HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.02231981 , _ __ _
- �;;;
� ,' �3 �.j . . .
�;�'—;.(:,,j;-�!`!'�� � � ' .
�t" '�!"''�Gwa-��J.�..*r.d�+,"f:3:=i:kSl%A'�,FFi..".,...,n..<..�a,.u.-,-.�C�... ,._,..t,_.is_s:,� �.:tY�:}�1...:.t?��h��:.� �._�_L:,.'i3�Ar k'_LT.�n% `"`'f.�..r.Gtiurdiekt i g :
t . n �4 '
[ ^ :l :
� i,
y' �����;
;;�� �>,•.:,�_,,
�,?;; BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
' ` AGENDA
���
February 23, 1981
;y� 8:45 a.m. Executive Session .
Litigation - Michael Kinsley
�' Social Services Confidential - Michael Schultz
_ . "=" 9:30 Social Services Monthly Report - Michael Schultz
�`` 9:50 Abatement of Taxes �
_ r�
� Hoag Subdivision, Lot 5 - Tom Oken
John McBride, Tract C - Sandra Stuller
10:00 Public Hearing - High Alpine Special Review Distribution
Lift, Snowmass - Joe Wells
�: 10:30 Basalt Comprehensive Plan and Introduction of Consultant
"w Sunny Vann E
'� Lee Merkel - Basalt Town Manager
• fi Jim Ragsdale - Consultant
10:50 Personnel Review Board Appointments - Phyllis Kenny
� � 11:00 Resolutions and Contracts
�� Minutes
�y Supplement8l Appropriations - Tom Oken �
�' Transfers in General, Road and Bridge and Airport
Transfers in General and Social Services
: ±
11:15 First Reading and Set Public Aearin .� '
-�.�,�'
4,..
�' Redstone Historic Guidelines - Alan Richman
� April 13, 1981 at 11:00 a.m.
�, Appropriation::Resolution Assigning Market Adjustment Funds
�'� for Wa y y
t;:; ge Pool - Ph llis Kenn
11:30 Appointments to Senior Citizen Housing Board, Linda Cifor
'� 11:40 NWCCOG Discussion on Telecommunications - Bob Child,
Candy Harper and John Dady
! 12:00 Forest Service Lunch - Mark Fuller
�r': Anticipated cuts in Forest Service budget
� Possible new accesses to Hunter Creek
' Progress report on Forest Service purchase of Ryan property
Y White River National Forest Management Plan
` Forest Service role in evaluation and mitigation of oil
�::_;
��; shale development
Yt 1:30 Agreement Eor Proposed Ruedi Authority - Curt Stewart
1:45 Building Permit Fees Increase - Herb Paddock, Brian StaPford
�;���_' 2:00 Bonding Program - Steven Bell, Tom Oken
;"a.{4,
'A"- 2:30 Highlands Detailed Submission - Richard Grice � ,
3:00 Additional Dwelling Unit Discussion - Jim Hamilton, Richard Grice j
,y; 3:15 Appeal by Canyon Cable to Detailed General Submission - i
�' Richard Grice �
i� 3:30 Reconsideration of Mobile Home Inspection Fees - Herb Paddock
' _ i
4:00 Joint Meeting Cancelled i
i
,r�
�t:i`,;4F�,'�
';t c;�.:;;c;„�
�''� , • -''�
4
�j
F '� �'���I
r t�:�;r'.�'q�`ii - ••
�'heie.�..-,.�.F�«.!t�t�'S:fi�i!:Al"rfn::2 ..S?-.::. .. ...r � . .lF,.. .v.'Sin:,i�vv::134iR-"..:.::-:,.,._.;.� �: . 'w.?t i'"
f�j . . .. . .. _. ..., i;t.��.r,...a.:ti;«laier�iXr, .
! ^t��p��Iv .
Ci.."u _ � f1;;^�;'.� -
�i'{Y�;
�' �"�R:
.. �';:.i:�:. ..
, - PITKIN COUNTY
SOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING _ 23 FEBRUARY, 1981
PRESENT: ROBERT W CHILD, GEORGE MADSEN, MZCNAEL KINSL�SC, THOMAS BLAKE, HELEN KLANDERUD
t+
__ a Social Director of Social Services Michael Schultz discussed a variety of topics
Services
' Report in his monthly report to the Board. The Child,Protection Team/Placement '
Alternatives Co�nission will be sponsoring a countywide Child Protection
- Awareness Week from 5 April through 11 April, 1981. Participating parties
�' included the achool district, the Health Fair, the day care center and the �F
• schools. Schultz asked the Board to proclaim the week of 5 - 11 April as I,
Child Protection Awareness Week. Blake moved to do so, Kinsley seconded and the
motion passed unanimously.
' Schultz also submitted a proposal whereby the Social Security representative �
� would utilize the facilities at the Cownunity Center rather than the courthouse.
_ Child moved approval of the proposal subject ,to the approval of the Community (`.'`-
--�.'.;. I',
(
�t; Center Advisory Board, Madsen seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
!� � The LEAP program, energy assistance for low income persons within the county,
�
a currently involves approximately fifty (50) applicants of the eighty (80) allocated °�-
F:
i
to Pitkin. Schultz noted that this was the last week to accept applications for t
i
the program and expressed his appreciation for the cooperation of the AWNA, the .
Community Center and other agencies in town in implementing the program. i
1
Finally, Schultz discussed the .implementation of Senate Bill 26, concerning
a foster home in the community. A five thousand dollar ($5,000) allocation in
start up funds has been granted to Pitkin County for the Department of Social
Services towards this end. The program would keep those children in need of
�
treatment and care in the community where their needs can be better addressed. �
Klanderud asked that Schultz keep her updated on the effectiveness of SB26
and the benefits derived from such a program. She suggested that:Schultz
recruit the talents and resources of the private sector as well. �
--------- �
Public The Board convened a public heaxing to consider an application by the Snowmass i
' ' Hearing:
Skiing Corp for a new distribution lift at High Alpine on Snowmass Mountain. �
Joe Wella of the Planning Office submitted to the record the Land Use Code and -
I
all amendments to date, the Land Use application form submitted by the applicant
�
_ undated, the Planning Office memo of 2 January, 1981, and the Snowmass Master
Development Plan submitted by the Snowmass Skiing Corporation to the White ,
River National ForesC.
Commiseioner's Meeting Zg February,1981 - 1
' .v.d-- •
f�� �"��; .~�'� .
. u 'e �
;I�..^y r•n���,K'..�'.^�:'�:t.r.i"'iv`.::;1'�"�J3..�.w.i...�...-.d..,�....... . ._. _.. �.w...._.�� . .a..._,_�..:.N.::X�..�:��5�..:..w_._ .:.:.�S6..t.Ci*i:::�_._;�a�,a� _
r� �:b�o� t+�. i.":
. �Cn�l.
f`. ^f
�; The proposed lift is a double chairlift with an hourly capacity of twelve 'r�sr`�` ..
T 3-:�r.`.�, �-,
�S hundred skiers per hour, whose location would generally parallel existing
� Chairlift Eight (8) and would extend further up the mountain to serve the
Hanging Valley area. The application was submitted as an amendment to the �
Masterplan approved by the Forest Service.
C•
� The applicant maintained that the additional lift, designated as Lift Fifteen
(15), was only a distribution lift and, as a result, would not increase
_ - mountain capacity from the base of the Snowmass Ski Area. It would serve
to better utilize the capacity of the base lifts and relieve upper mountain
congestion. Wells noted that base area lifts are generally des3gned to accomodate
� a desired number of skiers and the upper lifts merely compliment this concept.
��
He did indicate that the applicant has plans to increase the base lift capacity �
' for the Snowmass Ski Area at some time in future. As the base lifts are located �'
�
f
within the Town of Snowmass Village, the County prohably will not become involved
�' in any such planning. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the �
W ,
application without any conditions. �
Kinsley felt that the applicant should provide a complete disclosure of any
n �
---',?� Ski Corporation plans to increase the base lift capacity at the Snowmass Ski Area (''
#�I prior to approval by the Soard.
� . Leonard Oates, representing the applicant, maintained that the additional lift
[
�,
� would not increase the capacity of the base area and should be considered as a
distribution lift only. Should the applicant choose to increase the base lift
capacity at some time in future, land use procedures would be followed with
whatever jurisdiction was required. He then introduced Pat Halligan of the U.S. f;
Forest Service, who verified that an environmental assessment had been made for
the proposed lift after which a recommendation of approval was made. He did note
that this recommendation was made at the district level and would require
- approval from the Glenwood Springs and Denver offices of the Forest Service.
lt was noted that repeat skiers using the base lifts would actually lower the �
skier capacity on the mountain and should be considered as such.
;
Jerry Blann, representing the applicant, noted that the proposed lift would �
access high alpine terrain which has become very popular in recent years. The
application was submitted to meet this demand as well as provide better access to �
�
the Elk Camp run. If approved, Blann felt that the proposed lift would be constructed • '
sometime this summer. j l
There was some discussion as to whether the Board had approved the Masterplan '
f
for Snowmass and if so, whether that plan would require an amendment prior to �
approving the application. County Attorney Sandra Stuller noted that the Board
did not approve any such plan; the County had an agreement with the Forest
Commissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 - 2
;.''4�*K� ' .
�'^ -.:y'
1 • � J��
. LL
�.. � �{� .
�� ,.
� ,.ts�.'+�L��PI:,e,.i:t�+.��lt'.:�r��«:.�L��..:�4i:�� .r:: '� .1_ •r_"'�.:...�.L..:i�i...:..�.:�:{:...t:.:��i..�l.a..�. -_.........:,: .;w�L-sA-�i.,.�r::+w�ir+:YYLY�1.Jt s...
�.I _.. _ '�P 41�:
1 ����
i�l 4�1 4l.,.,..
'' Service whereb the Count would be consulted should the Forest Service
�. Y Y �>:�'� ..
'�Y�� receive an application for a major expansion of a ski area, This joint review
��
�ti� process would not be required if a minor expansion was proposed. Oates felt
that the Masterplan, like any evolutionary procedure, required a cereain degree
i
of flexibility. In any event, the application before the Soard conceYned a
� distribution lift only; approval should not be conditional to future expansion
� of the mounCain or the Burnt Mountain proposal. Child then opened the meeting
„s
, - to public comment.
Harry Truscott felt that the proposed lift constituted an expansion of the
upper mountain, and felt that the Board should consider loading capacity. By
suhtracting the capacity of Lift Eight (8) from Lift Eleven (11), he estimated ■
fr ~'
that approximately seven hundred (700) skiers per day were currently unable to get up
�,.
' on the mounCain. Approval of Lift Fifteen (15) would apparentZy increase the number
of skiers on the upper mountain resulting in an expansion of skier capacity.
In addition, Truscott referenced a report which indicated that inte�ediate and
. �1 �
beginner skiers only ski five (5) hours per day, while expert skiers only ski
for six (6). Based on these figures, an additional lift would not be required. '
• �.
- The proposed lift would access an area of untouched forest where there are ��
;. ;
� : currently no trails and where the slopes are similar to those of Elk Camp. '
i
�' ;
The application was not a simple case of relieving crowding and congestion;it
f
r
� would require a new and complete set of trails in the Hanging Valley area,
estimated to be similar in size to Aspen Mountain. Truscott felt the lift
would access some wonderful ski terrain as well as enhance the facilities of the '
i
- mountain. But the Board should not cons3der the applicaCion as a distribution �'
{
lift only; accompanying the lift were plans for a variety of new trails and a
major expansion of the upper mountain. Noting that the applicant had plans for � �
a new Lift Six (6) and to inerease the capacity of Lift ltao (2), he felt
the capacity of the mountain would be increased by three thousand (3000) skiers �
over the next five (5) years. Truscott recommended that the applicant be
I
required to update their MasCerplan for Snowmass Mountain before the Board !
F
1 approve the application before them today. � �
t
Blann noted that the application concerned only Lift Fifteen (15) and did not �
' feel that the Board should consider plans for the remainder of the mountain.
�
i
In order to compLete construction of the proposed lift by next season, the ,
i
Ski Corp would have to order the parts within the next two (2) weeks. ? �
i
Bob Kevan, the Mayor of the Town of Snowmass V311age, supported the proposed �
lift on behalf of the town, noting that it would not increase skier capacfty �
on Snowmass Mountain. The town has received several complaints from skiers
concerning the congested conditions on the mountain and Kevan felt the proposed
Commisaioner's Meeting 23 Februaty,1981 - 3
�'.'i.,".°. '7�� . .
:.+lrt'!i:..
�...�..r..��v'
1!` ' . rt�
L_
�'v
� 'FF:'����I .
� �`.+
. !.� �•��413:-='�cFb.'.:.r�n,a....v-x:?r..�4.� .,.�..,.� ._.... r _... .:�..... '.r��.liG:.*bc:lti.tFtF'( . .......... ._..�.....1...»..�.....".�. . . � .
. . . .. . ... � . . .�,„ '4_,,.,.
`' . ��f�:,'�'i,_'�..
(' lift would relieve those conditions. He was concerned that requiring the pr.,;:
y!,_� I;;.'; _..
��;� applicant to file an updated Masterplan for the mountain would indefinitely
�:'�;i
�;��; delay upgrading the facilities in Snowmass, and discouraged the Board from
,xl
'.�;� associating this application with the Burnt Mountain application. Kevan
�t'
�7'� reiterated his position that the Town of Snowmass Village strongly supported
�Y.;
�y�-,� Lift Fifteen as it would benefit the area and improve the quality of skiing.
a'
� Child asked for additional comments; there being none, the hearing was closed.
_ �� Kinsley then moved approval of the application with the acknowledgement that
the proposed lift would increase skier capacity on the mountain and conditional
to an i�ediate and continued disclosure, by the applicant to the Aspen/Pitkin
Planning Office, of any plans for new or to remodel existing lifts on Snowmass
nv
� f
,��`_ Mountain regardless of jurisdiction.
• Oates protested Kinsley's motion as he thought it called for County review of
Ski Corp plans for Snowmass Mountain. Kinsley replied that approval was conditional
�:b; only to a disclosure of the applicants plans for the area. Oates stated that
x
�� the applicant was not agreeable to the motion as it acknowledged an increase in
, �� F
�� skier capacity which might inh3bit the applicants ability to expand in future.
!
�'��' Flanigan noted that the Forest Service was of the opinion that the.proposed lift
};•:.,.
# -,` would not 3ncrease skier capacity on Snowmass Mountain. Klanderud suggested
� F�'^ amending the motion to read " ..the proposed lift may increase skier capacity on
F�'v _n
��� the mountain:
- i
�i Kinsley then amended his motion approving the application with the acknowledgement
''� that the proposed lift may increase skier capacity on Snowmass Mountain and �
'y`"
E� conditional to an immediate and complete disclosure, by the applicant to the
k��
� �� Planning Office, of any plans for new or to remodel existing lifts on the �
�:.
� i mountain regardless of jurisidction. Oates commented that the Planning Office
t��
.se, F�
has all the pertinent information regarding these plans. Wells replied that
- -•`;i% the Planning Office has never received in writing any such notification from
,��
Y..
�:: the applicant. Kevan assured the Board that the Town of Snowmass Village would
ti? always inform the City of Aspen and Pitkin County of Ski Corp plans regarding
*+�
� Snowmass Mountain. Blake then seconded Kinsley's motion as amended and it passed
unanimously. i
- -------- �
Basalt Planning Director Sunny Vann introduced Basalt Town Manager Lee Merkel and �
Planning
Town Consultant .Tim Ragsdale, both of whom were involved in an effort to �
establish a Masterplan and a set of zoning regulations for Basalt. The Board
!
,:,_ti had previously approved a carry-over of two thousand dollars ($2,000) in i
funds towarde this end. Merkel expressed an interest in effecting a Masterplan
� on hehalf of the Town of Sasalt and asked that Pitkin County become involved
�*. Commissioner's Meeting 23 February,1981 - 4
L,�
���� ,
1<',,,�_+;:'`_n`'L'
�' "�
��._...�..�
i
t �a ` �'
j,. _�
.:;'
� ;
4I Y�"tl��s�..,,`-s ::� . ,. _
.. ,,,,,.�N,'^^a5` :_�.r..._. ..,.,,:. � •r ' ` �.u...:..�c,.�i-
. 7� .�. ._ .. . ........_.. ...„��r...._�_.....a3..._.r.. ._ ,S�i.__�mi..........,.�....nt�sts�A�.�,}}�
� �. .
�t�!'
�. ,.::
y �,r; .,.- .
'' C4 t�.y..,;,..-.�
in the process. The Basalt Masterplan would have the traditional components �'�� . �
ci ��;:`.;,'-•
of any land use plan and would be based on substantial input from the public.
4 Ragsdale explained that the planning and zoning process for the town would
it:
r take from six (6) to nine (9) months and would require extensive citizen
� involvement. The study would not be limited to the town limits but would include
v Pitkin County and areas with the potential for annexation. The procedure
involved five (5) basic steps; general organization, data analysis, policy
€: �
_ formulation, plan development and finally an action plan. Meetings were to be
�
held with a variety of groups, including elected officials, youth groups,
senior citizens, the chamber of co�nerce and a general meeting open to the public.
e Within six (6) months, Ragsdale hoped to have a fairly concl{�sive plan to he
r� �
� published in the local papers, after which a final public meeting would be convened �
to consider a final draft. �
Child e�cpressed his support for the process and hoped to improve communication r
• i
� between the two entities in future. Merkel was appreciative of the County's 1
'�,, contribution towards the Basalt Masterplan, noting that Eagle County has not �
� contributed anything. Eagle County uses zoning regulations that allow for a much �
---•},��y greater density than the proposed Sasalt Masterplan, and is not favorably inclined �;�
tl !
#E towards this masterplan. Merkel and Ragsdale invited the comments of the Board '
� � at any time during the planning process. !
' ---------- �
Minutes Kinsley moved approval of the minutes of 5 and 9 February, 1981. Child �
seconded and the motion passed unanimously. �
i
- --------- I:
� �
P•R.B. Personnel Director Phyllis Kenny recommended that the Board appoint Bruce Boren
� Appoint
and Loretta Banner to the Personnel Review Board. Kinsley moved to do so, Blake
seconded and the motion passed unanimously. !
y Tax Finance Director Tom Oken introduced a petition for tax abatement on the Hoag ��
Abate-
ments Subdivision, Lot Five (5), tabled at the previous meeting upon Oken's recommendation. ':
_ It was not known at that time whether the County would be obligated to reimburse �
other taxing entities for losses resulting from the issuance of an incorrect �
' certificate of taxes due. County Attorney Dandra Stuller was of the opinion �
�
. ; , that the definition of " parson " did not include tax exempt entities and, as a ;
i
result, the County was not obligated to reimburse the other taxing entities. +
Oken also presented an abatement for Taxes on a parcel of land awarded to Pitkin ,
�
County pursuant to condemnation proceedings. The tract was owned by John McBride
�
' and was acquired for airport pruposes.
Kinsley moved to approve the abatement for both petitions, Blake seconded and �
jCommissianer's Meeting 23 February,1981 - 5 '
.�,..:;�..�;.-�a� � � .
r�°3;7;""' ::>� ' .
`.ir.` _ __:! �
S '�
�. 1
`i'�
k ''
'` f;l
�.] r +M�y��F�-..14?�.Cn.a'.."�_�r�^'_h':F���.... ........... .. ..%r ..._.. _ _ . ...�.., .e._�i»�Y-.eSVt',.�S��yi.u::.�.�.._��_..,��.."cir..�.,_.xw'i1L ..) « ;
�S Ay�tC
y�,
' ���y..' '
�a �sli.t:���:
p the motion passed unanimously.
��• �a�.. .
,,. �
i:^.I . ..
l'._ _'�______ .
�:':
� �!. Secoad Oken introduced a resolution appropriating supplemental revenues, expenditures
Reading:
Supple- and transfers within the general fund, including the cost of the office moves,
mental
Approp. professional servicea for the Castle Creek project and two (2) CETA positions
��
�. at the Coomiunity Center. K].anderud moved to delete the three thousand five
� hundred and [wenty dollar ($3,520) appropriation for professional services on
_, ' the Castle Creek project from the resolution. The motion died for lack of a second.
Child then moved approval of the resolution, Kinsley seconded and the motion
passed with opposition from Klanderud as noted.
' Second Oken introduced for second reading a resolution appropr3ating supplemental ��
Reading: k
Supple- revenues, transfers and expenditures in the general fund, which included the !',
- mental
Approp. carry over projects from 1980. Child moved approval of the resolution, Kinsley �
�
�q �
� �i seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
� ----------
� First Alan Richman of the Planning Office introduced for first reading the �
Reading:
`` Redstone resolution adopting historic guidelines for Redstone and the Crystal River �'
Historic !'
�� Guide- Valley. The resolution would actually establish the Redstone Historic Preservation
� �� lines
Commission who in turn would establish those guidelines. In response to some of
F �the concerns expressed during the public hearing held in Redstone in January, 1981,
�
Richman noted that the resolution required the owners of historically valuable !
�
structures located outside of the designated Redstone Historic District to submit
1
in writing a request to be.included on the historic inventory. It was also r.
determined that a histor3cal designation would not cloud the title to a piece
" of property. Richman indicated that lending institutions would probably be more
favorable towards such a structure than otherwise. Finally, a length of applicability�
section was added to the resolution that would require within two (2) years of
it's adoption a town meeting in Redstone to consider the effectiveness of the f
guidelines.
Child moved to approve the resolution on first reading and to set a public '
t �hearing £or 13 April, 1981. Blake seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
--------- i .
1
Approp. Phyllis Kenny introduced a resolution appropriating additional fund balances i i
Market !
Adjust- for the wage pool due to a variety of circumstances, including an increase
ment (
Funds in the cost of health insurance premiums, reclassification of personnel positions
1
and the increased cost of benefits associated with the 8.SX market adjustment.
i
Kenny explained that the market survey adjustment was based on a survey of
various entities and that the 8.SX figure was the median. The 1% merit pool
� 23 February,1981 - 6
Comm3�sioner's Meeting
T""�_"y".'+l
`^` :�'.:T;•J�
�..,'.�1.`,`,(i.
�' '�
_
, � ;
� S
I �s c.�
� a?�
fI r�.w�S!:'�«'i�i�a;s.'�';:a'LL�;,.�5::%''....,:..,.. .e....�..w...._�.'+� ;._�. ._. _ .,.... ......�,w �4 .:�1��z.....:.........w•�z.:�._�._..._.,_.._.l._�
} � _. . . . . . .. . .. . _ � �.._. ^ ... � .:�. � . .
NFr't4
S ��� �.:
�� is set aside for merit increases which are distributed thrice yearly. '�! _
�.,:Y
��'� ::yF���`''�'�-•
E�` Distribution is based on merit only and no one emp2oyee may qualify for more than
. �''i`�
G;'� a 7�% increase yearly. The county utilizes a thirteen (13) step compensation
�� plan for it's employees and the merit pool is the only way an employee may
,�
''� qualify for such compensation. The market adjustment, with larger FICA withholdings,
��
` retirement benefits and workmens compensation actually accounted for a 9.4X
increase. It was noted that the shortage was the first such occurence since the
_ -- y"i program has been in effect and Kenny noted that these costs would be better
accounted for in future, Curt Stewart noted that the appropriation would lessen
� the general fund balance and, as a result, reduce discretionary expenditures.
r
Kenny estimated that a substantial amount of the appropriation would remain in
, ^ the general fund by the end of the year due to turnover, etc. �
� Child questioned an appropriation for an unbudgeted deputy in the Sheriff's
Office. Kenny explained that the office entered 1981 with twenty-six (26)
' budgeted positions and found itself with an extra deputy. She felt that the
G`
(� situation would be rectified by the turnover rate in the department sometime soon. p
��: i
'��v Kinsley moved approval of the resolution on first reading, Blake seconded and
n ,
�;�
-- the motion passed unanimously.
���, --------- '
� �': Senior Gail Mahoney of the Housing Office introduced a memorandum from Linda Cifor
� Citizens
_°�' Housin of the Communit Center recommendin the a
g y g ppointments of the five (5) regular
Board
members to the Senior Citizens Housing Committee. The five included Keven Goodwin,
(
Hildur Anderson,Gail Mahoney, Mona Frost and Linda Cifor. In addition, five (5)
�
alternate members were appointed. '
Kinsley reco�mnended that Mahoney be stricken from the committee and replaced
�: hy Dr. Whitcomb, who was designated as an alternate member. It was felt thaC
,,,
`p Whitcomb wa� medically capahle and.better ahle. to discern the needs of the �,
�
participants in such a program. It was recoimnended that Mahoney become an '
i
alternate in Whitcomb's place.
Blake moved approval of the appointments as amended, Child seconded and the
�� mot3on passed unanimously.
----------- ' �
� NWCCOG Candy Harper opened a discussion on a county application for a T.V. license ' �
TeZe- �
, comm and translator for Treasury Mountain. Application was made to the National i
- Telecommunications Information Agency (NTIA) for a federal grant towards this end.
Harper noted that, under the new federal administration, public telecommunications �
funding was sla[ed to be complete�.yeliminaCed by the end of this year. She urged �
i
that the Board correspond with the NTIA in support o£ the county appllcaCion
�
� and need for such a system on the western slope. It was also noted that
`� Commissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 - 7
•��
S`��''r�iu:� - .
, '-•1
4� _:,�
I
,��
�:s':'
1 Y? i
, _ :-1
,
, ..:.
F,� "''"''"'�'z��,.�:.�.:,�c_.. ._-..,
� ..,,--. � _:�.. . _ , ,.._. _:..___....._.____..____..---
� ,o � :
�in�1'�
t� Representative Tim Wirth of Colorado was on the federal committee which ¢�ti;>i`' '.°.,
i ty.t*.5,..,
� deals with the funding for the NTIA, and it was urged that the Board �'""'' �
contact him in support of the system for the western slope and urge him to
x� cancel the proposed budget cuts at least until next year.
1
� Pitkin County Translator John Dady explained that the county was designated
� as the center for non-commercial T.V. in western Colorado. The license was �
�
applied for in the name of Pitkin County because of this, although an actual ,
- � station for this license wou2d be managed by the NWCCOG. Dady noted that the '
license was applied for merely to hold it; it was expected to take approximately
two (2) years before it was actually received. As there are no minimum nor
maximum regulations for non-commercial T.V., there was no way the county could lose
�
- the license once it was granted. The only obligation on the part of the County �
would be to keep the translator on the proper frequency. f=
Kinsley moved to support the application and to contact Wirth concerning j'
r
T� public funding, Klanderud seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
��
Forest Environmental Coordinator Mark Fuller introduced the new supervisor of the �
�s Service
- .-�...•;� Lunch White River National Forest, Richard Woodrow, and rangers Jack Troyer and '
�°('' �
�k.l Denny Bschor. Fuller asked if Woodrow could address the budget cuts and how
cp.
� F these might a£fect fire control and the Maroon BeZls Bus program. Woodrow noted that
�; �
funding for recreation and road maintenance were increased this year whereas �
mineral and special uses were down from previous years. An accross the board i
cut was not expected although the federal hiring freeze was expected to impose
some restrictions. Those employees that retire or leave the Forest Service for
�
��� other em Zo
p yment can not be replaced, although seasonal employees were expected to
�:
remain consistent with the I980 2eve1. There were no £unds in Yhe current budget
� to contribute towards the Maroon Bells Bus program, although the possibility existed �
F_
of utilizing funds designated for recreational purposes towards this end. Woodrow
noted that he would investigate doing so. Timber sales on Forest Service lands
C"
I; were expected to decrease, grazing fees were expected to remain constant and
p�
}3� user fees for campgrounds were increased only marginally. As a result, Forest
Service revenues were not expected to increase substanYially. Child asked if �
• these res[rictions might influence the ability of the Forest Service to moniter �
�
mining activities. Woodrow replied that this was not a function of his office; i
this task was relegated to the Bureau o£ Land Reclamation and the Sureau of Land
Management. �
.� �
Bschor discussed the possibil3ty of a new access to Hunter Creek, noting that f
�
r
' he expected a final deciaion on the oQtions sometime soon. He felt that the
'.�� optlons were limited to either the current county trail or a possible access
!�?; Commissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 - 8
�4 ' - •
�7
�+�� ~��
�;':';',;: '<;`'..�
r. ���� . , � .
� �.t't i`.� �
`., :.,.;.�,...;
� +,ia 4;c� � �
�. �-:_t;:�� . .
ru.T� ,
(t �?�P.fi^.sK's.:r:�'.:✓v.r:w.-;v�.iAl:.: .�'�. ...� . ',- '
1 � �._. _� ....... ... . [ ... ... ._"'..' " .c...w.:.+:ias::lhFiM�.�....�......_., ..�...��.�.....��a:�.rC. �+n�o E .
7n'dl)j
c� �ep�� �.,:
I� from Smuggler Mountain. A possible access from Red Mountain was not given �RCsc;,;,: '`
L.;•:.�...
r�r.'>. �;
� much of a chance as there was no legal right-of-way from this area. The
proposal was being studied in terms of winter access and the Aspen/Vail
trail proposal. Bschor felt that the existing county trail appeared to be
�� the best alternative as it was considered the least expensive option. Although the
II
� trail would require some upgrading it would still pose some d3fficulCies for
iE cross country skiers. Fuller offered to explore the possibility of obtaining
r ,
_ - an easement from property owners on Red Mountain to access the creek.
Also discussed was a proposal whereby the Forest Service would exchange the
water rights associated with Hunter Creek for a parcel of land owned by the
�
� Division of Wildlife. As the Forest Service was unable to maintain no�'. irrigate '
t
n
� the area, it was proposed that the responsihility for doing so be given to Es
I
' an agency capable of this, If the Forest Service does not exercise it's responsibility�
� regarding Aunter Creek it will lose the facilit . The Division of Wildlife could
Y
� utilize the water rights to maintain minimum stream flows and for other purposes.
l�
It was not known whether the Forest Service could use watex rights for the
� same purpose; the matter is currently under litigation. Woodrow noted that �
• maintaining minimum stream flows was the responsibility of the state and felt ��
: �.
# that the exchange was in the interest of the valley. In exchange for the water
� rights, the Forest Service would receive the Seller Meadows, aiso located in i
� �
i
Pitkin County. An environmental assessment of the proposed exchange will be
made sometime in future.
Kinsley noted that the county had an agreement with the Forest Service regarding .
i
ski area expansion and he was disappoittted that the oint review �
j process has
�3
not been followed. The Forest Service apparently has abrogated this agreement
so that the county is no longer consulted on ski area expansion within it's
boundaries. Woodrow was aware of the conflict and regretted the fact that the
agreement had been broken. He did note that he would be bound by the previous
co�uittments of his o£fice regardless. Kinsley explained that there are two (2) �
proposals for new ski areas currently before the Board, Little Annies and Burnt
i
µ Mountain, It was difficult to assess both applications as the Board was not `.
aware of the Forest Service position regarding these. Woodrow commented that I �
' the Forest Service is changing it's philosophy regarding ski area expansion, �
, and would take into consideration the impact of such an area on surrounding �
communities, cities and counties, as well as other Forest Service lands. He
invited dialogue on the matter from any interested party. Kinsley wanted some j i
i
assurance that the decision of the Hoard regarding ski area expansion would be �
upheld and considered final. Woodrow was unable to give such an assurance.
Regarding the Burn[ Mountain application, Woodrow explained that the applicant i
� Commissioner`s Meeting 23 February, 198I - 9
�.T.:�. .
tti
" _•e�_
i' ,�
'it '
4 � .�
E.
.
�.:. .:.i. :
����r'-'�!d':�4iurav�saTi-r.��.�n...-,.r::sc�x s.:.,..� • ... ... . ...............,..�-.,...__._....",..a,.___.._ ( .
�j . ., .:.-... . : � . �..n�.: ..-.- .
.: . _._..._._._......._...._N� 2 ..
!K �
� � .'
i.g7'..
�� has submitted a:develo ment lan for the area. The a lication is not com lete �R:%'s``-.•.,'
i' P P PP p �w.,;
�� r:?:,`;:;;'
� F�.=:a�.._ "
°? and the Forest Service has not yet coimnitted itself to review it. An environmental
k�
�,� anaT.ysis will be tequired prior to review and an Environmental impact Statement
� (EIS) may be needed as well.
��
Fullez noted that the Forest Service has been negotiating for the purchase of
�!�J�
�
�7 the Ryan property in the Castle Creek Valley and explained the heavy useage
L'�
� '
of the area by tourists, particularly as most oE the land is privately owned.
. : He wondered if the Forest Service, should it finaZZy puzchase the land, would
consider constructing a campground in the area to address this problem and if
the seller might condition the sale. Bschor felt that the sale was almost
c
Y finalized and considered the possibility of a campground although an environmental
f. .
assessment would be required beforehand. The only restrictions resulting from �
• the sale involved the management of the existing buildings, maintaining the ��
ski trails and the Ashcroft townsite. It was noted that the proposed sale
included two (2) parcels of land; the Forest Service was purchasing the first
�� parcel of the Ryan property and it's ability to purchase the second might be
� inhibited by a federal regulation prohibiting federal agencies from purchasing � �
__ ��t� private lands. Kinsley strongly urged Woodrow to investigate this and perhaps �.
�t�'�,�
� expedite the sale of both parcels. f
�s:
� The impact of the oil shale industry on Forest Service 2ands was considered �
�
� secondary. The major impact would result from the growth of new coffirtunities �
and the demand of those residents for recreational opportunities on federal lands.
Most of the impact was expected in the Rifle-Meeker area. The Forest Service would
- not become involved 3n oil shale nor air quality legislation, as this was
_ � considered the function oP other state and federal agencies. ,
Fuller briefly noted that, due to the unusually dry winter, the danger of forest
fires was substanhia3. Waodrow felt that it was s question of when, not if, the � •
forests will burn. He expected the occurence of fires to increase in the western
�t
part of the state and felt the public should be better educated in timber
management. The Forest Service would be cooperating with the Sheriff's Office
regarding forest fires and would assist in the training of local fire departments.
--------- 1
• Reudi Curt Stewart discussed a proposal whereby all of the local entities interested �
Authority
: in the purchase of Reudi Reservoir would form one organization called the Reudi '
Water Authority. The organization would be open to any governmental entity
and would provide a focal point for the many entities involved. Aspen, Pitkin County �
Basalt, Snowmass 'Village, Basalt, Carbondale and Glenwood Springs have expressed �
1
an intereat in the entity to date. As the actual membership was as yet unknown, the
costs of joining have yet to be established. The Authority would be established
� Commissioner's Meeting
�, 23 Fe6ruary, 1981 - 10
�.
y}• .
�;.�'-•:�::�=-,'�,.>;�
�;�
� ��
� _ ��,
�~ � '�
F�n f _ ' .' y� . ... ..
f�.. ���'�S...x'..3;--!�X•°,¢ �zic�':��i„•i�.. ..i.�.w...._ ..i � .._. _....i..�:�.�'�;.:�SY�Y.A.�.fR��Z7�y.lw.�w.�._.,_�r..��ICL:�Y�iaf'iv�..Y.:nx+us�.rh#���
. ...,. �t� ,�rK :
, .,^R ,<::
�i �R�i��;;,:,"'.�.
�fi in such a way that a party could withdraw from it at any time. Stewart was (^;�,!�� .
,'i requesting that the Board pass a resolution providing for the creation of
�:
� the Reudi Water Authority and select a delegate to it.
Kinsley noted that the purpose for creating the Authority, as stated in the
intergovernmental agreement, included the selling, leasing or disposing of
k� water stored in the reaervoir to the maximum extent permitted by law. It was ,
s
not known whether this wording was required for the purposes of negotiating
�
, with the WPRS or not. Kinsley suggested amending the agreement to replace
the word maximum with minimum so as to ensure a minimum recreational and
ecological poll in the reservoir.
Financial Ylanner Sohn Eldert explained that the Authority would include one (1)
� E�
delegate from each of the governmentai entities involved. The costs would be f,
�
• allocated equally to each delegation and would include all the fees for Musick.
As of this time, only the City of Aspen and Pitkin County are funding the effort;
� approval of the Authority would distribute the costs between the six (6) entities.
Child noted that under the terms of the agreement, an absolute majority would j�
be required from each of the delegates before any contracts could be entered into. I.
Such an arrangement would enable one (1) entity to veto a motion. Child suggested �'�
f '
� sending a representative to the Authority without actually joining it.
i
� Stewart noted that a section of the r.esolution called for reimbursing Aspen and ,�
� Pitkin County for those expenses currently incurred. He thought the Authority F:
_..#
,
would facilitate the negotiation process as it would involve one (1) delegate from
each of the entities rather than all of the members of each of the entities.
There was some concern as to the effects of establishing another forntal entity, �'�
�
including legal expenses, the powers of the Authority and it's liability.
Kinsley felt that a united group was needed for the purposes of negotiating
� and moved to approye the resolution forming_the Reudi_Water Authority with
� the following amendments; that the Board inform Musick by letter that all fees '•
f incurred as a result of the formation of this Authority be approved by the Board '�`
i
� prior to Musick's involvement with it. In addition, the word maximum was to be
� stricken from the section concerning the selling, leasing or disposing of the �
�
4 water in the reservoir. A qualifier addressing the need to maintain an ecological
� ; and environmental pool should be included in it's place. Klanderud seconded ,
1 1
� ;
the motion which passed with opposition from Child. Klanderud offered to serve
� : i
i on-the Board of Directors of the Reudi Water Authority. �
: i ;
i Building Assistant County Manager Brian Stafford introduced a memorandum recoimnending i
.,�..i Permit �
� Fee an increase in fees for the services of the Building Department. The services
, ;
� Increase
� f included building permits, inspections and plan checks. These fees have
1
Commissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 -11
:�``'�4''�''�1 ,
� .
�
t ,
� f YY''`'�{ � t .rr u '� n��� �. .;I.. ;1...• ,,..r7:�....r{;�1�7d5S�a.��.e-..._...�vi,��.s..M.�ali4l...1.7..'Tf3��MiN�}j,lhfr.l'n14��
�, r K+`Wa�n•wsr..�.•r.x'o-r�:uR��ti"-:Fr..a,. ... _... . . , . .. . _.
���y n
f
i
�/C.S::�.. �.
� historically been established so as to recover the costs of operating the departmenK. ��F�':,.;' ,.
i �, �
i
i The last increase occurred in January, 1979; since that t3me the department
� has hired three (3) additional full time employees, resulting in an eighty
i thousand dollar ($80,000) shortfall between revenues and expensea. '
In addiCion to the increased fees, which were expected to recoup approximately
70% of the departments deficit, the construction index modifier has been adjusted
to reflecY the highe= cost of construction in the county. This was expected to
i eliminate the remainder of the deficit.
Stafford noted that the fee increases would require publication for five (5)
i
�
consecutive weeks prior to adoption. He suggested forwarding the proposal to tie
Finance 0£Pice for further study before advertising.
�
--- ----� 1'�.�
. Bonding Child introduced Steven Bell, a Municipal Bond Unde�=iter with Hanifen, Imhoff
Program
Inc. in Denver. Bell discussed a recent concept in finance called the Agricultural
i��
Assistance Bond which would provide low interest loans to the farming and ranching
�'i
industries. The structure of the program is the same as that for municipal �`# '
�`•�
i and mortgage bonds, providing low interest loans as,the funds are tax exempt. 1
_T� Local lende= participation would be required to disperse the funds to the ��
� related industries.
�'� Bell's firm would undertake a feasibility study to determine the need for
; these loans and the willingness of local banks to participate in the program. ' ��
� Most likely, several count3es would be grouped together into one entity; this
� would allow the firm to issue one agricultural bond for the entire entity at a
,
less expensive cost. In such a situation, Pitkin County would delegate another �''
t
' county, mpst likely Garfield, as it's bonding authority.
To issue an agricultural bond, the underwriter would require some form of security.
In the past, this has been provided by the Farmers Home Loan Guarantee program,
a federal agency. Zt was not known whether the agency would be able to allocate Ij�
a sufficient amount of funds to Colorado due to the budget cuts imposed by the
new administration. A lazge corporation of institution may Yeplace the FALG
although the costs of the program may increase as a result. The Bank of America, �
for example, administers a similar program in California although the cost of the �
funds is somewhat higher.
�
i
Bell noted that Mesa, Delta and Montrose Counties have all expressed an interest
in the program. He would require additional interest from other counties prior to �
undertaking a feasibility study. It was noted that the county would not incur any ! �
t
costs until the program had been improved and the honds issued. '
Blake then moved to support the program conceptually, Kinsley seconded and the �
motion passed unanimously.
I ---------
' Couuaissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 - 1Z '
�,�.--•� •
t� =` ',�
t , j
_ I_ . . ._ ..�....
'; _
;r�•"
i � ::j
�, .
.,..
(t . "''""`�e���. .y..7��.ra�l.:_��r, eor:�...,...._ ,r .:�..+...._ :M.ti n�.2-r;�'.�. ,. .,,_...__,..1...t�r.M....:�:�=�.,a..,,;�;,,r
� . . . _...� ._..,. f i `.
,�-;�r. •.;::
' �j!:%Y.��......
�� Highlands Richard Grice of the Planning Office introduced for detailed submission w�°�,�'"� •�
'j Detailed �'"" ' ""
� Sub.'' the Highlands Subdivision, Filing ltao (2). The application concerned the
�j rezoning of a 2.57 acre site for the purposes of constructing sixteen (16)
; multi-family PMH dwelling units and eight (8) free market homesites. Grice
,
noted that most of the conditions have been met with the exception of the
water supply plans. It was noted that the applicant would not be able to
utilize the seroices of the Highlands Water and Sanitation District and
. was still negotiating with the City of Aspen. Grice reco�ended approval
nonetheless, conditional to the applicant submitting a finalized water supply
plan prior to approving the final plat. In addition, the applicant was required to
attempt to form an improvement district for the paving of �len Dee and Glen Gary
�i
Drives. Ashley Anderson, representing the applicant, noted that the majority of I
!'
• the residents in the area were not in favor of paving the roads. He contacted '�
all but six (6) residents within the improvement district and was informed
that the ma'orit of them were a ainst avin due to the ex ense and an increase ��
7 Y B P g P
in traffic. An alternative to paving included chip and aeal standards which ��
County Engineer Pat Dobie was not in favor of. Anderson stated that the applicant �
$_
_ would pay a prorated share of the costs should the district elect to pave the roads �
i'
� in future. Kinsley asked that the applicant provide some form of co�itment that
�
� would ensure a prorated contribution towards the paving costs. ��
Finally, Grice noted that the Planning and Zoning Co�ission had recommended f
that the County Engineer consult adjacent property owners to determine adequate
screening requirements.
�
- Kinsley then moved approval of the detailed submission conditional to the �;i
(
applicant contributing a prorated ahare of the costs towards paving the district.
Blake seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Addt'1 Grice introduced a memorandum concerning the Additional Dwelling Unit Regulation,
Dwell
Unit noting that the Planning and Zoning Commission was willing to refine the ��
regulation upon a referral from the Board. The Board was agreeable to such a
referral. � j
�
� Canyon Grice introduced the Canyon Cable Detailed Submission, noting that the applicant �
Cable !
requested the opportunity to appeal two (2) of the conditions of approval. Those �
conditions were the dedication for a sixty (60) foot right-of-way along Highway 82 �
and the requirement that, should the applicant choose to condominiumize the units
1
they would be sold according to 1981 housing authority guidelines. i
Herb Klein, representing the applicant, ea�plained that the sub�ect parcel was
a four (4) acre site that was rezoned for the purpose of constructing a multi �
Commissioner's Meeting 23 February, 1981 - 13 :
�.�i k��.:,��� • - � .
�.- . ��j
� -�_
; '
� �..,
C '
���;:;:`-f
r '�, _
�j , �Y�i.�:+�•.cc�� �^.�r,.:��,,.#dr'_t?���R. ..:7-::.. -,�. ......... �-..�.;�r.-«:.;..:.ir,:r.�� ''� ....�... � ..�... ....., ' MAi•0
,.. .r _ . . .o.��Tti:. _ .�:n.�_.."r ..� ,
l ih ��: .
M�`� '�'`
�;� k:�;pt:_:.�'�`.
� family apartment huilding. The right-of-way requested by the County would '"°''� •_
�;-'�.�_ . ..
'i
�:'� require the dedication of over twenty-four thousand (24,000) square feet of
�..
t.�;• land or over 25% of the total parcel. Klein reiterated his position that
�
a rational nexus must exist between the requirement for a right-of-way and
,�
?� development plans on Che part of the County. Klein felt it was inappropriate .
w-
to require the right-of-way when the applicant had agreed to dedicate a twenty (20)
foot right-of-way along the American Road.
. -- Kinsley suggested allowing the applicant a density credit and asked if this
would be agreeable providing the original sixty (60) foot right-of-way was granted.
Stuller noted that such an agreement would require a code amendment as there is
no provision in the cade for a density credit. Klein was agreeable to Kinsley's
ts fF
suggestion providing the necessary amendment was enacted.
i
' *. Klein then addressed the condition whereby the applicant would be required to
sell the units, upon condominiumization, under 1981 housing authority guidelines
� regardless of the year in which the sale takes place. The housing project was
�� intended to be a rental project with the option to condominiumize at some point
� � �
in future. The Board recently adopted regulations prohibiting condominiumization
- _, of existing housing units and Klein was asking that the Board approve the ��
rr:-�
�� condominiumization of the units prior to construction, while subjecting the
� :> resale of those units to Housing Authority rental or resale conditions in effect at �
�: the time of the sale. To restrict the sale of the units to 1981 guidelines would �
>.;., �'
�.° deprive the applicant of any appreciation of value. Klein noted that the units would �
•� be deed restricted fro resale purposes.
Kinsley moved to reconsider the application, Child seconded and the motion passed 4
r unanimously.
� Kinsley then moved to amend the conditions to delete the requirement for a sixty j
i
(60) foot right-of-way, and to allow for the condominiumization of the units
and resale under Hous3ng Authority siudelines for the year of the sale. Stuller
� i
- reminded Klein that he should submit one (1) final plat a£ter construction as providedl
.by Section 6-4.5(d) of the Land Use Code.Child seconded and the motion passed unanim- �
� ously.
` Mobile Building Inspector Herb Paddock had introduced a proposal to eliminate the � !
i `
Home ; I
' Inspect mobile home inspections. As Paddock was not available to discuss the proposal, !
i
the item was tabled.
, --------- + �
There being no further business, the meeCing was adjourned. !
I f
----- �
Res ' c y Submitted, PPROVED: . '
I
Deputy County Clerk Robert W Child, Chairman
v� Comrnissioner�s Meeting 23 February,1981 - 14
�k .
i;,
L'TFrj!,`�:Y?,,'�,�j ' . .
��^'�.1��_� � .
1981 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING EXHIBITS
February 23 High Alpine Special Review A Memorandum Dated January 2, 1981 from Joe Wells to
Distribution Lift Snomass Plannin and Zonin Commission
B Snowmass Skiing Corporation Land Use Application High
A1 ine Lift
, . � ,F � t
E „
C � Y
, �_ � 1E,��. F
'- t, ,a.. ,.,a,. , ' ,, ,�..,, o„ �,. „E,-,�.
, . ,. . ,,,,, , E� ,,, , ,'.. . �. , „ -o� ., :' „ r,� , ,i`� �� t� 1{, �1:,__,.
�` a.
7
i __.w._
•. • . F,OA&D Oi� G0. C(:::..I';:';;
PIT1tIV CC1.
Publio Hearin ��-+•�*
. M1iD1012ANDUPI �,1'
• nu;.o �•x BR
2�D: Pit);in CnunL•y Planni�ul and 'LOninq Commi�sion Subjoc � y�
P'1tOM; Fl¢u�ning Uf.fico, Joe Wclls E'=�'• N ���
}tL':� Special Fteview Application for a New DisCributi.on Lift at I[igh Alpi.nc
DATE; January 2. 19II1
In addition to the Lxttle Annie Ski Arc�a Proposal pxesently undcr consideration,
iti the coming weeks the Planning and Zoning Commission will be revic�wing
several additional ski-related applications. Tliese include an application to
replace two existing lifts in tl�c Buttermilk base areZ serving thc Feginncr's
area with a new double chair, a second application f.or modifications within
the Aspen Itighlands ski area (Ix�th of whic]i �oill be discussed at later
meetings)and a third a�plication to add a new mid-mountain lift at Snowmass in
the Alpine S�rings area.
The proposed new lift at Snovanass is a double chairlift �oith an hourly capa-
city o£ 1200 skiers per hour.• It taould generally parallel existing Chair-
• lift S, which runs from the top of the triple chair (Lift 11) ouL- of the base
' area to Alpine Springs Restaurant. This ne�r lift, which would be designated �
Lift 15, would extend fvrther up the mountain past the restaurant and would
serve ihe Hanging Valley area.
This lift is a proposed am�ndment to tlie Masterplan previously appr.oved by •
the Forest Service. That Masterplan .includes several lifts i�hich have not
been constructed to date, as shown on the enclosed map, but does not include
this lift. •
The Skiing Corporation states in its application that the proposed lift r�ill
not increase mountasn�eapacity because it w321 not create additional lift
capacity from the base areas o£ the Snowmass Ski Area.. The Pl.anning Of:ice
hus agreed with this position, as it ss consistent with the Ofiice's position
historically, is reflected in adopted Caunty policy, and has bec:n generally
• concurred w3th by the independent consultants preparin9 the Lit•tle Annie work.
We acknowledqe, however, that Lhis position is not universally accepted by
the Planning and 2oning Commission and therefore stress here that it can
be argued that existinq conditions in the area of the proposed lift do tend
to constrain capacity, Skiers utilizing a triple chairlift from the base
area with a capacity of 1£300 sY.iers per hour can continue up the mountain
only by way of a double chair with a capacity of 1200 skiers per hour; there-
fore, tl�e tlieoretical ma�simum capacity of the triple cannot be utilized
tvit}�out creating an unpleasant situation ior skiers o:aiting to continue up .
the mountain,
We do not believe, however, that the goal oF Tnaintaining quality skiing is
generally best served by li�niting the number of mid, and upper-mountain
distribution lifts so that the capacity of the base area liits already con-
structed cannot be uti].ize3 The only circumstance that we believe such an •
approach ��rould make sense is on� in which ihe capacity of the tr,ails networY.
does not anpear to be capable of accommodating the skiers distr.ibuted by the
new upper�mountain lift in question, and tY�at does not appear to be the case
wittt thi's propo�al,
So tliat you will Ue able to make a �nore informed decis3on on this application,
there is one additional piece of infor.mati.on whzch we believe th��t you �houl.d
be aware oE and that is that ihe Skiing Corporati.on t�as discussecl plans v�ith
the Town of Sno�.�nass Vi111ge reyard3ng impravem�nts to at least some of Chc
exisL-iny 2ifts comi.ng ouL• ot the base area at Snoi,nnas::, We have no first-
. hand knawledge of what Y.hose iroprovcments r.�ould be� but based wi second-hand
infonnaCioii, be].ieve that our posiL•3on woul.d be that tho�e inl�rc:vements
'wou18 con�iL-i:te ar� increase in capaciL-y �v.it.hin the er.isting Snounnzss SY.i
Arca, � .
7'}�nse im;,>rovements are not a part of L-his .ipplicati.on, The er.teni: t,o whi.ch
the 3' & Z rri.11 ur wil.l not 2x: 3aivolved in revi�w oL these im�,�r.ovcanenL•� mag
[lirlh f,l��inr. Dir.triLut:ion [�lFt
J.nn.tar.y 'l.� AU110
�.'tl�u'Y,Wo
bo of concern to tl�e Uoard. Ii may be ar9ucd, for.'in�tnnce, that thc County
hah no auLliori.L•y t•o revitw a1L-cration� to Litt 2, wliicl� may kx: a�itirely
witLin the Corr�orate limits of L•hc 7'own of Snowma:;s Village.
To ihe extent Lhat it i, utlimatoly determi.nec] that• �uch ba�e lif:t improve-
ment is not subject to County review,l�rior upper-mountain lifL• exNansion
could contribul•e to a condilion of inadequaCe trail capacity in relai.ionship
to ba:;e li.ft capacity, This is an issuc simply t�ecau�e the actual capacity
of the mountain aL- $no��nass is said to be constrained by tlie ability to 9et
skiers off L•he mountain at closing, particularly on thc lower parts of the
mountain,
We have receivecl no referral comments�which indicate that there are any :.ite
specific problems which.camiot be mitigat-ed..
F�OTE FROM THE PLAf�NING OFFICE: On January 7, 1951, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended (by motion) approval of the application with no con-
ditions. •
i
. _ I
. _ . . i
�
• �
,
i
. i
�
I
. ,
_
. �
� . �
. . ' ' +
� ' APl'CNUI): Il • '
,��^ �7�.�l.�{�`ivr Gn�T��(��.��. YF.OJI:CT lllltS�JJ;;Ft c � `
�,.� 1� V � � .,CCL•lott/La�ccl
�i2.; ' . .
`�%�� TJ1N� U..°,G 71PPLICr1fIO:t FOttt•1 DATF. ;Uil�dITTfiD � ,_
� j• - .
.��.� .._. .J. (!� '��� �
11' 1 I'1 CO..;.
' Publi
7�a t�c cb:�rr.i:Teo tsY r,rlLZCn�rr: • EXHIBIT
I ria�n l 0
!1a►;E SN041,L•�SS SI:It.TG COi;l'ORA T N� �-•• � n '
. � c%o Aspen.SkiinE Cor�>oraCion �J
AUUR[•SS P.O. }3ox ].2h8 As en CO 81Gt2 E'x'• i � ' .
rHONE:•,925-1220 . ' . ' ��
..� . . . . . .
. Snoi�nass Lif:� �`15 (High Alpine Distribution Lift)
NI1l3B OP PROJ�CT •
PROJECi IACRTIO:i:.i"(On aCtached sheet, locate on zoninq nap, shoNing bou.daries .
o[.tiny natural hazard and resource areas, any other special
�' • - . rcJulatory cTistricts. S�ction S, Land Use Codc; and locat�
, ' • • on appropriate CSU/r?z1� t:aps any areas not covered by the
. _ . ' : above_j •
� Services existin� Iiigh Alpine
TOTAL AP.EA ' ' �
SY.i trails and ski area r.elated.use� •
ExrsTZNC usecs�
BROPOSED USE(S) Addition of double chair lift to service present ski. txails ar.d
(appraxinate square ' related facilities.
fouta�e for each) •
' PF�SENT ZOPIIi;G OF SITE � � .
pESCP..i?TTO?1 OF LAND US° PROPOSriL Applicant, amending its master plan for Che
Snoca�nass Ski Area, desi.res to construct a double chair lift as slio�an on Che
accompanyin� map for the purpose of distribuCing skiers more evenly and eifi.ci.enC•2y
within the Fligh Alpine sections oE r; area. Said lift �aill not increase mountai.n *see
__. _. ` rever:
`1'O BH CO�iPLETED }3Y TfiE PT.A.SI�It�G OPFICE " � •
TYPE OF APPLICATIOPa: P.EZONTi�G SUBbIVISIO`F
F.U_D. � EY.Et•f°TIO'1
� � SPECIAL REQIEi4 35-<'.CZC a• SLIJLxvIST.GY
. j �
L'UILDT�G Pi2�:IT 1tE�'IES9
' R1:VIF.t: k'I�i:SF.: Pi.F.�AFPLTCAiTO:•1 D.•1?F CU:•:?LEi°�
GG1i$I'JiL SUF3tdISSZ0:1 2'.C. I�C^tI0"I Arl'l�
� • llOARD ACTIQid DT.YE -
DETAIL�p $UEICJISSION P-C. RCTIOV . Dlt^tF..
130ARD 7�CTIU:7 J7hiE
FIN.�tT. PLAT IID1�F'.D ACTION . DATE
, ' . • ' , . �
. • . � � ' [5
• ' ' �
� . �
- . ;
• � . � i
. . . +
. , • . . �
. � � i
. � (
. , i
• �
� ,. � I
: . �
»'Dr.scri.pCi.on conl•inacd Irom f:ronl': . . �
capaciCy ovm: that contained in thc approved masCCr. pl�n, and i� submiCtccI wit•h che
understandin� Chat the PiLkin County Plannin� OL-fice concurs in such� del•erniin.iL•ion.
As a consequeiicc, based upon tlie pre-application conference with the Planninr Office,
this applicaCion, Uecause the proposed project does not create increased r:ounCain
capacicy, addre�ses only thosc it•ems required'L-o be addressed in l•hc Special l:evieca
ApplicaCion for the proposed Buttermi7.k Aiountain beginner replacement lift, a �imi.Iar
type of project. . ' � • � �
. . . • � ' .. , .. .. :, . • '
, . - • ' �•
. . d
. , � . ' . �1
' � .,
. ' . . . �
r . . . • ,
, i
�. .. ' i
. . • • I
. ,.
, . �
. i
: i
. ; • .�
. ` ' t � '�
�xFiinz r �����
' • TO SNOSVMl15S SKIZNG COP.POP.7�'PION Al'PLICATION
� I'OR IIIGII ALPTNL' DIST12II3LITION LIi•'7' (LIlT $15)
Section 2 - Showing of Conformance with Applicable Policics,
Pii:kin County, Color.aclo, in the Application of the Snowmass
Skiing Corporation for Special Review Approval for High Alpine
Distribution Lift (Lift #15) .
Paragraph references as hereinaiter co�itained are to the para-
graph numbers contained in I�ppendix B to the Pit}:in County Land Use
Application rorm.
. 1. Master Plan/Rate of Growth Considerations. The skiing use
at High Alpine in Snowmass Ski Area is now in existence and has histori-
cally been in exisience for several yea�s. The Applicant believes that '
improvement in the quality uf skiing will not create an inconsistency
with the Master Plan or Rate of Growth Policies of Pii:kin County. The
proposed lift will not increase mountain capacity because it �vill not
create additional lift capacity from the base areas of the Snowmass Ski
Area. The purpos� of the proposed lift is to distribute skiers more ev�nly
within ihe High Alpine portion of the comPlex, thereby all�viating lengthy
lift lines o�hich occur at certain times and directing traffic so as to
spread utilization of trai.ls within Iiigh Alpine more evenly. The proposed
chairlift will thereby be. an improvement in the quality of skiing at
Snowmass. .
•The proposed chairlift has a capacity oi 1200 skiers per hour.
It does constitute a minor internal change in the previously approved
master plan for the Snowmass S}:i Area.
'Phe Applicant believes that improvement of_ the already existi.ng
area will not contribute to growth. It feels that the existence of a beti:er
facility will not, in and of itself, attract sY.ier visits, but rather will
improve the expericnce of the person who is already coming.
2. Hazard and Resource Areas Considerations.
{a) Geologic Hazard. The principal use of the pr.oposed
projeCt e�:ists and is in use. As shown in the C.S.U. - �.R.A.
map, nothing in the proposed construction would affect ihe .
geologic conditions. The terrain on which the lift is to he
located varies from extremely steep to relatively flat.
Construction of the lift is possible from an engirieering
� and construction standpoint.
. . . y� . �
, , • • , . . r.�
. .� , i
f • . ' • '
1 . � I
. , ' ' . . f �
' , �
. � .
. / , ':�
(b) Soi.ls/1:�-osion. On ihe liigh Al.p�.ne Distribution
LifL- Land Us� Application, L•lie soil charactcristics arc not
listed on thc C.S.U. - L.1t.A. Diaps for 1>itY.in County and a
- Soils An17.ysis l�as not bean donc as of' thc dai:c of this Appli-
cation. The appli.cant is experienced in ihe construcL-iwi,
operation anc7 mainL-en.ance of: ski lifts, in that such eon-
. struction, operation and maintenance is a high technolo9Y
' function. Prior to the location preci>ely of the proPos�d
chairlift, adequate lift consiruction engineeriny reports ,
will be done to insure the stabil.ity a�d enginecr.ing sotnidness
of the l�it. I'lexibility is maintained with respect to i:he
pl�cement of lift towers, which should be the only matter of
concern in analyzing the soils relative to this appl.ication.
The appli.cant states that it has constr.ucted numei.-ous other
liits in the immediate vicinity of t)ie proposed chai-rlift
and is familiar �vith the problems which may be encountered
by virtue oi the soils. It further stai�es that it .has the
ability to solve any problems so encountered.
3. F.xtractable Resources Considerations. Because oi- the
� existing use of the HigT h p ne portion oi the Snowmass Ski Area as a
ski area, the Applicant believes L-hat consideration of. eYtractable resour-
ces in the area of the proposed project should not be applicable. The
Apolicant knows of no c�tractable mineral resource underlying the property .
which is the subject oi this application. The close proximity of dense use
such as skiing and lodging facilities would tend to preclude mi_ning activity.
Regardless, becau�e of the liigh altitude, even if extractable resources
exist, weather �nd climatic conditions would preclude mining activity
during the'wintcr� and therefore, in the Applicant's opinion, the t�ao
activities could co-eaist and taould not necessarily be mutually exclusive.
4. Agricultural Conservation Considerations. The construction
of the proposed lift will not remove any property �rom agricultural use.
The seasonal nature o£ the Applicant's activity is compatible with summer
grazing by the High Alpine posiiion oi the Snowmass complex.
5. Scenic Quality Considerai:ions. The Applicant believes ttie
proposed chairlift will not have any eifect upon scenic quality of the
area. .
' 6. Water Supply. Not applicable per County Planning Office.
7. 5e�uage Disposal. Not apnlicable per County Planning Office.
8. Noise Consideration. The proposed project will have no
adverse noise impact. The current skiing activity already exisi:s. The
proposed lift will be electrically driven and rernaved from residential
areas. •
9. Air Quality Considcration. Not applicable per County
Planning Office.
-2�
. . . . . � . , �.
. . . . ,�
• , ' • '; ' � , • . .
. • �
� • . . � , . � �
. ' ' � . - �!
' ' � � . ' i�
• t • �1
� � ' ;I
t,
10. Hisiori.c/Archaco.logical I:e�our.ces Consi.dcrat:ions. The
Applicanl-. l�elicves i1�saC thc 1�rui�osecl p�:o_�cct �'or tt�c Iligli 111pinc arca
of the Sno��nnass, Ski Complex a+ill have no hisl-ori.c or aYChaco].ogicnl
eftect. Tt knows of no histo�-i.c or a�-cl»eolocJical signi•L•i_cance attached
to thc pr.o�?crty. A si:uc7y, of the Iiig11 �lpine arca, for the U.5. I'orest
Service weis donc at the time th� area was initially developed, and notl�ing
was �ound to e�:isi. of archaeo�ogical significance.
11. Roads/Tr.ails nesicTn and Construction Impact on Road System
Maintenance Provisions. No ne�•� roads will n�ed L-o be cut. Esisting
roads �aill be adequate for construction purposes. If any minor road
cut oif of exisling roads is necessary for construction purposes, the
same will be closed after cons�truction and restored and revegetated to
its natural state. 5ee paragraph 1 above for growth considerations.
Because no growth impaot is anticipated, no road system impact is expected.
12. Drainage Considerations. The constr.uction of the proposed
chairlift �vill leave no effect on the natural drzinage. T3�e F�pplicant
refers to its expereince in soils and erosion management and to the fact
that all disturbed areas will be covered with vegetation.
13. Impact on Transportation Consideration. Not applicab].e
per County Planning Office.
14. Impact on Public Facilities/5ervices. Not applicable per
County Planning Of:fice.
15. Contribution to Iinusing Stock Considerations. Not applicable
per County Planning Office.
16. Man-made iiazards/Safety Consideration. The Applicant
b�lieves tY�at hazards will not be created. The Applicant cites its
record and ex�erience in providing safe skiing terrain for the.general
public and its record a£ employee sa£ety. Every effort will be made to
make the lift and keep the present ski terrain as safe as possible for
skiers.
17. Wi1d15.fe Preservation Considerations. Not applicable per
County Planning O fice.
18. Energy Conservation Considerati_ons. The total. horsepower
for the lift is estimated at 375. The I,pplicant believes the energy use
level will not be a significant impact.
19. Water Resources Tmpact Considerations. No sno�amaking
activity is proposed or contemplated at IIigh Alpine. Atiplicant believes
that no water r�saurces impacts are posed by its proposal.
20. Final �lat Contents. Not applicable per County Planning
Office: �
. _3-
. _ . . . , . . . . �
• :� . �
. , . . ��I
, `, ' _ ' - . . . .
. � ti
, � � . . . '
� . • • . ` _ .
. . j
� " I
' , � . ' . �
. , i
. � • .j
. � '
. , . / ,
• i
� • . 1
����
.- - . .
• .' . ,
' \1
, `~ �,..Y \
. .'�...:,, s:a.�, �;.�.
...' �,��Iµtip,•d +��.
' � � .•-' _ . ',�'-Y ... p=qa�A �•. . } .
� ' � . . . �� i'' ' ,•'r. -`'•; i� .�. ��t:�}� .?•' ;;
, �` e , / .,\ /..- .. � ��..� >��.j .
� 1 ! •'!,� ~•�.'�; n �� /t: '� ��'.
. � , f,f. �,. •f�,~ .�o:: J f i\q`;» .
, �` '��• !lf',,! ~:'�' ��\ � a}`i„���� i 1 � ��
��,• ;
. ���' '% 1 ' ���� '��� � �``' .' �'i=� !
• ��.�� .� r�J� r- �.�,,. w�� _`� �+�.,. ,,. : ..
' ••J� '�, �} .�� `'�4 c:;�� /��.✓ \ t�'.` �M ..+.�-::`{��•': �t�� .���-
'1 � � ' �a� �� '/�,;-'� �( ';,J. ` :
, . . .` '�,:.�f . . _ .;,,,,�,,.r�, : , .t`....�.y;' , „ ;. • .;'�
� -'�` ,d�� _ ')��j! '-,."�✓j����'l � '. _r \.. �:Y,,).
i _.~ ~ ��' ��
\ ' ,�'/��, .��'�:: •--_'�.�-:,,�:..' .� t4�,�f'; ,.l ''�•-`z.���l.:� � E: ; �
, ;}n .+r�' `.+!"._M1 � _ \:\::, tyM~ _�,•= ' '." l.•�y {f, i jj''� �Y.�',1��1
4141 �,. ...Yi� �':;�:• r �I .�,:. {, te,� c'. .�� . .
hµ}1�C�,A 4 � �,\4~ '-++`-�.��;..., �;1 `�\"�, " ''�(f. ;.�r',�r r7 '.��'�.� yr ��\. .
+'.. .. � '� ' ` "'="'" \� i.'%�'Y„± � tY ,1i`�...> t
�'i:=.^�^-....�.%�. ,,\ '-..��''.. l:i. `�,�; ti -.'i i it'.:� ( �. it � � �
� . \'�\'.,\• '�.� � .. ��` i � :1;`� �'�i.
�. �•'.' "'1` /. � '.' . '� , _...
__..--::..( '.. - .z ' ,,'� '°'�"..�1.'.-,��:�,. �, , ltil..� . '.,' ' .
,• s + �
K '�'.. . * ��ai�="" ° t £ '��\ si �; � �, !f.''f` ��
� • #,�� �. -;y"�.:. 'Y.._ ���� �ii _ /� ; \-1 ? i` ,� 3 1 .
`� ('�� ! 4. � ,.•i- , ``, 1. �. � �'. � � �.
Cj� ` � s�a1 n . \�^_.' ,'. iy.f::.. � r. i , .�`.��� 1:! ;,'.! .x--•�� \
`�l �s � «':�
�s.`,�� "���_�� �'� �'a�`.,���i;Jr'y �� ! i J��\ �`,�,h; ;�` `�'� ; r
� , v .,trJ
' \ � '1;�Y� �' ~:~ _ _ r•;: i ����i4y ��� ,��. �.i��-' `t:��y . ?
. � �f' ' %,?�'�:,°F `�'���s_'yry.r:.,'��. � 4t � �l ,. .� t '� `�,° �1 'i ' �
..'� J r y •^r'::�,^`::- ',,��'l .�.'' : . .. t�a\,''� �J`. J
�_ •�.•,O � , `; �. :--'�`-� • ;� l;t .
�.C; �� .� �.;;,i..i d*`:.�° � �S: ; c.y-Ca{� '�:)�,'; �.. :�t 1`�y . �` ;'�a ��.� "'�n
V`R �� � ,�'t:`;;�•- i��;.:.: / �'-/ � � '� �� .ya � �; �}
�; ���1 �,�,�'t; ••;;�:�' - i � �',,,,a�°;�+�°';I �\.:� 1'% �! �j �,J ca,•.
1 e�„ ,��� C }'� � �t., �(i '`-'� ,a� �,/' u
•� • �� ��. Fa` � �� �� :� i; . C.-- :i'.�
� ��n' _/:_..�"-. ���,`:�i /`�.'`` /A�.� o `+`��1:.� �\�"t}j u�,�< .�.'.. (; , ''j .�r.E � f+ '�..•` •
��� �3' !: \� [1 " ) �.�i ;�. .t n G rrrt• .:j ,
,f `. ��x�'�� f'./ t .S���. !1'��� �U • � i���, t h,� � �" �; �� / ./r� r�� `�,�
. {��\'�'�,� =�A� �� '� �. .._- y �� ��..� ��� ���.. �\.•\:,� ��'. _ ��� �<<�'���f``�1� � i� �`�::.
;` ":\-\\\��\ �� r(/ - •r_��:..'�..r:.�:�j,� _�� �r,.' ..�'..4� `.,; � � "`� �'�..t\�t„�.i. �..,;� t 1
,\�*1. v �� �C- ( //��„"_ t `�';1\J J � �?•^�.°is.••�°A. ;,r•�, ':+ ` \,
,�k � '� 1 ��' ♦��_,�'-" r`'�y 1 �" �(�i�� :'�\ "r��.'±�� l��K^� 6 ft ''i•i�..��..(1'..f'� ',j` N`
+ .. ` , / � ;.: (��. �' . ` _1:�;Y. 1 � \
j` .. �;,�! � , i.Y :t-.,}+�i�i',� ,.��� �,1 i+ � tWr��.\ � ''� '°°� ��' •�j`�.'•t
_s �i`•t��, ���, � � ,�,,,�_ . m '��� .�t�--��' �'`,, : ll C .\ f• 'r�t�'�''t�<�.j' ���`y �'� <
�� ,�, r�,. . ` .;.: �"'��:-.:,, � , ��...--- �} . ;� n,,' ; '; I
� ''t� �'le' � «.3,.�0_ t"�1; } s:�:,,� ^-� � ��� � ;•�j U' f `� '���!
.Ft�� !. -'-� _i. � � J �� 'ti�� u v ry �.. �..
:__,:..�:,. �: �: � �1! �- , -_._:_ ,. 4�-��:��--tN' 1 ;� :; ; C._ �.:�.,.�ri,.r �;., .C..^��1 �
"�' 1�!� `\.. t�i ~' --...",,.,.�� \� ��; V 1? �.1�',�,;i\.f:t i�' �� 7�rt` C. ;X t
_�a:��--�-✓�i `Y � "f .:. } `'.`. .� �-� ' � � �� �' . • \ ��
__'_"' �. �^,.'�t . � Ij::.:l'(��-;1 e �-i:,"- :R �::�;..:�i,::• J �� i_�.,..-��'..;;,_.i ;
�"t�r�=�= �: ' P \.�=)'�� �1'� `t`.\.5�1��� ,�+�ll ` �f'�•
- _s:. �,Kti i,�:,,�,,, .�.`� JF. j ,�1.^s.ti:�.�-�', ��` , � ,�:;; �: .�. � l
�---.:.:-- _tc> Y,�. �`^v. t^ y�_ !!�''\,• �. Y,',\• �', ( .,'•,,, � `'4. '! •,... „ �
;'�. �,�
.-.�..".�R'=.::;.:;-`"•" , \, •J4•. �'. (` /':.( r ,( ( . : , �;�: � '� �<
\' ���•�
-,�_�-.- - ,`�;•,\�:. C����` '�:`� `s�, cy� 1��:;'i'� ; ��•- �` � /�� 4 ti �.,�^� -
; __--.::; � <<.:�_ ... . � �� � �"? j f� ����� � t �� .,��-
<..� ��� :;�'�1�0 � �1 °- �"��`-�� a . � + r t�..
.� =�'iicc.- �. � (�.'�.1 t '� ' f��4 -� �^;'�;-t. , �; �/ �,1,, +'���i� � t.,f�' �� �`
� �;:�.� � �:..
�.1 ..� . . \�\ • Ll `1 ` ,�'Tr `j- ( �-... •., � �,�� u w r �11�.,.„rri
�.� ..:/, �. .:--~: �\
-�_-;=.� �-:�' `� CQ /.�.� ;o � r. •�,-�> �.:..z tl� l. �j�.::�'.,�'� .
<< •t ( �� .\. �—. "�.� , r �, ��; �, . .
•`�' � !..lr!!.�` Q;1'..�'� �„��� �' �'!" � ,,+�:/�",�jr�� f G''� .. ��e ;.`
� J \ t...`` \��4: .�.� /� `i �'� �/�.`. +(. 5::� ... `,.°�,..,\./�%
:i tJ"; \ ,.^`, `'j ^ �U41 . -.:���j � � t��i�/��(1�. "'�.,o~"ar � r
'��1.�.�./, �;�� \ � }i ��;",t':��. '` �4�� � ,•f, ,,,'� j{
-i:J!/' �.`• ,.� �;^,• .�\� , �� �,�^; T .�.1�.r''�:�{�/'� ��/��/%�.+,.,r+Y''�� ' �,,.-��+.�r�
�/ �`�:�..... —. -..�~� •. �� . 1 y ';) \j �,!,✓j�` ,'.... .� �:
I \ ...r;� . ! , . �`:•. .
, ` .,; ;� . "� . ',\, �\� ���i,; -�'; \��""�'�;�,,;.;�'' �,;;��� � ;, . ,
� �, --- �` • �.._....._�` � � �,J ti.���-. ,,,.�, ,�,� . - ,��� � ..�.. ,i ;.
. /!, , - ... ` \.�•\L� ' '� � ..����^�J;w�f��:;.✓' N foA�l ` �� , . " .
l (. .�J� �f' . �
-��` . _- ��\�. .• � � ` 1,�,;�l.�� u ,�'\�.�1 h/��l+ /'1 f ' • , j '
�,,...•`�\� ��•,�`� • „��'`",t`•r� � ,} �.� L � @..`•'!y�t��� 1� . . ��
+ �.`. \', w v°�s J , U �.,� �� t� i.°:.y ,�l;.i � ' .
� ... . \S'�J^- ''`��.�1 `! `'j/ .:.w' "� / � ' . . .
..r � (•:�,� t `t� ^r
, J-"r:''''i• �- � ,.{�V r�,i••��l Jj`.`rj1.�_i�,:i • . . . , .
•�r,,.-^`.r� .�\` ''--- N`yCp � t�ji ,y9 f`y'/,� .'o!"=' •�' • . - � � � .
•�" .` . - 1Y' ;�rj l �G�,� `%ff . .
� , , • �� /� :��:,�r_� �% . �
' � `` � �l!:,•• <F;,�_'.o" . . .
• 'l.,��,` , � �r° Lt;;,� '/ � . . . .. ' .
. ,�^��� � • �� ' . -
� �°. .-���f.:
� ~l� � . � . .' . .. . . . � � . . .
.+�.y �. /� +� .�4�
l�''
.._.✓� r,,,r', . . . � . . ,' . . . �.
�....��..� . _ . . . ..
i
a � �The As ea Times ��a;�' ;f�y��4�
`�- p �u �, �f
�. ,
aox �E 1�'a-� ,�
50ARD OF C0. COb'Ud'� ��
Aspen, Colorado pr2'rcrr� co.
. Publia' Aearing �ibits
Date , 2.23.81
Subf eat ,= HIGH ALPINE LIFT
PROOF OF PUBLICATlON " - -�
STATE OF COLORADO ) COP�/ Of NOtIC@
) ss:
County of Pitkin ) .
I� - 1�►il��RQI-R- ��*+�+M►A�, do solemnly sw�ear that
I am the P�ib�isher ��� of THE ASPEN TIMES; �
that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part,
and publIshed�in the County of Pitkin, State of Golorado, and has
a general cIrculation therein; that said newspaper has been pub-
lished continuously and uninterrnptedly in said County of Pitliin,
for a period of more than fiftytwo conseculi��e weeks next prior
to the first pubtication of the annexed legal notice or advertise-
ment; that saId newspaper has been addmitted to the United States �
mails as second-class matter under the provisions of the Act of �
March 3, 1878, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- ��j`=ys"v•f � ;' '�Y ,�;p' �
paper is a weekly newspaper duty qualifIed for publishing Iegal �r�u ,r�.� � :��� �s �`� �' ,,'
- � 1
notices and advertisements with the meaning of the laws of the � r �; , ��� .�
State of Colorado. � � ���'„�, ' . ',h ' �, ;
, �.'� }�4 � .�
ThBt the annexed legal notice o; advertisement was published � - �$nowma�i S�i d�i��uEtoo Lift >I
in the regular and entire issue of every� number of said weekly ; � R"`''°�'• ` a. i; �
�CBISHL►RB$Y.Gi�/EI�� yh, I
p period of _�_ consecutive insert[ons; and ��4����-��d.���'d'�n +"
news aper for the : ��0. .��'�Of��Y�Ommi�neisoa ;f
that the firat publication of said notice was in the issue of said '4'ths "Y��"��8'���1��tt :�
� ' si ■speeiai'i6riew ���:_
p p ;�_ A.D., 19� and that �,� ��.�e
news a er dated .Tannarv '1 3O°�'� ~ . �0�°��� .1
. �q°°lFm� ra►elfqe ono�a l
m
the last publicaEion of said notice was in the issue of said news- 1 ����'��eH'ig6A"1�6spuirtion � �
- ��Nmnes 91d Ars�.Fmr fueth�:'infon
� ' mst(ori;oon�4'a�d t4s PLnniii�plgai►13ff$ '��
paper dated A.D., 19_ ��A![+�.�6-2o2o,e�cc,� - . ; ?
�:, s � ��
p '; � �[;@j �Y
I . � ' � 'a' t�6�5��1rb0�* � l�� .
.� PIl��1ldjL�l!' O�J�1 46�1 ��
/�i��iifi/,/i�'/�.r � Atkin Counq Fidd Oide%�o��, :+'
TiLU/v w!i- ?
� . .. �f�� ..sr r1
Subscribed and sworn to before me,.a notary pubIic in and for
the ounty of Pitkin, State of Colorado, this ___1'�_.day of
D., 19(� •
otary Pub ic '
My commission expires