The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutbocc.min.reg.11271978 4 a . � . �.� ' 1' . �s.�Dry .,�; ' � . � � ,p > s��1,: . . __.._.. ......_... .,�.. .. .. � .. . .. .,_ .. . .. - . F5:{1.. i�l :�: i, ' PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING AGENDA . November 27, 1978 4 9:00 a.m. ✓EXECUTIVE SESSION -:. 9:15 a.m. ✓P.H. Proposed Budget for Mtn. Valley - T. Oken r 9:25 a.m.�Mininq & Claiming Activity Report - bIF i � 9:45 a.m. RESOLUTIONS/CONTRACTS 1.✓ Information Booth Contract - SMS � 2.✓Partial Payment of Property Taxes - SMS 3.✓Resolution of Intent - SMS 4.✓SRA Operating Agreement - CS 5. ,/Vdage & Salary Survey Resolution - PK 6.,/Extension of ERA Boycott Resolution - BC k 7.✓Solid Waste Center Fee increase - BJS 8.�/November Warrant ��ritings � 10:00 a.m. ✓P.H. Prohibition Against Smoking in Public Places - SMS :t 10:15 a.m. �/SET P.A. TIMES ; 1. Amendment to Pitkin County Animal Regs(1/8/79; 10 a.m.) 2. Trailways Special Review(12/26/78; 10 a.m.) ��.�.�: 1�� ;. 3. Grange Subdivision Special Review(12/26/78; �.�m,) `: �. Code Amendments(1/8/79; 10:30 a.m.) 10:20 a.m. ✓Appointment of P&Z Alternate Diember 10:30 a.m. County Advisory Board(Extension Office) - L. Dunn 10:35 a.m. Budget & Informational Session Regarding Extension Office - L. Dunn ;� 11:15 a.m. ✓P.H. Webster Lot Separation 11:30 a.m. ✓P.H. Ohermeyer Special Review �1 12:00 - 1:30�.m. USFS/BOCC LUPICHEON MEETING L•30 p.m. ✓Benedict Gravel Pit Recommendations - T.O'Pray ;, 2:Oa p.m.✓Air Pollution Alert Proceduzes - CAAB - 2:15 p.m.✓Consideration of Woody Creek Road Names - BC 2:25 p.m.✓i2equest to Consider Pfister Quota Allotment - KS 2:35 p.m.�andall Property - GLO r 2:50 p.m.✓Solar Insulated Blinds for Courthouse - GLO _ � 3:00 p.m.�,/North Star Closing Documents - SMS � 3:10 p.m. Downvalley Subdivision Resolutions - JW � 3:30 p.m. Arneson Subdivision �xemption - RG � 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. JOINT CITY/COUNTY MEETING � 1. Jointly Funded Grant Program - GLO � �—�^o..' ..'L...i-i��:.n �3.,.�.*R-�' �C�Ej. � � • 4 , t.�;''y'.�'i�;�'1�:j . �r;`.:_.'-�•�.::t�, �. : . .. .�,. . � ' _ ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. } ' � ...—�_ . ... . .. . ..�.r.. .. _ . . _ . ��: '1� �`� �:}� r, i ��: - PITKIN COUNTY ��; �; 1: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS �'�'�i, �. Y ;`p::';ReRul_ az Meeting November 27, 1978 B:� . �.: F =,PRESENT: Chairman Robert W. Child, Joseph E. Edwards, Jr. � '�£; ..:�,�}?-� �___�_�-�._ E� . ��Public The Board convened a public hearing to consider the budget for the Mountain Valley ,P�:�;Hearing: `•"�'Mtn. Improvement District. Tom Oken, Finance Director, .ioted that the expenditure or �",w�Valley v�Improve- $17,533 for debt service is met solely by property taxes. This year's mill levy of .�ment �'District 9.37 is a reduction from last year's rate. There was no public comment. �` ;',A-"'�.�.Budget �. ;;:h� ChiZd moved approval of the resolution approving the Mountain Valley Improvement District : �-• , 5� budget. Edwards seconded and the motion passed unanimously. � '?,s� __------- �' :s;.:; -?�Mining Mark Fuller, Environmental Consultant, appeared before the Board to present an update ''�'i Claim :'�^'Report on mining claim activity in the County. Ae showed the group slides of the areas which :d . �;� have been staked, including tincoln Creek, Grizzley Reservoir, Taber Gulch, Ruby, etc. �� • � The claima are beittg filed by large corparations such as Amoco and U.S. Energy Corp. ��!n,' 9 _ T6e assay results from samples collected by Fuller have been inconclusive and he felt ��.� �� the claims are being staked in hopes of finding mineable material. The area which con- :�� '-� tains iron ore would be impossible to revegetate if mined because the altitude is so ;�,. 4�i: ��, high and the growing season is so short. Fuller also noted that many claims are on ;��«. �;� both sides of the County line so would be accessible from outside Pitkin County. Child ?" asked how many oP the claims staked are included in the RARE II study area. Fuller � said almost all of the 600 claims covering 10,000 acres are in RARE II, however the � wilderness act has almost no constraints on mining activity. He added that claims have � ", been staked in the_Pearl Pass and Conundrum areas and he suspec'ts there may be molybdenum • �K. � there. Few of these claims have had tfieir annual assessment work filed so some have � �� A � lapsed, however a number of new claims in different areas have been filed. He felt - r� this is probably speculative, but noted that mining activity is inczeasing. The assay �; ' results for County samples showed indications of silver, gold, magnatite and a small amount of molybdenum. Child asked if the County could stake claims of their own. '+` , � - . Fuller said they could, but noted that any mining activities within the County borders � are required to obtain County approval and must comply with County regulations. Edwards � � . noted that the County has no authority to deny;�mining as a special use, but can only �v`" E'�� regulate its activity. Stuller suggested that the County could make mining activfty �� prohibited in all zones rather than allowing it by speciaS review. Smith said that would t�'. • .t�, z�a F,^Fi �` ti � . �. �Commissionera Meeting November 27, 1978 - 1 �': �n' P�:IF'�_ _� !S °1i ��' Y':�: �k�. _ � ' ' _ k ...--�--.� .. 'r;: S make the existing mines non-conforming. Edwards directed the County staff to look ,"'i:'. at the speclal review caCegory and broaden the County's authority for denial of new ��; �:;P;+ mining activity on the grounds that it is incompatible with other economic uses in �:y° ':��. the zone category and with the recreational economic base of Pitkin County. k"�'�` i�� Fuller mentioned the Elk Mountain Workshop in Aspen which is keeping track of mining �;;y: �,+''s::: t:� activities on a statewide level. He has cons3dered holding a planning workshop on ` (C`41, mining and the recreational economy with the Colorado Geological Survey to inform ¢;��; �� people of potential problems and work out possible solutions. Fuller reported that :�� r Senator Hart's bill for revision of federal mining laws died in commi.ttee but he expects the proposal to come back. Edwards directed Fuller to keep abreast of the • ,�. status of that legislation and lobby for it. Information Stuller presented a lease with Snowmass Aesort Associat3on and the Chamber of Booth Lease Commerce for the information booth. She noted tfiat the TR zone for that property � � was extended for one year at the last meeting, and this lease is the same as the form � used this su�er. Child moved approval. Edwards seconded and the motion passed �`- unanimously. --------- � Senior Stuller presented a resolution allowing for a property tax rebate for seninr citi- �' Citizen �' Property zens, which is the same process used in the past two years. Child asked if this would � � Tax ��, Rebate overlap with HB 1112 which provides for deferment of property taxes for the elderly. (;,, �� Stuller said it would not; the individual could choose either method. Child moved approvaZ of the resolution. Edwards seconded and the motion passed unanimously. [�' --------- �� > Aspen Stuller atated that Aspen Airways has requested that the Cvunty extend their autho- Y� Airways �� Night rization for night flights for a miniwum of five years before they will install the �`x* Flight � ; Authority necessary improvements. She noted the Board does not have the right to contract � r` away their legislative prerogatives and any commitment to do so would be invalid. r3; �� Kinsley requested that the Board assure Aspen Airways that they have no intention of �;�;,�. �:�= repealing night flight authority after November 7, 1979, which is the immunity �'% €�: period currently affecting night flights due to the Home Rale Charter. Stuller F �_ i<::, presented a resolution of intent stating the Board's present intention with respect � ' ,`.� to night flight authority, which she felt could not be construed as an obligation ` �` C t; enforceable against the County, Child said he would prefer to give Aspen Airways i,; F;ti: - his owa personaZ assurance as to his intent with nigh[ flights, adding that the �� 4r:«, [`:.`.. �::: },_� � j:;'. . - ! Commissionere Meeting November 27, 1978 - 2 1 i?' �: �,� �.�,i�� ;Y!': , ., � r. :'}.: .�. . . . . . .. . ..�.: J:'- proposed resolution would not do much in any case. Stuller said she felt a resolution �:?::' �„r �:^;:: like this could be misinterpreted and would add nothing to what the Soard has already ��u,. �s�: said and done; she wnuld prefer not to have the resolution adopted. Edwards and �;�, �:r Child agreed. �.�a • �� SRA Bus Curt Stewart, Transportation Planner, presented an agreement with Snowmass Resort � ' Service : Agreement Association for winter bus servfce to Sn�r�nass Village. The agreement provides that the County will zun the service in the evenings, SRA will be responsible for the 6lcket aelling, and the recording and. payment procedure. Child cotrmiented that the 15p fare for children seems too low. Stewart said that is an error; the fare should tae 25C. He added that one other correction is necessary in paragraph five where a Iine was left out. Child moved approval of the contract with those two corrections. Edwards seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Wage & The Board again considered the reclassification and waga and salary survey for 1979 Salary Survey which has been reviewed by the Personnel Review Board and the department heads. Oken noYed that the salazy rates indicated in the plan include a 4Y cost of living in- crease for 1979. An additionaZ ZX wi1Z be retained to fund merit increases throughout the year. Child moved approval of the resolution adopting the classificatton and wage and salary survey. Edwards aeconded and the motion passed unanimously. Budget The Board.scheduled a work session on the budget for Friday, December 1, at 9:00 a.m. Work Session ERA Edwards moved to extend the expiration date of the County's boycott of states which Boycott F�; ' Extended have not ratified the Equal Rights Amendment to June 30, 1982, since Congress recently extended the deadline #or ratification to that time. Child seconded and the motion �' passed unanimously. � Solid The Board considered a resolution raising users fees at the solid waste center. Waste Center Brian Stafford noted that these fees take into consideration the fact that costs at ; Fees �.. the dump have increased 111% and the rates have not changed since 1974. Edwards � asked about septic waste fees since he felt that operation had been eliminated. Pat �� x.; 1;� Dobie, County Engineer, replied that the only aeptic waste deposited at the dump is t.�r �.; from the Forest Service. He felt the Forest Service should soon be able to handle �, � this themselvea; if not, the £ees will have to be raised. Child asked if use of ;'`�' �,>';� �; �'�:: � Commisaionera Meeting November 27, 1978 - 3 �:�' f�,' ;d: ��. Fs�r 'i Y:��1� F �. . � ��'� � �� _ �. �. f.'�'. the dnm ts free if eo 7.e have se arated the4r trash into ;"F` P P p p paper, glass and aluminum, t C%!: Stafford said the dum is no lon er seL u for that since the rec clin t`' P 8 P Y g program has r.:�, t�:�; been discontinued. Child felt these materials could be stockpiled separately so t'�f+ f�y . �i'� they could eventually be recycled. Dobie said the situation would get unruly with h� �� stockpiling, but added that the County ia considering turning the recycling program �;� t,� �over to the Hoy Scouts. $dwards felt it would be worthwhile to stockpile the alumi- - num, and not charge users who have separated aluminum. Dobie asked if Chat would be i only for residential users. Edwarda said that the no-charge rate would apply on2y to single tamily cara or small pickups, not co�ercial users. Dobie noted that Carbondale is planning to open a new solid waste site so the pressure on our facility should decrease; in the past both Carbondale and Baeal,t residents have used the Pitkin County dump since their solid waste centers are full. Stafford said that people receiving resident rates will have to have "ZG" platea or written proof of � � residency. A permit will be issued for local construction-related work. He added that the proposed feea are comparable to the charge in Denver County. Edwards felt the out-of-county users should have to pay a high rate, siace local residents pay taxes to support the solid waste center and also pay users fees. Child felt there is already a good distinction between resident and non-resident users. He added that ' these rates should be reviewed annually from now on. Stafford notec! that the gazbage � • truck rates are controlled by the PUC and he recommended that these rates not affect garbage trucks until April lst to aZlow them adequate warning. Child moved approval i of the resolution adopting the new fee schedule for the so13d waste center. Edwards � ? seconded and the motion passed unanimously. ° i �; ! Warrants Child moved to approve the warrants for October. Edwards seconded and the motion �*�-' � passed unanimously. Edwards felt there should be a system to cross-check the warrante :�- �{.�_ to safeguard against a vendor double billing Che County. The Board used to check i�`=` � " �S ; { � each warrant individually, but there are now too many issued to check each one. Oken � ! noted that there are controls in the finance office, however it may be good to have E :: r: an additional control outaide the finance office. Stafford agreed to set up such a �';i . i � . ' `s_is.i;. system. -- t�_�;, �� ----�--- �� ry;, P & Z The Board considered the appointment of an alternate member to the Planning and "5rA ! Alternate h;, 2oning Commission. Stuller reported that the P & Z did not endorse a particular fis app23cant but stated the would refer a downvalle re resentative and would ��' Y P Y P Prefer k; `.�, � .. _ . i:r�� . ;'`:� i;`': � Commiseioners Meeting N I November 27, 1978 - 4 ; ;�.,. �,�. _ �ts�.;�:� ' • � r .. � ., y �i. ?;i;, . ;i not to have Mike Conviser on the Board. The following people have applied: Michael k"' , l.;i,, f;;; Coaviser, Amy Britvar, Jim Martin, Dick Hansen, and Peter pobrovolny. Ann Altemas e�,,; f--: "s� stated that she submitted an application but evidently it has been lost. Child felt i;,; ,:r� ,f . the matter should be tabled so the Board can consider Altemus' application. Edwarda rx: ��. � said he felt Dobrovolny would be good on the Co�ission. Child moved to table the �� ' matter until the next meeting. Edwards seconded and requested that Altemus include �`,: her views on growth in her application. The motion passed vnanimously. � ---------- ',� Public The Baard convened a public hearing to consider adoption of a resolution establiahing ' Hearing: �;' No-Smoking penalty provisions for violators of the no smoking ordinance. Stuller aoted that ,�s�, the ataLe law controlling smoking contains no enforcement technique. Edwards asked �� a�,�'; why restaurants and bars are not included in the smoking ordinance. Stulle= said the � ��. atate statute makes it voluntary for them to provide non-smoking areas, but 3f they do F';. �; not do.so the premises must be posted to that effect. Child asked if the hallways in the courthouse would be posted or iE smoking would be a2Zowed theze. Stuller said that �C �. would be up to tfie Board. Ellen Anderson, of the Clean Air Advisory Board, said they � Pelt the lobby area of the courthouse would be a reasonable place to allow smoking, �: �.. but it is the Board's decision if they wish to designate a smoking area. Edwards felt �'> the size and language of the sign to be posted in restaurants without no-smoking areas fi� �� k.. should be specified. Stuller agreed to include that in the resolution. Child asked E � what an appropriate effective date would he for implementation of this resolution. • � ��: Edwards suggested December 15th. Child preferred .7anuary lst. Bill Rollins suggested the effective date be December lst. There vas no further public comment. ;�. Edwards moved approval o£ the non-smoking resolution with an amendment concerning �' specifications for the posting signs and with an effective date of January 1, 1979. 'g� ��. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimouaZy. � �' --------- �, � Advertise- Edwards noCed that he noticed an advertisement posted at the airport even tho¢gh �,� ment at t�`< Airport that is not allowed. Ochs said the Board gave approval only for the phone board and no �; �.;� other advertising is allowed at the terminal; he agreed to speak to Ai.rport Manager �� :,. Doug McCoy about the matter. Edwards eaid he feels that McCoy often ignores the �"� directions oP the Board and requested that Ochs pu[ an end to the situatlon. He in- '.�' t;` structed Ochs to have the si n removed b Wednesda November 29. F`�` 8 Y Y. i:y -- ,.,,. -------- ��...' ts�< E�(: j � Dog Stuller presented a resolution for first reading concerning amendments to the dog �?. Regulations �_'�: Amendment regulations. These amendments would eliminate the licensing fees for senior citizens' <_' ?'t< ,:° ;; � s � Commiesioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 5 ,t,. �., , � _ _ ...a. ,�..,�...�, ..M��,��,.��- .��. k f�� _ . U�t� {�'i. ^ 4�.: ^t � � � �__.. .. . .. .. ..... . . ��., �k,. h". �... �� dogs, and would return to the uniform licenaing fee for neutered and non-neutered dogs r-�:;< while establishing different fees for unaltered or altered dogs caught running at 3;'' large. The amendments would also require a court appearance for any dog owner whose i;;��` �.�. � dog ie charged with harassment. These changes will reflect the new numbering system �sa: being used in the recodification of county rules. '� '=�: First The Board also considered five minor procedural amendments to the Land Use Code for �E�' � Reading: � 5� LUC first reading. Stuller noted that all have been recommen��d for ap�ro�:1 by the P b Z. SL� Amenda�ents, !r� Trailways, Child moved to approve on first reading and set for public hearing the amendment Eo Grange � Special animal regulations at 10:00 a.m., and the Code amendments at 10:30 a.m., January 8, - Review ` 1979, and to set the Trailvays special review public hearing for 10:00 a.m. and the �i Grange subdivision speciaZ review for 11:00 a.m., December 26, 1978. Edwards seconded p� � the motion and it passed unanimously. �; Public The Board convened a public hearing to consider an application by Mary Webster for Hearing: . '` Webster separation of substandard contiguous lots 43, 44 and 45 in Starwood Five subdivision. � Lot �f. Split Richard Grice, of the Planning Office, noted that an access easement to-lot R-45 �. �� through R-54 is shown on the plat. The Y S Z, in their review, felt thia lot split gg: �� would not have a substantial effect on the neighborhood since the lots are suriounded. �>� j�� by already-developed substandard lots. Bob Nelson has reviewed Che site and feels £� there are no �� problems with installation of a aeptic system. Utilities are already �� installed and there are no physical limitations on the lots. Grice noted there is � h�. another access a2ternative for lot 45 through lots 43 and 44, however this would be �� - on a 13Z grade and would exit at the apex of a curve on Starwood drive, so is not �. �� desireable. The applicant has not aubmitted any information on the degree of economic bu'�C t�: loss if this lot split were not approved. The P 5 Z reco�ended a �� pproval of the lot �� s split with the condition that access for lot R-45 be through R-54 with access for the �`;': �d„+, other two lots off Starwood Drive. 6rice noted that the prospective purchaser of lot �'� ��. R-44 obtained a variance from the Board of Adjuatment to build within five feet of ��. P", the property 21ne due to physical limitations on the lot. The County Engineer has not F``" t�� reviewed the access to lots R-44 and R-43, but is reviewing the area for a subdiviaion '� j..� .. � _ ,,',`� exemption to be considered at the next meeting. _- r=�. Edwards moved to continue consideration of the matter to the next meetin :t?: g pending Ct'- review of the access by the County Engineer. Child also requested that the questions a;'=' of the degree of economi.c loss and the physical limitations used to get a variance be �`^'= Ci;'i resnlved at that time. He seconded the motion and it asaed unanimousl '`� P Y• si � .,. �� __�` 4��:;. �? �,-> N;�� F:I:' . . . 't�ir^;� `�,.. ii'^; ' ommissioners Meeting , November 27, 1978 - 6 s, �•, �,� _ ,�.�; ��t'- - , � .;. �. .,. _ � � , , The Board convened a public hearfttg to cons3der a request by Sport Obermeyer for (:�:: i�;7`- a variance from the parking requirements contained in the Land Use Code for their . y. �» warehouse under construction at the Airport Busineae Center. The B-2 zone district ��` ��: requires one parking space per dwelLing unit or one space per 400 square feet of � [L{,�'�, co�ercial space, however a recent Land Use Code amendment ellows this requirement ;�# to be established by special review in certain casea. The applicant is requesting a total requirement of 43 spaces, based on the peak number of employees on the pre- �: mises at any one time and the fact that many of their emp2oyees do not drive to work. The P & Z recommended requiring only 33 spaces with the balance of the area landscaped and available for construction of more spaces if parking appears inade- quate. Child agreed with the recomnendation: adding that by iacreasing the number � of apaces employees are encouraged to drive. Edwards moved approval of 33 spaces by special review for the Obermeyer warehouse facility. Child seconded and the mocion passed unanimously. A luncheon meeting was held with the U.S. Forest Service. Forest Service members present included District Ranger Tom Bell, J.T. Richer. Pat Halligan, Wildlife Officer RanBy Cote. � t ------- �. . t4aroon Curt Stewart, Transportation Planner, presented a report on the Maroon Bella bus �� Bells Bus Report system. He aoted that the concept of reducing fares to increase ridership in 1978 ;�: z proved successful. Ridership was ap 80X over 1977, with 26,428 people riding the "� � �� buses. The budgeted amount was exceeded by $8,000 with fare-box revenue up 13% for � a total of $22,385 in revenues. Stewart said this budget overrun was due to the � G';� cwr cost of the marketing program dane for the Highlands Skq Ride and the T-Lazy Seven ��' �:x Ranch, increased mainCenance costs, and a higher salary for the supervisor. He �'„ �.;� felt the proRram is carzy3ng people mote efficiently but 1s not generating as much �F �:*: revenue. T[tis summer, due to better organization and hiring of a full time super- s �;y F;f . visor, there Were no more complaints on the unprofessionalism o£ the system. Stewart:;i; F�;� t�_ nated that 15% of the budget was spent on advertising and marketing; even though i;� �`i'v this marketing program is expensive, he recommended that it be conCinued next year. _`�� '`� He also reccmmended that the free-fare policy for guests ot the T-Lazy Seven or . .. i'�'"-'� . ridera of the Skyride be continued, while the regular fares be increased to $1.25 �:; ��. for a two-way ticket, $4.00 for a family and 6Dq for a one-waq ticket. This would - ��i? result in an increase in revenue of Z8%. Edwards suggested children 12 years and ,�'; i`ti ander cou2d be aZ2owed to ride free when accompanied by adulta. Stewart thanked ;�i �..;.;, 4�, �-t f:', 3 '-'< �.i': � Commiss3oners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 7 :.��T� 3s ::; � �t" '�`s�.f. ' .. _ry- � ' . � . . . .�. .. . ',' , �__. - . . ... ..,. � - - _ ._ ._. ..: y'� t� , �,�i`: the Forest Service for their excellent cooperation, but auggested that next year the i;+'=` greeters at the parking lot be hired earlier and the uniforms be ordered sooner: �;f i� He presented the Board with two alternate budgets for the system in 1979: one is ��' ��' ' for 52 days, and the other for a longer period of time. Child said he would prefer �*� ;�- going with a loager system if the Forest Service can contribute more funding; the 'z �� County cannot afford to inctease their contribution. Edwards agreed that, given � � budget constraints, the Coumty cannot afford to fund the system for a longer period ;[:-�� of time unless some other revenue source is found. Stewart suggested that a method � be included in the operating agreement to allow the syste�s to run for a longer par- � iod'if the revenues are higher than what is pzojected. He noted that T-Lazy Seven � was much more p2eased with the bus syetem this year'and their only complaint was - excessive speed of the buses through the ranch area. He augges[ed that this be regu- lated by periodic checks by Che Sheriff's Department next year. Bell felt the system worked well in 1978, but requested that the entire program be set up by February lst for next year. Ae thanked the County for their help on the program. Burnt Karen Smith reported that the County has received an application for ski expaneicn Mountain Ski Area at Surnt Mountain which is being referred to the parties of the 3oint review agree- ment. At this point, a timeframe for.review must be developed, but Smith felt it _ would not be possible to meet the January 2nd deadline in the reaolution. We11s stated that the application is for expansion to a total capacity of 6600 skiers; this was reduced from the Ski Corporation's original estimate of 11,000 skiers because they wanted to reduce the number of skiera per acre in order to inerease com- fort. The Ski Corporation feels the decision for a 6600 skier capacity mountain is irreversible because of the lift layout. Edwards asked if the capacity of the exiat- '^: ing mountain at Snowmass pZus Burnt Mountain would be comparable to the ultimate `� i�. buildout for Snowmass Village contained in the getteral submission resolution. Wells j`�'�' R� replied the capacity of both mountains would be 16,600 skiers per day; the original �,� ?t suggested population of Snowmass was 17,000 however Wells felt that estimate is too �=�;« �: low. He noted the new town needs to assure that the units planned for permanent �' t$,' residential use in the general submission don't become tourist units; if they do }� r.t< _ become Courist units there will be a substantial effect on the needed ski capacity. �v (�!?' Edwards asked if there is a multi-year program to coincide with base development. ��. �t Wells replied that the Ski Corporation places value in the permit they have which w> 4�3 `_ `� lapses in 1983 and feels they have until then to begin construction. The County ;�; r� believes that that permit providea for changes in circumstances in the co�unity ard � $:� �'sA� �� ' `'^u 2 E;j: t`. Cou�issioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - S =��` k;{ � 4'Y� _ ;,;y4c=�':. -.,x'_ _ �$" �'�'�.. , _ _ ; . , : -.... -- ,. , . , _ ... ,y. . .. . � . . . ..lf�.: 4..' �''. 3:. allowa the County the right to reco�nend against the new ski area. Smith pointed out �=` f'F,;. that a specific time frame must be aet up for review of the Burnt Mountain applica- tion. Truscott asked if copies of the proposal t�ould be sent to apecific community �' i'.Si' i�'• : organizations like the Wilderness Workshop. Smith said theq would. i.`�. Little Tom Bell said the Forest Service needs documentation indicating the County's posi- Annie � tion on the Little Annie issue now that the in3tiative has been approved by the �t electarate. A written statement must be received by the Regiona7. Forester before the Forest Service can go on saith their review and do the environmental impact statement. Stuller asked if the Farest Service has given conceptual approval to the application. Bell said they have not, but have indicated they are willing to go ahead with the study. Stuller asked if the Forest Servtce will not go to the next step in the joint review process unless the County directs them to. Bell replied the Regional Forester will not give permission to proceed with the environmental impact staCement unless the County is s�illing to participate. Edwards asked what County participation in the site specific review would involve. Be12 sa3d the County would review and ro�ment on site speclfic matters relative to the County. He repeated that the Forest Service did not give conceptual approval to the Little Annie application; they just do not see anything at thia point to lead them to believe the proposal is not feasible. Child noted that the initiative states the County must have the consent of the other agencies in the joint review to go on to the site specific stage; he felt a co�itment from the Forest Service and State vould be � t :� necessary. Bell said the Foresc Service will not give any approval until the EIS " i is approved; they are still reserving the right to disapprove the application. ,� - t Stuller aeked if the Forest Service would not give conceptual approval before the � � : site specific review. Be12 replied that is correct; they will just �ndtcate �. ,,{ �` whether or not they are willing to proceed with the study. Ashley Anderson, repre- g,, t senting Little Annie, asked if the Forest Service is wiliing to proceed. Bell re- �:( � :�� plied he is trying to get authorization to proceed if the County and all other G S � a encies in the oint review a ree the are willia to �* g 3 g y g participate. � : ¢p � Site Smith noted that Ron Garfield, representing Little Annie, submitted a draft site ?�� c, � Specific i:? ° Agreement specific agreement for the appl3cation and the Plactning Office 1s reviewing it. He ; has proposed a phased review process Lhat would put the Forest Service L�IS first, a" : ,,a # with the County special review being done after the EIS is comp2eted. BeZl said the " � joiat review agreement says those processes must run simultaneously because the ss? S;� ri_ rCounty special review is part of the EIS. If authorization for the EIS is given '� �u.:: q �r. ±, ��: � -;i. � Cowmissioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 9 f�_�;' ; i'<:`s t` -:�.:;,ykE: i �y��..r � • ��=:-'��j;� ' , ' :� ri y:�x t.� Ji. by all four parties in the joint revlew an agreement wi11 be dra£ted stating what e'� ;�� will. be inc2uded in the EIS. Stuller polnted out that the joint review agreement also� �'� Fi e*.: states the Forest Service can appoint an ad hoc citizens co�mnittee to participate in t`' e'�' the EIS issues. Sell said the Forest Service first muat determine what the LittZe �"5 �� Annie initiative means and receive a certifiLd copy of the election results. They will then draw up an environmental assessment repor[ to detezmine if an EIS ia � necessary; Bell was sure an EIS would be needed. Harry Truscott noted that decid3ng what has to be studied is a big ,job; the Wilderness Workshop has drawn up a list o£ suggested items to be atudied and made reco�endations for membership on the ad hoc � citizens' cownittee. He added that after the necessary data is defined an impact analysis process begins; he felt that impact analysis process ahould also be in- cluded in the site specific agzeement. Smith stated.that when the P � Z reviewed the Little Annie application they felt more information is needed on the demand for new �k:` ski areas and suggested that the John Gilmore study of 1974 be updated. Child felt that would be appropriste but asked who would pay for the study, Edwards asked if any fees for retaining consultants to analyze the data provided by the developer would ' be available. Stuller said the joint review manual doesn't address that point, but anticipates that only in-kind services will be contributed by governmen[al agencies. Edwards felt there should be some independent review of the data submitted by the � developer, and there should be a mechanism in the agreement to provide funds for the County to hire an independent agency for this review. He directed Stuller to � meet with the staff to develop a proposed site specific agreement including a pra- x f vision for funding for the County Lo retain independent agencies for studies relative p . "� ta the application. � � Helicopter Yat Halligan reported that an application has been received from Greg Williams for ; .3 Skiing � 1 helicopter skiing. The proposal covers three districts and two forests and would � 5 be based at the Grizzley Reservoir. The application received by the Forest Service �,�; � ,� ; has been submitted to the other ranger districts. Child asked if the operation � �� would be on RARE II lands. Be11 said it woutd but noted it is legal to allocr heli- C.;� �ro: �� ? copter skiing on RARE II landa, although he was unsure if the Forest Service would {"'Fs � ` ka :t li:-�.. - do so. Child felt the lands being studied for wilderness inclusion would be managed =' ; ,�,.`�y: N,. .f as if they were wilderneas. Bell replied Chat RARE II lands are required to go 4°�': , �� through an environmental statement process be£ore any change in the environment can S' ns� be allowed, but the land can be used for uses that won't degrade the wilderness possi- t� _ .,..;..;g f'S;. = bility. Smith felt any helicopter skiing application wouZd require special =eview �� wY. ;_i�. '� by the County as a use associated with a Forest Service permit or as an outdoor s.`� k wt . :� i.`I`-'. i . 77�'3' � y Commiseioners Meeting Navember 27, 1978 - 10 '�'� sic° � "�. 3 c�'. . . i.K ::��- � . .. .::?i.inµ:.i r� . - j :Y: . . . ... :. ... � , . ...- . . . .. � . .�. . y ry,:. . ... . y:i:! C. � . recreational use. Child noted that 1041 review would also be required if the appZi- f;' ' f� 4�:_ cation involved the airport. Se11 felt the main impack of the proposal would be r,-; �� trans ortin clients to the Ta erts Lake helicn ter ick u �rx P 8 g p p p point. Murray Canningham, tk�: re resentin the a licant said a van would be used to trans ort �� P g pp , p peop2e to a drop- � off point and a land vehicle wouZd be used to take them to the pick up location. �; Edwards asked if the applicant is required to have the County review this matter in � _ the land use planning agreement with rh� Forest ServicP, Be11 snid the Forest Service � is required to refer the application to the County. Edwards felt the application 7 must obtain County approval and comply with County regulations, and that could be overriden by preemption only. He said an application for special review shouZd'be filed. In that review, the County would look at conflict with cross-country skiing, the effect of helicopter skiing on the back country experience, and compatibility with low intensity, less motorized uses. Edwards asked about the br3dge on the East Maroon trail. Be1l said the Foreat Service has funds to repair it this summer. Child asked if the Forest Service's b'udget for the purchase of private lands would be increased if local government indicated its support. Bell said that is true, and he will submit a list of appropriate agencies to submit comments to in that � � regard. . � ---------- � � Benedict Terry 0'Pray, Zoning Enforcement Officer, reported on the status oF the Benedict ; Gravel Pit .� gravel pit. In his review of the matter he determined that the P & Z recommended � �ti � approval oF issuaace of a permit in 1976 under the County's saad and gravel regulatlons.k;� -� § The matter was then considered by the Board of Coaraissinners and rereferred to the � L � P S Z. Theze is no record of the matter after that time. Sim Smith stated the § .f �~ P & Z's approval was on the basis of incomplete notice. He added that P & Z member -1��, Henry Pedersen seconded the motion for approval but later resigned because of conflict � ';' of interest. 0'Pray continued that the most recent mention oP the pit was a May 16, �� fF ; K�: ;: 1977 memo from Extensioa Agent Dave Soyle on revegetation. That memo gives approval _ �i:. tn the revegetation plan and reco¢unends that the escrow money held by the County be F� '; returned to Henedict. A stop work order was issued to the plant this fal7., and 0`Pray � stated that to his knowledge no other violations have occutred since that time. i>.': �''cF Stuller asked if a reclamation plan was approved in November ot 1972 when the permit .- �� for the pit was first issued. 0'Pray said he could not find such a plan, and the ��' +�,:> �n. only information he could locate refer=ed to the establishment of sa escrow fund in � �?c F'!, ¢��'G. t'��'+: �� Commissioners Meet3ng November 27 1978 - 11 4��.� , i:!�'. y,�4,Y � - - . . ,��,: _ ,..,t�. _ _ . _ . s. Y!. '�. f � the amount of $500 pez acre. .7im Smith showed the Board plans for the pit done in �� ;i ��;. � September of 1972 and noted that the excavation has now gone far beyond that. Child �z m �� '� suggested directing Larry Dunn, Extension Agent, to come up with a reclamation plan � r. �� -? for the pit. 0'Pray said Benedict has a reclamationplan now and suggested Dunn ��- � �, `§ ;� •:� review it. ;; � Edwards stated there wae an agreement in 1972 to revege[ate the site and, although 1, ^h,A it appears that wasn't specifically dellneated, it means at least grass should be � planted on all disturbed areas. He felt the County ahould require Benedict to �: ;� revegetate the disturbed areas and directed the staff to draft a letter to be signed �+`',' by the Chairman stating the minimum revegetation apecifications, to be,formuiated � � � by Larry Dunn, including the delineation of necessary slope angles so vegetat3on can '� i�. � be successful. This demand letter should include a date for completion of the � revegetat3on work and bonds he2d by the County will not be released until that is � accomplished. Edwards added that a copy o€ the letter ahould be sent to Hemann. � Any reapplication for use of the pit would be up to Benedict; this revegetation � requirement comes from the 1972 permit for which revegetation was not completed. � Edwards felt Boyle approved the revegetation plan �ust becau.>e Benedlct has spent � more than the $3000 held in escrow, but that figure is not a maximum amaunt to be � spent. In addition to drafting the letter, a calendar vith performance time � schedules should be completed and Stuller should invest3gate a mandatory injunction � �� if that performance is not done voluntarily so some action can be taken by the County. �� -------- _ y� -�-'�' Clean Ellen Anderson, of the Clean Air Advisory Board, appeared be£ore the Boazd to ,. Air '" Alert resubmit air pollution alert procedures considered Iast year. Stuller noted that ;�j Procedures at the last consideration the Board requested that costs for the bus system and . .�r°i � -�'.i interim parking lots be formulated and the question of the legality of the interim : . t parking lots in the zone districes be resolved. Anderson said that Curt Stewart has � � reviewed the CAAB's suggestions and felt a limousine service could be contracted for � �;� ;:1 use durin an alert. Stuller noted that the CAAB's ro osal calls for 100 arkin "��" k� 8 P P P 8 {�� z spaces at Lhe Roaring Fork Grocery site, however the County is limited to 15 apaces �� ry��_ there. Mderson reported that last year there were 12 to 15 days in which levels were�;:`.` high enough to call an alert. Bob Nelson wi21 be taking the readings this year and �:^e�i �:. he may work wi.th the radio weather forecaster so quicker alert predictions can be �;� liiz: made. Nelson sa3d that at this po3nt an alert could be called only for carbon-mono- t:^:i ?�' S.+ xide levels, since it will take from three to four months af sampling to get parti- F�'� F'�.. ,;,•,. culate readnuts, -Edwarda asked if the intercept parking would be cnandatory. `" �:.. �:�. f11y?: �N; }Ir� Fw1. � Commissioners Meeting November 27, i97g _ 12 �, � �xib;y�� a K- ww�.r��.� , . :;;�`;.Ca-:�,�::i��$ � . ,k:$��; . , � _.__ . . . -. - . . �ys�. �:�ti; '��;,�. ._ra, ,��,. :;{� Anderson replied it would be voluntar Edwards directed the CAAB to develop an Y• �� ; implementation plan, working with the appropriate County staff inembers, assigning :'� �,� � f;` clear responsibilities to individual departments, and present it to the Board in 'i;` � . �, resolution form. Nick Lampiris, of the CAAB, noted that funding would be needed for � T�: ;� the intercept parking lot signs. Edwards said the County could make the signs and "n get authorization from the State Highway Department to install them. �� '�' ------- � ;�. Woody Cora and Stanley Natal aere present to discuss road names in the Woody Creek area. �;�p Creek '�� Road They requested that the name of Lenado or Canyon Road be changed back to Woody Creek ,`�r Names ' ;;; road, its historic name. Cora Natal said the phone compan'y would agree to change � the name in the phone bnok if the County sends�them a letter stating the correct ,� � name. Stanley Natal pointed out that the Woody Creek Caucus supports changing the � � name back to the Woody Creek Road. He added that the fact that there are two roads � �� called the Woody Creek Road causes a lat of confusion in the area, and he felt the � name of Lenado Road attracts tourists to the area. Child suggested that the County & f`s� Engineer review all the names of County roads and prepare a letter to the phone � company Iisting Che correct names. Edwards agreed, and said the area east of the � Woody Creek Bridge should be.called the McLai� Flats Itoad, the lower portion of the � i road should be the River Road, and [he road up Woody Creek should be called the Woody _ � � Creek Road. y A: � �. ��Y�� Pfister Sm3th noted that the Planning Office has recei.ved a tequest from the attornies �� Phasing Study reptesenting the Pfister subdivision application to set up a special work seseion with ;� '� Session � ; Request the Board to consider the idea of phasing. Stuller reminded the Soard that at the �' t r y last meeting Kinsley and Edwards indicated that they were not interested in giving �; � a. the application any £uture allotment. They were not prohibited from taking fina2 ��' <�: i action because of the Owl Creek rereferral which held up the other subdlvision applica-�1,.' �.: � i � tiona, but a formal motion to deny phasing to the Pfistez application was never made. � � z Barb Ornitz, representing Pfister, said they would like an opportuni[y to have a full discussion on phasing s3.nce this is the first time it has been considered. She felt ;{x; �,�, - theq should explore the possibility of phasing in a geaeral overall view, and take %=,`s' : �'= a look at this year's quota and future allocaCions. Dwight Shellman, representing �°< Pfister, said it is difficcslt to dea2 with phasing at such a general level, and felt �'- the Board should look at the individual pros and cons for each application. Ae noted ,�; t;;..j that they attempted to devise a method to develop the Pfister land with 60X resident f'�:. r..,:. f;t c.;;4 . � � i,;,�'i r� Commissioners Meeting Novemher 27, 1978 - 13 .,•aQ:::.nu'-a_ t: _,-. , ,� ,,. ''�`;�z`a'` _ -y. <�a,.r•<� � _ � ' y'�'� - ' ' — .. . _ - � � ��. ` t. x:• housing and he felt that must be seriously considered. Edwards said he is not �-,� � interested in phasing because he feels the negative aspects outweigh the positive. �� 7�, c s�(, He noted that an area can be allowed to continue to develop by applying for subdivi- � .h �` os �� . ° sion each year, since it will already have installed services and will probably be � !y' •'t awarded the most points. He stated that the Board should reserve their flexibility � in future years in case a better application is received. Ornitz eaid that this � s� ,i� project has defined areas of development, and if attention is given to one site it . -� .� � *aill require more than one year for development. Shellman added that if the applicant i: knew what the Board wanted, the magnitude of the development could�be scaled down � '�; and a concensus could be reached. The Board agreed to attend a study session to con- ` :t � � sidez the idea. � ' � _---- ---- � Subd*vi- George Ochs introduced planaer .7oe Porter who has been hired to design a plan for ' sion of ,�,�� Randall a lot split for the County-owned Randall property. Porter showed the $oard a map � Property � of the property, noting that the purchase contract for the land stated one lot,at '� the southetn end of the property could be sold as a homesite. Porter looked'at the � vegetation, floodplain, slopes, and alluvial deposits and coacZuded that the entire s area is buildable. Ae reco�nended that the southernmost tip of the property be sold . � � . as a lot since it has good views and solar orientation and access is available from � � � � a right-of-way at the southern edge. He added that a road could be bu31t into the � � remainder of the site for construction of a parking lot for the Hunter Creek trail �' ;� from that right-of-way. Porter noted that the possibility of a land trade with David '`" � Michaels,. the adjacent property owner, for consCruction of employee housing was ruled '',� � ':� out aince it 3s not allowed in the purchasing contract. The water line to the site ,� � �� (k: � would require re sir and construction of an 800 foot line, but Porter felt a septic h P �s� � . �- � , L:�'M1. . . . F"' tank and well could be developed on the propezty. The Boar@ needa to determine whether'.� • � � they want to sell off the parcel, and if they would like to get• a parking lot for the `� ,� ��,�" e�,: Hunter Creek trail at this lacation. Child noted that the Sierra Club and Wilderness ¢>'� tr-:=. r.� j Workahop have both reco�nended against providing a parking lot for the Hunter Creek �;:' �: ' trail. Ochs added that a parking lot is being developed at the community center. �S; � ; Roby Albouy said most people don't know that the trail head is by the community center �` and they L•ry to park further up the xoad. Edwards asked if the installation of a „';;-� y;� house on the southern edge would detzact from the main use of the property as a park. i'', Porter said it woUld detract to some extent; the main question is if the money 4" generated from the sale of the lot is needed to purchase diFferent open space parcels. k;'=; ��%: i;"' Coumiissioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 1G , :.`.�:�'`:. - .�,,-:, ��.��.�� ' _ i _ _— 1:,. ., ' � ; �`�� - � _ .. . .__._ . v,. � ,: ;� ,. y�Huntet Edwarda recaunnended that next summer a picnic area and small trail head parking lot ��Creek '� ;;�Parking be built, and the Board wait on the question of the land sale. Child asked if there �� ;a�. Lot ;i-, are any critical open space parcels the County is trying to acquire right now. r� ", t�;'� Edwards felt the Coutty should proceed with obtaining approval for the Iot split, so r� • >;�; d.� �;'t it can be sold in the future if necessary. Stuller asked if the 7.ot eplit could be � `•' �i ;�, approved without water availability. Edwards said [he County would 3ust need to show �� evidence that a well could be installed. Raymond Auger asked if the easement to the �.�e'� property includes utilities. Stuller said there is a second easement for utilities. n; � The Board directed Ochs co take the property through the lot split process and to �' schedule the construction of a picnic area and parking lot for next summer. :� --------- � Solar Raymond Auger appeared befoxe the Board to present his proposal for solar blinds � Blind �; Demonstra- for the Courthouse. 13e explained that these blinds give a ten-fold decrease in �? tion "" heat loss and are made of a laminated material which seals the window frame. At =�• . .� ;� a cost of $2.75 per square foot, he estimated the blinds would pay for themselves as_ ;�s through heat conservation in four years. Edwarda asked abont the cost of double or � - � triple glazed g2ass. Auger said the cost would be less but the insulating value �; � would be much lower. The Board said they could not afford to purchase the blinds in k. `� 1979, but requested that one blind be inatalled in the Co�issioners' room for Y4 demonstration. � � ��_�___ � North Stul2er presented a resolution £or financing for the North Star Ranch. She explain- . ,s ,� S[ar =� � Ranch ed that this resolution authorizes execution o£ a note and deed of trust, with a � � Financing � Eive year payout. IP the County does not make all five payments, they retain the ` � �;� S land for which the payments have been made. This purchase also includes water rights. � �; �s The reaolution also states that if the County zones the property as public lands, �� they will agree to release that zone category if the property is conveyed back. Jon t�' �� Mulford, representing The Nature Conservancy, stated that this resolution does not � . comply with the agreement between the County and TNC and does nat reflect what he �a '� g�`:.; .� was advised would happen. The Nature Conservancy was never approached about taking �£i t �,� back a note for the property, and the resolution doesn't appear ta provide for any - ' `# payments until 1979. In addition, the $1,030,OOU f3gure in L•he resolution indicates a markup and interest rate is aot shown. There are several errors in the deacr3p- tions ior _*he land and 'water contained in the deed the mortgage. TNC bought the property for $875,000; that figure plus $46,000 in expenses and $75,000 in interest Commissioners Meeting November 27, 1478 - 15 i .4�*! � .�,.�a..�«N..��.� , .;,,, -;, {' _ �f `�"`,� ' _ :�_ .. . . _ . .: .�;' , : �: , ,�,:' >t r�;;.� �,, is what the County should pay for the properCy, not $1,030,000. Mulford felt the �� = markup for the bonding person is too high. tie stated that TNC fs prepared tn make a � '-`� �; :'"`.�+ payment to Jim Smith oE approximately $200,000 this week but they want a commitmen*_ �� r that the County will go ahead wi[h the purchase before doing so. Oken said the �� nl +r` $1,030,000 figure includes $10,000 to Shorty Lankfoxd, $3,Q00 in legal fees and the � remainder is used in the underwriting. The interest raEe is 6'-�X. Stuller agteed � � ;��"': with Mulford's question as to why the note is shown as payable to TNC rather than the � 1�.i underwriter. Edwards suggested the Board meet to review this Zater in the week When ;�. �; a bonding representative can be present. Mulford stated that before making the pay- �. "' ment to Smith this week TNC needs an unequivocal exercise of at least the County's first option without any contingencies. Stuller asked why no County money is going �. into the purchase the first year. Oken replied that is so the County can take the payment-in-lieu-of-taxes funds to make a one year reserve. The Board agreed to con- tinue the meeting to Wednesday at noon to consider the matter further. �; _ . � ------- � Downvalley Smith presented resolutions for the downvalley subdivision applications as requested �' Subdivision ' Applica- at the last meeting. These incorporate the P 6 Z's recommendations and certain `�; tions ?,� referrai agency coc�cents. She reporced that the newest update from the Building ,f. � DepartmenC as to downvalley buildout shows 29 units have been built this year, while the Growth Management Policy Plan guidelines indicate the area shou2d be alZowed 34 units per year, The Board's reco�endation for approval of 18 new units this year and � 7 next year substantially exceeds this reca�endation. Child said after looking at the speciPics of the PMH requirements and these figures he has changed his mind about .,� � approval of these subdivision applications. He moved to reconsider the Star Mesa � !%�. and White Star applications. Edwards seconded and the motion passed unaciimously. � 4 ��y � Child moved that a resolution of denial foz both these applica[ione be prepared for � 3t consideratton at the next meeting. Edwards seconded. Child said the main reasons he ,�`�' �� changed his mind were the projection for the number of units to be built this year �% �� was very inaccurate, and he was inadvertantly discounting the PMH units from the quota. �� s : A6 He felt when these two factors were taken into consideration the number of units �?' k:- e; approved by the Board wae much too high. Bayard Hovdesven, repr•esenting White Star, pointed out that their application met every single qualification of the Land Use ��; s.,. Code. Chi2d noted that the P 6 Z recouIIOended agaittst the application 6ecause of road r;� c_y'. safety and the fact that it would open up a whole new development area. Jon Mulford ti; asked if the Board is applying the Growth Management Poiicy Plan as though it were ;,'�. sa. n.� 'i:� ' �'; Comm3ssioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 16 'f � s `� _ � _ : ,,'�4x.:, t ., � #��. _ x�,.��'^'�°, _ � _ _ . - . . _._ . . __ : g. �:� ;" s an established quota. Child satd he is not, and the subdivisions he would like to �,: ,. �: .:y �^a ti approve Would still exceed the guidelines, but would be closer. Child's motion pasaed � unanimously. �� < �` . � The Board considered the xesolution granting general submission approval to the :� ,r Altimira-Waterman subdivision. Child asked about imposing the condition that the � PMH and free-market units be developed at a one-to-one ratio when the entire aub- ;a't div_'.sion w111 be devel.oped in one year. Smith said that condition c�as inclnded in :� case they choose to phase the development over a few years. Child asked about the - ;<a ,4� apprapriateness of tests to determine homesites for two of the three parcels. Jolene :3: � �; Vrchota replied that the homesites should be conf3rmed for each parcel especially .` �' with regard to slopes. Child asked about a covenant against future sabdivision of �� ;�, the 40 acre parcel. Smith said thep £elt the PMfi restriction on two of the lots was ',� appropriate only if there were no deed restriction on the 40 acre piece. Child moved �� approval of the Altimira resolution. Edwards did not feel the description of the restrict3ons on the employee units was adequate. Stuller noted that those restric- �_ tions are not clarified until detailed submission, hut agreed they should be clarified to reduce confusion with PMH units or low and moderate income units. Edwards re- quested a language amendment to state the units crill be deed zestricted and sold ._ through the Housing Authority to qualified persons, and any improvementa will be �.i limited to a maximum square foot value and total square foot size in accordance with �" the gaidelines in eEfect at the time of construction or sale. He seconded the motion with that amendment. Child accepted the amendment and the motion passed unanimouslq. '`' -------- ;� ±& Arneson Grice presented a subdivision exemption application by Roy and Brenda Arneson to �, . Subdivision � ',Exemption redraw the lot lines of their three lots in the Redstone Subdivision to fozm two lots. �� i R!' ' Edwards moved approval with the condition that a plat approved by the Coanty Engitteer r a and County Attorney be recorded. Child seconded and the motion passed unanimously. �� tl' . ------- � .,�c �. At this point the joint City Council - County Commissioners meeting began. City �: � .Council members present included Mayor Stacy Standley, Steve Wishart, Michael Behrendt, y George Parry and Tom Zsaac. �: . �i_. --------- �� :Interna- Ochs reported that he, Mick Mahoney and a representative from Snowmass Village met �tlonal �" Systems with representatives of International Systems, a professional grant agency, regazding s�� 1 Granr '�� ' Proposal a proposal foz a $22,000 one-year contract for o6taining grants, with a guarantee �� ' x�: 5; �,4 �t ��; r ;� � i5 i �% Commisaioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - ll �"r' °. M1:' Yt �„ ' ,+. i,i-.r. ..�r�K' ..... .. . ....... ,.. . , .,.�.�. .... . wswnat..... n 1 rt' � �•' - . w;.�'.r'"��'1�,• �3T � ��'�.�-e��..�:1' . . • .. y9�?S '��i.six,i'. . . . i . . �.:. ... . ,.-. .. .: , . ..-.. _ ,.. .. .... . ...... ...-.,.,. � .�� _. � � . . _. . . .. . . . ��. � L:,' { that the company caill deliver at least $22,000 in grants during that periad, will - � extend the time period of the contract to obtain the necessary grants, or will refund � �',�. j tei � the difference. Ochs also suggested that Phyllis Kenny work with the company and one- x. �', � � third of her salary be split three ways between the City, County and Snowmass Village. � t� � He has also received a proposal from Carol Fuller for grants work for the three �. � municipalities, bat felt she may be more valuahle working on specif3c grant applica- :k ; tions. At the end of the year the municipalitiea could look at the grant money received .' 'rs ` and divide the International Systems fees on a proportional basis. Standley said ;; there would be no guarantee that each municipality would receive any grants, regard- � � less of what portion of the Internationa2 Systems fee they pay; it would still be �. � possible to end up with nothing. He asked about the legality of pyaing this company y � a portion of the grant money. Ochs replied they would not be getting any part of � the grant money, but would be hired by the municipalities. Child pointed out that � the company could get almost automatic grants each municipality receives annually � and count that toward the required $22,000 total. Ochs said they agreed to get %� $22,000 above and beyond the grants the municipalities normally receive. Behrendt � d asked what lncentive they would have to go beyond $22,000 in grant money. The group # requested that Ochs check the references £or International Systems and return with � a report. Ochs asked if he could proceed with the contract if he gets a favorable $ recommendation. Standley said he would like to review the referrals first. � w --------- x � �' Communica- Ochs stated that the Sheriff reques[ed tabling the co�unications center item z tions .,� Center because the Coam�unications Board didn't have a chance to reviem it. StandZey reporied '� that Ron �tock, [he City Attarney, reco�ended that the City take strong action with- ,Y x out consulting the Commissioners. Mahoney said the ca�unications center is breaking � t. dowa; it is hard to operate because the responsibility for the center is overseen � � hy the Communications Board which is overseen by the Commissioners and City Council. � Ae felt it is not wise to manage the center this way. Acting Police Chief Rob .� � �`�, McClung felt there are adminisCrative and security pro6lems at the center. Their F� computer terminal is asaigned to them by the CBI and must be run by a 1aw enforcement �; 7p . agency; the CBI is upset that a civilian organizatlon is supervising the terminal. � This could result in loss of the terminal. As a result, McClang has had to take ;`� k� xesponsibility for the terminal and could be held personally liable for its misuse. �; �r McClung felt the admin3strative problems result from the fact that the communications ;:} center is located at the Police Department, and they receive calls which should go ?� t::y to the Police Department. He is unsure if a director oE communications is needed, �'�e "� ;:'�, i�:f ;;,:, 'r.:; Co�issionera Meeting November 27, 1978 - 18 - ::,�•�',�Gri_r:�4F�w ...j..J., . ._ . (, i�--.j � ' ^ . 5 4_�li�� . • .. 5... ��y,y_�. . ' . . . . �.y. . . , . . ... - ' };,. iP H'. 4i � ;. and felt the department may only need a supervisor, since most of the responsibility "r' � for the center falls into the lap of the Police Department. The caffinunications � director was recently fired and the supervisor became director, however McClung is � concerned with the eupervision of the center since he is liable for it. He would � like to retain the Communications Centes Board for direction and put the dispatch ; office in the Police Department for administrative reasons. Edwards commented that ' � � thts is the second time the Council and Co�issioners have considered this problem. ` fle felt the conclusion was that it would be a good idea to try to centralize certain F i functions. and that a joint communications center would operate more efficiently ' s !� � and serve the community better, He noted that the Communications Board hasn't y� discussed this and he did not feel they have tried to work out a solution. Edwards � � concluded that it would not be in the best interests of the community to terminate :� the coamiunications contract. Mahoney said he d3scussed this problem with Ochs last � week and he doesn`t want to see the center break down, but feels a better linkage is needed between the oommunications center and the Police Chief. McClung said he t ;: oniy wants administrative control for the center in the Police Department; he doesn't want to disband the cenCer. He stressed that the computer terminal is a necessity � and the center cannot operate without it. McClung added that Boulder has a City- County co�unications center and that works because it is managed and operated with personnel from one department. Ae felt the mafor mistake is to try to make the center independent from the Sheriff's Office and Police Department; McClung felt y the center should be under some s3ngle responsibility. Edwards suggested the Communications Center Soard meet with the new director to discuss the possibility of restructuring. He said it seems the situation ia that Che Police Chief doesn't get along with the Sheriff and peCty riva�,ries aze creating this problem. Edwards � noted that 1f the problem is one between departments it won'[ be solved if the juris- dictinn for the center is gi.ven to one department. Stock commented that the Commun- ications Center Board cannot solve the problem; the problem is in the structure, not in the Board itself. Ochs agreed with Edwards that pclitical matters are tnter- r fering with the Board, and he felt the same problem would exist if responsibility for the ceater is given to one person. Standley directed the Board to review the � S* rnacter and return; if they can't come to a decision the City Council and Coa�issioa- � ers will have to do so. Edwards suggested that monthly meetings between the Police Department and Sheriff's Office may settle the matter. �� Commiasioners Meeting November 27, 1978 - 19 �� . r�: �� - ; � '�':;;exw. .y. �.�-�-%�' ;: " 4�- r x,> fr� . _;<�,,;,... , ;r:; . � , ._. _ _. _. • �.. I. r, �,; _ ;. -+The-Soard recomiened their earliet maeting. � �Ahacus The Board considered the resolution granting general submission approval to the j ' Ranch � Abacus Ranch (Frank) subdivision. Child felt the phasing clause should state that the free-mar&et and PMEi units wfll be developed at the same ratio. Wells noted � z that the applicant stated they could not build the PMH units if the free-market uaits ' are not sold first. Child felt the PMH units would have to be built along with the -'4 ` r: free-market un3.ts. Wells brought up the qvestion of preserving the open space so �' a ricultural o erations can continue. Child asked if there is a g B p prohYbition against " further development on the Ranch. Wells said that would apply only to the ZIO acres � ;� in the subdivision. Edwards suggested that language similar to that included in :�: '� the Altimira subdivision resolution should be included for the restricted unita in ;{S this subd3vision. Wells asked if the Board would require an additional deed restric- � a: tion on one of the existing 3Q acre units to meet Che housing requirement. Edwards �}� °y�s said the applicant would have to testtict a 30 acre piece if they want to sell four � :� £ree-market units. Wells fe�t it would be preferable if the open space is not � granted to the homeowners bu[ is kept with the ranch so it can be used in their agri- � ��i cultural operation. Edwards suggested the homeowners could own the open space and • be required to lease it to the agzicultural operation as long as the ranch continues. A Since Edwards would not vote for the reso2utton the matter was iabled pending Kinsley's °.; return. � ---------- �'Pauper's Child moved approval of the Pauper's Paradise subdivisinn as a lot split. Edwarda ;�'�Paradise seconded and the motion passed unanimously. x Smith Child moved approval of the resolution granting general submission approval for Subdivision � the Smith subdivision. Edwards seconded and requested that language similar to the A2timira subdivision language be added Lo the restricted units. Child accepCed the amendment and the mation passed unanimously. Vagneur The Vagneur Ranch su6division application was tabled pending Kinsley's return. �. ' '�Ranch � Dog Child suggested that subdivisions in which dogs are prohibited should be required �� . Prohibition Access to grant accesa to the Animal Warden so the regulations can be enforced. r �� t..r �� $%d 'Comm3ssioners MeeCing November 27, 1978 - 20 #. a j' i, ..j�u� ; T � .'G y ' — .. fs;; y 4�.' �c,qrsr;'c.. � . . � . � �� w'��w�t�;� . � . � - :� � �< pC t.�f�. �"� A continuation of the November 27, 1978 meeting was convened on Wednesday, November �; � 29, 1978. Chairman Robert W. Child and Joseph E. Edwards Jr. were present. � ' ---------- y � North The Board again discussed financing for purchase of the North Star Ranch. Child � Star � Ranch asked why no payment is being made in 19�8. Finance Director Tom Oken exp2ained Financing � that by deferrireg the payment until 1979 the County can use 1978 payment-in-lieu-of- � a . - taxes (PILT} £unds for the next year rather than having to rely on the PILT appro- � priation in October for that year's payment. With this one year time Zag a reserve fund can be created for the following year. Stuller explained that the final closing for the North Star is to take place on December 8th at which time the County will exercise all five optiotts they hold on the property. In response to a question � raised at the last meeting, Stuller e}cplained that the reason The Nature Conservancy is shown as the payee on the ttote and the mortgagee on the Deed of Trust is because � E.F. Hutton will underwrite the purchase, but they can only finance property, uot acquire it. E.F. Hutton will commit to immediately buy back the note and Deed of i Trust from TNC. Tom Oken, Finance Director, distzibuted a memo explaining the costs incurred in the transaction. He has requested that Shorty Lankford submi.t documen- tation oE the bid amounts received from the underwriting companies, and information � on what interest rate other municipal debts are paying. Ochs asked if it would be � • possible to en[er into a one ar two year agreement with E.F. Hutton with renegotia- � t3on in case the municipal rate drops. Oken said it would be possible to refund � those bonds and include them as part of a larger bond issuance. There will be no � prepayment penalty for this. Edwards asked if there is a fixed obligation for the � ' County to buy the property from TNC. Jon Mulford, representing TNC, said the County � 3 has entered into a series of annual options which they can exercise or not; if they ,.;� are not exercised, that part of the property is given back to Jim Smith. StuZler � �� added that the County must exercise at 2east one option per year, and can do more if �� desired. Edwards ttoted this would commit all of the Gounty's PILT funds for the k� next five years. fte asked if TNC woald be wf.l2ing io cover the County for one year ,. � if PILT funds were not received if the E.F. Hutton agreement were aot approved. � i,(_ MuZford said TNC caould do everything they couZd to hold the deal toget6ex. Edwards said he would prefer doing a deal with TNC. Mulford pointed out that TNC has no '° f; i: ob�ection to the E.F. Hutton approach, s3nce it includes a lower municipal rate; he ;'. , noted that wfth the TNC approach the County is gambling on the prime rate. Oken s' ix sa3d that if the County goes with TNC they must make a $337,000 payment now; he � �'� ;�; Commissioners Meeting November Z4, 1978 - 21 ;{ _Y�', • �:� ..'�� - <. � . x�-��„�-, �� . ��''�+';�x,.. .t.,f:i . . __ _ ,. .} •M •,, i }' r.; .. }t ,''I ....S1Y. ;� felt short term financing would be necessary to cover that payment. Edwards asked � � :�4 � if it would be possible to spread the interest so the payment in the last year is r� � higher and this year`s payment is Iover. MulEord said TNC would have to renegotiate �Y �� " e with Smith for that. Stuller noted that when the County entered into the option � �',� � agreement with TNC this £all they felt they could make that payment, but now it � � appears they cannot. Oken felt the most the County could afford to pay this year � E. � c�ould be $260,000; he pre:ers tha E.F. Hutton approach because no payment is due � until 1979. Edwards asked if the TNC method would be cheaper if Smith agreed to � a � 3 a 8'�Y, interest rate. Oken said it would not. Ochs pointed out that another disad- vantage to the TNC approach is the large amount of outstanding prittcipal that the fi County will have to pay interest on next year. He fe7.t it would be more advantageous t ` to take advantage of the low 3nterest rate offered by E.F. Hutton and renegotiate � �� with them if the prime interest rate drops. Okett said it would not be possible to � � . renegotiate with Hutton. He added that it the Board accepts the fact that the �t f � ^ County cannot afford to make a payment to TNC now, our only option is to accept :� k i the E.F. Hutton deal. Child noted that the County takes possession at the properiy � immediately if the Hutton financing technique is used. Mulford said TNC would be � � willing to give the County a management agreement if they finance through them. He � �' added that if the Board accepts the E.F. Hutton transaction, TNC could request that ry � the note holder give a thirty day notice of default to TNC so they could try to � � save the property. ChiZd asked if the County could apply for granta from the Bureau �5 k� of Outdoor Recreation (BOR} �f theq go with fi.F. Hutton. Stuller said they coa2d �� ' � not get grants in either case since the County wi,11 take tit2e to the property on �� December 8th. Mulford reported that the BOR is not interested in the North Star C�;� property because it isn't an active recteational use parcel. Edwards stated that if �; F�..k TNC carried the $50,000 downpayment fnto the later years in orde= to reduce this �£ year's payment their approach would be acceptable. He asked if they would be willing ��" €; to reduce their $47,OOQ Eee if the County accepts the Hutton pzoposal. Mulford r;;. {: said that fee has already been incurred. Edwards felt the BOR may be interested in ';' ' continuing their grants in future years since they have already made an investment "� I:;: in the Narth Star; 3f the County did an option agreement wi.th TNC they could still apply for these grant monies. Mulford pointed out that Karen Smith daes not feel . �i. the County's chances of obtaining grant funds from the BOR are good, and she sug- `:. �:: • gested another property be used in next year's grant application. Ochs suggested Ix the County could continue applying for grants if title to the property were in I`• Commissioners Meeting November 29, 1978 - 22 a LL�:,'�YF4 . • . . �rv��-�P�� - ��,,.'�°ti�` _ :� ,>' , .z:," ,�;; . • , . ` _ . ._ _ ' 'l \.' � � ,{'. e�� someone else`s name. Stuller said Hutton would not do that. Edwards felt the ?� $40,000 fee charged by TNC and the $40,000 fee in the E.F. Hutton proposal were too i;� ; high. Ochs noted that the County agreed to that fee tor TNC because they could G;, negotiate for a better rice fnr Smith's f' p property. Mulford suggested using local '�. }� investors to cover the deal. Stuller fel[ the bond issuance could be done without ;� `3 hiring Shorty Lankford and the County could negotiate with underwriting firme directly. ;._ _ :� Edwards asked if TNC would agree to defer their fee until the last payment. Mulford �� said they would not agree to do so Zast summer because they felt Pitkin County had ':i �; adequate funds to cover the payment. Ochs noted that the County has received a $75,000 grant from BOR for this year, but the funds won't be forthcoming until next spring. Oken felt he could make the $337,OU0 payment to TNC if he could get short- ti term financing for that $75,000; he still preferred the E.F. Hutton approach because � �the County is not as dependent on PILT funds or the level of the prime interest rate. Edwards moved to adopt the certified record of proceedings for the E.F. Hutton � financing with the conditions that documentation be presented to verify that the � E.F. Autton bid was competitfve and that Lankford did obtain other bids, that there �. be a prepaymeat without penalty provision for both tha note and deed of trust, and � that the minor changes requested by Mulford including the amended legal descriptions � be included. Child seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. � There being no further business the meeCing was adjourned. � Respectfully submitted, APPROVED: „s" ��%e�l/L/ � �' J'� • �.•'Lt.z SteWaFt; ',Deputy County Clerk Chairman Ro6ert W. Child r`� .�' t t.{ �. �y.+�'C �^K x � .' . � �r ` i��.�r.€ � 7 i � - '' �� .�� s � �--�(l�r,y � � �r�� y � , . � �`-�\� 4 ¢ : �.p ,i ,� Josep E. dvards, Jr. � � � � �c:xf`T' � 't •r 1. ,. a . .S'- (. " . . j i x� �"n J ct '�' :.,.cn � � : � i � � E � � . � 5 � i ;i . :i �� Commissionere Meeting November 24,. 1978 - 23 .. . ,'�';'.,;,�z,� . . .. ... ...,. v..�u*m*u�.a:-�, .,. 1978 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING EXHIBITS November 27 Webster Lot Separation Lots A Memorandum Dated October 19, 1978 from Richard Grice to 43,44,and 45 Starwood Five Board of County Commissioners Subdivision B Memorandum Dated October 19, 1978 from Richard Grice to Board of Coun Commissioners BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 39 1978 EXHIBITS TO MINUTES �, ,�:a c... . ,, ... . . MEMORANDUM f'-�'"''' �"� F:tblic E:c��ria;; _.,i�i�, . . , ,. , EXH{BiT /J� T0: Board of County Comnissioners suv3oct � /) E:�i. No � FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office -� - RE: !Jebster - Lot Separation - Lots 43, 44, and 45, Starwood Five Subdivision DATE: October 19, 1978 This is a public hearing to consider an application from Mr. Jim Reeser on behalf of Ms. Mary Webster which requests permission to separate the above mentioned three lots in�:the previously subdivided Starwood Five Subdivision for the purpose of single family development. This application is made under the amended section 7.22 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The amendment provides additional review criteria which should be considered before granting special review approval. for your conven.ienc�'#he:se criteria are as follows: 1. "The number of sub-standard lots developed in the area and the effect of separate development upon the character of the neighbor- hood and purposes of the zone category; 2. The extent to which the lots comply with existing subdivision regu- lations; 3. Tne effect of separate development on available utilities, roads, and other public facilities; �. ".ny physical limitations of the lots; 5. 'fhe configuration of the lots as it affects their suitability for separate development; 6. The degree of economic loss to the owner if separate development permission is not granted (including a consideration of the value of the lots if separately developed vis-a-vis their value if used in connection with each other); 7. The history of acquistion (including a consideration of the purchase and whether or not the lots were involuntarily acquired); 8. The historical use of the lot." The following Planning Office comments relate to the review criteria listed above. 1. The three subject lots are surrounded by the Starwood Subdivision which consists almost entirely of sub-standard sized lots - most of which have already been developed. Development of these three lots would not have a substantial effect on the character of the neighbor- hood. Z. All utilities currently are available in the immediate area with the excepti.on of sewage disposal systems. Bob Nelson has connected priliminary on-site inspections of the lots and has determined that sites do exist wh�ch are capable of complying with the County regulations for septic tank installation. 3. There are no significant physical limitations on the lots. A site inspection was conducted by myself specifically in order to deter- mine if access existed to R-45 which would bear a logical relation- ship to the topography. I discovered two possibilities for access to R-45. One would be down a natural draw at approximately a 13� grade. This drive-way would unfortunately connect with south Starwood Drive at the appex of a hair-pin curve. The other possi- bility for access would be through R-54 at a grade of approximately 7%. This latter access was reserved on the original plat, is still available and is obviously preferable. � � Memo to BOCC � Webster - Lot Separation October 9, 1978 Page Two 5. In the event approval is not granted, the degree of economic loss to the owner would certainly be significant, however, we do not have any specific information in this area. 6. The history of acquisition is that Mary Webster purchased all three of these lots on August 15, 1974, under the assumption that they were each separately developable. The applicant has not provided this office with any specific information regarding the pur.poses for the purchase. Considering the substantial degree to which the lots satisfy current sub- division regulations, the number of substandard lots already developed in the area, and the lack of any physical limitations on the lots, the Planning Office recommends approval of this Special Review request with the condition that lot R-45 will be accessed through lot R-54 as indicated on the original subdivision plat. The Planning and Zoning Cormnission considered this application at their regular meeting on October 18, 1978, at which time they recomnended your approval of this Special Review request with the condition that access to R-45 wi71 be through R-54 as indicated on the original subdivision plat. sr i � � ; M E M 0 R A N D U M � .,.�'i;'9 T0: Qoard of County Commissioners - : �r, _,. �;c'aibtt� FRQM: Richard Grice, Planning Office EXHIBiT RE: Obermeyer Parking - Special Review ;�,: ;,,,;;� � DATE: October 19; 1978 ��'• i'0•' � This is a public hearing to consider the :attached application from Sports Obermeyer which requests permission to vary the minimum parking space requirements for their warehouse facility which is currently under con- struction at the Airport Business Center. The Land Use Code requires that in section 3.02 that in the B-2 Zone District there wi71 be one parking space per dwelling unit or one parking space per 400 square feet of non- residentiaT space; "provided, however, that the required parking spaces for warehouse purposes shall be determined by special review, taking into consideration pedestrian access, private and public mass transporation, and the need for cormnercial vehicles." Copeland, Hagman & Yaw, architects for Sports Obermeyer Warehouse facility in the Airport Business Center, have prepared an evaluation of the projected parking needs for the facility. Their evaluation is attached. Their evalu- ation concures with the Land Use Code in that one parking space is needed for 400 square feet of office space. They suggested a total of 24 spaces ' be provided for this portion of the project. For the apartment unit of ; 1200 square feet, they suggest that one parking space will be adequate. � For the warehouse portion of the project, they suggest one parkittg space ; per employee based on their peak number of their employees. This would add � an additional fifteen parking spaces. ?lext, they suggest adding three ' additional guest parking spaces bringing total number of parking spaces t up to 43. � The P]anning Office feels that their evaluation is valid and correct, in � that it indicates a maximum num6er of parking spaces that they would ever need under the most intensive circumstances. Their evaTuation is based on the assumption that all employees will bring one car with them when in reality the applicant has explained that many of their employees choose to ride their bikes, cross-country ski, waTk, or ride mass transit to work. The Planning and Zoning Corrnnission considered this application at their regular meeting on October 18, 1978. At which time they expressed a con- , cern about the suggested number of 43 spaces still being too many spaces. � Their preference was to see 33 parking spaces constructed initally with the balance of the open space being landscaped and remaining avaitable � for possible future expansion as needed. I ! f sr I� i � /. t �s , , � C, �i �; ,� . The Aspea Times r;�r,:;D or co. co�,;:x�R�s PITKIN C0. BOX E P�'��Zjc Henrin� �xhibiLs ..3.'�. i:.t-i:p • / � ,. 7 � Aspen, Golorado • 1•-•.�_•_....�.......� � ��u�Q�� :�Z�trz.�l.�l!��d�t!C� E::h. No.; _.,_ PROOF OF PUBLICA'�ION .,� STATE OF COLORADO ) COp�/ Of Notice ) ss. County of Pitkin ) . �ry ��g I, �nll.11la.lri R, Duna*,vaV do solemnly su�ear that ,y� I am the PLZhlisher of THE ASPEN TIMES; that the same is a weekly newspaper prinled, in whole or in part, and publIshed in the Counly of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has Tr�t"" -r-J6r-��anS'�'^�"j.'v 1. '.1 a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been pub- - ��. �� » t 4 lished continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Pitkin, rk f ,:"t t: � 'Y:�� for a period of more than fifty-two conseculive weeks next prior t' `�b'��t� to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise- � �, +��j�- tR v�,�;,� `� ;� ment; that said newspaper has been addmitted to the United States �: "NOTiCB A9'1n P�OP,OBBD BIiDGET, .., mails as seeond-class matter under the provisions of the Act of �IN-��'R`�•V�'�Y March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- a��D�� Nofi.c�u b�nb�ptin�C a p��}1 � paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal �� d'1�� ` notices and advertisements with the meaning oF the 2aws of the ��°bB°°d' ' State of Colorado. :. odfD��t,eeas'toe•�tl�"'.p(oimt�'aur.�� _��,�„�e�n�.c�a.�.c.�.'°.�t��4 Th�t the annexed le al notice or advertisement was �'p'Oo°�°a bud�°�h~b�°Akd�''1 g published � Pitkin CoWnh PSn�me D��y� F} in the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly w�=L Op00 IYf�ILLbUC�•a�!� �C w�p� �po�sdbud�etwfUboiNl�i�d°rta t � Resul�r Meqtms of the�Mt��C�p4Y' ,'� newspaper for the period of consecutive insertions; and � �mw'°°°"t°6°haid�i 1�' , that the first eionen_l[eefins Roam:�WtELi� publication oi said notice was in the issue of said ! ��p , „J-,; a.�n4�i'�'i 1�7�,� � .�:A�rs.sw�sr«at8is".Geir��eas ; newspaper dated Nov cm bP r G�� A.D., 19 and that �� --�i bpd{et file or repst�r:hu''ob�ek�ons ; the last publication of said notice was in the issue of said news- � �� ,;��" ��=r-�`,.*ki� x e�j� � ._Fl[amtau' ,'V�ifq•� '. paper dated A.D., I9_ - �P'�+�M�� _ . .. 1 } ) :"._ ; 1,.: 4 1 1��.,�}� ��QY . ! � r , . l " ' >..., '� , �� ' v!/s�{%Gt �'."f / ,/-��'��-C��Z f ' f ��t�°��°� ra �a��, I�ovembsr � . 23 1978 �- �-��h _.. _,�"' . . . ;., T..' ��...,�.�� -: � � Subscribed and sworn to before me,.a notary public in and for �,�• the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, this �_, day of " � A.D., 19� . �� Natary Public 11iy commission expires �Y Commission Expi;CS P�oV. 3, 19� ,� - //o��7�� 1 ', �1'11�. 1��.��1� 1'11!]�� .. ��:, Box E .�. � c:i::.t�tt`s � i;... 'i.i C0. Aspen, Colorado " ''�-�� Ilcarin� Exhibits . . ;.o . ..1�_:�.Z.:1.�' � Ji� suv�o�t : �1P�2'11".�'.�.-LCf � Erti. No.: .— - -- PROOF OF PUBLICA710N ' ; $TATE OF COLOR.ADO ) ' j > �. Copy of Notice - County of Pitkfn ) William A. Dunaway j I. ........-••..................................................... do solemnly awear that I I am R.he I�U IJZ 15 he T'.••-•......_._............... of THE ASPEN TINLES� I that the same 1s a weekly newspaper printed, !n whale or in part, � r` .,� f' I and publlshed tn the Couniy of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has f bt��otice�' � a general circulatfon theretn; that said newspaper has been Qub- � _, �, �'�'�"'�'�4''k`� t-�''"'" '�� i lished continuously and uinterruptedly in said County of Pitkin, (( `"��ORO��O°1ju��' I t arid 46,9ta�weod PYss 8ubdi�t�ion � for a perlod of more 6han flfty-two cansecutive weeks next prtor ` •NOTICEIB!lBRSBYiHVENTeluttAare.; to the £irst publication of the annexed legal noticc or advertise- , .wf11 b��:piblk�:��b��1°', � ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted ko the Untted 3ta.tes �'�'�7'80,��!��mg°.�.'�.,.��1°O�°6° tp matls as aceond-claes matter under the rovisions of the Act of N� '�7�:R�� ' ! P CoininiNiAn� r Mt n oom Pittin'�' March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that sald news- �.��? •'' � , paper le a weekly newspaper duly qualifled for pubilshing ]egal �0A�O�.�.�Ow°°�°t'°oed'lof� ` ;rac paepdw of.[�r.m►�y e....topm�nR. notices and advertisementa with the meaning of the ]awe of the :7ba�pplipRioa;md.d1 rdhaoL mataei�l .• I State ot Colorado. ` maf 6s revi�wed�t.tha�OIIicy;',•' F I,'. 1808.d�led�.Mp�n o�all 926� aat._�,, � � i That t]ie annexed lega�l' notice or advertisement wes publlshed � � "" /d Robeet:W.Child,Chairnun'.; I in .the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly ' � ��°�C0°A�� ' '• � - Publlehed in the A�pen Time�Oetabee 98��:: 1978 ' � . ';;�.3 newapapera for the pertod of ......1........... consecutive insertiona;and ��' - ' ' : . .' ' that the flret publication of eaid aotice was in the tasne o� eald t ` � � October 26 78 ' newepaper dated .....................................•••-••- A. D.� 19 ........ and that ! the last�publica,tion of said notice was in the isaue of said newa- j PaPer dated _.........._............................... A. D.. 19........ ' f •-�f/,.,,�i��'w.C.�.l�...t.'.�.��!1..�.�...L.�_...._.. I Bubacrlbed and swom to before me, a notaty public!n and ff ; th ! the County of Pltkin, State o! Colorado, thta .........27....__.. day of ; October `(tS � ........................ ....••••........ A. D., 19........, i •l�►•��:;l.K��Lti�.2��1.�..1� . :. � _.................. ! Notary PubIIc . I 6/6/t32 � � My commisstan expires .........:....................••--.............. ! � � t I ! �i a�-�Y 1'1�� 1��1] '�11.f]�� BOX E ��''-RD OI' C0. COMhS'R'S PITKIN C0. Public Hearing Exhibits � Aspen, Colorado 1�:�7, �� i'a�.o -- Su,�;o�t :�b��.m__�-G,f�.Y.�.�. �et/ E.:Yi. No.: .. . ...._ PROOF OF PUBLI�ATION sTn� oF coi,oxr�no � � �. Copy of Notice County of Pltkin ) William R, Dunaway , I. ......................................... ................ do solemnly awear that � I em�the .._....pLi b.L.2 S Yle Y' ....-•-.. of TFIE ASPEN TIDZES: '; :~ . ?; ��"' � that the same 1s a weekly newspaper printed, 1n whale or in part, ."� � �, ; and publtshed in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has ' ;: ptiblic��Ce:.� ,�' : a general clrculation thereln; that said newspaper has been nul�- ,._ . ; lished continuousiy and uinterruptedly in sald County of Pitkin, r �;, ' � E '' `*'....;� ;:. . for a period of more than flfty-two cansecutive weeks next prtor � �,`gg .��,��--v �� to the iirst publtca.tlon of the annexed Iegal notice or advertise- - ,y: �: �01i�C-�E'ISNEREBY '� ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted to the United 3ta.tes �N�th�t�pu� mails ae sceond-class matter under the provlsions of the Act of �b��`�b°��0"°�!p'�'n -: Camt7"BoodofCa�et7Cunmiiva�enoa . , March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said ne�vs- I;'I'�""'��?7,'`1976��•�1;8p�,m:•ia.tbe ' paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualifled for pubilshing lega.l ;��0°°��°�u�L�m::ltittin`' notices and advertisements with the meanin of the laws of the tion��" g , 69��a O�!�e,�Ye��tb';vary ttie -i 5ta.te of Colorada '�°'m"m P�+oB q+�"�equii+emeot�:of-- Sseticn S.OR of tbs lieidi(�s Code for their That the annexed le all notice or advertisement was ��.��°�� ' g publlshed �°,'��.Centar3�aitrtis:madsat. . in :the regular and entire issue of every number of said week�y ' tl1°�'O°°'s�.8rd Aooe of the Mpen.:' ; Citp Nai!ae ca119Zd-2020 e=t.Z2? �.. _, ° -• /d Robeet W.Chi1d,'Clu�rm�n•;. � newspapers for the period of ......1........___ consecutive lnsertions; and '� �a��+tY Camiousioners: < � ;Pu61L6ed in the Asyen 7'ime�'Oetober 2g�:,;; , that the flrst publication of satd aotice was in the issue of satd ,,,:1978 ._ ' :r-. ,..'.:,, t 5..;•;?' October Lb 78 '' .:_.:�L ...... ' newspaper dated .........••••-••........................•••- A. D., 19 ........ and thaL the last�publlca.tion of satd nottce was in the issue of said news- � paper dated .....................•••_•-••••_•••••••--• A. D.. 19..-•••-• 'S%-.�C��G7!/��-°._...--•-•••-••-•-•- •_ Subscribed and aworn to before me, a nota.ry public fn and dar ; the County of Pitkln, State oP Cotorado, this ...._....2.[.�h_ day of O C t O.IJ2 T'.................... A.D.. 19._..�8 . •� •��--L��.��................ � .. Notary Publlc My commfssion expires 6�6�tSb �i ' ��,�2�� . . _ .... . _ _: _. . ...,:: r11� 1��.��J� �'111�r� Box E �,�nRD or co. cet,��.t�x�s pITKIN C0. Aspen, Colorado Public Hearing Exhibits � rato . ..1.�..:�.�•_...LL._- • Subject :��---�-�� ' Er.h. No.. .. •— PROOF OF PUBLICA'1'ION sTAZ� oF cor.oxAno � > �. Copy of Notice County of Pltkin ) I William...Fi,_�___.�,unaWaY..... ao eolemnly swear that .............. . I am 4.he __._PU}�I1.SYIBT'......................... of THE ASPEN Z'IMES; that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, 1n whale or in part, and published in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has a genera,l circulatfon therein; that sald newspaper has been Qui�- ltshed continuously and ufnterruptedly in said County �f Pitkin, for a period or more 6han fifty-two conaecutive weeks next prlor to the �irst publica.tion of the annexed legal notice or advertise- ment; tha.t sald newspaper has �been admitted to the United 3ta.tes ...��+"L-k i3� • matls as sceond-class matter under the �prov[sions of the Act of �� 4`#T��':? M � �' i�j � � March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said newe- F'�� public�� %�� paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualifled for publlshing legal � '�-� �' N ,.r CORRBCTION Ndl'!CE nottces and advertisements wlth the meaning of the lawa of the , "' �. = State of Colorado. � `�7CL19l�RS8Y(3IYENlh�tt6�p�b, ,� 1�h�uiof bda'r t�band ot County C�imN�dPitkin Cwqts ColQaib That t2ie annexed legaii' notice or advertlsement wae publlshed ( W��'�Nmambr 11.�1Y7A i�rpor in :the re ��ei«1`to No+r�e+b�r 97 197A". 10" gular and entire iasue of every number of sald weekly I :��_� �1;la . ,�au�;i606.Ertlftla '� to au�id�r,� newspapers for the period of •-•••-••1•••...... consecutive insertions;and :i�� ,. : that the first publlcation of said aotice was in the Issue of said ` 'tdnooedili�,��.�� ` . i �� at� newspaper dated _...NO V 2Rl}Je T',,,1 C A, D., 19 J 8.. and that �� , the last.publica.tion of said notice was 1n the Issue of said news- ?�d+r(Y9�Q��"��' :�.HO`.., r �_r, .,�,�,'F�,� �! �. paper dateci ..........._............•-•...............� A. D.. 19....... ffiOl�Ol► Ot C0�1''$'�1O11A�� `•� � r � 'ti `�"{V�L�J[7 ,. y, t� e , G.f.�',G.�d's'1 ��,G�'1.�� iarua��te.r'��•'�o��or.m�:� � . oii . c�i ............. .. . . ......-°' .J..s, .... • . �. . .....��._..:._.._�._�...n",'�,'�..�.:.:._'.�:=;*i;"�; Subscrlbed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and Sar ' the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, thls ..L.7..5�../.......... day of J•(x'•�i��!/.•.CL�i:�:.-f•• A.�7.. 19..�� ' -••r�;,Q� .��..�. .�-�---�.. .............. .. ..... ........_... ._.. - Notary Public My commission expire�.��tnn•�Expkes.Nou,.,3� �QQtf i I �