HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.09191977 i i;x' �
' :Sr:;a`_ _ , .
,r
k � � ,
�e
.Fi'�.. { �.
� ; �,
C.., . _�.. . . ... ..... .. ..... .. _ .
. . .. .. . .. . _
. :.. .. . ....-.:..,_ �...iY�g.h'.'.� .��� , s.•.... �ir.. ,. ^Sy ��'
.. ". ''_. .. �. .. A . ....-. ., Cd` ..,.
iF.n
. � p�.. .j:..;
r.
. f�'�^�,'.
. '
�
PITKIN COi7NTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS I
AGENDA �
September 19, 1977 �
'i.
1
9:00 am RESOLUTIONS:
'• CETA Finance Resolution - CB
_ • NWCCOG Voting Members - GLO �
• County Business Hours - SMS
• Election Advisory.Board Resolution and Amendment - AC
• Borrowing Resolution for Airport Land Acquisition-United Bank - CB
9:15 am SIGNATURES: �
• Colorado Big Country By-Laws - BJS
• Application for Personnel Grant
• Region XII Criminal Justice Planning Council - DK
• Auditor's Confirmation Letter - CB
• Treasurer's Monthly Report -
• Sign Warrants
9:35 am Care Center Proposal Presentation - R. Markalunas, M. Frost, BE
50:00 am Report on Subdivisions by Roadways - SMS
10:05 am Pitkin County Library Appointment
10:10 am Transfer of Liquor License of the Redstone Inn - AC -
30:15 am Midland Park: 1) Financial Contract - GL0
. 2) Right of First Refusal - GLO i
- 3) Dpdate - Status of Application - Ted Guy
10:35 am T-Hangar Contract Approval
10:45 am PLANNING MATTERS:
• Approval of 1041 Work Program E Supplemental Funds Request - KS „
• Condominiumization Policy for Duplexes - KS
� • 8��3ea-Hea�esrs--F' � ri�+ _ uc
11:30 am P.H. - Designation of Revenue Sharing Funds
Noon Lunchbreak
: 1:00 pm Subdivision Exemption for Sludge Treatment Site - KS
1:15 pm P.H. - Midland Park Rezoning
1:30 pm P.H. - Riding Ring Special Review . :
2:00 pm P.H. - Repeater Site Special Review
2:30 pm P.H. - L.U.C. Amendments
3:00 pm T-Hangar - 1041 Exemption
3:30 pm Little Annie Ski Area - A. Anderson E Ron 6arfield - SMS i
3:55 pm Setting Public Hearings: 1) City Water Extension to Holy Cross (2 pm, 10/24) �
2) �oodnough Special Review (2:30 pm, SO/24) i
4:00 pm Snowinass Corp - Remand fran District Court - McGrath
Followed by Executive Session - 1 item
REMINDER....September 20 �Tuesday) @ 7 pm - PH in Redstone re: Crystal River Rezoning
The next meeting will be held next Monday, September 26. The meeting following that
will be held Monday, October 3 (as the second M�nday, Octobertl0, is Colorado Day)..
, �
� . _ . . _ .. __ _ ._ .. ��
.�H �
i
1���r
. _'__ .__ _____ _._"_�__,_._. -_ -_--_ - -____�_._-__ ._��..__�___ , .�.._. .'_-_ '
'"___._'__ '.
... �_._"-"_-"��___�._._ ..__ . _...�'.-__.____
. . � ____ "__`_�_��_� ' "' "___"__ _'.
�.''
�.
'� j�.
II
PITKIN COUt3TY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (
;;Re ular Meetin Se tember 19 1977 i
'� . t
�! This is a continuation of the meeting of September 12, 1977; no quorum was available �
� ti
i! • ,
at that time.
i'.
l; -
�, ---------
;� .
�'
PRESENT: Chairman Michael Kinsley, Robert Child and Joseph E. Fdwards, Jr.
ii
'_ __�___��
1
IRoad and On a motion from Kinsley and a second by Edwards the Commissioners unanimously
iBridge Funds
�' authorized the Chairman to sign a resolution appropriating funds to the Road and
�` Bridge Department for CETA grants. .
If ----------
II
�:
j`Borrowing Chuck Baker, Finance Airector, presented a resolution, note and assignment to allow
�' for Airport
`�I.and Pitkin County to borrow money from the United Bank of Denver for the land acquisition
;!Acquisition
�� program under the FAA grant for the airport. He noted that our current agreement
�
� with the Bank ha5 expired. Sandy Stuller, County Attorney, told the Board that this
�i debt is enforceable only against FAA revenues. Kinsley moved to authorize the
' Chairman to sign the resolution, pzomissory note and letter of agreement with the
�
�' United Bank of Denver. Edwards seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
i --
,
jNWCCOG On a motion by Fdwards and a second by Child the Commissioners unanimously approved
�Voting
I`Membera a resolution requesting that the NWCCOG amend its constitution to allow ataff inembers
i.
�j to vote for elected officials at all NWCCOG meetings:
,1
4; ---------
,,
�
�Uniform EdwaYds moved to authorize the Chairman to sign a resolution establishing uniform
�Office
!Hours business hours for all county offices. Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed
I� with opposition from Child.
l�
�� ---------
�j
�iElection A resolution concerning establishment of the Pitkin County Election Advisory Board
���Advisory
�Board was presented to the Board. Edwards noted that this board serves in an advisory
I
'� capaciYy to the County Clerk. Stuller added that it is not a formal board for review
!�
li
�) of voters not allowed to vote, but serves to aid the Clerk with respect to the mainte-
�I nance and review of voter records. Kinsley moved to suthorize the Chairman to sign
jthe resolution. Fdwards seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
4
j Annie Coble, Deputy County Clerk, noted that Mike Martin, who previously served
E
` as the autside aCto=ney on the Board has left Cown. She requested that Braoke Peterson
�
� be appointed to fill the vacancy. ICinsley moved to appoint Peterson to serve on the
Election Advisory Board. Edwards seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. i
i '
� � ��
iCommisaioners Meeting
September 19, 1977 - 1 �
li
--- ------------------_.T�--- ----------------------�-----�---_-----
�,
CBCRC6D Kinsley moved to formally endorse the bq-laws for Colorado Big Country Resource �i
By-laws �
Conservation and Development Area. Edwards seconded the motion and it passed ��
q
unanimously. ' ��
---------- i�
I
Personnel Kinsley moved to authorize the Chairman to sign a resolution authorizing the filing !,
Grant f!
Application of an appl3cation for a grant under the Intergoveznmental Peraonnel Act for the ;�
purpose of establishing a personnel department for Pitkin County. Edwards seconded ��
the motion and it passed unanimously. �+
�I---------- i
;�
Criminal On a motion by Kinsley and a second by Edwards the Commissioners unanimously j�
j Justice - �j
i Planning approved the appointment of Donald Davis, of the Sherif£'s department, to the ��
! Council I
� Appointment Criminal Justice Planning Council. ;
i ,�
� ---------- •i
IWater George Ochs, County Manager, presented an agreement for water rights with the i
? R3ghts - i
' Airport Walter Paepcke Life Znsurance Trust and the Estate of John V. Spachner, of the i)
� Ranch ,,
Airport Ranch. This agreement gives the County licenae to use a poriion nf the �
�I
� water rights for the land recently acquired through t4e Airport land acquisition R
� program. 6� of the 90 acres being purchased have been historically irrigated �
� r
�
and this agreement will allow the County to continue irrigation of that portion of ;
i�
the parcel. Edwards reported that the FAA is not interested in buying water rights; "!
he added that this isn`t a transPer of rights, but is just permissian to use them. �i
�,
Edwards moved to execute the agreement, Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed '�
� unanimously. ��
; ---------- ;!
1 nutes Child moved to approve the minutes of Aug�st 22, 1977, with a minor amendment on �j
' '1
J page six. Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. �;
i�
---------- !;
i�
�i
Warrants The warrants were unanimously approved on a motion from Child and a second by I1
Edwards. !�
ij
---------- f+
�I
Alexander Rinsley moved to authorize the Chairman to s3gn a letter of agreement with �i
Grant & Co. j�
Audit Alexander Grant and Company for the 19�7 audit. Fdwards seconded the motion and ii
a
�i
it passed unanimously. ,+
il
--------- �i
;�
i
Treasurer's The treasurex's monthly staCement was unanimously approved on a motion from {�
eport
Kinsley_and a second by Child. i�
1
i
��I
��
:1
Old Hospital Mona Frost, Chairperson of the Council on Aging and the Care Center Committee, ��
uild3ng :
�i
�
j�
ommiaeioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 2ij
__. �._. �_..._ ._________
�
i
�.
-------- ___ _--- ---- --------
------------ »
___----�-_:__--.-,�__
----------- ---- -- --- - ��"'i;:
I' '�..
(i Old and Ramona Markalunas, a member of the Care Center Co�ittee, appearec3 before the "+'�`�,
� Hospital ?�,.
, �.
�i Building Board to present a proposal for use of a portion of the old hospital building as
; (cont.)
an intermediate care center. Markalunas noted that this type of center could serve
all members af the community, not just senlor citizens. The hospital building would
; be particularly appropriate for this since it is already equipped as a medical
;,, facility; the only remodeling necessary would be widening of the bathroom doors to
'i
;; acco�eodate wheelchairs. The Committee is propos3ng that the east wiag become a
�;� • �
� residential care facility, the south wing be used as the care center and the rest
�'
��: of the building be used for human resources. Kinsley asked if an intermediate care
�� facilit re uires 24-hour su ervision or lon p
i Y 4 P g-term care. Markalunas re lied that
��
�� they are using the definition of an intermediate care facility provided in the
�!
ii
i� State Statutea. This definition does not require 24-hour care and ca11s for
q
jI pzoviding supportive, restorative and preventive services. The Committee is planaiag
�� for IO residential rooms and 24 intermediate care beds. The char e
{i g per day would
IIbe approximaeely $29 for intermediate care and $11 for residential care. Kinsley
�I noted that those figures are based on a heavy level of staffing. He fe1C a financial
I
�� feasibility study on the proposal would be necessary; they presently have costs
�;
1ton operating and maintaining the building but not on staffing. Markalunas added
I
ii that the cost per day figcxres are based oa 24-hour staffiag; they are not sure this
i
I? will. be neceasary. She noted that 318 letters were sent out to people over 65
I�
N
�j in Pitkin County requesting feedback on the care center; 50 people over 75 years
�! of age said they would use the center if iC is bu31t. Kinsley asked what types of
I:
f.
!� people the center would serve. Frost replied that it could help people of all ages;
(I
� some would be there temporarily and some permanently. It could be used by patients
�� released from the hospital but not yet ready to completely care for themselves. The
i
iCommittee has collected 1,385 signatures from residents saying they would Iike a
j' portion of the hospital used for the center. Frost pointed out how important it is
�� for older people to be allowed to remain a part of the community in which they live
�
' after they can no longer live alone. She felt the care center should be used by
1
j long-term residents of Pitkin County who helped build the old hospital with their
�� tax dolZars. Markalunas noted they have resolutions from the Council on Aging,
�
iR.S.V.P., the Elks and the Eagles, as well as many letters from churches supporting
� : the care center proposal. Kinsley stated that such a facility would require a
� Certificate of Need from the State Health Department; he has heard that such certifi-
f cates are difficult to obtain for "long-term" beds. Markalunas requested the support
of the County for further study of the concept, noting that now is the ideal time
since the building is available. She streased that they don't want peop2e to be
"institutionalized" in the facility, but want the building used by ali groups and
Commissioners Meeting September 19, 1477 -
'
� � .
i �
_ ------- -------------_--------------------------------------- _��---.__.
� �i
� Old gges in the communit Child asked if the room size would be ade uate for
Y• Q P��anent i�
Hospital j
<cont.? residents. Kinsley showed a design by Benedict and Associates which would convert j
' the residential section of the hospiCal to individual apartmeats. Frost favored �)
',
! using the solarium as a "senior center". Markalunas suggested using the kitchen II
facility to ptovide "meals on wheels" or to set up a cafeterla available to all mem- ;i
;�
bers of the community. Kinsley stated that a public hearing will be held on this Ij
!I
matter sometime in the next month; in the meantime, the Committee should work with I'
Benedfet and Associates to see how this and other proposals would work in the �'
�I
building. W[ien the options have been decided upon a financi.al feasibility study j�
��
i �
could be done on each. He noted that some basic renovation of the building will �{
��
be necessary regardless of which use is chosen. Child said that this renovation i
is mainly in the community services area on the west side of the building. Edwards Ii
said that the main problem with the long-term facility is obtaining State and H,S.A. j
�I
approval; he felt this should be obtained before doing any architectural or financial ��
studies. If it appears that the Committee is likely to obtain such approval,
iI
� �j
they could proceed with the financial study. He felt that the Commissioners are !j
I
not opposed to this propasal if it is feasible from the State approval and financial '�
� standpoints. Personally, he does not want the County to continually subsidize �{
j `�
� the facility. Markalunas requested that those same criteria be applied to any f�
�; other applications for use of the buiZding.
! ---------- i�l
ubdivision Sandy Stuller reported on subdivision by creation of roadways, as discussed at �
y ��
oadways the last meeting. At that time Child requested Stuller review the law and offer an ,
�;
opinion on the legitimacy of a position which would not recognize parcels divided �I
by a public right-of-way as already subdivided. She noted that there is very little I�
� caselaw on the subject, and advised the Cousnissioners that they are free to assert ;'j
� the position taken at the Iast meeting which would disallow such subdivision. Stuller �
jfelt Lhis situahion should be addressed with a specific Land Use Code amendment. ,�
li
� Edwards requested that the County ALtorney draft a Land Use Code amendment stating ii
that the County will advise any applicants for subdivision that roadways and roadway ;j
jt
easements do not create a separate parcel with respect to subdivision, that that ��
� � � t�
position be taken with regard to the issuance of building permits or subdivision �
i�
a
applications, and that subdivision by roadway would be considered a criminal violation.��
!i
--------- ;i
;
,�
ibrary The appointment of a Library Board representative was postponed to allow more li
oard ,I
ppointment interested people a chance to apply. An appointment will be made at the next
�
� meeting. �!
-----°--- �
I
�;
�i
i+
Commissionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - 4 ji
';i
��
�
'--- e., ..._ ....._..__.._.. . ._
�
- -- _ ----- ---------------- --------
-- --- .� . . . . . �. _� . � . . .. � � `--- . . . . .. . .� . ..��_ _.__.:- a�y �
IRedstone Annie Coble, Deputy County Clerk, presented an application for transfer of ownership �'��-
II Inn Liquor �'�:�`
ILicense for the Redatone Inn liquor license to Ann and E. Irwin and .7ohn LaSalle. The
�i
;� Sanitarian, Sheriff and Treasurer have all OK`d the application. Edwards moved to
ii
i:
jj approve the transfer of ownership. Kinsley seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
i'
ti ----------
Ij
!:Midland George Ochs presented an agreement with Shorty Lankford for financial services for
� Park:
I:Financial the Midland Park subdivision. Lankford has begun work in the proje�� and is near
.jfConsultant •
I' completion of arranging for interim financing for construction. Upon completion of
i! construction, permanent financing through the issuance of a long-term revenue bond
�' will be prepared by Lankford. The total financial budget presented for Midland Park
�;
�� came to $100,000, with $65,000 budgeted for Lankford's fees. The $65,000 fee is for
I! the interim co�mnitment and the ermanent bond issuance. Kinsle ex ressed concern over
i, P Y P
�� the high costs. Ochs replied that the tax-exempt financing alone is a very complicated
I�
�j process which requires IRS approval. Lankford noted that for $2,000,000 in financing
I!
Ii he is chaxging $100,000, or 2't% for each of the two phases of the financing.
�! $20,000 of the $100,000 is for bond discounting. Fdwards asked if the budget would
IIbe lower if the bonds weren't discounted. Ochs replied it would. Kinsley requested
�i some verification of the validity of the costs. Ochs noted that Lankford had a
il
II similar contract for the airport revenue bonds. Edwards said that the fee charged
�i for financing of the airport revenue bonds was compared to fees charged by other
�I -
, financial consultants, and was approved after determination of the fair market price
il
' for such a service. He requested that Ochs determine that the fee being proposed here
li
Il is fair with regard to fees charged by other financial consultants. Ochs noted that
If
i
I he requested a break-down of tasks required £rom Lankford; he reviewed the break-down
I� and was satisfied with it. Edwards asked to see the task break-down. Kinsley moved
'�
� to table the contract until the next meeting. Edwards seconded the motion and it
i!
�� passed unanimously. (Item continued later in meeting.)
(
�� ----------
�'
IiMidland Ochs reported on three methods for an appreciation rate policy for Midland Park.
i Park:
��Apprecia- The first is based on appreciation on owner's equity, whereby a property owner wishing
Ition Rate
I to sell would gain back only the principle monies invested in the property plus an
i
iagreed-upon compound interest amount on the invested equity. The second method is an
flappreciation value based upon local employees salary index. A purchaser's salary
iwould be equated to a unit he or she could afford and then adjusted as salary averages
� in the comnunity increase. This would mean that the purchaser would always be paying
Ithe same percentage of his or her salary for housing. It would require developing a
local salary index upon which to base the appreciation rate. The third method is
Ibased on using the Denver or National Housing Index, which is now being used for Park
Circle. Thia approach is the most liberal in terms of allowing for financial gain to �
Cou�issioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 5
I
,
r
------ --- — ---. ---------- -------.
------ — - ---------- - ----- --- - ----- — ------ I -- ----_
accrue to the employee. Kinsley expressed support for the second method and asked ;�
how the index would be determined. Ted Guy, of Copland, Hagman and Yaw, replied I�
I
that the County could identify representative jobs and follow the salary rates for �
i
those �obs from year to year. Guy noted that the appreciation rate allowed may be �i
�i
influenced by the IRS tax-exempt status being applied for, since the second and �;
��
r
� third methods would allow the purchaser to make a profit on the bank's money. Edwards�
f�
felt it would be stepping beyond governmental purposes to allow purchasers to make �
F 'Ia profit, and would, in effect, constitute subsidizing low-income land speculators
with government funds. Kinsley suggested scheduling a workshop to determine what 'I
i�
would be the optimum appreciation rate policy and what would be acceptable to the IRS. ;,
i�
Ochs agreed to set up such a workshop. fle asked if the Commissioners would be in- �i
terested in renting or leasing units in the project. Kinsley replied he would not. I'
� i
i �i
� Edwards noted that leasing would avoid all the hostility that arose with the Park
• ��
` Circle project. �i
i !�
� --------- �� �
j �I
Midland Guy presented an update on the detailed submission for the Midland Park project. i,
! Park:
� Update The project has been reviewed by the City Engineer, who noticed a lack of survey II
� information. This problem has been remedied. Greer Construction has estimated it f
� li.
� will cost $1,268,300 to build the project. Roads and utilities will cost an additionai
i N
j $203,000. Guy reported they are negotiating with the Aspen Hills Condominiums �
1 �I
' to lower the grade on a portion of their land. The Midland Park Homeowner's Associa- �,
. ('`
j tion will retain ownership of the land and will be responsible for snow removal, �I
;i
maintenance of the grounds and monthly payments of water and sewer fees. A portion �?
I of Midland Avenue will be dedicated to the County but will probably be maintained j!
i
li �
by the City. Guy added that the City has agreed to allow Midland Park to use the ��
;; ��
U
1 in-city rate for water tap fees, which is half as much as the county fees. The i
i�
� detailed submission application and an improvement agreement will be presented at ��
��
� the next meeting. ,�
;j
-------- ��
i
Financial Edwards moved that if, after investigation of the fee structure for financial '
i!
Consultant ��
Contract consultants by the County Manager, it is determined that Lankford's fees are com- i
(cont.) ��
patible with the fair market costs, the contract for financial services for Midland i�
;,
Park be presented to the Chairman and he be authorized to sign prior to the next :'
meeting. Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. �Q m� � ;I
8'e3i3 •��7 j�
,
---------- !i
•�
;,
T-hangars Doug McCoy, Airport Manager, presented a use and lease agreement form for lessees {�
�I
ease '�
• of the T-hangars being huilt at the Airport. Re needs approval of the lease form i�
so financing for the hangars can be obtained. The monthly rate will be $165.00, �i
'i
or $1980.00 per year. Mountain West currently charges $2000.00 per year for hangar ��
�i
,�
�,.
ommissioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 6 :�
,I
- - ------------- - -- - ----- -�--------------- --- --
�- --------- -- ------- _ ��."�'
, ------- �� :
i space, but their units are heated. The County's hangars have no heating, so the "
I �.'�•:
I; leaseea will provide their own heat vta apace heaters. Edwards requested that the
�� maximum electrical capability of the wiring for the units be specified. He asked
i',
about liability for the County in the event of a fire. Stuller replied that is
i;
.�
covered in the lease agreement. McCoy noted he already has eight people interested
in renting hangar space. Kinsley moved to approve the form of the agreement. Child
i' sewnded the motion and it passed unanimously.
;; _ .
ii ----------
i; �
"1041 Work lCaren Smith, of the Planning Office, presented 1041 work plans for 1977 - 78. The
',Plans
' base grant for this year was reduced from $26,750 in the previous year to $15,000.
i±
Programs to be undertaken with those funds include ongoing work on refining the Land
�! Use Code, continued development of historic preservation legislation, implementation
I!
i
of regulations dealing with transbasin diversions, review and reconsideration of
�I development of a quota system under the Growth Management Plan, working with the
I'
f� County Zoning Administrator, updating of zoning and CSU maps and consideration of
I;
ii development of an architectural topo model of Pitkin County. An application will
i�
�'• be made for supplemental planning funds. If received, the,y would be used for Crystal
i�
;
River Valley floodplain studies. The Planning Office has contacted the Colorado Water
n
u
�� Conservation Board to detetmine whether they would be supportive of an application
i!
; to study at least portions of the Crystal River, so that residents can obtain federally-
il
i� funded flood insurance. The CWCB proposed that the study include ortho photo mapping
I; of the entire stream reach within [he County which would cost approximately $7500.00.
'i
i�.
'! Smith noted that this type of map would have many other uses in addition to floodplain
I:
�i information. Using rough cost figures, the Planning Office estimates the study could
j: be done for $24,000 (including the ortho photo mapping). The Commissioners all agreed
il
i;
that this study is needed and agreed to consider the request at budget time.
I� ---------- , .
�Condomin- Karen Smith presented a memo on policy £or condominiumization of duplexes. She
�iumization
��of noted that Perry Harvey and Jon Mulford both have pending applications for condominium-
��Duplexes
�j ization. The Planning Office reco�ends adopting a Land Use Code amendment concerning I
� consideration of condominiumization. This amendment states that the Board shall � �
i
consider the effect of condominiumization on the supply of housing available for
I�
I� permanent resident primary housing and may condition the exemption on demonstxation
��
� of compliance with the housing policy. It adds that the applicant may demonstrate
I
1 compliance by any of the following criteria: evidence that there will be minimal
tenant displacement, that the conversion will not be unaffordable by persons of
moderate income, that future prices of unit resales will not become exclusionary, � ,
that tenants who cannot purchase their units will be relocated to similarly affordable
ICommiasioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 7
�
I.
� ...._......__'____ ____"_._"___'_""____"_�.___'.�._" __
... " __'___ . _..._..... _'___._`_'__.-'_...__.� .___"_-.'____"_.' "__'________-___.._.-._..__
� ..._ -..__.__-.__._�._'_______'__.--__"_.-_�__'_-.'___
.. ....._ � _ " _."__"...__..�_'_`______.-'_____".'-_'__""___"___"_____I`__'_""J..'___._"_.. .
'�
� housing, that future occapancy of the units will be made available to local employees,i�
I�
or that the prospective purchaser is an employer who intends to rent the units to ji
,;
his employeea. The amendment also contained restrictions on fair notice to tenants !j
ii
and on a six-month lease minimum. Smith noted that these are only suggestions, and �
i�
i
the Commissioners could adopt any or all of the requirements or use some other form ;;
being tried in other places. Edwards said that Colorado law needs to answer the �'
Y
��
question of whether the County has the right to control the form of ownership on ;i
° . �I
a piece of property. He is unsure if subdivision regulations can be used to answer
'�
i�
this question, or if they are limited strictly to density and land use concerns. ;i
1+
Edwards felt that the existance of duplex units aids the rental market situation and �i
l�
noted that the price of condominiumized duplexes is not significantly less than a ��
single-family residence. Therefore, through allowing condominiumization the County
,i
is not making the unit available to a Iesser-aff2uent person and is hurting the ;�
ji
employee housing market. Edwards concluded by stating he is not in favor of chang- �;
!�
ing the code to allow condominiumization. Mulford disagreed, stating that the jl
i'
- selling price for half a duplex is significantly less than for a single-family ;�
B
residence. Gideon Kaufman agreed, and noted that condominiumized duplexes have ��
i '�usually sold to the people living in the units prior tn condominiumization. Perry
Harvey agreed that the selling price is less than for a single-family residence. jl
Child was not convinced that allowing condominiumization would take housing out ��
of the employee housing market. Kinsley felt that creating a mechanism to control ?i
�I
future resale ��
prices of the units is crucial; without the assurance that they will
'i
remain in the em lo ee housin market he would be o �'
P y g pposed to allowing condominiumiza- �
•i
tion. He feZ[ it 3s unlikely that the units wi1Z continue to sell to locals rather �!
j �
than tourists. Condominiumization could either increase density and allow the
�I
! buyer to turn the unit over for a profit or iY could create more employee housing, ��
' �
� depending on the control mechanism. Mulford pointed to a study made by Brian '�
!�
Goodheim showing that 95% of all condominiumized duplexes have been sold to locals. �!
i
;1
; Kaufman felt duplex condominiumization doesn't really belong in the employee housing
� category because it affects a different segment of the community. Child was opposed !
,�
� to allowing condominiumization if the County controls future resales. He fe2t this '
would create too much of an enfotcement prohlem and it would be discriminatory to ;�
:� jl
� control prices on one type of housing alone. Smith pointed out that more stringent �i
regulations thatt those presented could be adopted. Some cities require 507 of the ��
� i:
� tenants to agree to condominiumization or control the sales prices o£ units based !j
�
en prevfous rental rates. (Edwards left.) Child felt the County should observe the �j
�
City in this process before changing policies. Mulford noted that some people are i;
'� ��
� condominiumizing without going through the proper County channels to avoid meeting
� Commiasionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - 8 �';
� I'
4
---------- ---------
--- - ------ --------------- ,,,,�
----- =
---- - ---- ---------
__--_"_— . ... .. . ,Y:�.
�;
�i-_
i the requirements. Harvey stated that very few tourists are intereated in purchasing ,�e;:!
rs;;�
� half a duplex and this undesireability would create a built-in market control.
�I
;i Kinsley felt a six-month rental restriction was too short and suggested a one-year
i
�� minimum lease. Perry said many duplex owners want to rent their unit for one
!
month over Christmas. Kinsley was agreeable to an eleven-month lease restriction
I;
�� but expressed concern over enforcement of the provision. Kaufman suggested requiring
i: I.
i� the duplex owners to bring a copy of the lease to the County every year. The Zoning I
I� . �
'' Enforcement Officer co�51d handle this. Kinsley requested that any condominiumization �
i; I
�� policy adopted be reviewed after two years of operation.
�i
(; Kinsley moved to refer a Land Use Code amendment allowing duplex wndominiumization
I
� consistant with the requirements in the Planning Office memo and adding an eleven-
�'
�� month rental restriction to the Planning and Zoning Coimnission. Child seconded and
li
the motion passed unanimously. (Edwards was absent.)
�i
li
1 ---------
Ii
�Public The Cort¢nissioners convened a public hearing on designation of revenue sharing
��Hearing: I
IjRevenue funds. Chuck Baker noted that counties are required by Revenue Sharing regulations to
'�Sharing
��Funds hold a public hearing at least seven days prior to presenting a budget for the use
II
i of these funds. Foxy Kerwin, Librarian, was present to determine if.revenue sharing
�� funds could be used in the future for library expansion. Betty Erickson, Human
Ij
�, Resources Coordinator, stated that many communities use their revenue sharing funds
ii
I'
�i for Human Resource concerns. In the past the county has designated these funds for
ii
Ii use in transportation. Pitkin County expects to receive $110,000 in revenue sharing
! funds in 1978. There bein no , p g
�� g public comment the ublic hearin was closed.
I� �
II ---------- I
I�Sanitation Karen Smith presented an application by Aspen Metro and Aspen Sanitation Districts �
iDistrict �
�5uhdivision for a subdivision exemption in order to purchase 55.51 acres from the W/J Ranch.
�;Exemption
�j The application qualifies for exemption under the co�unity facilities category (
il
�J' which includes utility land acquisition. Special review approval for the sludge �
I�
�'� treatment site was given by the Board of Commissioners on November 18, 1974, with �
ry
I� many conditions attached. The conditions concerned air and water pollution, noise
I �
j concerns, odor controls, etc. Sob Nelson, County Sanitarian, reported that the
�
isludge treatment facility is substantially in compliance with State and County regula-
i
'I tions, and the conditions imposed in the permit are being met. He noted that the
� Sanitation Districts will make more improvements on the site when ownership of the �
land is guaranteed. The site is 80X funded by the EPA. The Planning Office I
� recotmnends approval of the exemption, but suggests canditioning the exemption on
Icontinued compliance with the special review permit.
i
Kinsley moved that the County Attorney draft a resolution granting a subdivision
ICommissionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - 9
�
Ii
- -- - --------__.
.. __--------- -�----.._.---------------------- -----------.._----------��.--------
I exemption to the Aspen Metro and Aspen Sanitation Districts based on continued i�
I compliance with the conditions listed in the petmit, and noting that this exemption �f
should not be construed to generate any development capability at the site. Child �! E
'I
amended the motion to allow development for accessory uses for the Creatment plant, '� �
��
i.e. a storage shed, Child seconded the amended motion and it passed unanimously. ;i
y
�I
Midland The Commissioners convened a public hearing on rezoning a por[ion of Midlaad Park ;j
Park � • - .A�
Rezoning to the PMFi zone. This is necessary because the annexation and subsequent de-annexa- '�
Public ' °
IHearing tion of a portion of the property to the City has left that par�el withouC a zoning !'
ij
designation. Annexation to the City occured in November, 1976, but conceptual d
�I
i�
approval of subdivision was halted by the City-imposed administrative delay in �;
u
anticipation of the then-proposed GrowCh Management Plan. At the request of the !f
!i
Board the City de-annexed the property three months later. This rezoning invo2ves �
i
the lower south-western parcel of the property; the rest of the site was zoned ��
��
PMH in the general suhmission application. (Edwarda arrived.) i!
i
il
John Stoller spoke representing William Staley, an adjacent property owner. He �1
I�questioned the need for the project in the first place and also the desireability �
h
o£ building it at the Midland Park site. He felt there will always be a housing �
u,
problem in Pitkin County and this won't be the solution to it. He noted the vacancy ��
,- rate at the Silverking Apartments and presented newspaper ads fot rental or purchase �j
i;
) opportunities at reasonable prices. Stoller said that not a11 employees can live j;
I
in Aspen and noted that downvalley transportation is available. He felt the project ;;
�
is d3scriminatory to employees who are not in the-$12,000 to $20,000 annual yearly
� I;
salary range. The area £or construction of the project is aZready of a very high
i �
density and this portion of land is the only flat piece of land left for recreational ��
I;
purposes. SC011er requested that a citizen's comou.ttee be appointed to study the
area and the best uses for the land. Claite Sandersen, an officer of the Ardmore !i
�
�
Homeowners' Assoc3ation, said she received a letter from Brian Goodheim on April
';�
4, 1977, stating the County's intent to purchase part oE Staley's land. She was �
c
,�
opposed to the project at that time but Goodheim told her to wait until a public �i
;i
hearing was scheduled befare the Comm�issioners to voice her opposition. Sandersen -
was concerned about the access road to the project and noted it would be difficult
; ��
i;
to get emergency vehicles to the site. She'stated that the Homeowners' Association
i maintains the road in front of the Aspen Hills condominiums and part of the Midland
�
Park land is on this road. She stated she is opposed to any development of the area �!
because it will increase the.popul.atian in an already dense neighborhood. She j;
added that the Homeowners' road must be protected from any trespass. Dan McCarty,
i
E
an Aspen fiills condominium owner, spoke out against granting an easement for access
j i
�� i
'� owniseioners Meeting September 19, 1977 -'�10
i
i
i
-------- - --------- --------- — ------------- ----
---- ---------------- ---�---- ------- --- _ ;ay�:
��Midland to Midland Park. He objected to increasing the density o£ the area and felt more people y,�',
�.
�I Park ,��y;
j'j(cont.) in the area would decrease property values. Kinsley conceded that the site chosen
i'i
�� for the project may not be ideai, but given the ecarcity of land in the valley there
i':
!� is no ideal site. He contended that providfng affardable housing is a valid concern
i! of the County because, without places for employees to live, the community will fall
i�
li apart. This pro3ect is an attempt to provide local working people the capability
I
���' to bu into the co�unit He stressed the im ortance of havin p
Y Y• p g peo le live and work
�� � � here to avoid allowing Aspen to become an exclusive rich person's town. Kinsley �
�'
�j also felt that the Midland Park project is consistant with the character of the
�� neighborhood. Stoller said that the County is not abiding by all the rules private
�?
I:
i; developers are forced to adhere to. He felt a private developer could build the pro—
I!
�;
ii ject more cheaply, and pointed out the high consultants fees being charged. Richard
:�
�� Cummins, a Park Circle condominium owner, felt it would be unfair to create housing
�i
ji £or only one income-level; this project would exclude music students, dishwashers,
�I
�i etc. Sandersen asked why this public hearing is being held so late in the process
�� :_.
i; and why ad3acent homeowners weren't notified earlier. Edwards replied [hat this
�
� process began over a year ago and there have been three rezoning public hearings.
I
l� Tom Richardson asked if the ori inal ro ert owner Randall a lied for a
i 8 P P Y � ) PP permit
i�
�� to build employee housing and was rejected. The Commissioners replied that that
�i
'� was not true. Kinsley added that the County is following the same procedures that
�i
j! a private developer would follow. Fred Mostrum asked about the selection process for
I
�i buyers of the units. Ochs said a list of criteria would be set up, including income
Ijlevel, time employed in the co�unity, years spent in the community. It would not
Ii be on a first come firat serve basis. These criteria would also apply ta future resales
�
!� o£ the units. Helen Phillips, of the Aspen View condominiums, asked how financing
I� would be handled. Edwards replied that subsidized interest rates will be obtained
i
jvia County revenue bonds. Stoller asked if the County was required to notify adjacent
iI
I
ij property owners of the zoning hearing. Stuller replied that they were not. There
I�
�� being no further public comment the public hearing was closed.
I�
I
i
�I __________
,I
l� Public The Coffinissioners convened a public hearing on the County's application for a special
II Hearing:
�� Riding review permit to locate a horseback riding ring on County-owned land on the south
( Ring
side of Castle Creek road. The ring would involve a standard size ring of approximately
� 240 by 120 feet. Posts of a height of 4'� feet would encircle the ring. Karen
Smith noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the applica-
tion based on the following concerns: there is no great demand for such a facility,
Ithe proposed location is the wrong place for it, it could generate traffic congestion,
I
�
Commieaioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 11
�
I�
__ ----- ------------------..�_...._..._^�------- -------...__------ _=---
,
the land shou2d be reserved for open space, the Facility would have the potential i�
' !I
for generating special events, it would create an adverse impact on surrounding �;
property, it would produce noise and parking problmes and increase traffic on �I
the dangerous Castle Creek - Highway 82 intersection. They suggested that such ii
�
� a facility would be more appropriate at any fairgrounds acquired in the future. j�
; Merci Eicholtz presented a statement from the Pitkin County Horse Trail Association l�
commending the County's desire to have a rfding ring but feeling that the proposed �I
�
a . . . , ii
. +f
� location is unacceptable. They feel that the ring should be incorporated with any
� r
� fairgrounds to be built in the future under a master plan for such a facility. ��
' The Association volunteered to help in accomplishing,this. Eicholtz added that ij
� �
this sma11 ring would serve very few people and the County should wait to build a �'
� ,I
!
� facility they can really be proud of. King Woodward, representing the Meadowood f
� Homeowners' Associat3on, agreed that the proposed location is unacceptable and ��
� requested that the excavation done to date be restored. Gene Mechling also expressedf�
7 �I
� concern over the congestion this would generate on Castle Creek road. John �I
? �� Kellaher, an ad�acent property owner, was opposed to the visual and olfactory ;i
i1I
� pollution this would produce and requested the facility be constructed at a differentlt
� site. Edwards noted that the ring was never envisioned to be a high use facility �
� or used for special events. He felt that since the County owned eactra acreage J±
� Q
! around the hospital this land could be utilized by some people who own horses in '�
? ii
� the Count He �,
� y. pointed out that it is impossible to train a horse without a ring. i�
;1
Edwards felt that the traffic generated by such a ring would be insignificant and �;
reminded the group that the possibility of the County acquiring fairgrounds is Ii
!i
• very remote. The hearing was closed. �i
':i
Child moved that the special review application be denied. Kiasley seronded the il
��
motion and it passed unanimously. ii
!I
---------- I
�I
Public The CoimniSSioners convened a public hearing to consider a special review applica- '�
earing: �I
epeater tion for the establishment of a repeater site on the west ridge of Red Mountain. •,�
Station ;�
The facility is needed by the police and sheriff's departments in order to expand �,
1�
communications capabilities to encompass the Zower valley, Crystal River and ';
I�
upper Maroon and Castle Cree&s. A speciai review application Erom the U.S.F.S. will ;�
�i
" also be required. Smith submitted for the public hearing recoxd a letter dated fi
June 17, 1977, from Art Hougland, Police Chief. The structure will consist of a I';
;I
buried aluminum arch culvert with a 30' antenna on top. The FAA has agreed to �j
;!
waive the lighting requirement. One daily trip to the site via a four-wheel drive
4
vehicle will be necessary during construction; it is estimated that construction �i
;;
will take seven days. After construction is completed [he only access to the site ��
a
�
ommissioners Meeting SepCember 19, 1977 - 12��
;j
f'
r
__. __ . _ _ ...,.�...� -
_ _
i
I
----- ------- --- -----=-- ------
_- ------------- ------- : : �:
-- - _ ,
�,'.
Iwill be by helicopter. Smith reported that Stanley Natal expressed opposition to w;,
i
� the repeater on the Woody Creek side of the mountain because it will involve much
iitimber cutting. Smith added that the line itself is reviewed by the P 6 Z under
II
�; state statutes; the Commissioners review only the uae itself. The Planning Office
i
li
recommends approval of the application. Hougland stated that the sttncture would
li
�� have a 35' high antenna pole on top with an antenna about 10 feet higher. Edwards
r
�' asked why a propane tank was being installed. Hougland replied that would be used
�;,
�' for auxillery power and would be refilled by air. There being no further public
i; comment the public hearing was closed.
�i
1! Kinsley moved that the special review application for the repeater site be approved,
r
ii
with the qualification that the site be used for that purpose only. Child seconded
',� the motion and it passed unanimously.
L
I�
----------
I:
�j Public The Commissioners convened a public hearing on Land Use Code amendments. Karen
`i Hearing:
! Land Use Smith noted that these amendments have been considered since adoption of the Code,
; Cade
�� Amendments and it has always been their intent to amend the Code as time went on. All of these
�
amendments have gone through the Planning and Zoning Commission. Smith submitted £or
I
j the public hearing record the P � Z resolution of August 3, 1977, and the Planning
i
iOffice memos of August 4, 1977 and September 15, 1977. She then went through a page
�j by page review of the amendments. Page 1 allows houses with more than five bedrooms
!i
! hy special review only, page 2 tightens Che definition of a dwelling unit and drops
C �
� the maximum floor area limitations a e 3 amends aad clarifies the PUD
�� > P & provisions
Ij� of the code includin hases of review, architectural lans landsca in
g P p , p g plans and
I;
�� criteria to vary parking and height requirements, page 10 concerns architectura3 review
f
requirements, page 11 makea statutory language changes regarding the maintenance of
Ii open space, page 12 disallows land with a slope greater than 30% or in a designated
��
�j floodplain to be considered in net land area for density purposes, page 13 deals with
�
! subdivision exemption language changes for lot line and plat requirements, page 14
.i
I� changes the conditions for an exemption from 1041 requirements if the hazard can be
�i
'i mitigated, page 15 changes the amount of park dedication fees, page 17 limits the use �
� of park dedication fees to open space, page 19 contains the general submission pro-
II
cedure introduction, page 20 clarifies detailed submission procedures, page 21 amends
Iprocedures for applicants desiring to amend the code, page 22 provides a new definition
(I of a subdivision, page 23 drops abatement procedures for all non-conforming uses
I except those with a high impact, page 27 defines home occupation, page 28 concerns
mandatory dedication of water righte, page 29 involves group homes for the aged and
requires referrala to caucus groups. Chuck Srandt noted that in the definition of
a aubdivision "leasehold interest" is not adequately defined as to term of the lease
Commisaionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - 13
I
�
��
_ ---- ---- �-
---------------------------------------------__-__._--------
-------__------------
--�----. .
i
and to which leases this applies. Ne added that disallowing density calculations
i
for Iand over a 30� slope constitutes downzoning that portion of land. Jim Curtis ��
felt the slope requirement would be unfair because it would not have a unifor m '"
;I
impact on land in the County. Andre Ulrych, who has a subdivision application in i�
i
process, noted that the slope requirement would cut the density of his property �(
ii
in half. Lester Jones, owner of a ranch in Emma, stated he would favor allocting ��
�I
� homes to be built in the slopes and trees surrounding his land to preserve the
a . ti
meadow as open space. Chuck Vidal stated the Commissioners don'[ know what effect ;�
;i
this slope requirement would have on individual property owners and felt this prac- �'
i�
tice is discriminatory. ,Tim Moxan, representing Mitchell Enetgy and Development '�
j�
Company, agreed that this constitutes downzoning and that it increases the amount ��
;i
of acreage required per unit for a subdivision. Ne felt the slope requirement would �
reduce the density allowed as far as possible under the law. George Stranahan, `�
;I
moderator of the Woody Creek Caucus, stated that the caacus is opposed to this ;I
I�
• requirement and considers it random downzoning. Re asked how it would affect his ��
i
property which is in the floodplain. Smith noted that this effects only land in i
?I the designated floodplain; none of Stranahan's land is in the designated floodplain, j,
� since the designated floodplain lies adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. Harold ��
i j'
Pabst, landowner in old Snowmass, felt this requirement represents absolute con- ��
fiscation. Ae noted the difficulty he is having selling his land because [he '�
zoning requirements are in such a state of flux. This requirement would probably i
; cut the buildahle portion of his land in halE. Smith noted that Stanley Natal ji
! , phoned in the same setttiments concerning this amendmenC. Ulrych asked why he �
' tl
; received no notice of the proposed change. Smith concurred that the resolution ��
� �I
� should have been sent to all the caucuses. Kinsley favored tabling this i[em I{
i I
i �
! pending receip[ of more public Ymput. He also preferred striking the section on �'
� �i
� slope and floodplain concerns wiCh regard to allowed density. Child agreed. ��
i(
� - Edwards felt that this section should be retained. He noted that when you consider �;
� 9
� a subdivision you consider only the buildable por[ion of land; not sheer cliffs. !�
The assessed valuation of a piece of land is also computed only on the buildable �
� �I
portion and taxes are paid on that basis. He did not think that useless land i
1�
' shouZd he ailowed ta be used to get additional density £or buildable 2and. Edwards i+
i,
admitted that the 30% requirement may be too stringent, but felt the proposed �i
li
standards do have logic. Vidal felt that many of the safety and building concerns '�
can be dealt with through subdivision regulations. Edwards noted that some �!
. :i
subdivisions have drawn ridiculous lat lines which include only a amall buildable ��
site just to include more land for density calculations. Moran felt this amendment
ij
is not the proper way to address that problem; the subdivision regulations can ��
�i
�
Commissionera Meetin �
B September 19, 1977 - 14 ;j
II
;t
��
,.
�----- —�-- --------------- _ ,,
— . __
--- __� _�_—� _ . _ . _-- ;:
�I
; prevent that from occuring. Edwards agreed that some of tfie amendments should be
II taken under advisement and the County Attorney should be instructed to look at the
�j leasehold definition, the comnon open space requirement and non-conforming uae
'� abatement sections. Brandt asked why the housing section of the Land Use Code wasn't
f;
I; refined, especially in light of the housing resolution adopted in 1974. Fdwards
I!
�� agreed that this section needs clarification. Smith is working on that. Vidal
�I
�,
�; asked about the requirement £or deeding water rights to the County for all subdivi-
i� sions. Smith said that applies only if the subdivision is served by the municipal
I�
�, system, and it affects only that water not being used to maintain the subdivision.
,,
i�
li It was decided to clarify this section by allowing water used foz either consumptive,
I�
�� irrigation or recreational uses to be retained by the subdiv3sion. Rinsley moved
��
�i to approve all the amendments presented but to table those concerning density
� calculations for slopes and floodplains, common open space requirements and non-con-
�i
Iiforming use abatements pending revision by the County Attorney. Stuller was also
i"; requested to clarify the section dealing with leaseholds, however that amendment was
i�
I
I approved and will be revised later, Child seconded the motion and it passed unani-
I
� mously.
I) -'_---- --
I'T-hangars The Commissioners considered an application for an e�aemption from 1041 special
4 zoai
�iExemption review procedures to allow construction of the Airport T-hangars. The construction
jl
�; site is in the Initial Airport Impact Area. This exemption is allowed under the
�� �
) Land Use Code amendment just passed which allows an exetnption from 1041 tequirements
��
�� if the hazatd can be mitigated. The Planning Office feels that the T-hangars are
ii
� consistent with the guidelines pertaining to the area and will not create or be sub-
Ij ject to any hazard related to the airport facility. Kinsley moved to approve the
�I 1041 exemption and find that the designated hazard can be mitigated or avoided
ii
�; and will create no significant damage to property and to the public health, safety
�i
�j and welfare. Child seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
��
!� -°------
ii
�jLittle Ron Garfield, representing the Little Ann3e Ski Corporation, presented a request
��Annie's
I�Ski for reconsideration and reco�oendation hy the Board of Commissioners on the LiCtle
IiArea ynnie's ski area. He noted that in May of 1976 the Commissioners told the applicants
�� they did not want to create expectations on the part of the applicants concerning
ii
approval of the area, and suggested they wait for adoption of the Growch Management
i� Plan and an inventoty of a11 ski areas in the County. The Growth Management Plan
Ihas been adopted, howe�er the applicant cannot wait for completion of the ski area
inventory. The Little Annie Ski Corporation is asking Pitkin County to identify
Little Annie's as an area worth studying under the �oint review procesa with the
Commissionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - 15
�
I I
; r
_- --- ----;
------- ----------------.,.__-----��_.._ �_
Little U.S. Forest Service, and further requesting that Pitkin County serve as the lead 'I
Annie's
(cont.) agency in this process. The lead agency aseumes control of the application, !
.�
schedules meetings and sets up the agenda for discussions with the three other i
��
entities involved in the joint review process: the City, the State and the USFS. !i
i;
This first step is necessary in order to do a detailed study of Little Annie's to �'I
i (i
,, determine Che Eeasibility of the Proposal. Garfield presented a f.Zow chart involving ;�
ii
48 steps to be followed in the joint review process. The appli�cant is now at the ?�
� � .
first step in the process which consists of preparation and signing by the USFS, '!
4
y
! State, County and City of a joint review process agreement. Stuller noted that the '.,;
� h
chart shows this step as following conceptual approval by Pitkin County. Garfield ;�
I ij
i stated that that was in error and that the conceptual approval section of the chart �i
il
i should be eliminated. He stressed that the applicant is not requesting any County �j
;i
approval at this point, but is merely asking that the review process be initiated. '�
! q
"! Garfield did feel the area could he developed before:1982 if all necessary appzoval �
� Ij
!� is received. John Denver, Mike Strang and Bil Dunaway spoke out in favor of taking +�
' �I
� this first step in the process, to study the proposal to determine if it is of �j
qq value to the co�unity. Garfield added that the applicant recognizes that at any +J
i
� point along the joint review process any one of the governmetttal entities invo2ved ;�
� ii
'' could turn down the application; they are willing to accept this risk but want to ��
J �i
�; at least get the process underway. Karen Smith noted that Bill Kane studied this I�
� �'
�j proposal briefly before leaving for vacation. He agreed that the County can authorize!i
1ithe study to proceed but that the criteria to be studied should be made known now. �
:� ;i
,� Kane listed the following items to be investigated: housing, employment, population, •i
I jr
;�
i income, house buying capacity of the employees, locat3on of the employees, distribu- �, '
' tion of employees, travel characteristics of the employees, travel characteristics ?
�� li
.�''�. compared to tourist travel, demands for goods and services, governmental costs, 'i
'� total annual investment, increase in the pex capita income in the community and ij
�
� ij
increase in annual retail sales. Smith added that any negative impacts discovered I!
�'
with any one of these criteria would constitute grovnds for denial of the applicatian. ��
�i
Garfield said they have no problem with the criteria listed. Smith asked if the lead
�i
agency is required to develop the data required to do this study. Garfield replied ;,i
that this would be the responsibility of the applicant. Kinsley felt this would
;i
� be an appropriate position for the County to assume with respect to the USFS. He :I
;I
e�cpressed concern about the impacts [he area may have on town. Child felt the (�
applicant deserves the chance to go through the joint review process, adding that �
'i
this community wouldn't rest easy if LittZe Annie's were la3d to rest w3thout entering�+
!i
into this procesa. Stuller asked Garfield if he would submit a written statement to ��
the effect that any action on the part of the Board today does not constitute ��
i
�!
��
�
'I
ommisaioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 16 i�
r ,
;;
- i
I
i
-----_����`— ---------- ---- , —_ ,,,
ILittle conceptual approval of the application. Garfield agreed to submit auch a statement. '�,.�:i`..
f
�Annie's ''`�
cont.) Edwards felt tliat the development of additional skiing must depend upon whether or z"�'
i,(
�� not the Snowmass area decides to expand. He felt this proposed area would have I
�j advantages over Owl Creek ar Burnt Mountain. Se added that the normal joint review
�'
i� process requires conceptual approval and the f3nding that the application is in accor-
�
�`' dance with the goals and objectives of the coimnunity. He said the County is not in
I!
!! a position to make that finding at this point, but he would be willing to proceed with
�i `
I� the joint review process if the applicant maltes the disclaimers Garfield agreed to
�I submit. Edwards said he would agreed to begin the process if the Forest Service will
li
i� let the Gounty enter into the joint review without finding that the application is I
�I
� in accordance with the goals and objectives of the community first. He noted it
,
�� • would be impossible to make this determination because Little Annie's was excluded
ij
i, from the Master Plan. Child asked Tom Bell District Ranger, if this requiremene
1'
;� could be waived. Bell said he believed it could. Child felt the applicant should
I.i
I cover the most difficult points of the criteria lisCed in Kane's memo first. Edwards
i
$i felt the people involved in the process should devise a list of criteria to be
,{ considered and enter into an agreement on how to proceed with the application. He
1� added that he can't promise that beginning the process will end in approval. The
�
' Commissioners agreed to enter the �oint review process for the Little Annie's ski
i
liarea and to serve as the lead agency in the review. Tom gell added that this step
� does not constitute approval by the USFS, but is merely an agreement to study Che
f� idea further.
�! I
�4 ---------- �
�� �
j'Set Child moved that the City water extension to Holy Cross public hearing be set for
I�Public
��Hearings October 24th at 2:00 p.m., and that the Goodnough special review public hearing be
Ii
� set for October 24 at 2:30 p.m. Kinsley seconded the motion and it passed unanimous-
i
li ly.
i
� ---------
iMitchell- Nick McGrath reported on the litigation involving Mitchell DevelopmenC's suit of
�Snowmass
�Litigation the County conceming the rezoning of Snowmass contained in Resolution 76-150. They
I�
li have received a remand from Judge Litwiller in District Court. McGrath has prepared
� a resolution dealing with the issues discussed in Litwiller's opinion. In adopting
.( . new zoning, the Board should find that there was a mistake in the prior zaning or
i
there has heen a change of circumstances. The findings will be based on the tecord
previously made and no new evidence should be submitted. McGrath referred the
jCommissioners to a memo outlining the various courses the County can take. Kinsley
I
� felt he needed more detail on the matter and requested that the various optlons be
discussed in executive session. Jim Moran, representing Mitchell, asked if the action
I
Commissianers Meeting September 19, 1977 - 17
E
�
_ --------- ----------------__-------------_-------��----------------
- - 7-----
Snowmass taken by the Commissioners today would merely be a "patch-up" of Resolution 76-150 Ij
Litfgation ,�
(cont.) or if it would determine a new course of action. He did not feel that reworking ��
the resolution should be limited to an executive session. The Commissioners went 'I
i�
tl
into executive session. !j
�i
The Commissioners reconvened their regular meeting. Edwards noted that the Co�is- ;j
�I
sioners looked at the alternatives available to them. These included appealing the ;i
judge's decision, declining to make additional findings or reviewing the record to see ��
that there were additional findin s a ro riate to sustain the record `i
g pp p previously
i ',I
entered. They decided upon the latter course of action and a resolution to that �'
��
effect was drawn up. The Co�issioners found that at the time of their action there `I
;j
was a Master Plan in existance which specifically dealt with build out, that ��
ii
(j
the resolution was consistent with the Master Plan that was adopted, that the entirety ;�
�
of the resolution and general submission was done under PUD and that between 1974 and ',i
1976 there were changes in the circumstances with growth that had occured which
' i1
Iwould justify the rezoning. Moran asked if any copies of the draft reaolution con- •i
;I
tained in the Co�nissioners packet were distributed to anyone outside the Courthouse. j�
� '�
� MeGrath replied that they were not. Liz Stewart, Deputy County Clerk, stated that ii
i �
I copies of the draft resolution had been sent to the press. McGrath said that was �'
; fI�
) against his specific instructions, but if it were the case Moran would receive a copy ;�
! of the draft resolution. Kinsley moved to approve the resolution. Edwards seconded �I
i
I�
the motion and it passed unanimously. �i
�,
---------- � � li
I
Public The Commissioners reconvened a public hearing on Crystal River Valley rezoning at '!
Hearing: `�I
Crystal 7:00 p.m., September 20, 1977 at the Redstone Inn. Kinsley and Child were preaent. '{
River
Valley Kinsley noted that they spent the afternoon touring the valley to get a sense of ':.�
Rezoning 'i
the location of some of the areas being considered. Sohn Stanford, of the Planning
Office, submitted the following items as exhibits: the proof of publication notice
from the Aspen Times and the Glenwood Post, letters from Sames Larson, Mr. Arnson �i
and Ms. Hester. The zoning being proposed is as follows: the north portion of the li
� �I
• valley would he RS-20, most of the remainder of the valley would be RS-30 with the !t
� �I
� following exceptions. The Swiss Village tracts would be R-15, the Avalanche Ranch ��
i:
4
' would be Tourist (T) to 7000', the Seventh Day Adventist property would be AF 2-PUD, ;i
� �i
I
( one parael of land between Avalanche Ranch and the townsite of Redstone would be AF-2, :,ry'
I
!. the land surroundin the townsite '�
� g (in the Sanitation District) would he AF-1, the
��
! townsite would be Tourist, the Waggner property would be B-1, an unnamed subdivision i
� south of Redstone would be R-15, the property near the mansion would be AF-2 and '�
I ;I
i Redstone Ranch Acres would be zoned AF-1. Sylvia Morrison asked if people owning a :!
i
jlot in Redstone Ranch Acres could still get building permits for their land. -1
I '�
i!
i ;!
� ommisaioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 18 jj
,:
� y,,m,,, _ . . .
�
1 '
�
1
. _.._..._---.'--.�.---'--"------'-.'-'------"- - � �:
� -� -------...-------`---------_.—'_------------------ �
� ----'-'-- �.----'—� . . . ._.
il ----------'---------------------'---°--._.�—�:_�—�_^_ Y �,�.:
{ICrystal Stanford replied that they could; this zoning does not affect lota in previously '"�{:
�;River :ys-,.
f!Valley approved subdivisions. Paula Mechau mentioned the problem with water supplies in
i!Rezoning
�I (cont.) Redstone Ranch Acres and felt this should be given consideration. Stanford stated
1 that the Commissioners have devised some changes they would like to make in the �
i�
': previously mentioned zoning after performing theit site inspection today. They
li '
1; would like to extend the Tourist zone in the townsite only as far as the commercial
i
;
j; development now exists and zone the remainder of the townsite residential. They
i:
i; reconsidered the zoning for the Avalanche Creek area and felt that ArF-1 for the
:'
�:
Church property and Avalanche Ranch and R-15 for Swiss Village would be more appro-
;i �
� priate. Joseph Llewellyn, owner of land north of the Redstone townsite and within
�i
�� the confines of the Sanitation District, xequested a higher zoning for his land,
�1
�'! which is now proposed for AF-1. Ae would prafer R-15 or R-30. Jim Larson,
;
ai Llewellyn's attorney, stated that his client originally owned 31 acres, buC he
jj * sold of� five parcels of the land prior to adoption of subdivision regulations.
�i All these parcels can tap into rhe sewer system. Bill Yokums stated that an
��I inducement for Llewellyn to sell one parcel to the 5anitation District was the fact
1' that all of his land would be able to tap into the system. Seff Bier £elt that
�,
��i any growth in the valley should be restricted to the townsite. Doris Ferguson
1! agreed. Sylvia Morr3son asked if the 56 acres belonging to Norm Smith near the
� Redstone townsite is included in the Tourist zone. Stanford replied that part of
�
1,
� Smith's parcel is included; the Tourist boundary goes, to the road leading to the
I;
�! reservoir. Morrison £elt none of Smith's property should be zoned Tourist. She
f; more
�; added that there should nevet be/than one unit per acre there. Ixwin Grange felt
II
ij that R-15 zoning for Llewellyn's land would be too high since it would allow approxi-
�j mately 60 houses on 20 acres. Llewellyn stated he has no present plans for
�� development of the parcel. Rita Herbert asked why the northern portion of the Valley
�I was proposed Por RS-20; she would prefer RS-30. Stan£ord stated that since that
�i � �
�i area is flatter it would accommodate development better and with less environmental
p
;� damage. Kelly Grange spoke against high density zoning for the Church property;
i;
he stated he is willing to downzone his property and felt the Church should do the
�i
;;
�, same. Irwin Grange said the Avalanche Creek area already has a high density and
i� should not be allowed to become more crowded. Stanford replied Lhat the Planning
I
�� Office has designated two areas for growth, if it occurs; those are Redstone and �
��
�( Avalanche Creek. Irwin Grange felt the Avalanche Creek valley is too narrow to
i
�� accommodate more development. Mary Lilly also felt that AF-2 zaning would be too
ihigh for the Church land. Kinsley stated that the Commissioner� now feel that AF-1
i
� would be a more appropriate zone for the property. Mechau felt the townsite and the
� Church property are both too dense. Irwin Grange felt the northwest portion of the
i
t
(
�
�Commisaionera Meeting September 19, 1977 - I9
� �
I
I� � '._.,
, _ _ � r
.�
._._...___^�
-------------------
_...__.------------------------ _
__-----___-------r------._.___
Crystal Sanitation District boundaries should not be included in the AF-1 zone because this �j
River
Va21ey is grazing land, Morrison felt that the property within the Sanitation District !j
Rezoning �
(cont.) boundaries should be considered differently than the rest af the valley since develop-;i
;i
ment there could help pay for the high cost of building the facility. Ferguson i�
;i
asked if the Commissioners considered the amount of Forest Service land in the valley '�
when drawing up their zoning. She does not favor a lot of development in the valley ��
i �
but wants to allow people who work in the valley to live there. Ferguson opposed �i
i�raising the cost of land too high through low zoning and pre�rred maintaining a '
ii
happy medium in the valley. Kathy Menke asked if the Commissioners have cons3dered ,� -•
the impacts on wildlife for building on a slope as opposed 'to a meadow. Kinsley i`� • ,
,''
replied that those impacts are unknown. Stanford noted that deer and elk do feed �. _..
i�� -. .
in meadows and the County does have some spots identified as critical winter range ��
I' ��
areas. Jim Denton pointed out that there are almost 200 subdivided lots in the i.
,i
,valley that have not yet been built upnn. He noted Chat that allows for large i
potential build-out in the area. He felt that the County should downzone to the i!
extent that is reasonable and consider the impact of these undeveloped lots. Roy I�
�i
i Arneson felt that ten acre zoning would be too restrictive and would raise the cost �'
ii
? P
i of living in the valley too much. He would prefer five acre zoning so middle '�
�1
� class people could purchase land. Susan Stever agreed. Llewellyn asked how many ;�
� people in the audience could afford to live in the valley if they had to purchase ��
j i
I.and with ten acre zoning. He felt ten acre zonittg would make the Crystal River ��
i;
� a rich man's paradise. Mike Strang felt the Commissioners should over-lay the �{
1 'i
delineation of federal lands on their zoning maps to get a more accurate view of
� �j
3 I.
r
the valley. He stated that it is unrealistic to zone that portion of the valley j�
ii
abutting Carbottdale RS-20 because Carbondale is experiencing such rapid growth. l�
� This wi21 lower the County's tax base although they will still suffer the effects i
� of the growth. He felt the County should consider adopting a formula for landowners ��
� to cluster density in dry areas and keep large meadows open for agricultural uses.
� . �I
Some development will be necessary in the valley to create a tax base to handle
3 the Carbondale influx. Kinsley felt that the real impact of rapid growth is that �!
;�
a few people make money and the rest of the community loses. He said the law of
,�
supply and demand does not apply in Pitkin County because the demand so far exceeds
the supply. Ray Vender felh that all residents of a communiCy shonld share the tax ';
i�
;i
- burden of retaining a greenbelt, instead of making the landowner responsible £or !j
�!
,i
paying taxes on land everyone en3oys. Kinsley agreed and noted they are trying
1i
different methods to get at that problem, Virginia Morstein-Marx noted that the land '�
j!
�,
above the BRB Ranch is getting very dense. Larry Mencer, representing the former ';
ocmer of the Redstone Inn, requested that the zone line encompassing th e Sanitation i
;�
i;
Cou�isaionera Meeting Septemher 20, 1977 - 20 f;i
i
I!
L .__ .. ... , ..... . . _ . . -:' -
,
� 'w
t ;i
,� Dietrict go all the way to the boundaries; the map excluded a portion of this --
land. Anita Denton auggested that the Commissionera consider the desires of the
t
� people who live in the valley and preserve the quality of li£e in the Crystal River.
jThere being no.further public comment the hearing was closed.
I
i ----------
� There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
i
,
,A �
s � ii ,� F Respectfully suhmitted, APPROVED:
l�,1/ ��T �'�
,�: I •:f .
v ' ' � '> .
A�a . . ? � �. ,Ux. Sfawai'�' l
•� �ji��t ° '�Lis Stewart, Deputy County Clerk Chai an Michael Kinsley
Ga'�-'�I a �
,.; . � ,.
{�M �` .
�4� � �
( �`! � v�` obert Child
,J ��
`� _
( osepfi war s Jr.
I '
I .
i
1
I
i ...'::.
I
i
�
! : .
i
i _
1�
4� _
, :
Commissioners Meeting September 19, 1977 - 21 `' t
1977 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES EXHIBITS
SEPTEMBER 19 MIDLAND PARK PROJECT
A Detailed Submission Supplemental Information dated September 6, 1977—
Co eland Ha man Yaw Ltd Architects
B Memorandum dated September 15, 1977 from Karen Smith,Planning Office,to
Board of County Commissioners George Ochs,County Manager& Sandra M.
Stuller,Coun Attorne
C Memorandum dated September 12, 1977 from Karen Smith,Planning Office,to
Board of Coun Commissioners
COUNTY RIDING RING
D Pitkin Coun Public Ridin Rin S ecifications
E Letter dated Au st 2, 1977 from Glen Scott,As en Valle Hos ital
F Pitkin County Horse Trail Association's Presentation before the County
Commissioners Se tember 16, 1977 Hearing Concerning Public Riding Ring
RED MTN REPEATER SITE
G Memorandum dated September 15, 1977 from Karen Smith,Planning Office,to
Board of County Commissioners,George Ochs,County Manager, Sandra M.
Stuller,Coun Attorney
H Memorandum dated June 1'1, 1977 from Art Hougland to Bill Kane and Karen
Smith,Plannin Office
LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT5
I Planning and Zoning Commissioner Resolution 77-OS
J Memorandum dated August 4, 1977 from Karen Smith,Planning Office to Board of
Coun Commissioners and Plannin and Zonin Commissioner
K Memorandum dated September 15, 1977 from Karen Smith,Plannign Office to
Board of County Commissioners,George Ochs,County Manager,and Sandra M.
Stuller,County Attomey
L Letter dated September 12,2000 from Jim Curtis to Board of County
Commissioners
M Mailgram dated December 9, 1977 from Virginia Jones Parker and Barbara Jones
Scott to Bob Child,Pitkin County Commissioner
N Miscellaneous notices of public hearings for Se tember 19, 1977 meetin
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 16 1977 EXHIBITS TO MINUTES
-: , __ . .
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects
SOARD Or C0. GOI�Ih('R'S
PITkIN C0.
Public Hearing Exhibits
• Dato . _.,�� /� •77 .
s � .�j�d./� �c'�z���
EXHIBIT
� "" �
�
� - - 7
: �
: i
: : �
,
: _ ,
,
: ;
;
�
;
, i
;
MIDLAND PARK PROJECT i
i
DETAILED SUBMISSION '
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION i
,
SEP7EMBER 6, 1977 i
;
�
: !
�
_ I
!
: � I
i
i
: i
�
;
,
. . , . . ' . � . . � . . . � . . �
�. . .. . _ � ' . . � �. . . � : � � . . .. . . . . . ' � i
� � - . . . �. .. � . � - . . . � .- . - .. . . i
, . . . . - . . .., . . . . . .. . . � . � . . +
' . . . . . . - . . _ . ' . . .. . . � - ' . � . . �
' . � . � . . . . - . . . .� . . 7
. � . .� � . � � ' . 1
. . . . . . ' � .. (
�
�
i
(
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Arch(tects
i
SITE DEVELOPMENT COS7S (updated 9/6j77�
This'�category covers all costs not directly included in the �
i
construction of the 37 units. They include land costs; utility �
i
costs; road, landscaping and other site costs; prafessional Fees, ';
and county staff costs. These costs are explained in detail within �
this section. i
i
�
i
;
LAND ACQUISITION COS7 ;
�
Land acquistion is in three parcels. The main parcel i
y
of slightly under 12 acres was acquired in 1976 from Don `
;
Randall . 7wo small parceis are currently under negotiation ;
for purchase to complete City Right of Way dedication �j
requirements. The main parcel has been paid off in full . �
I
The cost of the smaller two parceis is estimated to cost �
between $1500 to $2500, the higher figure has been used. �
�
I
Main Parcel $170,OOO.UO i
R.O.W. Parcels 2,500.00
i
$172,500.00
�
UTIIITIES
I
All normal utilities will be provided with the exception �
�
of natural gas. The costs listed under electrical include i
�
the cost of trenching and installation of PVC conduit for �
Telephone and Cable 7.V. Costs listed below are based on the �
most recent quantity take-uffs and unit prices supplied by i
i
' iocal subcontractars. `
-1- �
{
;
� Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architecis
Sewer (Aspen Metro) $13,500
Water (City of Aspen) 20,100
Electrical (holy Cross) 37,500
Telephone (Mtn. Bell ) No Charge
Cab1e T.V. (Canyon Cable) 4,000
$75,100 :
5� contingency + 3,800
$78,900
LANDSCAPING
This category included general site lighting, live
landscaping, and concrete sidewalks and landscaping structures. ;
;
The only change from earlier estimates is a 15% increase in
i
sidewalks. � �
. ;
Planting $21 ,000 '
�
Structures 5,000 �
. � ,
Lighting 5,000
y
Sidewalks 5,750
$36,750 ;
5� contingency + 1 ,850
i
$38,600
SITE WORK
This sub-category includes all surface work except �
�
walks and landscaping. It does include drainage structures
;
. ,
and all asphalt roads, driveways, and parking lots.
i
-2- i
;
�
' Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Archtlects
Surface Drainage $ 1 ,500.00
� Grading 44,500.00
Asphalt Roads, etc. 23,100.00
$69,100.00
59� contingency + 3,500.00
$72,600.00
PROFESSIONAt FEES
This category includes all fees required to plan and
design the project, to receive the required governmental
approvals, to prepare construction documents, and to supervise
all construction. All the amounts shown are maximum
upset limits. Actual fees will be somewhat lower since the
consultants bill only for the time actually needed to perform
their work.
Approvals $ 16,000
Site Development 35,600
Architectural 84,000 �
Project Management 9,000
$144,600
OTHER COSTS
Some monies were spent prior to our entry into the
project. These were itemized in the Planning Office Memo
dated August 31 , 1977 and presented during last Wednesday
, meeting.
-3-
�
' Copland H2gman Yaw Ltd Architects
Architectural/Planning
(Benedict, CHY) $ 4,200.00
Engineering (Tri-Co) 4,200.00
Appraisal 1 ,400.00
Housing Authority 7,300.00
County Staff 1 ,000.00
$18,100.00
SUMMARY
1'hese costs are apportioned to every unit on the basis
of the enclosed square footage within each unit. The
units that are the largest and have the most impact pay
the largest share of these costs.
Land Acquisition $172;500.00
Utilities 78,900.00
Landscaping 38,600.00
Site Work 72,600.00
Professional Fees 144,600.00
Others 18,100.00
$524,700.00
For the purposes of the following calculations,
Site Development costs will be apportioned at $15.30
per enclosed square faot.
-4- -
' � Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION COSTS
During early August, Greer Construction Company
prepared a cost estimate based on Preliminary plans prepared
by Copland Hagman Yaw, Ltd. and using specification
criteria outlined during a pre-bid meeting. These drawings
included 10 duplex units with garages that have since been
changed to 10 large two bedroom units. The designs of the
other 27 units have been revised somewhat but remain basically
the same now as they were in the preliminary set. A copy of
Greer's bid form is attached to the end of this report
as Exhibit A.
. -5-
,
,
;
i
�
Copland Hagman Yaw Lld Architecis
LAND LEASING
During last week's P&Z meeting we were again asked to
investigate the feasibility of leasing rather than selling ;
,
land. This issue was reported on in a July 6, 1977 ;
• �
memo to the BOCC & P&Z. At that time George Ochs and I i
�
recommend that land leasing not be used because of the i
loss of equity without a reduction in monthly payment and �
I
because it would require a long term financial investment
in the project by the county.
This project has always been designed so that the county
would recover all of their costs by selling the completed
units. The land leasing concept would require many years to
recover the initial land purchase price but would then
� generate a profit. This is expecially true if the lease
payments were increased annually so that the payments
remained constant in 1977 dollars.
The land lease concept does have the benefit of lower.ing
the down payment required to purchase a unit. The l.and
cost for a one bedroom unit is $3400 and increases to $5660
for the three bedroom units. The savings would vary from
$340 to $566 if a 10� down payment were required.
The complementary disadvantage to the lowered down payment
is the loss of equity. A quick comparison with the Lone
Pine lease payment shows that the monthly payments would
-6-
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architecis
amortize a value ranging from $9,000 to $12,000 in land
cost over a 30 year mortgage. This compares to our land �
costs that range from $3400 to $5,b60.
Additional control of the land gained because of the
land lease was investigated by the County Attorney but was
deemed unnecessary because the Right of First Refusal ,
Architectural Covenants, Deed Restrictions, and Zoning Laws
gave more than adequate control over future uses.
�Some problems also exist in arranging the tax-exempt
financing if a land lease arrangement is included within the
project. This area will be addressed by the representative
of the financial advisor.
MARKETING
The County Manager has made the decision that because
of the anticaipated high demand for these units, that no
major marketing program will be required. All marketing
and sales will be handled through the Housing Authority which
was set up to perform this function on all PMH housing units.
Therefore, no marketing costs will be applied to the estimated
sales prices. A budget figure may be calculated once the
new Housing Authority Director is selected and appointed.
I would estimate that 3 to 4 months will be required to
complete all necessary marketing and selling. In salary costs
this would be $5,000 to $7,000. If a half year is required
the cost could exceed $11 ,000.00. Without a Housing Authority
. -7-
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Archttects
Director and a specific marketing plan these costs are
very difficult to estimate.
ESTIMATED SALES PRICES
As mentioned previously all anticipated cost except
those occurred in arranging long term financing through
Tax-Exempt Revenue Bonds have been included or otherwise
accounted for in the following estimated for unit sales
prices. Construction estimates are based on $35/S.F. and
are considered to be very good in light af the earlier
estimate by Greer Construction. Tap Fees are assumed for an
"in Aspen" project.
The final absolute prices will be within 5� of these figures.
ESTIMATED SALES PRICES
SITE BLOG
UNIT t1NIT DEV. CONST LOAN TAP SALES
TYPE SIZE COST COST COST FEES PRICE
1 BDRM 675 10,325 23,625 1600 1100 36,650 �
2 BDRM 750 11 ,475 26,250 1775 1100 40,600
2 BDRM 900 13,775 3i ,500 2100 1100 48,475
3 BDRM 1125 1,7,200 44,375 2875 1500 65,950
MONTHLY COSTS
Some questions were raised on the amount of the monthly
utility bills and Home-Owners Association dues. The purchaser
will have two monthly payments. The association payment will
cover maintenance of the grounds, sewer and water charges,
and will include home-owner's insurance. This payment wili
-8-
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects
average netween $50 to $75 per month. A similar payment
at the Season's Four Condomiums is $70/mo. but also includes
maintenance of a common recreation center with Jacuzzi , Sauna,
and outdoor pool. Monthly dues at the Aspen Hi17s condominiums
. are$75/mo and includes paying off a new roof.
The other monthly charge will be for electrical service.
Because of personal habits and comfort levels this bill will
vary from $40 to 80/month at current rates. Ali units have
excellent solar orientation which wil] he7p reduce overall
heating bills. Those owners who practice energy conservation
measures wi11 see a marked decrease in ti�eir electric
bills over those who do not.
Discussions with the County Tax Officiais indicate that
Property taxes will be assessed on the Right of First Refusal
Value rather than on the open market value of the units. Monthly
taxes will be $36.00/+�onth for the one bedrovm units. The
three. bedroom unit will have to pay about $65/month.
_9-
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects
EMPLOYEE AFFORDABIL�ITY
Several methods are used by lending institutions to
evaluate income in relation to long term mortgages. The
method used most frequently across the county limits the
monthly mortgage payment to 25% of net income. Net income is
defined by lending institutions as the income remaining
after installment loan obligations have been met; it does
not mean income after taxes. Apparently banks feel their
loans are more important than taxes* Since housing costs
are so high in Aspen, local lending institutions will
use 30� of net income.
The following table identifies the maximum 30 year
mortgages for specific income levels with varying interest
rates. The actual interest rate available for this project
has not been finalized so rates have been shown from 72�
to 10% in 29' increments. The figures to the right of the
mortgage amount is the monthly P & I payment. The chart is
an expanded version of the chart prepared by Chuck Vidal and
introduced last week.
This chart assumes several gross family income levels.
The second column is net year]y and monthly income after
installment loan commitments, usually a automobile loan.
The third column represents the amount available monthly
for mortgage payments. This has been calculated at 30%
of net monthly income. The final columns are the maximum
-10-
_... --.._..-- _ __.. _._ _ ,
. �
Coptand Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects �
i
° purchase price that is affordable for the specific
interest rates and income levels. The figures assume
a 10� down payment.
*This is a very personal interpretation. The real
reason for this method of defining net income is
that taxes will vary with the income level while the
installment loan payments will not vary until the loan
is paid in full.
-ll-
_ _ '
Copland Hagman Yaw Ltd Architects r
• �
` LONG TERM FINANCING
The Duane G. Lankford and Company has been retained
by the Board of County Commissioners to assist them in !
� i
arranging the lang term financ�ng of the Midland Park
i
Project. �
Because of the direct involvement of the Pitkin j
i
Housing Authority in this project the financing package
is designed �o utilize Tax-exempt Revenue Bonds to
_ finance. Because of the complexity of this issue
a representative of Lankford and Company wiTl be present
to answer questions on the financing methods being
investigated. ;
. ;
i
i
;
,
. . j
f
�
-�2- �
�
N N � � r-+ � O�i O �
+A � 00 C!1 IV �
O O g O O � � � �
O O O O O �
� �
, �
� tNV r-+ �O O� �-+ W p � � � �
Oo � ►.� O+0 N W� N � � N CJt � tv O � 0 �
Cn O O''� O Cn ''� O O ''� O O � O � �
� \ \ \ \ \ � \ \ u�i � �
� � � � � � � � O � `� p
• O Q O O �
O
6v �� rd
v o`po o w c.Nn � o
cn o cn o v� � � +�° k
� � .
� �
� �
�►
0o V O� Ut �{a � �1
V � W N O r�-r��'"' I
F't � t,y
O O Q CVli O �p �
O O O O O � !'C!
r-r ["
�
� V O� C1� W r-+ 00 �'
� N N r+--�' Q O� � vc C�1
� N N �--� � �O � � �
W O O O O O �
� �
�
�
Oo O� Ut ,,p. W '—� 00 �
O �O W V O� ,.�.� NI�- 9
d ui � oo v � � �
N [�'"
O O O p O � ,_.,
� �
. �
v�
V - O� Cn �A W � �D
O� Cr � C1i U�
fD �
V O� �-+ Cft i..t
O O O O O �
�
�
t�
W W W W W � �O
�'t �
O O O O O �
m
�
+ss
�] � CJl �ja CJJ r-� �—•
Q h-+ 1--� I--+ (J ^ �
O � � V N � �
O O O O O �
m
rt
�
�
�
i
. �
� ' EXNIBIT A � �
4yli�J'�li::;u c[.;4J�i`J:�'li:'1:�iI1V;`.li'11Q:D1�1 ��:QD.
.�3ti5 5ua�isc til�cet . QU�U.I'f'S�':2Ufl.13f�Vi;:;I\C� 1937 !'.c1,L'ux 5693
S:in llic;,o 1lrext�'illa�c
l`::lifocaia 92[Cl ' Culnr:�d��8(615
(7ld)234�GSd9 (303)925•23U5
Augus�t 5, �.t9'l'l
T�IIll;G�tAID :t'ARti r't��:7js�;`� SUt:�.'tr� r�o i,at''�_P��r. �Lti:Lri�.n�`. - �
_ �.�. __ �_. _ _ .�, �
T�TV.i.iVG :1fil;s�� .
A :3LDG _�_.__4F,N•��� �c) ��T I,3.•ai il� a�^;a ' . �
]3 �?Llli; 1�;'�-S� �i� i�i Li��i.n�r �.rcG . .
C L:t,.�rT ,� os.�5 a�� �,,�i� ��iv�n; ar'r_�z �;�c:;':_;��:J�� ��r 3 �,ri7?
�
i? �3I��G �,ii:i�.; :�:� r'''' ��iv:.tt� ����c��; • .
!: ii.�,it�i , j7 ��:i.�) `•;r� :,:`.4 .i].\�.t':1?.; C�ti�..c^i . '
` i
� 1'� 13.��11�t .J) �!.%.�C� J��� i����: .�J�_1%�.111f.� i�.I t,::� � _ • . . �
0
�i !�(��.)i ;��h���) �i,-�� r i !1:L1�:lt 1�� f�I'i;�l ,
'ri i:si,:_i;; :'.,v,Jii `:�,;►, :'':� Liv:�2'1_� �:�1'?<i
i
1. y�!)�: ��1���� :�tZ l�'.. !�lt�iii� �:J.'G'<:i I
.�_
�� t;)�ri;y �,t);�0 ��,'�� ='i 1:7.�1;:; :��:�1
li �Ll�(x � li`a�� :�;:� 't''i .(�?.`l:l.i!�' ��i:?�J.
... ._ ���'l)''t�_i� ._j+.�_�.r';:__�.y�_.j`�_•---�JV!:7� ClT'��i.l:i
C�1R�lr.J.; ?:i�•::?;;`: .
C, �i.i_,i�(i Z(.J() �,i? �,�•l fa,l:':i:_-;2 �L�•;l
:�
i: i?T�:.l�f 1"�'�� `i` -..1. �-�l�`'l��'.�. �:�.i�(-'.il. .
:c ., �:�:�; , y,,,, ,.. �-- �,-.•�.
�r�;);_: :�� .� l:� .�;��:: �:,._ .1
V �:i�!J�_. �1'7:(� .� l���i ��.1,..�:1�) �A1•,l� '
J . .•
1� !:�.:�.i�: . ''�'�)l.� , ._ `�f_i i.il?.':.1:''�' �i��.'l:':.i ,
ti •r, •� •>r. • v,`; ... ...-�:rn ��.�•- ��� �
`.1��.�.i!1.� ...,.,...�1 t�t'! 1�_ u�t�...�.,., ::i c_�.
(;�11.��i'UF�;.' �i.'t�� `.i •
C �]�DG y?�• ;�,:L �"�, IJ f�lL 1��_It V area .
lr BLLG �)4� :��? !�'x �arPort �lre��
i; BLP.G ;'�'1•I• S� �"1'� i,ar�nor.�, area
F' nI,UC' 924 S(� f���` (;ur��oJ��t �r��a
i U'i'!l'L 3,U;Ei .=`� :�'^ � •:N '�'' �
`.,: � �_:�i ci ., area::
� i3 U U C C:'I' +
Livin� �lT��a; �•�.,:�2:.� Sc��iurc� I�'ec�t �� :i;3`.;.:�p�t ;q I�'t = $ 1,1+4��:,91.0
Gara�� : �,2�U Scj��a��� FzE1: � ;fi��. p�-r Sq Ft = � �(i,�50
C�rl>or'L.�: ;,Gc)�- Sclu�z'c rce t i:� ��;��:?. ����r Sc.; P�t -- � 73„�20 �
_..�.__ `_._. .___ �!�YP111� 3 U U��;'�, — :fi 1 , '�7 1,0 8 0 ' �
....__.._.__. . _ _ '__"'_ i
. , �
. . . .. . . . . . . , . _ . . . . . ,�. , . ,.. - . . ._. .. ... . .....-,. .. ..�.-...y*-�-•• �
. .. . . i
_ .�:, i
„•- .
• �
�
�
• �vLulul'�t�v ��Q�l��`JL`Le��`11���1� ��• i
3335 Sun�ise Strcct ' QUALtTY GU[LdI►V�51NCi; l937 : P.O.lius 5698 �
N'est Vipa�c '
San qic�o , b
Califocnia 92103 " � Cult�rrdo 81b IS i
(71d)23•1•(i5-09 (303)925•28U5 • :
i
j
� : August II, i9'17 - �
Pre�irnznary Proposa]_ ,� RECEIVED A�� 8 1977
Rei '1'he Miclland Par.t rrojec�t • . !
I Es tima�ted Cos't oi Coi1s-��'LlC'i,:L'Jll: . ;� l.,SS:I ,3�0.00
:B;:.s�d �-�r_ .Pr:::li�nin,z�•�� P1�„�; d..,��.;ec7: Jia:Ly �'7 r 19'1'T� �
p�°.:,�a.�^ad �:;r �ol�l:_�nd ]ta�,ul�i� 't�w, ?.,�tdd �z�x� px�cliia:i.naz•y builgei; ,
, •
!�,ice��in� ���:i�ci� `l�ed C;iay on Jtily ^v, 197?.
iI ac�t.;�-r� s oo�i;aees l��t::ccl on ��re:l.�.i;iir_:��,�T p:Lar::� ;
T�ivin� ai�:as - �i•.L;��:ii ,�q F,'-l;
G�i a�� arL�?s •- 2,2>� Sq i't .
• �aipox•�c ar��as- �3,6)� Sq l�,.t
:1:I� ill��ri���ce.� :
�l Col:l ;�c.�o►' <<ii.i:il :�;oocl sii:�i��_1_�s ltnll �; �3�OOU.UO �
� 1�'la.�t: ruoi:.� vll"l:ll roc�f dx•�iiizs aila cla°y�tive:].ls lll�,.�1TCT 4 2U,2�.�,UO
:EV ltc�a:� Pic��c _i:?i r��,:i�c_�;�c�� :
;l :�l�t:.;;'� (:.:C:�1VE,'G1C�11
.�.J lllJ4�.�:�j � .
l/ \i��._��:J Llj1L� l:ll V`•�iiJ � � �
�) �i'�Ueii3 �`l:.1�.�::
1� �ii: Ll�?11�L?011 ;��U17C�u
]i` T,ia:�.ii :;c:wc1�, �v�;�c�.r and clec-crica:L �
G ).iLl:L.Lillll�T Z�L�i'ii1:L'li «��d :!'J_��n chc:cl�. fces
II, �Ya'c�:• ��u�d �e�ve:z• �ta�� �'c:�s
I :�J_c;�Y,�ic •t;z�a�i;•F'c�r:nc_• �
J L' anci�;ca»ir��/I�uum spriril.l�x sS,s�;ein
1� !�.�;, ���lVlll�; , .
T� ?3ua.:l.c�e;x•°:� H:��o}c Ii�stir�z�ice �
t5'! Projuc-t; �ccux•a.t5r '
l�i Cai•lx:i; a;icl Re:,il:i�n�t I�''loorin�� •
U UTll�� .l. .U. • ' •
�' 1�'ir��p:tacc�s �
�t( �j1J� lr�: TJJ.�>lI L111�'� •
1.
J _ _ __- .__----•--- _..r.� _-___
i . " • Midl�nd Y�a,rlc T'rojeci:
. Pre].iminary I'ropo�al/Greer Consi:o �
nu�us � a, i9'l7 -�
i Page T�va
� ' . RECEIVED `•����- 8 1977 .. �. . .
, ._
� .
V Quali�ications : � �
A On� ].ayer of ply�vood on floors, no underlayment. . •
B vo �vir�c:iotiv�� iri br.tt:hs , �h�y wi:L1 iri�t,��rfrx�e vri�th fiber-
� g1a^s �i:ub:��
,,
C iVo P1iu•��azca �u.iJ_cts -- /�o � So Csde�t , � �� -
D �i.baz�•�t�tss �ct�b:�
J� '���J�?il'�;;. �'8iiv'(' .:i G�71Tl�.v��:� :i Gl-'�=-�. .;].1��C — 7�0 15�� ��1.�/'�011
u >
' LM, :�i1v 1�.n S�31':'::�.° ..�.I.]"0�� .::)Y' c`�Fti.11 l�l.l.L.�.Cl.Ll'?�i .
(i t):1:' '�i',?.i;:"•:t' ..�_].1"!:•.` T'Oi' �:.lC�l Ltll:l.li�11!" '
li u.:ir�„ a tl.0 ;:�:.1__►_on c�1��c�i;,:����: �•r��i�a� I►ec� �,c>>:� :�n orlc b�cii c���n v�a.t
! ;��•:4:1;� c'-.. lUi� t�:��.�!�1� (:l.�•r:`��1':LC: �'dil�l.c�I' �]Ci:1��:L'J.' 7.1'1 �!7_.�_ U'G}1G'L'n
J ��•.� ����i'1.��a �i'c'.- �i�i?�'� �)14�':L11-i,S�it':� (�.�i!�l.'�� �'/J_'L�1 ;.�r.r:j'1I"11:��1C:C�. C�l�i]_1��'
��_L'•u'�1. .r�l'i�':..:.::i_:a:l:?il L1ci.iCt� �_i�1VC �ll:)ji�Ul:liil�l�LC.�_;y qi�V.�� j]i::l' ClUU"f'.
i�. i\O �':.i1lJ::; O.t" ;:`1:i�.1�,:;•:; Ul1 �I)1:1�C��_C��a •
:,
1� :i;�:i��l�%�.'.•:i �:.�.t.;O�.i�;'i::LC: C�?:L.�tll;';�
I T�'� 1�''L1.1111 ��t'J��`r���.1_ �f0 �l_�_Lit(1:L?lUlll �1'1.Y1C�OVl:� t1c7 C�1S:L11� �U:;@ c'1 VJOOCl :ill.l�
!'� lVil �''.i..L'�l'til:'_C: �.L.�.Ce OI� ;7::1VF`;'3 . ,
t) Jol; :C;� i'.i.�:�t:�•i::_i ��� u;�i;z�; <'.i.!-0 Lba �����IZ�t7.�t �sriin�;le:� a;/��,ia rooJ'
• i , ' , i:'. ....:�)f.,.ii .�n+^, f�11;;U::�: 1l, ��,�7�]'
. i:'Tiii�'ti�'`� �'i}'�:i; ,`r;!��Ti�.i;'i' . �k�c� S
, �. � . ..::_..:. :• _'-:. . :.-c.:. ._:. ::-=-- . � 1����
r�rcEi�J�:.�
t:.��rTr.,r:�c;:�� rr,r�:v:rnit:,t,x �rirr.;� ���n ur:;;a�al�r,;
I)h:SC,1;7I='i.'[Oi�l ,.� Ci��:1`.i' I�I�::i'UI;'I't�:l) 1)i•;;5;7 ,U I)�l'1.'I's � VAL�11-:
__..._._.__....-_.-•—..__.._._.__._.__.. — -- �_.. .----- - - - - - - - - - -
1 ��'r V 1' /c'� r.�.r ...._...__..--' c. � �)�)...•"°'-'-'-'-• °-----' +--... ____....�.._..__ ---�
_ _ _ .. . . __....__.. _......�._
___ ... _ ......... .
._.------__..__..._ .. . . _. __ ... � --
. . . .'r�7......� _. '
----.r.,.,..,_2.�..,�_.nt,;..,-__r.�,o,_��__--. ------ -. --------.----- .______..—__. _..__. ._._._._..___.� _._._..
7,,C;oncY•.�1��,_inc`l�abri=�_ 10.� 610 '� G�•.t�7 �•F•
.._. _..---='-'--.—_- ------�----- -
-- ---- ---._—._--- --..
3 S�ircr<<ir:iar_ 30,OC�0
.._....._....---._..._�_._._._.___..�..._._..._._.:._._,__._..__�__�(�.._.___._ � ` .
!{' PC�iAr�l �i7T.�)�?l�tY'yr � 'I1.1.� ���9 J �.�r'T/LJ•�". -�_.._.-.�_ �..._._
__..�_._.._n .�_.�_,.___ _'�.'-_�._..�.."' ' — 'l---_'_��'�__._'_'__"_.....___' .'_"- '�-���_.�.� _�..._..
5 R ou�h Lttrn?,�,•^ pL.'7 6� - ' - �
� f
r. ._ � . , :� �.o.<:¢-S-�' 1 - -- - - ---- -----
.__..��'_�.� ��....��.�����.� _���J'�_�'_�... �"-- .
+-.�.�...�.�� �. .. ��� ..
__G I'i.n3.sY� Car.n�nl:r�,' ,._V_-4R,-0)l,•- ----• �
-- -- - � -�- -�-- -•-�--
r^I�ini^h Lumi,c.r. 60,19 7 `--------- - —�-
�-f - -----------..._... ��_... --
ti 7�]utubin ---• ---- 1�.5 i?Ob �G.`�l9/5.�. --- ----•---�----
......._..._.__ .�_�.�—�.__.—----_.._ �__._� ..L_._..—�� - i .. -----.__ r _.
;� S�;�yuai/P?S ;r,. Iror. - 9,2K0 ^�� `"��" . r.�
�t _..._-i.__�— _�1�._._..
1 Q`>:l�'L'�; i+14J't.l�_'_'. —'.,.._'--I---` a�,l�1 q'-I�_ -----'- � a —' --- ;
.:f.j� I,Op11�1!`�:!i�i.;�+'Cj?^pOri11:T i _ _5�^����n � .__�.____—_�_....._..._..�___�._.--1•— ----'--i--_-�-
--�-----'-�--^-�-- �.__,..�._.r__. �_......�I_..__...-----.._ _i__�...._
�.,: �%'';J"?-�' �` E,'-�1�� ( I I f
_ ..... --------____.____,,.__�__'. ._ _..___ ...._. __ --------------.. _. __`_______ _._.._...
i i TiOIiP'• ii?.?'l�l'.',1'_"C. ( f'.�.`,tr...; ___.____.r__...�. __(. ! _t_
T . _ ,
� ' " . ,
.
...•: . I , { �
.-...._ _._....----•----'__-'--_'-_.'--..._ . •
-•i �-.�.. -• ---._._�-'-'-"._._.._.._-'-•"_.-_.._ --._._�--.._...�.-"- --'-'.
-...:•,.,
ili.•;...?1.�.:,!� !;:dc.. ,�i'ct(:?.I.�.O•�r�;--- �� _%i::'�
I " "
_... .
, �
9 ./ I
..._..__.....�.�_....�'___....�-�___..�....�..._..�...� .��..4..y-.._. .�..�.� ...�_.`� __.�._�.��.�.. r�..��..�.�.��... .�� � . � ....�.... -
.' � _. _� '
•
l.i� �.1)!)��c(�::��J !1r1 ���'� Q � _ ._ _....._.ti.i._
� . .
.���.._..�..__"....�._'��"�.�'._�`����_._.�.._��."..����..._...�_'�_ ..�� '� '" �'_� _ �......._"'�._�.��.'�_�'__ ���."�.__...��....���__.........
�.. .
�� ,•.�.,:c�.'._�.::" l. . � )J'-'J..G _7�
,. , � ltM.� . i
� � �
..:.._ --- - -------__-----_...__...--•-----..._''_:__....�--- --�/S.-�_---�---•--.....--------�---.._______.�.._._. i.
, .__._....
,f �;,.. : .i; !:f.;� elec;.r�r. � ' .;_
; ,•.:.:� .:�, , ' • t
�.ii �!.C��.j Il' /��:d.liftfi�,�__".'_''"'.'_��i�r"_.'J.,rI_._{'_""__.-_"'�_'_.�"__�._..�.r"_"'I"' I..+_'-_.__"__ _i�_...
-'`-)_._. ;,i_?_._^�'%'V`_".''�'...--------- 1 �_.j'j,_..^ii -�---------• -.I -----•-_ . .�tI----------�^..._.I�....
..f 1) _..:.�=_�:_i/_'•.L..C:n.'_,.'1_�1'_�_' '"_'G����_1)_ � _"'_. _ i.. ! � I
."��._.._���.-_L�r�_?___— � .�},ar�V�� __ "'__�-'__.... �._ •-__".-_.-.�..I_"_'...
.._ '�' ' '� ' _s._.��_.__.___�___�___.�__._�_�.._i._._.._...
.
. __�._...__.�.__ �..------•-
�_.._
- • t � .-,..�-_
7�� i p:':'..'.1.:'I''•:l.011 ! GU.c._j
,�, . �_..
. ..- ....___.�____.._._.__.�._.^- --------- -- —•---------------•-- - _^�
• .
-,. �•�� '
..
,•j '.'u,.l.�i: :,�..�_.�..,..�t�.�,. �� !s^�i:. J i •
.:.____
• :=-----•—•---------------��-----� � �------ �------
- ---- ._------ ------{---- -----------•F----- _
, , _ -
,.r�. i;lean-�1� . ; 2,:3'L'i � ' j �
,. . ' �
..._.__..._-----�_..,_.__._.----...----••----�_._._. -----�---•------ --•--------- ---• -------- ------
------ -----• ------ �- { _I..._... . ..
%�..'."��!.''_:'.�_:=�_ _ ' �`'- <<�"^iT
_ _-- -----------f- . - -,_ _lf-____-�-------
i �_��..i-_i(1�-��=.0_nD�^il�.-�?_�-1L'_.-------'l�'�C�-,r .I..'--.._..._._._.._ !y__._..._�_— i :I � ..._.....
��� t�-` ---'_-__IJr�'1r:��._,.._._!_,.� _�.?UOO � .--••_----- I -----'--�'-'.._l� ! `-'�____".-�-_ __..
..�"...;�---......_��.-�-�--��-1,1�.,,ilf-- ----, Jot���){�. I _._� .- f � �f `-__ -
;,� c-,r;,T r;��,:, -�- 2, ;���,_.I" - ----i-�---_�______ _ ._...._
,, .,
..f_ _�---------� ---
. , . , .
- �------------- --------_-.��..__..._-------�--------,--
--.___.-----__._.___.�__._.__.._..__`..____._._._ _____:
30 � �
, I .
...---�--�—�----�-�-------� ----�--�-------�._..----•------------•_—___•_--__•_--i-----�..._...._.__---!•_----�
j� ; _� _ I
�,------_`=,
_. � � i
•° ---------.�._.____y__.�_..___.�._��--_.
�..,_..�_._.�_..:___-•----- �--�--_.�.._....�.._..__._._....
'' � '1�� ����-_.----------� t
3 ---------—----..� .� ,__�----� --..._-- -.� _---_�____ -� _..___�_.._.._. �.__.
-''l=--------_ �__ ��`._^__�.... ! -------.—__ � ____--�----- � ---------_.,.. � __.
_':,--.- __=_.`._.._=- ' __._._.._...__._{_�^�.__ ' _____..�� ( . �___�� ' ._�
------------ --�-- -.=-- .. _...�_.� _
3'l ! j • �
-----.-_�...._._. .----_.__.. _: �_...__.-----' �� .�._� Y
--� .
,�,; , ,---•�_.__.____ _..__��.�..
.
—.-.--._.______.
. 1 � �
=_-----�- --�--------- ' ' " '
:�?_. ----.—.__��__l.___.__�___� ___.___ -.►-----��..`�"._. � ___.___..�---��- .�-.-
_'��__ _ _ ______.__._ � ._ �� .; � Y1 I
'��..._._____. _ �I. . �l. ��� w_-----__ � __.___.__._.�__^�� ._.__._,____..
,;_j ------_._ _..___......;. ...__.___...._._ .;._... _... ._�. ___..___._.__... N .�M_...�.r�.....�.w......._.
- ��_ _----.-_-____�.__�^ ._.__�.____----.Y_��_�._......�. µ_�.Y.. .�.....__.F.. �_...
�_. .._.___----.__.___ ._...______.. .i.__._._._.�.. _.._____�_ _ . ..___--�`4 .____.__ __....
;,�� �= __��_...._
.. ..__
_ ..---_---_--�.--___ .i ___ ._�---._____�_-�:__._ .____ __
;�, ,-- . i . . . �
-----�----..-------._ _..---�----__..._._ _T___-___ � __-
._____._..._..___�__._.....___�..__._ � .._
. _�.___.._._�_ .
!i G t �.:._.. '
� -�.;"-..-.',---,_..___.'.. '..- .. ,----- ._____., ._._....---•�`_��--�-�._. _:-^'�= .._ _ ..._._...�...._,......_S_.^...
_'i�; i;onf,�c ;:cn•'� l�;;b; � "1� ,�1i2.�._g/�' ��._ ' _... . . ........_ _. ...__..-••---._._ ...... .
. , �'!„'.1i, i�n.,��• • �' ��. : {. .i..
I
__ ___ _ __ .
,,
MEMORANDUM
i
�
t
T0: Board of County Commissioners �
George Ochs, County Manager yonxn or co. cortarx�s ;
Sandra M. Stuller, County Attorney PiT]iIN C0.
Public Hcaring �xhibiLs
FROM: Planning Office (KS) r�;.c •
� • -----�:.I�l.-:77--
RE: Midland Park Rezoning suv���c : ._Y.�1lL� �j ,P�,��nh
DATE: September 15, 1977 E' EXHIBIT _. �
� � .
The application of PMH zoning for the Midland Park � ;
you because the combined action of annexation to the city and subsequent +
de-annexation has left the property without a zoning designation. l�hen .
the property was first contemplated for employee housing in 1975, zoning
was a mixture of R-15/RMF in the City portion and R-15/AF1 in the County
portion. The rezoning was accomplished as �art of the General Submission �
approved in October of 1976. Annexation to the City occured in Movember . .
of 1976, but conceptual approval of subdivision was halted by the City-
imposed administrativp delay in anticipation of the then proposed Growth
Management Plan. At the request of the Board, the City de-annexed the
property three months 7ater.
We recommend approval of the rei�statement of PMH zoning. Referring to
the record of the public hearing on the origina] Genreal Submission, we
recommend you make similar findings that the zoning is compatible with
the surrounding area and that the proposal is consistent with the intent
and purpose of the PMN zone district by providing a higher density in .
return for housing that is consistent with low and moderate income housing
price guidelines established by the Pitkin County Housing Authority.
(We refer you also to the latest price estimates prepared by Copland,
Hagman, and •Yaw.) The mandatory PUD which is required by the PMH zone
promotes flexible design approaches for the siting of development,
al'towing for better site atilization and integr.ation with surrounding
areas.
lmk
�,
• " . LOARD OF C0. C01,17�t'R'S
, PIThiN C0.
Pub13c Hearing �xhibit�
i��2o , ___�1_,!J�7�
M E M 0 R A !� D U M Snb,7 ect : �.C3�.n}�.,�P�J�L,G' Yl�
EXiiiBIT __. �IIY�
/
�
D
a
T0: Board�of County Commissioners
FROM: Planning Office (Karen Smith)
RE: County Riding Ring - Special Review
DATE: September 12, 1977
On Monday, September 19th, a public hearing will, be held to consider the
county's application to locate a horseback riding ring on County-owned
land on the south side of Castle Creek Road. The exact location of
the proposed ring, between the nerr hospita] site and Prince of Peace
Chapel, is shown on a map inciuded in your packet. The proposed improve-
ment involves a standard size riding ring of aporoximately 240 by 120
feet. Posts of a height of � feet would encircle the ring. Parking
spaces for ten cars 4iould be located between the ring and the road.
The parking area and entrance road are proposed to be covered with
red pumice storte: the ring itself is to be covered with three inches
of sand on top of existing soil.
The primary use of the ring is expected to be that of non-schedu7ed
practice and exercise classes primarily for jumping and walking, trotting,
or cantering. It is anticipated that no more than five or six horses
and riders would be using the ring for such purpose at any one time.
Potential for use for organized shows and special events is left open
to be scheduled as demand dictates and to be controlled by certain
requirements such as crowd and parking control and sanitary faci]ities.
Presumably, if approved, a management plan would be developed including
provisions on these issues.
� The application states that the facility is consistent with the County's
posture encouraging non-motorized transportation modes and that no
other facility exists in the County to serve the needs of resident
horseback riders. Because the proposal constitutes a recreational
facilitX, it requires special review in the AF-2 zone district.
The Planning and Zoning Comnission considered the matter at its August
3rd regular meeting and recorrQnended denial of the application. Some of
the concerns expressed which led to the recommendation are as follows:
1. There was contention over the assertion that such a
facility was in great demand and that it would encourage
non-motorized means of transportation. To the contrary,
P3�Z felt that the majority of potential users lived
• downvalley and that regardless of p7ace of residence,
most users would probably drive to the facility with
horse trailer i� tow. It was suggested that the contem-
plated county fairgrounds �vould be a more aporopriate
location if such a facility is in high demand,
� The argument was further made that the crux of encourage-
ment for horseback riding as an alternative means of
transportation was the network of trails and the in-
town horse stable and that this facility was peri�heral
to the incentive for using the horse as a means of
commuting.
Memorandum
Board of County Commissioners
Page Two
September 12, 1977 �
2. The particular piece of land was thought to be better
' left as open space rather than developed with a facility
that would open up the possibility for high intensity
activities.
3. The Planning Office expressed reservations mainly related
to the facility's use for special events. Ten spaces
for parking cars wouid scarcely accortanodate the oarking
demand which would be encountered during organized shows.
Castle Creek Road is not weil suited to handle the over-
fiow. Parking on shoulders would present traffic and
.• •safety hazards as well as potential damage to natural
• vegetation.
The visua7 impact of significant�numbers of cars, �
whether parked on road shoulders or in an expanded
parking lot,was thought to be inappropriate to the
present scenic quality of the entrance to Aspen.
The safety of the Highway 82 intersection was of
particular concern.in the case of special events.
While the County does intend to make improvements in
the circulation pattern and the ring is located so as
. not to interfere with those improvements, traffic
congestion and hazard looms as a distinct possibility
in the interim.
4. Concern was expressed over the impact on the surround-
ing land uses, again particularly in the case of sqecial
events. Pdoise, glare, and air oollution are potential
intrusions for at least three dwellings overlooking the •
site and for the hospital to the east. t�lhile the
hospital sits on an upper knoll and is not visually
oriented toward the ring, traffic congestion will com- '
� plicate hospitai access and noise and air polTution �
. surrounding special events cannot be discounted.
.
Five acres to the east end of county-owned land have '
been ]eft open for possible hospital purchase. However,
the hospital still believes that such a facility would
infringe on their options. (See attached letter of
Glen Scott, A.V. Hospital Facecutive Director, for the
hospital's position statement).
In short, the recommendation is based on the concern over special events
use and its attendant complications. If an approval was granted, con-
� ditioned on a prohibition of special events, there is then the feeling
that the facility is not justified by the demand. Either way, there
is a preference for a different location.
lmk
encs.
• ExHisir
� �
a
PITKIN COUNTY PUI3LIC RIDING RING � �
Remaining consistant with the County policy concerning the encoura�c-
ment of non-motorized transportation modes; and due to the fact that-
currently within Pitkin County there does not exist a pubZic ridin�
ring for horses, the County does hereby apply for a special reivew
permit to construct said ring on the County-owned land located off.
Castle Creek Road, ( ' which is zoned A -2
p�. s�� �jr�;�.y ������ �
bIMENSIONS
The proposed ring will be of standard riding ring size which is 240'
long and 120' wide ).
CONSTRUCTION
The ring will be constructed of lodge poles and posts with the posts •
8" in diameter spaced 10' apart and setting 4�' above the ground.
The poles will be 6" in diameter and tied into the posts with rail-
road tie spikes. .
The surface of the interior oY the ring will be 3" of sand on top of
the exist4ng soil, which will be compacted'prior to the placement of
the sand.
The parking area and earth cuts will be lined with railroad ties
and the parking area will have a red pumice stone covering the lot
and entrance road.
EXPECTEA USE
The initial use will consist of non-scheduled, personal use only
with a maximum of fxve or six horses and riders at any one time •
expected. The facility will allow riders to practice and exercise
their horses in both jumping and flat classes, (walking, trotting and
cantering). If the demand exists for organized shows or events, the
County will allow them on a limited basis providing they meet the
xequirements for special events (e.g. crowd control, sanitary
facilities, parking control, 2tc.).
SCENIC QUALITY - _ -
The visual �impact rvill be felt� by four property owners, as their
properties are the onZy residentiaT lots which are adjacent to the
proposed project. All lots sit higher than the ring and they will
look down on the project, Their scenic view of the town and mountains
will not be obstructed. A7.1 three lots will be able to see the ring,
parking axea and activity within the�facility. It may be observed
from Highway 82 as you leave town, but only from a substantial
distance. - �
� --- - - -- - - - - - -- " _ . F�nDn or �o. to;z.,i�r.��
- - - . - .. . . . .. .... _ _ . ... _ -PIThIN C0.
" . - -'- - -- -' ""-'- -- -"� " PuUlic Hearing Exnibil:c
Aato . -•_�•-��••'77__. '
Sub�ect :�CI_1fZ�_���('j� /�l11�
l
' �.r-. . .
Pa�� Two
NOIS� �
Noise genera�ed by the projec:t will be minimal with the following .
impacts felt:
(a) Noise generated by traffic pulling into parking lots; .
� (b) Horse-related noises;
(c) Instructions to horses from riders;
(d) Unloadin� of horses.
Major noise impact would be if a scheduled show or event takes
place in which case there would be crowd-related noise. '
AIR QUALITY
Any smell generated �rom the ring will be minimal due to the following ,
factors; • .
(a) The County will incorporate the ring into our weekly main-
tenance program for bicycle and hiking paths. Horse manure ,
and trash accumulated will be removed once a week, (more
�requently if necessary) and no later than a day after
each major event, .
(b) With the ring consisting of sand, a great deal of the
smell will be absorbed �nto the ring itself.
ROAD/TRAILS DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION IbfPACT ON ROAD SYSTEM AND MAINTENANCE
PROVISIONS
The proposed site will not interfere with existing traffic on Castle
Creek Road during construction phases nor will it interfere with
any of the existing bicycle or hiking paths.
The ring has been positioned on the property as not to interfere
with. any of the proposed alignments for the redesigning of the
C&stle Creek-Maxoon Creek Boad intersection. There will be no
addit�qnal maintenance required by the County Road Department, (in
the w�nter the ring �ill be closed eliminating �he need for snow-
plowing) with any maintenance required on the entrance road being
handled by the Trails Maintenance Department. .
DRAINAGE � .
The ring will be constructed level creating the need for some cutting
and �illing o� the�land site. It is antxcipated that the amouttt of
fill needed will be met by the amount of earth cut, Much of the .
water #rom rainfall will be absorhed by the sa.nd hase with any
� � additional run-of� �ollowing the natural slope of the ground into
the existing ditch along Castle Creek Hoad. The soil around the
site is very permeable and.a drainage problem has not existed in
the past. Any cuts made will be either railroad tied or re-seeded
With natural field grasses to eliminate erosion possibilities.
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
� With the expected use level, additional trafYic generated by the ring
� is anticipated as minimal. For special events, traffic control will
f ; . ,
< •
I �^ , .
P:��;c Thrce
be required of the event organizers. The entrance road to the ri.ng
will remain in the same spot on Castle Creek Road when (and if) the
Maroon Creek/Hi�hway 82 and Castle Creek intersection is changed.
The traffic pattern wi7.1 be similar to an automobile exiting from a
privaCe drive and there is ample viewing distance to make a safe
entrance onto Castle Creek Road.
i
MAN-MADE HAZARDS .
No natural or man-made hazards exist on the site.
SAFETY
The safety concerns will be covered by the following:
( (a) The current County insurance polzcy will indemnify the
I � County against any suit resulting from the use of the ring.
l (b) The ring will have "Use at your own risk" signs posted
� in key locations.
IMPACT ON SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD
The impact on the Meadowood neighboxhood will be minimal (as
mentioned several times before) due to the projected general use
level. Each of the impacts of concern (scenic, noise, air, roads,
drainage, transportation) will have little or no effect on the
neighborhood. The impact for special events will be the major
concern of the neighborhood and given the projected infrequencies
of these events this too should be considered minimal. A thirty-day
public notice will announce a hearing before the Board of County
Commissioners giving the impacte@ neighborhood and public an
opportunity to be heard before the project would be appxoved.
i9ith the responsible maintenance and upkeep of the area, this
project should be considered an asset to 'the community as a whole
and is worthy of qour consideration. "
E
�
� �
,
. �
� � � . . , .
/ . ^---1
� �
,
wa 8 Z
i
,
�
�
� .�
1 �
� G�►vw�� ` '
�, �o�t►iv�kia�
; I w►�oVG w+� h
�
�� /��� .
f;, �� .
� —J
,
�' . _ �iv�.. __ . • �M � •. �X
;
� �� �� ��
, .
.
i; _ �
.
�
�
i - �"O�� � • �
i
1
.
i
I � • � •
� �
0
� � . pGa.w+e e,t �n. �1�� '
i� � • - �
l --- ���k�� ----- //
; . �
�, i� .
�,
�:� . ,,�
� . �
I �5�1e �n��
• /� �o��
�
� ' '
...._------- •--""_ '/
� '
&OARD OF C0. COMM'R':. �
PITKIN C0.
Fublic Hearing Exhib±t:�
Dsta . ---�_L��.77_� ��,�� ��,��
sub,a�z : C�un.±�._.�ic�.cn�Ru�� � l� 2��
�� _
� . . .
�'
i
� ' O'
� .�....._.._ _ 7i� .. _ _ „
i
I
- i
�. � �. . ' � . � -
�� I
� 12v' Q'"`c�c�°`��
; ���
j �< .
; ' `"�r`� �A�e .
_ � �
� I ' ! I
' i � I I �o�► �►� .
{ � �
I
;
;
;
. ���
� /��oaqN.�� t'A1�5 �Sc��S
l o s � �.
�
'! ay2`
� (
�� . • - - � .
;1 3�/Z,
� �
;
i �i �e.�lo� I D�nGj .
. .
� �
, ,
,
�
+
�..
i . :
� � .
•. ; �.-•.
i _ _...._ ....______._. .__ __ _ . _.__ _
��,....�_�
�
� . .
� . .
i
' �.,,
� ..
���-• . ,..., w ,n,, � .r-�, r
f..� �',6' ,_ � �:j,; `j����
� . ..� y, . . . .! , � - ,
' � ' � ��
�%i:�, " � i-�.•�' .
( � . �! }'��aJ'e.i . . ..r't�;��.1�' �
y " bOARD OF C0. COidhi`R'S
PITkIN C0.
! � Public Hearin F;shibit;
Au�u�t 2, 1977 "
EXHIBIT , ,
�U, � � �'n�'
t10P.STs RIA`G - P;OltT1I OI�' tdE[•1 11ASPITAT, �
�... �
1. Aspen Valley Hospitzl and its board of directors are in opposition
to the estaLlishment of a horse ring in Che proposed location. This
project had come to the attention of the district board at an earlier
Cime and they registered their concerns. They still hold those same
feelings:
2. The reaeons for our opposition:
a. The intersecti.on of pTaroon Cr.eek and Castle Creek Roads with
Hig}t�oay II2 is aZr�ady an extreme].y conges�ed situation. It is
estir,iated that bet�•;c.en 50Q and 1,000 per.son visits, in and auC,
will be made to ar from the ne��r hospital each day. The added
laad of autowobile traflic through t;iis intersection, because of
the Iocation of tha new liospit�l, is of extreme concern. To
further buxden ttie intersection, especially at peak times, with
the tra£fic of persons comin� to the horse rir.g would be a furCher
concern. Tt is envisioned tt;at cor.siderable trai2er traffic c.oald
_ be generated by the. presence of the horse ring, which ��ould further
make the Castle Creek Road, the iagress and egress to the horse
• ring, more of a hazard.
b. As the hospital has indicated in past discussions with the county,
it is conceivable that the land on which the horse riag is locaLed
might be needecl for expansion of hospital services in the future.
It is desirable to have that land open and unused for any purposes .
so that it can be easily acquired by the hospital when needed. If
___.,__.it is to n1tiW�tcly..Ue used ior some purpose other than opsn space,
_ it woeld seem appropriate that expenditure of funds not be allocated
for the intended purpose (horse ring) at this time.
c. This seens to be an inappropriate location for a horse esercise
area. The experience of the county with the t.orse barn behind the
bank off rlain Street �vould seem to indicate the need for such
! facilities elose in to�,•n is not necessary.
- d. . If the ring is to be used £or eshibitioii purposes, which we presume
that .it will be, the added crocrd, the noise produced, the dust and �
• other, perhaps, unpleasant results generated by animals and large
crocods of people close to ttie hospital could be undcsirable from a
patient`s point of vieH who is in the hospital.
� 3. We express these concerns in sincerity and would recommend that the
•horse ring not be esCablished in the proposed locat3on.
Resnectf y subuiitted,
� -___.— _ . .._ _.__,_
; G run Scott, );z;ccutive Dirc�tor •
�''�`ll� C�A. L'ux fl - AsF�cn, Cui.;r:ui� E�lutt - (:;i::) !T?�-11^U
I _ . ..
i , ' '
• '...._. . , ,
; .
� • ' � . .
� � � �
+ . . .
( •
i
`� . ,
� • .
. �
_ . . _. _ _ . _ . . .. ... _ _ ____. __ _ __
r . . . ,. ..._.._..._-_._ _ _ ..__. ._......._._..___. . . _.
. .. . . .. _.. . _ ... . . .. . � .
.. .. ..� .. ... . . . . . . . . .. . _ .. . .. �
. -i- ,� EXHIBIT
' . �
°a
' ' �
PITKir� CCL'iiTY NG�SE TRAIL A55GCIA7ICi'J'S FRESE(4TATILI. BEFCP,E
THE CDU��TY CGfflil'iISSILtacRS� SEPTEhIEEri 16� 1977 AT HEARIfuG CGPd- �
� CERt�I(�G A FUEiLIC RIDIivG °I1�6: -
� In Septemher 1974 the Horse Trail Associatian of
Pitkin Courty �vas Pormed because oP the then existing emergency
Ioccasioned by portians ❑F the Rio Grande right-of-ivay being
� paved. :ve forrr.ed to �lert the Ccmr�issioner=_ tp the conflict�
� this haci creater_' ��tw�er� cy�lists and h�rses.
The Con���i�sianers hy resalution ;;74-76 dated
, 9/23/74 ap�.ointaC mer•,�h�rs of our Association tn serve as
"en advisnry committee to a=sist in thz planninc an� develop-
rrent nf � horseback systca� throurhDUt t�c county . . . . "
�le i�:orker! during the sumn:�r oF 1y75 u�iLh the �iti�ens
i -
i �rail Caucus in pl�nninu tr�ils �nd th�ir pi•iori�ies.
; - ' Since then little use h•�� been rna�e of ouz �cvi�•ory
i services altl,ough �ue are avail�ble at any ti;ne.
iiou;ever, when disgraceful tonditian= fer the staalinr
nf ��nin2ls aro=e at the county staole -- �anditiana �h�t u.�er.�
a c'i=credi� tn the cnunt; and city -- e�e succrs�fu.l?y r_�.11e�'
up.nn the Cen:n:i==inn�r; tn c?c�F tr•c �tabl� to cem;r.err_ial l�z:se.
Nt th3.s ±ime �!.F cna�e tn corr,nene tlie �cm�i==_ione:.=.
For thnir �a.�?re t.o h�=;uG � ricing rin� facility ev�il�;�le t�
t.he ridPrs of Fitki.n !'ount.y. H[+t��eve!-� u�e acrze v!it.h tne F u �:
that th� pr.epnsed location i� in:,,�propri�t.e. J�c feel =_�me
seriuu�� mist�kes ❑nr VJJ:{.� nf ��ublic funds cauld be �.vcired
if the ccunty e�culc call upan the u�Ealth nf ai�! and �Cvi�e
OUI' rraup COUld ]].v�.
:Je r�ca�rrend th�t whatever reseurce� alluttec tc
� riding rin� anc its cCI�UfICtS �e incorpurated in the Cuunt�
Fair Grounds under a in��sLer plan.
.,ihen Fitkin County develops a F�i.r 6rounds, it iuould
Ue the a�propri�te place for an arena encompassing a �ie�ino
ring, faciliti.es for pony club sho�us and their other events, '
4-H Club radeo� and shows, roping cluh events, horse shows of
statewide anc� even nat.innal scope -- and even palo. The
i , Kennel Club could alsn rn�!<e �se of the�e same Pacilities. '
�
� ' . • .
i
, . . . ' .
r:
•This facility af a County Fair Grounds cou2d bring
' , such activities to the Aspen �rea that now go elsewhere. It �
would bring the statu=_ to Pitkin County that is now enjoyed
by Estes Park in the Horse Shaw cir�uit. �
Gur Association will be available to work with and
� • assist the County and Fair Grounds Committee regarding the
best way t❑ accomplish this and to �etermine which aspects of •
the arena are most important to v�ork toward first. _
� , . L���Rn or r.o. co�ra�x�s
PT.TiiIFi C0.
.
. ?:':blic Hearin� E�chibits
...:,, . • .
. . ..--�---�.9__.z�.__
' �t�,�;�:at . .�a.t�...P�td�n�' ��n�
MEMORANDUM
T0: Board of County Cortanissioners
George Ochs, County Manager ��•%�=�-� �.' ��o• r,o;.,�.t�R�,
Sandra M. Stuller, County Attorney PlT��jI1 C0.
Pah2ic Hearin� Ext�ibits
FROM: Planning Office (KS} nate , _._.�.:(_�.•^77
RE: Red Mountain Repeater Site sut ecc s ,�f7�d�y
� EXHISIT
DATE: September 15, 1977 �
0
a
• a
,
There will be a public hearing before the Board on on ay, 9,
to consider special review approval for the estab2ishment of a repeater
site on the Y�est ridge of Red Mountain. The pr000sal requires special
review under the Land Use Code because it is a facility associated with
operations permitted by a Special Use Permit issued by the U.S. Forest
Service. The facility is needed by the police and sheriff's departments
in order to expand communications capabilities to encompass the lower
valley, Crystai River, and upper Maroon and Castle Creeks. The applica-
tion constitutes an upgrading of an existing cortanunications facility on
the same site.
• While additional detail on the nature of the improvements is provided in
the attached letter from Art Hougland, it should be pointed out that the
structure will consist of a buried corrugated aluminum arch cu7vert ,
eliminating much of the above ground construction. The most noticeable
improvement then will be a 30 foot utility pole with a 20 foot antenna .
on top, uitimateiy to be replaced by a microwave unit of the same size.
It has been represented that the unit will not be visible from town or
from residential areas, although lighting at the top is presumably a
necessity to satisfy FAA requirements.
Probably of most concern is the potential for disruption during construc-
tion. The Forest Service has already limited access to the site to a
rubber-tired back hoe to be driven in via Hunter Creek (one or two trips
will be the maximum). In addition, worker access will be by one four
w6ee1 drive vehicle making a daiiy trip. Construction is said to be
' limited to no more than a week's time. The structure itself will be air-
lifted to the site by helicopter and all subsequent maintenance will be
accomplished by air.
' The Planning and Zoning Commission has considered both the site appli-
cation and the extension of a power line from the Lenado side. They
� approved the latter with conditions at their September 7th meeting, and
recommended approval of the repeater site at their June 22nd meeting.
g In their finai consideratTOn of the line, they wished to further convey
� to you that approval of the repeater site be limited to the express
purpose of the com►nunications facility.
' Provided that the stipulated construction provisions and the recommended
. use limitation are adhered to, ws recommend approval.
�
i -
�
� �
i . _ _. _ _ __
y
,; .
� .
IOARD OF C0. COL1f,i'R'S
MEMORANDUr! � pzxhiy co.
F.ib2i.c Iloarin� �snibi±�
. .
, .�:./..9:��.._._.._.
� T0: Bill Kane, Karen Smith • c«r����t - /�'Q(�.'.m�: �d�M.Z�4✓�l�`
� FRO:�I:, Art Hougland EXHIBIT •-•
°' DATE: June 17, 1977 ; u
;; /`
� RE: Red Mountain Repeater Site . �
i
�� The Red Mountain repeater site will be located at the pre-
+ sent location of a sr.ialler repeater structure. The structure
will be mostly underground with only the front portion exposed. �
Natural vegetation will be allowed to cover the structure. '
Other components of the site will be a 30' utility pole
with a 20' antenna on top. Perniission has already been received
from the FAA. This pole will ultimately be replaced by a micro-
wave unit of comgarable height. An above ground nower line will
� service the repeater site. A propane fuel tank and ventilation
system are also in the pZans. The power line will be designed
to cause vey little impact to the landscape. Only necessary
trees will be removed. �
; The entire porject will be revi.ewed and supervised under
• , the auspices of the USFS in accordance with the policies af the
� same. �
i The entire nroject will be constructed by Summit Construc-
!� tian Company and supervised by the City of Aspen. The construc-
tion equipment and materials will be airlifted to the site with
the exception of a rubber-tired back hoe whicI�► will be driven to
� . �the site via Hunter Creek at the start� of the project and driven
� back down after completion. A small four wheel drive v2hicle
will make a daily trip to carry workers. .
i • • -
� � . The structure will be assembled at a site at the base of the
� mountain or at the airport and flown (in either one or two sec- •
� • tions) to the repeater site. The-actual construction at the site
should•take no more than four to• seven days_ The facility will '
� .. be serviced and maintained by:,the Pitkin County Communications
� Board. � - : - �
`
,� : . : AH�IDW • . . . . . ' � ' . ' • ,
Enclosures
i . . . .. . .
� . . . . . .
i - .. '
t ' • ' .
�. • ` . . . . •- .-. . _. .. . . . . . . _ - •- , - • -_... ..
' ' . . ' , ' �_ . , ' ~ . �. .
i • • • ' • . ' , . . . : . .' . :
� , ' ' .
i • ,
I • , •
� � . . • ' ' .
i • • . . •
f • '
f
I �
` • •
t •
. ..... . . 1�'�.:�.I�r�J
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMI-''S'SIONCO.
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO,''' �'"c Hr,ni•in� �x}��its .
RECOMMENDING VARIOUS AMENDAlENTS TO .THE
! LAND USE CODE• u EXHlBfT
/ / •� �ui�10 � .,�,,,� �
. �xh. I a � �
. WHEREAS, theze have been considered by the F anning ing
i .
? Commission various proposed amendments to the Pitkin County
� Laad Use Code the adoption of which the Commission recommends,
N
� and
r • '
r.
�
WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to transmit its re-
commendations to the Board of County Commissioners in
ti
writing and resolution form, a1I. as hereinafter provided; �
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and
� Zoning Commisssion that it does recommend to the Board of
'� County Commissioners of P.itkin County adoption o£ the
,
1 • follo�sing amen3ments to the Land Use Code, subsequent to
i
public hearing thereon, all as provided by law.
i
i�
;
Section 1
i
I
� That subsections 1 (all districts) of Sections 3.03,
f
I 3.04, and 3.05 be amended to read as follows:
��
�� 1. Single-family dwellings
tl .
�J . a. 5 Bedrooms or £ewer A
j� b. More than 5 bedrooms S
; � .
' Section 2
i
�
{
i
That Section 3.06 Special Review Permits be amended
by th� addition o£ a new subsection to read as follows:
i
; .
� 3.06.04 Special Review Single-family Houses
� a. Review Criteria. Single family '
� • dwelling.aprilications will
• be review�d to ensure con-
formance with the d;:finition
� of single family dwelling and
� with limitations �n occupancy.
!
�
i
�
I .
� .
' b, Presumption. A family composed
I of six (6) or more persons re� �
� lated by blood or marriage shall -
�
� be presumed to have a need for a
inumber of bedrooms equivaZent to
, the number of persons in the fa- .
mily; provided, however, that this
presumption is rebuttable, and
evidence to the contrary may be
presented.
Section 3
�
That Section 12 Definitions be amended by the rep2al
� and reinactment of the definitions of "Dwelling Unit,"
+
I
� "Dwelling, One Family," and "Family" to read as follows:
I
� "Dwelling Unit" �
;
' Any structure or part thereof designed to be occupi.ed as
! . living auarters for any single family and constitu-
• ting a separate, independent housekeening unit; cor!--
prised of one or more rooms ('inc�ud'in�r no nore �than one kitchen)
anA bath facilities physically separated from other
� rooms or dwelling units in the same structure;
and not including hotels, motels, and lodges.
i
! a. Studio: Limited. One room, �undi-
i vided, except for kitchen or bath
facilities.
i
� b_ One-bedroom: Limited. T�ao rooms �
I in addition to kitchen and bath fa-
i cilities.
c. Two-bedroom: Li.mited. Three rooms in
addition to kitchen and bath facilities.
. d. Unlimited: Three or mor•e rooms in ad-
� dition to a kitchen and/or bath fa-
cilities.
i , "Dwelling, One Family"
+ � A detached principle building other than a mobile
,, home designed for or used as a dwelling exclusively
i� by one family as an independent living unit.
�
11 °Family,•
I
�� An individual, or two 'or more persons related by
blood or Marriage, or a group of not to exceed
;� .' five (5) persons, living together as a sinqle house-
Y.eeping unit.
:�
;� •
�
i �
I
f � . ..
� .
� -2-
� .. .
I . .
I� .
Section 4
That Sections 3.07, 3.07.02, 3.07.03, 3.07.04, and
• 3.07.05 Planned Unit Development, be repealed and re- .
enacted (with additions) such as to read as follows:
3.07 � Planned Unit Development
. .� 3.07.01 Purpose
The planned unit development is a pro-
cedure which allows variance from strict
adherence to the area and bulk require-
. ments of zone district regulations (Sec-
tion 3.o2) in or.der to encourage and
" facilitate the compliance of developments
with the policies and regulations of this
code. Specific purposes include:
a. Promoting flesibility in the type,
design, and siting of structures
to preserve and take advantage of
the site's unique, naturaZ, resource
or scenic features and to avoid or
mitigate any hazardous areas.
b. Encouraging more eff icient use of
land and public streets, utili�ies,
' and governmental services. �
c. Preserving open space for the bene-
fit of residents of developments as
weZl as the community in general.
d. Achieving a compatible land use
relationship with surrounding areas. '
e. Promoting greater variety in the type,
design, and siting of buildings
and thereby improving the character
and qua2ity of new development.
3.U7.02 Permitted Variations from Land Use Code
Requirements "
In ozder to achieve the objectives here-
inabove stated, a planned unit development
• may vary certain zone district and sub-
•division requirements in the Pollowing
manner and subject to the following
restrictions: Such variations may be
permitted singly or in combination pro-
vided that all are clearly indicated on
- the Final Plat.
a. Clustering of buildings and units
• through variation of minimum lot
area (Section 3.02) shall be en-
couraged provided that the density
of the overall project shall not
� exceed the allowable density in the
zone dis�rict in which the P.U.D.
lies. Such density shall be deter-
• • mined b'y dividing the net area of the .
� P.U.D. (exclud�ng public and private
riqhts of way,flood�rlains, and areas
� with sloLns of 3Qi and greater) by the
mini�um lot area of the district.
-3-
_ .... .... .....__ ..._ .
. _:. . ._------ '
i .
I
b. In order to accommodate clustering '
F o� units and the provision of common _
�' useable open. space, variation may
�: also be permitted in the following
� area and bulk requirements of Section
�: ' 3.02; minimum lot area per dwelling
!� unit type, minimum number of of£-
street parking spaces, minimum �
• front yard set back, minimum side
� ! yard set back, minimum rear yard set
� back, minimum Zot width, maximum •
height of all buildings and uses and
; floor area ratios. Compliance with
Section 5.71.14b requiring subdivision
in accordance with minimum lot re-
quirements of Section 3.02• may be
waived.
c. Notwithstanding anythinq to the con-
' trary which may be contained in Section
� 3.02, Zone District Bulk Requirements, �
�:
�I the maximum heiqht of buildings and
' structures may be varied in relation
to the £ollowing characteristics o£
�� the proposed building (or stzucture)
!� and site: '
ii
;:
1. Geographic location;
� 2. The probable effect on surround-
� ing slopes and terrain;
� � 3. Adverse visual effect on adjacent
l sites or other areas in the im-
i mediate vicinity;
i
� 4. Potential problems £or adjacent
sites caused by shadows, loss
. of circulation, or loss of view;
(� 5. Effect on the general area with
respect to the creation of ex-
treme contrast in building height,
or interruption of vzstas or
; obstruction of open space.
I� 5. Uses within the building or
• structure.
�`•
d. Variation shall not�be permitted in
��� use requirement s of the zone district
•in which the P,U.D. is located nor
;;• from the requirements of any appli-
!' cable general regulations of Section
S of this Code. �
j; e. Anything above to the contrary not- !
ii withstanding, buildings may not be ,
I� ' so arranged that any structure is
j` inaccessible to emergency vehicles.
r
` £. Except as hereinabove stated, no
I� aoplication for a olanned unit de-
;! velopment sha11 be aFnroved unl�ss
� the apnlication and the accompanying
��� plats and plans cor.�ply with all gen-
�! eraZ reo,ulations o= Section 5, part-
;.
�! icularly the Subdivision Design
i� Standards, Section 5.71, and with all
;. zone district regulations for the zone
` district or districts in which are lo-
�� cated the land area and structures
�� shown in such application.
��
!i �4_
_..�.__._�.
� ,
i •
�
�
; 3.07.03 General Reauirements
! a. A tract or parcel of land proposed for
P.U.D. development must be in one
; ownership or the subject of an appli-
cation filed jointly by the owners of
i all property included.
I . b. In order to ensure compatibility among "
the various land users in a P.U.D.,
the Planning Commission or Board �
' must find that the total development
can exist as an inteurated whole and
may, in cases where conflicts among
� uses may result, require setbacks
or other design elements in addi-
tion (or in Zieu of? those standards
normally applicable.
c. The development of the P.U.D. may be
planned in phases pxovided that as part �
i of the general submission, a developmeat
1 , schedule is approved which describes:
i1. An application for detaiZed sub-
�
mission in phases;
2. The parceZs which are to be constructed
+ upon in each phase and the date
i
of each phase submission;
; 3. The number of uaits to be built in
J ' each submission, and
I . � •
i 4. A schedule for the construction
, of improvements, or making of
contributions, for various ameni-
ities, public services and facili-
ties, open space and employee
housing.
i No general �submission approval shall
� be construed as approval of any sub-
sequent detailed submission nrior to
- review and approval of the same as
provided herein.
d. Each stage within the P.U.D. shall be
so planned and related to existing
� .and/or planned services and facilities,
including commercial space,such that
each phase is self-sufficient and not
� dependent on later phases and so that
� . failure to proceed to the subsequent
stages will not have any adverse im-
pacts on the P.U.D. , its surroundings,
� ' or the community in general.. Each stage
shall also be planned so as to ensure
j that open space and anV other amenities
� will be provided along with the pro- ' •
� posed residential construction at each
phase of construction.
i .
ie. The development must include vpen
space for the mutual benefit of the
' entire tract; be designed to provide
! variety and diversity so that maximum
long-range benefit may be gained and •
• the unique features of the site pre-
( .. , � served and enhanced; and be in harmony
, • with its surrounding neighborhood.
, Provisions for the maintenance of common
iopen space shall be made in accordance
I with Section 1a. 4.
�
I . -5- .
� • . _
f. The P.U.D. shall not autom3�ically
be permitted the maximum density � •
allowed in the zone distri.ct in �
which the P.U.D. is located. The
applicant shall be required to give
. his rationale and justification for
the density proposed considering �
such factors as the suitability for -
deve2opment of the site in terms of
natural features and constrairits;
the availability of various public
services and facilities; the ac-
cessibility of public transportation; '
the relations o£ the development to
' goals and policies of the Growth
Management arid any other comprehen-
sive plans; and the conformance
with the policies and regulations
of this code,
3.07.04� Common Useable Open Space �- __
Requirements for minimum lot �.area and use- _ - �Yic:,; _t.� -
able open space per dwelling unit may -----.� .� ��;:.•<- { - _
be reduced if the P.U.D. plan contains �'z'�= �' .�
areas allacated for common useable open �- -- - :.
space,if such zeduction would not be � -�
detrimental to the character o£ the
planned unit or surrounding area; and pro-
, vided that, with respect to the common
open space
a. Tt is to be used, and is suifable,
for scenic, landscaping, or recreation
purposes, and
± b. Tt is accessible and available to all
occupants of dwelling units in the
P,U.D., and •
. c. A proportionate, undivided interest
� fn all common open space is deeded
i in perpetuity to each lot or unit
j owner within the P.U.D. , which
� deeds shall contain restrictions
� against future residentiaZ, commercial,
and industrial development of common
space areas.
d. A homeowners or other association �
is established to perpetually main-
� , tain the open space foz the benefit
. of the residents of the P.U.D.
3.07.05 Architectural Review
� During the detailed submission, the
i Planninq and Zoning Com�ission may
. require an architectural site plan to
! 'review for the purpose of promoting the
. preservation of the visual character of
the County, the stability of land values
j and investment, the public safety, and
� the general welfare by preventing the
' • erection of structures or additions or
! alteration's thereto of unsightly or ob-
noxious appearance, which are not pro-
perly related to their sites or adiacent
. uses or which do no': enhance sqlar re- �
sources; and further, preventing the
�
1 `6'
�
indiscriminate clearing of property, �
excessive grading,and the destruction
o£ trees and shrubbery. In carrying
out the purpose of this section with
respect to the external design of the
� buildings, approval shall be considered
in accordance with the following objec-
tives:
• a. Reducing the adverse visual im-
. pacts of structures wfiich, because �
of size, scale, color or Zocation,
are out of harmony with the neigh-
bozhood in which they are to be
constructed .
b, Minimizing•disturbances to the natural
terrain and existing vegetation;
enhancing drainage; reducing soil
erosion; and otherwise maximizing
compatibility with policies and
regulations of this Code.
c. Promoting advantageous solar orienta-
tion and energg conserving desiqn.
It is the intent of this Secti�n that
the Commission exercise the minimum
control necessary to achieve the overall
objectives hereof.
3.07.06 Landscaping Plan .
� Theze may be required, as �art of the
final plan, a landscaping plan indicating
a well designed treatment of exterior
spaces which measurabl� improves the
quality of the overall project. The
design objective of the plan must be
• clear and be supported by a written
statement. The plan must provide an
ample quantity and variety of ornamental
plant species which are native or regarded as
suitable for this climate. The County
may require the applicant,as a condition
of approval of the P.U.D. detailed sub-
mission,to provide a guarantee to cover
the cost of instalZation and maintenance
of the landscaping improvements to insure
the installation of all 'landscaping shown
and the continued maintenance and re-
placement of the same for a period of
two (2) years after installation.
The g�iarantee shall be in the form (and
ar.tour_t calculated by the County Engineer)
as specified in Section 6.03.05 0£ this .
Code, and may be released by the County
as therein specified.
�3.07.07 Off-Street Parkinq Spaces
The number of off-street parY.ing spaces
in each P.U.D. shall meet the require-
ments of Section 3.02 of this Code, ex-
cegt that, on review, the number of o£f-
� street parking spaces may be increased
or decreased in consideration o£ the
following factors:
� a. The estimated number of cars owned
by future occupants of dwellings
in the P.U.D.
b. The parking needs of any non-residential
uses;
-7-
, �
c. The varying time periods 'o£ use,
whenever joint use of aommon parking
is proposed. .
d. Available (or proposed)� public transit.
Whenever the number of off-street parking
spaces is reduced because of the nature
of the occupancy, the County shall obtain
assurances that the nature of the occupancy
- will not change.
3.07.08 Mandatory P.U.D.
Whenever the zoning district map desig-
nates a mandatory planned unit develop-
ment district by affixing the 2etters
P.U.D. as a suffix to the classifi-
cation of any district, a11 development
shall proceed according to these sec-
tions as a planned unit development; pro- �
' vided, however, a P.II.D. designation
notwithstanding, compliance with these
sections shall not be required for the
construction of one single family resi-
dence on a separate lot.
3.07.09 Planned. Unit Development Review Procedure
and Re2ation to Other Code Review Pro-
cedures.
a. A pZanned unit development application
shal'1 be reviewed in accordance with
the Common Procedure, Section 6, and
' � shall include all phases of review
from the preapplication conference
through Final Plat. P.II.D, and
subdivi.sion approvals shall be
' considered simultaneously at each
phase.
b. For larger planned.unit'development
applications, where the detailed•
submission w.ill be submitted in
. phases in accordance with a schedule
appraved as part of the general .
submission, there may be held ad-
ditional public hearings for each
phase detailed submission (for the
purpose of getting public input)
as more data and in£ormation on
each' subsequent phase is available.
c. When the general submission includes '
a schedule for the phased sebmittal
of the detailed submissions along
: with a timetable for providing am-
enities, any deviation from either
development or amenity schedule
shall require the approval of the
County. On failure to secure such
approval, the County may withold any
further building permits or detailed
submission approvals. '
' -8- ,
�
d. If an applicant does not begin or
substantially complete the P.U.D, , �
or any stage o£ the P.U.D: , in the
sequence and within the time im-
posed by the approved development
, schedule, the Planning Office may ,
recommend to the Board that approval
of the P.U.D. be revoked, or that
the development schedule be amended.
The Board shall give written notice
by registered mail to the applicant
directing the applicant to appear
at a public meeting of the Board not
less than ten (ld) nor more than
thirty (30) days after notice is
given. The•Board shall consider
testimony by the applicant and
either amend the development
schedule or withdraw approval.
If the Board revokes approval of the
P.U.D., notice of the same sha1Z
be recorded in the office of_th=
Pi*_kin County Clerk and Recorder
Section 5
That, in order to insure uniformity throughout the
Code, and compatibility among all its provisions, the
following actions be taken with respect to various
sections in response to the changes provided for in
Section 4 hereof (Planned Unit Development) : '
Delete Section 5.71,02 and renumber all subsequent
sections.
Amend Section 6..03.04 d.4.ii by the addition of the
following sentence:
When the approved general submission in-
cludes a phased schedule for submittal of
the detaiZed submission, the first phase
shall be submitted within one (1) year
from the date of approval of the generaZ
+ submission.
I �
� .
i
;• Amend Section 6.03.04 d. 4. by the repeal•and reenacf�rent of
' ' of subsection iii tA read as follaws:
I •
� ,
� . .
I -9-
1
i
�
iii. If reasonabZe grounds exist therefor under "
this Code, the Board may withdraw any
approval of a' P.U.D or subdivision plan� : • •
approved pursuant to general :submission
procedures. In the case of a subdivision
such a withdrawal shaZl be acted upon in
accordance with Section 4.A5 of this Code.
In the case of a P.U.D., such withdrawal
� shall be acted upon in accordance with
- Section 3.07.09 d.
Amend Section 6.04.02 by the addition of a new sub-section
q. to read as foZlows:
g. In the case of a P.U.D. , the plan should
be in sufficient detail to evaluate the
architectural, landscaping, and design .
features of the P.U.D. The plan should
show the location and floor area of all
existinq and proposed buildings, structures
and other improvements, including maximum
heights, types of dwelling units, an8
� density per type, with like information
suppZie@ for the non-residential structures,
including commercial facilities. Plans
shall include the following:
� 1. Architectural drawings or sketches
indica�ting building fZoor plans and
� all exterior elevations of the buiZdinq
' ' or other structures proposed.
2. The landsoape plan should show (i) the
extent and location o£ aII plant materials
• and other landscape £eatures showinq
outline of wooded areas and trees which
are to remain, (ii) flower and shrub bed
definition, (iii) proposed plant material
at mature sizes and in appropriate.
i.ocation to scale, (iv) species and size
, of existing plant material, (v) proposed
treatment o£ all ground surfaces (e.g.,
; paving, turf, gravel, etc.) , (vi) location
of water outlets, (vii) a plant material
j schedule with common and botanical
I names, sizes, and. quantities and me-
I thod of transplant,
� •
i " Delete Section 6.04.02 d. 13.
Delete 5ection 6.03.02 g, 2.
Delete Seation 6.03.02 h. 3. and
Amend Section 6.03.02 h. 2. to read as follows:
�•2. The stages inwhich the project will be built and
the approximate date wheri the construction of each
phase is proposed to begin,including, if the P.U.D.
is to be phased, a schedule for the phased sub- •
, mission af the c�atai)Fd submission, the Aarcels
' •which are to be constructed �u�on in'each phase and the
� , ' date of each phase submission; the number of units
to be built in each submission; and a schedule
j for the construction of improvements, or making
of contributions, for various amenities, pub2ic
services, and facilities, open space, and employee
r housinq. -
-10-
�
Amend Section 6.05.04, Recording the Final Plat, by the .
addition of a new subsection c. to read as fallows:
c. The final P.U.D. P2an and subdivision plat both
required to be filed with the Pitkin County
Clerk and Recorder may be one and the same
document or separate documents as circumstances
' may require. '
Amend Section 10 by the addition of a new subsection I0.04
to read as follows:
10.04 Maintenance of Common Open Space
10.04.01 Tn the event that the homeowners' or o�her
association established pursuant to Section
3.07.04 d. to perpetually maintain open space
for the benefit of residents of a P.U.D. shall
fail to maintain the same in accordance with
� ' the approved Plan, the Board o€ County .
Commissionezs, on giving notice to the
� association of its intent to do so, may
enter upon the open space and maintain
the same unless and until the association
shall again undertake such maintenance.
all as required by said Section 3.07.04 d.
10.04.02 The cost of such maintenance by the Board
� of County Commissioners shall be paid by
the owners o£ properties within the P.U.D.
that have a right of enjoyment of the
� common open space, and any unpaid assessments
shall become a tax lien on said properties.
� The Board shall file a notice of such lien
in the affice of the Pitkin County Clerk
and Recozder upon the properties affected
by such lien within the P.U.D. , and shall
certify such unpaid assessments to the
Pitkin County Assessor for equitable
allocation among property owners within
the planned development and Pitkin County
Treasurer for collection, enforcement, and
remittance under and as generaZ property
taxes:
Renumber e�isting subsection 10.04 as 10.05
t -ll-
�
� •
i
,
, •
�
• Section 6 .
That Section 3.08 Other Zone District Regulations be
amended by the repeal and reenactment of subsection 3.08.05
to read as follows:
3.08.05 Density adjustments for Floodplains, Slopes
over 30� and Private Rights-of-Way
Whenever there is proposed for developr.ient
a tract or parcel of land which contains
any area which has b2en designated a flood-
plain pursuant to Section 5.42.01 a.l. or
which has been designated as having (in its
natural state) a slope over 3a$ pursuant to
Section 5.41.01 a. 2. of this Code or which
constitutes private rights-of-way in a
platted subdivision, such areas shall be
. excluded in determining land area for
. purposes of calculating allowable density
or required open space.
Section 7 �
That, in order to correct a current problem of
administering exemptior�s for unrecorded plats, Section
4.02.02 a.2. be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
-12-
� �,.��. �
� •
� •
�
s �'
�
2. Is for the purpose o� revising lot lines and which
creates no more than the original number of parcels,
subject to the £ollowing, conditions: ' • • •
i. In the case of confor�inq Iots, any lot or
parcel created shall conform to the minimum
• requirements for area or dimension as
established by any provision of this CoBe.
ii. If the lots of the original plat were non-
, conforming, Iots or parcels created shall ,
not increase the existing non-conformity.
iii. All laws relating to the amendznent of recorded
plats are:complied with (if applicable) .
Section 8
That, in order to require that a plat be recorded
only when an exemption amends a recorded plat, Section
4.02.03 a.4. be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
4. For exemption applications involving an
amendment .to a recorded pZat, the exemption
application shall include a plat BeZineated
� ' in drawing ink, at a scale of 1"=200'
� on mylar which is twenty-four (24) by
thirty-six (36) inches wide, prepared by
a registered land surveyor, who sha21 cer-
tify on the plat that it conforms to *_hese
and all applicable State and Federal laws
and who shall affix his name. All other
applications m�y submit instead a map
showing lots described by metes and bounds.
Section 9
I ,
' That Section 5.42.01 a.2 be repealed and re-enacted
to read as follows:
2. Where the 100 year or intermediate re-
gional flood has not been established by
an engineering study approved by the Col-
orado Water Conservatioa Board, this regu-
lation shall apply to all lands within
an area which is twentv (20) horizontal
or �ive (5) vertical• Peet (which4ver is
greater) from the existing high water -
lirre on any river, stream or material
drainage channei.. '
� -13-
r
Section 10
That, in order to permit a 1041 applicant to show miti- '
gation of the hazard"s identified on 1041 mapping, Section
5.40.06 be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
� 5.40.a6 Appeals to the Board ' •
a. Mapping Disputes
I. Any person contesting the location of
of an adopted area boundazy or the exis-
tence of designated con�itions within
the area shall be given a reasonable
opportunity to present his case to the
Board, which may, if appropriate, exclude
the property from the adopted area.
2. The Board shall not grant the exclus-
sion unless technical evidence is pre-
sented which clearly and conclusively
establishes that the map locatio'n of
the line is incorrect or that desig-
nated hazard or resource conditions
do not exist.
3. If the Board grants the exclusion, the
Board shall note such exclusion on .
• the afficial map.
4. Without further cost or delay to the
applicant, the Board shall undertake
any necessary proceedings (see Section
1) to redesignate or amend the area so
as to reflect the amendment of the
official map.
b. Mitigation of Hazard
1. Any applicant for a permit within a
designated hazard or resource area
believing that a designated hazard
or resource may be simply mitigated or
_ avoided altogether through techniques
such as construction engineering, siting,
or:desiqn, shall be given a reasonable
oppartunit_y to present his case to the
. Board. The Board may grant approvaZ,
approval with conditions, or deny the
special review permit for development
" within an adopted area.
2. The Board shall not grant approval �
of the permit unless technical evidence
is presented which clearly and con-
clusively establishes that use of the
proposed technique will create no siq-
ni£icant damage to property and the pub-
. lic health, safety, and welfare, and
' that no adverse effects or damage to a
resource will occur.
. -14-
3. The Board shall a�tach to any approval
any conditions neaessary �to ensu're that �
the proposal complies with the guidelines
for administration of the designated
' hazard or resource area.
4. The Board sha11 not, in any case, grant
an exclusion from the designated area
nor shall the Board amend the official
map.
c. Appeal Procedure
. 1. The applicant shall submit to the Planning
Office suf£icient technical data to support
his application including, where appropri-
ate, the submission contents specified
for the particular adopted area. The
Planning Office shall schedule the matter
for consideration at the earliest possible
public meetinq of the Board. The Planning
Office shall send a copy of the application
to the Colorado Land Use Commission.
2. The applicant may present evidenae and
testimony at the Board meeting and the
Planning Office shaZl make a recommendation
to the Board whether ta grant the exclusion
or grant the special review permit with
" or without conditions.
3. The Board shall take action within thirty
(30} days of its consideration of the
application unless action is postponed
for the purpose of gathering additional
information.
4. In the case of� a denial, the applicant
may seek approval by processing• a £ull
review through the General Submission
procedures. •
Section ll
That Sections 5.71.12 and 5.71.13 be repealed and reenacted
to read as follows:
5.71.12 Park Dedications
All applications for subdivision approval of
. residential sites or improvements shall be subject
• to the .following Iand dedication or cash payment in
lieu thereo£, for the purpose of acquisition of land
for active and passive park, recreation, and trail
purposes and for capitol improvements to any park
and recreational lands or trail systems.
' -15-
a. The subdivider shall dedicate to Pitkin
County land in the ratio of ten and one-
half (10.5) acres for every one thousand
� (1,000) residents of the proposed subdivision
(that is, the number of residents multiplied
by one hundred and five ten thousandths
(0.0105) of an acre per resident) . The
' number of residents attributable to the
• subdivision shall be calculated according •
to the following schadule (applicable to
muZti-family, single family and duplex
structures) :
Isumber. of Residents
Type o£ Dwelling Unit Per Dwelling Unit
5tudio 1.0
One Bedroom 1.3 �
Two Bedroom 2.7
Three Bedroom 4.0
and 1.3 for each additional bedroom.
A duplex structure shall constitute two '
dwelling units for the purposes o£ this
subsectzon.
b. An example of the application o£ the formula
in subsection a . is as follows, assuming .
• the subdiv�sion of 30,000 square feet into
two development sites of 15,000 square feet
each, with the purpose of constructing one
single family home (each with two bedrooms)
on each lot: �
2 (single famiZy homes) x 2.7 (2 bedrooms
= 2.7 residents) x 0.0105 acres x 43,560
sq. ft. per acre = a dedication of 2,470
sq. ft. .
c. At the election of the Board of County
Commissioners, and in lieu of the conveyance
. of land required by subsection a . , the
subdivider shall make a cash payment in an
amount equal to the current market value �
of the land required for dedication by
subsection 'a. The amount to be paid can
be calculated in the same manner as described
in subsectian b, ,with the additional step
of multiplying the square footage ot the
area to be dedicated by �he current market .
value of the land to be subdivi.ded. Assuming
a Iand dedication of 2,470 square feet for
the subdivision of 30,000 square feet of land ,
with a current market value of $10,000, the
cash in lieu of ].and fee is calculated as
follows:
.. _16-
2,470 square feet x $.33 (market value
of iand per square foot) _ $815.10 in
dedicatio� fees. � • � •
E. For purposes of calculating land value,
land shall be given its current market value
without improveme�ts except site im-
provements (including curb, gutter,
street, sidewalk and utilities) if in-
stalled at the time of subivision.
, Market value may be substantiated,
� by a doctunented purchase price (if an
arm's length transaction no more than
two years old) or by any other recog-
nized means; provided, however,that
assessed valuation shall not be relied
on as evidence of currant market value.
In the event the County and subdivider
fail to agree on the market value of
the land, such value shall be established.
by a qualified appraiser acceptable
to both parties.
f. Tn the case of mixed residential and
commercial, industrial or other uses,
the required dedication for residential
uses shall be determined as described
in subsection a.or c.using as the land
area of the residential development the
minimum lot area required for the pro-
posed dwelling units.
g. No dedication shall be required in the
event of the resubdivision of land
• • (or structure? if a park dedication
was made to the County at the time of
the initial subdivision o£ the land
(or structure) .
h. All nark dedication fees shall be ear-
marked and used only for the acquisition
of land for public active and passive park
and recreation, and trail purAOSes, and
for capital improvements to newly acquired
or existing public park and zecreational
� lands or trail systems. Nothing herein
shall be construed to require that
these funds be applied to the acquisition
of land or construction of improvements
for the exclusive benefit oP the resi-
dents of the proposed subdi�ri=zo�,
provided that any such lanc - ����rove-
ments acqnired or construct_ �1
be such as are reasonably a-•° .'_e
to the residents of said su�=:__ -_`.�-on.
The Director of Finance shall i��entify
the source oP all park dedication
fees and apply the same only as herein-
above provided.
-17- '
� _
i. tVhenever there shall be considered a
development approval under the PMH , , ,
zoning category and the Board of •
� County Commissioners wishes ta sub-
sidi2e its construction, the Board
may exempt the development from the
requirements of thi5 Section 5.71.12
or reduce the amount of land dedication
or cash-in-lieu imposed hereby.
' j. The land dedication and payment of 'Eees
required hereby shall be done prior to
or simultaneously with the recordation
of the final subdivzsion plat. All
dedication fees, from the time they
shall be due and pa1able, shall become
a lien upon the land or improvements
against which they are assessed and
may be collected against any subsequent
owner of such land or improvements. �
Any claim for payment may be prosecuted
as an action in personam or by an action
in rem for enforcement of such lien,
or both.
5.71.I3 Other Required Dedications. •
In addition to the dedications required by Section
5.71.12, each applicant for subdivision approval shall
make dedications for•. common open space, pedestrian
� trails, drainage and public utility purooses, in the
followinq mar_ner and under the following conditions:
a. In the case of residential development,
the subdivider shall dedicate, as
open space for common use by the sub-
division lot owners, ten and one-half
(10�) acres o€ land for every one
thousand (1,000) residents of the pro-
� posed subdivision. The number of resi-
dents attributable to the subdivision
shall be calculated in the same manner
as described in Section 5.71.12 a and
the residential land area in the same
manner as described in Section 5.71.12 f.
This common area shall be covenanted
exclusively for open space uses and the
obligation to maintain the same shall �
, be placed upon the residents of the
subdivision, individually or through
their hame owner's association,as
provided otherwise in this Code.
i
-18-
•
b. S4henever a tract to be subdivided includes
any part o£ a bike�vay, bridle path, cross-
country sRi trail or hiking trail desig- . . ,
nated on the Pitkin Cour.ty, Trail System • .
Plan, the subdivider shall plat and grant
public easements in compliance with the
plan. Any such dedications shall meet
t�e.specifications of t�e Pitkin Caunty
Desi n Standards and S ecifications
, riscoe, Maphis, Murray & Lamont, 1975) .
' � c. Whenever a tract to be subdivided inclu3es
any part of an existing or planned public
utility or drainage system designated on
an adopted plan, the subdivider shall plat
and grant public easements in compliance
with the plan. .
d. The easements and dedications required by
thzs Section 5.71.13 shall be in addition
to any riqhts�of-way grants otherwise '
provided for in these subdivision regula-
tions; and shall be in addition to, and
• not included in, the computation of the
park dedication required by Section 5.71.12.
Section 12
That Section 6,03.01 Genera.l be repealed and reenacted
to read as follows:
6.03.01 General
The General Submission is the £irst gerieral
stage of review for planned unit developments
and subdivisions, and for rezoning and special
review applications to be considered in con-
� junction with a planned unit development or
subdivision. An appZication for rezoning, for
a special review use, or for buiZding permit
review not made in conjunction with a P.U.D.
or subdivision may be finally ccr_siclere� by the
Board after completion of the general submis-
sion procedures. The applicant shall file an
application with the Planning Office in accord-
ance with the requirements set forth below.
Section 13
i
That Section 6.03.04 d 4 be amended by the addition of '
subsection iv thereto, whiah said subsection reads as .follows:
(iv) Rezoning and' special review applications which .
. are made in conjunction with a P.U.D, or sub-
• division application shall not be finally con-
� si�?erec� at the time �f 'approval of the genera_1
� . sub^:i�sioa, but shall be grantecl only upon
• approval of the detailed F.U,D. pr snbdivision
submission. In the event final plat approval
-19-
� - . .� .
� �
li
I�
i� �
is not obtained, the approved rezoning
�shall lapse and the original zoning
� designation shal.l be reinstated.
� Section 14 ' •
That Section 6.04.01 be repealed and reenacted to zead
as follows:
� The detailed submission applies to P.U.D.
� and subdivision applications and to any
rezoning or special review application
� considered in conjunction therewith. In
this review phase the applicant wi.22 pre-
sent further information nece�sary to show
conformance with any condition of the
Board's approval of the general submission
and to show resolution of any technical
problems raised by the general submission
Section 15
That Section 9.01 Scope and Authority, and 9.02, Private
� Applications, be repealed and reenacted to read as follows:
6cope and Authority
From time to time the Board may amend any sections
di this Code, including the number, shape,
boundaries, area or requirements of any 2one
" district or areas, and may create new districts
and areas. This section sets forth alI pro-
cedures for adoption of amendments to pro-
visions of this Code except �hose
-20- . -
(
��.
�� ,
j provisions pertaining to .private application
; for rezoning (Section 6.03) and adoption and
i amendments of Reference Material$ (Section ,
� 11.031 . '
i '
i
� � 9.02 Private App2ications •
I '' "'''
j 9.02.01 Private applications for amendments to the
� provi.sions of this Code shall be submitted to
I the Planning Office no later than the second
; Friday in August for consideration in that year.
� A public notice that applications are being
� accepted shaZZ be given no later than the 15th
day of July by at least one publication in a
� newspaper of general circulation in the country. .
�
i � 9.02.02 A private agplication for change in the language
j of the Code shall include the name and address
� of the applicant and the language proposed for
addit.zon, deletion, or amendment. Such appli-
eation shall be reviewed in accordance with
procedures outlined in Section 9.03 below.
9.02,03 A private application for xezoning shall contain
the submission contents and be reviewed in
accordance with the pzocedures specified in
Sectton 6,03, General Submission. The Planning
Office sha].Z certify the application as complete
no later than the 2nd Friday in September,
' otherr�ise the application shall not be considered
in that year. The Planning Office may, however,
require additional information in the course of
its review. "
9.02.04 All private applications for amendments to
provisions of this Code shall be considered
by the Planning Commission no later than the �
2nd Friday in November of each year (unless
both the applicant and the Commission shall .
. agree to waive this requirement) .
and that the numbezing of Section 10.03, subsections a. ,b,, and c. , be
changed to 10.03.01� 10.03,02 and 10.o3.03 respectively.
Section 16
That Section 12 "Def.initions" be amended by the addition,
after the definition of "Rockfall," of the following definitions:
"Sign"
Any structure, reproduction, facsimile, statue, or device
used or intended in whole or in part for a.dentification
or directional purposes shall, for the purposes of this
resolution; be a sign and there£ore subject to appli-
. cable provisions of this Code.
"Sign Area" ,
• The area of the smallest plane geometric figure encom-
passes the facing of •a sign, including copy insignia,
background and borders. ,
� -21- .
f �
I .
"Sign-Free Standing"
Anx sign structurally separate from a building being supported
on itself or on a standard or 'legs. • . . ,
"Sign-Projecting" '
Any sicJn supported by a buil.diag wall and projecting there£rom.
"Sign-Wall"
� Any sign painted on, incorporated in, or affixed to the building
wall, or any sign consisting of cutout letters or devices affixed
to the building wall with no background defined on the building
wall.
(with the corresponding deletion �of Section 5.70.01 and renumbering
of all subsequent sections beginning with 5.70.07.) ,
And further that Section 5.70.04 b., Sign Measurement, be repealed
and reenacted to read as follows: .
b. Sign area shall be the area of the smallest geometric
figure which encompasses the facing of a sign including
copy, insignia, background and borders, provide@ that
i cut-out letter signs shall be considered wall signs and
thei� aggregate area shall be credited toward allowable
sign area at one and one half the measuzed azea.
i Section 17 � ' •
�
i
j That Section 12, Definitions, be amended by the repeal anc3
� reenactment .o£ subseotion a. of the definition of "Subdivision"
or "Subdivided Land" to read as follows; '
� a. A tract or parcel o£ land which is divided into two
(2) or more lots, tracts, sites, parcels, separate
j interests (including leasehold interests) , interests in
i common, or other divisions £or the purposes of, whether
; immediate or future, transfer of ownership, conveyance
� of undi.vided interests (for development pnrposes) , or
building or other development. Included within the
E definition of' subdivision is the use of land for the
� development (for 2ease or saZe) of condominiums,
apartments (and any other multiple dwellinq units) ,
or for time-sharing units, Exempt from this definition
are improvements with the same density which have
previously complied with Section 4 of this Code and
� land exempted under b. below or by the Board pursuant
to Section 4.02 of' this Code. As used in this section
S "interests" includes any and all interests in the
Esurface of Iand but excludes any and all subsurface
� intere�ts.
� And further that this definition be amended by the repeal
l
s
and reenactment of subsection b.l. to read as follows:
1. Which could be created by any court in this state
pursuant to the law of eminent domain, or by oneration
of law, or by order of any court in this state iE the
Board of County Commissioners of the County in_ which
the property is situated is given timely notice of any
such pending action by the •court and given opportunity
. to join as a party in interest in such proceedings for
the purpose of raising the issue of evasion of the .
County's subdivision regulations prior to the entry of
' the court order and if the Board does not file an
• appr.opriate pleading within twenty days after receipt
;:,�;:- � of such notice by the court. �
-22-
1 .
i
1 Section 18
That Section 7 entitled "nonconforming Uses and Lots" be
repea2ed, in its entir ety, and reenacted to read as follows:
SECTION 7
NONCONFORMING USES AND LOTS
� 7.OI Nonconforminq Uses •
�.O1.OZ When, within the zone districts established at the time
of the adoption of the Pitkin County Zoning Resolution
of 1955, the Pitkin County Land Use Code of 197b, or any
amendments thereto, there exist structures or uses of .
land (except high impact uses as hereina£ter defined)
which were lawfully constructed or established but
which would be prohibited under the provisions of the
current zoning regulations, such nonconforming structures
and uses may continue until they are removed, provided
that no nonconformities sha11 be upgraded, enlarqed,
expanded, extended, reconstructed, structurally altered,
or used for the purpose of adding other structures
or uses prohibited within tha same zone district.
7.02 Nonconforming High Impact Uses
7.02.01 Nonconforming high impact uses are those heavy business,
commercial or industrial uses which were lawfully
established but now nonconforming and are located in
agricultural, residential or resource zone districts
which uses include (but are not limited to) : concrete
batch plants, minina and other extractive operations
� � (e.g. sand and gravel pits) , processing plants, crusher
; ' operations, hot mix olants, sata mills, quarries, junk
' yards, dumps, billboards and other outdoor signs,
� auto wrecking yards, and such other heavy business,
' commercial and industrial uses that are the source of
significant amounts of cinders and dust, and of
noxious fumes, smoke, noise, air (and visual) pollution,
and so on, any of which may,be a nuisance and injurious
to adjacent properties or the public in general.
� 7.02.01 All nonconforming high impact uses shall be abated im- ,
�' mediately, provided, however. that owners o£ such
� uses may, within one year of the use having become
I nonconforming, apply to the Board of County Commissioners
t for special review use agprova2, which application
shall be considered under the terms and criteria of
Section 7.06.
7.03 Struatures Under Construction
Any structure or use for which a valid building permit
has issued pr-ipr to the use or structure becominq
nonconforming may be constructed or established and
occupied in accordance with the approved plans provided
that the establishment or construction of the use or
structure shall proceed with diligence.
� -23-
7,04 Changes of Nonconforminq Uses
Any nonconfarming uses may be, upon approval of a
special review application considered under the
relevant criteria of Section 7.06, changed to a use
of the same or a more restrictive classi£ication
as described in the zone categories o£ the Land Use
Code. For purposes of this section, uses shall be
� considered higher or lower according to the follow-
• ing sequence {highest to lowest) : agricultural, resi-
dential, public, office, accommodations, commercial,
light industrial, heavy industrial.
7.05 Discontinuance, Destruction or Repair of Nonconforming
Structures oz Uses
7.05.01 Whenever a nonconforming structure or use, or any •
significant part or nortion thereof, shall be dis-
continued for a period of one (1) year or more, such
nonconforming structure or use shall be considered
abandoned and shall not therea£ter be reestablished,
and all further use of the premises shall be only in '
conformance wit� all a�plicable current land use
regulations.
7.05.02 No nonconforming use or structure having suffered
damage (by whatever cause) to the extent of 70�
of the value of the improvements above grade shall not
be reestablished and all future use of the premises
shall be only in conformance with all applicable
� current land use regulations.
7.05.03 In the event a nonconforming structure or use shall
have suffered (by whatever cause) damage to the
extent of less than 70$ of �he value of the improve-
ments above grade, such use may be reestablished
(without enlargement) upon receipt of special review
approval qranted pursuant to the criteria established
in Section 7.06, provided that an applicaLion for
special review shall have been filed within 90 days
� of the date the damage was reaeived, and that, if
approval is given and within 6 months thereof, a
complete building permit application is submitted
with the proposed structure or use meeting a21 re-
quirements of the County's current building code.
7.05.04 Nothing herein st,al� be construed to prevent the
making of those repairs necessary to maintain any
nanconforming use or structure in a safe and operable
� condition provided, however, that in no event may
work be done which constitutes a capital improvement-
to, or general upgrading of, the premises or which
wi11 result in an increase in floor area.
i
i
� -24-
� � .
i . .
; .
� .
7.06 Review Criteria
In considering any special use review application pro-
cessed under this Section 7, the following criteria and
standards shall be applied: . � ; � •
a. Theac�mpat°bility of the structure or use with the
policies and regulations of this Code
b. Whether or not the use or structure serves a
siqnificant public interest that could not be
, served by the relocation of the structure or
use to the nearest area where the then current_
zone district or general land use regulations
would permit it, or the extent to which continua-
tion of the nonconforming use wouZd violate the
public health, safety and wel£are and the public
interest in retention of the use or structure in
its present location, as a whole.
c. The measures which can be undertaken by the appli-
cant to eliminate, alleviate, or otherwise reduce
the incompatibility or adverse effects of the '
nonconforming structure or use, and any special
use review approval may be given sabject to com-
pl.iance by the applicant with any conditions (iri-
cluding abatement at a stated time) designed to .
ameliorate the adverse effects of noncon£orming
structures or uses.
7.07 Public Hearing
�
Any public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners
iwhich may be held pursuant to this Section 7 shall be
i advertised, at the expense of the applicant, by the
j � publication o£ a notice thereof, once in a newspaper of
� general circulation within the County, at least 30
� days prior to the date of such hearing, which notice
� shall contain the date and place of the hearing, the
I name of the applicant, a description of the affected
property, a description of the nonconforming structure
or use,the name of the person or entity requesting the
hearing, and a general statement of the nature of the
proceeding. Al1 interested person may appear and •be
heard at such hearings. �
7.08 Substandard Lots
� —
7.08.01 A substandard lot is any lot or parcel of land,
however described, ,held in separate o�anership that
when parcelled satisfied applicable area and bulk
requirements { if any) but fails to meet the minimum
recruirements for area or width as set forth in the
' zone district regulation current at the time a
building permit is sought.
-25-
� .
I �
� .
� '
: ..
f
,� , _
�;
; .
� ,
i �
7.08.02 Other provisions of this Code to the contrary notwith-
standing, one single family dwelling (with accessory
uses) shaZl be permitted onany lot made substandard as
a result of the adoption o� the Pitkin •County .Zoninq •
Resolution of 1955, The Pitkin County Land Use Code of
1976, or any amendments thereto; provided, however, .
that in those residential districts where duplexes or
. multifamily dwellings are permitted, or may be permitted
by special review, the requirements for square footage
or lot area per dwelling unit shall be strictly inter-
preted with no credit given for fractional portions of
the required minimum as a basis for construction of �
additional dwelling units.
7.08.03 The provisions of Section 7.08.02 notwithstanding,
if two or more lots or parcels of land (however
described} with continuous frontage in single ownership �
(including ownership by husband and wife, or either,
in their own names or in the name of a business
entity or entities controlled by either or both)
were (or are) of record at the time of the adoption
of the Pitkin County Zoning Resolution of 1955, the
; Pitkin County I,and Use Code of 1976, or amendments
E thereto, regardless of diverse time of acquisition,
and if all or part of the lots or parcels do not
meet the reauirements estabZished for lot width
and area, the lands a£fected shall be considered
to be an undivided parcel for the purposes of this •
, Code and no portion of said lots or parcels shall
. be used or occupied which does not meet the width
and area requirements established by this Code
except under the following conditions:
a. Any lot which is substandard as to area
and/or width situate within a platted
subdivision that did not require or did .
not receive approval by formal action of
the P2anning and Zoning Commission and
Board o£ County Commissioners according .
to County regulations, shall be considered
' separately @evelopable for the purposes
of construction of a single family dwelling
(with accessozy uses)regardless of the
fact that contigous lots may be under
single ownership (as hereinabove defined) _
if the same shall receive approval as a
Use by Special Review pursuant to Section
6.03 of this Cade. In addition to those
review standards stated in such section.
there shall be considered whether the lo:�
. or parcel, as p�.atted, including existing
' subdivision amenities, substantially
satisfies the County's subdivision regulations
in effect at the time such review is inade.
• . -26-
i
b. Any lot which is substandard as to area
and/or width within a platted subdivision
that was re�uired by County regulatrians to �
be and was approved by formal action of
the Planninq and Zoning Commision, or the
Board of County Commissioners, or both,
• shall be considered separately developable .
for the purpose of the construction of
one single family dwelling (with accessory
uses) , without regard to the fact that
contiguous lots may be under the same
ownership.
7.O8.U4 No lot or parcel of land, nor any interest therein, �
shall be transferred, 'conveyed, sold, subdivided,
or acquired in either whole or part so as to create
a new nonconforming use to avoid, circumvent or
subvert any provisions of this Section 7, or so
as to leave remaining any lot or parcel below
the requirements of a legal building site as
otherwise described in this Code.
t
�
i
�
Section 19
That SF.CTI�N 12, Definitons, be amended by the repeal
and reenactment of the definition of "Home Occupation" to read
as �ollows:
"Home Occupation" '
Any commercial use conducted principally within a residential
dwelling unit provided that:
a. Each use must be conducted entirely within the
dwellinq and carried on by the inhabitants
living there and no others.
b. Such use must be clearly incidental to and
' secondary to the use of the dwelling for resi-
dential purposes and must not change the residential
character thereof.
c. The total area used for such purposes may not
exceed one-half the first floor area of the
dwe2ling unit.
d. There rnust be no outdoor advertising display
or other exterior indications of the home .
occupation.
' e. There may be only incidental sales of stock,
• supplie� or products conducted on the•premises.
f. There rnust be no exterior storage on the
premises of material or equipment nsed as part
of the home occupation.
g, There must be no offensive noise, vibration,
smoke, dust, odors, heat or glare noticeable
, at or beyond the property line.
h. There mus•t be provided any.•off-street parking
necessary to adequately accommodate additional traf-
, fic created by the home occupation.
, r27- ,
� ,
j
j .
_�..�._.w..,w,.�..�.�...�
i .
And fnrther that Section 3.03, 3.04 and 3.05 be amended by the
addition, in all zone districts, of Home Occupations as. a
permitted use. . '
, _ . +r
Section 20 '
That, the Commission having determined that mandatory
dedications of water rights is apprapriate in certain situations
inasmuch as this type of acquisition program will allow Pitkin
County to more intelligently manage the water resources of the
Roaring Fork Valley as the acquisitions wi1Z (a) prevent the
abandonment of water rights by the discontinuance of their .
, beneficial use (b) prevent the creation of independent water
utilities and their location in areas not anticipated by the
Land Use Code or other County regulations (c} provide for the
acquisition of more senior rights to permit the County to pro-
test water diversion projects that are considered detrimental
to the Valley (d) provide'for the acquisition of more senior
� rights to quaranty minimum stream flows during periods of
low water supply (e) provide water for the irrigation of public
lands (f) reduce the costs o.f condemnation of water rights
for minimum stream flows and other gwernmental purposes and
(g) aid in the implementation o� a land treatment program, the
� Commisions recommends that the Land Use Code be amended by the
addition of Section 5.09.04, entitled "Dedication of Water
Rights" to read as follows:
Section 5.09.04 Dedication of Water Rights
, Whenever any applicant has received development
permission for any lands within Pitkin County, and
such applicant is the owner of a well or surface
water right which has been berieficially applied to
the lands to be developed, and, further, the improve-
ments to be constructed will be serviced by a water
utility, then the applicant sha1Z convey (without
consideration) to Pitkin County all or any part of
such water right which is no longer needed For
the maintenance of the lancls to be improved. .
-28-
•
�, __ ---�.
. _ , -
.
�
�
i
� Section 21 •
That APPENDIX A,APPROVED 5QBDIVISION PLAT LAAIGUAGE, be
amended by the repeal of section 4 thereto, and the re-
� numbering of all subsequent paragranhs accordingly.
� Section 22 .
That, in order to meet the manaates of C,R,S. 1973,
Section 30-28-115 (a.5) , Section 3 of the Land Use Code
be amended by the addition of Section 3.08,06 to read as .
follows:
3.08.06 There shall be permitted,in all residential zane
districts, owner-occupied or nonprofit group homes
for the exclusive use of not more than eight persons
, (si�cty years of age or older) per home who do not
require skilled or intermediate care facilities.
� A group home established pursuant her�to shall not
, be located within seven hundred fifty (750) feet
of another such group home and nothing herein shall
be construed to permit any deviation from the pro-
� visions of this Code with respect to height, set-
backs, area, lot coverage, or external signage,
nor to permit architectural designs substantially
inconsistent with the character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
Section 23
To clarify the uses in the B-2 district, that section
3.05 #14 be amended by the repeal and re2nactment of the
textual material to read as follows:
Personal services outlets: food stores, sel£ service
laundries, dry cleaning outlets and drug .stores.
and that #19 of the same section be amended by the re-
peal and reenactment of the textual material to read as follows:
General Services-spaces shall be allowed for .
the following general services (that do not
necessarily offer a tangible product} ; ware-
houses, wholesale and retail storage (with distri-
bution office on premises) , maintenance and
. storage garages, bulk cleaning and dry cleaning,
day care centers, dog kennels, ve� hospitals,
repair shops, printing presses, and essential
governmental and/or public utility uses. .
Section 24
That, to ratify present practices, Section 6.03.04 b.2.
be amended by the addition of sub-section iii to read as
follows:
iii Any proposal lying within a area of reasonable �
• interest to a local caucus group shall be referred
to the chairman of the group for comment within
thirty (30) days.'
-29-
1
i
Section 25
�
' That the introduCtory sentence of Appendix D be re-
pealed and reenacted to read �as follows: ,' ' '
The fees set for the items below are to defray a
portion o� the expenses of review of proposed devele-
ments and shall be paid at the time of submittal
of a review application.
Section 26
That Section 6,03.04a.1."Application" be repealed and
reenacted to read as £ollows:
,' 1, The applicant shall submit to the Planning
i Office fourteen(14) sets (unless fewer are
required by the Planning Office) of the :
application form (Appendix B) and all appli-
cable general submission contents. If the
� application concerns a matter of state and
local interest (Section 5, Part 4) , the
applicant shall also submit a like number of
copies of the 1041 application form (Appendix
C) .
and that, correspondingly, Section 6.04.04a.1."Application"
be repealed and reenacted to read as follows:
1. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Office
� ' tlic ?plicable detail submission contents and
sufficient copies thereof to forward to, the
referral agencies hereinafter described.
Approved by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission
at its meeting held � , Z977. •
Chairman
Attest: ,
���rf
�4pu.tr� Co . Cla.�k�
Approved as to orm:
��-1.�n,7i��,/�//+� i
� i -
-30- .
�
. , . . -
` `� :
!f , ,� .. .) '� ;) 4� �.
�
� ' MEMORANDUM
�
� .
T0: Board of County Cormnissioners Lor;r,� a� co. cola,.t��t�;
Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Cortunission PIT1tII�1 C0.
FROM: P]anning Office (KS) Public Hearing Exhibits
Dato : _..°.1..:��/�.7._._._
! • RE: Land Use Code Amendments - Set Public Hearing �ub �t :/�(�.� ._��n(�.
DATE: August 4, 1977 �'" EXHiBIT
. � �
At their August 3rd meeting, the County Pianning and Zoning —
' passed a Resolution recommending to the Board of County Commissioners,
adoption of numerous Land Use Code amendments. That resolution (in
draft form) containing the Code amendments was referred to you for your
review by memorandum of July 20, 1977, from Sandra Stuller. 41e are
asking you to set a date for a public hearing which we suggest take
place on September 12.
Without repeating the entire list of amendments, you should know that
the Resolution contains some significant revisions to the Code, many
of which were requested by you. For example, the provisions and
procedures regarding olanned unit developments have been comoletely
reworked, partly in response to proble�ns discovered in reviewing the
Snowmass General Submission, but mainly to clarify objectives of and
permitted flexibility through the PUD process. Other amendments of
particular interest inciude: a iimit on the number of bedroans,
in a single family unit, density adjustments for slopes over �30� and
floodplains, new park dedication requirements, a clarified definition
of "subdivision", an amendment deleting abatement and other provisions
related to non-conforming uses, mandatory dedications of water rights
in certain situations, and group homes for the aged. '
The Planning and Zoning Coir¢nission has devoted riany sessions over the
last several months so these recommendations come to you backed by a
great deal of consideration.
Although there are other proposed revisions, it was felt that we should
draw a line and forward this batch to you because a number of these
amendments have been pending for quite some time. There are several �
which remain to be considered, and it is our intention to pursue fihese
with fihe Pianning and Zoning Commission on a reguiar basis beginrting
imnediately.
'fhe remaininq Code amendment proposais which have been requested include:
1. Mobile Home Code
; 2. Sign Code
� 3. Consideration of guidelines for and whether to allow
caretaker units and duplexes.
4. Churches as Special Review in low density residential
districts.
�
5. Amend Section 5.41 to clarify that an architect can, in
certain hazard cases, be responsible for foundation design.
6. Regulations far transbasin diversions.
� .. . ___.. . _. .. . . . .
. � � 'l..l �_) 1 :j
Memorandum
. Page Two
, August 4. i977
r
7. Appendix listing zoning and subdivision amendments.
8. Reference Section 30-28-110, C.R.S. 1973, giving Planning
and Zoning Cor�nission authority to review all utility
extensions.
9. In Section 6, Common Procedure, require X copies of
all submittals.
10. Change Section 3.02, #2, to "Minimum 7ot area per dwelling
unit type." ' _ .
11. Consider clarifying procedures for review of mining oper-
ation.
12. Update reference materia]s.
13. Revise fee schedules. �
14. Revise "marketability and assessment information require-
ments in detailed submission.
lmk
�
�
f
,
.
i
� ,
,
, � ... .. .......�.�.. . . �. ... .. .. ... . . .... . .. . ... . ..... ... . .
�. , \� `��" • ' � � l
Memorandum
Page Two
August 4, 1977
f .
I
7. Appendix listing zoning and subdivision amendments.
' 8. Reference Section 30-28-110, C.R.S. 1973, giving Planning
and Zoning Commission authority to review all utility
extensions.
9. In Section 6, Co►renon Procedure, require X copies of
aii submittais.
10. Change Section 3.02, �2, to "Minimum lot area per dwelling
unit type." ' , •
11. Consider clarifying procedures for review of mining oper-
ation.
12. Update reference materials.
13. Revise fee schedules. �
14. Revise "marketability and assessment information require-
ments in detailed submission.
lmk
i
�
;
�
�
I
MEMORANDUM
70: Board of County Commissioners
George Ochs, County Manager Bonxn oF co, co��R�s
Sandra M. Stul2er, County Attorney PSTkIN C0.
Public Hearing Exhibits
FROM: Planning Office (KS) nato
. ..�:/.�.:7�.
RE: Land Use Code Amendments s' • .5�_`p
ExHiB� �a�d
DATE: September 15, 1977 � � ••-
a
' . ^�
Over the past six months or more, the Planning and Zoning as
considered numerous amendments to the Pitkin County Land Use Coce. These
amendments have been prepared in response to specific requests as well
as being the result of a general monitoring of the Code's functioning since
its adoption in April of 1976. The amendr�ent process recognizes that
the Code is not a static document and that in the course of administration
under the Code, opportunities for clarification and fine-tuning have
become apparent.
Because the proposed changes are numerous, we will reserve our cortments
for a verbal presentation at the meeting on Monday. We will briefly
outline each amendment and its rationale. In the meantime, we refer
you to the resolution recomnending these changes aporoved by P&Z on
August 3, 1977. A draft of that resolution was forwarded to you on
July 20th. We aTso refer to the memorandum from the Planning Office
included in your August Sth packet. That memo summarized the major
changes proposed in this resolution and outlined further work contem-
plated for the Code but not resoived at the time of the P&Z recommendation.
We urge your careful consideration of the amendments and recommend their
adoption. If additional amendment is desired after Monday's meeting, we
request that you adopt those amendments which are agreeable and direct us
to make changes in the remainder. '
lmk
....." ..�i'."_;- .. ':S1`T,tr', �r-.. � ,� S ...�...,.. . -rsva , —e^ n . "^i?`�;..?v°'S"".r
.. . .. . . �. .. ..�.s.:�. .. ...,.. ,'.'�r.m. ..-�. .....—:... .�..�..... .. � . . . ..._.. �tPr`�3�{A...... . �'
�
� '
� ' • •
:;;i,�:�D (?i' C0. COJd7�t'R'S �
• PITkIN C0. • � ''y�
Public Hoaring Eahibits � �: `� �`
.'•'.�-.-�`�R'"..''a':� 5�i`'�y�, �
Date . ....� � •77 ' i� .
' ' des(gn workshop,inc.
Sub,a�t : �.�.n.� Cod�c � �x s�7s
/�mdnd aspen,co 81611
�� 303-92ra-8354
� Septanber 12, 1977
. �_ . Michael Kins].ey, County Cc�renissioner - ----.
Pitkin County Board of County C�m.issioners EXHIBIT
Courthouse �
i As1�en, Colorado 81611 � �
Dear Michael: _ �l �7r .
As a resident and professional plarurer in Aspen and Pit�cin County,
F I am Pxtranel.y distressed with the prvi�osed ch�zge in the Pitkin
. County LaiY3 Use Code that would elimir�ate zoned density credit for
' land aver 30� slapes, floodplain, and private aocess easanents.
While T agree �that this land is envirornne�itally uns�w�d for building,
I find it confiscatozy t,o r�iave density credit when praperty taxes
� are being assessed ar�l paid on the land.
The effective iinpact of the code charige will be to cut the zoned .
density o£ aaunty lands in a "spot" fashion, primarily �nalizing
only those landawners with land aver 30o slope. If the intent is
' to revise �*��nr�riate county zoning, I suggest a m�re stsaight-
foYward and uniform approach would be to again dawnzone the county.
� Havever, davnzoni.ng va�uld be inconsistent with the recently adopted
i zoni.ng change fxncn RS-16Q to RS-30 and RS-20.
� I suggest adaption of the prop�sed code change will create more
' political and cattmxnity conflict than those actions surrounding the �
Woody Creek debate. Ironically, tiVoody Creek is a prime e��le o�
the irrationality of the proposed change. County goverimtent has ex-
- tended significant energy and resources to resolve the Woody Creek
divisiveness. Naw these positive steps are being disregarded by
again downzoning Woody Creek propesties, i.e., the vexy issue at-
tc�ipting to be rectified with RS-20 and R5-30 zoning.
I respectfully request that you carefully consider the consequences
of the proposed code change and wte against adapti.on.
Sincerely,
tw. Cw ��
J G�.irtis `
zc� wox�csxoP, arc.
�%
;
. ;
. F
' �
� � !
� community development land planning landscape architecture !
H A P A R K E k � � ' ' • • . . , ., � . .F ., ..���. .,� .. � ,.Y,ti� • . y:. , �n .. ,..�ATES POSTp� .
v1 Y
q6�9 84 4VE SOUTH( T `� � ' I� W 5
MERC�R I8L,AND WA 9�040 � weste�n unian 11►��ri EXHIBIT �
. � *
�
a
. 4�020006E343 lZ/09/77 ICS IPMRNCZ CSP DVRB � -
206�326687 MGM TDRN MERCER I3L.AN0 WA 100 1��09 �, �19A
. /"'� !�
sJ ; ,► BOB CHILD CARE PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER �� � •.
PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE ,
ASPEN CO 81611 . ���n/1JKti �
: .
,► ��'N� ✓r
�
�
� `Nv -
DEAR MR CMILQr
AS 30LE OWNERS OF A RANCM NEAR EMMA WE WANT VOU TO KNOW THAT w� AR�
VERY M�CH OPPOSED TO THE FURfHER DOWNzONING OF OUR I.ANO. WE fIAYE HEI.IJ
THIS LAND iN OUR FAMI�.Y FOR OVER �5 YEAR3 AND HAVE 9EEM A tON5TANT
INCREA$E IN RESTRICTION9 AND ExPENS=YE COUNTY REGULATIONS. IN
PARTICIJLAR THE EXCt,U3IpN OF �31.OpE3 OVER 45 DEGREEB FROM THE TOTA(, OF�
� DiVI�ABLE ACREAGE AND TNE REZONING OF VALI.�Y PROPERTY IS AN EXTREME AND
DI9CRIMINATORY MEASURE WHEN ADDED Tn ALl TN� OTHER REGULATIONS. PGEASE
VOTE AGAINST THE3E PRQP08AL8.
VIRGINIA JONES PARKER Z, - '
BARBARA JONE9 SCOTT �y, f �
/ ��
11119 EST � � � ' ''
MGMCOMP M6M � � �
�
�
,
i .i
----a
. � j
�
i
�
i
1
t
,
v � � r
n � �i
�
TO REPLt'�'( MAILGRAM, SEE REVF.FiSE SIDE FOR 1NESTERN UNION'S TOLL- FFiC-E PHONt NUME3ERS
EXHIBIT
�1'IJ� 1����Jl �.�111]�� � � � � -�
Box E
.... . - , r:...°�;�
J
Aspen, Colorado r „ r�'�':-�' ��•
• �f c I:c�r:.iig 1sf�iibi?•�
;�� , _ . .......�.:%_�:.�7
�ub j e c t : .1�Q�./G�1�u�._„� (�J
-����
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
$TATE OF COLORADO )
> e9. Copy of Notice
County of Pitkin )
' I, .,,.W i 11 i am,_.�,.,_..,p��,�w�y.. ao solemnly sweax that
I am khe ..�1��2�,�.8�7.�x'•---°...-•_•-•--•••....... of TFiE A3PEN TIMES;
that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whale or in part,
aad published in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of CoIorado, and has
a general circu]ation therefn; that sald newspaper has been Qub-
lished continuously and utnterruptedly in said County of Pitkin,
for a •perlod oP more �han ftfty-two cansecutive weeks next prtor ,
to the 17rst publica.tion of the anaexed legal notice or advertise-
ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted to the United Sta.tes
mails as sceond-class matter under khe �provisions of the Act of
March 3, 1879, or any amendmeatq thereof, and that said ne�s- � :. •'
paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing lega.l �;T 1"1�ub�'�.n��� ; ;
notices and advertisements wlth the meaning of the Iaws of the r� ' � `
State oP Colorada 'EUBL'iCNOrli(��
`�:e ... ':.�'Of A�blic EiMrins..
That tlie annexed legalt notice or advertisement wa9 published •RL;Deipi�t�onofiueofAe°e°ns�'wrm6 �
in :the regular and entire issue oP every number of said weekly `F�md°t°bsre°°d�g�g�"°��1Atiaur
�.������at�w�71 b iidd bebre.fhe ', i
newspapers for the period of .......Z_......._, consecutive insertions:and ��° C°'¢ C°��p0n0n � � +
tanbsr•19..�'at.il•.SO am m the Cam= .
t,hat the first publicatioa of aaid nottce was in the issue af eaid ,���.�ooi ruap:o!-t1�e C.ounh'' �
CouiL Hous�.bO8 E N"�►&iebt;•llepm.;:•
news a r dated ,._.�..G'.�2.ti.�ZI1}:15�'...�..�lr'_. A. D.. 19 Color�do.to rsostvs poblie ialktas to the- �
P Pe ..�7 and that mtmdedu�sdNeda°u��ariu�f��• �. ,
the last�publication of said notice was in•the issue of said news- atl mt�ed pti�°°�'�'°°b°a � i
tend .`.
paper dated Ekaior eitizeo s hameporf+tim �o� f1►e t !
....•••...._..--•-••-•••••••-•--••••.-
-••... A. D.. 19._....._ }�ycing u availrble thmu�'the Dial-A-:, ;
' Ride praHram•': -. •. ' . i
�'!(./...��.��.�fer!��! �... - "`.By Miehsel Kinsle��Chatm� :i �
........`...... Fitk�a Counb' �
...................••--._.._ .. -�
15mee � �
Sspt�ber lb 977 � I
SuHscrtbed and sworn to before me, a nota.ry public in d�art� , _.. _ . - �- � �
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, thls .......I.. .G.�..._... day o! �
....... ����!.�L.�.�!i A. ,D., 19..�!
.sy�C�1���(�. ..._...... .. _. . .. �..�.5:
Notary Public f
�
n�zy �omm�ion expires .My.d�ioirlriiissitafl•EXplr.es..Alav. 3, 198Q �
i
;
�
6
�
r
u
�
f
!
,.._..�. _ _..-,..,_�,..��_.w ..�-.�.�-... ,�,.,,.. �._.�,:.-._ .. .___.. ,_.... _ _ _.._,... ..__:_, --., � ...,,r,,.1...-,,..F....,.,r�,�..R.�=�...:..
_._ . +^�^..
�1'11� 1��.��ll �1'1J�]��
BoX E TO!?FD OF' rr. ('^,:;:i�P�;�
P.T.T:��it CQ.
Aspen, Colorado r:u�.�.c rl<:a����,;; r-,�.: :r�:�-. ;
:, .,,, , �. ,y,�?
• .......................��--�----..
�u,�;��t . .!��.t�t��n.._.�'��da�r
PROOF OF RUBLICA'TION
STA'PE OF CQLORADO ; �• CO�f�I Of N01'IC@
County of Pitkin )
I, .W111iar[�,_,�_,..,.���ay,t�.._ ao solemnly swear that
t am�.tie ..__..._.._Publ��h��'.................. ot � As�1v TT1►�s; ',
that the same is Q weekiy neaspaper printed, in whale or in part,
a.nd pu6lished in the County of Pitkin, 3ta.te of Colorado, and has
a �general circula.ttoa therein; that saSd newspaper has been �-
]lshed continuously and uinterruptedly in said Cotmty of Pltkin,
for a �period ot more bhan flfty-two cansecutive weeks next prior
to the �irst publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise- r�Y'��'� ';
ment;that satd newspaper has�been admitted �to the United Sta.tes ,'�xpV �`tic �notice � ��
mail9 a�s sceond-class matter under khe provisions of the Act of :��,�s�N�F�3 ' `�., �
March 3, 1879, or any amettdments thereof, and that satd ne�re- �A RL R�d:lfa�apdn g�p,atsr g,b . , ;;
paper is a weekly newspaper duly qua.lified for publishtng 1ega1 � ��.� ' �'�i`e.i,�-1 VR�n�w`� �
�':.}�4�+1�.,,.� �WiA�O�.: -f
notices and advertisements with ttte mea.ning oP the laws of the . ,��;:. ,-:: �:. . . •-' �
State of Colorado. •-I�'ottab6�Ui nnt�atapnbUch«uio�
�.�n e.baa e.�.�.�.�a�r c��r -!
Canmi�dmen m ltaridq. _ 1
That the annexed legall' notice or advertisement was publlshed � ig�7,��;pp �����_ ;
ia .the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly `�����PP�io[f6��ib.ut '
.. . ..
'l��pa�nd f�'Pkkin Coority*86�riR�Of ; ;
,8a W im�tal!a r�t�s dt�m f6�wMt r �
newspapers for the period of .-••1...-•-••.....consecutive insertions; a2�d ridNdAipnNowt�io:Aoop�u(fh��p.<,'. `
that the first publication oP said s�otice was in the issue of said ,�°°mq�m'���°d���O°i°� .;
Cit�H!U.9462090.�st 2Z4 durfu` ; ;
:i�ulu bu�io�liour�. - - > .
newspaper aar.�a ...,P�.ug4l�s.t...�_1............ �. z�., 19?7_.. and that .. .Bp Mid►sel KimtaY.en.�,m.n ;
the last�publica.tion of said notice was in the issue of said news- ` ,���C��,���
„.; r._ , '� '.
;PubWhad In"We Aepai T1me0.'lhund'aY, .:;
paper dated ....•••...._...._.......••_•-........._.. �l.. D.. 19........ Au�ut 11,1977.. ' : ,, _i
. . . __ _ __ :,'$
.._.1..�..�.��,.�!��..... - ._
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public aad�ar
the County of Pltkin, State of Colorado, thts .....!�..._.. day of .:
...���.1.��.... A.D., 19.f...l. f
�
............... ..1�.�..��.��...�.... __....-- --._. .�..
Notary PubliC
1►2y commission expsres�L.��mmission.,[xpirgS,Nq�(, 3, 1-r8u �
e
4
}
_.......,...� ,,.... . ......... .........�...,�..�<. ...-, ,., ..._.. ..,., ..,, _..._.. . , - . . . _� rr�-� _, ..,�..,,,�...�.,.�-�,�a,�.��.-�,
�
1�1�� �����1� !'11:t1��
Box E
I�ARD OI' CO. COitiiLt'R'S
Aspen, Coiaradc PxTktr� co.
Public Hearing Exhibits
,. , • ...�:..�_g• 77 �
. ��...� ,
Gub3 ect . /.��r�..._��__/���tZ��
PRQOF OF PUBLICA710N
STATE OF COLORADO )
� �, Copy of Notice
County o! Pitkin ) �
I, ._.W i 11 i am A. Dunawa�;_ ao solemnly awear ihat ' '
I am Rhe ._...._.PUU1�521e,T'.-°•_••••-...--••••. of THE ASPEN TibLES; �
that Lhe same Ls a weekly newspaper printed, fn whole or in part,
and published in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has
a general circulatton thereln; that sald newspaper has beett Qub- _ ,,,,,,,;;,
lished COntinU0us2y and uint�erruptedly in sald COUnty Of Pitkin. "s � • � ` �� '
for a period of more h]�an fifty-two cansecutive weeks next prior pubiic notice �
to the �1rst pubHca.tion of the annexed legal notice or advertise- '' `
ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted to the United 3ta.tes H PtIBLiC NOTICS
mails as sceond-class matter under fi2ie provisions of the Act of � ��ON OF NOTICE .�
liS:Ited Mnuntsin polioe ltepeRter'8�ta
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- �l ` - '� -
paper ie a weekty newspaper duly qualifted for publishing legal • CORRECfION�ffi HEREBY MADE in '
notices and adver•tisements with the meaning of the laws of the �°��CNO� - i�����-
teiu Reps�ter Site bo bs he d oa 9epta�bsr �,
Sta.te of Colorado. 19�19T1,at 2:00 pm ; • ;
The,Nofioes.aPP�a*�n� in !hs I►�iQuet>,
That the annexed legalt notice or advertisement was ilth'and At�ad Z6th Lsues of tbe Aepen;�
publlshed ltimesinaonticflystatediatdste�dthtdths
in :the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly br�r°°t°b°�°�°ted°°A"Q°°H°un' '
7ba loeation u Red MwR�r'' r ,
news pa p ers for the period of ••-....1..._..._ consecutive insertions: and � . ByDtiehasTKinaley`Ch°�n ' '
that the flrst ublica.tion of said notice was in the issue of eatd B0°�a1C0°0����e� '.
p Publi�had m tha Aepen 15m�e�s�1'hue��ede,yY��
8eptember8,197T , ,
newspaper dated SePtember..8 --._ a. n., 19Z�I..._ and thaL . ` � ;: r.rs
.....•• - ....._.. . .._ . _. .---- .. 3
the last,publica.tion of said nottce was in the issue of said news-
paper dated _.......--•_....•-••••.................•••• A. D.. 19......_.
.�(�.��..���..�..._../._t...°!� . ........ -
Subscrlbed and swom to before me, a nota.ry p�xblic in and�
the County of Pltkin, State of Colorado, this _.....,(.............. day of
1.� ��j���j�� ;
«�'.:/../1.JG.lJ�/-.�... A.7�.. 19..�,� :
/ _a!���/� ... .. . . .. . ..............
.(..L.K,-. .._. .�.
Notary Public
n�ry co��ian exn�e3 l�Y.�mmission.Expires.Nov� 3, I980 �
�
�
�
i
i
... ,-.,,,:,......_..,_.,... .._._...... .. ,�..,..,�.._...m.,_.._. . �. ,.......�..,_,....._....__.... .:..... . ..... . . . .. . .... .. . . . _. .,..,,,.».�,T�<,..,.�...A,K-_.�..,.....r,.,,,,�......,.,.,.m,r.x:-a
.. ..._ ..... __......_ _ .. ..._...�. . .. . . r.�
f
�
�1'11� I����J] ��'111�.�� �
�
Box E ����+r,� or co. cor,s;,t�x�s �
PITIiIN C0.
Aspen, Colorado ""����c fIcaring Exhibits
� , .., . ._�.:.�q.:.77_....._._
�ub j o c t : �'Q�.,�l��1.f.U1�
�4 Cor��cfinn nah�¢
PROOF OF PUBLICA'TION
$TATE OF COLORADO � �• COp�/ Of NOtIC@
County of Pitkin )
I W i 11 i am fl. Dunawax do aolemnly awear that
I asn rt.tie _.._.P.LibLi.Shex'......._----...._..... of TxE r,s��v z*1�s;
that the sam,e is a weekly newspaper printed, in whale or in part,
and published in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has
a �general clrculation thereln; that said newspaper has been Qub- ,,; ;:� '" � :1
lished conttnuausly and ulntetiuptedly in sald County of Pitkin, .pubMie noti�e
for a �peTiod of more bhan fifty-two cansecutive weeks next prior ;
to the �'lrst publtca.tlan of the annexed legal notice or advertise- ,PUBLIC NOTICE ��; a -
ment; that sa.id newsPaPer has+been admitted 2o the United 3ta.tes ?•`;=�`R�`Bidine�Riaa.-BPecieLRevierv;�",;;
mails as sceond-class matter under Rhe �provtsions of the Act of � ���'��a:; '
March 3, 1579, or any ameadments thereof, and that said news- Noaaev}iaebyQivenWitapuDlichsuing,�
publishing ]egal "`�Tb°held•tie�oie the HarB o;C�'i►tyc�
paper is a weekly newspaper duly quatified for �j��,�����at.�
notices and advertisetnents with �the meaning of the laws of the 1:3a ip the Count;�+Ca►ethw�s to aowWer`1,
Sta.te of Colorado. ths Cw:nty's appLatioa for.pscFd ievicw:
apprnv�l of a ha�web�ck zidine ring�p�op�
oaed M bs loutad sauth af theLast2e Crosk .
That t'he annexed legalt notice or advertisement was publiahed Ru�dbetweentheAewh°'�talsiteaadfhe !
1n .the regular and eatire issue of every number of said weekly �°O°°f�°�"�°�+ 1°u type" a�'n,e �
requiies spsad i+eview bbfa�e bs'mg-pe� i
:riuWd In fhe AF-2 di�tritt A copy of the :
newspapers for the period of ......1........... consecutive inserttons; a�d appHatim m�y be revtmrod m tha PLn !
Ahat the flrst publtcation of said notice was in the lssue of said n���o�����a�
S'h''f � � ..'.: r �.�y�L .�
Au u t 11 •---.. a. D., 19 .7Z. and that �'';�=���"�or�,�°�c��`�`m°"'�.�� �
newspaper dated .•••-...._.�...5.................
the last�publica.tion of said notice was in the issue of said news- _ 'n +� • �� a
Pubtiehed ia the'Aspem 15imee lhataday:.± �
paper dated .. A. D.. 19........ 'AuQust 11,1977 ;;• ;, �; '
..._....--•_.......--•••••_••-•••••••• ' . •
, :
• - ..:-. ...c '. ..._. _ ____._.�_._:`.._....:, I
--�i!/.Arfe����lflJr././..!!...� • • ••--_ ••• S
�
{
Subacrtbed and sworn to before me, a nota.ry publtc i and�ar ;
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, this ...._,.��_..._.. day of �
1
..����.�l�IiL.S.f�__........ A. D., 19.�.� 3(
S�
•--._.. .-..-• •--. ...._.......... .. .. ........ .._ .......
Notary Public
azy comm�,ssion Px�res My, Commission Exp(res Nov. 3, 1980 -
i,
;'�
i'i
!I
� i:
i
.. ,. ..._...:_. _.._,.--�........ .,.__...- ._....r.....,. ..,,- ..;.:.., ,..,__.... .�,-_.._.,_ .. _ ...., ...._ . . . ,..,.... .:...___. ..�...... ...+... . ,.,�„»....�w—.,.-+*�,.w+.wT+wa-e....�.s,.�.-..r�r.+r..•.mtro�..
`1'11� 1����.fl �.�llll��
BoX E F OARD OF CO. CObiht'R'S •
PTTkIN C0.
Aspen, Colorado Public Hearing Fxhibits
-,,lto . ....g._�.g:.77_........ , i
Subject : ��.I�1G�Cl�.���� �
�QQ CGT!'/d Cf70� 170fjC¢: - .
PROOF OF PUBLICA710N
STATE oF coi.oxnno ; � Copy of Notice
County of Pltkin ) �
i.
W1113.8ri1 I3. Dunaway do eolemnly swear that `
z, -•.................................... .................
i
I am fihe ....�Ll�?.a..�.�kl�.x:......._._...._.._...... of THE ASPEN TIMES; �
that the eame is a weekly newspaper printed, in whale or in part, `
and published in the County �f Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has � i
a general circulat(on therein; that sald newspaper has been gub-
lished continnously and uinterruptedly in said Coun.ty of Pitkin,
ior a �perlod of more bhan fifty-two cansecutive weeks aext prfor .� „ .
to the £irst publica.tian of the anaexed legal notice or advertise- y�" ���.;; �. :.' , �°;.: ' � '. ;
ment; that sa.id newspaper has�been admitted fio the United Stakes ,s�� �',�`'°nQt�C�r;, �
maiis as seeond-class matter under Rhe Provisions of the Act oP ':= � ,•. • ._
z:= �,
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- `<��w� � �n pUBLiC,,NOTlCET, ,�- ;
paper Is a weekly newspaper duly qualiffed for publishing ]egal �r�� '�� ' '�P by�h�.:
,"r.��Nqttos isherebY B�!�tLst s P�
notices and advertisements with The mea.ning of the laws of the ��Q��.�etion of apnblla;
State oY Colorado. . ;�ridiagrw�a��eCO1II�'OM'D0•d�Ad; ;
rm ��tw�o�"of�
0
: .�c��a�..�. rb haa�sap-: ;
That t7ie annexed lega0:notice or advertisement was publiehed ,_��,�g.ye�ors.the B6�zd ��o:
in :the regular and entire issue of every number of satd weekly -vCammieridne�s.All�`�°'� ��:
.:�,�d propsttyowners u�s ari� .
ieprsewted ; _ �
newspapers for the period of.._...1._....... consecutive lnsertions: a�ad � `-. `, ; •
that the flrst publicatton of satd aotice was in the issue of said ';�e� " z`
newspaper dated AU�US�-.�l'•-..._......•-•• A. D.. 19 .7? and that �'Publiel+edinfhsMP�T�°esAu64�1977,: :
......... �
the last�publica.tion of said notice was in the issue of said news- ;': - - • """
paper dated _..._.....__............................... A. D.. 19........
-•L.v..�+���.�t!?r?..,,��):��LG�....... j:
l'
Subscribed and swom to before me, a no ��
tary public in an �oa�
�/ i;
the County of PiEkin, State of CoIora.do, this .......�;1............. day of ':
� '.
..�.����� '...... A. D.. 19.1....� ii
„
...E��?'.1..r2�. .�'..�.'._......_ .;�,�-��'�......
Notary Publlc
ary comm�ssion exp�res Aly�Commission•�x{�es•{��µ. 3, 198a
�.
,
'�
,�.
�:
ii
i
• ;
.. . ... . . ... . .. . '::--� .l`iCT.N.•:f.Y..'.!)�'wr�F3CNl31`!`.YK'R'S� ':v�.. l.lkb
... ..... ................�..�,.�..._,._ .....�. .,..��....�-a.�n.�. ...� ...... .....�.:.... .... . _: ......... ._..-,_.. ....... ,.....�.
,.�.-...... ..�> . , .. ���q'�
i
1 i
-�1�� 1����1� -r�fl��:� ����3 �
. ;
Box E soaRD or co. cc� � �
PITA[N C0. �
AS(�en, C0�01'p[�O Public Hearing �-: •;:
nate • ---..�1...�9.�_�7__.
sub�e�t :�A.L1G_.��1,Q,�yr�l�
a•miac��na[ ��. Razancn�
PROOF OF PUBLICA710N 3•�0' Rl�'"1'��n '
k. Kap�zlar 3a�,�rr1 ;
sTt�� oF cor.oxAno �
� �, Copy of Notice
County ot Pitkin ) y
;
I, ....�aLit�Z'£�Z7....M.....Ci.�SS.a��..... do eolemnly awear that
, ;
;.s�.
; � -,. ...-_ •
i a�ane .Busine.��...Mana,ge�_..... or� nspErr�s, ; � .. �
that the same 1s e. weekly newspaper printed, 1n whale or in part. , .... ..public nofice:� �
and pubHshed in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has : �����aTm�B �mb�e1R,1977.1��ti�h�rb�en `
a ,generai clrculatton thereln; that said newspaper has been Qub- p����q,��1Y,1979. ;
lished continuously and �ilnterruptedly in sa.id County of Pitkin, � NOTICE��RSBIF(BYEN thid lnar „fbi b11owL� � . Lrae�� _
for a�perlod oi more bhan iifty-two consecutive weeks next prior ° �u��O��4��0° � � �����P`
m u[Pifkh►Cauatp w11! b te�61r to tab�e li7T bnr�n e�ah�duMd tat- .
to the Sirst publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise- A���������� �<-di�:ti�.m�, &p„ ,:
ment;that said newspaper has�beea admitted to the United 3tates ar�tlo�.p�larb.�eh�duNd fae�fmdy, tamti�r 1i1,1977:
mails as aceond-class matter under d.he �provisions of the Aet of
March 3, 1879, or any amendmeats thereaf, and that said new�s- Ynblie Hwelnp.` �'� �
paper is a weekly newspaper duly qua.lified for publlshing legal 1.��������p� , 1.16 pm ;•: �''`
notices and advertisements with �khe mea.ning of the 2aws of the : �- s �. ;.
SW.te ot Colorado. j ;' ���d�f��b'�P�i► . 1.80 pm
Lws�b�ek�(�rL+ilontrdaoWbaf � .
' G�l L:C�k I l o�d b�t w w n t h�h w p i t a l - „
That tlie annexed lega�C notice or advertiseTnent was publfshed ; : ,, ; dy,�od prine�dpw�i Cb�pbsl � � � �
' in :the reg�ilar and entire issue of every number of said weekly a �,A������: �� , ,,
,.,�
:. .
�e�pMtw�iite m tlis wMt rfdp ot �_ {r �
newspapera for the period of....1...._.......consecutive insertions:asid �` : Arpo Hamfain ,t , .! '
t,hat tUe firsL publlca.Uon of said aotice was in the iasue of said �4.������m�pi� -:�� ., L �
,,`• �' Caueb I�d� Vr'Codrr�oommend�d bj�
newspaper dated .._Atl�U3t_.2.rJ._. ..... A. D., 19 77... and that di�Pl�nin�indZaoio�Communu►'mit� . +; ;
the last�publicakion of said notice was in the iseue of said news- ��0°���d 9,197'7 .
_ ;,. , . .... .. ., ,. �. :
' ���:wsn.u.a.�ai��c��.. �sss2oxo�ru a�� `
paPer dated ........--•�.._-•......................... A. D.. 19.-••••_ ?'��114sdntRoominfhrPlfkicCauot� nl.r:budnirhwe.. . •
Cau�uuM.608;Ei�t�(�in 8tt�et,A�pen tMi�Nl Kin�ln Ch�iimm�:.
on 8�pt�mb�e 19,`1977 d thi dma�dated � Hwrd of Cwaty C�omirimas:.
/ '•���rrlieatlau.od'pinpad aod. : • Pftkia Camq.Cobndo
�j� ��� ' diao�as ae�ratlabls tor dmto�iap�nd ', ;' ;:
.. ..�......._-c��.:!L.....____._... iaquiria�_ bi mrle ia the , O!- :PubUahed in the Aspen 1Siaes on Ayaud .:
6as.`A�aa�t7 Ha11.180 Bon�m�� 26.1877
Subscrlbed and sworn to before me, a notary pubHc in and�ar � ' -
. . . ..
. _ .. , . �
.
•�r r
�/ � �
the County of Pttkin, State of Colorado, Yhls .......1............... day o! �
/ g ;
����1(.�.1.._.. A.�.� 19.�� i
;
�
� ... ....C�_�.G.LI�.._ ..:......_.!%�2.���(�. rl �. �.;
Nota.ry Publlc '
'_ , �
My commission'Explres M�:.�Qftimi�SAO.!l.Expjres,Nov, 3, I981t ` i
, ; i
. - :
� . '; `i
�
;`, i
�
� `
_ _._ ___.. __.._.. -.- --- ..._.....__.. _. . ._ ._. ___. _ ___ .__ _ . _ . _ . .__ ._ _ _. _ . . _ ----- -___ _.. _.i
�
!'11� 1����1� �.�1111�� ;
Box E
�
�
Aspen, Colorado I?
PROOF OF PUBLICAt10N �
�
;
;
STATE OF COLORADO )
� �, Copy of Notice
County of Pitkin ) �
x, W i 11 i am R.., Dunaway.,, ao solemnly aweax that
i �n�.ne ,,._....,Publi�her,___............... or TxE ns�x �s; Eonr� oF co. COhf;:t�R�; '
that the same Ls a weekly newspaper printed, n whale or in part, PITkIN C0. �
a.nd publtahed in the County of Pitkin, Sta.te of Colorado, and has Pub2ic Hearin� Er.hib=t.;
a •general circula.tion therein; that said newspaper has been Qub- D�to : �f'/�} .7-?
1lshed continuonsly and ulnterruptedly in sald County of Pitkin, "°"'°----°-°-°°--••••- �
for a �perlod ot more bhan fifty-two cansecutive weeks next prlor Sub,jeCt : m���n,�.pk_R�,��„� '
to the tirst publication of the annexed legai notice or advertise-
ment; •that sa.id newspaper has been admitted to the Unit,ed Sta.tes
mailg as sceond-class matter under �the �Qrovisions oP the Act of
March 3, 18T9, or any amendments thereof, and that sa3d ne�vve- � (,�j'/'�C�jjm /'��L'¢
paper fs a weekly newspaper dnly qualifled for publishing degal �
notices and adver•tisemettts with �the meaning of the lawa oi the
Stake of Colorado.
That tlie annexed IegalC notice or advertisement was published
in the regular and entire issue of every number of said week?y
, .
,
newspapers for the perlod of ...1.............. consecutive insertions; az►d • !
that the first publicatton of said aotice was in the issue oP said
. �
newspaper dated ..�.l�l.l,S.te.._.1�,... .. A. D.. 19 .�7. and that " ' �
the last publica,tion oP said notice was in the issue of said news-
paper dated ._....••-.___.___..-••.................... A+. D.. 29_....-•• '
......�..�....��..'�_._�'...-..�.��r�����
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a nota.ry public 1n d�om �
the Gounty of Pitkin, 3tate of Colorado, thls ..../�....... day ot �
. .��e�r.au"••-••. A.�., 19.1..� I
1i���,C� i
--�1��'��....... .. ... ... i
Notary PubHc
i
nzy coramission exptr� .�j�_�pmrDi�sion,Expires Nov. 3, 1980 ;
�;
�
;i
�;
�
,
;�,
�
�:
( -----------
�------- ---�—___----__... .._. -�-----------
I .
i
�: . :
�
c ;�:�.
� �{ ;,.
r�,,;,_
��CE�_ ���r�
. 'e i��y�'t�;
. � � ubli��r�otice ��:
; ��•��� �, � }= �.,� ,
�,,�,�,�, �
, �'Y :;, � � t:PublkH�''i�rtn��'r� t��
K 4 � � . t.d. t� �r
�,F I�1dliosLbvabYalwo�fi#a�'� ai
� wlri b�hdd`an , , �`
,1➢T7.at i lllpm i4�y �
t .;b,00nada tbr�arw W mtL�;�
m�P at4��d� L�
?:w�'.
� kaowaa�tbil[ial�ParY. an�.;
''wa�rqntl,l.:dwm�id' .' �,�
, Arp�n�mdi�nowpe,apoi�dfo �d -� !
� I�rm�orrit ll'aLe�f�� eapy of a
4.�, �b`s ,. In tb�,%; !
oe6ea,Ci�j H� +�1.���J6-9D9D.aoet:t '
' �: re�uLi bu�iaw)iouia . �
,.=By,IfideaellCinrlr�r;:pu3rman :S
- F :�.5,.. .r��!d������l11',:3 �
..:. ...:, . . .. 1
f !
. . � PII��ld;ltl��lll�/�NU'�t���lDIld�y ��i �
�^ �Ujli1�ll�1� �r ' i�. A
��''�+l����_1�4X"+� �4�rs..F i�J;;i`1�L.-.. 1 � : tz� z .� - . � +
���jy'"�' �;�,..i�,u�r?'. � r H� '�'Yi��w",� �� �}r j-,�r ,-. , _ :�
� ^��,.K.7,�� � �"` � N.r s�.�r��� - 'b *-. ' . �rsl�t�. �.e 1 .{jy,,..�nC} ttij
�
�.�"'.f.�.��;. f k� r ��.� � � � `� , �MtDLAND , PARK s `.� �ra�' ��i=.��� �.�
��-�. �.�a~ .u,�Y� �`a�t�:.,. f �.;� D18CONNECTION tMAP tr•'k`u�rr.�xxh�.a :'
;@§"�! � � x4; ,a dt;m � � � � F { ' t�rN[ratY.�A.+reN.;�aahd?�t�'ji�:F��'397.t �
.�F'u w�n,�^'.f:k,"��.��fz'4-j� C.i�'' Y �-: �� .r . wc M wn _ro.ww' wu � i .�
� � �y,, � rr� S� s d'� k +•wa�. u�we• r+�` r+�wr �
� i� .c�,j'i,•+ C ' ,y���4 t a „�`ey�f,,� � � t^.�i �'� k-^���1'�'a�����fS'b
e . ,y.yyy�,��� + i�'�� �+ � '�•�Fy��tF�'�!�"a�y�� � i.. ��'�'e��l `�11�' .�,�,';��� � - i
ti'Y " � 0. �:�. 3}'IY .f S /* '� ;�.^� a � ,y 3 < x
a� �Y,hn. s � � f i ..�,. . j✓ c..r+ S5 .�F' .� �.t:Yr'x��'*�i�fr�lls��,�F��i75, --i,� Z:
r s. - t.� -x i :` ! t `�+" o-r t Y' n �1 .+ �
�+it�� N�1�'��,K �, � ,+;,,, . �� �y ( t�, z��-i+� .�'$�3�''�yz`• -� t° �{ n
k'+i�`?';���.�Yi�^O,`�`�hr6zx� .,,� ._ N ( fiYl �` �r tr,f��`���������?� � x� :
S,�' r
� �y�,a�1�f"�'..7'�'V ! q k���f�Y ��.�� ��we:-.�..� f' t �. iFCY<Z��L�-�,.�ai�sa`'.�G�'�.'��kT _.� 3
���r � �
+�4�2ti�Y'�.�}�f'f`~}�tk¢.g,+�TYr.' �11}F) .,. Ms 4.��`►n �. .. :J' ��..�1 ��'r.+ ut J�.��l _i ;
1 �'2. '^
r �di�i � k�Z��h �'�I��E Ytt1 -'•�r it .� r '�.. ��l 'a' �u-. a'.. � (.>. "tiM -jT�•'S� Y..""i� _� �
,���r�!Pry,r«��N�^�hl , � ��.-�� � 4,� � r 3 7�21Ss�y�y� � ��car' a".J'.L"r.l�r�t��`.i''�.i.a :�i . �
A
ro �. �.�+h s t s; . "� 3"�'� "^r'j4't �f(Tjfr y�y�:rX,��l�� ' t�t�4 I
'� ?.+'��- ����3��"'�� t" ° ��� �� ;IY r ,s�,,�,`�"'""' '1� �}p.^i3f�a 1lM-' 3�!.'i��r1$���C '� f �
�[, t LF r F i �-�`.f.��'i r � a,�.$'f 'F •a ;y�} ,;;� y.`.. �;-�'sT;�.%�+�.`'i.dp s j.°i �
e ? k� ay°t �,� .:.� � �.. i�,F- -.s s .� {J+-w..s�.7�`n� ta."�.�� �1
�K -� i � � .� �-�'--- Ss. .- •}
7 a,r� }3r- ry� {. t j+._ 7 a.� ry if!�'�{ r . �'- ,t'°,.',..3r,"S.'�� .(w�..,,.,.�"`G..:_`t"'�,s..�-� 4 �-.,
{tr5 ,. i ;7�`�^ l:�S f,�y - •.� � ,�y�`S�� R3 :� � � '�' 'X'"'�"'y...."_ �w-` *g 'R'-°. ��� es'�.�� ;
� , 4� �t �fi��. � t b �r ✓ t t��ry�w y .�t ,X,, � �: "KE'.�#'tYi#�a �'+� -r �-
� ,.r �
� I � 1� 1} �{ ,}�}' Y1. �%R `d'4$j 1.F, 'Q .^� �.j 4 h L
t `�r-,�a""'__�—i'>�.",��„ -a�t � �-��'+• ��"A9�+y"r.. i � '^7G""` �c?lY�T�� i�"`til '`�en'�,` +� ..,r�. .
r#.r''HCr �' �s�,� `3`e4`' .� '»., i>'S '. u,�.5 .*•Ct.' �''.�..L'i Jy�"^ 'Y]� s�1.., �3��o x r �:1
� lV F��� i y� , �S { T � � S 1 ��"' fJ . 'fa.��f e �t • S . �
F' 4 .�. �.y { � � y r f F' Ct .j= t � t Y, a. s � >,l � 1 �5.;�
'�� h�..i '`J�'�t yt� t { 1 r 4 � s s -re<� +i�1.. ,� � S.. i a t3' , .r� 3'r l� }.£ aY 1�!
�f�r�+ y i xi*. � ''� '*(�� i "� �#�...+ •s5 ��«. tz a 4 l '�er-� ,`�+��''� ,-E�{.s1���tt'��'�ti }:.
'�t t � h . �rae w.�a� � • � �4' a �i.f x tAyy. tt s � t ^�'., �
Y�,+Tis�."�3,A s j=..�i K� y�a.-� �� � _` }4 '£�{".y+��f fs����ti .} � �.,y�f s rT -- �1,��"��1L lti A�'`��r '� 7
.� �_�,,Y''T�� �t'La�7{� �
a�a,.t '�' r ��( ep � 4 F�- ,+�y � r f'rx�' t+'� -. �.�'��`T y°y� �J �i '��,�.4u.� ���`�'4-�� �3�+lt i�
*rri1M C�fit�� 'E`�✓ V' .� � [Y `v�e �a'R� 1 � ��'. � Y �Fi tr1 � /
a?. � ,N �,+ ,7s`f.%`'�' '��ca L: �'��..�a °l�a ixrtr ��fi��^'�`'�b�'"G,,'gf � k�.�►; ."'r�+$�'�`-t4�.��r sdar ��'�� �f .:}
� ���,�5��� '� � r i r . � � k �;Z.�`�s�ka f F� � "� s�t �
s �r >t,i„ t�,,�s�cyi.e.�,�f"'"'3�aYz7pt'x/4�,�"Fmi�#.� 2'..y�rt�i .'.`�'1%�S,ilx,. *�' v ��y� �t`tr s-�. .� �s�q..� j p�r�i
{t✓.a.��.�i'K°x.r9rr1:- .�.�L.., �� .�:5' t*���+�..nr :'H m"r _�.. �1�:.'=+Cf^ '.ti � . �.I..7� ..N� w '
_,...,,_e;,e,.-,_'w'u."���rrY�al'd� ,. n^!wd"-.t�".a��[��i-.:.'}.'�""�C�e.`�...�."_��.r�`..�� .�ssyfin'''�,=�.'s�`�ws�:'.L"''.a$�.".^1.,..:;.7:
x.�., 1.
1.
i.
. 1. . . _... ..... ... . . . . . .. . � .
I
` �. ' •
;t
[
'
G?.At3T OF UPTIOiI
For and in consideratio:l of grant to the Redstone Water and
Sanitat�on District, a q•�asi-rnLnicipal corporation of the State of
� Color3do by Grace D. Lle�•�eliy::, .Tosepii Edo�ard Lle�aellyn and �orothy
Jean Artaz, as Tru�tees �;:�sL<:::t to the Last �Jill and Testam�nt of
Rees Lle�aellyn, d�caased, da��d the day of
1974 of the follocoin; described laa3, ico-�•�it:
T::at �art a:: the •�ollc:•r'_�.� �escr�L-ed land �•�hiciz lies
U2LW2221 tfic r.2St J411).� O� ti:.^. r.i�7St81 River Ori t�12
Weut F�iln L:1.°.. �'.OL'ilt�1 ::0::l G':1 ��le G8Si., LO-471t:
� i.=2Ci. 02 �di'iCl lOCc'�::i'_ lI: '"i:3 ..�%;; Oi $i:C�lO1Z 17� T�. 1�
S. , it. Sb [d. oF �'t�`�:.�« P.:�i. , �rw-re �arLicularly dascri-
ced as =ollo�as:
• Pi2�_.:11:ii1� 2`V c1 �G':::� �:= i-t'-�'- G2:St ila 2 OL S2_iil .c.cCtlOTI 1.7
w!?2nce t::a �ast 'Quar�a_ Co:-r_e� o= said Sectioa 17 bears
; S. 00°lu'GO" ;.?es:: - __.�S •°aet;
• L"ner.ce S. So°03'f���JS7a�,: `L42.5� ::•aat to t��e ce�z�zr o=
tL� CryJtal 1:.v�: ,
tnence S. 17°02'C;u" ��sL 150.u7 Taet along tlie center line
of ti:e C-r�sta? :;�ti���;
tize7ce S. 0:;`So'�0'' i?asc 3�S.7& =eet along t..e center line
o� ti:e Ct���a'_ ^�v�x•
thenc� S. -�`0'_'�:+v" ?das� 2>i.73 re2t alon; Cne ceater line
of tt�e Cr�::-=�1 ?2_�(:��e':.
. t17C'T1C8 S. -v�.%J�V:J�� }rj::S:: u1.19 f�.ut 8i0:� i-i1C.' CB.^.i.@Y �.111�
of the Crystai P.�v��;
t?ier�ce S. 70°20'00" � .... io5.42 �eet to Llza i2ort��wzsterly
rigat-o�-�ray l.ina oi.t:a co-���y �_oad;
tnence ;c:. 4i°20'u0" �a8� 195.77 =eet along the i3orthcaesterly
rioht-oi-way line o= t22a couii�y road to a point oa the sasC
line o= said S�ct�on 17; �
• t:ience ,?. 00°10'00" :ast .7�1.93 Teet a'_on� tlie east line oi
said Section 17 to zti� poi:z� of Ueginning, containin; 4.50
� acres mo•re or less an:: subject to a county road as built
and in place.
County of Pitkin anci State of Coloralo.
hereinafter referr..d to as t:ie sut�ect proparty, the Redstone [dater
and Sanitation Distric� i��erc-'�y �ra::;.s Lo Grace D. Ller�ellyn, and her �
heirs, successo�s �:� assigns the righ� Lo oure:iase tliz subject
property if tiie rollowia� �vents occur:
� , . � .
i . . � �
1. The Redstone Wate� and Sanitation District or its
' successors and assigns s:iall ceas� using the subject
property for th� ::-te�z.;.en� of sewage for a period of
. five years or saici bis�-ric� shali iaLl to comnence using
the subjec� �,�o,e_�y -=or LIl@ t-r��tna^t o� sewage �ait'r,in
a oeriod o` �.=_va ;�ea_a co.�aeacing �aitn the date nereof, and
2. Grace �. Ll�we'__�r., ..�� heirs, successors and assi�::s
paying the I'i���to�� �•T�ter a�:�d Sanitation District or its
successors ar..: �.=.signs, �o the �ubj ect property the sura
of $c,500.00 on o-r be�ore ti►e expiratiori of five (5) years
i
� ar.d Six (6) nonths aiter su�ject property is no longer
;
used �or the ;:•_ea�:�:ent of sewage or iive years and six
� � MOT:LIIS fTO:?': t!i0 C:�0 Ci�Y60L lf t'.^.0 treatr.�ent Of se�aage OII
�
� tne subject ;:-ract is :ot con:ulenced �oithin =ive y2ars of
tne date hereo=.
This op;.ion shsll t.:_�inate upon the iirst to occur of the
' � followino eveats: �
. � a) Grace D. �"_e�aa�1�: or har heirs, successors and
• asei�ns isilin� to pay to the Redstone Tlater and
Sanita'tion I7is�rict or its successors and assigns to
, the subject D:ope-rty tha sum of $n,500.00 ��ithin the
time proviZed �y Paraoraph 2 above, . or
U) ihe 21st a�zniversary oi the death of the survivor of
the followi.� naned pe-rsons:
L_ndsie R�_:e� Ll�wellyn
_��ntoiz Jose�h Llewellyn �
''!'•r�vis R�e� i.le�aellyn '
Shanna t•fa•ri� L1e�aellyn '
ic.:ya Y.ynr. �=c;wellyn
2ick.:y Lee A-si.az
�
:��or_ca Jea�z Palmer �
� Jay �:::e Art2z
Wendy Lee Palrner
REDSTONE j+1ATEF E1IQD S.ANITATION bISiP.ICT
BY �S�
. � Its '
_�_
____
� . ATTESI:
• )SI
sy
" STATL OF.COLOR.4D0 }
� ) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foreGoing inst-ru�:ant was acl:r.oYaledged b�fore �e
this da� o= , .1974, by
. � . as
' and oY
respectiveiy of t::e Redstor.e
Water and Sa.zi�a�i�: Ais�_ic�.
Witness my ha.3 aad o�-=icial se2i.
:4y co�rn�ssion e�:nir�s: :
i�c�ary _�_1_a '
�
.
`3,_
. . ' i
. . . t
i �
. • ' � .
' 1�.•.ieZliYl. ii�n . .
, ..
' � . �"'`---�!.���
� ' .
� _�.`
S�l�.t--� . {" = 1�':�:.. ►
T".L//!J �'C� � . .
�
' oc� 7"LiNCt� a �7'1Ct .(1i �.A^:� ZO.^-�2�:�?.^. �•) i'.ti7n �q2•}};o=i5�; �j��S ��L� $0�:�':OY' �.ry�
. Tor�^; �1� 'lf! iout?^., Rz^:•� ;;' ;1���, oi t'r.c• c:•,.; r,•..;ci�.�ii.
;•°r,1•�c'ir�n �rorc� ;�1r�i_cular?,y �•=�ci•il,�d as ;'�-�'.��u- :
.
&yf;i_r.nin,; at :t pnir�t or. t'r�a ea,t li^a �f �ai:. ���c�::.�:•, ;7
• • t4}',�1'.Ce `.5� ??ast 1.�t�• Col'r�.r Of �n3� 3..�':'O•� 1; e+�:a:•,.
SoLth QO°7A�0{�" c1�:,t ?;21.9� fc�o;.; t�,cnr., So•.:�i, i�;�::°q}'�C••
� :'J�+st ^.�:2�5� fr�ot t.n .`.hr. r.�r.��r o: ;:'.^e C;-- �•a'. :ti.v^;•;
,�....
:. s� r � ,.•. , i
. +.hanco�;iaU�;�1 �`7��>.�.?.�(11i�� 1:it. �. •n� �`�f i•(�t. 1!0��. �.�.1'� C�:.1�.(;?•
• 7.1.1C1 Oi L�10 r:';fSiLi1 �C�Yfl:'j t:1F:!^,GR .50�1�;�1 ;)}Cc.'.��'��"}�� . . :...
� �_'i^�?� fo��t ala!r. tho ccntflrlin� of t.i:. �°;;c��;: _ iti�:�:r;
vfi!.'.:lCF: SQ11�.:1 1(:�7�.�(1�1�� ,�pSf'. z:rl.�/i f�.H': �tiC�"�' ::.^:4 G7;;�.C.�.
13.no of. ti�e Cr;;�tal ��vor; �ner.cc So�rt•h �.::�';;'n�" •���:•„�
, . F,.1..1.? �co� al.�n:; t!:�: r.��•:,c�r1::-M oi t'.:� Cr�•.;t1]. :t:vc:-;
' t'.�IOI:CO S.^.L:t.'1 n�p�nrr�'��• :5.1 i�. Z�.iK��ti�.�. rC��i, t0 �(:': .tOT�.::. �ng�Ol'�!
� T'1F;::t`�0:�-V/Al- �i•,�1 OI' i 1':t? COl*�i'•,`,,j' ^71��j t:.`:1::�� `;�..+.:� /�l�;��..�;r�
` �w95�'i. �.O�i�7'7 I`�:Ct. 1�.0.'�_ f;;?t? �rOI'.f':�It�G�'.C1'���r ri�ht�0:-�:1'• Z.i.T:C
�� oi the cai:.nt.v r��ac? t.� a poi.:;}� on �'.:� r_ast l.ir.�r of :aic,
' �. Saa±ion 1?; t^o:ica �:U.r±h C�G°l�?'��" :�s� 7c'• '?? Sc�^�. alu:'�.•
�• � �
�. \ . �L1f3 f?15� �.17?C Of :3j.f� JOt,t:�.Otl 1.�j t0 Y;:'�3 .^.n?.Yli••Oi ^C��'...:':i.i.t!e
�� � oont'ainir.�* �I�Sn 8(.`('t1u fiC1T`CI 02• �.OuS 1?l�� �Ut?�OCi. t0 A COUT;f•��r
� � , roa�? as �Li.l� ar.tl in •placc+.
_ `, ,
�3Zt, �_ , � . �
��'� �4, • � .
' • •9i _--::�-_ E1'`�:z• '%4 �•2.
�
'�`'�--'. �.:��L't't���•� ;'J
\
, ,
.,� .
` / .'
•,� � i
� � � '
� , \ / .
�.. �' •
'\\
� �
`\�` ��\-\ •t.j E t� '2—C�—W • .i
� �. c�c�
\ \ � � � .
� �
_....--- .._ .
__ _._ ---.__
_ __ _....._..._ . _ ___.__ _._-----___---- ---__._-----!
, ,,. �
`s
c�:� £�n�ix��4 at�rl l��r►d,�ca#�in�. Suclx ncreeo.�f.n� nh�.11 ��
�in�airi�.3 for so 3ant, �� �is� r.i�cri�G oacupir�� ��e
' S��'r;��e� pxa���Y;y.
�� ���']��g i"li`yl'�!d3i�itAt� ffi�lr'•i�.�. t7� ii:�.::tl�.."T[,►� Ltri�3�C1 �Y141 �.:�LI1"� �O C�:14
i
��:r���iSit o� t��� ��c��.xc�, nuca��:�scsr� �rtd �r���.Mp:a o� ��s�;�
�
����ic:� tt�r�ta.
�
�:xe�utu�.# izi uu�.zl.ic�.t:��: ±:?�E� ._., .. ......._ �::i�tiy•c� �;�z�c;i, l.�v�:�,
. .;..
.ti�l��� ..:i.+{;�`}�`�,.���i.� {..',��JT
: n�
i'`r'.,-............. ...._.......�.......-...,...._..�..�...... ..._n.,.......,._..,�
. . . •1-••w�:1y.1 a � 1 i'J'i' / 5 'at '� i� .
i:4��.?'.�dti• •1'a hJ���.Jt ;a�.it: .�:E:e?�z�t..l.�f� �
� � � � � �� � � . � �YC•+•:•'":�'fteie � . . .
. . . . i:.�.3? � �
''�5�._�._ ',•'a'�i�:B�C�Ct7�.,......�...................�...�. ,.
.�i'�'i'���':
�!�nx�Cm�ry.r,....r._...,......___...._._......�__.__�...,.
_ ;
. ;
-�� i
�
_ 1
�
�
;
;
�
EXHIBIT
WILLIAM D. eTOCHEMS g �
�rTOwNer wr uw a
BII BLAKE AVENUE + �
GLENWOOD SPR�N6S,COLORADO 81601
TELEPHONE �03•GID•a67t P09T OFF�CE BOX 190
September 21, 1977
�oaxn or co. c��,uh���s
PITIZTN C0.
Public Hearing Exhibits
Mr. Michael Kinsley, Chairman � �� _7�
Pitkin County Commissioners nate : ._._.... �
Pitkin County Courthouse sub3ect : �'C.1��....1�.(.V...I.�QZ�����
5 06 E. Ma.in
Aspen, CO 81611 '
Re: Crystal Valley Rezoning - Llewellyn Property
Dear Mike:
As I stated at the hearing in Redstone on September
20, 1977, I represented the Llewellyns in the negotiations
with the Sewer District for the acquisition of. the sewer
plant site on the north end of their property. The only
thing in my file are the contracts and conveyances and I re-
member that all of the negotiations leading up to the con-
tract raere oral.
I clearly remember, however, the District taking the
position with the Llewellyns that if they set too high a price
on the property, the plant would be built elsewhere thereby
depriving the Llewellyn property of the opportunity to hook on
to the sewer line. Furthermore, the line was run down the
road through the Llewellyn property an additional 1,000 feet
or more in order to situate the plant so as to serve the pro-
perty.
Very tr ly you
.
William . Jochems
WDJ:v�
, .
. EXHI�T
( � ' � /
- au�ust 27� 1977 ,
' . —
! Pitkin Planning and Zonin� Dept. `
� I'm encloaing a book�'that meybe of interest to you, on rezoning propo�ols.
i
Thia was an area where I lived previously, and the study woa conducted for
several months. The planners drove into the area every dey, looking around ,
and telking to the people. Of course, there were many meetings during that
i
period, to inform the residenta of the proposals and to hear the feed-back.
Several items that have come to mind since the meeting in Aspen are:
� 1- Concerning commerical zoning for Redstone, I feel the end of town near the
, Inn is an ideal erea for business growth. On the river side of the Blvd.
there is available property from the Chapel, all the way to the B:idge, near
the Mine entrance. The land would have to be built up for ,�}i� protection
against the river� and this area xould also be visible from the main highway
phich would be good for the business people.
2- As for the outer area zoning, I feel very strongly that there should be
five acre per unit �home) pieces, which did not seem to be on your maps.
Twenty and thirty acres per unit is just too expensive for most of the people
that want to move into this area. Redstone should not be thought of as a
rich mans valley. I don't want to price the average working man out of this
area. Along with considerations for the amount of atrailable water and the '
terrain of the lan3� there should be some thought of the type of people that
live here. What these people like about the area and how THEY �sant it to grow.
3- Another area of consideration is turning most of the available flat land
into poseible sub-divisions by zoning it into very small pieces. That type
of land is easy to cuL up� so is often over done. I believe in helping the
farmer to keep his land by offerin� him tax benefits, so that•life-style can.
be preserved as an important part of our environment.
4- Something I learned faom•the last study I was involved in xas a way to
retain the character of the original town. Establish a local coaaiittee to
make desigr_ suggestions for all r.ew building projects requiring a building
permit. The committee could revievr these construction projects, keeping in
mind .preset guidelines for retaining the old-time cheracter of Redstone.
This group however, would not beable to force their suggestions on a property
owner. Also, such things as permanent mohle homes. should be restricted.
5- Historic zoning for the toeu of Redstone, or several special buildings:
There are several town atructures that I suggest be declared historic for
there preservation - the Redstone Inn, the old Firehouse, the old building
across from the Inn, and the Castle plus the Carriage House.
6- Zoniag Adjustments: �Vill varizr.ces be obt�inable for zoned arcas if that
persor. caa. prove juat reason for a sFlit, plus adequate water supplg, to divide
their land sm�ller than the recom�ended zoning ?
I am interested in seeing that our children hove a chance to live in thic valley,
t�nd not h:ive to move to the cities, becau:e they cou13 not affor3 to ste�y here.
O S�� �
� . • soaxn oa co. cohut�x�'s' �
� .PITkIN CD.
�r Ateo�v�as �e� . � �blia Hearing F.�chibit�
/�' 00�1' �f/�iS GI��/.v.i���rC C. Dato . _���i.--•17 _•- .
sub�a�s :.���5�.�.�:.�.'Q.����h -
7'a �rr�Fcn� f�► ��ric K. � :
' . E�:}t. No.: _._.�........................
, � � . . � EXHIBIT .
. ` �� � �
• { . (� C, �� ,:� i 7�
.. . . ;��� ,�. / f �
� � ���� -
: . � f. ' � � .� � � �i � � �'� ��� �
; �
._. • . . � �� e � � ' � ��� � ��
; . : . �
. , �
. . ��',�.-�► /�.�� ��� u���
. ,
. ' _ ' � � �`''``l G�U/ ' /� '
. � �
� - . . . ' -; . /� �� ,�,�,a/ ;�, ,:�e-� ,���.c.
.i ,' (� � ^ ._��•�' ��
. . , .� . � ':_� �u��� �.�-� -� y,
. � '_ . : � . � � � z�,,c `,.vt,��, ��
. .. �� C f�r,���� �'�r�
-� -- ' - . :,:� . �liu G�-��'c . ,� ��.0 C `-�'i l
. . . � ''+ �,E� GL��� � ����"° �-�—°�``,�i��=�
.� . . � - L�� ` �, �� -�, Z��
- �� /` ,
. .. , - .. � � ��-�'�,�.� /�-`�`
, .- � ��t J , _ : /
. _ , , f �tieeu c.C%t�.�-��1
. . �� ���� ��� � ��a-�(
. ,: . ��"°`^' _tv,_,e
. � . - �_.��. T� f���
. � . � . �-- , ,
, :.��,/�
• � ' �" ��,�Lf' �u�'�` �L���� .
' � � �`� ., z��u
� .�� .� _ . � �,r����L �z., z`r �.��'�
. • , f �4'l��'U"`'7�[� • / " _' G�-C�'�Q�F �:2��,
I '
. ��
.
� • . ' . . b'OARII OF C0. CONdd'R'S
PITKIN C0.
Public Hearing Exhibtts
' ??aLe . :.�_'1_.:Y._'.1(L�_:.�.L�.L_� +
. , � �C�(
• . . . , gub�ect : (,a�._,IkLI 'L1�Q
;� , , . .
. , ' . . . , -
_, , _ t�
. ` �, ,
� . , . ' �
�.-• ,
. � fl
14 � ,/ ��y��. � �
-e't ` � �-
' . � .� /��D�.- �����4,�iLD� i � / v�l �� /t-u-�c4r.L�/
• . 6 r'�nv� ,, �� � �� .
� �� � /�' N"r �
'` . L G2,�,�-r�r�t� � � ,'I �v�_p
, , � : � l�2�¢� .. . 1��
� . � � . � — � ��
� . � � - . , � � �'�� � . . �
, � .- � � . � � �,�,� .�. . . �- ���.
. � . . � ��� -
w.�:� -�-� .
. . : . ._ �� � .�,�� � , .
. . � . �� � � ' � �'��
; w� �..�� � �� .
. ;� : . .' .. �r f�'`r�` � ��� �,e�. - ,
' : � � : e�`� �� ^-.U..��.
. . - _ `i � D,,;� c�� �� _ �u����
l
, , , �/ y�.
. . . . , [� �,r,�`` ' ��f� cr�r� ,
'-�__ "• " . �;�,. � �� ���� ����> a,-��r/
" � .. . �:..; ��� ��`` �-�� �' .
�. . : �:� �� �`-�-` � z-� -�- �.�:
.�.. . ..: ,� � �yed�-�-�. �� '
'; .. �,�-�' �; ����"'� /
- .. . ., T . '! � ,���,�„� , \�� ' �zr�lcc't.
.. , - f ��r� • _
, -��-�` �.� � �
.. . , � . � � � �� a _ p �,� ��-�-��`-
� f2�° � � �,2�.c u`1j �
. . . ; � J U'r-� �� yv�,�-�!
. . C��� �,�- �`'� �/ �-�-t� .
� � . 1 ./��""` � a f2����`� �� 1 . �'/.�r
- .. ! , ��� W�Ltt�l > �'J,,_,r,-�,,.�Gt.�
. i ��;Y,u� U"p _ / �,�-ir-�-z/�'�,ic •l` .
.- ���2�""�;' � �Gv " �� ;��Z�c..,
�!
. ; . ���,lu
• • , c�c� �y�t�� /��... -- ._ ..._ _.. . _
. . '{.._..._ , , ' „ -' , ' . . '
i . .
. ' , i
. , v,.,
,�
1 ' _ . � . • � �..r'�"tt",��.C� •
', - . �, . _� . ' . .� .
i . � • �
� .
, � •
. rf
. • �' . .
f
� .
• �
' �:) � -�
• . , �z� �� a.,,r �tir� ����r
��� '
� � �
, � : . . ���'� ir,e`.�C� �v/.� o-�;r,� �� ��
.. : : ` _� �,,� /�;�y/,lB�..� `��-,�-� G��.t�/:
�d(.0 �
� . � " �� - , � � ��-�,�t �-�� ��� . .�.�
' ��� � � � .
, . . � �� � ��°-`�
: . � � ; � ` ��_� �.�-,� ��` -
. . t v ��.�.�..��
.�� � ".� � . � „ �� ''���;, ��� ,�> �
. t ,, ��� � . G, `�
. . - � . _ . -�� ��'r,,.�-�a�` L� ���.�
, . � �
. . . , ���� `� ���;���';�-�
. - . - .�"� '� � , ; �� � v
_� .• ' -i,� �,G�i!�,iwt' " �l . ` ��l
- . " ' � � � �
. - • �rG� �� C�LSti! �ty�
. �C��f� - �- ' . .
/' � �`6u /����-t.
:. : :,. • - ��,�'�, C -- i
� I l �y," �'��'�''c.`'--� cc..
: . �. � - - . �I �,��� �/-� � , ,
, . . . ; ,�w� � `� ���-
. . , . ��- -� � 1 , �
,� . � ,�=� � °� ���
� ,
, � 1 � � � -%�
, . . �iZ� c� ,���.0 Gr�c.-�v`-�jt
. . �I /! L�i,I- / �.
. . tvu ;i�/` � ;�i�cF� ;;��✓ EiL�.���
� • ., i � � ? �
' ' . ��. �u��7°�� -
; . . . . . - . -.- --- .
� , . . ....
. � � _ , � . . , . . ��� ,
- . .Y .. . ..,,,.�-..�. .
i �. , � � � . - ' "
� . � �
� � .
� . . . �
; � . .
; . � �;
, . � �._. . •
; � . .
. . - ,i
I . . .
� '
t .
t
f �
�
" • .
. . . •
i ��-7 "
� S./
' . ' j. ,�' �� /l.� �G� ,`��
, . �
. � � a� �
A • . . . ' , I • c /�(r(
. ; . . , � � � � � ��� �
.. . . � � _
. : :. . . � �� s . �o��
. . . . � . . _ .��. �� � �� �-�-� .
. . „ �� ,
: � � , > �, . , � ���-r�
�✓� ° , t�� L�r-��-�
. . : � U��� 1��� . .
. , . , � � L _
. . , �-� �;�� ��� .
. �� �. � ���� .� �-G.�
. �- �:�
. t . : ��� � � .�.� � ��`� ,
� � .. . ��� ��
� � . � � . ��� �� ��
�, ._- ' . . ' �°_`3: . � � .,�� p7��e�. �-c �
�. � . :-. � .�%�/�'`' � �G��
. . . .:.., �� ���� �
_- . � -. �� _ , - � _ ��,-�.�,;
- - � �� � � a � ��� .-� '� 1�'�.
. _ -. . : � ..� ��'`�" - ' � �-�'�, .-��
. ��� � ��� �
. . . � �`�
�� � . . . , �� � l,�,��-�
._ � . : : � ���� y ,_
. �-�
: � � � �/��� , �-°�����i�
, �,�..�-� ��-�` .
� . �,�� °��-� ,��
, �j�y Gt lG�� �� r/
.�', . j ' . � ' .
. � , C'L!7//i�r ` •
i /
' ._...._-.-.r--..r-r--_.._.-...... ....... . . .. .
i . � . .. .._.. . . . . ' ... _ . __.- __^_ . .
• , _ � . � . . � .� '� /
. . �� � .
. � . . • • .. �G'•�•�^f
. . • � . � � . . - . . , • , .. , .
. • .
• , - . . � ' �, , •
• � .
� _
. �� // �
�/� �j�J E.47�-�'�i'`•zZ����c aoc-i
, .,- � ��� �
• ' Y �G " v ,l � -, `
. f � . � r i2'^ `�CZ�A A. •
�l �� ��� G�
ri/it/! f/—c�c �
.:. � : : . � � � �,� �,,�� �-c
. .. . , ; _ ��'�' —��� .
. , . : ��,� a ��.� �
� : , � �1�� � � `� �� ���
. . . . _ ��
� , � . ��` . � �
. . , , . . � L� .���� , �� .
. .,t.. . : ;, : � �,�GyU"�.`� `��6�
. . . . � - -. ��, � . �
� . ��.,.: . . � � � ,��� .
. :; -,� -�'� ��� _
�� .�- � � . ,�'� - Gu'-ir.�t �`� . � _= " '`�ur``.�-��
.. .- _ . - , � � � � .
. . . . }�. � �� .� �c ��'
.�. . . _• �,, a� �� ��u
- .�. �- / �-(:�� � ��� -
� . . ' . ���-�� � �.-
. . _ _ ��,,;c� -�t
. : . . . � � �,,� ��� � _ •
, , . . �� � ��,� �-,,,�e�1��:;
' . . � c.�c� ��� � /
: . � � � � � , ,,,� t� ���� , �`'-
. . . . . � G//��� �� �� �,
, : � � v� ���� �
,. .. � �� ,� ���.�- .
- .; � �.� �f � � ��;
� � � � .: i .��--�`'�Z'..�`.e , y �l
. , i �"-�'1+� 7 � G'c�i�. C � �
' . ! L��� ��
� . � • ; . . .
. . _ . . . , . • � i
. . ,�
. , ' . . �,.�,��'�.� '
. . t � � ' •-
. . .
,. � , r�
- f ,�^' .. �
. • . .
' . . � . . • ,
� . � C��. . .. . �. ..
. � ��;
� _ U'� .'ti`"`��� �,-�e� �t �.e��GI�Y�:� �
�R � �
; : ' : � : - • �1�,�,� u�-� ' �` 7 Q;�° ��
� . . �. �.� � �: � ��. � � . ,
� . : �`�
: : , , . ,. . � ` �� �j`wvvl a .�L.� v(� ��f
' , . ��IJ"�'�f/ /'(��(/"� �� �!�%�Z,R/G�-� /��/l ��/U
• , � I i
.. . � . �� . L �� �-�� �
. :'� � . :=' �,��c.�.�' �� ���� .<--�-� ��
. . . . . ` ��
k;:. , . . : : . . � ,�,-�,� ��'� ��� .� > . .
. •. � � .� �':�t/( L` �'��"`� C�,�' G�'`2'�*�-!
_... . . � ::� ` � �
; .. .' �� � .�� �
. ���� , �
� .:�� _ .
_ � � - �- � � � . �� .
,
_. . . . , ...: . �� �� ��'--� ,,
.. �.. : . a�r�/� /"�-�'.�� � '�' .
.� ' � � .�
, . . . _ . �, / �"3�/��9
- ,� ,� � � ��G��-w�'� �ricr. �'P9.��-
i
;
- , . . . � �
' - . ' � . � � . . . . . . ��Y.�",r��9� _ . � .
� - .. • ; �. . � . � . . � - , . . .
. . . � � � � �' � � . . . _ . . . .
. ' - • . / . . . . .�..��.� . . � ' .. . ' . , �.. . � .' `'t
EXHIBIT
- 1 r' r �� � r. .. r+ �3 � �1 �-20-?7 r'�.
1'1�� 1�:�.�rI� �1'1111��
;
Box E L��r,D or co. co;.u,��R�s '
PITJiIN C0. 4
Aspen, Colorado Public Hearing Exhibits j
Date . _,��7 �
�
sub�e�t :�_.�lV. k'�l�pI?G1� ' i
� ,
PROOF OF RUBLICATION �
;
STATE OF GQLORADO ) '
� �. Copy of Notice �
County oP PitWn )
I
I, .W.a.�.�.iam....�.._...D�zz��way._.... ao solemniy swear that
I am khe ..._�u�1�i.She�'......__._....---•-•-•... of THE ASPEN TINLES;
that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whale or in part,
and published in the County oP Pitkin, Sta.te of Colora.do, and has
a genera.l circulation theretn; that said newspaper has been Qub-
lished continuously and uinterruptedly in sald County oP Pitkin,
for a �period ot more ht�an flfty-two co�secutive weeks next prior
to the Sirst publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise- ( ��' " �• ' •� �
ment; that said newspaper has �been admitted 4o the United 3ta.tes pU�IIC •�O�IC��
mails as aceond-claes matter under khe provisions of the Act of ?�Cry���.V��,��� '
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- " ' ' °' ` '
pa.per is a weekly newspaper duly qua.lified for publishfng legal Notios i�h�ehy d�en fhat a a°°tl°wd '
notices and advertisements with 3he meaning of the laws of the �������n0��°�°��;�
Camb Commirdoe�ea:ao 8sptam'_c. +<,
Sta.te of Colorado. 19TJ,at�7:00 pm in fb!;l�ii�taa!�an�'i�'
Rad�tms,Cobndo.eo ahe�i�r a raaqlni.
That the annexed legall notice or advertisement was published °��°�°�����v���
p(f�.Countj: .� �
in .the regular and entire issue of every number of saSd weekly • 1 x •'�L^ 4 �
M�jor p�ovidao�d W.e'rmm�'ieehd°'.
AF-4 PUD:7uiib io��fh�8wenfh Ad-,
newspapers for the period of ....1............. consecutive insertions; a.ad veolLCCtinn���.�., ,&17mebi., is- '
that the first publ3cation of said aotice was in the issue o[ eaid ����"""' Z°°�'��°i
R�ne��eniC�dIIB-.90.5�ot:ttieremaiod�ruf�-.
AU USt zrj ?7.•-- and that . owdAFl�`l�for�����so-'
newspaper dated ........_�z..-•-••-•-•..................... A. D.� 19
the last�publicakion of said nottce was in the issue of said news- �°°�II°�6''����'���
H�i�b Sulidi�idm.- '�'.
.,. :, .. .
.. ;,, . _. ,
paper dated ._•.....--•...............••. A. D.. 19........ Aoapydthe�aea6c�io�m�p�mq!bs'. :
--........._. e�amined•in LLs OAks;of ths C��ty-Coun�' .
P1�onsr iR Cit7 Aall.ll�pia
///� :in�c�tLr.budnw Loun 4am 8:00 am to `;
Gf�L��%�'.�l/G1��.�/� 6�0 pm Mmdw t�u lhidw• _
•-•_•••-•_•-°-•-°...-•••••-••-- -°........................... _.._ ;> ;,c;
sy�a�.ei xa►ady:��
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a nota.ry public i and dorr ���C���m�`
' r s
/� ' Publiehed m t6s Aepm'11me�1Lur�dip�, :.
the Couaty of PLtkln, 3tate of Colorado, this ......_.G� �'��'i� :. y .. �
••..._..._.. da oY ,: .
Y i_ .. ....,__..._._.__ .
.............. A.D.� 19.�� ,
C.G;�
.. . �C._._.... ..... -•• •-.......�...._.
Nota,ry Publlc ��
My commission expires {y�-Gfliniiiissi0n-fxpires-iVov. 3, 1°80
�
-.__ _._._.___.._.�._...._.__......_,.,..� _..._...,,_. ___�. __.____.... _._ __ _...__
_ _ _ .r_ 1.
� �� •
BOARD OF C0. G01�Ai'R'S PROOF OF PUBLICAT7011i
PITAIN C0. GLE11lWOOD POST
Public Hearing Exhibits
Date : --•-•�.�Q�?7.... � STATE OF COLORADO, •
Sub�ect : ��,_Riy_�...�QZVncI�� COUNTY OF GARFIELD.} ss. �3 9 2 2
�
r. .................reter..w�...�ta�ffer........................... ao Sa���Y
�, aeneral Mana er
, � } ,�.s � swear that I am ...............................................�................................... of the
��� � rx�y���� u GLENWOOD POST• that the same is a newspaper printed, in whole
a�r.�y„i...,;�u�s, or in part, and published in the County of Garfield, State of Colo-
ow��h•�+�n x�.rakr, : rado and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has
�"'�!�'�k�O1M^W�!�n °a s'�:'"b"s° •" been published continuously and nninterruptedly in said County of
ti y+977 7�OOp.m Mi�h�Rsd��eni th�ot R«i �
�b�con�WN e�nimYnp e{'i GarField for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next
`'" � bi!n�,«vaMw-wroua to ; prior to the tirst publication of the annexed legat notice or advertise-
.
�f pk�� .= � ; ment; that said newspaper has been admitted to ihe United States
� t�.o��...=a,xpt��a.�Fa ] mails as second-class matter unde; the pro�•isions oE the Act of
�'° Z° b`�"'�'"'�°°r^�Ih+;: March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said newspaper
�''' "r`°'� i°"' �°'•W°°°°""� is a newspaper duly qualified for puUlishing legal notices and ad-
_ p' �+r �� Zo�� �« R`d`ro�.'�°°`�,' vertisements witbin the meaning of the laws of the Slate of
�,° p��0:kr-1h�-•-�-,,wriet8'd'.r of rM::
"'�h�ee P""'°°'h e«^��. Colorado.
1 t RS- /w tond�ponh of�M��Nkn I(n��:
. r�^ •��Ny ol Cryatal VNw Hdphb Sub.�', . .
�' ' ' That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in
�,'�� �+�'��.'�qk rnan��w mav.may u._ the regular and entire �ssue of every number oE slid newspaper for
Z�Mid�M�Offlc�ol M�CJyitound.:
. Pk r��S�ryHell Aip�n Cobrode durYp.:: . .
"� i ,��+«�ha���.,,,,e�aoo.�n ros oo- the period oE......1.......consecutive insertions; and that the first pub_
P''° �"�°''`�"'f'�°'' � lication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated
y � . � �' w �`K� - '.
-�ey .:, .X t� ����'�~�M.
��,�4�e� ��� �1�$L1.Q�....2�...............A.D., 19....:j..'�., and the tast pnbIication of said
�>r�n.�:d��.��a iv�h x,.��;;
�odrai ,; ,� ,,,. notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated ...........................A.D.,
x�. , __ _.. . . ...._ .
19.............
�
In witness whereof I have hercunto set my hand this .30th
day of ..........A1�.6h�.e�t ..��A. 1 .. ..........
`�� �.
(3eneral Manager x ��� �
Subscribed and sworn to before me,a notary pu lic in and for the _
County of Garfield, State of Colorado. this ..........�Ot�................ day
.........Ati�t3et................. A.D, 19.77....
. of ......... ..-.. ....... .
�� .� p
{SEAL) ...�'.Y�Q�tX�GAn1t,..4� . .. . .
.. �. ��
DIotary Public
���cpltw J�n.18�19�P�
MyCommission Expires.............................. ................................:.........,
f
:
i '
�
J�ROME F. GAMBA P.E:L.S. MINING&GEOLOGICAL
CONSULTING ENGINEER eNCiNeEaiNc
P.O. Box 1458 303 945-5903
Gienwood Springs,
Colorado 81601
Bo�rd of County Commissioners 28 September� 1977
Pitkin County Colorado
506 F�st Nlain Street � �
Aspen. Colorado
EXHIBIT
� � L�)C!)�'
Gentlemens /
I ae� �+ri'ti11g fihis at the request of Mr. Joe Ilexel]yn to explain the
planning and design cansiderations involving the looation of the Redstone
Water and Sanitation District seWage treatment plant.
I acted as engineering consultant to Redstone duri.ng the formation of:.the
district and subaequent design and construction of the system.
During the plarming period, several locations xere considered for the
looation of the sexage treatment plant. The selected site was finally
ahosen over a site ad�acant to the Redstone community becanse the aeleated
site xould faoilitate aenrer service to those develope�trle lands betxeen
Redstone snd the Forest Service campground to the north. This was considered
to be a very praotical decision in that if sexer serviae were svailable.
the land could be developed to a density similar to the Redstone community
xithout a great proliferation of ne�r roads, poWer. and telephone lines
Which existed in the area at that time. Water serviae to the area could be
provided from the ad�acent Redstone system.
Development.land with similar characteristias is very minimal in the
Redstone area. The advantage to:the District �rould be the addition of
revenue producing taps on the main.trunk se�rer Without tho expense of .
collector seKer line construction.: At the time of construction. the Federal
grant provided for partial p�ayment of main trunk se�er lines, but did not
cover colleotor aexer Iines.
I �hope that this information will be of assistanae to you. If. I may be
of further halp in this matter.please do not hesitate to call.on �e.
Respectful�r, , . .
Jerome F. Gamba � . - � .
, _ , . . . .