The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutbocc.res.060.1978 _,.:.s ,;,�f;:: , X;�;�:ti�:'= ,::sa��c''�i i�l�:�fr ��^' �S' t�i p u � . `i RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY � ;;� `:' CONIMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, � %; '=� RECOMMENDING AGAINST THE SALE OF LAND BY � :j � n THE FOREST SERVICE TO LANDMARR UNIVERSAL � �y Resolution No. 78- ��j � - :I �� WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land `� Management ("BI,M") has forwarded to Pitkin County (for comment) , � T',.',_� . �. �� the application (under the Unintentional Trespass Sale Act of i� September 26, 1968) of Landmark Universal, Inc., for the purchase �' of Lot 4 of Section 16 and Lot 25 of Section 17, TBS, R86W of ±' the 6th P.M, containing 3.92 acres, and _' 4 � WHEREAS, the SLM has, specifically, requested comment as �. � to the "impact such title transfer might have on the County � '�� ''- land.use plans and zoning in the immediate area, given the � �� : recent rapid changes in land use from agriculture to residential � ? for adjoining lands", and Z` WfiEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has, at its � 3, � regular meeting held June 12, 1978, renewed the proposed C � application and found, with respect thereto, that: ; 1. The land area is incorrectly identified as being '� zoned RS-20. In fact, the area is zoned AF-1, � a zoning category which establishes a minimum lot � area of 10 acres (per dwelling unit). The proposed 3 'a $ parcel would be substandard in size (and probably � dimensions) and its use would be contrary to the � ] County's policy against the establishment of building � � � sites not meeting the m3nimum requirements of the � applicable zone district; and, further, to the % � policy of ensuring that no development be permitted "which is in violation of the laws of the (Pitkin) ,; ; County" (Section 2.02 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code). � i � ,;�.,,}�: :. � . �"'�.�C�.:'�;t�. .ie':., �J- i'1��: �' . .. _ 4 r^�t., ',�f v,,.(�t, . . � �`�=i1f-: „kx''�dF'��- ._ 'Hi l�„r* . _ . ,.... _ . . . _ _ -- V._ �� .,J'r � i � 2. The lands proposed for acquisition lie within areas ! of (a) high visual wlnerability, (b) critical � � :. winter range (deer), (c) (medium) wildfire hazard � ` areas, (d) slopes of 30-358 and (e) protected areas ' on the CSU maps (Environmental Resource Analysis i ..-t Report and Maps, Colorado State University, 1974). This fact results in little likelihood of development fpermission beinq given for any development on these t sites in accordance with the County's polic� o£ •. (a) preventing "the construction of any i.mprovement � ' ....which may...subject any person, including the occupants or users of any such improvement or use of their property to natural or man-made hazards � .... (or) cause immediate or foreseeable ma.terial danger �to significant wildlife habitat" and the � policy•of (b) preserving "the scenic quality of the . County for the benefit of its residents and the continued stability of a recreation economy which is dependent upon the quality of its rural natural setting" (Sections2.03 and 2.16 of the � Pitkin County Land Use Code). ; 3. The application notes that the "NE portion is too � steep for structures without excessive leveling and durface disturbance". Any development within � ~ this area would be contrary to the County's policy � of preventing "the acceleration of the erosion of 4 i soil and rock as erosion contributes to stream } sedimentation, dust, gullying, alteration of � drainage patterns, exacerbation of flood hazards, � $ loss of natural vegetation, visual scars, leachinq ; of minerals into lakes and streams, destruction of � • animal habitats...." (Section 2.11 of the Pitkin � y County Land Use Code). 4 4 � -2- i i �;'�' • - .'Y��; .'':1 y �'�tr�'��.' , _ ,a4��;,»��c �� !-`"��" - . _ , , _.... _ — - -- _ K •7 A��' �zt:. . . � . � . � ��.';�y'_�: {� . � . . . . ' �- � � 7 4. The acquisition would result in the conversion of � agricultural lands to residential purposes in contradiction to the County policy of preserving "the economic viability of agricultural lands and operations within Pitkin County to ensure that F' large tracts of land now committed to or capable of agricultural uses shall be preserved, where � practicable, as a food resource area. To this � end it is the policy of the County to: a. Ensure � that development surrounding agricultural lands � or near such lands shall not make continued agricultural operations impractical or economically infeasible by reason of diversions of agricultural � land into parcels of unworkable sizes, shapes, _ or compositian.... (and) d. Avoid development or development patterns that will require water to be _. taken out of agricultural uses." (Section 2.13 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code). 5. On August 17, 1977, the Pitkin County Planning and . Zoning Commission adopted the "ASpen/Pitkin County Growth Management Policy Plan (third draft)"("GMPP") as an amendment to the Aspen Area General Plan. The GMPP recommends an annual build-out of 44 � residential dwelling units per year within the Down � � Va11ey Area (including lands which are the sub�ect of this acquisition); a maximum build-out which � has already exceeded construction on previously I subdivid.�d lots. The creation of more residential development potential in this area would contradict � ; � the County's policy of assuring that "the use and 3 development of land and any actions committing t � i such land to development or a change in use will ' � c -3- ' i i ' ...�^,..,.: •. � .i.'.._ �:,>.: y..:7'��`.:Y . 'xy,:r�•.. . ,�, _ _ __ � � w .._... . ; �j': '_�f'i^}%�y�l� ' . . �*tY::�p!•�.. '!��'� . '��:. �pS.- . ,. �� ' ti Y'� 5 I �t. f i � 3 not be, as a general matter, inconsistent with the � : Goals and Objectives of the Aspen Area General Plan, � � as amended." (Section 2.01 of the Pitkin County � Land Use Code). -- 6. The acquisition would site residential development �' in the area distant from commercial and service areas and where the only available means of trans- portation is the private automobile. This fact contravens the County policy of encouraging "in any � r_. new development....measures which promote non-motorized � transportation alternatives.... (and) which encourages the use of transit systems, public transportation � and the like, as opposed to the individual use of the automobile." (Section 2.19 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code). � 7. The acquisition, which would increase development :.� � � opportunities in the area of the Holland Hills at .� Basalt Subdivision (adjacent lands owned by Landmark t � Universal) would defeat each of the following Pitkin � ' County goals identified in the extract from the "Environmental_ Statement, White River National Fores� 1977, Eagle-Aspen) appended to the applicatirn -Scenic views of the surrounding mountains from public places within the community should be preserved and created. ' -A transportation system within Aspen should J emphasize pedestrian and mass transit travel and de-emphasize automobile traffic. I -The open character of approaches to Aspen I slvuld. be preserved. \ i -The County's wealth of natural resources (air � and water quality, scenic views, natural rivers � i 1 3 -4- i ; {�°'��`e� �� _ _ -,..... r'3 'wY.�'�'�^� . - � . L3� �ib C��°. ` . .�N.�..b#�S'�� . . ' . le' . . ..� . _ ./��• 1'..: , t r�-{�f` i . # i }t i 1 and creeks, wildlife and aesthetic appearance � �_ �should be preserved by allowing only well designed � and considered development. � -The population growth rate should coincide .. � : with other goals and would hold growth sub- stantially below that experienced since the last 60's. , (Abstracted from Goals-Task Force-Summer 1971, The Aspen Land Use Plan, July 1973; and Chart II-Goals- Winter, 1976) . 8. The acquisition would result in the introduction of residential development adjacent to BLM properties, a result inconsistent with the Countg policy of preserving and protectinq public lands "including but not limited to National Forest and Bureau of Land Management lands, from the impacts of incompatible development. To this end it is the policy to: a. Ensure that development surrounding or near public lands will not cause high concentrations of populations � in such areas. b. Avoid development that will � encourage the intrusion of roads or high levels � of human activities on such lands. c. Ensure that � any development will not result in adverse � " environmental impacts on such lands such as water � or air pollution and threats to wildlife habitat � � by dogs or human activity." (Section 2.24 of the � Pitkin County Land Use Code)_ � AND, W[�REAS, given the foregoing, the Board is unable � to endorse the proposed acquisition, � � a NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County � � Commissioners that it does hereby reco�nend against the sale � ;'s ; � -5- ` !i , . b.� .. .. . #-G��` r. �::::Y.;��4X 1 rP,„,-., ��` «:: � .. ' �: ,. ' _,,,.`� ...�._ _.._ m.....� .� � . _. _ - s. ,f i by the BLM to Landmark Universal of Lot 4, Section 16 and Lot 25 of Section 17, TSS, R86W of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, as as described in the Land Report for Colorado 13908, Pub].ic Sale Petition application dated April 9, 1968. Approved at Board of County Commissioners regular meeting �..�ld June 12, 1978. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER5 -�- , OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AT{FSTi:r�,, ., \ • . y ti � �� o:�a �.��-��D� �'• s� /f BY . , �/ ��#'y Robert W. Child, Ch � ;�« s Dep�i ty er •and Recorder : . . . . y�,' �` ' r v.:�W a . . . - . . � . F • •°r , APProved as :to'Form: �f`' Y. � ounty Att ney , I , _ ' E t � _ � �: i�. -6- �, � '� � _ ' r� : �. ;°s i �j _ ,. ._..__..._, ...,:.. . ��....... .... .. .__... _..........,.,_,. ......_ . , 'r:,