HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.08281978 -E ,�,.��.�F�:� _ .
S� � ,
`'ax'J.�h. .
yy'�.Z�.d.:•'.f��. ' . .
�:�isT
��
� ,. .. �... � .,. ._.. . . :,.: ,_�,. ., , �- ,._. ...
` .. ��
�
y!:
:�; ,}
:�•
� PITKIN COUNTY COMiKISSIONERS' �'
4
MEETING AGENDA �
. August 28, 1978 a
�
� 9:00 a.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Welfare -
�. 9:15 a.m. RESOLUTIONS/CONTRACTS:
� 1) Fair Grounds Resolution - RS
_� , 2) Denial of Lime Village Subdivision - SMS
3) Metcalf Extension - SMS
4) Proposed Amendment. t� Home Rule C'harter Re: Election Procedures-
5) Contract for Asphalting of Rio Grande/Aeron Park - GLO SMS
6) Aspen Barn Storming, Inc. Lease Agreement - DM
�� Approval of 8/1,.4�78 P•4inutes - LS
$) Treasurer's t4onthly Statements - RS
9) Vegetation Baseline Inventory - GLO
9:30 a.m. SET P.H. TIMES--FIRST READINGS
1) Amendment to Animal Regulations(10/9/78 10 a.m.)
2) Samango Lot Separation(10/9/78 10:15 a.m.)
3) Bialek Special Review(10/9/78 10:45 a.m.)
4) Lull Special Review(10/9/78 11:15 a.m.}
5) Aspen River Valley Ranch Detailed Sub(10/9/78 2;00 p.m<')
� 9e40 a.m. Proposed Purchase of County Property by AVH - J. Bulkley
� 10:00 a.m. P.A. Silverking Condominiumization - KS
.� 12:00 Noon USFS LUNCHEON--OUTSIDE COURTHOUSE
1:00 p.m. Townhouse Lounge Liquor License Transfer - LS
1:05 p.m. Sam's Knob Liquor License - LS �
� 1:10 p.m. Courts & Course Stocks Transfer - LS �
1:15 p.m. P.H. Parking Requirements - KS
1:30 p.m. �ASpen Metro San-Holy Cross Easement - SMS
1:45 p.m. P.H. Heiqht I,imitations - RS �
2:Q0 p.m. Aldefer Subdivision Exemption.:^ KS Pys,
2:15 p.m. P.H. Swiriming Pool Covers - I:S !`
2:3D p.m. P.H. Amending County Ambulance Regulations - SMS �.
� � � � ��� �s
2:45 p.m. P.I�. Guttesman Lot Separation - RG -�"' � �
' 3:15 p.m. Midland Park Final Plat Approval - SM � �
;t
4:00 p.m. JOINT CITY/COUNTY MEETING: `�
1) Location of a Gravel Pit - GLO
, 2) Schedule P.H. for Little Annie(9/21/78) �
'� - - ,L_-�,._..a�._��„ i;+ _ scc �
4) A-95: 1) Flxible Industry-Related Start-Up Traning - GLO i7
2) Migrant Family Planning - GLO ;
3) Town of Snoc•rmass Master Plan - GLO ��
4) Skyline Six Area r'�gency Plan - GLO �
5) Region XII Crirlinal Justice Planning - GLO
;i
i:�
;�
. .A
;
:�k .
it
y.Fu.
�Y':�
t
=N '��F
. �"y,,..'µ�;E� - . ..
.:r., .
_. .. �:
',
,,�
�;a . �f.:
�� t
,`� PITKIN COUNTY .
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
� Regular Meeting August 28, 1978
?'� PRESENT: Chairman Robert W. Child, Michael Kinsley, Joseph E. Edwards, Jr. (arrived late)
��
,�
. Fair.ground A resolution reserving $40,000 of the public works fund for 1479 use for acquisition
; Funds
of County fairgrounds was unanimously approved on a motion by Kinsley and a second by �;
�. Child.
�
.l. . -.
,,�
---------- ,
�;Lime Kinsley moved approval of a resolution denying the special review application for the
Village
Denial separation of lots in Lime Village subdivision. Child noted that he received a letter
�
��,'` from Jim Mollica, the applicant, requesting reconsideration of the item. Stuller said
�"'� Mollica can reapply under the.newly amended section 7.22 af the Code if he feels it �
[ ..
�
will affect his application. Child seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. �
;� ---------- t '
� � .:
'� Metcalf Kinsley moved approval of the resolution granting a time extension to the Metcalf €: ' :
�
, Time
� Extension subdivision. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously. t =
' ' ;'� ----------
. ;.
. Charter A resolution placing two amendments to the Aome Rule Charter concerning election t
Amendments: ;' [
,. Election, procedures on the November ballot was unanimously approved on a motion by Child and •,
• Referendum l
a second by Kinsley. Child felt that the Charter should be made more specific con- j
cerning referendums and initiatives; he said he would be willing to work on drafting
an amendment limiting the scope of the initiative section of the Charter. Stuller noted � :"
that the two amendments contained in the resolution were preaented to various Charter '
I;
� t'i
members and there were no objections. ;?',
!f'
i� :
,. --------- i. ,
Bike George Ochs presented a contract with Elam Construction for paving of the Rio/Heron r
Trail �
Paving trail, repaving portions of the Mill Street trail, and paving on the Castle Creek � .
Contract �
Bridge and the Airport Business Center trail. The cost for the asphalt work is extremely 1,
high because so many small-scale jobs are involved. Kinsley asked about paving work ��
;
on the Ute Avenue trail by the Aspen Club. Ochs said that will not be included in the �r
contract because the Aspen Club will be responsible for those repairs. (Edwards � ��
,
arrived.) Child moved approval of the contract and asked what the normal price per ton � t;y
is for asphalt. Ochs said the normal price is $28.00 per ton; this asphalt will cost � �i .
� ��:
� `r
� '`i
I f±'
Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 1 ;,ti
i s;:
I
� i'a
� � ;:
�
, j4 :
,�t
.`�"..S'l....1 .. ._..
. �.,�y^,y"�1y.'i'xt�:;. � ...
� +� J
� � � _
� ��
$48.00 per ton.
'.�
Oklahoma Kinsley commented that the Oklahoma Flats trail is much too steep. Edwarde asked
Flata
Trail if it has been paved. Kinsley replied it hasn't, but the trail has been cut and `�
gravelled. Ochs said the trail in Oklahoma Flats was approved as part of a city
subdivision; the developer was unwilling to accept an alignment on the old road
through the area because it would cross a home site. Edwarda asked if more fill
could be added to lessen the grade. Ochs said that wouldn't work.
'Vk Kinsley seconded Child's motion and it passed unanimously.
� ----------
� Minutes Kinsley moved approval of the August 14th minutes. Child seconded with one amend
3
a
� ' ment on page five. The motion passed unanimously.
; ::
� F :
y ---------- � . .
k Aspen A use and lease agreement with Aspen Barnstorming was unanimously approved on a _
� Barnstorming
� motion by Kinsley and a second by Child.
j
� ----------
+ Treasurer's Kinsley moved approval of the Treasurer's monthly statements £or March, April, '
� Monthly i .
� Statements May and June. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously. �
j
-----_____ � i, `
North Star Kinsley moved approval of a vegetation baseline inventory agreement with Western i ;:
` Vegetation � !
3 Baseline Resource Development Corporation for study at the North Star Ranch. Child seconded
� Inventory � ;
� and the motion passed unanimously. j _
!
� ------- � "
� .
� BRB Bridge Child reported that the BRB bridge was completed this weekend in the Crystal River � '
i
� Dalley. The bridge was a cooperative effort, and the area residents requested that � ;
f .'
the County deposit some fill around the bridge and remove the pier. Ochs agreed to � �; •
` ; :"
take care of the matter. � `.
„ ---------- t ; ,
i.:: .
� Runway Doug McCoy, Airport Manager, presented a grant application for acquisition of runway .
Lights ; ,
�� Grant lights. He noted that if the rurnaay lighting system is not installed this fall the �
3 Applica- i
3 tion County will not receive their ADAP grant. The Board requested that the item be �
� delayed until later in the week. '
� �
l;�
'' First Kinsley moved to approve on first reading and set the following items for public ��
Readings: � �
Animal Regs, hearing: amendment to animal regulations at 10:00 a.m., Samango lot separation at � .
Samango, � �
Bialek, 10:15 a.m., Bialek special review at 10:45 a.m., Lull special review at 11:15 a.m., � �
"� Lull !
1 �.
�. _�i � �f: .
; i3: .
�`�' Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 2 � ��
,�
=i s',
j; _
%
`fi.
,J,.
'��.a,-��,,�:. ` .
��e- � � . _,,. . ,
. � . .. . � . . . _ . . .. fj..
and Aspen River Valley Ranch detailed submiasion at 2:00 p.m., on October 9th, 1978.
Smith requested that the last item be omitted aince a public hearing is not required.
Kinsley amended his motion accordingly. Stuller noted Chat Che animal regulation
amendment re uires �`��?
q posting of property for vicious dogs. Child felt more stringent
;(:�.
regulations should ba adopted. The Board agreed to diacuss the matter in further x,�;
+� �;
detail at the public hearing. Child seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. sr
-°------- �.
�
e,,�,
Hospital Glenn Scott, Hospital Director, appeared before the Board to discuas purchase by
Land
Option the hospital of approximately ten acres of land now owned by the County adjacent to �'
the new hospital. The hospital has no iwnediate plans for use of the parcel, but �
would like to acquire it for future expansion. Scott showed the Board a plat of the �
�',
. area, noting that the County would reserve one piece at the north end of the property
for road access. He felt that the piece indicated would be the mosC useful for any �
�
future expansion, and said the hospital would 13ke to acquire as much of the prope=ty
as possible. Stuller asked the Board if the Gounty would be willing to assume the
option and survey coste. Kinsley said those costs would have to be covered by the
hospital. Scott said the hospital would plan to reimburse the County for any expenses
incurred for the land. Stuller said there should be a deadl.ine established in the
option agreement. Kinsley said granting Chis opt3on would mean that the County would �,
'�lose the appreciation of any other land they may have purchased with that money. Ochs
reported that the transit right-of-way includes one corner of the parcel. He added
�i
that the Meadowood Homeowners have objected to the proposed realignment of Castle �
�
: Creek Road, so it is uncertain if any of the property will be needed foz the new ��,
.�
�::
alignment. Edwards said he woald like to reserve the right to realign the road through�
u"
the parcel. Child asked about bus service to the parcel. Scott replied that would '�
� :
be no problem. Ochs asked if any deed restriction for open space was imposed when u
- the County purchased the tract. Stuller said there is no restriction on the property. '�°
: a
S Edwa=ds moved to give the hospital an option on the land, which will include a time �
'� limit and a restriction for the right to a road alignment and trail easement. �
;� Kinsley also felt the option should contain a restriction to the uses described by �
�
the hospital, and the property should revert to the County if the uses For the parcel �'
� �'
- " are chanoed. Edwards added that the hospital will pay all survey expenses. He asked �
� if an appraisal would be necessary. Kinsley and Ghild felt there would be no need ' � •
;
for an appraisal. Child seconded Edwards' motion and it passed unanimously. i y "
� �}
---------- r`
{ %f
i7
;�
' Commissionera Meeting August 26, 1978 - 3
��
�
.�_
I: -
� �;: ,
. :
i,
� Rt`} �.,,,e� -. . . �
� h��!r..:i . . , • ` '. �..
Lime Village Edwards asked what action was taken on the Lime Village resolution. Stuller said
the Board's response to the requeat for a motion Co reconsider c�as to direct the
applicant to reapply under the newly amended section 7.22• Jim Moran, representing
za'
Mollica, asked i£ the application would go through [he P & Z again. Stuller replied �;;a
�>..
�,<
it would. �.i:
�
�,
E�.
- " ���_�_�_ � y�{�fit,�..
i'
_, Liquor Edwards moved to approve the following liquor licenses: a transfer of the Townhouse �"
- Licenses �
Lounge license to Cony Corporation, a transfer of the Sam's Knob license to the �
�,
corporate name, and a stock transfer for the Courts and Course reztaurant, subject �"
to Stulle= reviewing the files. Kinsley seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Aspen The Board considered a letter written by Albert Kern, representing the Aspen Metro �
Metro San �
Easement Sanitation Dietrict, concerning a revocable easement given to Holy Cross by Pitkin
County foz the purpose of installing electric lines to the sanitation plant along
a portion oP the old railroad right-of-way. The letter states that the Sanitation
DistricC has applied for a grant from the EPA £or expansion of the plant, and they
fear that this revocable easement may affect the status of the grant. The District
requested that the County consider changing the easement Co a permanent one. The
Board's response to the letter was that a pesmanent easement is not inconsistent with
the interests of the County, and the Board will entertain the possibility of granting
i
a permanent easement.
- Public The Soard convened a public hearing to cons3der the general submission application
Hearing:
Silverking for condominiuudzation of the 304 unit Silverking complex. ICaren Smith, of the �;
Condominium- .
ization Planning Of£ice, submitted the following items for the record: a 3une 1, 1978,
general submission reporC done by Sno-Engineering, a July 11, 1978, letter from
Chen and Associates, a July 17, 1978, letter from Willard Clapper of the Volunteer
h
Fire Department, a June 23, 1978 memo from Fire Marshall George Newell, Planning �
�
Office memos dated August 24 and July 14, 1978, an August 23, 1978, memo from Dave .��
Ellis, City Engineer, and an August 25, 1978 amendment to the application from sg:
'�
Andrew Hecht.
c.
�
Sm1th noted that Dave Ellis had co�ents relating to the water system, road
�
circulation, utilities and parking. He felt that the water system could have impli- ,�
cations for increased costs for the units, since the initial sysCem was only in- E;
foxmally accepted bq the City and was never inepected. Ellis recoimnended that a ��
�,
water maintenance agreement be formulated between the Silverking Homeowners and �a
�::1
:� . . �, ���� .
� Commisaioners Meetfng Auguat 28, 1978 - 4 ,
i
a �
aK��
.�_
' F �
���4��� �
:a�, �.�;. ' '
�:.as ` .
. . . � .�... . . � K•jl.�.
i':
y,^
y��;
' }:
�w
the City to allow for the City to bill Silverking for any maintenance costa. To �"
;;z
date there have been no ma3or maintenance expenses. The original plan for Silverking i=
��
called for four phases, with the water system to be looped through the fourth phase; ;��
��
since the fourth phase was never built, Ellis reco�nended that the water system be 3
�
looped through the phase four land area. He estimated that could cost from $20,000 �
to $30,000. The utilities for the project now crisscross the area and there are no �
dedicated easements; he recoumiended that chis situation be corrected. The original �
proposal for the condominiumization called for the elimination of from 25 to 40
parking spaces. Ellis noted that the present parking situation is non-conforming
and has created a problem; he reco�ended that any approval be conditional upon
additional parking being supplied elsewhere, possibly across Lone Pine Road. Smith �
recommended that any peripheral parking be used for storage of cars, with the parking
�
adjacent to the units to be reserved for residents. Ellis also noted that the elim- �
ination of the circular route through the project will reduce proximity to the bus �
system. He felt the neighborhood question of circulation planning on Smuggler Mossn-
tain is one that must be resolved.
Willard Clapper coffinented that the cul-de-sac between phases three and four should
�.
be at least 100 feet in diameter and that fire access should be reserved through that �
�:
area. He recommended that any landscaping be a maximum of two feet high. In review- .�
ing the plans, Clapper did not feel there is a serious threat of fire spreading from
�'
one building to another. �
�
With respect to the structural cracks in the building, a report was done by Chen
�
and Associates and Anderson and Hastings, who felt the cracks would not affect the �
�.
structural integrity of the building. Smith recou�ended that any approval be con- �
;�.
ditioned upon referral of the follow-up report by Chen and Associates to the Colorado fi
Y�.-�
Geological Survey. Dave Shelton, of the CGS, said he could not evaluate the serious- '�
�
ness of these cracks until the detailed report has been received. �:
�7
The Trails Coordinator recoo�ended that the plat be modified in the southwest corner ,',
s
to connect the trail with the Lone Pine trail, and that the trail be curved, rather �
than ahowing a perpendicular easement. �:
;'#
- The City P & Z considered the matter on July 19th, and directed the Planning Office ,_
to prepare a resolution indicating their support for the project to be certified by
the individual members. After reviewing the resolution they did not approve it, ''
stating they are generally supportive of proposals of this nature but were concerned
with the loss of rental units, the impact on the Growth Management Plan, and with the '•; .
Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 5
�ey_
;�x� '�+�'�'4� _
3
'L�� �a"��,, '
�� �
. _ ,,.;; . ; � ., , _. .
. . - - . .}:,
A:
�, '
6 4A
• E
�?
insufficient price guarantees contained in this application. ;�'
Smith felt that the central issue involved here is the housing impact; the dis- _<
::s
s3
placement of people from this project would create a need to build more unita to �
�
house them which would exceed the GMP. She did not feel it is statistically provable 's
�
that all the current residents of Silverking will be housed in one way or another. ��
This project would not benefit seasonal workers or service personnel who would not �
s
- want to buy, people who could not afford the downpayment, people who could not • �`�
f�
qualify for the loan, or people who accept Silverking as temporary housing but
wouldn't want to invest in it. She said the "sloshing effect" within the PMH units
cannot be determined, and any predictions are speculative. Smith added that the `!�
applicant's contention that investors in the 93 free-market units would keep the
rents low is statistically unproveable since the final selling prices of the units �
are unknown. Smith pointed out that the prices of the units may change as the cost
of the project increases, which occurred with Midland Park. In reaponse to the
applicant's comments on the current vacancy rate in the project, Smith noted that �
the vacancy rate drops in the winter, and pointed out the low quality of the �
project. The Land Use Code states that any new free-market units generate a demand �.
for new employee units; this proposal creates new free-marekt unita but does not �
'�
add any new employee housing units. Smith felt the proposal could be improved if !�
the downpayment for the employee housing units were eliminated, or if some units �
beyond the 87 employer units were reserved as rental units 'ta address the seasonal :�
employees. Without these assurances, Smith said she remains skeptical of the dis- ��
�;
placement situation, and fears that next year there will be proposals for more units �
to house the employees now residing in Silverking. �'
'�
Housing Director Mark Danielsen submitted for the record his memorandums dated �:
July 13, August 17, and August 25, 1978, Brian Goodheim's letter dated August 28, �
:L
1978, recommendation by the Housing Advisory Board dated August 22, 1978, and re- ��s
�i
commendation for proposal by Harry Truscott and Donald Enaign. Danielsen noted „
_ �;
_i
that the application consists of 124 PMH units, 87 employer units, 93 free-market
units and 23 free-market-type studios which will have PMH restrictions. The price E:
ranges will be $20,300 for a studio PMH, $30,000 for a one-bedroom PMH, $47,300 for
a two-bedroom PMH, $36,000 for a free-market studio, $60,000 for a two-bedroom
employer unit, $75,000 for a three-bedroom employer unit, $63,000 for a one-bedroom ;�
free-market, $79,000 for a two-bedroom free-market and $99,000 for a three-bedroom
i:;
r;
Co�issionera Meeting August 28, 1978 - 6
•4 Y.. � . ' � .
_ Zy^.k,
^�r'- _
��, �,��{�
r
i� � � -
:�;, . � r v;: .
, � -.- -..; . . ..�..., .,
� Y.. � � . �.: ., .. ..� _ ...:..: , �. .. �
. . . . : , .�. .�. .... .. .,..._'_ . . . .�..
. . '_ , .. • .I!i
"° . '�i.
�':
a-`�
free-matket. �`'
.}
�..
Andrew Hecht, representing the applicant, submitted for the record his letter dated ;;
+i
August 28, 1978, the general submission application, Mark Dar,ielsen's Suly 13th memo, i;
r=
the minutes of the July 19th P 6 Z meeting, the minutes of the August 15th City f:
: r'a
rr
P & 2 meeting, the minutes of the May 15th Commissioners meeting, and Mark Danielsen's ;�;
�,f
memos dated August 17th and August 25th. Hecht reported that in May a conceptual G�
plan for condominiumization was submitted which included 188 PMA and 166 free-matket �
�i
units; on May 15th more speMfic information was presented concerning the n+i.x of the ",�
units, the price of the units, and tenant displacement and the applicant was directed ��'
5.
�.::
to prepare a general submission application. On July 19th the County P & Z approved
the general submission with 211 PMH units. The City P S Z also ezcpressed supporC :�
for a project of this type. He felt the proposal provides a way to make subatantial �
improvements, fix rents, and create units affordable by Aspen employees. Hecht '�
noted that a significant area of concem is the fear of tenant displacement; this
siutation has been cons3dered by the applicant, and he felt the housing analys3s
provides factval basis for evaluation of the question. Hecht stated that 65 Silver-
king residents have expressed an interest in purchasing a unit. He felt the 87
employer units will be used to house seasonal employees and will increase efficiency
by keeping all units occupied at all times. 108 local businessmen have expressed
an interest in buying employer units. Hecht noted that the Housing Authority can
impose rent controls on these units, if desired. The renovation of all units caill �
extend over a period of 18 months to minimize the effect of any displacement; this '�
will also allow more employees to meet the PMH qualifications. The applicant will !�
establish a housing office to assist residents in finding rental space elsewhere. ,,"�
R
The free-market units will have a six-month lease restriction to assure lower rents. �
He felt that non-You=ist units like these will have lowe= rents, since the owners �
� .
will want long-term tenants. Recht added that some free-market units will be pur- �
. �chased by current Silverking residents who are overqualified for the Plfii units. He
- �,
stated Yhat the statistics in Che housing report indicate that the vacancy rate
„
t;
increased becauae rents were raised but no improvements were made; this proposal ,
will provide a method to make the necessary improvements. With respect to the
effect of the project on the Gi�, flecht stated the GS�II' ie not designed to cover the ;�-
i�;
. .j
condominiwnization of existing un3ts. These units will be used for resident housing, ,
;'.�
with the free-market units covering the capital improvemeat costs. The proposal will =` �
ia
allow for $3,000,000 in improvements with no rent increases. Hecht concluded that
F;
�:�
Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 7
•�.a�
- ---,�
<..�,��.Y.'� " '
�Z�l��: . ..
. ,,;. ., . ., ... . .. , .
,-.. ....,. ..,,.. .
.,. . . � . . , ..... . . ..:... ,x�
'
�!'
.. �.
_%
the proposal is the best waq to make the necessary improvements and put an end to �'.�
EF:
the continual decline of Silverking, and to allow for the full utilization of the s`
;�
housing resource that Silverking represents. ��
Fi
Child asked if price ranges were quoted for the employer units. Hecht noted that tt
the prices on the employer units would be fixed. Gail Mahoney, of Sno-Engineering, �
said that 800 questionnaires were sent to Aspen businesses explaining the nature of '�
_ " the proposal and asking for expressions of interest; no definite price zanges were
�
included. �
Wilton Anderson, architect for the applicant, said he would have no problem correct- x
ing the poinCS raised by Ellis. He explained that when Silverking was originally con-
structed, no reserve fund was created for replacement of items such as carpet, drapes, ;
roofs, blacktop, etc. These items have all exceeded their normal life and should ,.�
be replaced. He estimated it would cost a minimum of $2,�QO,QQO to hring Silverking ��
back to its original level when built and to fulfill the promises made to the "
Coimn3ss3oners at that Cime. Repairs the applicant intends to make include new roofs,
exterior repairs, painting, new windows and doors, paving, landscaping and sprinkler
;�
installation, repairing sidewalks, boilers, pumps, baseboard, and swiu�ing pool, ;
replacing exterior lights, appliances, carpets, drapes and plumbing fixtures. Jay �
Kuhne, the applicant, explained that additional improvements will be done heyond
� the xenovations. These improvements would require an average $90.00 per month rent
3ncrease in each unit if they were not done through the condominiumization. In
their proposal, the costs for all these improvemente will be covered by the 93 free-
' market units. Andereon noted that this money must be spent whether the application
* is approved or not. He reported that Kuhne proposes a $3.7 million expenditure, :�
;
x
� which will include such additional imQtovements as creation of storage space, cor=ec- i:�
tion of major plumbing and sound problema, revision oE poor kitchen layouts, and the '�.
, �
� addition of more insulation and more square foot space in some units. Anderson felt �
. � the landscaping would lessen the impact of Silverking on the surrounding neighborhood. `�
�
Bill Kane, of Sno-Engineering, said the Sno-Engineering Resource Management Survey �
�
covers Silverking as a housing resource, and is not intended to focus on the indivi- �
�
dual housing needs of the residents there. With the high vacancy and unemployment �,
rates that now exist at Silverking, the housing resource is underused; Kane felt �
1�
the condominiimmization proposal would provide h3gher quality housing, and would pro- �r
��
�h
vide an opportunity for houeing ownership for lower income people. The report indi- �;� '
. .�;
cates that if Silverking continues as is, it will lead to increased vacancy and an ';?
increased decline of the project; the project is presently in the red and there is �=`
i;
i�,
I
�� Co�issionera Meeting August 28, 1978 - 8
�yi ..
_:;`;a;' . . ..
:�n.:-y.F.,� . . � .
.''� .y F - �
..�y� rS�,� ,
A5, f�-.
��u-�i�,,.�r i.
xj'•
,`��.
�it
no incentive for further investment in Silverking as it now exista. Kane felt
Kuhne's proposal is the most carefully considered one the County could get for the �i:
project. He added it would be a mistake to conclude that the free-market units will �"
;�;
be swept up by out-of-town investors because of their unique situation. Kane con- �
; �
cluded that by satisfying the demand for ownership housing for low and moderate income �
people, proposals like this will result in a more stable community. `°
Kuhne stated that if it is proven to him that the good of the people of Yitkin �
County will be adversely affected by this condominiwnization, he will withdraw his
application. He felt that the Sno-Engineering report was unbiased and indicated
the condominiumization would be good for the co�unity. Kuhne showed the Board
the staging plans for the improvements which are based on vacancy percentages at
different times af the year; he stressed that no one will be evicted from the pro-
ject, and a housing office will be established to assist rasidents in finding other
rental housing. He noted that, using the County guidelines for the number of people
per bedroom, he could house up to 270 people in the employer units alone; this
is substantially more than the current occupancy rate. He has had 45 requests for
the free-market units, and of those, 31 units would not be owner-occupied and would
be rented out. Ruhne added that the price per square foot for his units is one-third
the square foot cost in Aspen. The financing will allow for an interest rate of
7�%, and 90 to 95X financing. :
Danielsen stressed that the major issue here is tenant displacement. If the pro-
posal is approved, the timeframe for the improvements will be crucial. He estimated
that the cost of ownershi would be a "'
p pproximately 10% lower than the current rental
rates. The financing for the units will also be very important; conventional
financing would require $2,000 more in income than the mortgage pool concept.
Danielsen estimated the approximately yearly income qualifications would be from i�
$6700 to $15,000 for combined income. Ae noted that the employer units will also be ''�
PMH resale restricted. Some points to be considered if the proposal is approved r�
�
are whether the Housing Authority should finance the units, and whether that is �
legally possible, or if the Authority should consider financing and then leasing units €
to employers. Danielsen pointed out that 1£ the Housing Authority owns phases one �
• ;�.
and two they have the option to rent the units out themselves if no market exists �
for purchase. He reco�ended that the Authority also consider obtaining the land i�'
IY
in phase four, which is included in Kuhne's option. T6e purchaser qualifications for ri
;�;. ,
.i
the PMH units will include an 18-month residency requirement, however some criteria
:�
I;,
Commissioners Meeting Auguat 28, 1978 - 9
,, - �
-'%::�;,-.�:
�:��-„��;;` _
,����'� `
, l�
��,s� � � �, .
. . . EI.,:
,� ;
er u?
�D,,
may be dropped for people on fixed-incomes. Danielsen asked what would happen to t`'
;a.
aeasonal employeea while the units are being renovated. ;
�f
Kinsley felt the critical question in the application ie the likely rental cost of E�
�
the free-market units, compared to the rental rates of the units if Silverking is �
not condominiumized. Aiso, he felt everyone must consider the alternatives if this , �
proposal is denied.
Child opened the hearino to publir comment.
Tom Peckham submitted for the record a report on the condominiumization done by
the Silverking Residents Association Steering Co�ittee. This report concludes that
over 3/4 of the residents are opposed to condominiumization, and reco�ends denial
of the application. The survey indicates that 95X displacement would occur, and
Peckham noted that that figure should be extended to cover the peak winter work force. `.
Housing for seasonal employees will be non-existant if Silverking is condominiumized, '�
and Peckham predicted that the winter work force will probably leave. The units
listed as available for rental elsewhere in Aspen in the Sno-Engineering report were
very inaccurate. Peckham said that members of the Steering Co�nittee telephoned the
owners of the units listed as available, and many. of .the figures were incorrect.
He said the presence of Silverking has held rents down in the surrounding community
� and predicted that if the condominiumization is approved landlorda will take advantage
of the housing shortage and raise rents. Peckham concluded that the proposal will
have a negative impact and lead to a low-quality labor force.
Sheldon Fingerman agreed that the units listed as available in the general submis- �
sion report are very inaccurate. He noted that the Steering Committee's report shows �
alternatives to condominiumization, and predicted that rent inereases could be kept �
s
to a bare minimum if the residents and Commissioners work together. �
�i
Ernie Ashley, president of the Chamber of Commerce, reported that the Chamber has ;�
made a co�itment to become involved in the employee housing needs for the community. �
They support the upgrading, maintenance and creation of seasonal employee housing, �
and feel that Silverking should incorporate these concerna in their operation and �7
ks
minimize any displacement. ;�
F#
. Jay Pearson asked how much the monthly dues would increase on the free-market units. t�
�g
��
Kuhne replied that all improvements will he paid for by the sale of the free-market �
(x�
units, so the dues for the units will range from $17 to $89. }:i
�v.
Harry Truecott, a member of the Housing Advisory Board, showed a chart relating to �,.
r�; .
the housing impact if Silverking is changed from a rental complex. The figurea
Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 10 ';�
ta'
r.�...,
1
t ,��yj1�� , ..
. {,�a" x�'�i. , �
���
_. ., _� . , . �., . . .
. . ..... . .,:�.,�� .. ' .. . ,..:�::. -.:��:.: :::; , �� � „_._..-.. .. .
.. ._... . . ,..
., � .. . ,:. . .. , . �g.;
9
� ��y
� hj
� related to the number of units available,the number of units needed and the price �
� ,
ranges needed, based on figures from the 1975 housing survey and the latesC census �
�
figures. Truscott concluded that going through with the condominiumization of }�
.� Silverking will not worsen the balance between the available and needed renta], unita �
s� in the Aspen area.
�. Ernie Ashley, speaking as an individual, noted that last year Aspen experienced
att employee shortage, and anticipates that the same situation will exist this year.
She asked what is being done for the seasonal employee. She felt a shortage o£
rental units will worsen this situation. �
�
Roger Hunt pointed out that when the 700 i�est Hopkins building was to be turned
� over to the people renting the units, the majority of the units were owned by out-
- .� of-town residents within one year. He said Che free-market units at Silverking
� will inevitably hecome tourist units. He recommended that a public corpoLation be
�
;. czeated to control Silverking, giving investor employees space in the units. Hunt
� stressed that the community needs these rental units to serve the seasonal needs of
f.t
_ ,t
j Aspen.
Alan Kopchenski, who employs approximately twenty people, noted that his job
• ' applications are down 80x from two years ago. Ae felt the Silverking project needs
i.mpravement, but the condominiumization will eliminate a viable part of the rental
; maxket. As an employer, he could not afford to purchase a unit for his employees.
� He predicted that people will not continue to come to Aspen if there is no housing
or skiing. Kopchenski felt the local government, business community and Ski Corpora-
` ? tions should work together to solve this problem. He said the County's exclusionary
zoning has created the inflationary real es[ate market which has resulted in the
' s
housing shortage, and suggested that the County should form a County subsidy to
control Silverking as a rental project.
Frank Aarvey stressed the importance of maintaining Aspen as a com�unity viable
�
for families. He felt residents should have an opportunity to buy or rent, but
rental opportunities must come £irst.
Fred Kamm spoke in favor of the proposal, stating he doesn't know of another ,�
opportunity a working person would have to buy something in this community. He i�
�t;
agreed that rental housing is necessary, but people who want to live in Aspen must ,�,
�a
be able to buy something, and this proposal looks like the only chance. i�
y
Kinsley said the PMH and employer unita in this proposal are good thinge, but the �
�.
s,�
�;�:
:`.%
Commissionera Meeting August 28, 1978 - 11 _
't
ti+i'�y
..,.vwm...a. 1� �
;y.r
. �1.j,�4wn•'N�f,�S: � .
�''M1.i�i �cI �
T
. Ti.iY. ,.: .
.���� � '..� . �:
..... . .. ... . : .�.. .. �..� :..._� .
, ..., .. . . .. ...._ . . ..
. . . � . __... � - q.. -
'f!:
i:
�
� comnunity must face the realit of what will happen if this is denied. Silverking �
� Y � .
'� will have to do something. He showed a chart indicating the current rents, the �
� ��
likel future rents if the condominiumization is not a �
y pproved, and the probable rents (,5
� �,
of the free-market units. For a one-bedroom unit the current rent is $295 - $320, �
� the future rent is $365 - $400, and the free-market rent is $275 - $350; for a 3
two-bedroom the current rent is $370 - $400, the future rent is $415 - $450, and the
-:-r
free-market rent is $350 - $450; for a three-bedroom unit the current rent is $455,
the future rent is $510 - $545, and the free-market rent is $450 - $600. He etreased
that these figures are just predictions, but felt they are the best predictions
available and should be taken into consideration.
Bill Comstock, a Silverking resident, said he would hate to see a co�unity-support-
� ed situation there. He asked how many people contacted in the survey were unemployed
� and how many were subletting. He said one must consider the problem of the deteriora-
� tion of Silverking and ask how it can be maintained or improved.
�
. � Fritz Senedict pointed out that the replacement cost of these rental units would
probably be twice as much as the Silverking units cost to construct. He felt the
loss of these rental units is a major concern. He noted that some people in the
co�unity are considering turning the lowest rental units in Aspen into tourist
rental units (without condominiumizing) and felt that is a possibility which could
not be prevented. Benedict said the Co�issioners should consider the high turnover
of rental units to tourist units which has been occurring. He Pelt this proposal is
imaginative, but doesn't feel the question of the loss of rental units is being
addressed. All the improvements proposed are not mandatory; people will live in
whatever they can afford.
Stephen Orlitz noted that there is a substantial number of people who have no in- ' �
tention of leaving Aspen, but do not want to be forced to buy something to stay here.
He didn't feel all the superficial impravements are needed, but felt the rental
housing is very necessary.
Guy Noble said there is no way employees will ever have an opportunity to own �
anything if this is not approved, and spoke in favor of the project. She said the �
t:*
aurvey done by the residents is very inaccurate, and felt the people conducting the Li
survey had a very negative attitude. c
Michael Steinhart, a Silverking resident who has lived in Aspen for nine years, `•°'
,`�
said there is no way he can stay here if he can't buy something. He favored the rii' .
proposal, saying he must be able to purchase housing whether he can make a profit r
;;E
or not. �,�
;'f.
'4
Commiaeioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 12
�:.. �
•"-1'::':.,Y;i
..41
'�� c�.�, .,''�. ' .
�"tk'�� .
�s.—,".�
` , uria'- . �
.. ._.. . r�i..
,;
u"�
�:
�sa.
Reese Johneon said his rent has increased Prom $225 to $400 since he moved to s�,
Silverking, and no lmprovementa have ever been done. His salary has not increased =�
proportionately to his rent increases. He felt if the condominiumization is approved i�
��
he will know what his future is in this co�maunity.
Robert Bracher stated that the image of a co�unity is reflected in its permanent �
residents. fte felt the deciaion of the Co�issioners should be more directed toward �
permanent reei�ents than towar4 saasonal employees. �
Larry Slater reported that his rent was increased from $250 to $320 in one year;
the purpose was to repaint the buildings, and some improvements were made, though
not many. He said there is no reason Silverking cannot be kept full year-round,
but they cannot continue to raise the rents indiscriminantly. Slater would like
to buy a condomin3um at Silverking, but doesn't feel the condominiumization is good
for the coffinunity since rental units with fair market rental pricea are needed.
He felt if the complex were properly managed rents could be kept lower and the units
would be kept fu1L
Kinsley said he tried to generate interest in improving the situation at Silverking
four years ago, but no one was interested. fle felt people are oaly interested in
changing the situation when there is a clear danger.
Dorothy Brown noted that the current management at Silverking has not rented out
� any apartments since Kuhne's proposal was made.
Mary Anne Conti said she polled people in her building and felt the polling done
by the Steering Committee was fair and accurate. She noted that Kuhne's poll was
taken before any facts or figures were shown, and so the results are not accurate.
Conti added that the present proposal is too "iffy" for a final vote. ;�
Dan Connelly commented on the rent increases and the bad condition of the buildings, �
adding that no improvements have ever been done. He asked what would happen to �
people who have to rent units if the condominiumization is approved. � _
�
Michael Biittner said the people who come to Aspen in the winter come for different �
S4
reasons. He didn't feel the condominiumization would affect the winter work force. �
,
Ernie Ashley reported that one recent poll indicated that the two ma�or factors
contributing to the shortage of seasonal employees are the housing shortage and tlie "
lack of a ski pass. ;_
F?:
Ko achenski asked if the Count has considered doin an thin with Silverkin t'�'
P Y S Y 8 8• i�.
Kinsley said it is a possibility, but not one the County would relish. He noted tt i>`=
�� .
may not be legally possible for the County to make that kind of investment.
`.s
Kopachenaki felt more County involvement could result in a better plan for Silverking. I';b;
Comnissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 13
ti�,;�•
�,:�.-
;;„_7,..,�F�l.: _ ._ .. . �
..:i�.�.M�ic��A ` .
�
, K �� .
. ,...... . . � �).
Y};'.
� X.
� 'F:
Kuhne pointed out that the comments heard today were made by permanent reaidents, ir; y
;z
not by aeasonal employeea. He noeed that the permanent residents' rent will always '-'
r;
go up, and his proposal is a method to fix the rent at a constant level. He said �`Z
�95
if these people stay here as rentors, they'll never get anything. �'ff
f�
�
Michael Kolodner, a bonding consultant hired by the applicant, felt the condomin-
iumization proposal meets certain needs. With regard to qualifications for pur- ! �;
�,
chasers, Kolodner eaid people who apply for a mortgage must demonstrate an ability
to make monthly payments; this could include proof of monthly rent payments which
were made on time. Not everyone who now rents at Silverking could qualify, but
\
Kolodner predicted many of the current residents could.
Betty Erickson pointed out that this proposal would provide an opportunity for a
person of modest income to purchase housing; since these people represent the core
of the community they should be able to own their homes.
Jeff Evans said the reason for the housing problem is the 3009,' inflatian rate, 200X
of which is due to the County`s land use policy. Until that is corrected, Silver-
king is not the major issue..
Roger Burkhart, a Silverking resident, said he came to Aspen in January of 1978,
at which time the housing situation was bad; he predicted the housing shortage would
be worse this winter. Kuhne noted that between now and next summer there will be na
displacement.
Bill Douglas agreed that this proposal would offer many people an opportunity to
purchase, however he was concerned about the residency requirement. He moved away
from Aspen for two years to earn money so he could return here, and he fears he may
�
` not be able to meet the residency requirement.
John Slade asked what would happen if a person wanted to purchase his or her unit.
Would they be moved out while the renovation was being done? Kuhne said they would � i
"f
cover moving expenses, such as reconnecting the phone and cable TV, and would try �
to make the least financial inconvenience for the tenants. Also, any tenants would
be given one month or six weeks notice.
� Vince Galluccio noted that the high density at Silverking was allowed for employee
��
housing. The managers of Silverking then raised the rents to create such a high �
vacancy rate that they could justify the condominiumization. �"
The public co�ent portion of the hearing was closed. Child moved to continue the �
r:.
meeting to September Sth. Kinsley seconded and the motion passed unanimously. ��
�:
`�
� ---------- �� '
��
;�,
;w.
v�
�}
j Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 14 `�
�, 't;�
:FYY�y'C k.�
�',:..
aY
;� �
.::yr<.
.5 �*�,.� ' .
. ',f Ia.�.P�•rt•i. . . . . .
�
l'S��bsx'�' . � .
e
.. . � ':. ' , ':-. . . . i .
., ._. ... .....
. �. ,... , �...�. �...� .....,.. _.,.._.�_ ....::.:_ ...
i�).
t.
�A�•,..
Edwarda left.
:�
-------�-- ��:;
Cade The Board convened a public hearing to consider a code amendment regarding parking �;.�
Amendment: s.
��
Parking requirements which would affect mainly the business and industrial zones. Smith ,,
Requirements �;r
explained that the amendmenC would create a new method for calculat3on of the
�.
I:�'
parking requirements for industrial warehouse uses by making parking requirements for `;
�
these uses a special review matter in the B-1, B-2 and I zones. The special review �_
w
p would consider the needs of the development and its access to mass transit. �#
H �:.
g Eventually, it is,hoped that this type of special review matter can be handled by ,�
F i.���,
� the P 5 Z, and will not require Commissioner approval. Smith noted that this ardse i�
as a result of the Obermeyer warehouse at the Airport Business Center; under the �
current regulations they would be required to provide 40 parking spaces, although �
that much space is not needed in this circumstance. Kinsley asked if thia amendment ��-,
� would make the parking =equirements discretionary in each o£ these cases. Smith
�
I said it would. Child said he favors the flexibility but felt a maximum parking
requirement should be established. Smith said the maximum would be one space per
7 400 square feet, as established in the Code. Child moved approval of the amendment
I
� and resolution. Kinsley seconded and the motion passed unanimousl;.
�
: � ---------
�
• Code The Board convened a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Code concerning
Amendment:
Sarns, height iimits. Smith explained that this wouZd allow bams to be constructed at
Height
Limits the maximum height limits for the RS-20, RS-30 and ftS-160 zone categories. Presently, �
the Code allows only the "principal uses and buildings" to be built to a maximum �
of 28 feet, and limits a11 other buildings to 12 feet. The P & Z recommended that
this be amended to include barns in the 28 foot limit, and to define barns to prevent '�;
any residential uses. Child asked about silos. Smith said it would be appropziate �
for the Board of Adjustment to consider these, since there aren't very many in this {5
�
area. Stuller said policy-making should not be done at the Board of Adjustment level. ;'
Kinsley moved approval of the amendment. Child seconded. Child noted there are �
�
�
some barns in the County which include stable managers quarters, however this resolu- Py
tion does not allow any residential uses in barns. Stuller said that was the P & Z's �
intention. The motion passed unanimously.
�
--------- �
�
� Alderfer Richard Grice presented a subdivision exemption application by Fred Alderfer for �
' Subdivision �'
i. Exemption the revision of lot lines betweea lots 13 and 14 of the Aspen Tennis Club subdivision ��r
:;.
,
in order to allow the two owners to take advantage of the best building sites on the rY
; �,�
7 '
i ��
�;`
� Commissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 15 ?�.
a
',;;.�",-yk:{w
_ �
�r.;..
,;,.
.ar� i�*.
� ��a�:{'-.a.,. . . � .
, y„s�`:• i;r
- ,. �. ,, . - ... . . .._.. . .
.._:._.. , .,_ , . , _.. .
, _ �.,.
,�,.
a'4.
parcels. The lots now conform to the R-30 zone, and will conform to the zone after �
the revision. The exemption createa no additional sites, and the applicant has met ;�
the recording plat requirements. Lot 13 is owned by Alderfer and lot 14 is owned �
by Srent Waldron. �
Kinsley moved approval of the resolution. Child seconded, with the condition that
no additional development is created by the exemption. The motion passed unanimously. '
Public The Board canvened a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Suilding Code
: Hearing:
! Swi�ing which would require the cavering of outdoor heated swinm�ing and therapy pools between
i Pool
Covers 11:00 p.m and 3:00 p.m. from October lst to May lst. Stuller noted this was done
at the request of Edwards. Kinsley moved approval af the resolution. Child seconded
and the motion pasaed unanimously.
Community Kinsley announced that Gene Marsh has been appointed as Community Center Director/
Center
. Director Human Resources Coordinator.
Public The Board convened a public hearing to consider amendments to the Amhulance Regula-
Hearing:
Amend3ng tions. Stuller reported that interim ambulance regulations were adopted in January,
Ambulance
Regula- 1978, as required by statute; the ambulance advisory board has made their reco�enda-
tions
� tion for amendments to these regulations, and these changes are incorporated into the
resolution. The major changes affect licensing vehicles, radios, annual inspections,
and the establishment o£ an emergency medical services council to grant waivers to
some of the requirements. The amended regulations will take effect January 1, 1979.
In addition, the resolution requests the aid of all private ambulance services in
County disaster planning. Kinsley pointed out that the EMS council is inconsistent x
with the citizen advisory board membership requirements contained in the Home Rule
Charter. Stuller said the EMS council,is a part of the Commission of Public Safety .
and is not a county board. The resolution was amended to state the County will
"recognize" rather than "establish" the EMS conncil. There was no public co�ent.
Kinsley moved approval of the resolution as amended. Child seconded and the motion
passed unanimously. ° `
� .
• �:
----------
4�,
Public The Board convened a public hearing to consider a special review application by
Hearing: ,
Gutterman Fredrick Gutterman for aeparatian of six contiguous lots (lots 2 - 5, block 4 and
Lot Split � �
cz
��
t,.
Commiasioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 16 r�
r,.=
;��;
.r
�.
'.t_^.. . ' .
';L„
_...r.,, ...
���� ,x��>._. .
��'� � •
�t����i=,'
��:
, ...• ,. •:,,
, ,. .: . ,.._, _ _ . _..
-. _
�..
,t,
;'�
-�,-
lots 3 and 4, block 5) in Bruah Creek Village subdivision for the purpose of separate �
development. Richard Grice reported that the CGS commented that several of the lots ��
s�
will require significant engineering design for access and building sites. The State �
�
Forest Service commented that the subdivision is in a severe wildfire hazard. Bob �
Nelson, County Sanitarian, was unsure whether sufficient water will be available for
the sites. The P & Z conducted a site inspection of the lots on 7uly 19th and
determined that the topography of lots 2 and 3, block 4, is too steep, and recommended
that access ta lot 5, block 4 be through lot 4 block 4. They reco�ended that
development be liutited to lots 3 and 4, block 5 and lots 4 and 5, block 4, with no
development allowed on lots 2 and 3. The owner requested that lots 2 and 3 not be
combined with the ad�acent lot, although development is prohibited, so they can be
donated to a non-profit organization for tax purposes. The separation would reault
in four home sites.
Chuck Brandt, representing the applicant, requested that the lot lines for lots
2 and 3 be maintained, rather than combining the three parcels into one. He added
that the P & Z felt development would be possible on lots 2 and 3 from an engineering
standpoint, however any development would result in a large cut in the shale. Child
asked when the subdivision was developed. Stuller replied Brush Creek Village was
developed in 1966, so the recent amendment to section 7.22 would not apply.
Nelson agreed that it may be possible to engineer homesites and access to lots 2
and 3, but it would be expensive, would result in a big scar, and some problems may
be unsolveable, particularly in lot 2. Scott Ferrell, who holds a contract on lot
- 2, felt the top of lot 2 would be developable. Nelson reported he has had problems
with the engineering plans for lot 1, which is adjacent to this property. Brandt
reported that Mike Otte has a contract on lot 3, and pointed out that this is a
�
siutation where two employeea could purchase property. He suggested the Board could
require access, water, etc. prior to issuance of a building permit. Nelson said the
only solution he could foresee for a septic system would require a lined evaporative �
system to avoid soaking the shale; this would involve a large cut. Grice asked ��-,
about a chemical system. Nelson said a large cut would still be required. Ferrell �
5
noted the cut could be terraced and landscaped. Child expressed concern about the �s
nossibility of water contamination mentioned by Nelson. Nelson said all sewage :�
<�<
systems in Brush Creek Village are done site-by-site because of the shale underlying F?:
�
the subdivision. Kinsley asked if the lots are substandard as to area. Grice replied �
they are. Child didn't feel these lots subatantially satisfy the subdivision regula- �
r�
Lz
tions. Grice said access is the cricial point; there isn't logical access to the ��
Ft
f:`',.
'r3
�'!i
Au ust 28 1978 - 17 �'
Commissioners Meeting S +
a ,:ys�<.
` �
i;'i 1��trt' " . . . , .
� z . .
_�`�r e- �
�S' -_..,.,
U,-s�, . .
�.�
.
�
... . ,. . y.:.
__ .. _
;, _. . _._...:. ,.
_ ..... , 9.�
_ . -F.
� I
�
sites. '
Child moved to approve the resolntion, limiting development to lots 3 and 4 in
block 5 and lots 4 and 5 in block 4 with accesa to lot 5 through lot 4. Rinsley
seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Midland Stuller presented the Midland Park final plat for approval. She noted that the
Park
Final Board revicwed the condominium declaration aD detai].ed submission, and s3nce that
" Plat
time there have been two changes concerning the definition of "limited common
elements", and an amendment to allow the owners of the units to review the annual
budget. Ted Guy, AYChitect, showed the Board the plat, explaining that it has been
fully reviewed by lou Buettner of the City Engineer's oPfice for proper easement
language, road dedications, boundaries, etc. Guy reported that all construction is
on schedule, and unit owners will begin moving in on Friday; the landscaping is not
yet completed. He has reviewed the items mentioned by City Engineer Dave Ellis con-
ceming width of the eastetly access road, specific plat language concerning
adjoinets' property boundaxy calls, a bill of sale for the water mains, utility
easement language, maintenance lines for Midland A�enue, and dedication to the City
of the Aspen Hills public right-of-way. Kinsley moved approval of the plat and
condominium declaration. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
The Board then convened as the Housing Authority. Kinsley moved approval of the
following actions: signature of the Consent to Meeting, appointment of Mark Danielsen
as Secretary Co the Authority, authorization of the Chairman's aignature on the � �
- - Final Affidavit and Agreement for issuance of title insurance, authorization of [he
Chairman ta execute an Easement and Bill of Sale to the City as conditions of water •
�
service, authorization of the Chairman to convey to the Commissioners the remainder
of the Randall property not included 1n the subdivision, approval of deeds conveying
the north half of the strip of land acquired from Aspen Hi11s fo= right-of-way which
lies within the City limits to the Midland Park p=o3ect as•private roadway, and the
south hal£ to the Co�issioners as public roadway, approval of a resolution authorizing
County maintenance of that part of Midland Avenue contained in the subdivision, and
consent to the sale of the units and authorization of the Chairman and Housing Director
to esecute deeds of conveyance and other appropriate closing documents. Child �
seconded and the motion passed unanimously. �#
�
Kinsley moved to amend the service agreement for Midland Park wnich was approved at � �
the lasY meeting to state that it w311 service Midland Park and Lone Pine only at �;
��.
�s
¢:t
E':
Iqi
P�1
Commissioners Meeting Auguat 28, 1478 - 18 >;-:;
_ :��k+��,
,� 1
. �jiy�.w � _
`�-�����``�' .
� t;� .
. ;
. , ,. . _ . ..... ._ _ . .. .. , _ .. ..: . . ,; .
' ,,
. . . a.�
;�.
� ?.
�,
the stated interest rate. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
�+
Stuller presented to the Board the certified record for permanent financing, which
she requested the Board approve subject to further amendment; Child will not sign
the resolution until it is in final form. This pledges the Promissory Notes and �
Deeds of Trust to the bank as security for the loan to the Housing Authority, and �
requires the County to foreclose within 120 days of default. Child moved adoption
of the certified record of permanent financing resalution and to authorize Stuller
to make any technical changes necessary. Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
The Board extended thanks to Ted Guy and Shorty Lankford for the great job they have
done on the Midland Park project.
At this point the joint City Council - County Commissioners meeting began. City
Council members present included Mayor Stacy Standley, Michael Behrendt, George
Parry, Nina Johnston and Steve Wishart.
Gravel Pit Ochs appeared before the group to discuss the concept of development of a common
gravel pit/hot mix plant in the valley by all local governmental entities, including
the City, County and Town of Snowmass. He noted that preaently the only approved
' pit is Elam, aince Corn's pit doesn't have a permit. Kinsley suggested using one
of the existing pits, since the governments could then be responsible for revegeta-
tion; he would be opposed ta the idea of a new site. Mahoney asked if a new pit
could be located by the solid waste center. Ochs said most of the gravel supply
near the dump is located by the Highway, and so it would result in a large acar.
6 .
Mahoney mentioned problems with exclusionary practice with the Elam pit. Hal Clark,
.�
representing Elam, replied that Elam leases their land from Wink Jaffee, and Jaffee,
not Elam, received the money from the highway contract. Child felt the administrative �
prablem with all the state regulations should be considered in the cost of a private �
pit. Ochs suggested that the City and County Engineers be directed to develop cost ��
estimates for various alternatives. Behrendt felt it would be more appropriate to k'{
allow another private party to open a pit in the valley so there would be competitive �
3
pricing, rather than opening a pit just for government use. Ochs noted that if a fp
I
P
pit were opened by the gover�ents it would be available for use by anyone bidding �
an a City-County road job. The group directed Ochs to continue to investigate the �
possibility of opening a new pit and .come'back with cost estimates. �
�
M1
�!-
Cownissioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 19 �
'6�=M'�F�y,i'�
"s,
.�y;�.
� :
�''���.,�,: "
,
,-�� ���. -
y_.-i�.� . .,
, .. , � . . ��..: .. .-; ., .
. .. .. . . __.. . .. ., �,t.,
�!'
�'.
Little Smith reported that the local governments and participating agencies in the Little }�
'Annie �_ F:
Public Annie joint review process have met, and the next atep is to schedale a publ3c �
flearing
Set hearing to give the public an opportunity to comment. The hearing was to be set
for September 21, but that date will conflict with a COG meeting. The joint meeting
was set for September 20th at 7:00 p.m., in the District Courtroom.
_ A-95's On a motion by Rinsley and a second by Behrendt favorable comment was given to an
A-95 on Colorado flexible industry-related start-up training, to train people in
metal and woodworking. The motion passed unanimously.
- i
Kinsley moved favorable comment on an A-95 on migrant family planning and the motion
was seconded by Johnston. Child felt the group should express no interest instead.
Behrendt moved no comment. Parry seconded and the motion passed with opposition
from Kinsley and Johnston.
An A-95 on the Snowmass mastex plan was given favorable co�ent on a motion.by
Ki.nsley and a second by Parry. The motion passed unanimously.
Kinsley moved favorable comment on an A-95 on the Skyline Six area agency plan.
Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
7enifer Carr presented an A-95 on Criminal Justice Planning. Thia is an annual
submission for funding for law enforcement training. Behrendt felt no comment
should be given. Carr said that would diminish the training for the Aspen Police
Department and the Sheriff's office; the A-95 will contribute $22,000 to the
training program and no matching funds are required. Child moved favorable comment.
Wishart seconded and the motion passed with opposition from Kinsley. : '
--------- � -
�
Joint Jack Schuss, Mayor o£ the Town of Snowmass, felt the three governments in the
ia
Purchasing �X
valley should investigate the possibility of handling some responsibilities jointly, �
L
such as planning, purchasing, maintenance, grants, etc. Standley noted that COG has �``
;h
i
a purchasing pool if Snownass would be interested in joining. Schuss £elt they should fi
- explore the possibility of a purchasing agent for Snowmasa, the City and the Coanty. '`
ti
�
Other suggestions made for combination of services lncluded the computer, the "�
credit union and insurance. � •
�
---------- �
!
�
Co�issioners Meeting August 28, 1978 - 20
�.
�•r.v,�f,.��ti�','':r " .
1` A. -.
��a�'�: ,
r � - •
.. ..:STi���M�l� .
- ,, �Yi`
� ''i'�'''`'
°�5�;
•September 5, 1978 continuation, Robert W. Child, Michael Kinsley and Joseph E.
Edwards, Jr, present. �
Silverking The Soard reconvened the public hearing on the Silverking condominiumization applica-
Condomin-
iumization tion. Mark Danielsen submitted for the record the Ernet 6 Ernst letter, Danielsen's
� (cont.)
memo of Septemher 1, 1978, letters from employers interested in purchasing a unit,
and the Garfie2d and Hecht letter of September l, 1978. Child submitted for the
record the letters received from residents of Silverking since the last public hearing.
Karen Smith aubmitted the motion of the City P & Z made August 31, 1978, stating
that they recou�end approval of the condominiumization within the existing City- -
County policies, with revision to include low and moderate income rental units.
Child asked if later action was taken on that motion. Smith said that was the most
recent action. Kinsley asked if the zental requirement was quantified. Smith said
the City P 6 Z did not quantify their recommendation because they didn't feel they
had enough data. Smith also submitted a letter dated August 29, 1978, from Chen
and Associates which supports their earlier conclusion that there are no soils pro-
blems severe enough to affect the structural integrity of the buildings.
Andrew Hecht, representing the applicant, requested that the Board table the appli-
cation to give Kuhne time to discuss the matter with the Co�nissioners and reform
. the proposal Co meet the County's requirements. He said Kuhne needs more County
t
input in order to devise a plan that will better suit the County's needs. Kinsley
" saw no point in tabling the matter; he felt a reapplication for a different pro-
posal may be appropriate. Child agreed, noting that as winter nears people need to
have the housing aituation stabilized. Hecht replied that the applicant requested
input on the condominiumization and didn't receive it from the County. If there is
a better solution to the problem they haven't Eound it, and are sti11 looking for it. �
Kinsley disagreed with the statement that the County has not provided input on this
application. He added that if the matter is left hanging there won't be housing
available to people, and felt tabling would not be to the advantage of the applicant,
County or residents. Kuhne noted they were given guidelines to operate under by
the County housing office, and felt the gist of the contention surrounding their
e
proposal is the mix of free-market, employer and °MH units. If that mix is not �
�k
acceptable to the County, he felt it could be straightened out. Kinsley replied he @
doesn't know if that would be possible; he has come to many conclusions which a=gue
9
a
against the proposal and he will vote against it. Child said that at one time he �
�'
Commissioners Meeting September 5, 1978 - 2Z §
. �
�'��:�c�t�`� . .
ti
�..��
.�... :t,..;
� ,..
E �: _
G °��i�
.. s����, . � . ,.
�
��,
through a better mix of rental and condominium units would answer the problem, �,
but he no longer feela that way. He doesn't feel a different mix of units is appro- r_
priate, but rather thinks the County should investigate anoCher PMH program to �
acco�odate those Silverking residents who expressed an interest in purchasing �
houaing. Kinsley said that Kuhne has been a delight to work with through this
application process, and thanked him for his concern with the community needs. He
" noted that.if this application were approved it would precipitate other condominium-
ization proposals and it would be hard for the County to turn those down. Tfiis,
in turn, would lead to higher rents. Ae doesn't feel that the argument that the
i
free-market units would be rented long-term to employees would be true in the long
run. Kinsley thinks that Silverking as it exists is a feasible financi.al entity,
and said one major consideration is that it would never be possible to build rental
units at a lower square foot cost. fle said that if one were to try to lead to
condominiumization of a rental complex, one would do what has been done to Silverking
in the past few years. Kinsley added that people who want to buy a unit at Silver-
king support the proposal, and people who want to continue renting are opposed to
it; he didn't feel either group was considering the whole picture and responding
, to the community needs. He would like some of the units condominiumized as PMH units,
with the rest of Silverking left as rental, Based on discussions with people in the
business coimnunity, he felt this solution would be possible.
Kinsley moved to deny the proposal. Child seconded the motion and felt a deter-
mination must be made hy the Co�nissioners to meet the needs of the people intetested
in buying a unit. He, too, expressed thanks to the deve2oper, the P 5 Z, the
Planning Office, Mark Danielsen, and the Housing Advisory Board for their considerab2e
time tnvestment in the proposal. He requested that Kinsley accept the following
amendments: the decis3.on to deny the application includes the reasoning that Silver-
king represents a suhstantial portion of the tental housing in the co�munity and
there is a substantial market for rental units; the creation of the free-market units
doea not fu1f311 an existing need and is contrary to the Growth Management Plan; the
employer role in solving the housing problem can be resolved bq a lease - sub-lease
; ; situation; and the loss of a substantial number of rental units would have a severe
impact on the seasonal economy. Kinsley accepted the amendments and added that the
basic supposition of the County in approving Silverking originally was as rental units.
The motion passed unanimously.
There being no further buainess, ehe meeting was adjourned.
�
,k�� Commiseioners Meeting September 5, 1978 - 22
k
`� i
i
s
=z";;�,'
°�:--
; _ .-. � ,
.. 1 S � . - S� ,.�
� ,.�� ...._ , f_3�`.�,�'�?�j�''�.�o"�'��....-,'�. ..'Y'^.w,r,,..::_.Sr�.:r;rr�,n.s..� . .-, r^":.,. „�:,;., � . , . r . � (��� �:
Respectfully submitted, APPROVED:
. �tA�K�,�y� � 4 , . � . . . � . . �� . � � �� � ..
;����,` �
` L . ��(
'; i.��t7�w' �.r F,� z StetiaYt, Deputy County Clerk Chairman Robert W. Child.
: .1�:��"` �t(' �r c Y }r. , , , . . � . .
� •�gs � � tc_� .t� ,<� ;-�
x. . /
sfftia . ,; l �
�c. r �, � � :� ' . . . . .
j� Nd$ i, r , *- � Mi ael Kinsleq ,
<h�r� �,� ,• ,�fi
'::-
` , : -� � , � :,
Jose •E., . w`ar s� '
--`\\���� �.
;'; � '
� . . �. . . . -�r
. .. � . ;� � - . � � � � . � . . . - . ,��F-..
. � . , � . . . . � , . . . � - ��'.:':..
. � � . . . � � �. . . : - .� - � . ��. f
- � - . . . . ' . . _ . . . . . . ;h i.4. ��.
� � . . � . . . . . . . Nt
.. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . � . � .. � � .� .
,:�•'. . . ... : �. '
� . .. . . � . . .'3.. :.f... �..
. �. . . . . . . . .. � . . `'i 1
� . � .. . . . . . . .� �. . ��s
�. � .. � � � . � . . - '. . ;3
. . . . . . . .. . . . . , . . . _ . .. . , . y�
,. �
::.,: . . . . . . . . . . .'
- �� . . . . . �� �a.
`
•..i. � . . . . � . � � . � ...� - .. � � -��4''�{�
. � .. . . . ._ � . ' . t�Y
.. .. . . - � . . . � � . . . . . y
7...� � . � . .. . . �. . .. � . � � :�tn .
i�. . . . � ,� . . . - . . .. � . . - - . G�1 t.
\ . . . , .. . . . .
. . .. . . ' . . � . .� . . - . � . . .. . . �5' .
1.:: . . ' . . � . . . . �. � ' . . . . 'x .
i..� . . . . . . . . . � . . . . , .
. � .�. .. �� . ' .. � . . . . .. � . . . . � � ..�. . .. . � _.; ��".�.
1 - . . . . . - . . . . . . � : . � .
i�.,5 ' ' � . . . . . . . . . _ . . ..
.�.' .. � : � . . .. . - � . . � . . . . " .
� . . �� �� - �� . . . . ' . . � . . . J% "
�
tn?::. . . . . .. �� - . . . . . . . . .
.aa�i . � . � . . . . . � .
k:;, . . � , .. - .. � . � . � � . � � � . . . ..�� �
Commisaioners Meetiag September 5, 1978 - 23
�� ..—_�._�____-- ---- �._____._� ..._.�._.......w.«:.....:.,...,....,.....,.,..: ---- .
�,.
,' ,
:�;*�.:.,,
1978 BQARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING EXHIBITS
August 28,1478 Accessory Use Height A Memorandum Dated Angust 22, 1978 from Karen Smith to
Limitations/Parking Board of County Commissioners
Re uirements
Gutterman Lot Split B Memorandum Dated July 19, 1978 from Richard Grice to Board
of Coun Commissioners
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 25 1978 EXHIBITS TO MINiJTES
EX IBIT
. �
MEMORANDUM ,2 ,
, T0: Board of County Commissioners ' fi�� oF co. co�,u.��R�s
. George Ochs ' ,
Sandy Stuller . rtxxzrt co. .
� Publia Hearing Exhibits —
. FROM: Planning Office, Kar.en Smith Dato . ? "�� ��
RE: Code Amendments • suu3ect : � � � 'i"l'7//�G• �
• Ezh. fto.. ._. -
DATE: August 22, 1978 _
On Monday, you'11 be asked to consider two Code Amendments addressing portions
of the Code that we have found to be a problem. The pttoblems arise from recent .
Board of Adjustment cases where variances have been sought. Hardship has been
less the issue than simply inadequacy in the Code's requirements. Please see
the attached resolution for the language of the proposed amendnents.
A. Accessory Use Hei�ht Limitations
We are increasingly encountering a probTem under Section 3.02 Bulk Require-
ments where the Code limits the maximum height of "principal uses and
buildings" to ZS feet and accessory uses to 12 feet. The Building Depart- .
ment has asked for clarification that tarm and garden buildings in the
AF-1 and Resource Zones shou]d be allowed the maximum height. Now they
interpret the Code to allow only one principa] use, �o that if there is
a house, a barn cannot also have a 28 foot height. Artd there aren't many
6arns that work well at a twelve foot limit. On the other hand we do not
want to open up the districts to garage/penthou�e"studios" applying for
permission as barns. Therefore we propose to define barns under the head- .
ir�g, "farm and garden building."
The Planning and Zoning Corronission considered this proposal at their
• �uly 5 meeting and recomnended approva7. They did drop out of the
proposaT the AF-I zone, feelinq that no major agricu7tura7 operations
� requiring large barns were located in those zones. 7hey a7so clar�fied
that no residental uses could be located in a barn.
B. Aarkin9 Requirements
A question of the across the board appTication of a certain parking
requirement was raised b;� ±he attached application. The issue was raised
in the B-2 district for a proposed new warehouse. ldhile the current
parking requirement of one space per 400 square feet of non-residential
space seems to be adequate for the smaller service comnercial and office
uses, it's less desirable for larger warehouse uses where there are fewer
people in comparison with the storage space provided. The Obermeyer
example shov�s that the parking requirement is detrimentai to op2n-space
objectives and contravenes our desire to promote auto-disencentives. We
do not think that this is a proper decision for the Board. of Adjustment
to be making on variance grounds. k�e'd suggest an amendment based on the
rationale offered by Copland, Hagman, Yaw Ltd.•
Aroend Section 3.02 Minimum number of off-street parking spaces per
• weiiing unit or per 400 square feet of non-residential space;�,.provided
however, that required parking spaces for warehouse purposes'sha'I1�be .
determined by special review and taking into consideration pedestrian
access, private and public mass transportation, and needs of comnercial
vehicles. .
The P&Z recommended approval at their July 5 regular meeting. We note that
while the provision now calls for full special review, this is one matter that
could be handled by P&Z review only. .
' sr � '
r,�n�D or C0. CU,.,.; .,
PITHIH C0.
� Public Hearin� ExhiLi'.:;
��.;o . .....�...:�.�:7r� �
. :-uUj��t : � � lot�Plif
' ' • ' • M E M O R A N U U M �-=t�• Na.: EXHIBR
. • ' ' � � � .
TO: Board of County Commissioners `o� ' •
� FROM: Planning Office; Richard Grice
RE: Gatterman Special. Review - Separati.on of Substandard .
Lots 2-�, :,lock 4, and Lots 3 and 4, Dlock 5, Brush ,
Creek Village Subdivision
DATE: July 19, 1978
This is a public hearinq to consider a request on behalf
of Fredrick Gutt�rman made by his attozney, Chuck Brandt, for
the separation of the above-:aentione8 six contiguous lots in
• the previously platted Brush Creek Village Subdivision for the
purpose of development of sing7.e family homes. This subdivision
originally received County Commissioner approval in 1966. ihis .
application is made under the amended Section 7.22(a) of the
Lancl Use Code. . •
Comment has been received from John Dennison o£ the State
Forest Service regarding this azea which is designated as a
severe wildfire hazard area. John's comments are as follows:
"(1) The combination of high, c'.ense brush {gamble oak, service-
; berry, and sage) growing continuously on steep slopes (40 to •
50 percent) is extremely dangerous; (2} The roads in this sub- ,
division are inadequate in width, have excessive grade, inadequate
• radius of curvature, and zoad intersections are less than 45 �
degrees; (3) There appears to be no multiple, separate ingress- �
� egress to the subdivision; (4) The above problems are compounded
further by the lack of a hydrant system in the subdivision and
the great distance to the nearest fir•e equipment; (5) Further
development in this area should af. least be contingent on
excessive fuels modification on steep slopes and a fire hydrant
system."
The application was also referred to the Colorado Geologic
Survey. �ave Shelton suggested that several of the lots may
not be developable without significant engineering design and
solutions, from the viewpoint of access and suitable building
sites. Dave suggested further investigations to prove that
reasonable building sites and access do exist. �
Bob Nelson, County Sanitarian, :�as commented that it is
very difficult to predict where water may be £ound in the Brush
Creek Subdivision. At this point there •is no evidence of water
availability. "whe individnal sewage disposal regulations of
• Pitkin County will require engineering design on at least 2, 3
and 5, Block 4, due to slopes. We do expect severe geologic and
soil constzaints on �soil absorption systems of each site due to .
the presence of shaZlow she13 formations or sandstone bedrock,
clay formations which yield very poor perculation rates and,
drainage patterns. ' Careful subsurface investigation and design
will be required."
This application was reviewed by the Pitkin County Planning
and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on July 5, 1978.
At•that, time, the Commission felt that a site inspection would .
,
Board of County Commissioners �
July 19, 1978 .
Page 2 • .
. be necessary in order to �letermine which of th�se Tots do have . •
• access of 30 feet in width which bear a loqicaZ relationship to '
topography, as provided in current Pitkin County subdivision '
design standards. A site inspection was conducted at the end of-
. the Planning and Zaning Commission's regular meeting July 19, 1978.
In view of the .significant topographical constraints, the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommends that development be limited to .
Lots 3 and 4, Bl�ck 5, and Lots 4.and 5, Block 4. �urthermore, .
the Commission recommended that access to Lot 5, Block 4, through
Lot 4, 31ock 4, be approved Hy the County Fngineer prior to con-'
struction. The Commission considered the possibility of suggesting
that the applicant redraw the lot lines to indicate the correct
number oE building sites. But at the suggestion of the applicant`s
attorney, it was decided to simply limit development to those lots �
with suitable building sites in order that the applicant mi.ght
maintain the option of donating the undevelopable lots to a non-
profit organization for tax purpoSes.
� RG:mc �
J 1�.r l�J��1J '�J1J��� .�,r:-;D o,� co. �o�.,i.t�R�s
SOX E PITKIN C0.
^_�blzc Hcaring ExhiUit3
Aspen, Colorado , .,a . ....�---��•?�"�I�����(
�ub3 cct . If�C..�-��'_'"r� /
PROOF OF PUBLfCAT10N
STATE OF CQLORADO ) .
� �. Copy of Notiee
County of Pltkln )
i, ...W�,�,.�,�,�.�.,,.�...._.,�un�way, ao eolemnly awear that
publisher � `' �~ ` �--
, .,- .
Y am Rhe ..._......_......_.._.................._............... of THE ASPEN TIMES; ,-_ ��: : �' •
that the sam�e is a weekly newspaper printed, [n whate or in part, '�C n�t�Ce
a.nd pubHshed ffi the County of Pitkfn, $tate of Colorado, and has �. �� -, „
a general circulaUon therein; that sald newspaper has been Qut�- � � , •
lished coatinuously and uiaterrnptedly in said County �P Pitkin. ' • ,�r�K�� . �
for a (- �����toeWii�hwws ,, .
period of more Lhaa flfty-two consecutive weeks next prior �(�e����p�iw�a� :
to the iirst publlcatfon of the annexed legal notice or advertls� ��. ;�NOT[CE:D3�i/Y INVEN:'IaA.Tt
ment; that said newspaper has fieen admitted to the Untted 8tates t �������rw�j ,�,'
1 .af Co�f.j?O�rm Aoplt 90„ ,.
mails as aceond-class matter nnder the provisions ot the Act of 1i7A�t 1:2i::�in f8�"Gmmi�e�',
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said ne�vve- 1 �B�a:Pkk(�`�Caml� .�
paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualitled for publiahing legal � � �O �°��O A�� �c;,. . ,�
t- .th.PkK.Cem�L_OU..cee.as..w:�.,,..;,:,..
notices and advertisements with the mea.aing ot the lawa of Lhe fA���f�m�t:f6r� �. _:
State oi Colorado. ? �emaiMekhi�i�e���00.�MR "`
• 1 d�pa�q a d�t�sio�Wa 6!''+dd�► ..
That ttie snnexed lega0: nottce or advetttsement was pubilshed .firPLmissOAle�ie��a�v $D. '
in :the lregular and enttre iasue ot every number ot said weekly � �"��. ���!�"'��` �
1 Bn�ed�� ` '
..... consecutive insertiona; and ' �m�� ' '
newsPa'[�ers Por the pertod of............... , , .. .
tha.t the flt�at publicatlon of said aotice was in the Issue of eaid i � Pe�a�yN��q��gq�197�• ,_
, .., ..' . .::;:: . ;;
_.........x.__...�.................... A. D.. 19 7 ::.�
newsPaper dated �U�- . 2 _ ..._.$ and that --����� .
the last,publtca.tioa of said notfce was in the fssue of said newa-
paperdated ..........._............................... A. D.. 19........
������%���_
Subacribed and sworn to before me, a notary p�tbltc f aad dac
;
the County of Pltltia, Sta.te oi Colorado, this .3�.S t day o! �
7$ f
.....`.rUl.y...............••••...... A.D.. 19._....... 1
r
._.._ . . �....... .��z.��............. �
. otary Pubuc '
�y comm�asion e�tres .......6�6I82 ' '
.............................. �
�
t5
&
b
.. .,.....:. .�. ...._-sn .. _. . .. . . n��NfMl�d'##f �xxMitl�'P4AixlW "e..M+=.
�'11� !�i��11 �111���
Box E ���^rp or co. col;tr,t�rt�s
PITICIN C0.
Piiblic Hearing ExhibiLs
Aspen, Coiorado
;� . .._...�..:�?�.' .7�
�/�7 �j}7 /. /1 I,� �1 ,
::l1liJCCt L !J.Sf�7/�! // niJ.�(7�iI�
'--•---..�.,�..
PROOF OF PUBLICA710N
BTATE o� cozoxnno ; � Copy of Notice
County of Pltkin )
I� l;J.illiam_..R.,...Dunawa�y do aolemnly awear that �i'4 �. . ` '` "
.... ...... p. �
publ i s he r �' Ublic nofice °
I am khe ....... ._ •-••-•.._.....•••-•........_............... of THE A3PEN TI�L'ES� -• �.*�rr ,. . , .r,... ,Ky:
that the sazne 1s a weekly newspaper priated. in whNe or 1n part. � �� � `'+�! C:�g `•�.
and publlshed ta the County oi Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has 1tR:H�����ar`B�(CB�o�i
a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been Qu3�- �.;i°N�����/l.�iNEN 1�AT'� �
lis2ied continuously and uinterruptedly in said County of Pttkin, !•:p„b��y��q ������
for a period of more t]ian fifty-two caasecutive weeks next pHor � •��f'�=m��. ;
to the Sirst publicatton of the annesed tega.l nottcc or advertlse- ' 197e.�t 1�6�pm'.ii 1h�.;C�4�w� :
1�ie,Pitl�iq�Cwoti Cau�w�
ment; that sa.id newspaper has�een admitted to the United 3tates � ��in �tlam�ii�wdioBieWesO.OZ ,:
mails as aceond-class matter under the provisions oi the Act of ������f�����
March 3, 1878, or any amendments thereof, and that safd newa- �°����°����
h�en�iefti NB�OodBBtlOpis
paper ie a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing fegal ,:di�f+i�tt�9dtMt�eiMda�d�Qeitimd
aotices and advertiaements with the meaning of the laws of the � �°*•���°+O°b�:�i'�' •
�i�w�ldld O�e�isfh�Mp�n ,
State of Co[orado. �y������p� .
� �/i�ob�tl�iN.C�irm�a '
That t]►e annezed legall' notice or advertiaement wa9 publiebed .�°d���� :
in :the regular and entire Sssue of every number of said week2y �PublLh�dintlrA�l�rJobS'l,2978. ;!
. � . . . ., :�
�~- _�.. . _. .;
newspapers for the perlod o! ._...1.._...._..._ consecutive lnserttons;and � �
t,hat the first publlcatioa of satd Aotfce was in the fssue o[ eatd
newspaper dated ...`JUlY....27................. A. D.. 19 ..�8 and that
the last publfcatton of sald notice was in the fseue of eald newa-
paper dated ...........»............................... A. D.. 19.......
_ ,
L:(/GC i�:L�^Zr/L���G���C(/GG
-•...-•-••............................ ... ...........................
Subscrlbed and swom to before me, a notary public in �oa�
ISt �
the County of Piticln, State oP Colorado, thla .._..3................ day ot
.July 78
...................................... n.,n., is.........
.._.�._ . ._ .:,.�.`����............
Notary Public �
�y cotnm�ssian expires ..............6�6�82 �
.... ........................ I
�
r
. f
t
;
f}
1
-rl�� i�:���1� ��1111�� .
. :,�:;n ur� r.��. � c:.;,.:�x��
BOX E PITICII�I C0.
l'.�blic HeZrin� ExhiUit:,
Aspen, Colorado � _��_7�
5t,v;��t . ��m.�t�n.�_.�l C�rer�
PROOF OF PUBLICA710N
STATE OF COLORADO )
� �, Copy of Notice
County of PitWn )
William R. Dunaway
.............••••............ do solemnly aweax that ,_
I. ................................... . � . ._ _
ublisher � �;p ,i �u � .
I am Rhe .:p......_.....___._.._.....-•••••••-•-•••.._......... of THE ASPEN TIME3� V . ,'� ���� ; �
that the same is a weekly newapaper prtnted, in whaie or in part,
.�N � ;�.�Y(i1Vi�i t�16� �.
and publlshed fn the County of Pitkin, Sta,te of Colorado, and has � d��.;•.
a senetal ctrculatton therein; f.hat satd newspaper has been QuU- . . '���
!lshed coniinuously and ulnterruptedly in sald County of Pitkin, .,: 4�•i! ����j���'����'
for a perlod of more hhan itfty-two cansecutive weeks next prlor �1d�4Grnlp:Cwufhaw,�EOS!rt lf�
to the ilrst publica.tton of the annexed IegaI notice or advertfse- ��`���O°�O���tl
�ow►t�ts tlr.lTaifi��.�i1�Uei����::
ment; that said newspaper ha9�been admitted to the Untt,ed 3tate9 tLt:wwTi�d�Wt�p:" i�_;_�`
mails as sceond-class matter under the provis1ons oi the Act of �anatbw�pli�1icwirii1�`
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that sald news- �������'��
ews ?tMirdsofllPYbs1�.�1.
paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal �:in�i:�w�p��t1Y� ,��p'
notices and advertisements with the meuning of the lawe of the ��.�»:rn�la61�?i�,.ta".�C�uaty - ,
State ot Colorado. ���°������'
- . G)y6�et IY.Cbffd
. .• A�trepe.He�d�f :
That the annexed lega�l' notice or advertiaement was publfshed � C°O� •-:
in •the regulax and eatire iesue ot every number of said areekly ` �a��°��°�.'�O�'lII,fD'•
� .�awai ;ia�s. I
,. . . > ,_
K - -- -- :.-_
newspapers for the perlod of ..-••••....1...__.. consecutive insertions; and
bhat the first publication of said aotice was in the issue of eaid
newspaper dated .`.ruly_..13................... 1�. n.. is .78. ana +nat
the last�publlca.tion of satd notice was in the isaue of said news-
paper dated .AUgUSt...lO............ A. D.. is..78
..1(r� --•����„.................._. .....
SubsCMbed and swom to before me, a notary publtc in and dar
i�th
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, thie ........................ day of
August 7$ -
............................................ A.D.� 19.........
�.\...����IL���SNi�v 1�)rC...�`:-�........�...`G�.`�.�:......
otary Public
My commfaston expires ......6�6�82
.......................
. r�'��
e�
� �
� �1"11� Il���l] �.�111���
�
BOX E 1%�AfiD OF C0. C01�i6i•R'S i
• PITKIN C0.
/45Pert� Cotorado Public Hearing Exhibits
:��,;.o . ..�,,:��..:..,�..�.
Sub,a�t : .��/..a�o.�e Re��
_ :�.. . .
� PROOF OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF COLORADO )
� �, Copy of Notice
Ca�nty of Pitkin )
I, ..:...�!'la.�..�.a.s'�IIa...�7......���t".1.$Y do solemnly swear that
publisher . _:,.,. .... -.- , ~„I
tha�t theesame is.a weeWy..newspaper printed,�lnE hNe or��.: - ublic nofice ::
p.
and publfahed in the County of Pitkin, 3tate af Colorado, and has ,� �.Hr,.;.::
a general circulatton therein; that said newspaper has been Qub- •NO�L�Ci�RIdI1C1QIN�iO '•�.
lished continuously and uinterruptedly in said County oi Pitkin, � N��� ���'c
for a period of more 6han lifty-two consecutive weeks next prior ` �a�������`�
Q�rb.(�sYni��;wl�e�ei�et�Abik
to the itrat publicatton of the annexed legal notice or advertlse- �a�It�i,r;A�s�,lf7�,;�tli0 ,
ment; that sald newspaper has �been admitted to the United States ��-�-���S�i��.�
mails as aceond-cta9s matter under the provlstons ot the Act of ��'�����' '
A�Me. atKai.ri'a�Nirirefw�:.,
March 3, 18T9, or any amendments thereof, and that said newe- wB�M�r:�C�--��
paper ie a weekly newspaper duly qualifled for publishing legal � ����.�.•
notfces and advertisements with the meanlag of the laws ot the ��i������is�
6tate of Colora.do. th��de�M�l1�L
e�tbi t�Ir�:n�Ywyt�r:rt .
bihneir,,a:ri�V�iat tiat.�w�wq.=
That the annexed lega�notice or advertisement wa9 pub!lshed .me�laiYii�ii's�41iYN ai�f
in :the regular and eatire fssue of every number of eald weekly �°�W�vM�� '
��.a w�Wi�st.'tY!a�Inri M�,ia-.,-.
;' �e+Wtwi��ilbls�!LOG�d�
newapapere for the perlod of ....1............. consecutive insertiona:and ��:���f�ti����
t,hat the firsi publicaUon of said �otice was ia the lssue ot eafd �,.. ���°y'0M'����r�'p��''
r, aad Atuw-wlr�iliit��lwai�Rr ;.
, . �t� �� .
newapaper dated ._'IUlY..._.27.................. A. D.. ia�8... ana t.�at > ; �r•�r.�+++r.M���
F� Ltle fn 1� d t�w:.
the last�publfcaYfon of sa3d notice was 1n the isaue of said news- : �/����� ��� '
, _ .
�� y���,
t:: Daus; _ . ... t-e:-.��.
i !�f
pa.per dated A. D.. 19... ^- Tgs BpApp;;pF l7pQNTTeCpIpdL..'
""................... ...... .... l .. . .S . : �:
• � -� .. - � ��
' . . ���Hn�.
:: Y3��c �.1�.����-'��.
�������1.������Ff.�:�..... . � A�r.�s v!�ur;aiM:�.e:
� :
-.rn6u�.a i�'�e.�.�t�..�a�,rr,::
Subacribed and sworn to bePore me, a notary pu'blic and�ar `• � ' '�''� `r' • ' �
; :• ; `*
1St �., _> , -
.. . _. . :...
� _: .. ,. .
the County of Pltkin, State o! Colorado, this .......3... ....._... day of
.July 78
......... .............................. A. ,D.. 19._.......
...;��,�r.,..���!/.l�i.l!3..Q.S.\c��:�...........
Notary Publlc -
My comai�aston exptres .......6,6182
- �
i
�
_ �
1'11� 1����J� �.�111���
Box E ;.:,;..;� c��� ca. c�:;:�.t�rt�s
T'.?]:II! C0.
Aspen, Colorado ' �''�'c l:carin� j:,.;:iibits
:" s �---�R..:��
�,:��;��t �l�G�l.�i.22�.CLlOf��I/�
, _..
� PROOF OF PUBLICATION
$TATE OF CQLORADO )
� �, Copy of Noti�e
County of Pltkin )
I W i 11 i am A. Dunaway ao eolemnly swear u�at ;` l��"��jyyy� =X ' `�
...`�'t :.1 � i{�M�
.................................................. f .
�i ,� r" r . y � �
publisher t x. ..., .:, a ��'` ';` `;
I am Rhe ..........._.......-•....................._ ......... of TEiE A3PEN TIMES� ,..
�a�i�t. :.
7 �y,��/�}�
that the same is a weekly newapaper printed, 1n whale or in part, .pV = II�,i1�•.�{,���
and published in the County of Pltkin, State of Colorado, and has 3•'. !'�!r �`.t '` :=.. F,,
�'•�'r�cxar�ca •� � �
a �general cfrculation therefn; that said newspaper has been Qub- `` �.�. , .
llshed Continuously and ulnterruptedly in said County �f Pttkin, � .��°�j°�y��°�.�� �
for a period of more �han fifty-two coasecutive weeks next prlor '".. N07iCE.ffilQR�7f,tiiYEN:;THATa:�
to the Sirst publication of the annexed legai notice or advertise- . •!w���������d: .
°�.d�nab asmiiimi�t�a' .. 95,;•;�•.
ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted to the United States ;°•l��q����
matls as aceond-class matter under the •provisions of the Act of ��.�'r�mb CuuA�i'•�i'
March 3, 1879, or any amendmenfs thereof, and that said nc•ave- d���d�0°�����# , �
pa.per Is a weekly newspaper duty qualified for publishing legal 6)is Iw He�C+wk B�i� fM °
notices aad advectisementa wlth the meaning of the Iawa of tlie .. �•���;��ib-.
; �itii' 6inbMwtl�t.;
State of Colorado. �� ��
� _1808�(id d'areaY Irt4l7� ..
That the annexed legad notice or advertisement wes pubIiahed � r�����Q�� '
in the regular and eatire iasue of every number of said week2y ������ � `
1 � r�:a��.�r�...�;r.:ns :,-s
newapapers for the period oi .-••......._._.....consecutive tnsertions; aad "' �' : ' ',�'
t,hat the first publica.tton oi said tsotice was in the issue o[ eaid
newapaper dated .....�T..ulY....27................ A. D.� 19 _.C.8. and that
the last�pubiica.tion o! said notice was !n the issue of said newa-
paperdated ..........._............................... A. D.. 19........
�v.LS1�s�.�...�'..{!l.__..���L..��lC�2
Bubscribed aa►d sworn to before me, a notary public 1n doa�
1St
the County of Pltkln, State of Colorado, thls ......3.............. day of ,
78 ;
--.....July...................... n.a., is.........
t
...�:!��n�:�.....�,....`.�v:�:............... : ;;
Notary Public
My commfasion explres .............u��182................