in this area, so if is bisected in two places where there isan old easement to the countydating back to 1954.".That easement stated that. it should be a public highway over andacross-this parcel The national forest; the White' River forest is2.3 million acres we own 175 acres of hree parcels here,-this is not a' "my backyard" 8 issue. We are not talking about access to the forest we welcome users of the forest. The problem is the use of the middle of our property; this is the length of two football fields. It is notjust parking, it is a staging area for snowmobiles, we are the toilet used by people, who use this area, and there are many more issues than parking here. It is also a question of the County not putting the cart before the horse, because as you see on this map in green, as Brian would confirm, this is a County road in green across our property dating back to 1954. The County requires special review of use of a County road by snowmobilers. That has never happened. We have a right to rely on the County enforcing its own regulations, both for the commercial users and for those who use this County road way with a snowmobile both below and above the bridge and that is not what has happened here. The County needs to go through its own process. That is not covered by the state statute, the County needs to apply its own special review regulations to this use. Linda Luke (WCC): Purpose here is a dual use both as a resident and a person who drove that road every day for a year and was ditched more than half a dozen times by snowmobile equipment that was too wide for the road. People carry chains, who drive that road every day, so that their neighbors can pull them out. It is a safety issue, the road is not wide enough, and someone is going to die. That is what concerns me; no one is really addressing the way to get to the forest service that is not safe. I don't think that people want to shut people out from being up there; they just want people to be safe that want to go up there and use the forest. And I don't think that it has been studied, and 1 don't think that it is the time to go build a parking lot, because I know and 1 think everyone knows that if you build a parking lot it is going to be full and people are still going to park all along the road. Because they have been doing it for years and they have never gotten ticketed. I have a letter also that was put together by the Caucus that express more than what has been expressed in the room. I can read it to everyone, I can give you copies. Chairman Murphy: ff you would like to submit it for the record, we can have it submitted. Luke: But what I am saying is to build this parking lot now is absolutely the wrong time, you need to study what is going on up there. I would love it if you would get in your car, because commissioners have done this in the past, get in your car on a snowy day and drive that road between 8:30 and 10 o'clock in the morning and try passing those huge trailers going up there. You will understand why we need to address the issue. I don't want anyone to die, I don't want my neighbors to die, I don't want our guests to die, I don't want our skiers to die, I don't want our snowmobilers to die, I just want to keep it safe. 1 think we need to take the time, and we owe this community that, to take the time and do it right. Chairman Murphy: Thank you, I'll bring it up to the table. Ok, commissioners do you have any questions for the applicant or staff. Commissioner Howard: I have a question regarding the accidents on that road. CSP numbers... there were twelve of twenty accidents in winter dr'Ning conditions. We are going to say those twelve happened in snowmobile season, how many ofthe twelve'involved sriowmobilers; eitherbecause somebody had to ditch their car to get out of the Way or yov have a~snowmobile trailer orrthose? Peters: The problems with those figures that date back four years in the first place the records are pot up to date. We know for instance the winter before last a Forest Service uehicle was in an accident with a snowmobile vehicle, and it is not thatsome of these accidents have serious in terms of injury. ,But they essentially close the road, when the snowmobile trailer goes off into. the ditch or sideways it closes thaYroad. I have had to wait up to an hour to get home, coming home late in the day and the road is essentially closed. Pettet: The answer to the question is they would have specified if there was a trailer being pulled. And here it says fourteen of the accidents were single car, six involved two cars, infhe data it would say trailer.involved. ~ Howard: None of the reported accidents involved trailers? Pettet: That is correct, that is actually right, none of the reported accidents: Pettet: That is a good point Daniel, the CSP is in the process of converting,theirdsta into a digital format and this is where they have gotten too, they have only gotten to 2005. It would have been much more work for them to go by hand and get this information to date. Luke: I neverreported anytime I got pulled up'out of a ditch. Chairman Murphy: Nas everyone here been pulled up out of a ditchsince hey have lived here? knows have: .Howard: Linda is this Ann's letter#hatwe have a copy of? Luke:. No, I have a letter, thaYs not signed by me, butl did submit'one...inaudible. ,..as a :representative. ofthe caucus.;.inaudible...executive committee after numerous lettersand ' diswssions and trying to isten to everyone. Because everyone is passionate about thsand my .biggest passion is safety, 4 do notthink thatanyone up there wants to close anything off to anyone. We just want people to be safe: Commissioner IVlallory: That is one of my questions for Brian, AnmOwsley's letter suggests that- the Caucus has not been fully included in the process, and you mentioned you met with hem last Thursday. Can you describe what the Caucus involvement has been to date? Mr. Clarke: What the Caucus had is everything that you have in your packet: Brian said he was not at their meeting Pettet: And prior to thafthere was a meeting with the Caucus andahe Board of County Commissioner vahere staff was recommended to,build a task force. The task force was formed and there were recommendations, actually alternatives, that were developed by the task force. 10 Those were presented to the Caucus back in June or July. The Caucus reviewed that and staff brought recommendations back to the BOCC. The BOCC gave staff the direction to move forward with this plan; the Caucus was represented there as well. The next step was to go back to the Caucus, we did, and we arrived here, and that was the process. Mallory: I guess I am confused, because that is what I had read in the memo as well, and then in this letter it was suggested that it wasn't as articulately presented as it might seem or as clearly presented. And then hearing that Frank and Dan didn't really know that today's meeting... I am just wondering what the noticing procedures have been. How included they have been ever? Clarke: I can't speak to the public process and the task force process that Brian is working on, that is what he was just trying to explain to you. Regardless of the number of meetings, some Caucus members feel it is insufficient. And the letter that Linda just handed out, that is signed by Linda as a member of the executive committee, representing that "the Woody Creek Caucus feels that you should deny this parking plan due to its findings are based on an incomplete process. We ask that you deny it because Pitkin County is choosing to opt out of its own special review process. We ask that you deny because it is our hope that a new task force will be created. One with a balanced membership that can meet on a regular basis." So, apparently the Caucus clearly feels that whatever the process was undertaken, from their prospective, it was not sufficient. Commissioner Johnson: This Kobey Park access, did the task force meet just once on July the 21~` for two hours? Pettet: That is correct. Johnson: I'm done with this, because I think this is really important and I think it speaks to the rural character up there and I understand that you have been up there for a long time. I think your needs need to be accommodated, but from a process stand point it seems to me that we have way to little information here and I don't quite understand having the Woody Creek Caucus at all if they can't be involved to a degree in which they cannot say the things they have said have gone on or not gone on. Chairman Murphy: I have lived in Thomasville, I have lived on the backside of Aspen Mountain, and I drive up to Lenado in the winter time and in the summer time. I remember what it is like to live on those tough roads. What is the county doing right now to address all those areas where we have intense use on these roads? One of the areas is Little Annie's, Midnight Mine Road, and how many public access points for snowmobilers do we have? Pettet: Many, and we have this problem on all of the access points. Chairman Murphy: We have got them on all of them; it is a County wide issue. My recommendation is that the County has got to get behind this. They just seem to be all that 11 way.' Now Ldon't want to say cross purposesbut itseems theCounty needs o step in.ahd take a,lead for the public, that is my initial comment Commissioner Howard:1f we don't make a recommendation and we say we are done with this for the night because we just don't have enough information, what is going to happen this 'winter? Clarke: I can answer part ofthat and Brian can answerpart ofthat end part is unknown because it will be a BOCC decision; The statute says that the failure of the Commission#o act within 30 days after the date of official submission shall be deemed approval, unless a longer period is granted by the submitting.board, body or official: In talking with the County Attorney today we would consider oday to $e the official submission. So you have to act within thirty days or it's deemed approved. Or, Public Works asthe applicanbcould say we'If take more time, we4,ll give you sixty days, we'll give you ninety days,-we'16re-review this. Or you could approve it or deny it Either way it willgo to.the BOCC, and they will decidewhether or not something, if anything is going to be dyne this year. Mallory: I think that the fact that we are discussing such, a public access at this point in the season with snow on the ground, 1 think that i#poses a lot of challenges especially in the precedent that is set in terms as how this process is undertaken, and I think it would behoove all of Us, and it would behoove kind of the protection of ourpubli~c lands and foremost the access to public land, but also the private propertythat is passed through to get to public lands, and the communities thatare passed through in getting to these access points, that it needs a thorough discussion. I was impressed with the minutes from the task force meeting, but it seemed thaE two hours to discuss the nine proposals didn't seem like enough'time, didn't seem dike enough time flush it out and get all the user groups to put in their input... twould like to see .this. application either becontinued or come back with more thorough input and also more weight out of all the opportunities and options and to have all of the user groups have the opportunity to speak their. concerns.: I think safety is a big issue upon this road and that there are not a iot of options, Lthink we all recognize the constriction of the space. So iYs going to take a lot of creative thinking to come to a conclusion that can be appreciated. by all. I think it would behoove us not to `move too quickly, not that nothing should be done this winter. That is the next question for all of us, what could be a'temporary solution to recognize there could be an accommodation being made in the spirit of compromise, and we recognize this valley is currently conflicted between the Use of publicdand, it is on the forefront of all of our mihds. The process can be a question of how can something be done this winter maybe as a triabperiod and 6epicked up his spring; more accurate data be collected and.scoping other opportunities. Howard: One ofthe things from asafety>issue of course would be what improvements get done to the rest of the road, but as Daniel or Frank pointed out if you construct this beautifulparking area.up there it increases the amount of vehicles that are up there: I know for sure if you improve the condition ofthat road substantially you are going to generate more trafficbecause people who would not go up there because it's a dangerous road;go, "oh gee, we got guardrails 12 everywhere, its paved, its chip and sealed", we're going to have even more traffic, which I am not sure we want to go that direction. I think we would be foolish just to delay this thing without taking some sort of action. On Mirte's point we go forward with this for just one winter so that we at least have some signs up there that say hey guys don't park in this area, it's going to be a one lane road. Respell some private property or whatever else has to be done so that at least we are moving forward. Maybe iYs nat a permanent solution but it gives us one more winter to go through the process and tolled more data. Augello: Brian, how much besides putting the signs up, how much road construction or widening would happen? Pettet: With this plan, none. The alternative, actually the recommendation came from staff to the BOCC, had some dirt work involved to widen the road and the BOCC rejected that alternative. So the answer to the question is no dirt work. Augello: If putting signs up for this season is an experiment and if we do get probably notjust enforcement, but there should be some enforcement...some of the dangerous stuff that we heard about tonight, you know selfishly taking up the whole road while you are loading and unloading, or parking so that someone does not have a safe way to pass you and then taking off for the day, and so there could be some enforcement of that, but also could be some observation of that, how effectively its used. Maybe the signs are ignored, maybe the signs are not in the best place, maybe with the signs iYs still a dangerous situation up there and it shouldn't be at all. I don't know, any way I'm just thinking that is just a better way for us to come up with a better solution, to think of this season as a bit of an experiment. But it won't work if at this time next year we are sitting here and we don't have any additional information. Howard: Brian, excuse me, but did you,just say the BOCC directed staff to come up with this plan for this year? Pettet: Yes, to follow the process and take this plan through the process back to the Caucus, to the P&Z, and then finally back to the BOCC. Mallory: But not as a permanent solution, but as a just this year solution? Pettet: Well, it was my understanding that everything is an experiment in Pitkin County. From what I heard from the Board was to continue the task force, and continue to look at this. We have a code enforcement officer that we can make this a priority of his to go up there and record some data. Find out if there is compliance with the signing plan, the problems that exist. Augello: So it would not be the sheriff that would go out there? Pettet: It could be both, whatever it takes. The sheriff has maybe other things to focus on. Johnson: lust to repeat, my main concern is process. I don't think we have sufficiently held a good, at least in my opinion, a good public process to come up with a good solution here. I'm 13 reluctant to vote for the signage plan, because'under staff comment it says that it is a proposed change in use of Woody Creek Road to allow parking. That seems to me different than a signage plan change on something that already allowsparking. Change in use to allow parking to' me in my thinking is radically different than ]ust a signage plan: 'I think that whatstould happen is the BOCC take it up<and actually set out a new or different, or in my opinion, better public process to #ollow, And if it has to be a countywide issueaboZt snowmobile parking, then perhaps that is what it is, and just let the status quo go. Commissioner Howard moved thatthey.recommended to theBoard of County Commissioners to accept the staff recommendation for the sienase clan on a temaorarv basis for this winter while undertakinemore inaut and study. Commissionerdohnsonwconded Chairman Murphy called'the question,:and motion failed 3- 2{Augella and Howard favoring; Johnson yMUrphy, Mallory opposing) Commissioner Mallory moved that they recommended to the Board of County Commissioners the plan be disaoaroved and there be furtheraublic input and study: Commissioner Johnson seconded: The vote was unanimous favoring the motion,¢-0. • STAFF INITIATED LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF:PERSON: MIKE KRAEMER- - Applicant: Pitkin County....,, - Applicant's Representatives: Mike Kraemer, Pitkin County Planner ' - - Summary of Request: solar panelsare considered development acid must conform to siting criteria in Chapter 7 in addition to use specific regulations in Chapter 4 ofithe Code. As written today, pursuant tosection 4-30-50 (H)($) the Codestates that free-" standing solarenergy collectors cannot exceedl0' in height. This Standard originated' with the adoption of the 2006 Land Use Code and was meant to address visual impacts. of collectors. The"solar community" las,expressed concerns over tkis standard because theystate that a 10' maximum height`could create a situation where snow will accumulate at the base of a panel and .potentially block solar access.'dt has alsobeen stated that irncases wherea olar collector has been mounted oma hacking system that moves with the sun throughout the day, the tracking system could be damaged if snow is blocking its ability to function.. To-date, if an'applicant desires to exceed the 30' height limit, a variance can berequested from the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Kraemer proceeded-with his presentation as outlined in hismemorandum to the COmmissionefs 14` Chairman Murphy opened the meeting to public comment. Andy Leetz, a solar contractor, said, in many cases 16' will not work in a lot of the higher • elevations and that eventually a higher height will need to be addressed. Doug Graybeal, architect, was just at a Board of Adjustment meeting that approved a 16' height limit. He stated that 16' should work in Pitkin County for almost all installations. Tim Lindholm, homeowner who just received approval from the BOA said 16' works for him. Mr. Clarke commented about there being a standard 20' height limit for any accessory structure in the County. There being no further public comment, Chairman Murphy closed the meeting to public comment and brought it back to the Commissioners. CommissionerJohnson agreed with the first staff recommendations, and that applicants would have to prove a need to go from 10' to 16' feet. Commissioner Augello would be comfortable with them being the same height as an accessory structure, but wondered why we would want to limit them at all. Commissioner Howard would like to see the limit at 10' with the ability to go to 16' with Comm. Dev. approval. Commissioner Mallory is comfortable with 16' at this point with more comprehensive solar legislation coming soon. Chairman Murphy moved that they recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the limit stay SO' with an ability for a special staff review to go to 16'. Johnson seconded. Motion failed 3-2. Johnson moved that the recommendation be to go to i6'. Mallory seconded. Motion passed 4-1, Howard opposing. V. MEETING ADJOURNED 15