HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.03251985 , � .-�,�:
'r'iY'
`y� _
. . 4 �. ��t � , .
r. '9,`�'�+- � �� �,,''�):..
...
' 4`��-t�?;1� '�a �z - =�: a' s 4�
xY Vq�j l�¢ '.,���� �II
.
.,
. '. '
`'t' �4 . ..s� � :� �y ,'.
�
�.i°F • .' . ' . . � . . ....' .
BO:IRd OE* COUNTY GOMlIIS5IONEK5 AG�NDA
25 MAttCH, 19$5 t
1�e30 p.m. �xecutfve 5essi�sn - Litig�tion - Tan 5mith, Ce�unty At�drney
AUNINIS'fltA�'ION
' 1s00 5muggl�r Mernit�ring t�rcigram = Tdm 5mi�h. T�m nunlop
1:3d publlc �atement
s 1:45 R�gdlutidns �nd Cont�ect�
; C1w1 Cr�+�k f�UU, Modifir�ti�n v; �indl pl�t - �Murk Vidal
': '�h� Pr���rvr� G�n�r�l 5ubmisr�idn - �n1�E�c P�nnh, f�lanning
� Whitis ��ar ttan�hhrs LoE Liflti Adjug�m�nt - Rlan Riclvnan, Plennin�
ti M�allaw t`�116a `Paxi e�trhdrt �vietidn = C�ey �.�8ry, A��'e
y councy nernrh�y
� Pira� R�adinn �nd ssar t�ublir Heerin�
Noly Cross Ees�m�nt = Ga�ry ��ary 8 April, 1985 � 11�00 a.�.
s =�aw ,�s�en vall�y t1��lea1 Fcun�attcn ���ciai �vanca ciQun�
� �Lce�ns�� - Kim 61hLEa8Een�, ��puEy C�unt}• C1@rk
�
€ L.1tlD USB
� 1:..;, �irst R�adin and aet Pub��c �I�erin
6UC Amend: Im� aan�ntaE an o S�en�e Focaground Overday -
Alttn Rlchman 29 A�ril, 1985 Q 10e00 a.m.
wowc ssss�or�
�:"A R�ad Sp�c�flcatlAng/impr�+��m�nt �l��rieta - Pem Snf:h,
. Ron Thnm�x�n
4:00 Jaint Fi�Q�in
Resc�ss�+�n 4 3th P�nny City Salcs 7ax - Tam �miEh. P�u� T�.ldun�
Trai� A��a�m�nt - tlal achilling, City tlana���
" 1985 Nou��ng Qua�iEi�atian� 6 GNadazir�R� - Jit9 Aclt�m?l.�.
`� Hou��ng �ia�etor
� TU�SDAY. 26 liARCH, 19�5
i
� WQRK S�SSIONS
9:P0 a.ro. Co�nkJ Fair U�scuss�o� - Mary Sue Kenningtop
1p;3Q $lam Ci°avel. A2ternative access -- &ud Eylat
- �
' 11:15 �odrd o� Adjustment Interview: Rau3 Gawrys
:s�
.�:;
�2:00 4unch sreak
±3 1:30 p.m. plannin4 & Zonin4 Commission Interview; Pat Adger
�� 2:15 Soard of Adjustment Interview: Spero Niarhos
�� 3;00 Discussion on Citizen Board Appointments
�� 3;30 BOCC Special Meeting; Citizen Board Appointments
:�
, ,.
•;s..
`�'s`,�,y t'��� -� � -�' ;=
H �:' �,y .:a ��� ��?��y� '!t �' �r �..Y�JA��i .
:.. 3'.. Ti' `� �' . �'M . '!�.'}.Lt�` � \ � i . ..
� F-� ;� t ; ..... �'�aff 3�.�r,�'. }y'� t�.3';.i�
.�!c"+r'�:� �"f'�rAM�+i�+.'Y'� +���twy.X. -�+w%:.��s � Y���V.'r'r.aa.+4.._+'�'
PI?Itill OOd1!!M
SOARD OP WMMI88I011BR8
gur_tit.in MEET?NC 25 MARCp. 1985
PR6SBNT: NELPaI K6AND8RUD, CEORGE MADSEN, MICCIAEL KtNBt�EY
Smuggl¢r environmeneal Nealeh Dicector 'com ounlop tntroduc@d dlscussion
Araa on the monlioring progcaia aetabliehed Eoc ths Swugqles Nountain
Nonitoc ec�a, an araA noa►inated tor inclualon on the SuperEund NatLoaal
Pcogram Pciority Lis� by tha Env.ironmental ProtQCtion Agancy. Ths eoard
Update adopled a reaolution las! yeac raquQSting that rhe Agancy postpona
!he deslgnation of the area p�anding r� comprehenslve reovaluatlon
o! tho basta !oc ita �ocai�atloni in exchonge !oc tha poatpo�ement,
the eoard agreed to prepara and implement a remedlal proqram
Eoc the acQa that �ould include tbo monitoclnq oE the aile on o
regula� basis. Dunlop cxplaf�ed that tbe Agency vould comwe�ce
a two (2) montA drilltng psogram on the site tomocrow ie an
4!lort to assess groundwa�er co�taminatloq. Various propecty
ovners in !he Smuggler Mountain area hava aq�eed �o retain !he
aerv#ces o! a� engineering ficm to participatie in the tvo (2) month
monitocinq Prog[am, and specitically rhe ceview oE tha eamp2ear
particlpation by a p�lvata Pirm was necessary to verify the
' results oE the 6PA sam�sles, as thesa resulte would be utilized
foc a Llnnl deta�minatLon on !he SuperPund designation. Dualop
axplained khat the property orrners have requested that the County
contribute Eunds tavards the monitoring pcogram. the cost of
ahich ha� not yet bean determined. The cequesk foc ionds would be
submitted fac eoard ceview once a spaci�ic cost bAS been eskab-
lished.
The item vas pcesented for in�ormatioaal Purposes only a�d no
activn was taken.
Public Financial Advisory Board Chairman Chuck Carleton discussed the
� Comment constcuction of a new joint maintenance facility tor tt►e Ci.ty of
Aspen, Pitkin County and Town of Snawmass Village. Al2 three (3)
governmental entities were in khe process of planning for new
equ�pment maintenance facilities for their respective Road and
Bridge Departments as the existing facilities were inadequate. The
Tovn has already cetained an architect for a separate mair►tenaace
facility to be constiucted in the Village, and it vas anticipated
- that a bond election requesting authotization for the two and one •
half million dolZar ($2,500,000) facility would be conducted this
`; :" spring. The Advisory Board recommended, in an attempt to �ealize
�„.:.,::= cost savings, that a consultaat be retained to teview and determine
- the feasibility of a single joint facility that would secve each
�;_. ,� gavernment. It was suggested that the City, County and the Town
- initiate an analysis of a joint maintenance facility, apecifically
'�<=_^;-`.';:�
• ,� to addcess its Eeasibi�ity, an appropriate size and location, the
'�1��9 i;
�:
..� ;' ;;; Commissioner's Meeting 25 Macch, 1985 — 1
,�.°..'�i�
�3='�
�s,
'; -
. �,_
.Z:- `� .1 i ..
.� 1^"�t � �,,*t� � ��� , -
r
_�Ys_ . ,Fh �>
_s �t�T'
. .- r,s=,,tvF#+��,+t °. H•.,.....<,,�,.. ..._. ., .�._<..s.n.rw� d�3`-�3ft�i:si'S -f6� i:_ �-.. t ,.t_
cost, and others. It Mas recommended that an independent rnnsultant
b� retained far this tesk as ther� would be no ve9ted interest
in the outcome and that the thcee (3) govecnments participate in
the funding of the analysis an an equal basis; tt►e 8oard has
alceady appropciated ten thousand dollars ($10,000) to study the
t�location of the Road and Bridge facility fcom the aicport
propecty, and a portion of these funds rnuld be used to participate
in the �oint anelysis.
County Manager John �idert expressed aome concern with ttfp
ret�upat= it was not known, foc in�tance, wh�thrr sl! three (3)
pntitieg would support a 3oint maintenance facility, in which
cas� an appropriation of fund� to a�segs guCM a Eacility would
not b� prartfcal, �lderc undc�rstotld that the Ciry was interest�d
in surh �n analysi�, whertas rhe Town was not.
Carleton explain�d chat appcnximately eighty pecrgnt (80t1
of the eleCtncate �upportec� the consolidation ballot questian
dutfng the laat Censrel Elec�ion, a marqin which was also evidenr
in the Snowmasa Viilage pr@cinet. The ABvisocy eoacd Eelt that
the County ghould inittate the analysis ae thle times in the
event it was de�erminad that a �oint Eacility couid succeasFully
Eunction to serve ali thce@ O1 gov�rnments, and that subslantia2
savinga in conatru�tion, operatlons, maietQnance, 9eaEE and
Qquipment cosrs could be aehieved, ehe Town Council vould havQ to
addregs the basia Eor eortstruceing tt8 own facility.
Kinsley requeated that the lldvisory Doacd preparer a acope of
voek for Eho proponad joint facility and subaequetntly mok@ a
pceaQntsl�lo� to tbe Town Couneil. Hc auggestod that th@ Advisocy
�oa[d alea cevieti+ olher ca�ital lmprovoment pcojacts thaC +rece
undo� eonsiderolton by all thcce (3) govecnmon�s, aa well ae '
ehe School Dtetcice. the ltater and Sanitatlon Dlatricta, and
oehors,
Cacleton explained that be r+ould make a st�ilar pcesentation
to both the Town and !he City in tho immodtata Eutuce, and bo
agreod to adviae the Efoard aeeocdingly. He noted �hat kt�e 1►dvisory
eoard vaa aleo Askecl to reviav the a+embership ot khe �oa[d ot
Counly Conuaisstoner�r a rt►emE�ership oF th�ae (3) �as Lavo�ad foc
�lacal reaso�s as it vas felt th�t three (3) Eull-tlme Commissiona�s
could achieve the �ame perEo�ma�ce standatds a� tive (5I part-tima
. - Commiasionasa aerd at a reduead cost. In addiCio� it was telt
that, i� the event conso]idation occurred, it would be easier to
achieva such vith thcae (3) me�be�s rathac than f3ve 15).
Klandecud felt khat, i� Ehe event vacious ucbpn areas oi
the County were annexed by the City, such so that County government
o�ce again focused on rural services only, the ttme �ould then be
appcopriate to redeece the membersbip of the Hoard.
Carleton explained that the Advisory Bvacd aas not concesned
witk► the timing of the ceduakioni ik was s�mply felt that the
operation and management o£ all th�ee (3) governments should be
merged into a s�ngle entity.
� pWl Chuck Vidal, represeoting the Owi Creek PUD app2icant,
' Creek intsoduced a sesolution modifying final plat approval to the Owl
POD: Cteek PUD. The amendment was initiated by the applicant specifically
Kpdify to address one (ly of the conditions of final plat approval
. Final whereby dogs were prohibited on the subject property. The applicattt
Plat has experienced difficulty in se12in9 the ten (10) lots as
� prospective purchasers have opposed the prohibition. In an effoct
to enhance the marketability of t6e lots, the applicant has
- proposed that final plat approval be modified to allow for dogs
-- : i on the subject property under limited circumstances. The proposal
_- ;, � submitted by the applicant wouZd establish a protective covenant
piecluding dogs unless specifically authorized by the Homeowner's
.R��t� Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 2
.'.Ti'���
, - ��:-
-� j
s-°`- � � .
- 3 ���,€
z . ,,�x ,u�P �'_'� �
.. . , ,...P'��o,t�t�...-. �.`.'' , ..``: " ..::_ S�.. _��z'i;.. . . ....._
Association; dogs so authori2ed must be testrained, �nd the
Associatiort would be responsible f or the ptomalgation and implemen-
tation of a dog control program, to include licensing cegulations,
the Ievying of ffnes, and othecs, The Pitkin County Animal Control
Department would be authoriaed to enfotce both the crvenants and
the regulations. In addition, the bepartment Would review the
effectiveness of tbe doq control measures implemented in the
subjecC subdivision, on at l�ast an annual basis; th� �oacd may,
upon a finding by the Departtnent that the proqtam was iaeffective,
requice that the Asaociatinn implement some other control program
or preclude dogs within the gubdivision altogerher. Vidal explained
Char Animal Contcoi Dicector Lisa Ruasell and Aggigtant County
Attorney G�ry ��ary tsoth revi�aed th� apprdved the amendment.
Rinsley expresaed some conc�rn that the amendmgnt would
establish a procedure vh�c�by dogs would be allowed in areas
tontaining critical wildlife habirat, a pcocedure which would 6e
avai�able to a number of other �pplicantg. Klnsley asked if the
procedure propoged by Che applieant xae intended to be a ganeric
process avaiYable to �11 applirants oc a specific means oE
addceasing the Owl Crttek @l?D �KOjeat.
Animal Control Director Lise Russeli und�rstood ehaC ths
amendment proposed by Vidal was genecic sucb so !ha! ie could be
utilized !� a numbac oE projects where dogs would othQCwis@ be
prohibited. Thrt pcoceduro woultl r�quiro that ho�cownor's aseocia-
tion8 utlllzo the sorvicoa oE the Animal Control Departmont basad
on an hourly Ece oE thirty dollacs (530).
Vidal explained Ehar the amendment, althouqh proposed Eoc
tAe Owl Creak PtID, wss qeneric ia that it would bc available to
other projecta. Tho pcoeedure was p�opoaed on an oxp�rlmental '
basie, howavert the proceduro could be revised by the Animal
Co�kcol Department, Lac lnatance, in the event it vns not etfocttve,
The amendment was intanded to provide homeovnac's assoclatiana
with the oppoctunity to cegulate ancl rnntrol dogs ta a[oas where
they othervlae vould b� pcohibitedt in the event ao etfective
program could not be establtshed, as detarmined by tho Aniosal
Contcol Dapartmeae, a pGOhfbition eould be implemented.
Kinsley a►ovad !o app[ova tha resolution, Madse� seeo�ded an�
the motion passed vith oppositio� [com Kla�derud.
The He�b Rlein, an attosney cep�ese�ting the applicank, fntroduced
8resecve a casoluti4n granting apptoval of genecai submissioa for sabdivi-
General sion and PuD €a� the P�ese�ve Subdivision. Kle1n no�ed that the
Sub�essn major issue of concern nated during the public hearin9 an the
proposed development vas ihe amount of open space to tie preserved
on the subject property, and that the cesolution reskricked, as a
condition oP app�oval, proposed Lots 1�relve (1Z) thcougb Sitxteen
(16) as open space in pe�petuity. Klein exQressed some concern
that the conditfon vould preclude the applicant from deriving
the tax benefits associated With the voluntacy restriction of the
&ubject lots as open spacej the applicant probably would not
detive these be�efits, regardless of the cpndition, given the
discussion on thi� issue that vas now a part of the public
record on the project. In an effort to provide the app2fcant vith
some of the tax benefits that otherwise vould be lost, Klein
requested that the Board rnnsider alloWing for the development of
Lot 7ve2ve (22); in the event the subject Lot could be developed,
the applicant would vol�u►tari2y deed cestrict the �emainder of
_ , the propecty as open space in perpetuity, Klein noted that the
Board was authorized to �equire the pceservation of a reasonable
amount of open space vithin the context of the PUD procedure; the
- applfcant did not feel, hoxevec, that the open space restriction
_ .. as identified in the resolution was reasonable.
1`�=' ' County Attotney Tom Smith noted that the original public
_ - y Commissionet's Meetin9 25 March, 1985 - 3
;��`Ja�
•,..... .�, _ ���.M�..���
. �
•-�.-
���'�� > r:�:" s�e. _
...._ . �..=i:d. 3�,M�+�le._ -♦..�� ' s •:"_„�' sa...—.4.�..? i-3rF�"T��� �. . J`a�'t_�
. . ..�;,....a::,s.-. .., . .... . ��n�c:t.:
hearing on the development proposal was rescheduled to a subsequent
date qfven sfgrtificant issues and changes to the application. Smith
recommended that, in the event the goard desired to consider the
request foc the development of Lot Twelve (12), the public
hearing on the project be opened once again to provide for publfc
input. The request was considered a significant change in that it
wauld increase the t1UfibGt of lots ftom eleven (11) to twrlve (12).
Klein [ptjUEStEd that, in the event the public hearing was
opened once again, its purpos� be limfted to the d�velopment of
Lot 7�+elv� (12) only, Klein wa� concetned thxt the eattre projert
Nou18 be tpVi�N�cl onc� again in the event another public heating
was scheduled.
Kinsley fndicat�d Chat he aould be uillipg to apen the
public heacing on the pcnjece nnce again. He did �ot feel,
howeve[, ehat the heacinq ahould bp limitpo lrt ueope to thE
8evelopm�nc of nnly one tl) lot, r8thec, the eneire project
ahould be tt►e aubjeet of the heacing.
Madaen fe1� that the entirg Board 8hould decide on the
need to open the pubiic haacinq ones eqalnt es ewo (2) eoard
members wece unablQ to actend today's meeting, he suqqoseed that
the requQae be conaideced at ehe subaequ@n� meetinq.
Kletn expreaeed aome concern that ehe entlre pco�@ce would
be revtewed once aqain in the event enother public baaring was
achaduled, and he subcac�uQnciy wl�hdcew hia c@quest to allw+ Eoc
th@ tlavelopment oE 6ot 'lvalve (12). ltiein oxpreasad somo cancern,
howaver, with the ehird condition oE approvai identifled in the
reaolution� ebts condiEion required thot the applicant oddcess
tho appltcablo critorla oF Soctton 5-401.21l1 and (g) by detailed
submissioa. lfietn noted that ehls condittoo was imposed by the
Pla�ning aed toai�g Commtsaton specifical2y to addross tbe
wildli[e impacts assoetatad vitb Gots lwrelve t12) tbrouqtt sixteen
f16)t as these lata vere ellmtnatad trom eha pcoject durinq
eoard revtav, the eonditlon ahaulcl be sl�ailarly be deleted.
P1an�ac Colattc Penne suggeateA ravisions to soa�a o! tha
conditions of appravalt the ficst candltio� ahauld ba axpanded !o
retleet I�aodplain concerns. tha thirteanth canditlon should be
, expanded to indicate that alternative traii eaeements, lncludi�q
- an alig�mant along khe south bank of the Roacing Fork River, may
be cequfrad at detailed submisaion, and tha sixteenth condition
should be expanded to provide tha basis for the open spt►ce
reguirement, Pen�e suba►ltted the �evfsed cartditlons as follaws;
1, detailed infocmation sho�in9 compliance vith floodplain.
bigb 9round water, and backwatec effects studies
(previously approved by the County Engineerl vbich will
result fcom the development and bridge reconstruction
be provided by the applicant Eor review at detailed
suawission. The floodplain line shall be surveyed and
shown on the final plat, Finai plat shall beac a le9end
statin9 that, at the time of issuance of a building
permit foc any lot, the Building Department shall
designate mitigation tecbniques necessary foc conformance
wfth the above studies
� 3. The deletion of the third condition of approval in its
entiiety
13. easements must be provided for recreational access to
- the Roaring Fork River from the north and in the R3vez
- course. The applicant shall provide at a minimum the
trail easement ptoposed along the north side of the
" River, and shall furthec investigaEe alternative
- trail alignments, including potential alignments on the
_ south side of the River. At detailed submission, an
, ` ' alternative trail alignment may be reqnired
i+'� Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, T985 - 9
�s+� F��
- _ �:
•�-
.,;�e+'�� � s� 1 1
�•i ' y � . .�::: �t'i� ,1f. `z •
r yA." � .
. ��` _ h L 1.�•{ �:�.1 ♦ *��I.� tj�YT� � s �
�� ;a r c �- "' a Y���j .�� at
• •
'� �
,. . .
- � � �. . _..... �� _ . _ . .- ..r.�..-.,�.-.-. . .
_ 16. in order to assure oonEocmance of the approved project
afth the requitements of Section 3-�.1 of the Land Use
Code, proposed Lota 71+elve (12) through Sixteen (161 must
remain as open space in perpetuity, and the applicant
sriall demonsttate to the Board at rhe time of final
plat approval thet a satisfactocy mechanism to meet
this requirement is being implemented. Lots 71+elve (12)
through 5ixteen (16) are deemed not guitable for
developa►ent Eor the reasong stated in the memorandum
from CotettQ Pennp [o the goard dated March 11, 1985,
under thp heading "PUp Ccrnsidera�iong"
Rinaley rhen moved to appcnve t1►e r.esolution ta include ehe
amendsd conditions noeed atwve. Kinsiey explained that he actually
opposed the pieven (21) 1ot subdivisinn ag ihe number of lors
was atill ronsidered exeessivet tt was felt, for instanee, thaG
as many as two t2) addieional lats ghould be deleted from the
pcoject at rhla time. Ne noted that the 9oard failed to reach a
conaensus during the previous meeting, however, such so thet a
wajority voCe rould only be reallzed with aome compromiae.
Kinsley �xpletned that he sappoc�ed the motion grentinq qeneral
submiasion and PuD approval to tha projec! during the pcevious
meeting ao rhae th@ applica+�tan could pcoceed thtough rhe review
procQns. Nis motion to appcove th@ r�solution submitted for eoard
review todpy wae nor indicative oE hia suppoct for eh� project,
ratber, !c was lnitlared ao thae the► pcoject would not be o�etructed
in tbe absance o� the eneiro Soard. Madaen �econded and tihe
motton pasa@d with opposttlon Erom, Kla�dorud.
wbite Kinsley moved to approve o reeolution granting a lat 2ine
Stac adjustment to the white Star Ranchee Subdivision/E+uD. Madaert
Ranchea seconded and tbv motio� paased unanimously.
18T Assistant Counky Atlorney Gary �eary tnrcoduced on Liret
Read: reading a rasalution gcanting ko tbe Roly Crass Slectric 1lesocia-
. , Aoly tion. Inc, an undecground easewent tor electric po�er lines and
Croea egulpmant sarvicing the Pitkin Caunty sus Maintenar►ce Facility. The
Slectcic resolutioa vas submitted in n� artempt to formallze the usa oE
6ase- tba main alectric�l li�e serving the Facility; the power line was
ment i� place at tbis time and the Associatian has completed a survey
for its locatian. The reao2ution, vhich haa beea cevie++ed by khe
Public works Directoc, would provide the Association with an
easemertt for that po�tion of the aus Maintenance Facility propesty
upon vhich the power line was located. Esary exp2ained that tt►e
reaolutfo� was cepresentative of a grant of easement rather than
the disposition of propecty, such sa that it did not require an
ordinance.
. Kinsley moved to appcove the resolut3on on fizst teading and
to set a public hearing for 8 April� 1985 at 11:00 a,m. Madsen
seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
- : Aspen Deputy County Clerk Kim Whitestone introduced a liquor
Valley license application snhmitted by the Aspen Valley l4edical Founda-
; Medical tion, The applicant has �equested three (3) special events liquor
Found licenses and temporaty use pecmits for a fundraising event to be
- " Liquor conducted on Sanday, 6 April, 1985, at the Aspen, Buttermilk and
.��-,.� :':• License Snowmass Ski Areas. Referral comments wece generally suppoctive
'::, and Whitestone recommended approval without condition.
�;;. ..
'�-.�-=`� � Rinsley moved to approve the special events liquor licenses
�"`��'::;�� and to issne the temporacy use permits for specified locations
'��`s';.�'`"� within the three (3) ski areas without condition. Madsen secanded
,-;_._;
=,=„r•',;;;�
�,.�-�'� Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 5
��~:-�'�?:�
. ,.
,�...
+ ._rf ' r }
r'• � ,��'�M� � �.. s�+ a� , �
. �,f t`-�: -:.. .;:�. �'K::. •'. c � ��.� l,sa'�G: �
?, :� . �t `ti; L,� �'� � -3` �Y t
.. ..� .-..,. ....:�.bw. . ��� -+. .,-r�:t , �A Y��.vY a' 'r s. .. -r
. . ,t.c}'•-�a.. ...:i.n,:- .YVV+ . .a7�r1L�;>. , l:i,-.: -
and the mntion pasapd un�nimously.
I5T Acting Planning Director A1an Richman in�roduced on first
Reads reading an amendmpnt to the Land Use Code thai vouid impl�aent
LE1C the 5cenic E�oregrouad Overlay. Tbe goard rpcpntly edopted an
Amend admfnistcatfve delay fn th� AP-2 Zone nisrrtct and rpferred the
SCenic queation of � zoning plan for landg within this Dfatrict to ihe
pore- P�anning and Zoning Commission. The Sr�nir Poregronnd Overlay
gtound r�presen�pd the ficge romponent di that zoning plan. Richman
Overlay explained that the Commisaion wag ln the proceg� of finalizing
the 3tate NigMray 82 Cocridor Magter 1►lan whieh iaentifi¢d a
Seenic Poreground, an aree ronaiseing oE those lands proximete tn
and mdgt vi8ible Erom the NigM+ay, rh8 Fnregrnund was egteblighed
in an effort to guide deveiopmenr wtthin the Cc►crfdor away fcam
che mogt hiQhiy visible sS�es, resulting in an a�aath¢eically
pleaaing antl it1CA1 enttance to the City oE Aapen. The amendment
9ubmite4d for Board revie+► today vould @stebltah a new Section
7-1.13 oE the Land Uae Code as foilowg:
"3-1.13 Scenic Poreground Overlay
Cel The lntont oE the Scenie Foceqcound Ov�rlay is to
establisb a scenic ceeoucaQ acaa which incluEes only
thoae londs which are proxlmarQ to and mo�t visible
from stato Ntghwoy 82 wtthin the A�pen Notro Area end
vhich conat[tute tha viBUal antranca imago to Aep@n on
ita eosleecn and western limtra. The pucposes oE eatabitah-
ing the Ovecloy arQ Eo stcar davelopmcnt away from tho
moat highly visible sites on lande vlkhin the Nighvay
Corrido� aod to insure that developmente ace destgned
to complla�ent the natu�al feaCures wlthi� the Highway
Corridor eo as !o oblaln an aesthettcal2y pleae3ng.
• cural approach to town
(b) Developmenk on any paceal of land vhich Lalls wiEhi� or
!s croased by tba Seenic Foceground Ove�clay on tho
otEiciAlly adopted Pitkin Couoty aoning maps shAll be
, aubject Eo ceview to datermitta the contormanae of tha
� development wi�h tha evaluattoa c�iterla tdantifled balow
' tc) The critecio For devalopmant review rlthin the Scenic
Foregcou�d Overlay shall be as fallavs:
(i) vhether tbe develop�e�t has utilized existing
topogsaphy� such as dry ridgee and hi21s, to
scceen buildings to the maximum exkent possible
(2) vbether the development bas been designed to
coa�plimenk the aatusal topography of the land,
i including, whenever poseible and appropriate, the
utilization of innovative acchitectura2 technfques
such as earth shelteced design and clustering of
i structures in the least visible pQrtions oF the site
� (3) vhether tbe development has avoided the location •
of uses on the higheat gcoand or most visible
-`�� sites from State Highway 82
_ ' (4) whether the development has been 2ocated outside
_ of the designated Scenic Foreground
::=�-I (5) whether the deve2opment has been landscaped in
� accordance with the adopted State Hiqhway 82
=� Cozridor landscape guidelines and has preserved
"� natural vegetation to the maximum eYtent possible,
"`"`" r.=� including avoidance of irrigated meadows
} � �
�� ` (6) whether the development's exterior lighting has
r".",1...+„?.-. .
}si,t�.'.�}i;'
. t�-�=��-' �
�� Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, I985 - fi
;�°�:-
:.-•;��.;:
,_ _ o
_- ---__��..
� ,�,.
�=�.� � �- s :,,
�t. ,;9r �� „ s '.��' � �� .x� y"�� �
' �, � � ` ��='.�'' � �.rt.
� ' i �.v T� ,.'?C ...� _Y�to,�'+�,�•Y
. . .�... .. '- . - ,,� ,.a , .. .':'1".'� . . .. .. .. �d�,,:.'l• .
bppn designed fn such a manner tAaC the light
source will be sufficiently obscuted to prevent
glare as viewed from State HighMay 82
(7) whether the development has utilized landfocros and
earth moving only to compliment development rather
than as the principal device fac scceeninq develap-
mpnt fram viea fram the Highway Cocridor
(N) whether, in the case of non-resid�ntial development,
the uge ha� bpen lorated on a large site and has
b�en designed effici¢ntly ta pre�ervc the awjority
of the site as open space
(9) whecl►er thc� developmen� hae been destgned �o aa to
avaid ta the maximum �xt�nC p�eeib2e, any Scenia
viewp�ane idencified on the adopled State Niqhway
82 Corrfdor Mascer Pian
(d) the plenning and Zorting Commisaion ahall rQViev tha
development for its ro�formance vith the abova critsria,
ar�d ahall finally approve tinciuding such cevisions or
conditions as may be appropriatel or deny the proposat
ar a public meeting'
Rtctuaan submicrQd mana oE �he Higbway 82 Coccidoc indicnttog the
loeaEloa of the Overlayr tho boundacies oE the subjerck areea werQ
ldontiEied on the maps tn a gc�eral man�Qr as a surv�y haa not
bo�n occompllahod. Tha Overcl8y, ond tho revi�r crtterio idantiEiad
within the proposed omeada►onr, were not intended to address every
activity that occucred vithin the aubject acQa. catber, it vae
intended pctmacily to pravide foc ChQ review and approval oE new
developmene a�d majoc reconstruction.
The amendment va�e revt�ewecl and appcoved by the Planning and
Eooing Commisstp� as its ceqular meating an 5 Narch, 1985.
Ki�sley axp�essad some concern that Cha boundacy ol !he
Scenic Forag��ound a�ea was not spect�ically eetablishedt ther�
was concac�, fac i�stance, that an applicant may not be avare o�
� - tba review criteGia thaC must ba addresaed in a developme�t
pro�oea2 situatad wikhin tha subject area givan the vaguaness of
its boundaries.
Richman explainad tbat, although the precise boundariea oE �he
Foregcound have not yet been surveyed. the subject acea has been
generally identified and Pianning OE�3re staff wou2d advise all
applicants, ducing the pce-app2ication con£erence, that the
Scenia Poregraund criteria must be addressed, Richman noked that
khe Faregtqund Overlay vas intended not to pceclude development in
the subject a�ea but ta ertab?ish specific guidelines for such.
Kinsley noted that the Oveclay was inte�ded to identify
those lands situated within the flighway 82 Corridor that vould
require gceater ceview on the basis of visual vulnerability. ae
nated that there may be some pa[cels situated within the Foreground
- where vieual vulnerability was not a concern; the bouadary should
be sufficiently defined, hoWever, such so that those properties
situated outside of the boundary can be so ascertained,
Klanderud expressed some concern with the level of development
actinity that would require review. The Overlay was intended
- pr3marily to addcess new deve2opment and major reeonstcuction
_ _ that occurred within the subject area; it was not known, however,
== how one svould distinguish between a major teconstruction and the
� remodelling of an existing facility. As these terms have not been
� �� .; sufficiently defined, it was not known which review procedure
,� ::;;::�; such pcojects would follow.
-�t
�-�� �`�' Richman explained that the terms were defined on the basis
.-.-�.;.;�;}
T�f.t;;:;_�
�;�;��;� Commissionet's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 7
�t:::�
.'t_ !J
�„�.��,�,.,�.�., _
--�.':
,t^� ' l
. � ,�s Y � i� ���� + ��� �,"�'�� ��tr �*'�+ . .
. ... , ' ' .Y , .��»� r .`r�,... �,.. . ,- .��:e�.+i.-� ��i. �s"M.VS4`...:�:e�..a .. .
of the percentage of the assesaed valuation that the project
vouid constitute, He agreed to revipa this issue fn conjnn�tion
with the Building Department priot to the public hearing.
Rinsley then moved to approve the amendment on first reading
and to set a public hearing and special meeting for Monday, 29
April, 1985, at 10:00 a.m. Thp special meeting Would provide for
rhe final approval of the amendmenC prioe to the expiration of
the administrative delay and a11ow for itg use by prospective
Residential CMP applicants prior to the submission dpadline of 1
June. Madnen seconded and th� motion paseed unanimously.
Th�a joinr City Council - gnard of County Commissioners
meeting was cdnvened. Thone pre�en� inrluded Cnuncil�embera eill
Stiriing, Di�k Knecht, Charlotce tialls and Chic Coliina. and
Board members Klenderud, Madsen and Kinsley.
City Cnunty Attorney Tow Smith introduced discussion on the
7th City'e aeventh pec►ny aales tax. The tranaportation as�ee �ax
Penny legielatlon thae would provlda Eor ehe ooilecrion o� the Counly'o
Sales aixth penny sales tax. approved by the electocate ducl�g a
Tax special eiection in May, 1983, was ineroducad aa H.B. 1221 and
recontly npproved by th@ ttouao oE Ropresentatives. The bill,
vhtch would pcovide foc tho rollection of tho tax throughout !h@
Couney whl1� excluding �hat poction oE the Tw+n oE easalt whore
its implemQntatl�a would oxcaod thQ seven peccene (7t) atatutocy
1Smitarion, was ochoduled for consideralion by a Senato commttlue ,
this Thursday. In tho event of �saago by the Sanate, tha bill
would become effective upon the Govecnor's signatuce and couid be
collected as early as 1 July of this yea[. Smith explained that,
in the event the Senale passed the btll, the tax could not be
� 3mplemen0ed until such a ttme as both the City and tbe Tow� o!
Snowmass village rescinded lheit �esPective seventh penny taxes. The
two t2) governments hava agceod to cescind thaic taxea pursuant
to the terma oF the IneergovernmentAl Agreements execuled with
both entieiess those �►greeme�ts provided tos the ceimbursement ta
both govesnments by the Cou�ty upoa reseissian. The Towo has
� determined thot voter approval Eor the rescission was not necaasacy,
, and bae ag�aed tio achiave such by o�di�ance upon request. �ond
+ counsel Eoc tbe City oF Aspe� has indicated that khe rESCission
could be achieved by ardinance adopted by Council, oc by votec
approval. The issue was submitted foc discuasion today as Couocil
� must determiae, upon the advise of the City Attarney, which
� method would be used to rescxnd the City's seventh penny tax. In
the event the City Attotney determined that voter approval was
necessary, Council must agree to submit a ballot question on the
issue ia the immediate future for inclusion on th� 7 May City
election ballot.
City Attorney Paul Taddune ag[eed that the cescission could
' be achieved either by ocdinance or pursuar.t to voter authocization;
. 4 he cecommended that the question of the rescission be submitted
� to tbe electorate ducing the 7 May election as such was considesed
t the saf est method. Taddune explained that his only concecn
�� associated with the rescission involved the liability of the City
. � for the mall maintenance and food taY zebate programs independent
� of seventh penny sales tax revenues, and he requested an opportunity
; to review this issue. Re noted that City Manager Hal Schilling,
? who was unable to attend today's meeting, questioned the use of
= � the sixth penny revenues by the County; although the County was
required to reimburse both the City and the Town and to provide
- '3 an annual contribution of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000)
_ - to the Roaring Fo[k Transit Agency, it was anticipated that
additional revenues would be available as a result of the new tax
`:��_:=9:.; and there was some question as to what these fands would be used
;'';:"- f or.
�:�.�°;;
_>``:�' Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 8
����
�
, �- -
�-s._
,.� � �
�� , �.�.,-����- �y� ,} i y �
7 p
F�: '�' X:.�J�� '�}�
. � _ f '� t � '''�- '�a t� )�+y—�'�'t�3 F t
... ._. ... �....� ..a ..._s_ . .-. �....7t��:7�w 'NP . %"I�L�sM.►::.r.«.�w _
5mith explained that the ballot qu�stion requesting the
additional one percent (18? Coanty galeg t�x limited the use of
all c�venues so 8erived to publfc transportation service� and
faCilities.
Collins noted that the resolutfbn which provided for the
galeg tax fncr�ase i�dicated that it could only be repealed by Che
elertorate, He assumed, therefoce. that th� City could only
cescind its exigting seventh penny Cax purauant to an identicel
procedure. Taddune explained that CfCy Council may repeal by
ordinance any initiative/reEprendum approvpd by the vnrprs gix
(6) mnntha af ret such appcoval was gcant�d. Given this condirtan,
Councfl wau authorixed to repeal i�s raeventh p�nny tax by ocdinance
on2y,
County Menager John �ldert not�d that thp County would be
pcecluded from calletring it� sixtb penny tax in the event Cbe
voters failed to cescind the Ci�y'� �eveneh p�nny. UnBer th8se
circumstances, reaponsibility for eh�e loral ghace of grent Eunds
. foc the 8us Maintenance Peciiity and the n@v buses would be
assumed by the Ctty.
Kinsley exprusaed somQ roncern thae thQ roaciasion may bs
aubmitted Lo the electorate for appcavai and he augqost@d that
all asp@crs oE auch an octton ba rnvLcwed pcloc to a fina2
detocminatlon on ehe isaue. Thera was a $igniflcant ciak aasociated
with th@ eubminslon oE a ballot quoseion, toc instanca, aa
i�divlduols may not undQCntand tbQ laau@ and mey aimply eeeject
�he qucation o� lhi8 basis.
Taddu�e noted that the City rould etrongly deEend the
raacission of lts aeventh peony by ordtna�ce ae soch would not
reault !R any lost revenuos.
walls expcessed some eoncern that. tn the event !bo ceecission
was achievecl by ordinanco, a tutuco Council eauid �esclnd auch an
actlon. 1► cescissioo achlevnd durl�g an �laction could ooe be
neqated by a futuca Council as casily.
- Stirling notad that Couneil muat Finalise the ? May ballot
� by S Aptil, a�d he agread tp resolv� tha �ascission ot Che Cily's
aeventh penny tax by this time. Ra then woved to schedule tba
queslion on vhethe� tha resciesion r+ould be achieved by ordinanca
or by !he electorata Foc reviev du�ing the �egulac Couacll
meeting this evening nt 5:00 p.w. Collins saconded and tbe
motion, which vas limited to Councal, pnssed unanimously.
?sail Paul Taddune int�oduced the joint Trail Agreemenk wherehy
Aqcee the Counky wou2d agree to convey its intetesk in the urban trail
system ta the City of Aspen. Taddune noked that the Agreement has
not yet been finalized as it was not known wbether the County
intended to convey fee simple interest fn wagner Pack aad the Rio
• Grande Trail to the City.
, County Mana9er John Eldert explained that the Board agreed,
durin9 a pcevious joiot meeting, to acbieve a fee simple transfec
to the City of Wagner Park and the urban trail system except for
_. khat portion of the Rio Grande Trail situated west of Stein
- - park. All fee simple transfers can only be accomplished pursuant
_ to voter approval, howevec; the County's Home Rule Charter
" mandated voter approval and limited such to a General Election
� = only. Given this requirement, voter approval f or the tcansf er
=` ''°�� could not be accomp2ished unti2 Novembet of 1986.
i:-_ .-;.
`." - Taddune agreed to ceview the Agreement and revise the
'`� "�'' conditions under which the transfer could occur in compliance
,�:.
�'i���"':;�; with Caunty Home Rule Chartei requirements.
;�<� :
�t:r Commissioner's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 4
�,u •.. ., r
-r�c...s���,
v
-.,�iFr�,��
_..,......�.,...,.,..,,�m,.awe,��.:w,o:, �..�. �,....,. ., a,..... .,��,.
� ,�.`:
�" _' f ! .
+.; r..o .: 1�. -. - .
rv.. �` .� Y •
�� _• .�` � b ������. ��. �' :r '�:
._ . ..,. ... ._ . � _ ,�:._ ..` -�...�..:'<�.. ��+.:v>�:"......_�
1ST Housing Authorfty Chaitman Nacty Truscott introduced on
Read: fir�t reading a resolution approving and adapifng I985 employee
19g5 housing guidelines and cent�i subsidized housing (senior MCiaen)
l9nployee guidelineg, both as recnmmpnded by th� Agpen/Piekin Housfng
Housinq Authotity, and acceptiny cbp 1984 annual cepcyct on housing. The
(3uid�e guidpiinps �or �11 pmpioyep hou9ing unirs in the rommunity,
including both r�ntal and awnership, were prep�red by the Authnrity
nn an annual bagis and �ubrnitted tn the Board artd Council f�c
appcovai. In aiidition ee thp guideline�, rhe Authnrfry pcepacAd
an annual rpport on �he artivitie� of the Nousing Office. �'h�
ofEicQ partiripared in thp deve�npment of the Centennial Pcojert,
a n�w Cmpldyee housfng pro�ect coasisting nf ninety-two (92) sale
and ane hundred and forty-eigh� (148) rencal un�tg lorareci at the
bage oE Smuqglec Mountain= th� sale units have been romplered an8
focey-five (�S) sale rontractg hav�a been exeeuted, wheceas the
renEal unics would be ronnrructed this suana�r. it was aneicipaeed
ehat the entir� �togert would be eompleted and ocrnpied by the
end oE thtu ysac.
The Office ai$o cioaed the rasals o� ehirty-thret (33)
existing unttst ehe resel� inveneocy a�dm[niatoced by �ha OEEica
conafslod of two bundcad and Qighty C2801 untrs in Patk Circie.
S�ouggler Mob11e lfome Park, Mldland �ack, Lonc Plne, 8opcia CrQek
Cabins, Aap@n illghlands Vtllas. 5mugg�er Run Mobilo Nome Park,
Ilu�t@r Cceak and eho vinconti Co�dominiums. in addltlon, tho OfEicn
admtnistorod ono hundred aod eeight (2081 renta2 ereits !e ehe
Caallo Ridge and Ilunter Lonqhou0a pcojecta, ond would aaoumo
[@6#70RD�D�lIC� to� Ehe Coneonnial �e�eal unita upon comptetion.
The AUEAoctEy Feeently i�itiatQd a computecized invnntocy o!
all deed rQBtrtcted aa+piayee untta apeci�ically to pcovide Eor
greater oniorcea�ent of the employce houslnq roqulaelons. Tho
Oitice Mas able, �iCh the c�o�eration oP vacious homaawner's
association�, to identi[y a �umbec oE u�tts tha� �ece not be�ng
used ae a so2e and oxc]u�ive �alacc ot rasidency� a�d cnquiced
tAe �ala/tcar�ster aE slx t6) such uniEs.
Fi�ally, the Authocity va� invalved in a number o[ Code
administ�cation Euactiaas� including Ehe adoptian oF thc payment-
i�-lieu provislan, th� davelopa►ent of do=mitory houaing, and
ravisio�s to the cacetakar uhit and condamir�iumixation �egulatione.
In additio�, thc Authority savieved seventeen I17) City and
thicty-one (311 Caunty development applicatio�s to dete�mine
employee generatio� and the method for satisfyiag tbe employee
bousin9 cequicements associated with each.
Housing pireator Jim Adamski noked tnat the Authority, w�ich
was Puaded by the City and tbe county, realized a sutplus fa the
1984 budget of eleven thousand. one hundred and eighty dolla[s
(511,180). The Authority proposed, as a matter of policy, to
utilize these funds and all future su[plus funds to create a
sesetve that would subsidize senior housing. The reserve Euad and
the policy on tbe use o£ surplus funds rrould be further revieved
on secand rea@ing of the resolution.
!ladsen noted that the 9uidelines for senior citizen housin9
- cequired that seniors be capable of independent living, and be
- questioned the method by which this standacd would be app2ied.
� Assistant County Attorney Gary Esa�y explained that seniors must
- - � be capable of independent living and that a standard for such
would be implemented on a site specific basis. Staff has devised
� a genecal standard with the assistance of 2oca1 physicians and on
` - tbe baBis of federal guidelines, for incorporation into the
- individual leases.
i
`"� -- `. t Kadsen also noted that the guidelines required that senior
,� >:i citizens be sponsored by an individual/entity, and he questioned
�* .,�'�
�'; Commiesioaer's Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 10
�- y�
. ti.`.•.
:��'�^
` ` g, 1j � ��" ' -
,��,,�.,�ti `�. �: �; ;��_.
�- ��
�.<-��� . �.�:.•��s:�:�. ,�.>- ;�'
—_ .�. ;.
the need fot such. Council on Aging representative 8udg� eingham
felt thae the need for a apongor Nas essential. Hp notpd tihat a
senio= who desired ta ceside in subsidized senior houging cuuid
tse sponsored by any entity, including the Board, Council, the
ahurche�, and otheca. The need for a sponsot wa� intend�d to
inttoduce a humane element into the process and to provid� for a
party that would be advised in rhe �vent of an accident. 8ingha�
noted thar thcre were four hundcpd and forty-four (444) �enior
ciCixene in thp County, three hundred and eight (308) of which
resided wirhin the City. There were Eanc (�) senior housing units
at the community center at this time, and eight (8) additional
unita would be Constcucted within the Centennial Project. The
Council on Aging waa, in ronjunction wich the Hnueing Authority
end other asnioc groupa, pr�paring a aenior housing plan to
addrese th� need for senior housing on a long term basiet ie was
aneicipated thaC thfa pian would be firtalfsed by July of thia yaar.
� Kineley rwved Eirst ceading approvel oE ths resolutian and
: tio ae� a public hearing Eor Monday, 8 1►pril, 1985, at �:00
p.w. in Counril Chambers. Madsen seconded and the motion, which
wes lioittd ta thQ eoard, pasaed unenfmoualy.
Knecbk aoved to approve ths r�ealu!!on on firet r�ading and
to set a publie deering Eor Mondey, 8 Apri1, 1985, at 4s00
p.m. Naiis aeooad�d and th� awtion pasaed unaniaou�ly. Th� motion
was limited to Couocil only.
There being no Eucth�r busio�s�, tb� maating Mas adjoucn�d.
,Y,.
t
"��'�
;`;=;
f
- t
_'i
�v.[
:'_t
�' = 1
7Y�
��?��T P(..
��:���
��;�
:�,�
��:�,
, .�
_ �_j
- * c7,
.�+5
'�..�.-:A"-�� �
i..�
Commissionet�s Meeting 25 March, 1985 - 11
i�-:�=�.: :_..