Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.10.02DOCUMENT LAYOUT THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER Summary Sheet Resolution for the BOCC and /or P &Z Ordinance for the BOCC and /or P &Z Determination for the Hearing Officer Administrative Determination Staff Memo Application Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat(s) ki Parcel ID: 2643- 34 -2 -01 -851 Application Date: 1/12/10 Case No: BOA002 -11 Description: Airport Height Variance for a Camara Mast at the Pitkin County Airport Planner: Joanna Schaffner # Copies: Allocated Hours: Project Address: 233 AIRPORT RD, ASPEN, CO 81611 Property Owner: PITKIN COUNTY Address: 233 AIRPORT RD, GATE 7 ASPEN, CO 81611 Owner's REP: TIM MALLOY REP's Email: tgmalloy @sopris.net Referrals: Comments Due Date: % Over Hours: Owner Phone: Address: 0402 PARK DR REP's Phone: (970) 945 -0832 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Other Referrals: Meetings: 1st Meeting: Meeting Date: 01/05/2010 Review Body: boa Public Hearing? yes Notice Date: 12/27/2009 Meeting Notes: 2nd Meeting: 3rd Meeting: Approvals: BOCC Resolution #: P &Z Determination #: BOCC Ordinance #: HO Determination #: Admin Determination #: 2on ©Z_ zoj o Other Information: VR Approval Date: Plat Recorded Date: VR Expires Date: Plat (Bk, PG): Remarks: Application Type: ti.r � RESOLUTION OF THE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTING A HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR A CAMARA MAST AT THE PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT Resolution No. 02 -2010 WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Airport, owners of 233 East Airport Road, are requesting a 20 foot Height variance where 20 feet is the maximum height allowed for accessory structures, to erect a Co- Chair, Board of Adjustment camera mast; and WHEREAS, this parcel contains 550.66 acres and is located in the PUB zone district; and WHEREAS, the subject property is described more fully in Exhibit "A "; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 7- 10.30, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30- 28- 118(2) (C); and, WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented, the Board of Adjustment makes the following findings: 1. Proper notice procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property owners, has been shown by the applicant. 2. The required hardship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will not cause substantial detriment to the public welfare and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the zoning maps. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment that a 20 foot Height variance be granted for the camera mast, as shown on Exhibits B and C, because to grant this relief from the strict application of the Land Use Code will not cause a substantial detriment to the public good but would actually provide a benefit to all users of the airport. WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: January 6, 2010 ATTEST: / G Joanna S. Schaffner, �_, Date Atkin County Zoning Officer lie •Zo(O wste cLeod, Date Parcel ID#264334201851 000001 '� - 4 !� RECEPTION #: 566050, 01/1112010 at 11:46:18 AM, 1 OF 7, R $0.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO # 4FAi6 A PARCEL A PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT PROPERTY LYING WESTERLY OF HIGHWAY 82 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1 /2E1/2 OF SECTION 28, THE SWl /4 OF SECTION 27, THE NE1 /4NE1 /4 OF SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 8 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST AND IN SECTION 3 TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A STONE FOUND IN PLACE, THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NO 0 23'1 O"W ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 33 A DISTANCE OF 1343.36 FEET TO THE NORTH SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. # 15710 IN PLACE; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY S87 0 47'43 "W A DISTANCE OF 1334.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A 3 -1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE N01 0 04'05"W A DISTANCE OF 1337.21 FEET TO THE EAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 AND SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. 415710 IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 57'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 1346.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #15710 IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 57'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 1346.09 FEET TO THE EAST - CENTER SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 54'29 "W A DISTANCE OF 1345.58 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 54'29 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARy OF THE NEl /4NE1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 580.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY THE FOLLOWING THIRTY -SEVEN (37) COURSES ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY: 1. S42 0 44'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 51.34 FEET 2. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 523.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 0 18'00" A DISTANCE OF 212.68 FEET (CHORD BEARS S31 °05'02 "E 211.22 FEET) 3. S 19 °26'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 484.56 FEET 4. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1482.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26 0 48'25" A DISTANCE OF 693.62 FEET (CHORD BEARS S32 0 50'14 "E 687.31 FEET) 5. S32 0 32'37 "E A DISTANCE OF 124.19 FEET 000002 6. S21 0 16'39 "E A DISTANCE OF 216.82 FEET 7. S43 A DISTANCE OF 284.03 FEET 8. S59 °42' 14 "E A DISTANCE OF 144.19 FEET 9. S30 0 26'03 "E A DISTANCE OF 206.34 FEET 10. S37 0 19'48 "E A DISTANCE OF 162.90 FEET 11. S22 0 38'38 "E A DISTANCE OF 654.44 FEET 12. S27 0 02'07 "E A DISTANCE OF 311.26 FEET 13. S39 0 44'48 "E A DISTANCE OF 380.71 FEET 14. S29 0 08'10 "E A DISTANCE OF 140.10 FEET 15. S52 0 52'16 "E A DISTANCE OF 244.32 FEET 16. S52 0 52'13 "E A DISTANCE OF 429.03 FEET 17. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1822.36 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25 0 19'07" A DISTANCE OF 805.29 FEET (CHORD BEARS S40 0 12'42 "E 798.75 FEET) 18. S27 0 33'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 1780.08 FEET 19. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3732.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08 0 50'27" A DISTANCE OF 575.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S23 0 07'55 "E 575.32 FEET) 20. S 18 °42'42 "E A DISTANCE OF 1196.55 FEET 21. S31 0 07'57 "E A DISTANCE OF 155.94 FEET 22. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 42.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26 0 13'47" A DISTANCE OF 19.23 FEET (CHORD BEARS S87 0 59'31 "W 19.06 FEET) 23. S69 0 05'35 "W A DISTANCE OF 9.45 FEET 24. S29 °48'01 "E A DISTANCE OF 250.55 FEET 25. S49 1'29"B A DISTANCE OF 103.24 FEET 26. S31 0 10'17 "E A DISTANCE OF 1689.08 FEET 27. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 32898.75 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00 0 01'21" A DISTANCE OF 12.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S30 0 58'02 "E 12.89 FEET) 28. S 15 °15'18 "E A DISTANCE OF 315.91 FEET 29. S 19°49'51'E A DISTANCE OF 292.63 FEET 30. S07 0 35'33 "E A DISTANCE OF 212.79 FEET 31. SO4 0 35'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 97.46 FEET 32. S01 0 14'03 "W A DISTANCE OF 394.41 FEET 33. S08 0 41'56 "W A DISTANCE OF 264.78 FEET 34. S02 0 21'08 "E A DISTANCE OF 431.37 FEET 35. S03 0 18'45 "W A DISTANCE OF 481.87 FEET 36. S01 "W A DISTANCE OF 687.67 FEET 37, S03 0 50'58 "W A DISTANCE OF 106.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 211897 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N54° 19'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 568.54 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N67 0 55'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 50.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARYN75 °33'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 74.83 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N42 A DISTANCE OF 68.05 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197660 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE N29 0 42'06 "W A DISTANCE OF 160.23 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197660 N21 ° 27'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 114.67 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N31 "W A DISTANCE OF 235.58 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY NA ODI'57"W A DISTANCE OF 238.86 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N41 0 38'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 153.11 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197598 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S69 0 09'44 "W A DISTANCE OF 32.34 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598; THENCE N29° 10'20 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598 A DISTANCE OF 154.34 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N25 0 55'53 "W A DISTANCE OF 254.98 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N23 0 32'45 "W A DISTANCE OF 123.79 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N20 0 3627 "W A DISTANCE OF 125.21 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 169.52 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9'21'23"W A DISTANCE OF 127.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 102.13 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N21 "W A DISTANCE OF 53.59 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N24 °24'47 "W A DISTANCE OF 51.90 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 13'24 "W A DISTANCE OF 186.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 42'54 "W A DISTANCE OF 276.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 42'09 "W A DISTANCE OF 282.96 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N30 0 26'22 "W A DISTANCE OF 17.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SECTION 34; THENCE S89 °57'58 "W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 996.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE N00 0 07 1 52 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 1311.71 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE S86 "E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 137.57 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S58 0 04'36 "E A DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S57 0 44'41 "E A DISTANCE OF 140.77 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S48 0 12'58 "E A DISTANCE OF 44.49 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S42 1'20"E A DISTANCE OF 58.86 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL H -1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197537 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S 000004 OFFICE; THENCE N50 0 14'30 "E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL H -1 A DISTANCE OF 63.88 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF PARCEL 2 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE N55 0 13'01 "W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 A DISTANCE OF 205.30 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N55 1'28"W A DISTANCE OF 312.89 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S72 0'55"W A DISTANCE OF 175.75 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S61 0 51'43 "W A DISTANCE OF 70.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S89 °19'1 5 "W A DISTANCE OF 1105.31 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N84 0 26'04 "W A DISTANCE OF 124.55 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE N00 3'55"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 1388.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 597.303 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 0'&3v55 E%h ;6e 00 i 13 .EE Airport (Backmde of Rack) 24V Power Do.,,,iect S-Pply Switch 1 Minimum 1 UPS I ,nnect Power Fiber - Switch Panel Panel Highway BI. 0 CIO 0 10 Figure i - Section Drawing of Proposed Camera Tower n— V t Highway BI. 0 CIO 0 10 Figure i - Section Drawing of Proposed Camera Tower D Vi "S VAN F o p V +, t ti IT 1 0 7z t r y k t m e r •.. {�. Yr� Rw EA 1 I Z • ibit C dCQ� 3 _� '11m Shows =� P a f JO�sJu1 MINUTES Meeting of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment January 5, 2010 Members Present: Jamie Brewster - McLeod, Co -Chair Bob Throm Jim Rifkin Members Absent: Rick Head, Co -Chair Patrick McAllister Staff: Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Officer and acting secretary Brewster- McLeod opened the meeting at 5:30pm. CASELOAD: 16 -2008 John Olson Lot 2, R &O Subdivision AKA 1444 Lower River Road, Snowmass John Olson was present to request a 32 foot Collector Street Setback variance and an 82 foot Front Yard Setback variance where 50 feet and 100 feet respectively are required on this 24.88 acre parcel to permit three horse shelters. The existing, non - permitted structures are also partially located outside of the approved building envelope. The applicant presented the Affidavit of Posting. There were no members of the public present to comment on the request, and no objections were filed with the Zoning Office. Schaffner stated that the application has been re- noticed in the Aspen Times, through a mailing to neighbors, and with a sign posted on the site. Schaffner explained that this case has been left open since the fall of 2008, when the applicant first appeared before the Board for this same request. At that time, the Board was reluctant to approve a variance for a structure located outside of the approved building envelope. The applicant requested the Board table the application until the building envelope was amended. Mike Kraemer, Pitkin County planner was present to explain that the Planning Office did not wish to approve an envelope around structures that were in the setback without approval from the Board of Adjustment, but assured the Board that the sheds avoided all constrained areas and the envelope will be amended if a variance were granted. Throm commented that most of the lot was located within the floodplain, then moved to approve the request based on a topographic hardship. Rifkin seconded the motion and offered an amendment to the hardshi to include "not only unusual topographic .0 00`0 88 Q conditions but also other conditions or situations of the property whereby the strict application of the Land Use Code's setback regulations would result in a peculiar or practical hardship ". The vote was 3 -0, with all in favor. 02 -2010 Pitkin County Airport 233 East Airport Road, Aspen Tim Malloy, planning consultant, and Dave Ulane, Assistant Director of Aviation, were present to represent the Pitkin County Airport in a request for a 20 foot Height variance where a maximum height of 20 feet is allowed for accessory structures, to erect a camera mast. The Affidavit of Posting was submitted. There were no members of the public present to comment on this case. Malloy explained that the 2004 Masterplan (approved by the FAA) included a recommendation to replace the current air traffic control tower because "some of its characteristics are not conducive to the best possible situation for air traffic control." A new traffic control tower would have an expected height of 130 feet to 200 feet and a projected cost of 20 million dollars. (He pointed out the tower at the Eagle Airport is 148 feet tall.) The camera mast is an alternative to replacing the existing tower in the foreseeable future. Malloy presented site plans, modified photos, and illustrations of the proposed camera mast. The proposed closed circuit camera tower will be located at the south end of the runway. This mast will provide additional information and augmented visibility to the existing tower staff and improve airport safety. The pole will be approximately 37 -38 feet tall and the whip antennae brings the total height to 40 feet. The base will be less than 2 feet wide and the top will have a non - flashing warning beacon because of its close proximity to the runway. Rifkin asked about the location. Why so close to Highway 82 and not closer to Owl Creek Road? Malloy explained that it had to do with the manner in which aircraft taxi, tam and queue for take -off, all of which happens on the Highway 82 side of the runway system. Throm noted that this system is needed for safety. He asked why the cameras weren't being located on the existing tower. Malloy explained that there would be no advantage to having cameras located at the tower site since it was too far away for the camera optics. The proposed location helps tower staff to better "see" the other end of the runway. Brewster - McLeod noted that the mast was already approved by the BOCC. 0 ^ 19,! �' 1 !F� Throw made a motion to approve the height variance based on the fact that it is a necessary addition to the Pitkin County Airport in terms of FAA approvals to have commercial and private aircraft coming and going." Rifkin seconded the motion and added that "the alternative to this proposed tower is the existing tower would have to be either changed or added to and the detriment and the cost and inconvenience of doing that are outweighed by the advantage of approving this variance." The vote was taken and passed 3 -0, with all in favor. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 13 -2008 Sturz, Paul and Linda Parcel 6, Sopris Mountain Ranch Schaffner explained to the Board that the Land Use Code does not accommodate administrative approvals to amend Board of Adjustment decisions. However, it has been staff s policy to bring before the Board in an Administrative fashion, cases where the proposed structure or variance has been modified from the one originally reviewed by the Board. In cases where the modification is minor, staff informs the Board of the change without requiring a new application. If the Board finds that the change is minor and does not warrant a new hearing, staff will issue the permit. If the Board finds that certain conditions have changed, or that the proposed changes are significantly different from what was originally approved, they may direct staff to require a new application, including new public notice. Schaffner then reminded the Board that Parcel 6 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch subdivision received rear yard setback variances for a single - family residence and detached garage in 2008 due to topographical hardships. The subject site bisects West Sopris Creek Road with a meadow on the south side of the road and a hillside on the north side of the road. Due to scenic concerns, the county did not wish for the residence to be constructed on the meadow side of the road, and approved a building envelope on the north side of the road, with the provision that the development not break the skyline as viewed from the county road. The building envelop on this 52 acre parcel is pushed up against the rear lot line, which is shared with the BLM. The Sturz's have redesigned their house to connect the garage to the rear of the single family residence. The house itself has been pushed forward outside of the rear yard setback to accommodate the relocated garage. The revised setback request eliminates the variance for the detached garage. The only portion of the proposed house now within the setback is the attached garage. The hardship has not changed. Schaffner showed the Board the original site plan overlaid with the proposed structure, and highlighted the new encroachment into the setback. V The Board agreed that the total amount of encroachment into the setback is lessened with this new design. They unanimously agreed to approve the modification. NIINUTES: Throm made a motion to approve the minutes from the November 3, 2009 meeting. Rifkin seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 3 -0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00pm. Respectfully submitted, a Jamie Brewst - McLeod Date Co- Chair, Board of Adjustment 1 k. 1U PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Application Form REPRESENTATIVE E -MAIL MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL OWNER MAILING ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBJECT PARCEL PARCEL ID # Z4411'54L' 0 / 96 / 510/ Wo// ZONE DISTRICT f,Ublfi, (Pa LOT SIZE (To be completed by Zoning staff) Meeting Date: S � L Request: foot Front yard setback variance, where Case # 0' � U/ feet is required. foot Rear yard setback variance, where _ feet is required. foot — Side yard setback variance, where _ feet is required. foot _ Side yard setback variance, where feet is required. foot Height variance, where �_() is allowed. foot Arterial Highway setback variance, where 200 feet is required. foot Major Road setback variance, where 100 feet is required. foot Collector Street setback variance, where 50 feet is required. Comments: Application material was referred to: Zoning Officer r, � VCTrl u l� •O$3Z FAX y45- 0133 �")CO12 µ sardy Field Aspen/Pitkin County Airport December z, 2009 Joanna Schaffner, Senior Zoning Officer Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Joanna: 0233 East Airport Road Aspen, Colorado 816 1 1 970/920 -5384 FAX 970/920 -5378 By this letter, the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport hereby authorizes TG Malloy Consulting, LLC to represent us in matters related to the Board of Adjustment application to seek a height variance to allow the installation of a camera mast that will be part of the airport's air traffic control system. The proposed camera mast would be located on the east side of the Airport. This authorization includes the preparation and submission of the Board of Adjustment application and representation of this application before any applicable appointed and elected boards or official. Sincerely, 9 31- � -c James Elwood Aspen /Pitkin County Airport cc: Tim Malloy Dave Ulane P. Scott Cary J0t,G13 %%W *.. TGMALLOY CONSULTING, ELC LAND USE PLANNING • SITE DESIGN • NATURAL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS • PUBLIC PROCESS December 6, 2009 Pitkin County Board of Adjustment c/o Joanna Schaffner, Senior Zoning Officer Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Request for Height Variance for Air Traffic Control Closed Circuit Camera System Pole Dear Joanna and Members of the Board of Adjustment: The Aspen / Pitkin County Airport is seeking a variance from the height restriction for accessory structures in the PUB zone district for a closed circuit camera system to augment the existing air traffic control facilities at the Airport. Specifically, the Airport is seeking a variance to exceed, by 12 feet, the 28 -foot height limitation for accessory structures in the PUB zone district. The proposed facility, which includes a pole mounted with closed circuit cameras, a whip antenna and a red obstruction light (non - flashing), is proposed to be 40 feet tall. The proposed system has received the required land use approvals as indicated by the attached Administrative Decision #95 -2009 (Exhibit 1). The land use application was also considered by the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing held on October 19 1h of this year. A copy of a memo that was provided for the BOCC hearing is included with this application (see Exhibit 3). After opening the hearing for public comment, and hearing no comments from the public, the BOCC directed the Community Development Director to grant the administrative approval sought by the Airport. The administrative approval was granted with the finding that the 40-foot overall height of the facility is necessary to provide the optimum viewing of the runway and the potential runway extensions. However, the administrative approval also specifies that an application for a height variance be submitted to the Board of Adjustment. This application includes the following exhibits and supplemental information as required for an application to the Board of Adjustment: 1. A completed application form. One copy of this form was provided to the Community Development Department. z. A $648.00 fee. Payment of this fee was handled via an interdepartmental transfer. 3. Copy of relevant land use approval. See Exhibit i. Copies of the related land use application and a memo provided for the BOCC hearing have also been included as Exhibits 2 and 3. 402 PARK DRIVE - GLENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO • 81 601 (P)9709450832-(F)9709450833 -E -MAIL TGMALLOY @SOPRIS NET 9U O014 Board o f Adjustm Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport December 7, 2009 2 4. Letter describing why a variance is necessary. This letter addresses the required criteria for consideration of a variance as outlined in Section 2- 40- ito(b) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 5. If the applicant is NOT the property owner, provide a letter signed by the owner stating that he /she is aware of, and has no objections to, the variance request. A letter from Jim Elwood, Director of Aviation for the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport was provided to the Community Development Department with this application. 6. Current legal description of the property. The legal description for the parcel on which the proposed facility would be located is included as Exhibit A of the land use application (Exhibit 2 of this BOA application). The Airport is comprised of several parcels. The parcel upon which the proposed facility would be located is referred to as Parcel A in the attached legal description. 7. A survey. Topography must be shown if claiming a topographic hardship. At least one copy must be 24" x 32 ". Other copies may be reduced but must remain legible. Figures 2 and 3 in the land use application (Exhibit 2) are based on a combination of survey data, aerial photographs, and topography. While topography is not used as part of the argument for hardship in this case, the topography of the site played an important role in locating the proposed facility and screening some of its components from Highway 82. 8. A site plan showing: a) If requesting a setback variance for a structure: the entire structure, as it is to be located on the property, with specific and accurate dimensions to the property lines and right -of -ways. b) I requesting a variance for a driveway: the location of the driveway and associated regrading. Include a profile of the driveway. Figure2 in the attached land use application (Exhibit 2) is a site plan for the proposed facility. Figure i of this BOA application is a vicinity map that shows where the proposed facility would be located on the Airport property. Since this application does not include a request for a setback variance (the proposed facility is well outside the required too- setback from Highway 82) accurate dimensions to the property boundary have not been provided. 9. Proposed floor plan, where all room uses are identified in the structure requiring a variance. This may be reduced to 8.5" x il" size but must be legible. The proposed facility does not include enclosed buildings, therefore no floor plans have been provided. io. Building elevations of the structure requiring a variance. Figure i of the attached land use application (Exhibit 2) is a section drawing showing the components of the proposed facility. Figures 4, 5 and 6 of the attached land use application (Exhibit 2) are computer enhanced photographs showing how the proposed facility would look from various adjacent locations. ii. A vicinity /directional map, plus written directions so the property may be easily located. An 8 1/2" x W' hand drawn map is acceptable. Please indicate where the notification sign will be placed. Figure i of this BOA application is a vicinity map showing the location of the proposed facility on the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport. The facility would be located inside the Airport's security fencing. Close observation of the actual site would require an escort by an Airport 0,0'b' r' 402 PARK DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO • 81 601 /� 115 (P) 970 945 0832 • (F) 970 945 0833 -E -MAIL TGMALLOY @SOPRIS NET 1. ,.e Board of Adjustment Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport December 7, 2009 employee, which would need to be arranged in advance. Figure i also shows the location of the public hearing notification sign (at the main entrance to the Airport). 12. List of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site and their mailing addresses. This includes properties across the river, road, railroad, or any other physical divide, and also includes the Forest Service, BLM, Highway Department, Pitkin County, or any land owned by a public or private entity. See Exhibit 4. REVIEW CRITERIA Section 2 -40 -110 (b) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code defines the criteria for consideration of variances to the strict application of the provisions for the height and setback of structures. The applicable criteria from the code are quoted as follows: "The Board of Adjustment shall only approve a variance where, by reason of unusual narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specific piece of property at the time of the enactment of the regulation, or by reason of unusual topographic conditions or other situation or condition of such piece of property, the strict application of the height or Road and Yard setback regulations of this Land Use Code would result in peculiar practical difficulties to, or undue hardship upon, the owner of such property, and the granting of relief from the strict application of this Land Use Code will not cause substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Pitkin County Comprehensive Plan and this Land Use Code." Response: The applicable language in this case is "or other situation or condition of such piece of property." The "situation or condition" in the case of the Airport is their responsibility to provide the safest and most efficient airport facility to the public and comply with federal standards and regulations for locating and constructing air traffic control facilities. The practical difficulty arises from the Airport's inability to meet its responsibilities given conflicting federal and local regulations governing the height of the proposed closed circuit camera facility. The 2004 Airport Master Plan recognized that improved air traffic control facilities were needed at the Airport. BOCC Resolution 057 -2004, which granted approval for the current Airport Master Plan, identified relocation of the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) as one of the recommended improvements based on the information and findings provided by the Airport's consultants and the FAA. Since that time, solutions for improving air traffic control facilities at the Airport have been studied in detail. Various locations have been analyzed for a potential new air traffic control tower, but in each case the height and cost of the structure proved problematic. 402 PARK DRIVE - Ci LENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO' 81 601 (P) 970 945 0832 - (F) 970 945 0833 •E -MAIL TGMALLOV@SOPRIS NET �oolu .,. Board of Adjustment Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height aspen/Prtk1n County Airport December 7, 2009 In order to meet current FAA standards for air traffic visibility for the Aspen Airport, the required height of a full air traffic control tower ranges from 130 to zoo feet depending on the tower's location. By comparison, the air traffic control tower at the Eagle County Regional Airport is approximately 148 feet tall. Exhibit 3 of this application is a memo provided to the Board of County Commissioners for the public hearing conducted on October 19` This memo provides a brief discussion of various air traffic control tower alternatives, including graphic depictions of the three leading alternatives for replacing the existing air traffic control tower with a new tower. The cost of constructing a new air traffic control tower has been estimated at $15 to $20 million. It is believed that this cost would have to be borne by the local community. The cost, visual impacts and local regulatory complications associated with replacement of the existing air traffic control tower are, for all practical purposes, prohibitive. Given this situation, the Airport worked to find a more compatible solution for improving its air traffic control capabilities. The proposed closed - circuit camera facility represents a practical solution which eliminates the need for a new air traffic control tower. The camera facility location and height were chosen to provide the optimum viewing of the runway and the potential runway extensions, which are being evaluated through the Federal environmental assessment process. The proposed location and height provide the best horizontal and vertical angles to meet FAA requirements for air traffic control. The horizontal angle (position on the ground relative to the end of the runway) permits air traffic controllers in the control tower to discern individual aircraft and aircraft types. The vertical angle (height of the cameras) was determined by the FAA criteria governing the depth perception required to allow controllers to distinguish location and relative position of individual aircraft. The height of the proposed pole is the minimum necessary to meet FAA criteria for vertical angle in the proposed location. Several other locations were evaluated for the proposed camera facility but these locations either required a taller pole or they were not acceptable to the FAA. In an effort to minimize the height of the pole and still meet FAA requirements for vertical angle the proposed site takes advantage of a knoll near the south end of the existing runway (see Figures 1 and 2 in Exhibit 2). This location also offers the added advantage of screening the other equipment (see Figure 1 of the land use application — Exhibit 2) associated with the proposed facility from Highway 82. Granting the requested variance will advance the public good by enhancing the air traffic control capabilities at the Airport, thereby increasing the margin of safety not only for people utilizing the Airport, but for those who live and /or work in the surrounding area. In addition, the proposed 4o- foot -high pole would not be a unique item at the Airport. Light poles of this height can be found in other locations on the Airport grounds including the various parking areas and some of the aircraft ramp areas. 402 PARK DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO • 81 601 w r� S ' 17 (P) 970 945 0832 - (F) 970 945 0833 -E-MAIL TGMALLOV @SOPRIS NET lM Board of Adjustment Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height Aspen /G1tk1n County Airport December 7, 2009 SUMMARY 5 The information contained in this application addresses the requirements and applicable criteria for approval of the requested height variance. The height of the proposed air traffic control closed- circuit camera facility (40 feet) is the minimum necessary to comply with FAA criteria for air traffic control purposes. Denial of the requested variance would, for all practical purposes, eliminate the Airport's ability to improve its air traffic control facilities as recommended in the adopted Airport Master Plan, since the only available alternative (replacing the existing air traffic control tower) is financially prohibitive. This would create practical difficulties for the Airport to fulfill its responsibility to provide safe and efficient aircraft service to the public. In addition, replacement of the existing air traffic control tower with a new tower meeting FAA standards would require a height variance of much greater magnitude than is currently being circuit camera facility. Therefore, the proposed camera refit for the safety and welfare of the community. Given est that this application for a variance of 12 feet from the 28 3 itkin County Land Use Code be granted. Cc: Jim Elwood Dave Ulane Scott Cary Attachments 402 PARK DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO • 81 601 (P) 970 945 0832 • (F) 970 945 0833 -E-MAIL TGMALLOV@SOPRIS NET __ . r 'lllwO GRAPHIC. SCAIF }00 III 4'' " - - . Figure 1 - Vicinity Map Aspen /Pitkin County Airport Detember6,2009 Planning Consultant: Prepared for, Air Traffic Control Closed Circuit Camera System 402 Pa Drivesulting LlC 0 Ea Airport Road, SutAminlsVaUon Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81611 Board of Adjustment Height Variance Application 970 - 945-0832 ���J19 .., Board of Adjustment Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height I Aspen i[k,n County Airport December 7, 2009 Exhibit 11 Administrative Decision #95 -2009 N 000 ;20 %. 1110 ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2004 ASPEN / PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT MASTER PLAN AND GRANTING SCENIC VIEW PROTECTION APPROVAL FOR AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CLOSED CIRCUIT CAMERA SYSTEM Administrative Decision No. 95 -2009 RECITALS 1. The Aspen / Pitkin County Airport ( "Applicant ") has applied to the Community Development Director of Pitkin County, Colorado ( "Director ") to amend the 2004 Airport Master Plan and obtain scenic view protection approval for an air traffic control closed circuit camera system. 2. The property is located on Highway 82, west of Aspen and across from the Aspen Airport Business Center, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. The camera tower is located on the top of an existing knoll near the south end of the runway between the runway and the highway, and the associated equipment rack is located on the runway side of the knoll. 3. The BOCC approved the 2004 Aspen / Pitkin County Airport Master Plan, pursuant to Resolution No. 057 -2004. The Master Plan identified relocation of the Air Traffic Control Tower ("ATCT ") as a recommended improvement at the Airport, pending further review. 4. The Applicant has determined that the closed circuit camera system and camera tower will augment the existing ATCp and improve the air traffic control capabilities at the Airport, and avoids the need for a new ATCT. 5. The Director finds that the proposed amendment will not change the use of the proposed development or the basic character of the land, is consistent with action taken during the original review, does not increase the allowable floor area, and will enhance public safety and welfare by improving the air traffic control capabilities at the Airport. 6. The Director further finds while the tower is within the scenic view protection area and will break a ridgeline as seen from the highway, the visual impact has been minimized to the extent practicable by siting the tower on a knoll, which reduces the required height of the tower, and by the slim profile of the tower. 7. The Director further finds that: A. The 40' overall height (including tower, cameras and antenna) is necessary to provide the optimum viewing of the runway and the potential runway extensions, and the location and height provide the best horizontal and vertical angles to meet FAA requirements for air traffic control. B. The equipment rack is screened from view from the highway, due to location on the runway side of the knoll. C. The camera tower and equipment rack comply with the 100' highway setback. D. The location of the tower and rack is proximate to the existing airport perimeter road, so no driveway or parking area will be required for installation or maintenance. 8. The BOCC reviewed the application and heard a presentation on the alternatives to the camera tower at a regularly scheduled meeting on October 28, 2009, and directed staff to approve the request, based on the findings made herein. nr�-,- jubU21 Administrative Decision No. _ -2009 Page 2 THE DIRECTOR DOES HEREBY APPROVE an amendment to the 2004 Airport Master Plan and grants scenic view protection approval, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application. The camera tower and equipment rack shall be generally sited as shown in Exhibit B, and shall be generally consistent with the section drawing shown in Exhibit C. 2. Prior to submission of a development permit(s) for the camera tower and equipment rack, the Applicant shall apply to the Board of Adjustment and obtain a variance to the maximum height of 28'. This Decision does not assure approval of a height variance. 3. Prior to issuance of a development permit(s) for the camera tower and equipment rack, the Applicant shall: A. Submit a construction management plan to the Pitkin County Planning Engineer for review and approval. B. Submit a drainage and erosion control plan to the Pitkin County Planning Engineer for review and approval. C. Submit a revegetation plan for review and approval. 4. All areas disturbed by construction shall be re- vegetated with native vegetation within one growing season of the project's completion. 5. Failure to comply with these conditions of approval and the adopted master plan shall result in revocation of the approvals and permits. APPROVED by the Director, this _ day of 2009. Cindy Houben, Community Development Director PID #264334200851;P086 -09 9 0 v`uL2 s Board of Adjustment Appli[a 'On for A7C Camera System Pole Height Aspe7f#itkm County Airport December 7, 2009 Exhibit 2 1 Land Use Application 0 J iJuLJ Aspen /Pitkin County Airport Air Traffic Control Closed Circuit Camera System Airport Master Plan Amendment & Scenic View Protection Application Submitted to: Pitkin County Community Development Department On behalf of: Pitkin County Airport Administration TG Malloy Consulting, LLC 402 Park Drive Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970.945.0832 tgmalloy @sopris.net August 12, 2009 n %%.> %Wr Air Traffic Control Camera System Land use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 11, 1009 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this application is to seek an amendment to the current Airport Master Plan and Scenic View Protection approval to allow the installation of a camera tower and cameras to support the operation of the air traffic control facility. The applicant recognizes that a height variance will need to be obtained through the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment due to the height of the proposed camera tower. The following code sections are addressed in this application: • 2- 20- 15o(b), Minor Amendment to Development Permit • 7- 20 -120 -Scenic View Protection (for camera masts) The proposed camera tower will be located on Airport property, a legal description for which is included as Exhibit A of this application. Proof of ownership for the Airport Property is on file with the County. The Director of Aviation for the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport has authorized TG Malloy Consulting, LLC to submit this application and represent them in the development review process (see Exhibit B). PROJECT DESCRIPTION As part of the work being done to evaluate the potential runway extension at the Airport, various solutions for improving the air traffic control system have been studied. Due to the cost and height requirements associated with a new or redeveloped existing air traffic control tower, the Airport's preferred solution is to augment the existing air traffic control tower with dedicated closed circuit television cameras. The proposed system will be composed of a single metal post with two cameras mounted near the top and an equipment rack that will house the power supply and other necessary electronic equipment for the system. Figure t is a sketch that shows the system components and their dimensions. The height of the pole will be slightly less than 40 feet with an antenna at the top that will result in an overall height of 40 feet. The cameras will be mounted below the top of the tower. Due to the pole's height and proximity to the runway, FAA regulations require that there be a flashing obstruction light at the top as shown on Figure t. Figure z shows the proposed location of the camera tower, which is on the top of an existing knoll toward the south end of the runway. The camera tower location and height was chosen to provide the optimum viewing of the runway and the potential runway extensions, which are being evaluated through the Federal environmental assessment process. The proposed location and height were selected to provide the best horizontal and vertical angles to meet FAA requirements for air traffic control. The -2- or" �U , OuJ25 Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 horizontal angle permits the air traffic controllers in the control tower to discern individual aircraft and aircraft types. The vertical angle was selected to meet the depth perception required to allow the controllers to distinguish location and relative position of individual aircraft. The height of the proposed pole is the minimum necessary to meet FAA requirements and the location on the knoll was selected to minimize the height of the camera pole while still achieving the necessary height for the cameras. The proposed location also provides the opportunity to screen the equipment rack which can be located on the runway side of the existing knoll as shown on Figure 1. Since the proposed facility is located very near the existing airport perimeter road, no additional driveway or parking area will be required for its installation or maintenance. REVIEW CRITERIA The proposed air traffic control closed circuit camera system requires a minor amendment to the existing Airport Master Plan and Scenic View Protection approval. The review criteria for these code provisions are addressed in the following paragraphs. AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS (2 -20 -150) (b) Minor Amendments Defined opment application or permit one that meets the A minor amendment to any devel following criteria, as determined by the Community Development Director: (i) Is consistent with action(s) taken during previous development approvals for the property; and (2) Does not change the use of the proposed development between residential, commercial and tourist accommodation uses; and (3) Does not change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs, including basic visual appearance and method of operation; and (4) Does not constitute a new land development activity; and (5) Does not increase off -site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; and (6) Does not endanger the public health, safety or welfare; and (7) Does not violate any Land Use Code standard; and (8) Does not substantially increase the need for on -site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and ore than five (5) p ercent or decrease (9) Does not increase the floor area of the use by m the open space on the site by more than five (5) percent. Response: The 2004 Airport Master Plan recognized that improved air traffic control tower facilities were needed at the Airport. Resolution 057 -2004, which granted approval for the current Airport Master Plan, identified relocation of the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) as one of the recommended improvements at the Airport, 3- r1T 'l r`,n J•�uG s. I.. Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 pending further review. Since that time, solutions for improving air traffic control facilities at the Airport have been studied in detail. Various locations have been analyzed for a potential new ATCT, but in each case the height and cost of the structure proved problematic. As an example, in order to meet current FAA standards for air traff ic visibility for the Aspen Airport, the required height of a full air traffic control tower ranges from 8o to 18o feet depending on the tower's location. Given the visual impacts and cost associated with such a structure, the Airport and consultants worked to find an alternative solution for the air traffic control facilities issue. The proposed closed circuit camera system and associated camera tower are the preferred solution. The proposed tower and closed circuit camera equipment would augment the existing air traffic control facilities at the airport and do not constitute a new development activity or a change in use of the Airport. The basic character and visual appearance of the Airport is that of a busy regional airport with commercial and light industrial -style buildings and numerous aviation related facilities including security fencing, navigational antennae equipment, air traffic control tower, fire fighting and snow removal equipment and facilities, aircraft hangars, runway lighting and large aircraft parking areas. In addition, there are numerous existing light poles, many of which are 40 feet tall, located in the aircraft parking areas on the Airport. The proposed camera tower and equipment would be consistent with these other facilities. The only significant impact associated with the proposed camera system and tower is the fact that it will be visible from Highway 82 and the surrounding area. The tower itself will be located roughly 1,250 feet from the nearest residential dwelling unit, which would be the end units at the Annie Mitchell affordable housing development. The BMC West property, which is being considered for affordable housing by the City of Aspen, is located approximately 550 feet to the northeast of the proposed camera tower location. The nearest dwelling units in the MAA Housing development are approximately 1,750 feet from the proposed tower. From these distances, the camera tower should have a minimal impact especially when compared with the potential impact associated with a new air traffic control tower. More detailed information regarding the visual impacts of the proposed camera tower are provided in the Scenic View Protection section below. The closed circuit camera system is intended to enhance public safety and welfare by improving the air traffic control capabilities at the Airport. Nothing about the proposed system would endanger the public health safety or welfare. The height of tower exceeds the maximum height allowed under the current Land Use Code (Section 3 -8o -10 (e)). The Land Use Code allows an applicant to seek a variance from the dimensional standards through an application to the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment. No other code standards are violated by the proposed facility. The setback from Highway 82 was established at loo feet, via the existing Airport Master Plan, and the proposed tower location is outside the loo -foot setback as shown on Figure 2. The proposed camera 4- ��wiuG H 0 Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 tower and equipment will not result in any change to the floor area of any structure and will not alter the need for on -site parking or generate the need for any affordable housing mitigation since the proposal does not include any building floor area. SCENIC VIEW PROTECTION (7- 20-120) The Aspen /Pitkin County Airport is bordered by Highway 82 and Owl Creek Road, which are both listed among the roads for which the Scenic View Protection regulations apply. Since the proposed camera tower will be visible from Highway 82 and from Owl Creek Road, the Scenic View Protection criteria have been addressed in the following paragraphs. Figures 4, 5 and 6 show the proposed camera tower facility from the locations on Owl Creek Road and Highway 82 shown on Figure 3. These locations were selected because they depict the points on Highway 82 where the greatest visual impact will be experienced. (d) Standards for Development within Scenic View Protection Areas. All non - exempt development located within a mapped Scenic View Protection Area shall comply with the following standards. t) The proposed development shall utilize existing topography and natural vegetation, such as ridges, hills, and existing trees, to screen buildings to the maximum extent practicable when viewed from those right-of way listed in subsection (b) above. Response: The proposed tower location is on the top of a knoll south of the old intercept lot along the Highway 82 side of the Airport (see Figure z). There are no trees in the area of the proposed tower site due to its proximity to the runway and concern for potential aircraft obstructions. This location was selected because it allows the use of a shorter tower and it provides the opportunity to screen the equipment rack by locating it downhill on the runway side of the existing knoll. While it seems counter to the intent of these scenic review criteria to locate the tower on top of a knoll, it's important to remember that the height of the cameras is set in relation to the surface of the runway in order to meet standards set by the FAA for safe sight lines for approaching and departing aircraft. Therefore, if the tower were located at a lower elevation it would simply have to be taller to achieve the correct relationship with the runway surface. This would not reduce the amount of the tower that would be visible from Highway 82 (see Figures 4 and 5) and it would increase the visual impacts of the tower as viewed from the Owl Creek Road side of the Airport (see Figure 6). Another factor to consider regarding the location of the tower is that it must be relatively near the south end of the runway in order to maintain a clear view of departing aircraft as they taxi into position and wait for departure. If this were not the case, it might be possible to locate the tower on the runway side of an existing building, thus screening more of the tower from Highway 82. As shown on Figure z the proposed location avoids the ioo -foot setback from Highway 82 and the FAA- regulated Building -S- 6. %%W �Wo Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 Restriction Line (BRL). There is a relatively small area in this part of the Airport that avoids these overlapping regulatory limitations. 2) The proposed development shall avoid the location of structures within the Scenic View Protection Areas, and shall avoid the location of structures within any Viewplane identified in the State Highway 82 Corridor Master Plan and Down Valley Comprehensive Plan if possible. If location outside the Scenic View Protection Area and defined Viewplanes is not practicable, then the proposed development shall not be located on the highest ground or most visible portion of any site as viewed from those corridors listed in subsection (b) above. Response: The entire Airport is located with the mapped Scenic View Protection Area. However, there are no "viewplanes," as identified in the State Highway 92 Corridor Master Plan or the Downvalley Comprehensive Plan, located in the area or the Airport. In terms of the criteria related to avoiding the highest ground or most visible portion of the site, please see the response to criteria number one above. 3) The proposed development's height and bulk shall be designed to avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the visibility of buildings from those corridors listed in subsection (b) above. This may include, but shall not be limited to, breaking the mass of the building down into a series of smaller forms, articulation of the building tgades to avoid a wall or row effect, and staggering rooflines to avoid a long unbroken plane. Response: The first part of this criterion is addressed in the response to criteria number one above. The proposed tower has been designed with the minimum height and mass which provides the necessary engineering characteristics given the purpose for which the tower is intended. As mentioned previously, one of these criteria is the vertical and horizontal relationship of the cameras to the runway surface at the south end of the Airport (especially given the potential runway extension). Another of these characteristics is that the tower must not sway or move excessively in order to provide a stable video feed for the air traffic controllers. Asa result, the tower mast is designed with a relatively broad cross section to resist movement and provide stable support for the cameras (see Figure t). 4) The proposed structure shall be placed so it does not project above a ridgeline such that a structure silhouettes against the sky when viewed from those corridors listed in subsection (b), unless there are no alternate building sites on the lot or parcel. Response: The proposed tower will not break a ridgeline as viewed from Owl Creek Road, but it will break a ridgeline as viewed from certain locations along Highway 82. Figure 6 shows the view of the tower from Owl Creek Road and demonstrates that the visual impacts from this side of the Airport will be minimal. While the camera tower will break a ridgeline as viewed from certain locations along Highway 82, the tower is relatively slim compared to the types of structures for which this regulation was intended. More importantly, there is no other location on the Airport which provides lid %%J U'.," Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 the necessary view angles for the cameras and offers a significant reduction in the visual impacts of the facility as viewed from Highway 82 and Owl Creek Road. 5) The proposed development shall be designed to complement the natural topography of the land through the use of techniques such as earth- sheltered design, the use of natural materials and coloring, the use of low- reflectance materials, or clustering of structures on the least visible portions of the site. When a building is proposed near a ridgeline, then its form (particularly its roof form) shall replicate, parallel, or complement the natural form of the ridgeline so that it appears to be an element of the natural ridgeline. Response: The proposed tower can be painted to blend in with the natural landscape taking into consideration the change of scenery that comes with the various seasons. However, little else can be done to minimize the visual impacts of the tower given the fact that it will be located relatively close to the runway and must be visible to aircraft operators for obvious safety reasons. 6) The proposed development shall preserve natural vegetation and avoid development within irrigated meadows, to the maximum extent practicable. Response: The proposed location is not in an irrigated meadow and very little vegetation will be removed for the installation of the tower and the associated equipment rack. 7) The proposed development shall install utilities in locations and through procedures that minimize visual impacts to the maximum extent practicable. Response: The camera system will require power and a fiber optic cable feed to the existing Air Traffic Control Tower. These utilities will be installed underground entirely within the Airport grounds. 8) All satellite dishes in the proposed development shall be located to minimize visibility from those rights -of -way listed in subsection (b), and shall use earth tone colors and /or screening to minimize their visual impact. Response: The proposed closed circuit camera system does not include a satellite dish. 9) The proposed development shall not use earth moving and berms as the primary means of compliance with these regulations, but earth moving may be utilized in conjunction with other techniques to comply with standards in this section. Where earth moving techniques are necessary, man -made forms should be undulating and natural in appearance. Response: The proposed location is on an existing land form which was constructed to help screen operations at the Airport from Highway 82. This existing berm will be used -7- '-�w ..W Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 to screen the equipment rack for the proposed camera system. The existing berm meets the criteria of being undulating and natural in appearance. to) In the Rural Areas only, development shall be located so that activities and development occur in at least one of the locations specified in subsection (f) as they may apply to the particular property. Response: Not applicable. 11) EARTH TONE MATERIALS - The exterior of all development, except development located and designed in the form of a ranch compound, shall be built or painted with indigenous earth tone materials or colors. The exterior of a ranch compound should be built or painted with indigenous earth tone materials, or shall be painted or stained using local, traditional ranch colors, which shall include shades of red, brown, or white. Paints or stains that simulate weathered barn wood also shall be permitted. Response: The applicant is willing to comply with this requirement to the extent practical. 12) ROOFS -All roofs shall have a non - reflective color or composition. Reflective roof materials shall not be used unless the materials are treated prior to installation to eliminate reflection, with the exception of materials associated with solar or photovoltaic equipment. Response: Not applicable. 13) REVEGETATION OF DISTURBED AREAS - Lands disturbed by earth moving or berms should be revegetated using native species that are already growing on or near the site. Topsoil shall be stockpiled and placed on disturbed areas. Irrigation shall be provided to the revegetated areas if it is necessary to ensure survival of planted native species. Response: Installation of the proposed tower and equipment rack will create little disturbance. However, any disturbed areas will be revegetated in accordance with these criteria. (14) DRIVEWAYS AVOID DIVIDING MEADOWS AND PASTURES - To the maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways shall be located to skirt the edge of and avoid dividing meadows and pastures and to avoid major road cuts. Roads and driveways should take advantage of the screening potential of natural topography and existing vegetation. Existing roads and driveways shall be used where practical. To enhance screening, a row of trees may be planted along the roads or driveways. To the maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways located around the edge of or in meadows shall be laid out with soft, curving edges and shall avoid straight line corridors that are incongruous with the natural setting. Response: The proposed tower location is adjacent to the existing airport perimeter road. No additional driveway or parking area will be required to install or maintain this lWlll!! r� r JULuO Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 1009 facility. Most of the disturbance necessary to install the proposed facility will occur on the runway side of the existing knoll and will not be visible from Highway 82. The disturbed area would be minimally visible from Owl Creek Road due to the distance. SUMMARY The information contained in this application addresses the applicable criteria for approval of the requested amendment to the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan and Scenic View Protection Review. The proposed air traffic control closed circuit camera facility eliminates the need for a new, or substantially remodeled, air traffic control tower. A new air traffic control tower would result in visual impacts many times the magnitude of the camera facility for which approval is sought with this application. In addition, the cost of the closed circuit camera system described in this application is a tiny fraction of what it would cost to design and construct a new air traffic control tower. Therefore, the proposed camera facility represents a substantial benefit for the safety and welfare of the community. Given these factors, we respectfully request that this application for minor amendment to a development permit and scenic view protection review be approved. We recognize that Board of Adjustment approval will be required for a height variance prior to installation of the proposed facility. ■ F — Airport (Bac mft of flack) 24V Power Dlemnned Supply Swfta r I UPS 5 ' Fiber Panel Mam POWe( in EI Highway Figure i - Section Drawing of Proposed Camera Tower 0 00'33 Air Traffic Control Closed Circuit Camera System Airport Master Plan Amendment & Scenic View Protection Application Prepared by: TG Malloy Consulting, LLC Prepared for: Aspen/Pltkin County Airport Administration 402 Park Drive 0233 East Airport Road, Suite A /} ' Glenwood Springs, CO 8i6oi Aspen, CO B16n UOU W 4 970-945 -o83x 4 V. = So' Figure 2- Site Plan As /Pitkin County Ai August tx,xoo9 GRAPHIC SCALE 150 0 150 300 ( IN FEET ) Figure 3 - Context Map JVIATION' ENGINEERING 6 PLANNING 900 S. BROADWAY - SURE 350 - DENVER, COLORADO 80209 PHONE: 303 -524 -3030 - PAX: 303 -524 -7031 - MJMTION.CDN - 0 r� a O O Figure 4 - View from Northbound Lane of Highway 82 I 0 0 co cy") cD C Figure 6 — View from Owl Creek Road 11 LI Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport Exhibit A I Legal Description MM M 3 , 00339 August 12, 2009 e PARCEL A m PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT PROPERTY LYING WESTERLY OF HIGHWAY 82 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1/2E1/2 OF SECTION 28, THE SW1/4 OF SECTION 27, THE NE1 /4NE1 /4 OF SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 8 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST AND IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A STONE FOUND IN PLACE, THE POINT OF BEGINNIN G ; THENCE N01 °23' 10 "W ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 33 A DISTANCE OF 1343.36 FEET TO THE NORTH SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. # 15710 IN PLACE; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY S87 0 47'43 "W A DISTANCE OF 1334.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A 3 -114" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE NO1 0 04'05 "W A DISTANCE OF 1337.21 FEET TO THE EAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 AND SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #15710 IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 57'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 1346.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #15710 IN PLACE; THENCE N00 0 5741 "W A DISTANCE OF 1346.09 FEET TO THE EAST - CENTER SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE N00 °54'29 "W A DISTANCE OF 1345.58 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. # 19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE N00 °54'29 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE NE1 /4NE1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 580.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY THE FOLLOWING THIRTY -SEVEN (37) COURSES ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY 1. S42 0 44'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 51.34 FEET 2. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 523.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 ° 18'00" A DISTANCE OF 212.68 FEET (CHORD BEARS S31 0 05'02 "E 211.22 FEET) 3• S 19 °26'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 484.56 FEET 4• ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1482.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26 ° 48'25" A DISTANCE OF 693.62 FEET (CHORD BEARS S32 0 50'14 "E 687.31 FEET) 5. S32 0 32'37 "E A DISTANCE OF 124.19 FEET JV LUG{' 0 6. S21 0 16'39 "E A DISTANCE OF 216.82 FEET 7. S43 0 55'47 "E A DISTANCE OF 284.03 FEET 8. S59 0 42'14 "E A DISTANCE OF 144.19 FEET 9. S30 0 26'03 "E A DISTANCE OF 206.34 FEET 10. S37 0 19'48 "E A DISTANCE OF 162.90 FEET 11. S22 0 38'38 "E A DISTANCE OF 654.44 FEET 12. 827 0 02'07 "E A DISTANCE OF 311.26 FEET 13. S39 0 44'48 "E A DISTANCE OF 380.71 FEET 14. S29 0 08'10 "E A DISTANCE OF 140.10 FEET 15. S52 0 52'16 "E A DISTANCE OF 244.32 FEET 16. S52 0 52'13 "E A DISTANCE OF 429.03 FEET 17. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1822.36 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25 0 19'07" A DISTANCE OF 805.29 FEET (CHORD BEARS S40 0 12'42 "E 798.75 FEET) 18. S27 0 33'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 1780.08 FEET 19. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3732.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08 0 50'27" A DISTANCE OF 575.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S23 0 07'55 "E 575.32 FEET) 20. S1 8 °42'42 "E A DISTANCE OF 1196.55 FEET 21. S31 0 07'57 "E A DISTANCE OF 155.94 FEET 22. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 42.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26 0 13'47" A DISTANCE OF 19.23 FEET (CHORD BEARS S87 °59'31 "W 19.06 FEET) 23. S69 0 05'35 "W A DISTANCE OF 9.45 FEET 24. S29 °48'01 "E A DISTANCE OF 250.55 FEET 25. S49 1'29"E A DISTANCE OF 103.24 FEET 26. S3IolO'17 "E A DISTANCE OF 1689.08 FEET 27. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 32898.75 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00 °01'21" A DISTANCE OF 12.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S30 0 58'02 "E 12.89 FEET) 28. S15 0 15'18 "E A DISTANCE OF 315.91 FEET 29. S 19 0 49'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 292.63 FEET 30. S07 0 35'33 "E A DISTANCE OF 212.79 FEET 31. SO4 0 35'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 97.46 FEET 32. S01 0 14'03 "W A DISTANCE OF 394.41 FEET 33. S08 0 41'56 "W A DISTANCE OF 264.78 FEET 34. S02 0 21'08 "E A DISTANCE OF 431.37 FEET 35. S03 0 18'45 "W A DISTANCE OF 481.87 FEET 36. SO1 0 16'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 687.67 FEET 37. S03 0 50'58 "W A DISTANCE OF 106.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 211897 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N54° 19'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 568.54 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N67 0 55'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 50.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N75 0 33'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 74.83 FEET; rn J it 1 k! a. THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N42 0 28'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 68.05 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197660 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE N29 °42'06 "W A DISTANCE OF 160.23 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197660 N21 °27'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 114.67 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N31 °42'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 235.58 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N44 0 01'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 238.86 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N41 °38'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 153.11 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197598 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S69 0 09'44 "W A DISTANCE OF 32.34 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598; THENCE N29 0 10'20 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598 A DISTANCE OF 154.34 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N25 °55'53 "W A DISTANCE OF 254.98 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N23 °32'45 "W A DISTANCE OF 123.79 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N20 0 3627 "W A DISTANCE OF 125.21 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 169.52 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 127.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 102.13 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N21 "W A DISTANCE OF 53.59 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N24 0 24'47 "W A DISTANCE OF 51.90 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 13'24 "W A DISTANCE OF 186.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 42'54 "W A DISTANCE OF 276.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27 0 42'09 "W A DISTANCE OF 282.96 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N30 0 26'22 "W A DISTANCE OF 17.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SECTION 34; THENCE S89 °57'58 "W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 996.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE N00 °07'52 "W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 1311.71 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE S86 °04'1 0 "E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL I A DISTANCE OF 137.57 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S58 0 04'36 "E A DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S57 0 44'41 "E A DISTANCE OF 140.77 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S48 0 12'58 "E A DISTANCE OF 44.49 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S42 1'20"E A DISTANCE OF 58.86 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL H -1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197537 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S '16 L: i.i 4 c 0 OFFICE; THENCE N50° 14'30 "E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL H -1 A DISTANCE OF 63.88 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF PARCEL 2 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE N55 "W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 A DISTANCE OF 205.30 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N55 1'28"W A DISTANCE OF 312.89 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S72 ° 10'55 "W A DISTANCE OF 175.75 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S61 °51'43 "W A DISTANCE OF 70.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S89 °19'1 5 "W A DISTANCE OF 1105.31 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N84 0 26'04 "W A DISTANCE OF 124.55 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE N00 3'55"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 1388.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 597.303 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. n, 3u A ,: 4 PARCEL B A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE S 1 /2NW I/4 SECTION 27, S 1/2 SECTION 27, NI /2 SECTION 34, SEIA SECTION 34AND THE WI /2SW1 /4 SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, A FOUND 2 1/2" U.S.G.L.O. BRASS CAP IN PLACE; THENCE S 04 0 45'40" E A DISTANCE OF 127.64 FEET TO CORNER NUMBER 24 OF THE VAN CLEAVE PLACER A STONE FOUND IN PLACE, THE POINT OF BEGINNIN G ; THENCE S45 0 27'37 11 W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER A DISTANCE OF 483.62 FEET TO CORNER NUMBER 7 OF SAID PLACER; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER S44 °55'31 "E A DISTANCE OF 208.04 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 458480 OF THE PITKIN COUNT CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 45840 THE FOLLOWING EIGHT (8) COURSES: 1) S84 ° 55'16 "W A DISTANCE OF 75.27 FEET 2) S12 0 54'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 323.00 FEET 3) S35-4 1'22"E A DISTANCE OF 156.60 FEET 4) S68 0 41'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 180.10 FEET 5) N82 0 44'47 "E A DISTANCE OF 207.00 FEET 6) S51 0 06'42 "E A DISTANCE OF 158.20 FEET 7) S 18 °00'22 "E A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET 8) N86 0 29'39 "E A DISTANCE OF 67.36 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 458480 S44 "E A DISTANCE OF 76.37 FEET; THENCE S89 0 46'08 "W A DISTANCE OF 469.58 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE S03 °30'11 "E ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 194.58 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20 °31'14" AND A DISTANCE OF 35.82 FEET (CHORD BEARS N45 0 51'18 "W 35.62 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE N35 ° 35'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 516.32 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER; THENCE N35 0 3541 "W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE NORTH 40 SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 91.62 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS ^, -,, 6- OF 430.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15 °39'42" AND A DISTANCE OF 117.54 FEET (CHORD BEARS N43 ° 25'32 "W 117.17 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE N51 0 15'23 "W A DISTANCE OF 191.50 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15 °23'53" AND A DISTANCE OF 53.75 FEET (CHORD BEARS N43 °33'26 "W 53.59 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE N35 0 51'30 "W A DISTANCE OF 572.89 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH 40 SUBDIVISION; THENCE N48 0 59'04 "W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 447848 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE A DISTANCE OF 788.09 FEET, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 447848; THENCE S58 °54'10 "W ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 447848 A DISTANCE OF 659.03 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE NI 8 A DISTANCE OF 918.25 FEET; THENCE ALONG T14E ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,929.72 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08 ° 50'27" A DISTANCE OF 606.36 FEET (CHORD BEARS N23 °07'55 "W 605.76 FEET); THENCE N27 ° 33'09 "W A DISTANCE OF 873.09 FEET; THENCE N62 °26'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 23.29 FEET, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 156437 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER THE FOLLOWING (2) TWO COURSES: 1) N80 °00'27 "E A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET 2) N09 ° 59'33 "W A DISTANCE OF 871.20 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER N45 0 55'12 "W A DISTANCE OF 777.58 FEET; THENCE N38 0 19'30 "W A DISTANCE OF 341.07 FEET; THENCE NO3 °39'55 "W A DISTANCE OF 664.67 FEET; THENCE S69 °38'08 "W A DISTANCE OF 497.97 FEET; THENCE N70 0 25'06 "W A DISTANCE OF 256.72 FEET; THENCE N59 0 21'00 "W A DISTANCE OF 412.62 FEET; THENCE N41 °09'54 "W A DISTANCE OF 286.83 FEET; THENCE N22 0 40'03 "W A DISTANCE OF 301.15 FEET; THENCE N25 °55'27 "W A DISTANCE OF 214.59 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE VAN CLEVE PLACER; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE N45 0 22 1 13 "E A DISTANCE OF 883.09 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE S44 0 57'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 762.54 FEET; THENCE S00 0 02'08 "W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER A DISTANCE OF 568.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S89 0 57'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 568.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44 0 57'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 1,458.12 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45 0 02'08 "W A DISTANCE OF 693.47 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44 0 57'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 1,804.42 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45 0 04'42 "W A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44 0 56'02 "E A DISTANCE OF 2,458.52 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45 "E A DISTANCE OF 180.14 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 154.975 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. n-. JU4.v5 PARCEL C A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EI /2NE1 /4 SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -1\4" ALUMINUM CAP LS# 19598 IN PLACE; THENCE S01 °09' 10 "E ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 681.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SO1 °09'10 "E A DISTANCE OF 658.52 FEET TO THE NI /I6 CORNER OF SECTIONS 27 AND 28; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S01 0 09'10 "E A DISTANCE OF 1,151.03 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE N33 °50'34 "W A DISTANCE OF 39.58 FEET; THENCE N37 °30'52 "W A DISTANCE OF 109.07 FEET; THENCE N41 °49'36 "W A DISTANCE OF 145.70 FEET; THENCE N14 °43'39 "W A DISTANCE OF 61.31 FEET; THENCE N59 0 53'38 "W A DISTANCE OF 207.11 FEET; THENCE N44 0 31'10 "W A DISTANCE OF 318.82 FEET; THENCE N40 °58'50 "W A DISTANCE OF 156.98 FEET; THENCE N28 0 50'23 "W A DISTANCE OF 377.73 FEET; THENCE NI 9 A DISTANCE OF 430.84 FEET; THENCE N24 °1 0'22 "E A DISTANCE OF 21.84 FEET; THENCE N20 0 38'37 "W A DISTANCE OF 212.67 FEET; THENCE N71 I "W A DISTANCE OF 46.81 FEET; THENCE N31 °25'19 "W A DISTANCE OF 91.47 FEET; THENCE N88 0 50'04 "E A DISTANCE OF 1,155.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 28.160 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 0ul; "4G 0 4 PARCEL D A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE S1 /2NWI /4 SECTION 27, S1 /2 SECTION 27, NI /2 SECTION 34, SE1 /4 SECTION 34 AND THE Wl /2SW1 /4 SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, A FOUND 2 1/2" U.S.G.L.O. BRASS CAP IN PLACE; THENCE S85 0 52'21 "W A DISTANCE OF 2,051.05 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING THENCE S58 °54'l0 "W A DISTANCE OF 23.04 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY OF HIGHWAY 82; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY THE FOLLOWING FIFTEEN (15) COURSES: 1) NI 8 A DISTANCE OF 923.19 FEET 2) ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,907.22 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08 0 50'27" AND A DISTANCE OF 602.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS N23 0 07'55 "W 602.29 FEET) 3) N27 °33'09 "W, A DISTANCE OF 1,780.08 FEET 4) ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,997.36 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09 °38'31" AND A DISTANCE OF 336.13 FEET (CHORD BEARS N32 0 22'25 "W 335.73 FEET) 5) N18 °25'07 "W, A DISTANCE OF 59.68 FEET 6) N40 °22'34 "W, A DISTANCE OF 1 11.00 FEET 7) N44 0 25'02 "W, A DISTANCE OF 173.51 FEET 8) N49 °05'1 9 "W, A DISTANCE OF 155.37 FEET 9) N63 °23'50 "W, A DISTANCE OF 105.30 FEET 10) N52 °52'16 "W, A DISTANCE OF 332.40 FEET 11) N39 °37'54 "W, A DISTANCE OF 834.73 FEET 12) N08 °54'20 "W, A DISTANCE OF 202.77 FEET 13) N41 °09'54 "W, A DISTANCE OF 222.00 FEET 14) N22 0 40'03 "W, A DISTANCE OF 304.17 FEET 15) N25 0 55'27 "W, A DISTANCE OF 206.33 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID VAN CLEAVE PLACER; THENCE N45 ° 22'13 "E ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 23.75 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE S25 0 55'27 "E A DISTANCE OF 214.59 FEET; THENCE S22 0 40'03 "E A DISTANCE OF 301.15 FEET; THENCE S41 ° 09'54 "E A DISTANCE OF 286.83 FEET; THENCE S59 0 21'00 "E A DISTANCE OF 412.62 FEET; THENCE S70 0 25'06 "E A DISTANCE OF 256.72 FEET; THENCE N69 °38'08 "E A DISTANCE OF 497.97 FEET; THENCE S03 0 39'55 "E A DISTANCE OF 664.67 FEET; THENCE S38 ° 19'30 "E A DISTANCE OF 341.07 FEET; THENCE S45 °55'12 "E A DISTANCE OF 777.58 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 156437 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER THE FOLLOWING (2) TWO COURSES: 1) S80 °00'27 "W A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET 2) S09 0 59'33 "E A DISTANCE OF 871.20 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER S62 °26'51 "W A DISTANCE OF 23.29 FEET; THENCE S27 °33'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 873.09 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,929.72 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08 0 50'27 ", A DISTANCE OF 606.36 FEET (CHORD BEARS S23 °07'55 "E 605.76 FEET); THENCE S 18 °42'42 "E A DISTANCE OF 918.25 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 27.310 ACRES, MORE OR LESS ���:�48 c PARCEL E A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1 /2NE1 /4 SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3 -114" ALUMINUM CAP LS# 19598 IN PLACE; THENCE SO1'09'1 O"E A DISTANCE OF 2491.24 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING THENCE SO1 °09'10 "E, ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 41.66 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY OF HIGHWAY 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13) COURSES: 1) N33 0 50'34 "W A DISTANCE OF 73.92 FEET 2) N37 °30'52 "W A DISTANCE OF 107.50 FEET 3) N41 ° 49'36 "W A DISTANCE OF 150.28 FEET 4) N14 °43'39 "W A DISTANCE OF 57.37 FEET 5) N59 °53'38 "W A DISTANCE OF 200.79 FEET 6) N44 1'10"W A DISTANCE OF 322.55 FEET 7) N40 °58'50 "W A DISTANCE OF 160.07 FEET 8) N28 °50'23 "W A DISTANCE OF 381.95 FEET 9) N19 °34'08 "W A DISTANCE OF 441.70 FEET 10) N24 0 10'22 "E A DISTANCE OF 21.59 FEET 11) N20 °38'37 "W A DISTANCE OF 192.70 FEET 12) N71 0 28'11 "W A DISTANCE OF 44.32 FEET 13) N31 °25'19 "W A DISTANCE OF 112.79 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT -OF- WAY N88 0 50'04 "E A DISTANCE OF 26.05 FEET; THENCE 331 9"E A DISTANCE OF 91.47 FEET; THENCE S71 1 "E A DISTANCE OF 46.81 FEET; THENCE S20 0 38'37 "E A DISTANCE OF 212.67 FEET; THENCE S24 0 10'22 "W A DISTANCE OF 21.84 FEET; THENCE S19 0 34'08 "E A DISTANCE OF 430.84 FEET; THENCE S28 0 50 1 23 "E A DISTANCE OF 377.73 FEET; THENCE S40 1 58'50 "E A DISTANCE OF 156.98 FEET; THENCE S44 1'10"E A DISTANCE OF 318.82 FEET; THENCE S59 °53'38 "E A DISTANCE OF 207.11 FEET; THENCE S 14 0 43'39 "E A DISTANCE OF 61.31 FEET; THENCE S41 0 49'36 "E A DISTANCE OF 145.70 FEET; THENCE S37 0 30'52 "E A DISTANCE OF 109.07 FEET; THENCE S33 0 50'34 "E A DISTANCE OF 39.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNIN G. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 1.159 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. n •" 4d1:. 'if PARCEL F A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1 /2 SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 3, A 3 I/4" BLM BRASS CAP FOUND IN PLACE; THENCE S71 °40'00 "W A DISTANCE OF 912.38 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING THENCE S03 °52'13 "W A DISTANCE OF 129.06 FEET; THENCE S 19 0 55'35 "E A DISTANCE OF 266.69 FEET; THENCE S69 °36'12 "W A DISTANCE OF 623.09 FEET; THENCE NI 1 ° 51'57 "W A DISTANCE OF 947.30 FEET; THENCE S63 0 27'26 "W A DISTANCE OF 100.42 FEET; THENCE NO2 0 51'09 "W A DISTANCE OF 343.99 FEET; THENCE N32 °08'09 "E A DISTANCE OF 84.69 FEET; THENCE S31 0 43'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 10.24 FEET; THENCE S21 0 28'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 114.67 FEET; THENCE S29 °42'41 "E A DISTANCE OF 160.24 FEET; THENCE S42 °26'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 68.03 FEET; THENCE S75 0 31'51 "E A DISTANCE OF 15.15 FEET; THENCE S63'33'21 "W A DISTANCE OF 27.22 FEET; THENCE S75 0 33'00 "E A DISTANCE OF 77.84 FEET; THENCE S67 ° 55'00 "E A DISTANCE OF 44.38 FEET; THENCE S54 0 19'00 "E A DISTANCE OF 589.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING- SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 11.362 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Jii �.UJ C C Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 Exhibit B I Authorization Letter „_ . J �jk,; j51 I, w Serdy Field Aspen /Pitkin County Airport June 22, 2009 Suzanne Wolff, Senior Planner Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Suzanne: 0233 East Airport Road Aspen. Colorado B 1 B 1 1 970/920 -5384 FAX 970/920 -537B By this letter, the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport hereby authorizes TG Malloy Consulting, LLC to represent us in matters related to the land use application to allow rezoning of the portion of the Airport property located within the City of Aspen Urban Growth Boundary and other approvals necessary relative to the parcels recently deannexed from the City of Aspen and for the installation of video camera masts that will be part of the airport's air traffic control system. The proposed camera system is intended to be located on the east side of the Airport. At this time, we are seeking approval for Rezoning, Minor Amendment to a Development Permit, and Scenic View Protection from Pitkin County for this project. This authorization includes the preparation and submission of the land use application and representation of this application before any applicable appointed and elected boards or officials. Sincerely, a s Elwood, A.A. . Aspen /Pitkin County Airport cc: Tim Malloy Dave Ulane P. Scott Cary r,- -,.� JdkJ J32 lJ 0 Air Traffic Control Camera S ystem Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 1009 Exhibit C I Pre - application Summary ■ PITKIN CC,, PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCa41JMMARY PLANNER: Suzanne Wolff DATE: 5/21/09 PHONE: (970) 920 -5093 E -MAIL: suzannew(a)co.pitkin.co.us LOCATION: Aspen /Pitkin County Airport PARCEL ID #s: 264334200851 ZONE: PUB OWNER/APPLICANT: Pitkin County REPRESENTATIVE: Tim Malloy EMAIL: tgmalloy @sopris.net Type of Application: Minor Amendment to Public Master Plan Description of Project/Development: Applicant is requesting to amend the master plan to install several camera towers to support the operation of the air traffic control tower. The camera towers will not exceed 28' in height. Land Use Code Sections to Address: • 2- 20- 150.b, Minor Amendment to Development Permit • 7 -20 -120, Scenic View Protection Review by: Community Development Director Public Hearing? NO. FEES: $773 (make check payable to "Pitkin County Treasurer ") • $748 Planning flat fee (non - refundable; based on 3 hours of staff time; if staff review time exceeds 3.6 hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time in excess of 3 hours at a rate of $249 /hour) • $25 Clerk Technology Fee To apply, submit 1 copy of the following information, unless noted otherwise: 1. Summary letter explaining the request, summarizing prior approvals and addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above. 2. Site plan showing location of towers (11 x 17) 3. Specifications for towers and cameras 4. Photos from highway showing existing conditions and proposed towers (sketches or graphically enhanced photos) 5. Disclosure and proof of ownership of the property, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company or attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property and all mortgagees, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting use and development of the parcel and proof of the owner's right to use the land for the purposes identified in the development application. 6. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map 7. Total fee for review of the application 8. Executed Pitkin County Community Development Agreement for Payment of Land Use Application Fees (form attached); 9. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy) 10. Copy of this preapp form (1 copy) NOTES v INCLUDE THE PARCEL ID NUMBER ON ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION. This pre- application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and staff's interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. h r -- �u��54 0 4 Air Traffic Control Camera System Land Use Application I Aspen /Pitkin County Airport August 12, 2009 l Exhibit D I Agreement to Pay Form ri. �. V.✓J 4.y 9M PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and P (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: COUNTY an application for 14th Y A*o ~4 L 46614 L ' T .p,6 ( hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and ayfees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 008 -2008 establishes a fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the County's policy that development shall pay, in full, the cost of development review in Pitkin County. Fees have been set to be consistent and fair to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. 4. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that fees charged for the processing of land use applications shall accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review. 5. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for COUNTY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and /or Board of County Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission and /or Board of County Comrrpssioners to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 6. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base fee in the amount of $ ° O which is based on'1 hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20 %, then the COUNTY will bill the APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY Cindy Houben Community Development Director Effective 4/9/08 G:county\admin \forms \agreement to pay .. & Mallin .. .j '. :9 I Board of Adjustment Applicat on for ATC Camera System Pole Height j Aspen kin County Airport December 7, 2009 Exhibit 3 1 BOCC Memo (October 2009 Hearing) L %� w TGMALLOY CONSULTING, LLC LAND USE PLANNING • SITE DESIGN • NATURAL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS • PUBLIC PROCESS MEMORANDUM TO: Lance Clarke, Assistant Community Development Director C OPE. Jim Elwood, Director of Aviation FROM: Tim Malloy DATE: October 19, 2009 RE: Air Traffic Control Tower Alternatives As requested, we are providing this memo to augment the information provided in the application for the proposed air traffic control closed circuit camera system. That application includes a request for minor amendment to the Airport Master Plan and scenic view protection approval for a 40 -foot tall rigid pole for mounting closed circuit cameras to augment the existing air traffic control tower at the Airport. This memo, and the included exhibits, is intended to provide information regarding the alternatives to installing the proposed 40 -foot camera mast. We have also provided six additional copies of the original application for distribution to the Board of County Commissioners for the hearing scheduled for October 28th. The Airport Administration has been studying various alternatives for augmenting the air traffic control capabilities at the Airport over the past four years. These alternatives include a closed circuit camera system, the details for which are provided in the original land use application, as well an additional satellite facility and replacing the existing air traffic control tower with a new tower. The satellite facility would have provided an additional controller at the south end of the airport. However this idea was discounted based on capital and long -term costs by the FAA. Three alternatives locations were studied for a new air traffic control tower as shown on Figure 1. Location C is adjacent to the existing air traffic control tower, while the other two locations are near the existing main terminal building. The southernmost alternative (Location B) was to be part of a potential new terminal building (blue mass on Figure 1). These locations were studied because they represented the widest range of alternatives that met FAA criteria for siting air traffic control towers for the existing runway end and the proposed runway extension alternatives. The FAA evaluates potential air traffic control tower sites based on 15 to 20 criteria that are intended to provide the best visibility for air traffic controllers under all foreseeable conditions. Due to the existing terrain at the Airport and other factors, the height of the three alternative towers analyzed increases from south to north. The tower location furthest to the north (Location C) represents the scenario of remodeling or replacing the existing tower in its current location. In order to meet the FAA criteria for visibility, a tower in this location would have to be approximately 200 feet high (to accommodate an eye level height of 170 feet in the cab). By comparison, the tower at the Eagle County Regional Airport is approximately 148 feet high. Figure 2 provides a graphic depiction of the tower at location C as it would appear from the other side of Highway 82. Location A would require a tower approximately 190 feet tall (160 foot eye level in the cab), while a tower at location B would have to be roughly 130 feet high to meet FAA criteria. The appearance of the 402 PARK DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS • COLORADO • 81 601 (P) 970 945.0832 • (F) 970.945.0833 -E TGMALLOYCaSOPRIS.NET LJ V iVI,V� towers at locations A and B, as viewed from a location on the east side of Highway 82, is shown in Figure 3. Figures 2 and 3 show that the towers at locations A and C would break the ridgeline even as viewed from more distant locations on the east side of Highway 82. Views of these two towers from the travel lanes of Highway 82 would extend above the ridgeline much more dramatically. Figure 4 shows all three towers as they would appear from a point on the east shoulder of Highway 82 near the north end of the Airport. In addition to the dramatic visual impacts that would result from a new air traffic control tower, the cost to construct a new tower was estimated at $15 to $20 million. Due to intense competition for funding for air traffic control towers, and the fact that Aspen would be considered a low priority for these funds, this cost would probably have to be borne by the local community. Given the severe visual impacts and prohibitive cost of constructing a new air traffic control tower, the Airport Staff and its consultants pursued the closed circuit camera alternative and are finalizing design details with the FAA to install this system. We appreciate the opportunity present this information to the Board of County Commissioners and we believe the requested closed circuit camera system is a solution that offers dramatically reduced visual impacts and a significant cost savings to the community. We have included copies of the original land use application, wherein we have demonstrated that the proposed camera pole meets the criteria for approval of a minor amendment to the existing Airport Master Plan and the Scenic View Protection criteria. Figure I 1 3 , 0006 0 • o • Figure 2 GGC��61 0 0 Figure 3 OHM .�� L _, _ � ���'�. - -��- _ __- _ � - - - - I Board of Adjustment Application for ATC Camera System Pole Height j Aspen kin County Airport December 7, 2009 Exhibit 4 1 List of Adjacent Property Owners _64 I � � , may N✓ ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION ASPEN MINI STORAGE LLC ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC DISTRICT PO BOX 245 PO BOX 1248 420 E HOPKINS AVE 7037 E SOPRIS CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 BALLENTINE HOLDINGS LLC BURLINGAME HOUSING INC C/O PREFERRED PROPERTY CHILL LTD 476 WESTWOOD DR PO BOX 11765 MNGMT SER DENVER, CO 80206 -4139 ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2685 PO BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 BASALT, CO 81621 CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO DEPT OF COLORADO MTN JR COLLEGE ATTN FINANCE DEPT TRANSPORTATION STATE OF COLORADO DIST PO BOX 10001 130 S GALENA ST 4201 E ARKANSAS AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80222 DDABC LLC DROSTE BRUCE F 25% INT DROSTE EDWARD & WILLIAM 109 AABC 231 BOLTON RD TRUST 25% INT 231 BOLTON RD ASPEN, CO 81611 WINCHESTER, NH 03470 WINCHESTER, NH 03470 DROSTE PETER C JR & ELISE EAST OWL CREEK HOMEOWNERS GORDON JAMES TRUST TRUST 25% INT ASSOC 900 N MICHIGAN AVE #1800 PO BOX 6697 514 E HYMAN AVE CHICAGO, IL 60611 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 HAWKINS DUDLEY W L JR HEINEMAN PETER MCBRIDE JOHN P C/O THURSTON INC- STEPHEN PO BOX 37 19423 N TURKEY CREEK STE B MCDONALD CARBONDALE, CO 81623 MORRISON, CO 80465 761 KALAMATH ST #A DENVER, CO 80204 -4402 MCBRIDE JOHN P MCBRIDE JOHN PAUL JR MCBRIDE PETER MACK 303E AABC C/O ROARING FORK LAND CO C/O LESTER D PEDICORD ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 50703 1720 S BELLAIRE STE 300 SANTA BARBARA, CA 93150 DENVER, CO 80222 -4316 MOORE THOMAS A & CAROLYN OBERMEYER AABC LLC OWL CREEK RANCH PO BOX 126 115 AABC HOMEOWNERS ASSOC WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O VIDAL CHUCK PO BOX 3159 ASPEN, CO 81612 PITKIN COUNTY RANCHO CALIENTE LLC RANSOM KENNETH & SALLY 530 E MAIN ST #302 555 W GRANADA BLVD #E9 MOORE ASPEN, CO 81611 ORMOND BEACH, FL 32174 PO BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ROARING FORK LAND CO SAGE LLC SARDY MRS T J PO BOX 50703 303E AABC C/O MRS TED HELLUMS SANTA BARBARA, CA 93150 ASPEN, CO 81611 4946 WOODLAND FORREST DR TUSCALOOSA, AL 35405 WEST CANYON INVESTMENTS LLC DBA HARBERT LUMBER CO PO BOX 2607 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81502 -2607 I Gk jV County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE & } ss. MAILING PURSUANT TO State of Colorado } PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE SECTION 2 -20 -100 I, /W /IGt/I'CZA , being or representing an Applicant to the Pitkin Cou ty Development Permit, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 2 -20 -100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations in the following manner: By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first - class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail at least 7 days prior to the public hearing to all owners of property within 300 feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the�Lkay of tGC�wvy , 2009 (which is 13 days prior to the public hearing date of 0/2do The names and addresses of the properties within 300 feet of the subject site shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the public hearing. 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject pr perty (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) on the 2 day of �f!✓ 20 w ich is at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A photograph of the posted sign is air hed hereto. -AW loom ' Applicant's naiii P1 94h l Signatur Signed before me thisday o nr1n� t/ , 20QQ by ll - '14 L f V l ©_� (Attach photograph here) WITNESS MY HAND AND My co"ission expires: Notary Public's Signature ! i CHARLAINA rl t h 1 LABRUM r qj:•.,. QP FOF • 1v COMM Exp. 06232012 PUBLIf NOTICE Man ft �1�A 1!S9 PURPOSE_ MW A Wit- _ i 1 '� _ -- fw a 20rfoot hsl ' T J t f1fted w ith 000068.: 4� PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 20 foot Height Variance for Pitkin County Airport (Case 02 -2010) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, to begin at 5:30pm, or as soon thereafter as the conduct of business allows, in the Commissioner's Meeting Room in the Courthouse, 506 East Main Street, Aspen, before the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment, to consider an application submitted by the Aspen / Pitkin County Airport, 233 East Airport Road, Aspen, CO 81611, requesting a 20 foot Height Variance where a maximum height of 20 feet is allowed, to erect a camera mast. This parcel contains 550.66 acres and is located in the PUB zone district. The State Parcel Identification Number for this property is 2643- 342 -01 -851. For further information contact Joanna Schaffner at the Pitkin Community Development Department, (970) 920 -5105. Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Published in The Aspen Times on December 27, 2009 Pitkin County Account No. 002.02 r1 r, i iJ V�U� ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 420 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 BALLENTINE HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 11765 ASPEN, CO 81612 CITY OF ASPEN ATTN FINANCE DEPT 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DDABC LLC 109 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 DROSTE PETER C JR & ELISE TRUST 25% INT PO BOX 6697 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 HAWKINS DUDLEY W L JR PO BOX 37 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 MCBRIDE JOHN P 303E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 MOORE THOMAS A & CAROLYN PO BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ASPEN MINI STORAGE LLC PO BOX 245 7037 E SOPRIS CREEK RD SNOWMASS, CO 81654 BURLINGAME HOUSING INC C/O PREFERRED PROPERTY MNGMT SER PO BOX 2685 BASALT, CO 81621 COLORADO DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE OF COLORADO 4201 E ARKANSAS AVE DENVER, CO 80222 DROSTE BRUCE F 25% INT 231 BOLTON RD WINCHESTER, NH 03470 EAST OWL CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOC 514 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 HEINEMAN PETER 19423 N TURKEY CREEK STE B MORRISON, CO 80465 MCBRIDE JOHN PAUL JR C/O ROARING FORK LAND CO PO BOX 50703 SANTA BARBARA, CA 93150 OBERMEYER AABC LLC 115 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 WEST CANYON INVESTMENTS LLC RANCHO CALIENTE LLC PO BOOX X 2 2607 DOA T LUMBER CO 555 W GRANADA BLVD #E9 607 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81502 -2607 ORMOND BEACH, FL 32174 ROARING FORK LAND CO SAGE LLC PO BOX 50703 303E AABC SANTA BARBARA, CA 93150 ASPEN, CO 81611 J X31, `.3 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC PO BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHILL LTD 476 WESTWOOD DR DENVER, CO 80206 -4139 COLORADO MTN JR COLLEGE DIST PO BOX 10001 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 DROSTE EDWARD & WILLIAM TRUST 25% INT 231 BOLTON RD WINCHESTER, NH 03470 GORDON JAMES TRUST 900 N MICHIGAN AVE #1800 CHICAGO, IL 60611 MCBRIDE JOHN P C/O THURSTON INC- STEPHEN MCDONALD 761 KALAMATH ST #A DENVER, CO 80204 -4402 MCBRIDE PETER MACK C/O LESTER D PEDICORD 1720 S BELLAIRE STE 300 DENVER, CO 80222 -4316 OWL CREEK RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O VIDAL CHUCK PO BOX 3159 ASPEN, CO 81612 RANSOM KENNETH & SALLY MOORE PO BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 SARDY MRS T J C/O MRS TED HELLUMS 4946 WOODLAND FORREST DR TUSCALOOSA, AL 35405 James and Jill Williams Gordon and Elaine Gerson 4700 Gaillardia Parkway, Suite 100 716 W. Buttermilk Road Oklahoma City, OK 73142 -1857 Aspen, CO 81611 Page 1 of 2 Joanna Schaffner From: Lance Clarke Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:25 AM To: Joanna Schaffner; Susan Pearson Subject: FW: Air Traffic Control Camera Com -Dev Fee For the tower height variance From: David Ulane Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 7:48 AM To: Peggy Johnston Cc: Lance Clarke; Tim Malloy' Subject: FW: Air Traffic Control Camera Com -Dev Fee Good morning Peggy... Can you please transfer $648 from 404.69.91444.82000 to 002.02.00000.63336? This is our application fee to ComDev for review of our proposed air traffic control camera installation. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Dave David R. Wane, A.A.E. Assistant Aviation Director /Administration Aspen /Pitkin County Airport 0233 E. Airport Rd. Suite A Aspen, Colorado USA 81611 Phone: 970.429.2853 Fax: 970.920.5378 www.aspenairport.com From: Lance Clarke Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 9:09 AM To: David Ulane Subject: RE: Air Traffic Control Camera Com -Dev Fee 002.02.00000.63336 We appreciate your business! From: David Ulane Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 7:50 AM To: Lance Clarke Cc: Tim Malloy' Subject: Air Traffic Control Camera Com -Dev Fee �UL J 12/18/2009 Page 2 of 2 Good morning Lance... I understand the airport needs to submit a $648 fee to Com -Dev for review of our tower camera application. Can you give me an account code you want it transferred to? Thanks! Dave David R. Wane, A.A.E. Assistant Aviation Director /Administration Aspen /Pitkin County Airport 0233 E. Airport Rd. Suite A Aspen, Colorado USA 81611 Phone: 970.429.2853 Fax: 970.920.5378 www.aspenairport.com From: Tim Malloy [mailto:tgmalloy @sopris.net] Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 8:50 AM To: Jim Elwood; David Ulane Subject: Authorization Letter and Fee for BOA (height variance) Process. Hi Jim and Dave ... nice to see you guys yesterday! Jim I have attached the authorization letter that I mentioned yesterday. If this looks OK, I'll slap your digital John Hancock on it for the application which will be submitted on Monday. Dave the fee for this process is $648.00... can you make arrangements with Com Dev for payment of this fee as in the past? Thanks guys ... have a great weekend! Tim Tim Malloy, Principal TG Malloy Consulting, LLC 402 Park Drive Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970 - 945 -0832 Fax: 970 - 945 -0833 e -mail: tgmalloy @sopris.net 73 12/18/2009 tlNtl15 f101 r 1" { 7 '.. y I a� a U Q 7 .J U U C Q i O � rnU 5U � O C c p a a o w u � w a � u a F ws$� FFx� C W O p cNav� h O C1 O 4! "— f! � — f� tD T n 3 O - flyCL !G m 3 zOr It UP s = a!0 w F F m z w 0 = &I fa = f8 tl C1 — O W z aw - RRR"' .v — rf w ul N x r+ V z m u D \ _ }) ] \)§ ® t}/ }J \3 2) \( f�=< \\/375 2 « 2 )^ " ��()\ 2 ± ; \ \ ; ° 3 z o z �k b\)%§ 7 �oc�• u� -cz ® mot / 22 / ) §[E» \ _ }) ] \)§ ® t}/ }J \3 2) \( f�=< \\/375