The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutbocc.min.reg.10281985 :�: � ..� , �� . �.` 3 ��.,,� , ��.x� � .�:.' r: „��;,�':� � �� f .+F�� '' � 3� ��"'�� iT'l��f . ' i5 �F A � � j �$tl `�s.� t il �„rk�i�`�.... � Jxi- ,{` ' � �� t��S•. . ?�� sc. .��-ti+'-.v.�tiK.T.,' ._.. . , _Jx.+. . :�....�?f��' .. . � qR�IW C� � W!flfT�TVI�YAY lNNWl� ' se o�rose�, i9es 9s30 a.�. Bx�cuLive soaoion - Litigation - Tow Switb, County Attorn�y L11AD QSf 10:00 Public eeaclnq-Cbuceh at Radabon� 10�1 Ploodplain easasd Rtview - Cindy 8onb�n, �lan�inq NOIt[ 8�Q8IfMt 10:30 Coiorado DQpacl�Rnt o! ■ighwayi: 119�nda Eor Annual M�etinq - To� N�wlaad, Plaoning . 11:00 County llanag�rs Raport - 3ohn Blderl. Counly Nanaq�r i 12:00 Lut►ch 8resk � 1:30 p.w. publl e Conu�ent i # 11DNI/IB'P1171'1'ICII s 1t�S Reselutioes and Contracta ' Ninutes t Charles Crigbt Reaid�nca GNA Balaasion - Cindy �ouben I Or►1 Cresk Club Landscaping 81an - Cind]t 8ouben ' Ractin Coastruction License - sow Sieiefi ` 2ND Readings Colocado ilest Petroleu� Hai�te�ance Contract 1►wasd - Spo:o Niarbos � 2ND Reading: Dlck Sioges, Inc. Contsa�ct ]Wasd - Speso � Niacbos 1 Z:15 Public aeasir►g - 1986 eudqet/Ml11 Levy ior Counly ltoad � Impcavement Aietcicts - Lynn Dw►lop, Budget 1►nalyst R0�[ 6ESSI�1 2:30 Nonthly Pacceptioa Repocts - Lynn Auniop ...:� 3:30 Weed Coatrol Aistrict: Fuadi�g 1►l.tecnatives - Jim Duke ;';;# �;pp aoin� tteetina (Keetia4 held at Community Genter) � Roaring Fork Transit Agency - Bruce 11be1 a. Semiannual Report �� h. Fare Simplification .T,r � 's�' :�� : _� t __. ,_..�..��,....:�,m.��...._,�. ��.,_ p __ _ ., . - •-x.: �;c�„ � n,�;,�� x i , ti_e-. rf,:- , � " , "�3 �. - �'�-,,.4 c° . f� . �q'�..y„� � -��`� ♦ �. r . . 4 �} �� Z.•_ . 13 Y� '�y,4�1?�.i. � �,� ��x _ , �F .t i��'f't C` ..! . �v��f � i l.. � f�� •��'�i�: . . . ..�t..� ......e •r.AOM�►r:c,.a.��d.�.i.,...4+..._. z. f �� . -. . �sRi� oovrrrr BOARD OF COMNISSIONBRS Q�`��L•1LA Iffi '!'iH(' 2A OC7'A9�R. 1985 PRESElITs RtlIlERT M ClltLn, FIF;LF?1 KLAflDP,RUn, GE76NGP. W1D5EN� ROBERT RRJ1UDt5, 2nt1 AI.ARP. (arrlved latel Pubiic TMe Aoard convenud a public hearfng to coaai�or the Church ttearing: ae Redoeane, e 10�1 floodplain fu►zard revlew applicatioo. Plannec RcdaeonQ Pr�ncin Kriz�nonich introduced tho appiicaeion, a requcat to Church eo�seruct a new church faclliey on Redurona Ooulcvacd within ehe 1041 Redaetine townai�e in tho R-1 7.ont Diatcict. The loe upoe xhLch Review the new cburch vaa to be butlt waa partially located within tho • one hundced t1001 year Elooclplaln as identified on thc 19A5 Floodplain Study, ancl it waa Ear this roaaon thae special reviov waB reguiredr ehe subject propecty was previously subdividod. A chureh Eacilily vas an allovaci uesc vithin khe �ubjact zone dir�triet, and A building pecmit vould otherwise have been issucd t to thtt applicant in khe absance of a Eloodplain t1i1zA[d. RafercAl commants varieds the County Enginaoc cevtewod thc 3 a�ltcaeion loc conpliancQ wich tha floaclpialn criterio idantifiad � io Sectioa 5-402 af kho Code, ancl spacifically subsection (d)t3) i whero it waa iodicated that the use o� Eill material was pcecluded within the �loodplai� foc a structuce intendeJ Eor human occupntion. The building envelQpe proposed by the applicant vas situated ++holly out�idc of the Eloodplain boundacy with the exception of 3 one tl) corner of the proposed building, vhich would extend inta i the Floodplain by approximately ten (10) feet. The applicant proposed ta address the floodplai� hazard by using till Aatetial only for that portion of the neu building that would be located within the floodplain. The Engineer noted that the use of Pill � nate=ial was precluded by the Code, and reconmended instead that tbe building envclope be relocated out of the floodplaia so � that rw portion of the .,tructure was situated within the bo�ndary � as defined on the 1985 Floodplain Study. The Planning and Zoning Conmission revieNed the application = at its regular meeting on 17 September, and recor�mended appsoval �'' of the buildin9 envelope as proposed by the applicant Without condition: the Commission maintained that the amount of fill - necessary for the structure would not significantly alter the course of the Crystal River oc affect the ability of the River to '�.�';•�;�_ store water either upstream or downstream. �.�;� . �r�- The Planning Office recommended 1041 floodplain special `�'�,':.f-: review approval subject to the following condition: ss:, �=�-='_':'}', 1. the church building shall be located outside of the one ;�.�'�"�.s hundred (100) year floodplain. A map indicating the ��, building envelope of the church shall be submitted y f pcior to the issuance of a building permit �T�-�' �' 28 October, 1985 - 1 � :a:•': Commissioner's Heeting .-;._�`": } -x. f.� .. _ +i: ._ .. ��_�r. . .,. ,__.._.-r_.,.._..._....,. � .....`A � _��.+��tii°�sij.�:'�" �t'x�f' . . - Child noted that the Connty recer►tly nade ap�lication With the Arr..y Corps of Fngineets fot a 404 pernit, specifically to p[ovide for floodplain contcol seasutes alonq the Crystal River in the Redstone area. He asked if the control mea�ures to be implenented in cohjunction rrith that permit would affect the subjert property. Krizn.ar.ich explained that the 404 perrit Hould allow for river bank stabilization measures to be fmplenented along the river boundaty, anJ that aost of this bork Wouid accur do�rnstrear fro;� the aubject property. The wock Co be acconplinhed pursuanc ta the 404 permit was ton�ideted tempocaty pending the hte�araC[on o� a rivrc managenent plan within the npxt two (2) yearg. Braudls �xpers�ed aone conaern that thr relacation of the cNurch atrurture outside oE th� Eloodnlain. as reconyn�ncled by the Planning OEEtce, nay reduce the uiz� of the �,rking acea. Krisa�nirh explained that the builsHag envelope would be noved alightiy towardu th� parkinry lnt and aNay Ero�a the River, and that this would not renult in a cedurtlon in thc size of tbe narking lot. KlanBerud axpreaee�! sane conrern tbat tbe relorotion of ehe church as reromnended by ehe Ple►nni�g qEElce mby violaee !he setback cequirementu. ltcixa+anich explatned that the relocatcd ettucture would coa►ply aith all aetbaek resc;aicements: although A �ortion oE tho parktng lot ftaelf wou16 ba nituated wLthin ehe aaeback as a r�sult af eho cciocation, pnrki�g structures wcre nllowoJ viehln aotback areoa, County A�torney Tom S�aleh rated thet the building crtvelope pEOposed t�y the appllcane included o patio ntructure tAat would be whalty Locnted w(thtn ehe Eloodpiainr tho loca!!on aE thio parttcular cEruccura wao appcoved by the Plaoninq Gommission AA it xas considered a ceecsaeiont�l area that, technically, vas alloweJ by the Code. Smltb auggcatecl an additlanal candtkion ot approval, howQVVr, to cla�ify the usa oI thc patto ao Pollc>ws: 2. tha patio an Eho vest eidc (river sido) of tho Churah � sholl never be onclased or used as a hAbitrbla ALOA Citild thvn opencd the hoarin9 foc rx�blic conmcnt. Uouy Self. _ ; reprenenting ehe applicant, �xpleined that tba applicant would agrec to relocate thc huildiny envelopa as reoommended by tho Plnnning Olfice and ka cestrict the use oE the Qatio as �ecoauaandod • by che County Attorney. The new church stcuceure vould be built upon a �einEorced canetete foundation at a height of one t�) foot above the one hundred (100) yeat floodplain. f Lewis FlcBUrney, also �epresentiny the applicant, explained tbat the building envelope for the church coulci 6e celocated e�tirely outs?9e of the flood�lain as cecommended hy the Plaqning Office. Although such could be acconplished without reducing the s overall size of the parking lot, it Would cesult in the elimination � of a sidewalk located betveen the lot and the church and would � infcinge upon the lot by approximately five (5) feet. McBurney felt that the oCiginal site plan pcoposed by the applicant vas " the �ost appropriate plan for the subject propecty as it wauld pceserve the entice parking area artd eidewalk. liadsen ezpressed some concern that the buile�ing envelope, in � the event of relocation outside of the floodplain, would infringe upon the pa[king area, Adequate parking facilities were considered ,- ,� particularly critical for the new building as it would be used foc a number of community f unctions as well as for church purposes. ,. Madsen noted that the encroachment of the building envelope into the floodplain was minimal, wheceas there was a genuine need _�-�`�,:' for adequate parking facilities, and on this basis he suggested " that the oziginal site plan be approved. -'�:;:-=;::- ;�.�,;;,: Braudis also expressed some concern that the celocated ��;,• Commissionec's tieeting 28 October, 1985 - 2 r':-;"'.._ _f::�;-_ � �x: � f s•—��.. ;� + 4 � r ;t,� ,� � ,��.�G` �; r �-�� _ r � _ . ' '* 4 � , ?'°r �"'�',:r,.�e�=ti`� . . building envelope would encroach upon the parking area. He agceed °tbat the original site plan was the most functional in that it made the best use of the subject ptoperty. Braudis suggested that, in the event the floodplain concerns could be addressed, the original site plan should be approved. Krizmanich explained that the parking area would be locateci wholly aithin the [hicty (30) Eoot fron� yard u�cback, and that the relocatian of Che bullding envelope would only encraach upon that area by Eive t5) feets thit� would scill provide tMehtY-five (25) fcet within whSch to construct a parking acea and a sid�walk, a size cwnsidered sufficient for hoth such Eacilieiec. Klanderud notrJ triat, alGhough tht original site plan for che propecty r.,ay a�pear to br noce EunCtional, the Code nonetheleus pceCluded conutructlon of certbin strurturee witfiin 3 designated floodplain. She expceuse8 sor+e concecn tha! the oriryinal site plan, tf appcoved, would fail to eomply with the Eloodplain reguletlonn. Child notrd chat tfie approvnl of !he oci�tnal site plan would provide Eor �he conatruceion oE a naructure, aprroxim�taly ten (10) fect of wh�ch would be aituoted wiehin !hc onQ hundred (100) year Eloocl�latn boundacy= although tbfo eit� plan wac conctdored ehe �aost Eunccio��l, ln lhat it would eaxia�ize th� oumbe� of pnrking apaces on Ehe aubjert proparty, eha eoacd moy, aa a reoull, assume ao�ae liabillty Eor appravinry a alructuru locared !n the flood�l�ln. No eakecl iL !ho appllcant had ste�mpted to provida [or the use of Ehe :notel packing lot si�uated o� an adjacent parcol. SeIE cxplaineci that the adjncenE lot mny be available for church parking gurposeg on eeclain OGCAttLODA� but ehat he ha�l not diacussccl the iasue ye� vitb the praHe�ty ownac. Ucs noted that tho�e vaa a flaodplain di�tcict wtthin the Redntone tc�w�aile nod ' thAt imNcovcaoncs to cho dika AIOAta tl►e Ccyetsl Rivec wo�e botng accompltahed each year. Solf noted khat, within the �ext thcce (3) bo four !�) years, suffictent im��avementa ko the dike will have been implanented �o that the subject p�opecty wauld be :t anCirely o�tside o[ tha floodplain tx►uncla�y. He caquested that , ChQ o�igLoal site plan be appcovad on khe basis tha! Eloodplain distrlet improvenents r+ould rea�ove the aubject prQperty Econ the floodplair� boundary within ehe next faw yaa[s. Child then asked for additional conrentar thesre baing none. the heariny vas closed. Qraudis moved to gca�t special review approval to the original site plan proposed by the applicant oo the following basiss a. the encroachment of the nev church structure into the one hundced (1Q0) year floodplain vas miniaal in thac no oore than ten {10) feet of the structu�e would be . situated vithin the floodplain boundary _ ,,:. i b. the encsoachment would be tenpuracy in that future i flood control measures in Redstone would place the ne�i church entirely c+utside of the orte hundred (100) year ,�.: floodplain boundary; those measures would be implemented f� within the next three (3) to four (4) years c. denial of the special [eview application would cause n :. � undue hardship on the applicant :s ::.s>'-,_;' _�;:..:,s.,,_,-`� and subject to the iollowing two (2) conditions: .�,� =;� 1. the church is approved with an encroachment into the �`�-r �: floodplain �� ;'�"1,�: '�� ,,r� Commissioner's �4eeting 28 October, 1985 - 3 �-� ,'�. -�'. :� .. . . i _.__.,........_..�.. » ._.._.____.,.� ... ... . _ :.:,.. . • �-. ��.y _,:� t.a. .,.. ... . �.�y.� � . .. . ,:.. .._�.,.. _� . . ._.__ .�- -..v-. _....�......i�.+%:+��R+i..-��rs_#11�3-t+,. - 2. the patio on the west side (�iver side) of the church shall never be enciosed or used as a habitahle atea tSadsen seconded and the notion passed With opposition fron Klandetud. Child noted that the new church was proposed as the eziating facility Was not owned by the applicant and was ho longpr available to the applicant foc church �urposes. Child noted tha[ the Lutheran Chucch building in Aspen would be moved to Macble within the next veek, where it •:�uld be atored untll the su�aaec oE 1986; Che applicant ha� expr¢ssed an intereat in locating and uaing the subjpet church in the Redstone acea, on a tenpoc�ry basis, pendinry thp ronstruction oE the new facility, Chi�d suggeated that tne tloacd instroct tbe Planning OEEice to ex�dite the tlVilM oE a Bubdivision exemption application to pcovlde for the tempt�rary uge oE thc Lutheran church buildinh in RedaCnnet the review nf the application was to be expedited only brcausr thp Lutheran church was gcheduled to be noved next week. SQIE explained ehat the npplicant woul� prepace a subdiviaion rxpmptlon appllcetion and aubmit samp to ehe Planning OEEic@ pcior to the end nf this week. The Lucheran churah building would be locotcd on thu tlid-ConEinen+c propecty Eoc uee thts vinter p�ndtng thc construrcton oE the new churrht �ho epplicane has obtatned a nhoc� term leane from Nt<t-Contlnent to provlde Ear the ur.e of that pcoporty as note�i, The BoarJ geneca2ly �graod to ingtrucc the Planning OEfiee to oxpodlte eho revirw ot ehe Churrh ae Rcdatono aubdlvLaion uxamEieion applicatian� in aJrJitlon, tt was agtee� tha! a apeciol mcori�q may be nacenaary to appcove tho appliratlon next veek prtor to Qoving tha buildtng. (Dlake arrives) 2ND Chtld noved to appcovo an s�econd �eAdtng o cetsoluttan Reads autborizing tha o�;ecuttan of a conkcact for the Aepen-Pitkin Airpart County Airport Splll Containmaat Pcojeet vith pick Singec, Inc. Spill Tha ceoolutton, appraved on tirat reading at a spacial maeling on Contain 21 OCtpbe[. 1985, �equi�ad two (2) ceadings pursuant to Home . project/ Rule Chartar �equlraments vhereby exNenditurea no! pceviausly . pick authoriaed in the budget could only Ue autho�lzvd by Farmal Singor cesolutipn, sraudis :ocondod aad tha notio� �u�eJ unat+imously. 2HD Child moved second reading approval of a resolutfoo authoriziny Read: the executioa of a contract for the construction of a luel Airport facility at the Pitkin County Airpock witn Colocado WesE Petroleun Fuel Maintenance, inc. The resolution, vhich vould provide for the Fara constructlon of a new fuel farm facility at the aicport to accomeodate the rental car agencxes, was alsa appcoved on first �eading at a special neeting on 21 October. Rraudis seconded and the motion passed unanimously. . Public Buzz Dopkfn was president of the Aspen Chaptec of the �°` ; Comnent Expecimental Aircraft Association. Tha Association was in the process of planning an event for the aviation community, to include Mountain Rescue, Tailvinds, Aspe� Base Opetation, �he -' 99's, and other local aircraft groups, and desired to hold the � event in the airport terminal. The terminal was considered the �'_�' =� most appropriate location as the participants were all involved _ ` + in aviation, and Dopkin requested that the Board authorize its j } use. '$=f•-'�-_'�,; County Attorney Tom Smith suggested that, in the event the '"- "`' "-? terminal was made available as requested, the Association must � �; � "►a �T�x �` Commissioner's lieeting 28 October, 1985 - 9 � r :�� }�� i . � . - ._�, ,- ��,3E�g,. :, t ' " { .. `` .-�y�•. a . .. ,. ...~r.'....--.�a.-o.`I-+..•it?. .__ -.... �=�.....�.�w'i�w..w��+.i+.�7 ki"f'7r'i�y(.w . , obtain liabilfty insurance and assume r¢sponsibility fot all clean-uo costs. The Board generally agceed to authocize thc Airnott Managet to provide for the use of the airport terminal Eor the Association event as requested. The tequest was allowed, in this instattce, as the Association consisted of airport u�ers, so that no ptecedent Would be established. In addition, the use of the tpcminal was condition�d to the folloaing: a, the event �hall not res�clt in any �xpensp to th� Caunty b, the Assorta[ion must obtain liability tnsu�ance, to be a�provhd by thQ County Attorney, pttde to the evenE c. Chr nssociatidn �ha21 be r�spon�ible Eor all clean-up cbt�ts a��ociared Nith thc �vent Fryinry pan t!oad r¢aiden� Terry F►hit� expcceaaed concetn with the condition oE ttorcemhoQ Denct Road in the Thomanville/Meredith arpa, ancl he asked when this road vacs aCheBuled Eoc repair. Public Mnrl:a Director tnud Eylar expl�ined that there was a mud nlider alonq ehe aubjrce raad thtc► year and that the Road snd Esridge Oepnttnene aubaequen�ly ln�plvmen�QCi rrtpnir moasuc�a. Tbo t�partmc�nt only allocotQd evrnty-Efvc thouoa�tl dollacs (525,400) Eor thfa pur�son�, Nowevec, an ��ao�nt which pcovidod Eor tho elearinq of one (l) lane but whlch waa not auEficlent to eorcece the slidQ pcoblen. Tho Drpnrtsaont has implea+antad a �lan eo achievo all oE the necosaary r�Pairs, tncludtr.«� cuEa in�o tho h111atdQ eo ��rovide Eoc a aecond l.ine� the uaa oE ebo fl11 �atecial so excavated to crib eho hillxide, ancl oel�ece. oll oE which �ould occut ov�r tha next tvo t2) eo thrcc il) ycrra. TAc total cost of tho ncccssary im�rovementa vaa oati^ated aE one hundrod lhoueand dollars ts�oo,QOO). Whita �ugqet�ted that PEMl1 funda tw used co haaeen the road copat� schedule. t.ylat explained kAat appraxinately Eour l�ut�dted and [ifty thouarnd dollaca (S�S0,000) Ln FF.NA tun�ls wece mAde availabla ta tbe County chia yoar, vhich tuncts ++e�c used toc three t�? apacific prae�rrma; i�ediate cic�n-up p[o��Amu. minor cepair jobs and major capaic pcojcces. All oE tha FEMA funda made . availabla to the Cuunty 1►avv becn �pent, tha csajoctly on najoc rapatr projecto includin� the Gawer River Road RetAining �•1a11 Projecl. �epai�s vithin thc uruah Creek village Subdivision and im�roveraent$ i� the flunCer Creek area. srhite expressed soae concern thac the inp�ovements to the Road voald not pe acCOmplished Eor a petiod of yeaCSt the Road was not identiEied, for instance, on tbe five {5} year priority list established by the soard for road projects, and tbere was concecn tbat its disrepair vould adversely affect both the tourist and �ogging busiaesses in the subject area. Whit� noted that a number of honeowner's have expressed interest in reCaining the services of legal counsel so that certain �inimum road improvements would be accomplished. Blake requested that the cesidents of the subject area � �°,.� advise the Board in writing of tbeir road concecns, so that sufficient information vould be available xhen reviewfng the '��`-'" capitaZ improvement projects to be funded in future years. Eylar agreed to prepare a preliminary ana2ysis on the cost :?=ti:::°': of improving the subject xoad in its entirety, to include base >-.�.,, . �,�_-;,_ � work as well as slope stabilization measuces. ��.-}� ' ----- =a.;_'�'::; ,'-.�,.:;: '`*`�%:=":j Pitkin County Parks Association iepresentative fla2 Clack '"�� i. ��'� Commissioner's lteeting 28 October, 1985 - 5 �r�'� r�ts��y- r� rt� ��try,=� i ._ _.,._,.�.._._..... `.�.1 t}„', �_t ` .-. . ;�,i�.L�» �:'��a� . _... . ,��-f ".. ..... .._ ...�.eH<�. ,___ _....iv.'..�._..,_. '.��..<+�e�,yr -'`-t� cequested the use of County property for the storage of two (2) pedestrian bridges. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District recently donated two (�1 bridges to the Association, each of vhich was six (61 feet wide and fifty (SO) feet in length, for �se in future trail improvenents. The instailation of the bridges would not occur until next year, howevet, as land use reviey. and specifically I042, aould be required, The Association requestpd pernfssion to store the tao (2? bridges on County propecty alonq the Roarfnq Fork River in the same general ecea Where they would be installed; nefther stractuce would be situated within thp floodplain, ncither would bp visiblp fron adjacent propertie�, and the I.scociation wou2d revegetate the �rea once Chey were inatalied. Thc ttoard h�nerally agc�c� ta alloW Eoc the 9tota9e oF tht two t21 bcidge� as noted �ubject to the ceview and appcnval oE the ceque�r by the County En�:ironmental Coordina�at, and furthec, subjecr to the follorrinq ttrn (2) randitibns: 1, thc bridrycu shall rwt tre vicible Erom adjarent pcoperCies 2, tMe area upnn uhich th� brid�ea �ill be ntored ahall be ceveryetoted upon th¢ic r�u�aval fcn�u che properey, and ln na event lat�r than 1 September, 1986 4ozy Glen t�nbllc t1o�+e Park reaiclene t400dy Capper txhrQas@d sor�Q concorn tbat cloga wece prohibited s�ithin the Park= a land usQ ahpllcatfon ruqu�ar(nq rezonin� of eho P�ck waa approved in 1979 aubjece co vartoua conditlans oF rocord, ono (I) of whlch proclu�ed dogo within thc Pork pcopncty. Cappor au�mlttod a petictao oigned t�y a number of Park cesidents cequeating that thle condition bc a�ncnded ao �hat doge would be allowcd pcovldod thQy wece contnior.d/kcnnalecl vithtn an owncra yatd. ile Eelt that the aignaRurea obtainecl repreaented �ppcaximakely EtEty-one percent CSli) of the haQeawnvrs wilhln tha Park. Child cxPlalned rhat tha clog pcohibittan vas ortginally impoaeA aa Light Ilill, A desigoated vildiiEe area, waa located accoas cha !lighway tro� kho madils hoas park. Ha aug9cato� that, in the evcnt khe aaard desicocl to cecansidec tha conditton sso Ehat � dogs vould ba alloued within tha Park, a strins�ent kennel ceyuire- •- ment be imposed. County 1lttafney Ton Smith Acceptied the patltion on bahAl[ of the Roard and agreed ta reviev the procedure vheceby tho conditlon pcohibiting dogs In khe PArk could be amended. Sharon ttollica, representing the gcoup GASP, requested that the Board adopt a no smokio9 ordinance similac to thak recently adapted by the Ciky of Aspen. Adoption Uy khe County would pcovide for consistency betveen the two (2) entities both to enhance public awareness and provide fo[ better enfoccer�ent. � Action by the County uould address the airport, f or instance, a � public facility that was the first arrival location for many Yj tourists; both commute� airlines p�ohibited sooking at this time, �: a.,,:,� and smoking was prohibited in public places within the City, so � � that a County prohibition aoald provide for overall consistency. r"a The adoption of a no smoking ordinance by the�County would also `� ! provide for copsistent regulations amongst all cestaucants in the :�;;-'.': r County. r� _� `� Btaudis explained that he would oppose governmental intecven- � , tion in restau[ants to address the smoking issue, so that he _�_. .." would not support a cegulation pcohibiting smoking in these '�:::�?��-` facilities; it was felt that restaurant owners, in their sole �.--:-''`". discretion, should select the market which they desired to serve ;�:=-�-,, :�:��.A�^,T' ' :� Commissioner s tieeting 28 October, 1985 - 6 :��r� f�;:� .'+`<'''•.-� . ��. ;, ,� .� �,>�a� --`-_ .;..� k .�r�_ �:; ,� ,`� �� -� "*^ � �r �c , #}_ � "�. . R �t s- . �r: f�;�^� : , '.�:. '��+��'..i� . . .'��,� .i-.�-.,_. :.y4�'-T'.t -. �'.!!f=Rrt'-�--t r.satfF...`.�+�r aw�-._ . ..._.� �e.: aau that client� Would ra:cenize those establish�c.ts a�cocding2y. ite indicated, hot+ever, that he xoulci suppor: a s-o}:in, �rohibitiori in ::�e airpvrt as this ;ras a ru�lic facili.y the use of Which Was not discretio�acy. t:l3ndecud ioteci that thc Coutity a:iagted no-s^okinc. teg�la�tiols in 1978 for cer:ain public facilitic�, inc.udi:�, the aicport� aod tha:, in :his cen�e� [}1E �3oarc3 Ha� i» t:c fo.efroat of �ublic a«ta:cr.�ss or, t:ie issue; adop.^d regu2ztions sc�unl2y i.r�clu3ed s:co�cing iw the �ain ter.-.insl area a. t9tis �i:�e. She did ttot feei, ho��ever, thit lt woulcl bc 3,.airop:i�:e �o use Segi�iation to �ddte�a s�okinr in cestaucant�, anc inuica�_ci :hyt she tvo Would op�.�i�e yuch re�jula�fo:i. :he Eel� .��a: t;�c:e :+as a laCl: df f�ith in eshabli�hincj �cea.ec pub2i�. ac.arcn��3 or► s;okirr, and the need to be zeu;^_c:f�l o°_ ot:�er�, �nc: �;izt i: k�r• an �:�ic basis `ha: � �to�ibf:ic�n a�� f,[o-;o��c�; :.�:is aas n�: Cor��iaered suEfiCtcnC j�sti:ic�tto�Eo[ ro�eres:�ent interttn�iu:t. :�o:reV�C, anci fucthec::;o[e, ; it w+a� not Eeit ,h�t as� ducricy:ro: ixr�3ziaiciost s�o�:Id Eunc:idn. ��ducn 3,rcr�i eh�t :;r•o�:i:�� hbulri �a ytnhihltecl In the air7art eec;�lh:il n� i� xs: s con:ihed are�. ±te ubuld noe aupport � nrahi�lcio� in rc:,ti�ur�c�tu, houcwer, a::c: �su�h��cc� inateacF rh�e �I1 rag.iciran.� �ravf�ta ��;ara:� �ec:ttons: Edr a�oker� nnrl :eon-::�oacr�. Cwl��sc nc�e�ct :ei�k, e2�::au,:� ��aitin�� +�a t3rohihlaed in tha aitpsoc. �cr:^tnil jt cht� tf:°a, ��rH :e�� li«+:tcd :r� EhL• vaiting are� !n :hE �er:in�l pnly so»' :r�:: nne cnE�rcn�t. ihe uar oL tl�c airNnre evc:aln�t s+:�» r.ot �ii��reelaoac;+ tn �toat al: sir trxv�ler: �crlvitd t9icrc, �n�! Enc thi� cea�on i: wa3 :�lt th:�� a:+oking e:lioulJ �e eaticaly ;.rnbil>iEe�l, r.ot oai;� in th�e :�ain t�r:�!»sl but in th� :wo t2F �'n:�.��arcial eerain�la �� wctl. '�lake €�uastinne�l the acc.! Eor a �<^okin, ,�rah!l�ition in all :�:��iurnn:s ta� ci�c County, � ind ,��rticulatij che noontain ree�sucane:. C�ild na�ec thae chece u4c� �rcry+ E�sr ra�cmura�cs s+itl�in l:ic Councy'� juriacliction ar1� hc :.ugga��e�1 €nac, in licu o? ado,�tin� a p[oJi<►,i�ion as regueNted, ctee !saarci recxuc�t th3� all recstau[anEa volunesrily pcovide seaara�e «ectian: loc �pke« and non-s:�okers. Ch11eI also �S�ee� that s^okin9 °+houlcl be e�ti�ely �?cuhibitccl �it►►in chc aic�or� cerminal. � The �oarct unani:�ou�ly ��cc�d e:��c a:�o{:1�►g shoulcl be Prohibit�d vithir► thc �ncir� airgort ter:�inalt to achi�ve tk�is goal, tha County Rt.orney ►ra�. instructed to review the cxi:,:ing cegulacionN, reeo-:*.�end an �:�en�ent th3t :eoulci :��gly tu :hc encire terainul, and adacess � :�eLhod for cnfvrce;aenk. !?ollica, t+ho indicatec that sFe generally or.posed aclditional govecn^:en� requ2ations, aoted that a subscan:ial a:no��t o£ in£oc:�ation has been :�ade availab?e i^ reeen� j esrs on the effects o� Qsssive snok.inq; ic :ras felt titat gove[n�ent played a [ole i� pcocecti:.g t:^.e public heal_h anc: u°lface, and ic was on this �ar,is tha� a County-Hide restaurant p[ohihition was proposed. Shc noced that seven�y-five pecce^t (75�) of �he residents o: - � this state �rere non-snokers, the majority of uhor� were not a►ra�e -'" of the heal�h affects of �assive s�oking. �,�� - ='"r"'.��'', 91ake, Child ano !•iadsen supaoctec a voluntary p[ograr.: ._�..-_a - �.° whereby res=aurants rrithin the County's jurisd:ccion would be ' tequested to provide se�arate non-sc:oking sections. Voluntary � "� compliance Nas also supported by Braudis ann i:landexau, althougt� -�•��.,;�-t boch oppcsed the program noted abo�e given the ic�plication of ��' a government intervention in the event of failure. The County �� lianager tfas instructed to review the imp2elnentation of a voluntary ��;�� progran, in conjunction with the DeparLmeni of Er.��ironmental Health, �N;:=4:, ducing a fu"ture work session. 'iEi�:.,�A_.:.t ��``�:''�� The 3oard generalll agree�' not to pursue a s:�aking pcohibition �>� in County restaurants, and to request voluntary compliance instead. .� � Commissioner's ,feeting 28 October, 1985 - 7 F.*�' -s.�s ,:�� - °� , - .;�. - :.. *��{"�r t< �`�S `X�(� yi- 'f`a ! . ..3 �...� ;Y � t • . y s':' ,3-� '��-tt � ..... , � _ ,.-.......-.'.i+.s-r4:.. _ .. .,_._. .... .�"iu.��._...�_�6:..�i+�!�.��-tfr6�!�TR'�, 'x,?.. Ninutes The minutes of 26 and 27 August, a»d 9 Septembet� 1985, resppctively, wete revieWed and approved as submitted. O►+iqht Child :noved to approvc a resolution qtanting a thirty (30) Detail day extension for che Charles ouight 19t�4 GME+ appcoval for a 3d'umgsn t•�� t2) loi singlp Eamily subdivision. �'hc retsolution would Extend pcovfde a [hirty (�0) d5y extension for th� filing of the detailed �ubmission applicatlon. ►tsdsen aecond�d �nd the notion passed unanircously. Anpen Child �ovr8 to approve a r�solurion granEing approval oE �n Ftacqutt a��ncimpnt to thc tn+l Creek C1ub (Aepen Raea7u�t Club1 Landgraptng �lub Plan. t�caudis seeonclQd and the motion pastsed unanimously. �lartin tJo acEton waa token ag the congtcuctlon licens@ Aad beeo Conctruct �revtounly appcoved. Licena� Public Tho Boacd convened a publlc hearing !o conalder !h@ 19a6 Ilenrtng: budgeta and n�ili levlra foc the cev�n (7) Coneral ImprovcKnont 19A6 Dlat[irla withln tbe County. The �istcicta an�l ehe pcopoaed mill improv� !ovlca unre: AisE[icE !!ill Levv Du�lge t Mouneain Valley Geoeral improvement Distctct 10.357 Highlancla Gcneral Im�rovemenC biatrict 18.127 4rueh C�cak Vlllagc Gancral Imptoveoont ptatrict 29.380 lvining Plats Gene[al Impcov�ment Diakcict 12.1Q0 liolland I!ills Gonvral Improve�+csnt olstrtct 12.Qb3 Re�loton� Ranch Aeceu �e�aral Impcovemant Oiet�ic� 9.075 Ccy�Eal Rivar �aunEry �atatcs Cenecal Tnptovament Dist 40.2d1 •t Rudqet AnalyBt Lyn� DunloN i�troducec� kho budgats for tho subject pistricts, idQntifylny tho revenuea and the expanclltures foc � � each, pu�lop explainecl that tbe today's heacing vas anly intanded • !o pravido Eo[ public comment on each budget, and that tw othec action r+as required at thia time. The propoaed budgets and mill . levie� would be adopted in conjunction with tha adoption of tha County mill levy. 81ake then opened tbe hearing for public comment. An uniden- tilied sesident of the Redstone Ranch Acres General Impraveraent oistrict vas supportive of the mtll levy propused for that District p�ovided that it did nnt inccease beyond the level established last year. The 14B5 level provided sufficient revenues foc road maintenance, repairs and snorrplowin9, and it vas not felt that the levy should be increased. - a DuRlop explained that the 1986 bud9ets and mill levies � ,.<.i �roppsed for all of the above districts did not pcovide for any ':� ancrease beyond the 1985 level. _ „_ � Child noted that the forty (4�) mill levy pcoposed for the '= - Ccystal River Country Estates General Improvee�ent District was ` f airly high, and he questioned the amount of revenue that such �' ,1� � would generate as well as the cost pec homeowner. Dunlop eYplained �*`` that the levy proposed would gene[ate nine thousand. eight ' ` � hundred dollars ($9,800) in revenue, eight thousand, five hundred '�X.-:-• t �-.�.., , ,�..;,;;�.� ($8,500) of which was necessary for debt service alone. Alt oug •=��:._�,�`�_ the cost pet hor..eowner was not available, the residents of the �"�''�"� subject District voted to incur the debt and ir�pose a levy ��_ ;��`:'--�t'= Cor.unissioner's 1leeting 28 October, 1985 - 8 r`_�°;; s�'K t; �a'_ ._.. ..I ...._. . ,...._�.._..�_.._..._. . _ ...,. ....., • - " " ' `'�,- j' f ��.1r�' �� s t � ( ` S 1 'Y {t:�- . '� � "#�.6i1 �4 S .�� . ._. . _ � '�;'.7� �� .....�.. ��;' y�`�ar-s �y } .a s y„e, , __ _ ._ . .y... ....-. dc��.� °=Z sufficient to ensure its cepayr..ent. Dunlop noted that notice of today's heariny was published in the Asnen Tines and the Vallev Joucnal, and Has both nailed to and posted ir each of the seven (7? Districts. Alake as!ced for additional com+ents; there bping none, the hearing s+as closed. Flo a�tion aas taken. The jnint City rnuncil - Doard c�f County Comntsgioners neetinq waa convened. '�hose prhsrnt included Counrilmemberu Cfiorioitt Ftalls, paC Pallin, Ton Isaac and Chic Collln�, ancl iloard �ie;�bers AlaY.p, Child, ;tad�en, 51and�arud and gcaur*is. RFTA ltoarinq Fnck Tcanait Agen�y G�neeal t!anager ltcuce Abe1 Sea:i- inEraduced ehe semi-�nnuai reporr, a twi�c yearly update on Tcanait nnnual Agenry octivittea re�uiced hy ehe tneec�ovecnmetntal llgreement Rrport �hat eat�blis�hecl ;h� nryenry, nbe! rcovtd�d n brteE histocy aa follaua: the Ary�ncy, �reated [n ttnve�ber of 19A3 trj the Councll nnd ehr ltaarcl, conm�ncecl opecacihnu au a noparaee conaolidatQd publir transtiortaetan nyater. /n .7anuacy oE 1964 with routaa i� both tt►e City o� Aapen ancl Pttktn County, provided conerac�ual aecvire !o tbe Aaryrn ,kiing Company ta acrve thceo (]) aep�rate aki �rea::, an<1 pravtdQd oeher ne�ooea! aervicoa, includin� ehQ Maroan nQlia a�ci l.�tpcn ttuair Fcaelval coutec. ttinQ hundced and Etfty thausand �9SO,AQO) psnaengeca were c�arrlecl !n 198� oad aix hunJrec! khoua:►nd (400.Q001 non-contractecl �tlea uare �civenJ tota2 mtleac3c would a�rroxt�rate 6etucen eight hunclrocl and tiEty thouaand (ASO,OOOI nncl ntna hundrod thousa�� (90A,000) �ilos in the e�ent eontcactect �ec�icea ve�e lneiu�ed. Sixtoa� (36) oow buaea ware purchaaed ta replACe aqtny vahicles ancl tha now Uus Natntanancc Facility wa� con:plctcclt the new Facility prnvided [ar beeta� mainte�ancc, operatiar►a ancl nanage�+ont cankcol. Ftnaliy. tho ' Agenc:y vas In the proccos af �or+pioting a aor��orAte identiEy Progran. The Agency has, during the �tzt ewo t2) yearg, e[feetad a number ol tmprovenents all of which have conccibuEad lovard� i gceater eEficancy ARtI �OI�PCOVCd aervice to che communlCy. � Abel explained ehat a numbec of improvements bave bvcn � scheduled foc completion next year, includLng Eha acquisit?on and installation of a nunbet uf bu� Nheltars, the purchaae af a senio� vaa, the implc�aentation af a marketing p�ograc� and a fare i simpliFication proqtae,. The City rngineer has becsn providing assistance to thc Agoncy for the bus shelter progcam, Rcque3ts for Proposnls were recently solicited and it was anticipated that a contcact xould be awacded on 12 ttovenber. Bids fo� the purchase ; af a wheel chair-equipped seniar van have also been solicited, � all bids received wece within budget, and it wac anticipated that this contract would be auarded on 12 llovender as well. The Agency j has been reviewing a marketiny program with varfous condominiun t cooplexes, lodges, and others. i • - The 1986 Ylock Program for the Agency i�cluded: �,�'� a. a detailed evaluation of the City service piogram. The _ _._, � evaluation would be ackieved this winter, and a public hearing has been scheduled for 13 April, 1986, in the _ �: i event any recom.�endations should be implec�ented N; .,t ; .� :� b, the preparation of a Transit Development Plan. The z.`_. new TDP would examine the role of the Agency in the � community, inclu�ing the potential for a broader role �..... . than existed at this time; the Plan would, for instance, '�`�- �'^ assess the ability of the Aqency to address parking, �� downtown circulation and others 't{'.�*.X_-;N=� , .�r`-" Commissioner's Meeting 28 October, 1985 - 9 �:, �z _ �k� :.:+.i�..� , - ,;�. , y�-.��;.. u .�, �tt�.• � : rt . � .._ *'.--- _�...�"'-.. ..� ..ti.. .�. -'�-'�".�+�'•�:.i►�+��G:�P�'�'A�*....�`_" :• -�� r�'�.r: ' c. the iRplementation of a pteventative vehicle naintenance - ptogrart:. An auto�ated syster.. would be in use next yeat. and petsonhel ttafning Nould be achieved d. the en�ancenent of hgency adninistrative functions. County Financc staEf have been assisting the Rgency in conpilin9 financial infocmation, in finalizinq sales tax cevenue ptojections, and in preparing the 1986 budget Abel explained that a draEt 19H5 budget vould be available fnr revi�W by 11 llovember, and it wae anticipated tNat a public hearinq anct ffn�l approval woulti occur in carly nectnber. Chfld aotcd the ttu� tiaintenanre �acility included a lacgp a�oun[ o� ;�odern nachinery and E�Gilities, mu�h oE whieh �nnlcl not be npeca�ed by �xinting �tsff. Abel explained that ehe building ua� dest�ned r.o that �11 natneenanrr cc�uld be arcor��lighed by Agrnry otaff, and nn thlu hasiss 5 �igoifieant �r.,ount of nodern c3c�ui�cnt wac hcvvided. Altheugh exi�ting utsf[ rould not utillze all di thia c3c�ul��nt due te lark of tcaining, the 1966 budg�t !nrluded an alloca�lan for gcaEf Lralnin�. itequeatg foc Prapoaala h�ve alccady becn nollrlted for �hia pur�sose. ;iadae� ar��cA i[ the Agen�y �neiel�raEed an expanalon in aervleQ in 1986, �o inelude areaa aurh aa Redatone. Carbonctale, Glenwood aqringa, a�d �n A�+traek connQCClan. AbQI exhlalned ehn! the Aganey stoerd dealced to addreoa cxiati�g aervireu pcovidod by tho Ageocy pclar to aeaumi�g new rauteat ie w�a Eele ehae exlatinry acrvice 1�tvQla shoulcl Eirat be ocacaaod to determine whothcr they rrerQ beinc� �ravided at the maxir..u� levQl of eEPiciency, r,he ex{�nesion aE aecvicea uoul� be ceviewQd ulehin the canlext of the Tranait Devclopment Plan, ancl would itrst rec�utrc an anacsamane oE publie cransparc�elon nacdn and �cr+and in thc aceAA notod. Abol noted �hat the Agoncy haA bcen vo�king with the Redstone - � Coc�aunity Assoeiatiaa and uas in the procesa af aanducting a , aurvey of Area ce�idontu to cleta[mino denand [or �wbltc tcanupo r � tationt it wa� �ot knw+n, havrver, vhother the nodstano community ! could ae aceon.:-odatecl chi� yet;r. ; ; Colli�s su�agcoted thnt, nN kho tsus Haincenbnco Focility -.,! �rovided a aubstantlal ar.�aunt af ao�lern tre►napoctatian equipaient. Ebat the Facllity accanr•.adate tba vehicic �aiotcnanco nccds of � !he City, County a�d Toti+n af Sno:+r�ass Vi11agQ. Abel explainod t that the Facility vas constcucted in la�qc part vith 9MTA funds, and that the use of the Facility and ita eguipment vas, as a � cesult, limited to bus maintenance pucposes only. The use af the � Yacility foc outside vehicle mai�tenance purposes cQUld only be allorred in tbe event Ut�ffA was convinced that it vas fully utilized ` by the Agency and thece wzs ezeess capacity foc otber usecsr � under such circumstaoces, hawever, u!TrA r�ay require reimhurseaent { foc that poction of the Facility not used by the Agency, � t 9raudis noted that the sec�i-annual report would appeac to � indicate that the Agency vas becoa:ing involved in transportation planning, and he asked if the[e was sufficient expertise to � accomplish such. Abel explained tbat there was :,ufficient management capability to achieve transportation plannin9, noting that the - Agency was also working with the Planning Office in this regard. Blake expressed soe�e concern with the accuracy of the ''; Agency's budget planning process, noting that revenue and expendi- - _.. � ture projections during the past two (2) years have been somewhat inaccurate. Abel explained that the Agency was completing its second year of operations and, as a result, now had a basis � :: for projecting revenues and expenditures more accurately. The - impl enentation and collection of the transit sales tax contributed to inaccurate projections this year, in that it was only implemented _ this past July and there was no concise basis for determining the �� Commissioner's tteeting 28 October, 1985 - 10 r�:�;' ��' . ';,e?;. •-x:: �,,:�� }; � � , - a� r � '.'r 'r 3'S�F, ' ' 7 ;. ' � ^A Y # ,� . - " �$ �-t� �;.'.�" ��:`r" T-rt r `� ' " •. �' . _ ..� ....... ..._�__ .� sv -. . .�-:..._ . 4.. .-.�-.�.J 1..,��i1..�.�..�.r . "t... _ amount of revenue that would be generated. The Agency has attempted to address the budget planning process by soliciting the assistance of the County pinance Office; although these eEfotts Noulci pcovfde for more accurate budqetirtg, sales tax coi2ectfons wpre seasonal in nature and woulc3 be subject to some fluctuation. pinance birector Ton Oken explained that recent projections Would indicate that nc� new ttansit �ales tax would generate greater revenups that were arigina]ly anticfpated. A number o: problens Wece exgeriencpd with the initial tax collections this f�ll and, as a resuit, it was difficule lo accurately pro�t�t cnlleCtion� for the 198G budget. The Agency would be able to provide nore acCUrate projectiong at the end of this year once revenueu had bern cnlle�ted ovec � period of ;aontbs. Oken ex�reased anne concern r+ith the budgeC prncesu urilizad by th� Agencyt i� ++as felt that thQ n�e��y wab relying upon annual cachec Chan multi-year budryrts �a br►th thc pac111ty and the buses were brand new anci ass mout oE them Were Ut�TA funded= the Ahenc�yr should addcesa and budget for future bua pur.haggs, re{�airs to the Fa�ility, and othcr carital improvcnents on a long term bn�is. Abel explained that the Transit DevFlopment Plsn would encora�aas a fivc (5) ye3r �seriod, ^o [hat multi-year �lonninry wouid ocrur. The 1913G budgee gener�lly provided foc shoct tcrm eap[tal improve�.+cnta �sendFr� tha rompletion oE the Oevolopmont Plan. Abel thvn ad�roancd the t�rc air�pllficaelon �roqram rocently initiared by the Agenry. ►he exiating Ea�e sstcuctuce pcovidod difEerent Eareo Eor diEtecent zonea, ao Chn! thore wece tbirlee� (13) Hossiblo Eares. Sta[E pcnpoaed to a{�;�lify tho etructu�e, both to pravide [or � �,ore underrstanciaele nnd conNrehenalve syatem and as an incontivc �o u�e public trannpartotion. Tho stcucturc proposed e�tablishocl Eour IAl sc�ratc Farva su followas Zone Four l91 beyoncl Dasale S2,5q 2ane Tb[ee (3I bcyond I.azy Glcn 52.00 Zone 1vo (2) botwcen [frush Ccaak/ f,AZy Gl an 51.50 •� Zone Oae tl) botwavn Aopen/Saawmass Village S .50 A aeparate children's face of ana do11Ar (Sl) has also been established. The discount purchase pcagcam has also been amended= . the existing system provided fur n unlform thirty-five percent (3S!) discount for prepayQent, and the new system would establish a discount ranqe af between zero (0) and fifty percent (503). The new fare system uas revenue neutral for the Agency, in tbat it would result in neitner an increase nar a decrease in revenues. Klanderud noted that the nev fare structure was vecy lo9iCa2 in that the rates were generally based on mileage, She expressed some concecn, however� that the new rates for do+rn valley users may be perceived to be higher. conparatively, even in the event , of prepayment. There was some wncern with the accuracy of this � perception as the down valley users genecally supported the implementation of the transit sales tax; the fares proposed for � � the down valley areas were now considered higher than existing _ :t fares, whereas bus service within the City of Aspen was still - - free. - Abel explained that the down va2ley fares were not higher " than the up valley fares on the basis of mileage; the former were ' based on twelve cents (5.12] per mi2e whereas tha latter were � '" � calculated on the basis of sixteen cents (5.16) per mile. In '=�'== ;? � � addition, it was noted that the Agency was funaed with sales :�;.-'[`;;;;-;_ } taxes in lieu of property taxes, and that the great majority of -�`�icr- `� sales tax collections occurred in the up valley area, and specifi- �ns`'�- s cally within the City of Aspen. ��. : a�w �� `��i�,�.� Commissioner's t7eeting 28 October, 1985 - 11 r�.n:- ;''. - . � ..y,�, > :�� :. _ �. _. , ,, �p' �� :.�. > _ ,� r�.� .4 a� .3,^ i �� a _ �� 3� �. ��'ri�. ��,��-. ..V.F�. .'� l�a.�'q 9caudig th�n moved io approve the nev fare struct�ce on behalf " of thp IIoard. Child s��onded and the �►otfon passed unaninously. Collins moved to �ppcove the nev Eare �trucruc�, Isaac s�cnnded and the motion, Mhich wag limite� �z Counail, passed unanimously. � There bring no Eutther bugineas, the msQting was adjournsd. . �_f _ + P�+ w- } i � 43.� ` � � . � .Q� l � 1�� i� nl : � C,,'�;-� � � } .fi.� ! `�t:i 1 �,r ij w,{�p I'�r� �v'. � � �. �� _ �.� ..a..i�. . . . k. .��-Lu.R�. . Commissioner's Fieeting 28 October, 1985 - 12 ;s r�-.:._„_�-, 1985 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING EXHIBITS October 28 Church of Redstone A Notice of Public Hearin (No other Referenced Exhibits) . 39 � � The Aspea Times Box E �-'�: :, �" ��- i�:-� , , ��.-.TIiIJT �,��•..•,�,�,� Aspen, Colorado ,; f,-�,�r, �^ �° EXHIBIT `I;i'jC � � �'--7 � 1,' PROOF OF PUBLICATIDN � ' s STATE OF COLORADO ) C0�7�/ Of Notice ) ss. County of Pilkin ) I� William R. Duna�aay �o solemnly sw•ear that Publisher '� �ue�icN°�nc� I am the of THE ASPEN TIMES; :�CN Ue�H�OF��NS 10�1 FIAOD- lhat the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in pari, Nm'tCB ts HetteeY atvEN eh.c a�11e and publIshed in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has � "��b'�'"�0°��lses.■etaoo ��a.t8e Pfekin Coueer ea.ne of commb. a generaI circulation therein; thal said newspaper has been pub• �i Commt.eim.n'•�n� eoe E 1l�i�n��t»s4 A�pw Cola�dO.tn� tha lished continuously and uninterruptedly in said County ot Pitliin, �d•�n�� —adtcud�d�urch m�p�noelotl�ndth�t for a period of more than fifq�•tao consecuti��e K•eeks next prior �moniswr�a+aeti.�aoyavnoaa�i.in,in�e.&�? aooa di�4icR dons RedROM elvd in doxnto�m to the fIrst pu6lication of the annexed fegal notice or advertise- B�tc,,.,.bor.u,.00nn,�aatetieC�yratst.- ment; that said new�spaper has been addmitled to thc United States °C°a��1°°t' � Fm WrUur foform�tlue.mataet ths MpeolPiF mails as second-class matter undcr the provisions o[ the Act of i��'�.1so8�.1�a&.�A�n, Cotondo:el n(9os)s2s-2o2n aat 2z1. _� March 3, 18T9, or any amendments thereof, and that said news- -.�7bm BWca.Ciutrpenon paper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal ��°�O°°ti�0� Publ6hed ia ths Aryeo�uo 8�apfam a�. notices and advertisements w�ith the meaning of the laws of the �g,gs, State of Colorado. � That the annexed Iegal notice or adverlisement �eas published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly newspaper for the period of 1' consecutive. insertions; and that the first publication of said nolice was in the issue of said newspaper dated September 26 A.D., 1985 and that the last publication of said notice w•as in the issue of said news- paper dated A.D., 19— / �y�� / ��GGS _ Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, this �_. day of � A.D., 19 Notary ublic r4y commission expires �� t � 1 � . � � *Em lp oyee Buses ; Aspen Highlands will continue to transport their ski area and Lodge employees to and from work thus reducing the impact on both Highway 82 and the RFTA system. .� a *Marketing Information stressing the free transit amenities offered by the Lodge will be featured in promotional materials. Staggered bookings and non-Saturday arrivals will be � encouraged and a courtesy van will be on-call for airport , pick-ups. The destinata.on orientation and self-containment of the resort will be key elements of the Highlands marketing effort. � *Wilderness/Scenic Area Bns Service In addition to accommodating the Maroon Bells Bus Terminal ;� and public parking, the Lodge will offer direct bus service � to Maroon Lake and the USFS trail head. This service will further alleviate any peak loading that may impact the RFTA � program. • *Self-Containment I,and Use The Base Area and Lodge wil l contain a fnl l array of � facilities and services designed to minimize the need for travel to Aspen or Snowmass Village. Furthermore, the winter marketing strategy will be designed around lift pricing and attractions which will discourage traffic. This self-containment concept has been identified as a major auto disincentive in previous transportation studies. *Hotel Packaginq The proposed operation of the Base Lodge as a hotel in and � of itself is an auto disincentive. The base land at Highlands could develop either as a hotel or as numerous : clusters of condominiums with discrete management ; structures. A self-contained hotel fully staffed with its f own marketing department can attract and serve large groups such as ski clubs, conferences, etc. Groups are more easily managed by mass transit, as they tend to utilize. in-house facilities, thereby minimizing travel- related impacts. Condominiums complexes, on the other hand, are less attractive to group business, focus more on individual guest business, experience owner-occupancy and seasonal rental , all of which are factors that generate traffic and impact the Iocal residential community. In summary, the transit incentives and auto disincentives associated with this project are well st•ructured and should significantly reduce the trip generation potential of the project. . � DETAILED SUBMISSION In light of the diversified activities and land uses in this � area, a comprehensive transportation plan for the Maroon Creek _ Corridor would be of enormous public benefit. Such a plan could �T be prepared by detailed submission and could address many of the � difficult transportation problems. Its scope of work should ! include an evaluation if future needs and a facilities ` � develvpment plan for the following: . i Mass Transit � � ' Highlands Free Shuttle � RFTA Maroon Creek Route . . i Maroon Be21s Bus � i . Courtesy Vans i Employee Transit Parking Ski Area Pazking Facilities Lodge & Inn Facilities . Wilderness Park an@ Ride j Sky Ride � Trails j Bike Paths Nordic Trails USFS Trail System i � Roads j Maroon Creek Road Improvements � SH 82 Intersection � Tntersection Alteznatives � � Impact Assessment � Air Quality � Wilderness Rccess } I.and Use Financial � s i This analysis would serve as a valuable planning tool. It would ' guide the development and operation of the Highlands transit and parking facilities and help refine the program for the base village. It wonld give Pitkin County and the RFTA accurate scheduling and construction cost data for their transit and road system. It would aid the USFS and interested environmentalists in their assessment of air quality changes and wilderness use impacts in this corridor. This work together with the continued operation and of the Highlands transit system, will improve the transportation component of the Maroon Creek Valley beyond what now exists and would exist without this effort. ___ ---- _ � � �' . �I CONCLUSION O . ' The areas of concern identified in the P&Z General Submission ResoZution are �natters that can easily be addressed with relatively minor modifications in the proposed plan. In many cases they reflect misunderstandings or uncertainties on the part of the P&Z which we � will clarify at the September 10th meeting. Therefore, we believe the conceptual plan, as presented, should be approved. The areas of concern that are not fu11y addressed can be made conditions of approval which must be met at Detailed Submission. We will demonstrate, on a topic by topic basis, why the GMP scoring should be raised at or above the 27 point threshold level. By so doing the Board will recognize that our proposal is of sufficient i quality to stay in the review process. � i 1 Neither the public nor Highlands will be served by delaying the review process for another year in order to make minor c�esign modifi- cations that can easily be accomplished prior to Detailed Submission review. We want to work with the public and County to design and build a project that can benefit everyone. Further delays may � only hinder our ability to do so. �k � � t �� , � � ; . i� f � �� .: ., - �a �;� �. ; '�� LIS`�' OF ATTACHMENTS ,i: �, . , � A) TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT STATE HIGHWAY 82 � � (1) LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL FROM JAY HAMMOND � '' (2) LETTER TO HAMMOND FROM BOB MOSTON (CDOH) �� ; (3) LETTER FROM R.A.PROSENCE RE:SIGNAL B) LETTER TO RFTA RE: CLARIFICATION OF GMP REVIEW ; � C) LETTER TO LEE CASSIN RE: CLARIFICATION OF GMP APPLICATION ! i D) ASPEN HIGHLANDS MARRETING PLAN RE:AUTO DISENCENTIVES I � ' � I . f i I f ;� � t � � • i } � � j1 i • � �b ' ;� • .; , c tirr��o�rt�anvr+. ' - TO: City Council � r•r.or�: Jay fi�mr��ond, Assistant City l:ngincer� DATr: rpril c, 19s4 r.r•.: Traffi� �ignal at the �taroon/�2 Intersection -------------------------------------------------------------------- i �lp�r.oved �or sutinission to Cit�� Council �. Cit�� 61��nac�cr �' B_ �S�GBQLIN�2 . The attached c�rresroncl�nce and dat� ci�cunent s�me of the history of L-lie :t�roon Creek roacl and I�igh�a�y EZ2 intcr�ection tr�ffic sign�l . Dave C�.r�pbcll ' � letter �nc'. att�checl ata:rant studies; inclic�.ted the neec] for a �raL•£ic si�tnal bac.l: in 1�75. ^'he ��zrr��nts ' �•�ere uncicrtalcen in June of 1975 , a Lime of ycar a�hen tr�ffic � loi�ing an th� I�;��roon �nd Cast7.e Crec�k reacls ��ver�c�es abc�ut , E'•�°; of annual ��a}; 1�adzn�s. Ih th�t year, the �tatc !?�partrent : of f•:i�ht•�a,�; (n0!') cict�rnincci that � ,ign�l �aas !•!�rr�nted �t � thc • inter�ec�ion b�:�5ec1 on vnh�c�l�r volume an�3 in �ecru�tion � of contir�uou, tra;fic {�•�arrants ]. ��nd ?.) . !�?hile th� �tutc l�,zs � not c�:ai�o.ed its mininur� �•a�-:rr�nt volumes since 1475 , it is nrob�bl;� � conser��ti�� to s�y tha� traffic in the�e J.ocaFion.:, has incr^a::ecl �o�e 30: sinr� then. l:ccorc'inc; to fir. Can�bel?, thc 5tate still consider� a signi]. �:�zrrant�r3 �t fiaroon and r2. nlso at�ached are "�?�r.l I�xation" renorts `or 19i�?. r nd 1^?3 inc?ic��tinc? beF!•Jeen Four and f-ive acci.c?enrs per ye�r an�? ranl:ing as the s •r_conc: hi,hest accic7r_nt 1or�tion in 1�P3. tfos* of the accid�nts it tl�is location .�r� Minor � ho�•,e�►er, anci the ].975 �•�r.rrant stud}�, a:h?ch reports six �r.cidenrs f.or the location , dic? a� reconmend � lighr b�se�d on prc�ven�3l�le acr,i:l�nt� (�•�zrr�nt �) . The bad loc��tion renorts co inc�icate � rot�ever, that the t:aroon �nd F2 � intersection is oi�� C o�ar more active accic��1t l�c.tior.s. T h�:ve a.l�o att:chec s�r�c �],c:i corre�nonclencc bet�•��en t•lhiP J�n�s �ncl �7ave �a:�rb�ll inc:icatin,r �he I�:i�iilands intcr��t in d tCr�flr.'IC :aignal bacl: in 1977. R ECQ�1 t•1�Z�D11T.J Orl � t�?e a:ould recomme��? ins��l.lation of a tr��ffic sic�nal ��t thF f•��roon �. �n�i n2 intersection ba�ec on L-he fo].lo�•�ing: ! i ]. . ��cllicular v�lur:� ::��rr.�nt� nr, rf�rmed i�;� L•hc ck��tc in 1?75 inclicated � neecl �:� that tir�e . Traffic h,�a si ►1ce zncre�isec� �Ome JO�. 7. . A traffic signaJ. is a �ater cont:rol techni.crzie �han �lacing an ofticer zn Fiighway ,5� . The lighi: would allo�•� an offfc� r to control tl�e sign�l from the safety of thc sicic of the hi�liio�y - during pcak timc:; tahere 1�e �•�o�tld nnt be eipo�ec? to onc�r�ing ��chicles. • � 3 . InstalJ.ed et Stz�e c;:pense, the traffic signal i� the nos�� econvmical method of• cor.t rol �v� il�ble. The cost of: o��ra:ing a tr�f.fic light on a iull.-ti�c biais is signi.fic�ntiy l�ss �han even part-tim� rl�cer�ent of an officcr in thc i.ntcrrect?rn�. �. IllS�ca�.�.t3t1017 �� cl tCi1';L1C l,lll}1r �':lt�. Stil�.�. 1^�?L'C! lli cl C°1.'tc�].1� amount o; flc�ibiliL•y f�r controllincj thc i��ersectinn . I � is possiblA to �ro .r,ram the lighL t� fl.�sh d�.: ring t.�ose hc?urs l•T}lC•?Jl traf•fic COI"irC01 1S :1Qt IIC�:'.Si�'C�i c?� �:f!@ ).fl�C'C.^.:G'�:lOil :�.��C' to u].L-�r thc liRh� r�k�crn to c�.C:CQ^l'.C!CJatc ��drianc^: in tr;.ff;i,c � ;loc•: f_ron ::��son L•n s��-c�n. � 5. I'in�lly,• I would su�c;est that t•laroon and 87. is a morc a�:prorri�te location fer c?rivers enl•cring J:��en to encount;er tl�e: far�t tr�ff-ic si�na3 than the currcnt Cemc�tary L�ne lor.ztioi� . A 1i�h� �:} hiaroon �nel ^Z e•�ould i�� visii?).e frar:i a re?nsieinr��l.�le c�ist�n�c AS C�C1V:.'1'S .an�r.a��ch LU4:'1? i:XO:� 1,]�C_� 1HC�i�: :iL'C\►111C1. �:1 i c�n earli^ C reminc9er L-h�t l:tiey ere entering tc+ton �n�] sliould slo.:� cioi•��. �v�� a f].ashing yelloor �,t t��aroon woul.cl slo!•i traff.ic }.�rior �o c»tcri:�g the curve� �•�est oi CeneL-ary L.a�e. COUr?CIL ACTIQN Tf c�uncil c:oncnrs ��ith the ab�ve recomme:ndatian, tha notian ;:}�oulrl reacl �s f:oJ.lo��, "[-1ove to have �he City Enaineer' s Office r�e;uest the Colarac.o Dcpzrt�eni: �i I�igha��fs i.nstall. L-he a�arranteci trafiic sic�nal �t the �Saroan Cr��cF: and Elinh�vay f3?. intcrcection. " JE:/co/t•�aroon , Cnclosu res t ; ! � f � . � � � ST�TE QF COLOlZADO DEPARTMENY OF HIGHWAYS .� �..w BO6 So Ninih St.P O Boz 2107 �, {w�x�'1r`;� . Grand Junct�on.Colorado 81502-?107 (3D3J 242•2862 •;��.�8 �w i�d February 22, 1989 t I Mr. Jay Hammond City of Aspen P. O. Box V Aspen, CO 81611 � ! � Dear Jay: Attached is a copy of the original signal warrants study conducted in June, 1975 at the intersection of SH 82 and Maroon Creek Road (Castle Creek Road) that you requested. The other two letters are for your information and use. In effect, the Division of Highways has put on hold any action regarding a traffic signal at this location until requested hy the local entities. �ae believe the study to still be valid as traffic has . shown no signs of diminishing in the past 9 years. I hope this material is sufficient for your use, but if you need additional information, please let me know. � Very truly yours, R. P. MOSTON DISTRZCT ENGINEER � � BY �f�. _f /i' ; '�_. lx%..�.� � ^ D��f�,MPB'ELL DISTRICT SAFETY & TRAFFIC ENGINEER DBC:lmw XC: file , -�� ED� \ �� . rCr,i �� ;1 ; � � .' ' i � � � �� , ��a � .,/ � . ` �� , I . : , ��SPk''� �' i �'. :-------.. ...___.- ;'` JAGK KIN$'fC1NGtil('"-_._—... .�`♦�:_` • � - _.___._. .r� ._._.._....... _s.....v� .. ...,..'._.._ . ` _ ..._ �c��ON OF HIGHWAYS � OfSTRICT 3 �i � N � HAASC _j� R. A. PROSENCE � CNIEF ENGINEER �' i,��w, DISTRICT ENGINEER ' f�.tt or co�oe�oo 1 PO BOII 2107-606 SO 9iN ST. • GNANO JUNC7lON_ COLO 11�01 • t]O�t 2�3•2862 :�ovembcr b, 1977 � �•ir. t•i. V. :�. Jories, t'resident �' � i ff� As��en 11igh1anJs Skiing Corporation , P. 0. ISox T ! Asperi, Colorado 81G11 J r Uear ::r. Jone,;: Your recent Ietter to �ir. i'roGence concerninfi a trafEic si�nal at SN n2 and �taroon Creek Road has been referred ta this oEEice Eor reply. . • , � lJe re�;ret to inform you Cnat we will not be instalZin� a traffic � si�;nal at this location. Pir. Geor�e Oci�s, °itl:in C�unty �tan�p,er. ad- � viseJ Pir. Jac� �(instlinper, L'xecutive Uirector oE tiie �)ivision oE � � i�i,;i��+ays, by phone on �)ctober 28, Iy77, tii.�t 1'itkin (:�unty J�es not � � uant tt�e warranted traific si�r+al ins[alled at this timc. :(r. c)ci�s i ( statec! ti»t t:ic County h�s planacd somr_ ;;eomc[ric c:�an�;�_s on :laroo�� ; { Creek Rosa and that the County wou2d use ofEic�r control at thc inter- � i , section �•��en neccleJ. � I ' , Very truly yours. � � � �R. A. PRnSI::lCL•' J[ST!(LC'i t:.�ri.ilsl:l: � . , , i ii� `_ ' llAVIU P,. CNIi'S�F:t.i. UISTF.ICI' SAPL•'fY S 'rr.nr•i�tc l:;a�;Ii7�1:R llL'C:lmw CC: Prosenc�-uovee f ilr,r•" i • i • :� `� BAN �I � R � August 26,1985 � ( . � i Mr. Paul Hilts � Transportation Manager Roaring Fork Transit Agency 20101 west Highway 82 • Aspen CO 81611 RE:Aspen Highlands General Su bmission Dear Paul; As a follow-up to our recent conversation concerning the proposed Aspen Highlands Base Development plans, this letter is intended � to summarize our findings and clarify Highland's position on the key transportation elements of this proposal. The General Submission/GMP Application filed by the Aspen Highlands, requested approval of a 300 room hotel and support f�cilities. The review criteria specific to this application is the ability of the .public and/or private systems to accommodate the proposal within existing capacities. Your memo. of July 2,1985 which was sent to the Planning and Zaning Commission commented on the impact of the entire ski area� operation and not specifica22y the impacts of the hotel. In addition, at the time of your review you had been furnished only part of the application text and were not given the ridership and operational data of the Highlands Bus System. The transportation impacts of the Base Lodge per se, should be { minimal and well within the capacity of the existing systems. ; During the peak of the Winter season, the transportation needs of ithe Lodge guests will enhance the efficiency of the system rather than impact its capacity. Despite ticket pricing and other � incentives, some of the lodge guests will choose to ski outside the Aspen Highlands Area. These skiers will be transported to ' Aspen on the existing Highlands buses on the "dead head" side of the trip. The lodge guests at most times wi21 travel against the peak f 1 ow and theref ore hav e no �impact on the system. The only coincidental peaking that would occur between Rubey Park and Snowmass Vi 1 1 age. � To a 1 1 ev iate this probl em, Highl ands wi 1 1 � run direct service to Snowmass VilZage on a regular schedule to ` deliver. their quests and collect Highlands bound day skiers. In � addition the Aspen evening schedule will be extended to 8 p.m. to return the apre skiers to the Base Lodge. These changes to the E present schedule will adequately accommodate the needs of the Lodgc and wil 1 not create any demands or impacts on the RFTA system. � EiA�vNLR A550CIATES.INC. � CONSUI.TIfvG FNGINEGRS& ARCI IITECTS SUITE 302 CI7Y PLAZA E3f.DG. 2777 CROSSRO�hS ROUIFVAHD 517 E. HOPHINS AVE. GFtA�b JUP�CTION.COLORA00 815(1G • l3031 243•2242 ASPEN.COLORADO 81511 • 13Q31 925•!'ig�i7 1 � r i � � � M ' Your letter to the planning office of August 22, addressed the � over�ll capacity to the combined Highlands and RFTA skier shuttle. From this analysi.s and our subsequent discussion it was concluded that the present operation has sufficient rolling and back-up capacity to accommodate a 3000 skier day at the Aspen Highlands (peak day 89/85 = 2720). Once regular skier volume exceeds :5000 per day additional service will be needed. At that time Highlands will acquire additional rolling stock or contract with the Transit Agency for service. In response to your comment about the Highway 82 intersection and its limited capacity, the traffic analysis in the General Submission pre.pared by James Riggs P.E. supports your conclusions. Aspen Highlands has requested both Pitkin County and the City of Aspen to instal l a traffic signal or some other effective solution to the problem. In the past the county has stationed a uniformed officer on the highway at peak periods to direct traffic. However since the intersection was annexed into � the city this practice has ceased. Z recently addressed the City � Council and asked them to consider some action. In the near . tuture a meeting on this subject wil l be held and your support � �and recommendation would be of great assistance. � � ! As part of their Detailed Submission, Highlands will prepare a T comprehensive corridor plan for the Maroon Creek Valley. � Inclucled as part of the transportation element of that plan will }�e a detai,l"•ed analysis of the existing and future mass transit � s}�stem, for the day skiers and Maroon Bells Summer visitors. I hop? you will be available to participate in the development of that plan and I look forward to discussing this further. S�ncerely� ✓� � ��Patrick Dobie, P.E. � Aanner Associates � t � BANN � l� � � Rugast 27, Z985 , j Ms. Lee Cassin � $ � Environmental Health Officer � I 130 South Ga2ena St. � � � Aspen CO 81611 RE: Aspen Highlands General Submission � ; Dear Lee; ` This letter will c2arify the issue concerning the type and number { of fireplaces being proposed for the Base Lodge and Hotel at the � Aspen Highlands. In their General Submission Hiqhlands proposed to construct � four fireplaces as part of the project, each located in the main ;� lobbies. In addition they proposed to construct tireplaces in �� ;� _ the condo-cottages, in accordance with applicable rules and '• � regulatxons. The code is ambiguous with respect to this issue. h �� If the units were considered part of a lodge operation, the � � fireplaces would be prohibited. If the units were conodminized � ; then the fireplaces would be allowed. The application was not � ! . � s�ecifzc about the future ownership of the units and �� ` condominiumization is a strong possibility. Since the �� : � appiication was fil.ed, a moratorium was placed on fxreplace � construction in the city and, in line with the spirit of that � action, the .fireplaces wil l be deleted from the condominiums. ! Highlands sti11. wishes to construct the four fireplaces in the �� main lobbies. These will replace four fireplaces which curren�ly exist and will be designed �and constructed zn line with the strictest county standards at the time the project is built. The specific design and emission control techniques will be submitted to your department foz review and approval. � I �hope this resolves your concern and please give me a ca]. 1 if you have any questions or need additional information. � S ' cerely; . � :�,�` ��- � � Patrick .Dobie, P.E. : � Banner Associates Inc. � 7 � � � I � � ' �3ANNER nSSOCfATES.INC. � ,i CONSULTING ENGINEERS& ARCHITECTS SUffE 302 C1TY PLAZA BLDG. { 2�77 CROSSROa05 SOULEVaRD 51�E.NOPKINS AvE, s I GRA�vD.IUNCTtON,COLORAaO 61506 � (3031 243•2242 ASPEN.COLORADO 81511 � f303�925•5857 � � i � 1 �. i,vuy 1\4��y4 Aspen Highlands World Class Resort Section III Auto Disincentives . A� Backqround Recognizing that air quality and traffic congestion � represent two major concerns of the community as well as the public sector, as it relates to the approval of our World Class Resort project, Aspen Highlands proposes to meet these problems head on by devising detailed auto disincentives program in all its communications. This includes national advertising, regional advertising, local advertising, all collateral material, public relations, press and publicity as well as special promotions. B) Marketiny Objectives , � 1. To position �he World Class Resort (WCR) as a � completely hassel-free vacation experience for WCR 1 hotel guests. � 2. To substantially increase the percentage of bus � ridership by Aspen and Snowmass day skier visi�ors ? f rom the current SO$ range to at least 75$. ; , 3. To continue to work closely with RFTA and the U.S. � Forestry Service on the Maroon Be13s summer program ' on a long term basis. C) Marketinq Strategv and Tactics ! In order to achieve the above objectives , Aspen Highlands ' s ' is prepared to make auto disincentives an integral and • � i major part of all marketing efforts. The following ' f J strategies and tactics are �presented as examples of what � we' re prepared to do. Additionally we will consider all i reasonable ideas that might come up as the project , progresses. � f 1. To promote WCR as a destination resort where a car is a handicap. Further, that from the time a skier ` arrives, to the time he leaves, free convenient � busses, shuttles and limos will take him anywhere he � � wants to go regardless of the time of day. � This � message woula be included in all advertising '� brochures, press releases and �travel agent h � communications. j ; ! i Both scheduled air carriers would cross promote this ' � message in their sales efforts. We would also ' ; emphasize the fly-in, fly-out capabilities. � ' Attractive vans/airport limos similar to those at � Stapleton would meet all airline customers on a reservation basis. i :I We would consider of£ering monetary. incentives to all � 'I � ;I �; ( WCR guests that fly directly into Aspen. Conversely � we rould consider a "Service Charge" f or drive-in �` " guests. 2. On a reservation basis we would meet groups of skiers using Amtrak in Glenwood Springs with an appropriate size vehicle. Further, we would consider packaging � this into WCR room rates. 3. To help RFTA scheduling problems we would operate our shuttle busses during the early evening hours (until 8 pm) for hotel guests. 4. Each fall we would send press kits to all appropriate media so as to encourage feature stories on the . "carless" benefits of WCR. We feel certain that this is enough of a newsworthy story to obtain such f eatures. 5. We vould periodically contact via direct mail and sales calls all Travel Agents to encourage them to book WCR and fly-in, fly-out transportation. 6. We �ould encourage Aspen and Snowmass skiers/visitors � to use A.H. or RFTA busses by off ering a discount on lift tickets lessons and rentals. Conversely, we would consider a parking f ee f or auto drive-ins. 7. We would embark on an aggressive Convention Seminar solicitation program concentrating on off season, shoulder season periods when traf�ic, congestion and energy considerations are at a minimum. Similar incentives f or fly-in conferences would be ofEered. 8. We would offer free, public service bus cards to be used on all Highlands busses. Various interested entities would have to supply us with attractive posters to be inserted on both siaes of the vehicles. 9. We would make a long term commitment to RFTA to continue to cooperate on the Summer Maroon Bells bus program. A co-op brochure promoting this would be developed each summer. 10. We would consider a dollar incentive rebate to all Season Pass holders who would ride our bus. b) Summary We' re so convinced this project is right f or Aspen that we're prepared to do everything humanly possible to / discourage auto-traffic and encourage energy efficiency. 1 By housing upward of 1,000 guests at the base area with � appropriate anto disincentives, the traffic and congestion can be improved over what presently exists. Peak traff ic will be reduced by hotel guests skiing in and out rather than. 1,000 more skiers coming out f rom Aspen by autos. . ; , ' �: �� WESLEY A. LIGHT � A7TORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW P.O.BOX 1329 � I13 ELK AVENUE CRES7ED BUTiE,COLORADO 81221 (303)349•6439 � . • � • . July 25, 1985 Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County Pitkin County Courthouse �(HIBIT Aspen, CO 81611 • . � •� ,`��- HAND DELIVERED � � • . , 1 RE: Aspen Highlands World Class Resort Proposal; • 1 Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission GMP Review, Scoring, and Report Dear Commissioners: � � . , 1 � I represent Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation with respect to its World C1ass Resort Proposal. . � , On July 16, 1985, the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission refused to recommend a GMP allotment for unused quota • (1983 and 1984) and for the 1985 quota due to failure to receive the required threshold point score. These GMP lodge quota allotments have not been recommended for another proposal, as the �Highlands proposal is the only one pending this year. Pursuant to Article S of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, Aspen � Highlands hereby provides netice of its appeal of the Planning + and Zoning Commission's July 'i6, 1985, decision. As grounds for this appeal, the applicant would 'state that the i : July 16, 1•985, actions of the Planning and Zoning Commission ex- ceeded its authority� abused its .discretion, and/or denzed pro- � cedural due process to the applicant in the processing of its ap- plication under the growth management quota system. The applicant requests that the Board of County Commissioners change " the number of points awarded the applicant to a number equal to ; or greater than twenty-seven, and/or take such other action reason- ably calculated to correct the errors above denoted. � � . , . � ; .. . � ' • f . • ; :. I { ; � �� .....__._��,,.._. Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners July 25, 1985 . � � Page 2 ' Please contact me regarding the date and time when this appeal will be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. Sincerely, • � ��•� Wesl� Li ht . Y 9 Attorney at Law WAL:mbl cc: Tom Smith, County Attorney ' Alan Richman, Planning Office George Lloyd, Aspen Highlands - � , � ........y.��_..�.�-..,��.. .. . .. . . _. .. • ._ .. .. ._..... ..�.:: •._.- ...��.. .. .�..:..... . i �� . . W�--� t . .. 1 � WESLEY A. LIGHT � � ? ATfORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW . P.O.BOX 1329 r j . 113ELK AVENUE ' AU[3USt � 2� 1 985 CRESTED BUTTE,COLORADO 8122� (3o3)3�9�w39 1:...:� 0.' C"1. C;._,'I;';; } r��:-._. r.� � . � r;:?.a.1. �H18R � . Mr. • Tom Smith : � Pitkin County Attorney ��.�c � Q ��, . Pitkin County Courthouse �t�� -�=� � � , Aspen, CO 81 61 1 �__.,, i; � ' i�. � ` E RE: Aspen Highlands World Class Resort GMP Scoring Appeal Dear Tom: . • i On July 25, 1'985, I submitted a letter giving notice of Aspen High- � lands' appeal of the GMP scoring recommendation given by the Planning and Zoning Commission. That sppeal letter stated the required ; grounds necessary to sustain such �an appeal. ! ; ! � Upon receipt of this letter, you reguested that I further 'detail ; the specific Planning and Zoning Commission actions which Aspen � Highlands believes exceeded the Commission's authority, abused the ; Commission' s discretion, and denied procedural due process. i � y ' Aspen Highlands, in its efforts to work within the requirements of the County Land Use Code, has constantly cooperated with the County ;t and Planning Staff in efforts to design a project which meets the ;� high standards for development in Pitkin County. Further, Highlands I� is aware of the community-wide desire to upgrade its base and mountain � facilities in a fashion that will improve the overall des'irability i of Aspen as a destination resort. . I Highlands believes it has made a general proposal of sufficient con- �. cept, quality, and commitment to impact mitigation to merit the � threshold GMP score, thereby keeping the project alive for further � � improvement and fine tuning. Highlands is ready, willing and able ( , to meet the requirements of the Land Use Code, and develop. a project of which Pitkin County can be proud. We believe that a review by the I Board of County Commissioners of the planning and Zoning scoring will i: result in the realization that General Submission and GMP application ! is o£ sufficient quality to meet the GMP threshold. The following details suggest that Highlands should be given the j: chance to move forward on its proposed project. The window of opportun- � ' ity that exists for redevelopment of the Highlands base and mountain ;� is critical. Willing investors, control of outparcels, and favorable financing opportunities exist now. GMP threshold and General Sub- mission approvals do not commit the County to final approval of the ; project as submitted. Highlands, working with the County, can continue ;� to�rard a final project which meets the needs of the developer while mitigating impacts or improving current conditions._ ' �� „ ; ( f ---�••-:---- ... Y" . . .. -�.._ .. .. . . .__._..�_-.� " Mr. Tom Smith ' � August 12, 1985 '' � Page 2 � • . � ; The spirit and letter of the appl.ications before the County evidence j ' a desire to mitigate impacts, improve conditions, and meet the high standards of the Land Use Code. Highlands believes that a general negative attitude controlled the review of this project by the � . Planning Staff and the Planning and Zbning Commission. Despite the rQpeated representations of the applicant, in its application and at the hearing, to meet standards and mitigate impacts, the Planning ' and Zoning Commission ignored such representations. Rather, the Commission .awarded scores in many categories which reflected a nega- � , tive outlook which was simply not supported by the evic�ence before it. : � Iiighlands does not wish to focus on the attitudes or mistakes of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Rather, it desires to use the Land Use Code procedures to improve the quality of the proposal by working with the County. The failure to receive the required GMP threshold score frustrates this honest desire to develop a needed project in a way that meets the legitimate public planning concerns of the County. ; i ; , Therefore, pursuant to your request, the following details are pre- sented relative to our stated grounds for appeal. I. Abuse of Discretion A) Availability of Public and Private Facilities and Services. �� The clear intent of the application was to show that ' existing services could meet the demands of the project, or � that service improvements would be made to meet the needs ' of the project as well as the area in general. One commission member awarded a zero (0) score on the , "Road System" criteria.' There was no evidence to support � the conclusion required by this score that providing service would be totally impractical. Nine scores of one (1 ) were given relative to fire pro- tection, road system, and public and private transit. There was no evidence to support the conclusion that such services � would require "increased public expense" or not meet Land Use Code standards. � To the contrary, the application together with `the repre- � sentations of the applicant at the hearing disclosed that all necessary service levels will be met by improvements benefit- ing the project and often the area as a whole. Consequently, i scores of two (2) at the least, or even three, were dictated. ' The upgrading of the zero and one scores to two, alone, would result in the project meeting the required threshold score. ' B) Quality of Design. ' One zero score, and a number of one scores, were given in connection with this review factor. As regards the zero score, the evidence did not support the conclusion, as re- quired, that the project design was "totally deficient". As i i � � .. - . � . � . , ._ Pfr: �l'bcn �Smith---------___.__. •• . AuC�Ll$� �2� 1985 � r . Page 3 . � � rt .� regards the one scores, the applicant contends that the � , design flaws, if any, were minor not major. A major design � flaw suggests a flaw that cannot be corrected. The evidence . disclosed that the applicant was willing to meet identified ' ' design problems at the detailed submission stage pursuant �' � to identified conditions. There were no design flaws identi- � ��' fied that the applicant refused to address. Therefore, � � - they should have received higher scorss in these areas. � , ; ., II. Exceeding of Authority ; : � The transcript of the P & Z hearing discloses consider- � � able discussion of the need for multi-year GMP allotments �` for the proposed project. Since the Board of County Commis- �� -• sioners makes this decision, and since the applicant was only ; requesting the P & Z act on 1983, 1984', and 1985 allotments, � ; consideration of this issue exceeded the P & Z's authority. j � ; The applicant believes this concern with what the BOCC might ! � do was outside its authority since it had no power to grant � such future allotments and made no recommendation to the BOCC " i : regarding same. ' The transcript also discloses considerable discussion of the visual compatibility of the proposed project with the proposed Highlands Inn project (a project not �yet finally � approved and a project which �he proponent said will have a design change) . The Land Use Code does not identify. visual ; compatibility with other buildings, especially ones not yet � finally approved or constructed, as a criteria for GMP scoring. � There was considerable discussion of architectural style as grounds for reviewing the quality of design. The GMP review criteria sets forth architecture as an element relative to size, height, material, type, and location of units ' [Section 5-510.7 (a) (1 ) (C) ] . Final architectural renderings are not required. Yet, the P & Z was preoccupied with the architectural style as part of its review, even though the architectural renderings were repeatedly identified by the applicant� as conceptual only. The Planning Staff incorrectly advised the P & Z that architectural style�was part of the � General Submission if a P.U.D. is requested. Section 3-7.5 clearly states that architecture is to be reviewed at the Detailed Submission stage. Finally, the P & Z discussed the economic viability of the proposed project as part of the Lodge Proposal review. ;; _ Economic viability is not a proper matter for a General Submission or GMP review of a proposed lodge. Such an issue is only raised pursuant to the County`s poli¢y on Ski Area - Expansion (Section 2-20.3) , which is inapplicable to the �� proposed lodge project. � i: . . i' . I� � i �� _ .. ,� �.�.. _ ___ __ __ � �.�. � Mr. Tom Smith r August •12, 1985 , � � Page 4 � III. Procedural Due Process ' . � . . � � The legal cornerstone to procec7ural due process is ' � • "fundamental fairness". The applicant believes the process resulted in a fundamentally unfair result. The GMP process requires an application to the Planning ,. Staff. The Staff must review same and reject the application � if it does not meet the minimum requirements of the Land Use � Code (Sections 5-510.7 (a) (2) and 5-510. 4. (b) ).� The appli- cation was accepted and initial referral comments were j addressed by supplements clarifying the application. At the hearing reference was made to lack of an air pollution ;i study and more detailed transportation studies, even though !' the application was legally sufficient and certified as same. ' Under the GMP process, an applicant must submit its appli- . cation prior to the benefit of a public hearing and public feedback. The only feedback an applicant receives is from ' the Planning Staff. If problems or deficiencies are not I€ ' identified by the Planning Staff, the applicant is vulnerable �i to an ambush at the GMP hearing. . Under this system an appli- � cant with the best of intentions proceeds without the bene- :M� fit of public feedback at the mercy of the Planning Staff s :� disclosu�e of potential problems. �; Once the GMP hearing is h�ld, it is too late to modify �� the project to meet the unarticulated concerns of the public (} or Staff. Thus, a catch-22 situation is created, particularly �l when a proposal is competing with no other proposal and when !F the applicant has the only land in the county subject to ;i, Lodge GMP which is zoned for such a proposal. Fundamental !; fairness dictates some flexibility to allow such a proposal i; to respond to concerns raised at the hearing without auto- • '} matically being disgualified for a year. Time and again the applicant was told that attempts to clarify how impacts would be mitigated was a "change in the application" which could not be allowed, even though . the � applicant was attempting to clairfy its general representations with respect to impact mitigation. � Fundamental fairness must be viewed under the circum- ' stances of the pa.rticular case. The applicant believes the circumstances of its application for a Lodge GMP quota re- ��I; sulted in a fundamentally unfair process where it was com- 'I�• peting only with itself without an opportunity to respond - i and improve its project. _ % ��Aspen Highlands wishes to develop a base area project that will, to- gether with mountain improvements, provide benefits to local residents � and the tourist clientele. This goal can only be met if the applicant . � � F Mr. Tom Smith . AugUSt ,12, 1985 � � , Page- 5 • has an opportunity to work with the public and the County. We are ' asking the Board of County Commissioners to recognize that the application to date, while not perfect, is good enough to meet thresh- • old' standards. � : Highlands believes -that it can redevelop its base area to Pitkin • County standards. It believes that it can meet the legitimate public ` concerns evidenced in the Planning and Zoning Commission's Resolution. Further, it believes it should have the chance to respond and improve its project subject to those concerns, as conditions, set forth in the P & Z Resolution. Therefore, Highlands requests that threshold scoring be awarded the ' '• project, and that it is given the opportunity to meet legitimate :� objections, and to further explain mitigation .measures at the Detailed Submission stage. The Planning and Zoning Resolution fairly details concerns that should be addressed at the Detailed Submission stage � of review. The burden will be on Highlands to demonstrate compliance. � „ However, if the project is killed as a result of the unreasonably ' " low scores of the P & Z, the applicant will be frustrated in its : ;�) attempt to develop a project which the P & Z and the public support : i in concept. . . � , . . i Sincerely, it . .� 1�� ; i�. • Wesley A. Light � �i. Attorney for Applicant Aspen Highlands : �� , :�. � .,. ` �G WAL:mbl i ,: cc: Alan Richman : �h Board of County Commissioners ° ; . iii , , � 1.�� . i:` _ . � ` t � � � ' ,:j ;: ' ; � � ` � ; . . ' ;1 pitkin coun�y ' � � 506 east main street � aspen, co{orado 8'iB11 , i ' ' . ( Aucust 1 , 1985 EXHIBIT i . .._�<� . __ , � � S h�esley 1►_. Light, Esq. ` � • � ' � P.c. Bor. 1329 z�-::. ! . : __...._..__ �. . 1. Cr�sted Butte, Colora�o 81224 RE: Rspen highlar.ns General Submission and Gi�iP Application Dear S•:es: ; Enc�lose� please fir.d a copy of the record of proceeclings of �he ' regular mee�ing of tY,e Plannir.g �nd 7oning Commission of Pitkin ( County, of July 16 , 1985 . Please note that these minutes are � subject to the approval oi the Pl�nning ana Zoning Commission at their next regular meetin5. �It is my ur_derstandinq, bas�d or. the meeting that we helc3 with : A].an Richman on I�;onday, July 29, 1985, that 1�ou will submit, oi: � behalf of A��en Highlanes, a document specifying the grounds for i the appeal cf thc Planning ana Zoning Commission' s GtrP scoring for the Asgen Highlands �rogosal. Shortly a£ter receiving this 's documentation, we will inforn you of t'r.e time periad in which the � Planning. Office �vill respor.0 to the spECific objections. This worE: will be cone in timE for everyone to adequately prepare tor ; the hea=ing an August 26, 1985 , before the IIoard of County Commis- � sioners. ! : In the meantime Alan and I will discuss the grocedurES that we will reconmenc3 to the Bozr� of County Com;nissioners for the � Auaust 26 , 1985 , hearings. We will arrive at a decision by thc eno of next week, and aGVise you accordinqly. This will give you � an opportunity to subnit a proce�ural motion prior to August 26 � if you disagree rrith cur groposal. l If you have any questicns, glease call me. � Very truly yours, � . { � ; �� ti Thomas Fenton Smith County Attorney � TFS:cd . � Enclosure � � • � cc: Alan Ricrman, Planning Office : Cindy Houben, Planning Office ` � - � �..� � �,� _ _ �:� �v w:. _ • , _ � � . ' EXHI T � pitkin c _ �. 506 east main street aspen, colorado 61611 15� 15 � Vt5 August 12, 1985 D � �,� - ,� ,-��': � C �98� �;� V i�?esley A. Light, Esq. ' P.O. Box 1329 Crested Butte, Colorado 81224 RE: Aspen Aighlands General Submission ana GMP Application Dear We�: w'ith respect to the procedures to be followed on August 26 , 1465, before the Boara of County Commissioners, in hearinqs regarding the Aspen i-:ighlands Inn, please be advised that it has been the practice of the County to conduct its hearing on Ger,eral Submis- sion prior to the conduct of an appeal to the GMP scoring af the Plannir.g and 'Zoning Commission. The Planning Office recommends that this procedure be followed in this case, and I concur in their judgmer.t. It is appropriate for the Board to view the entire project as a whole before focussing on the somewhat more limited issues that arise in the contex� of a GMP scocing appeal. ; Since in the process of awarding a GI�TP q uota allocation iess than an entire project may be approved, it is necessary to review the General Submission application first ir. order to make a judgment as to what portion of a project can be appzoven through the allocation process. This approach is consistent with our inter- pretation of Section 5-510.4 of the Land Use Code. If you ur your client have any problems with respect to this approach, please advise the County prior to August 26th, so that any issues with respect to procec3ure can be resoived before the hearing date. Please be advised that Section 5-510 .7 (a) (7) , precludes the County from consinering any substantial amenclments to the appli- � cation. Although this is a req uirement of the GMP process, any � substantial change to a General Submission application must be accorded the same treatment, since it would be inappropriate for the Board to consider, in effect. two c'ifferent applications for the same projec't. ` 1 � ; ; ; ; " ,._�.r.rr.rr+`�rr�i� .�. __.,.�.�. .. ....-_.°""K'"W"""-»-"__..____ ... .._ .._.._._ ._ . i � . , l i If you have any questions regarding procedural substantive matters with respect to the Aspen Highlands application please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, . �tt-,..%` - Thomas Fenton Smith ' County Attorney , TFS:cd cc: Tom Blake John Eldert Alan Richman ' ` Cindy 8ouben i . � � 2 i ?�;'-.;l !:"' i';). .� ..� .. .i � � . . ....� (", � . -. .�, EXH BITJ ..,:�:._t � � T .;. �:, We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin Cou �1 � the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlan s ans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County shouZd work with Highlands to imgcove its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified f or another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRES& DATE �U. � 1 Z � 2> � ��JI��a�/./i�lr. f/ior,� ��7��(� � 7 --'-- }l //Z 3 �sF�� B � / � D � � ( ,�---".._ nUY� z _ � n . ��' � /�� Zl� a-o � 27-�� Q '. -C_�� Z l/ ,yo�,(�iors S/�.� P � - '�5 (� Z-t —�� q � f C�`/�( �'� ?' s'S �`�� l� �� , �� -�� n g� -� o�Q� � .� a� �,� � � � 4� z� �� ,� p 2 , ^? -? � � � _ � � � �� 71�� 0 3 � P,� . �ZZ� � Z � . la � � �s' �l �l� -c, . 'Q�S'SS c ,i c� � .�- .�,�„�,�i.A•,af �itl� ( �l4� Pciv e h S�Z��S �, y //pta � �27 f rG- �h�fo�/Le �� /96 � 1-��'�e� �'�,��,f � 8 � a�.�, (�'"��,�,w � (_-�e�c ?/D 2 S� � � �I Z"1 � 5 1,.,..�� c�;• r.o. r,n��:;•;,�; . , �-s�n co. We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Aighlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified f or another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modif ied. � NAME ADDRESS � DATE ro -z�8� �l i � � I L�r � r - :Y�J � -�� -iJ�J " ( d /�+� / , , , ; , �� _ � _�� . 9�3 � �'r��r —� cc � � �� i � ; . � �,, �- �l� � � z� es ' I x �� . �� s � c /3/I �/3 I?s '�i- Bu x 34 �s�n 'f� � �/u � ��> 3/ 1',e.�C'� ,:�� 9/�/r�� - (�bx �L� � � � ! � �.� - � ;,� � ' � y � / S �/ J 'Ci � �f d 5 /.�i�,j7��,�r s��.� 9 y �S � —� � � 4 � �c�� Isj� � � s � �� 3 L�_ ? 3.3� N C�. —�F� � ' - �� ` ��s.- o.� �\S I�s _ �, . r, � � Q,� r'C�-�v � ' 4 (� l Jt\ +'�.-�-. �(7Ca �i`V 1�..l�. \ � � /qz �yiv �� /! � � i . . I 1 � _. _ .�„ _ _ _ �____ _ ' We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its monntain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. i � NAME ADDRESS DATE ' S�.v E, �- �- --�5— I � y'_'-Z 0 w �Y 7`_" � /, �7'�- r� ; s�v �� .�- �T-. , � � Sao � ��'a..,� `� s � aiwr.rP .L cc�� `� '� ' �� ; �� a� ; � ��►i� �� S � `o�-�_'��A� �Ic �I-1 r� �. -l�-�-r-t-r 5 S-/b'� ; � i ,�— � �� - p� 2 � Sr e��l,r�� ' ' ,.� ; c�c :�. C�,o IS � � , , �� — s^ --/ /�fi�lL-v� /K /l�(/f A� /.��X /U� 3� %��1'/ _ �� n�. .� � /. ( � <' �— . —� –� .-, g 5 ; —,,�. o��I�/�t„�� G 7s�s �".�.��- 9 -s�� [ - r�� 77 i� ¢�S - k - -- /� S_ 9� i b S l� �. . �- �1 s � � ' �. C �` . p/` oo�r � 5 E ' � ? s� ;; � � . �j _ y � s � �� r� �;� �'� � _.. _ We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the � County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans � £or its mountain and base area re-development because: + l. The proposal meets an important community need, � 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any � identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. I Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of " plan aspects that can be easily modified. ! � NAME ADDRESS D TE � � \- �, • / ��.-�� , �-.- �/ ' /��~ �G'1- � / � c � 7 � "�` z �'��/ �� --�5 '; ,, /I� _ ^ ' � - �� [��(� �/ 1 '1.� ��++�✓� ��Z S `1\J<..- �.1�C. \J�Y- U-�� G�S , O �� g- a/- �S s , i. , � 2�3 � � � ` / � J r� r �F�S �� ' z. � �.�a-- 5— r -� �� s- r�- � � � �; ;, �. � � , � � �c� .� z �o. �a�� ' ,z A 1�.� wL �"'�L3/�� , i; / : , - � ` / '� v ��C%f�� ' ��' �.,.a/ z �a 3 �`�' ; � �; � �; � �.��.3 - �,3�� i <.�° �d k 9�/� " ,, . ,� • ;, s! �; � ,/ �f ��6� :, ;" , u � � ; 7 ` �e qi za /�s � z3 Ss ' � � Ss , �� .:.i ,�. S�� .ua�� /G/.r' ��3 -� i - - - - �3 . a,-id�� <� ! � . ��W.�a�t �l�t� !`: �: � 3 �U� � a . ��j � � . _� ��-"y �� 0-� �. ��G/� �, !' � � � C� �/� �� a�o � � 8��b1�-- F�. ,� fI�� L/ `LL... . "__...... . ......:.:......... ......_."'_'_"' ... .... . ......_._. . . i � � � � iWe, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the � County Commissioners approve Aspen Aighlands preliminary plans i for its mountain and base area re-development because: � 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work with Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of Iplan aspects that can be easily modified. 1 NAME / ADDRESS DATE �� Lu� gox 3857 �� - �7-kS , ' J � � 1 � � 1, /S /�W�B�� ` 7c Q� `d`� /�S� ' � ,,� '�c.��s � � �'r. ��JS: �' �6�v�.s-_ . � , �f �`,��,� � ,�� 1-,t Ca�� .�,z_,. l.. �f 2r: I : _: , , -.G.:s, /. / G - -.� . � . 9/v i�✓. �/sr��+n,� � �z6 yc� �i �. �� ;� � 2E/�� I / ��5��1 i� �'3� 'S✓��—�� G�a g�..ri � '� � � � - / lC�l�-- ,, ;� � '� w .� � S�� f , / i� ` �, � , 2p? � 6�� i. _ p S % Z„_,� . Z� �� (: �. /� / 9ra - �34s ��n� ! . t� S .z� F..S �` o �- L'0 � � � �; �� ., s,�„ 3,�� s. � � ;; -� a � Z� 2� Ssi �, D�r�9�T"AsP,�� g��S s � � i _ r !� Fl � . i P� 5t 32 I .� � �3�s��: f�yr�r.�� -�-c -�,��r - ��c l532 ZS ' �8 �� a��ir � � qit� <o �/�iz ; � - a3 . , , � �� ;. ;, ; i � . - � � We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development becanse: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, � 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Hi9hlands to improve its mountain and base area. ; Highlands should not be disqualified f or another year because of ' plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE �.I� '' c 55o rtoa,.� C Ic,R p g-2(� - �5 _ r-` r f C'' � � r'i9' d� � 8- a 5 � �z�� as C,� �-a�-� 53�" $�y zS — �J ` �� -r- �'1�o �_ �-,�/ s,ee � 2• � � /z�c"' �7 a ,s-- : � 3 �� 3a�� s' � ' . � ��' _ � ; � ��- - {.�r. i- �07� �Z �SS S � 2� 535 �' � ,� r � � � ��i � z -� � o � � � �� . � �/� /�s � ��;! ,r��e �(�f�v�e !'o� 1�i�r �u3s�1 ,4�,��_��Z��-s � T ��x � � � � � �/�� ' �. � w` .i3� � ��,ti S �' Z�s- ; ' � ' a lo C �.�/�.✓ l,Jt..�/ �a7�fcf'�' ,. , ,---- �is Z7(�s �.,... . .. �__....._...---- ... ., r �, .�.v_ - — ,. We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen HS.ghlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: � Z. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Sighlanas should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the � public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work ' with Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. � Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can he easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE �� P� �s1X��s2�� S ��1 � � ��c. � yo 8 �o � � c 1� 3 � c> - C� / " � � �� /�%d �o - � �1'l � �-- � , � �'/�a/�"s— l�� ,-��_ ��q ��,vo2 ��c �',, ��f�'s ��v� ►�e � l o�s S �s 3 � - t O 76 o s -�v 3 S- � � ��,� v d �� ,- .-. . � - -i/� � ` �� c � �i ;; - Q�. lotL � � 3 .�e o-yl� L • , � � ,�� /o� / F' , � / . ,o �'0 d �j� 3�s' .�.^ - s�-. � � f3o ! �. �� 1 y3�s- �a �u Cv � .�1.b - ��4� 0 � � ��r' � �� -1` M � �Z 4� �►4 ,� c(1-�-29 0� l N ^ o a o9�.� , � �3�6� L �s� ' _�t y , / ;� _ ....__. �MA1 ° __ .""" ._. . _�__..._. i�� ........ � ' We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the � County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE ' C� �—� `�-' �� '.�7 � ._.3 -eh. t�w�'-� sU 1 �. j� � �-3 P�D. ac, /6.3 I s � -� c?7 I� /�f-1� <�,,,...� f/�// �—� :'!�Cc�� . r-o� f�dx SG r� :�,a-e� C�o � 1:��. � �.o-�o sr s��,,�! �'v . � 3 .` �� Q �l� s � � _. `�.� �..��__�i�i'l3 � �--- �'� �r� I �--� q o� / va -c.-- T� o G?a�0� �°eti `'7 � / , �- 6� 6 �-n� � � � � • ' n �-- a . � .�. v �f�_ c wb:�" ---- -- ---- . ��f�,� �} �P /�/ �� ; , � , ' 70� �, --� - - � v�. �/�/�s- C� `�� 'i � c � �-�5— � � `�- .5 �-3 B� ; �c� .o � w<<- � 3�� ; �2.G�.:�.�.,�c�. E 7 �?� � �`3—�� , ' � .v , �. � � ` - ''�S �ax �7Ga- . _ �� _3��. � ��-✓ !.c _3-�SJ. �� ! _. ��.� .�..� _ . �� We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: l. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work with Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE ' �v .�',� cv 9-j� �%- ��. S--ft,,�,�-L ��-� �3�i�� %�L�, � � �;-�_ �r � a � �� -� ^ 3 -8'� � // ��L� �—Sas=�6� e S. ZZ.( 4 a -' o2n 5 S• �c.C, �7�� °r 3 85' ` �� S - o�,D `�z�-� �i 3%�-S � , � 9v W. �� 5 ��- o /// - o� s �� , � :,� � ,� � D J .S°. /h!GL 0�..i °t �I P S ' � i��.Yl//Z Z 3 �.Sr 'Po 8 bzZZ �wo..�„�3�� L 3 � ox �� t� 9 �� -- � �� s �3►x ��8� _ � 9 �/ ' b I 3Co W . (,l�c.2- � 3 !' . a� 2/,�z- 3 J � r�' .�.�— ' 80 a 3 �� We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: Z. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Aighlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE ��/✓�l-�,cti;�.l!-,� ��?S Ca�-�-wG�.�.��K y�-s -�S- p�I tc_,c, 5 f-�r�s � G-.�•�S • � e� 9,L�/ �,.�.�.��...' �� :`l3 ��.x�, t�.I-�Gi , ,�� µ_ C/ f� A � , �O. �5 _ � � � cc�c,� /iJ 6�� /�D S� G. H f,:�S U�;. ' � �S � ��I 2 � �o �� ' '�z5 Q� h s�s �-- ` � l L ��'� S✓Ib� �� S�� (��. �� C�d�t 5 �7 - S-�S � `'�� J . � S "�Ss� � - � b (Q - S��S� ( 11�� - � � - - o�C ZS'1 S � -.,f � � ` � y/��8.� �5� ` , �a �-s�'s ��, `/ ,O, '� C� -�-- �'-`S"7%`� '��`'� � a , _ � �- � �0 9/� � ��-,�'�e � � �'1 �� --�'/�; ' G / 1 �l ��-�/�S ! �"� � -,�� -5-- ' } � � R q .J'�, �f - � /' • � 3� °��-ks- _ < ��`dl��,�, --..__.,_...,.,.,,,,..,,,,,,,, . � We, the undersigned residents of P.ztkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Aighlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The Coanty shou2d work with Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. . NAME ADDRESS DATE �,�a K..��m- larrr 3�5�r �� S��o/z Q/S�/b'S °�---�� /Ss��d � .c�, 9�� s`_ J�'7 // // // �/ �-I��--�PEu Co�oSt��a�-�-�5'� 4s�rrss s� ��C�/�� 20 �. Q�n a� �1 �4-s r�, Cc�,gt�i( - ,. .� � 835-£lk�T yy wlf� $l6 r t �f' � � �.ZD �'. � " " 9 �� __� . ` �' / c �' 9 ��,5- 6 5S G-�{-8 S' ,,` . t3�/Z3 ��.�`,C.� 8'/G.�.1 Q-�-S S /� �. �/6I/ �/ ( .� c?-nl �.o. I 6 i 1 `��L/,S'S� . �� 88d� (_o. ��lo�. �Sl�c�� r6 �z � �r �� ' � r� 2q! a-��, Co 8�S�L W�y�.�S �'� _ �c� z �' � 6 � � �� o.G� s7' ��d'i��. �'/ �(7�(" �a, � �, �c�// q � �S` � � � � � .� O �Sr�k J///� 9 g`�' ' �� v �'.?5-732� �5 s3 , .�. ; ( z. 9- -8s' 3OSG .1 - G a2c� � We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. cor►ditions can be placed on the approval to protect the pnblic interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work with Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE � ��'G�G �• f/cu�•�"y 9 �= �_ fG��--�,d_��Ll�`��-- �/9 c I-�p.�l,vs ��. '�- �•�3 S C � T j � Z \ �� _ _ /sl �.a. B � � � �k �o�7 g 9 ��. '7` f�a NjZ7` f/�C'o��. 2' � 8I' �'' � (� S.� � /`l ��i��w.-, .� t395 Snd�,.�g,�,�N,( asa�� 9�9($s � �� . , i We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, reguest that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should .not be disqualified f or another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE � ` ��sn , - - � ��. � �� /�s-- a.Q � 6l 7� Mr,v t-�v,e� ��e• A,C� ��Zv ns ,.� S � l�ti�� n` �r . _ l� � �_ _ ' � � o p .,, O . V L-13 W, n�* ��i `�!� i � �/- D �/�� - � d .d /� �ad�P� 9 . ..,� 32v l>-��5� ��-� ��z'�� A _ /�/y/,�� / / � ,_ I I��"'" • � . �/..-`l ✓ �I %� ��T � �_'� �O� !� �/��/j0!/` r . �, �y��,� r�o`/7cy/K k�pti��s �� , d ao7 s� � �� 9-� � � £ c�0 �6x <�2 �7Y.o��D 17'�J�ll� f'�/ ��EN i �' �o x /�Z �O�IF�/✓O �l7Gfli' �,/ �G`!E' ' �z- - � G�� C-Lo�e .� -�, � �� 6�l �,1�,) � 13o g 3 �� _ �''l • �l - KS � _ _ .,«.� � �� .�� f�� i C� � �" � �J , �' � We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissionecs approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, ; 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any � identified impacts, and � 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the , public interest. I The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County shoald work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. : Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE � ��u lr'i• �O l � �/ '�'�-e C. I . ^ _ ,�� _ __ "l ,�/ a�P� � � � � S / �� ' � �� , � � i � /� %' � We, the nndersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposaZ meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. $T1�EE 1` NAME ADDRESS DATE � � �/ -1 - O'7 3 ✓n�crt ��Y�t1.iG. �v :�D � /c�2 C -�r I c �5.� �.�/-� -' '�� It� / C]. J ^ C.--'`--�:L.til.G-i / i ''r �'li `J�� I �l� J ( ' � i � .a � ,� �3� �r � �� vr.• " �G �SG'X �OO�u{ i/5.�t�c� ` Zc7��L'�5� � / j � , 1 �- — � u. .�,X7�/ I�Sr—�.' ��7 `sr . c.� / �—�= .C�S . ..._-- 7 .. � . ^-' �� /� L- k��'o � � I �� i�. �� y l i,�. .:/: � Fi'% �Q ��i� ✓ �%_��«.;��1.�; ��y .�cr. ��.P � �� , � _ _ _- - ---- wu-- _._ _ __. ._..,. � i We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the � County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans j for its mountain and base area re-development because: � 1. The proposal meets an �mportant community need, 2. Aighlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work w't Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS AATE �- � i 6 d i6�� 02 w /�' ��/7 ��6�� -�,.4._" �-zc._ �U•l 20 0`1 S � i�6 ` S i �\ ' 63X �( -soti;�. -1 -Fs5 , . 1 �^ � � � � � 8, �� P,o f3 ��'Z3� �-� �S� . , • �"- zv �- -�=� •� � ��oS� �-�� c�x.�-r�� l z t I�_� a�r a ozi �n `'6.�y�� -�, ' a 8►� � � 12�,jgs ° . �� - 1 i i ( f We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: I. The p=oposal meets an important community need, 2. Aighlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be pZaced on the approval to protect the public interest. The preliminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Aighlanas to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modified. NAME ADDRESS DATE �i�v C�.��-- �? D. �d�C Z OC� !�S f�?-- q/��fS'S — � n i.�� U U � � Uz /� .` 3 �� ov ' v Z ��P� �� "S` '��- �.G-.-�-�--¢-� �i o 2.�--�G1� �� ,��'sS' ' � ��Z�/L�'i� U/0� ��Z.-' �'f/% �� - � ,o� ' � � 3 6„� � ��3r .e. y '�T �� . �x �d�- � �S �� !�S �(� . �--- (u o �c�c r ,'"f-+-i' J-�� • P U rS��,,� 3'?9 �4 s �.1 �/°r�� . ' �-. .� • � ' � ,�-��.-r-.-�� _�t_ , � �1- G �- �t/� j .�S � v k �CXrS/ ��Jffx Az� � q �'S� + ;�� ` „ ' .�� l�J �� ZD �i k� i- „�.c -c ' ah 7_ v i .��.�.s-�.�,�� i b� I � /` �� ? �, � �—/`�`'_ _�---�� X �y-� �c i.n Gc 5 ( / 1 �� / S ��`� �� '� `J -Z 1�1�/�� fa 1�� L ' _ +�= .t / - �.'0 z f � � t,�Bo C�� ' . �/6s6 � i1v � i ��2 /�/'�p `��. 3 % ! _!��-.' � LG' ��"'? 7 �� j � !F'lr�(Ows �!'-f h`-sr c;�1 � �! / - - - � � 1��'�,��.�/.l�� >a�-- �IG/� �.. , � . �`1 ._.:':2 , . .i � •G,✓ ��'/ �a'/C�d �/��l ��.�-�� J�� ok' :'26 G�S Q,�. Co. �'�b iz /�o�l �//� l� . /�i�. � `�,Sz - Ca �'/,i Z �' /° ` 3 3 S, hJ l�c -i'�i �c,� � C_c.,,: _ ,� � ��-- ,�_; I a�.� _ ___ We, the undersigned residents of Pitkin County, request that the County Commissioners approve Aspen Highlands preliminary plans for its mountain and base area re-development because: 1. The proposal meets an important community need, 2. Highlands should have the opportunity to mitigate any identified impacts, and 3. conditions can be placed on the approval to protect the public interest. The preZiminary proposal is a good start. The County should work wit Highlands to improve its mountain and base area. Highlands should not be disqualified for another year because of plan aspects that can be easily modffied. NAME ADDRESS DATE • G � ' 6 -30-�5 , '�' � �� _ � �' �� 8—� � ' L� -� - . � ' ��i 6'� 3i- �� ° �S`� � �`5�/a� ; �� o z � �S � a'��_ � � �- ' �'/��S' ; In'� i �- ��.�l�� SZy S �njo.�M�-ss tvl�, �� 6►� " ..�w . Sm�t.� A.G?/6mc �d3v8 �'`� 8//o�Z ' •��/ ' ; _,, ; 6.'_`zf�6�Gt,�� ?0. s ..� c a' '��O i Z � ( � �- - t�i sl ��. C�7- �'1612 �e.�6- I�'�5 ` �:d e5�d. � � 3/ �'v S�(/Z � � ' ' � s �, d'/�� , ��/�'/ 'i � b � � ' Wi+te-ou# Ltd+. i 1019 Jupiter Drivc ( EXHI IT Colorado Springs, Colorado E30906 � (303) G35-2728 � � . �� • . � . � �-Ct4: h� / ,S 5!" i ' � ��- � ._..... ... , � � .� �Gz'�» ./J'�� ._.. .. , � �G - , � �.�'`�, ��/f�� . /��.,��, !� �1��.,.:,�.�::. . � �``' - ,,�/� . � `c-`'��G7�'1•�>5/d777'�:.' �.G�/,'�G��C.��, , G� ,nd , �t'v. r�'� � l/` . .. �c Li � /' i /� LJ��r ��Q.UF ✓rL��J .C4!�FG�`Cti•t�%r�Z•zo h� ,�,�j� ��-Kcd•�s �-�Ic�1 <O �.. C;.��v / �-� ` ��/ =� 1�� :�-��;:�� '� �7 ,Q� c.�r �r_.�� J� -L,'f5�� G��c.c�:�:C.�. / � � f -G-1L GLC.L.��tD�eo�,✓.rC�Gfrz',L:��:��:�%r��DZ lt�a- �2c�� . - . � � ��G?c�'�' C.G7`�uit� L�� /J7�z-��i_-��cl ��fL'i_ /� �-;��'�c� � � '�'i'.'4'-L�� . flG7�-��CLG�'l.�, =%_l-Cc.GC��✓ .GG�I•i(�i/�f u�J�",,r ��•( '�;j� ! ,,/�� // ,� ,c� � f !-•yl Y-f C•'`)')� C�7�.G i �XC.GC:•.�='J -�C..�� t7.�r C.. �C.�lc'�-a-G� LL, f.LtG �`��`'�%��""-�a/� 1 , �c'G� `�i•°t./�/.�Lt�• �"G'i�`rcG�!��r J:n�- ��=� ��7�G�j••l>c�-C�!'rlj �r t'�rCC�� --`� � C/,�%�% .•rGi_ii-7 i; �s��z��l-cc� /�ii lCli!l�sd tZi�C/•'�l,� `/7GG' C'--�ff/_ �rt�i� � ! (/ ` ' t�1?� ('i�.��1"ZC G �� L�.�2U_''�oi . i � � � .r . . �j� ��!i�v CL� c=�� G(�e',L�=/ /..J��CG-, c�i�<<�r.�r�- ' �"c�l."- I�UJ:f�ta// i /� /i' „ ' ' l.c.c-��'/. �`•`' � � (•��2l� �'7�:'�"- �77" � � ��- ! / . —_ �. �r�. G�t C i �C� ��`!C�__c�� 7-�c•',��ar , ___.--------. � Cj'y�>i� '�: �Zry�, `� _�_%J � ?f_l•�?7C•',�-�L,�S ' c�i �.�7�. d%�>>a-Ui/iis:x� . (�7 �d I� G�--�L�t'�_� �----- . `_ , � � __ --c�-:7^7�t�c Z!-,./ � -- -� . ��.��., �.�-.�f��Y,�.,��:�;:.�.�� '+ �-�'��l� . ",L/.��j.�, /l/L��'Gc c�..�?'��'. / I ' _. . , . .. . . _. . t .. . ' . . ... , ... .' . --•Y'...t� � . . ' .. .. . . . � . .. ',1: "-'°•�'� -.�. . .. . _....__.. a �,- --- _ ._. . . _ � � . . . . .. . . .t . _.... .... �. . .-_... .. � ii, 3 ' } � � September 9. 19f35 - � lo�,�.�- � "� EXHIBIT w" rt, Pitkin County Planning �� ` ' & Zoning Commission ` � _ 506 E. Main Street ' ' � � � ' Aspen, CO 81611 � � I Re: Highland Ski Area Submission Dear Commission�rs, I would like to encourage you to find some common ground with the ski area to look favorably u��on this submission. Lacking that, I would hope that you can find a way to work out the problems and get to a submission that can be accepted. The existing facilities ar _ substandard at best. The future success of Aspen depends on of�•.:ring a first class skiing experience. The intermectiate skiing oFfered by The Highlands is an essential ingredient in the Aspen ski picture. The creation of Snowmass, and its growing success, has caused problems for both Aspen and Snowmass in many ways. The crowded highway is just one of those problems. A better ski experience at The Higtilands could ;�itigate many of the proble�s. This may be the most difficult submission you have had to deal with. It will certainly require close coordination with the ; city staff and many other agencies. Many creative solutions will likely be necessary. The potential for a significant, long- lasting, community-wide benefit is liere. I sincerely hope you are up to the task and with you good luck. Ver�ru�-y yourjs, _�__. , - .��,� Patrick 3. Hunter President PJH/ds I 126 Mediterranean,SP 2E ; Aspen,Colorado 81611 HUNTER 925-4906 o ° ��OQ� �,� � C�O��(�� J.._----.___ � ll ._.... . . ......._._. _'_..__'.._ .. � .. . . . Y'. � _ � � C PLEASE CIRCIN.�'i'� ...,�..��; �sw�or�,vvaac Blake „� � �'�tild � � • � � � rr�udis ' �� 1 �� r��C�L:.�L] : � ^`Qrud �� } i I � ;;; [.___:_., �� l�c�::�inistratloa�e � September 6, 1985 Pitkin County Commissioners 506 E. Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 �-t0• � , �-,r / J� � � �� : Dear Si rs, vl � ��1.I..Ef�+�t/'S ; The following is a copy of an editorial in favor of the Aspen High an s r as aired on KSNO this past July. Recently the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission rejected plans by the Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation to build a world class resort at the base of the Highlands. The plans called for a Bavarian-style resort complex featuring and Inn with 300 rooms. . .meeting room facilities, and a European-style, 150 foot clock tower as the focal point for the complex. . .all the ingredients necessary to bring increased business and continued prosperity to our community. The unanimous decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission to flatly reject this project was irresponsible. The commission claimed that the project failed to meet the standards of the county's planning code, and had concerns over ; complaints of property owners living near the site. ' It would seem in the best intrest of the community and it's economy, to offer the Highlands a chance to amend or improve any of the eiements of the project that were not up to standards. . .rather than totally reject the plans. This action combined with the attitude of possible noise. . .bright lights, and visual polution are all apart of the provincial and cavalier attitude that stymies growth and progress in the Aspen area. This is not a community that is self sustaining. . .we are a resort center that thrives off the activities which center in and around the mountains surrounding Aspen. It is important to preserve the natural beauty that we have been blessed with and so long as it is taken into consideration with projects that are well planned and tastefully done, there is no reason i why we should turn our backs on progress. The Aspen Highlands 620 East Hopkins • Aspen,Colorado 81611 • 303/925-7383 _. _ _. . __ _ _ - --- _ _ _ _.._...__.....�... . _ .... ._ ... ._� : ._._.._ — ---- . . .._ _... . _. `� _ y `:i � , y � 1 I , ; i { deserves a chance to continue to be a thriving enterprise so that it may help to make Aspen what it truTy is. ..a world class resort. ' 'i �,: �i Thank you for your consideration. � Since ly, r � i � �'' � �L� !� r David L. J nson � President/ eneraT anager � KSNO i l , � DLJ/nh � ,. � i i i � i � 620 East Hopkins • Aspen, Colorado 81611 • 303/925-7383 � �------------- . ;J�-., ., ._. ._�..�_ -----�---- __ . _� -- ,,; � � � � /V �� snowmass � July 2, 1985 � � �.�-fo..-�. . ..L .._ _ _ s Mr. Whipple Yan tJess Jones � , c/o Aspen Highlands Skiing Company -r � 1600 Maroon Creek Road Aspen, Colorado 81611 ! � 1 Dear Whip: ; Thank ou very much for your invitatian to review our new and excitin , y p y g project at the Highlands last week. Both personally and as a representative of the com- � munity of Snowmass, we are excited about your new product and the extension of quality facilities that it will bring to our entire valley. Valley-wide upgrad- j! ing and professional marketing is something that is our #1 priority, and we are extremely pleased that you all, as a corporation, have seen fit to make such a �` substantial investment. Your optimism parallels Snowmass; and the investment �� that all of our members have recentl made in u .l y pgrading our plant as evidenced 7 by the opening of the Conference Center earlier this month. �� Should there be anything that we might be able to do to assist you with your �I presentation to the county or with any of our market research data, we would be ' more than happy to share those with you and your team. � Again, congratulations, we look forward to working m e closely with the High- �� lands over the next many years. ; a°: ,,. d� ii t per o re rd , ,. �� f - �� `' Keefer . Welch i; a� Executiv Yice President ��' General Manager �� '�i j KDW:JP i j Spence Yideon � � . i,� �� , .I �_; Posr Ofiice Sox 55Gti Sno�+�mass Vllage. Colorado S 1615•303/923-Z000 � --------_._ ��-- .. _ _ _ `; = C,AI�AILCA.DE TOURS ING `� � 5 Penn Plaza, New Yark, N.Y. 10001 • (212) 695-6400 � �' k: i: �� July 2, 1985 � .� � � _ -(.`lQ.: , � Pitkin County Commis�ioners � . �j Pitkin County Courthouse �-_.�,,,� -' - 506 E. Main Street � Aspen, Colorado 81611 � � Dear Cbmmissioners, i i +; As a past resident and now salesperson for the Aspen area, I was ver.y excited to learn of the proposed development of the Aspen Highlands Ski Resort. I am writing to seek your support of this project. We are all aware of the competition between ski area's these days. Certainly, Aspen is the premiere ski destination in America today, and i feel this project will only support that designation. '1 As a tour operator to the Aspen area, we find a big concern over the lack �' af quality hotel rooms, and the thought of a luxury hotel at the base of �; the mountain will greatly appeal to our custamers. For too many years �1; the Nighlands has suffered in the shadows of Ajax and Snowmass. Now that ��' the Aspen Ski Corporation and the town of Aspen have announced major } redeveIopment plans, I feel the upgrade of the Highlands will only hetp ' to co�nplete the picture. With the four (4j mountain coupon book, I feel f�� we can create new markets for people to stay at the Highlands and enjoy t all Aspen has to offer. �i,; !_; As evidenced by the Time Magazine :article, two years ago, we are aware that ;. Aspen is not immune to slow business periods and certainly a luxury hotel �� at competitive rates would �ot hurt the image of the Aspen area. ! �� In my opinion, the upgrade of the Highlands area witl only help to improve :'� the image of the Aspen/Snowmass area and I encourage you to support this j; project as well. �- R� � c� Th "k you for your consideration. k; ' S'ncerely ,I , �� 'r� }'1 : � �.-L�_ ,�i nce ygte man �_; . Director, Ski Division "s, ;! ` ��r. LC/rt �: '� Conr+edicul: 414 Asylvm Sirs�f, Hsrflord, Conn. 06103 • (203) 549•5100 �i: • ►�ew Ju�y:20 Third St., South Or�npe,N,J.07079-0188 • (201)761-1300 i ;, , ;, i' . . _ _. _ _ .. _. .. _ __ _ _.... h_. __.. ____ . ... _ --�---- --- _._ . _ , :, , ► . - • ••- . �, � � ; � August 16, I985 � . f; �-10 'a.� f i' ./�i '� Pitkin County Commissioners �q Pitkin County Courthouse � � - - 506 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Gentlemen: It has come to my attention that Aspen Highlands has proposed a master plan to improve the base ares and mountain. Bravo!! The Highlands area has been a fav- orite of mine personally and zt will only be better with its outlined expansions. The reasons for my lure to the Highlands are many, but the courteous staff makes everyone's stay very pleasant. The mountain has a variety of terrain and is not I� the tame little area some people have thought. And the ski. school has helped me 1 to ski again after an unforgiving accident! I have witnessed tremendous skill ;; development in short periods of time for beginners also. �{ From a professional point of view, which came after my respect for Aspen and i� Aspen Highlands, the group services are consistent and more accommodating �han �•: �;. the other mauntains. Families can better afford the Highlands and that wi.11 be �'" my target group for western skiing this year. The few emergencies ever exper- ;{ ienced by my personal friends or clients have been professionally handled without I� complications f;, �� The demand for Aspen skiing is tremendous! Additional Quality housing will be ;� welcome by all skiers. This resort expansion will also be an asset for the `; marketing attempts at increasing year round business. ;� � ` I believe strongly thet with fine people like Bill Brehmer involved in this i�; project, it can only be successful and an asset for Aspen. � Sincerely, ' ' I � �'� 1 � :, �• � , Z-� .•.� . ; � ;- �,,,,, ' .Tud"q soykin ��' ' Director of Ski Operations- l-�,j"� .. �- � '` Home address: 2400 Ailsa Avenue ' Baltimore, Maryland 21214 �' ' 301 - 254 - 7522 �� ,{ :'� , � ± t Commercentre 1777 Reisterstown Road Baitimore, Moryiand 21208 (301)653-0466 � i; ' l� � j r._.__. ._.__... . �.._ ,.� +r...__.. . .._�I�Y�YYri�l� ._... � ............,....._:.�....--.-..:..,..:i ... . . .. .. . _ . . '� . � ' 1 .� �.i•�"i{ry:.1":, �I � reat desti nc�tions, i nc. � g ► 4100.e. mississippi • suite 200 • deover�ca. 80222 • (303►756-1555 � ' . ' July 10, 1985 i = ', ��;^.. ._� .. ;; ! •. :' ., ;. :�- i.: . ., _; . Pitkin County Commissionera 9-j(� ; i Pitkin County Courthouse � �`"" ° � 506 East Main Street �� ' ��° -- i Aspen� Colorado 81611 i • � -- . i , . ; Dear Sirs, � The principals of our firm have been sellfng Aspen for quite some time and f are very excited about the $60�000,000 base area at Aspen Highlands. We feel that this will help us generate even more business into the Aspen area. Please give Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation your support. 4 Sineerely� _ . � Jim Moldane President !; , �i JM/pt i,� CC: Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporstion � ' .• . I ' i :`' . ; : � ':. � ' � � . � E • I , , { � _ 1 � �: . H.. _ . ...____......_..:....... _..__---_..._____....___�_._�._.�_--------�---_�_�..._.� � � �i ,j w � �� . �� v��o� �� :' . c� �,,�:, � c� � � � , � � Ju�� a�, isss � �,,�,; �'l0 5�5 � Pitkin County Comrnissioners � �� Pitl�tin County Courthouse a0G E. A°Iain Street As�en, CO 81611 � �; ' Dear Co�nmissioners: '� I um writinp to eapress our support for the Aspen Hiohlands Skiing Corporation's '�iaster Plnn for improving tf�e sl<i nrea. I ��' 9s a ma}o: Airline serving Denver, we transport r�ppro::imately 25,OOQ skiers to Colo,ado each ski season. Over the past few yenrs, Aspen's share of these slciers has �q decreased. As the othrr Colorudo ski arcr�s have gotten stronSer, Aspen's �ppeal se�;ns to huve got�en v�eaicer. Ti�ere is u reel need to updste Aspen's existino facilities and the need for u hotel i►nd � co:�ference center is even greuter. � � � � 1 ti�:ould ur;e }*ou to approve this �nost aoaressive improvement plun that Aspen � � I-�i?hlaJrds has submitted. 3ineere2y, _ ;' - , i #; .j`'.:�i�i- / ....-� . ; '!�,.�`�i`, . i /��/ i !�' 'h�� ," r` � ��' v f3i11 R. Frazier � �?' Sates ,lia�l�ger Re��ublic Airlines il �; . �;: i . � j . I � i I ; i ; ouo;zz,�ses DISTRICT SALES OFFICE � !.` '3 V�EA.°.T'�O�Af,Zq�;WA�. ' FHOENIX(�fl20NA 8503C C iSC;l:.i ? . � _. .''.-_..;`.;[':ir�.,"=_� i . ...,..J 1 ' _ - ' 4 j i Il ';� uc�r�. :� � i� Dlstrict S�Iss ONic� Ii _ Petrolsum Club 8ufldinp Suite 460 110-1 Bth Strs�t Danvsr,CO.80202 � � , .. i July 1, 1985 �-'�(�... � r � � - 1 To Whom it May Concern: This is to advise you of our support of the Aspen Highlands project. I am sure you will agree that ' the completed product wiii have a zavorabie economic effect for all involved. Sincerely, ( USAir, `r t i An rew J. McGraw, Jr. . District Sales Manager AJM/gf cc: Bill Brehmer/Aspen Highlands , 4 �. ;� :, � ,: . . ,: , ; ; � � ; � � � � ;� ; i i , ; HOT�L ,�9SPEN ' � �� , ` 1}� �i: � � � . .�� , � ► . �� ,� ,� � ; � . . , ; � ,�; �� , � � �LL � . ., _J. . i .. . .. . { � T � .. . . _.0 . ... i'..- , .. . . . , i August 19, 1985 - _;,, �j-(� •� . . . • � �k��l� �� Dear Sir: I would like to address a concern that I have over the Highlands , Ski Area improvement project. As a hotel owner and property manager � in Aspen, I understand completely the necessity of high qualtiy lodg- j ing and ameni�ies. It seems to me that any group or citizen who wishes � to improve and enhance this quality of service to our visitor should be given as much encouragement and support as possible. + ' I, therefore, feel that this project deserves as much help and I consideration as the law allows. The process that has been adopted by the county affords a great deal of public input and county re- � commendations which guarantee the best possible project be realized. In this particular case, I would hope that the P and Z board reopen the process and give this development its worthy consideration and work actively to insure the community the best possible project development for this site. The summer and winter contribution of the Highlands site to the valley and its citizens warrants such action. I look forward to attending your public hearing on this subject and would be quite happy to provide any other information and comments � that may be necessary. Thank you. � a � Sin rel , , � Len 0�l�n Genera'1 Manager ; Aspen Group Inc. '� THE HOTEL ASPEN • 110 WEST PdAIN STREET • ASPEN.COLORADO 9�61t • ?03•925•3att �. � .. . ,i . _ _ _ ._.__._. ,.r...�._._....__,. - - -- _ _.._._ _. - . '_.. . . . .. _ . . "_".,. Y i .... .. .. �.....'"""""'�__"-.' . .'_'_' ____ . .. � � �� . � � , �, ' �� ' June 25, 1985 ' �� / � � � , � � � . � i � i i' r '� ., � i � � �-.. _ ' � � ' � i Pi�kin County Commissioners �-�d� g �r� j , Pitkin County Courthouse � � �' Y f�' � . ; � As,pen, CO 81611 ,,,, ; _+.: 0�1'r�� t ' i . � r�� m � • . m' N " Dear Commissioners, F i � ; � Aspen Ski Tours is the larqest and oldest tour operator = ! � in the Aspen Resort area. Last season we brought over � � • j � 8,000 skiers to this resort. � � m II � ` .We promote and sell accommodations, lifts and related � � � I �travel arrangements to travel agencies, the airlines Z ' i and directly to the skier through our national marketing i ' � ( I programs. ' Z ; � � � Aspen's clientele request and require first class .o : accommodations within close proximity of the lifts with ° I �, full service amenities. Unfortunately, we must unable � � many of these requests as there is currently a shortaqe � � of this type of facility in our resort. �.. I v , i In this light we strongly support the proposed Aspen ry . : ; i Highlands Base Area Expansion and hotel project which ': , � will certainly benefit us all. � � ! � � � i Thank you for your attention and support. � � � � .---� �. � +: ; '. Respectfiully yours, o ' � • /. � � � � i i �.� � ji Barry Lefkowitz � , Owner . G • i � _ ' "� G { � ( f. 1� j U1 I � BL:em °� � J � O � ' ;' � ` '. � cc Bill Bremer ! ; Aspen Highlands Box T � � Aspen, CO 81612 I • � � l � y � � .V .. e '-1 '� �': lV.r��i-ii' . �.t� .,'- . •l l��w�� _ �`` '�.' .%� �� i�' �i• �w',. .��+x4,} / ROC��?UI�IT'�/�l A/R�li/AYS � HANGAR NO. 6 � STAPLETON INTERNAT/ONAL A/RPORT • DENVER, COLORADO 80207 / 3uiy 3, 1985 / ; ' .. . . . ,7_. .. •. . ' Pitkin County Couanissioners .. 1�."��.'�. i Pitkin County Courthouse : . p,�, ' j 506 E. Main Street y � _0 .___� . . i Aspen, CO 81611 --- � . i � Gentlemen: I The recent annourzcement by the Aspen Highlands Skiing Corpora�ion of plans for a new $60 million resort cor.iplex wi11 undoubtedly place the Highlands area among the world's finest. , The fact that Aspen Highlands has long been recognized as one of the outstanding ski areas in your County and the epitome of a well-managed resort leaves little doubt of the many advantages that will accrue to the State of Colorado as a result of the � proposed improvements. The greatest benefits from an economic � standpoint will of course be experienced by Pitkin County and � the ir�ediate Aspen area. � From the standpoint of an air carrier that has served Aspen for the past 16 years, we have noted the popularity of the High- � lands area and the numerous compliments expressed by our passen- } gers relative to the safe and efficient manner in which the area � is operated and the sheer enjoyment which it has provided for so � many people i � Perhaps the r.iost outstanding feature of the prcposed expaa- ' sion program is the realization by Aspen Highlands of the need � to enlarge and update their facilities to accouanodate the thriving � resort business and to provide an even more pleasurable experience ; for their customers. The "state of the art" - particularly in the y ski business, has seen the introduction of certain innovative ; ideas that have resulted in an ever increasing papularity of the � sport. Consequently, in order to properly compete, �ost of the major resort areas in our State have had to improve their facili- ties and provide a well-rounded resort complex capable of cap- ` turing both Summer and �tiTinter business. Those objectives would be more than adequately met if the Highlands project is authorized and development is ini=�ated in the Spring of 1986. ,...:3!39�-��- ::...... t:. Cr 37 � _ .......�..�., __. _____ � _.... . ----_ . . ...- --- --._._. . ___. _ ,_._ .._.._ ..__.... __ _ . ... __---.. _ _ Y � ( . � • • i i I As an interested party� Rocky Mountain Airways will be in a position to provide a level of service wholly compatible with � the needs of the greater Aspen resort complex and particularly in conformance with the expansion plans of Aspen Highlands. I . " would, therefore, urge the Commission to fully support the � master plan for the much needed project as envisioned by the � Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation. � � Sincerely, � ROCKY MOUNTAIN AIRWAYS, INC. 4 � i �/ ` Gordon F. Autry � President and � Chief Executive Officer � � If� 1 � ( � x G Iy� I�• �I .�� . �._ '�: '.� j. t ' �; :1 'r.: _. k, 1: :� y t � GFA:vks :C - �., i� ��. -2- ,��. i� ��. ,. i � ' i � �y� u ' � � � � �LtLC. �'�� An� 3980 OUEBEC STREET • SUITE 217 • DENVER,COLOAADO 80207 • 303-320-4747 �� F � V - - 1 June 27, 1985 I � Whi Jones . '_•�` c;.• . / P . Aspen Highlands � P.O. Box T �� Aspen, Colorado ��lb � 81612 . � ., � � J y�� Dear Whip, I would like to thank you for inviting me to your wonderful presentation last Friday, June 2I. The presentation of your proposed expansion plan with the addition of the conference center is extremely exciting to Aspen Airways. The Sales staff of Aspen Airways travels throughout the United States promoting your destination for skiing and summer vacations, and now we will be able to sell "conventions" to our clients. • This is especially important during our off season such as April, May, �, September and October when traffic is down. These are the months chosen iI for conventions and when your facility is available, meeting planners i� will choose Aspen as their destination. We are pleased to offer you our j support for your endeavors. I � Thank you for the opportunity to learn first hand of your future plans. a �`:, If I can help you in anyway, please contact me. Ir ince ely 1 � '� � �; ��%G:�%�� /°'_� ;, -�atricia A. Lee ;; Vice President Marketing � CC: Bill Brehmer County Coimnissioners of Aspen ; ;`. PAI,/sv '� . !� ;t �! WORLD'S FASTEST SKI LIFf ii t; �...��. �... � �.. :� ,.._.. . ; q ' _.. ! � -. _.._._. �1..�_�Q- .. .. � ,�- � � ::� , , . ._.__�-�-� � � �,,L � PO Box 279, Aspen, CO 81611 _ __ �i ;; �c HANGAR 5, STAPLETON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DENVER, COLORADO 8�207 303•320-47�LEASE CIRCUL.A+T� ��'— Blake September 4, 1985 Chlld � Braudis __ � Kia:zc��,s.,..t i%��:`- , Board of Commissioners, Pitkin County NS�,�. : �'j l� 506 East Main Street �J' � Aspen, CO 81611 Efi:�: V Dear Commissioners: R�� _ :'. ' '��:�S�r9t� As Director for Aspen Airways in Aspen, I am writing with respect to the Aspen Highlands request for reconsideration of their proposal to make some major improvements, including lodging, to their ski area. It is my understanding that the Highlands is requesting reconsideration in order to continue working on plans for their project which would include attempts to effectively deal with concerns identified by the Planning and Zoning Commission. As management representative' for a transportation company, which has attempted to serve the changing needs of the Pitkin County i Airport for over thirty years, I want to strongly express my � support for this request by Aspen Highlands. i Whatever the reasons may be prompting government regulations �� which would bring this proposed Highlands project to a standstill ! for about a year, I certainly hope ti�at our County Commissioners represent a rule of higher reason which will permit reasonable ' planning and project work to continue. � I am not suggesting that the Highlands project be approved as ' originally presented, and i don't believe Highlands is suggesting that either. I am suggesting that our government processes should certainly be progressive enough to permit Highlands to ;�i continue in timely fashion with communications and planning which ; may lead to significant improvements to their ski area and to guest visita to the Aspen area and at the same time meet Planning and Zoning Commission concerns. tr yours ti. �l , a�s,�i�� Dou as T. Speer Director, Aspen and Corporate Affairs ; ; DTS:mao � : G. B. Hickman yyORLD'S FASTES7 SKI LIFT President � � Aspen Airways � : � PLEASE CIRCUI.A�"P� . I�lake � ,-�h;�,.� � . SPC]RT DBERMEYER LTD. �ra�rc±is ' K' ��ru n� :;n L --- E -t — August 30, 1985 ��=u�� to Administratlo�4 Pikin County Commissioners Pitkin County Courthouse � 506 E. Main � �- (0 •�J� Aspen, CO 81611 . � ��1 / • ., ... . _.L�ft'L�'UI/� Re: Aspen Highlands Development Project _ _ Gentlemen: After looking over the master plan of the Aspen Highlands ; base area and mount-ain improvement program, I wholeheartedly � support the project and hope that you will reassess this whole matter. ' t I've spoken with the management of the Company and they ' assure me that all county codes will be met and that they � are very willing to work with the County to assure the quali�y � of this project. i Aspen needs this type of facility to remain competitive � with newer and more modern resorts. ; rdially yours, ; l , Klaus F. ermeyer President KFO:kac ' cc: Bill Brehmer P.O.BOX 7848 • 92 ATLANTIC AVENUE • ASPEN,COLOFiADO 81611 • (303)925-5060 • TX.45-998 /"' ...,�o �A/'�D'�'f° . . ,,PLEA'SE CIRC�-AT� �.`.'•;� :�,��,�: _ .. . rt� �� Blake 1 �ti - - C.'•:�� ': Thort�as D.Hines,D.V.M September 4, 1985 Bra..udis i ' Chalrman of the Board , �:'u(i ,�—��.. The Board of County Corr�nissioners t � � � �' :,.. �•. ' �••-- - -�: � : �.� ATTN: Mr. Tom Blake, Chairman � '� Pitkin County Courthouse E �"-- --• 506 East Main Street F�:_ , :;, to Administra� RFSOIrT ASSOCJA'i]ON As pe n, Co 1 o ra do 81611 303 East Main Street Aspen,Colorado 81611 Dea r Tom' IntormaHon 303/925-1940 � Reservallons303/925-9000 The Board of Directors of the Aspen Resort Association, at its August 14, 1985 meeting, passed the following resolution regarding the process involved in the general submission of the Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation: Be it resolved that: The Board feels that improvement to the base area of Aspen Highlands is desirable. The project is of sach importance that it deserves more public input. To that end the commissioners are urged to allow the Aspen Highlands Skiing Corporation to continue in the application process in order to give it the opportunity to comply with the codes and conditions imposed by the County. We trust that you wi7i give serious consideration to our resolution during your forthcoming deliberations, as we believe it represents the attitude of the business cortmunity. Since ly, Thomas D. Hines, D.V.M. Chairman of the Board TDN/vw cc: The Board of County Commissioners �T�� .;�� . .. . � ::.:�� < < .,. � , �• V • �� ... : ;'r�i::i;; r�.:� � . � '��I�� j'._;7.;.c J:cc,,�' 7--�- � � :�.�o . .��- �� 1'GHA �t�- � � u ��.yl�.(;�n�(y __ �_.�. , . BOX 706 ASPEN.CQ.81G12 (303)925•2595 �: � � Lt,�.�2. J � �9c�J �� y� �`;�i.aJ �-c�-Q�� "`��c�.R.-.�-r�� ' C�L � • .� �_ .�.� z,�.• ��:�-�-,e �Z�� /.1��.c�,� '��e �� n � �� Lu-��t�ac� /l�f/ � �..Ellll.d-� �!1 Gj.Lv�.OL�y E�-t�-!/L - .dG�Q�. �1 _ G�� n � �� ' �l�.e ,2��a�.-►.t� l�.c.�,.lc-� ,Lc� ,Lr.� �� t�.�au.�-.Co -) ti�,r-�--,v //, z�./ . �` � � . . /-/�L�� Y�� • -�e 7�c��c.�a-�� ...2�c��-c��-s��,.�Z.c-� .,t��-r.-e.�� 22C .c%�it-� ;y�2cz��1 _ � �.c.. /�-C L��c�►-��• ..`,.u-�.��a �..C.f�e ��--�a..� ,�t.. (� �. 2G�. �-i`'� 7t a�-C. / / U / - L'fi'n-GZt.reL/L L��'I�tL?.1-•--1�O�J.� �'l.. %Llt,�. �`�-d.-�•� �J 7Z ci� � �{�Lt�(itLl (�C.�(..t- �� u�i SD hL�-ze ��'"c�<1� (iGt�i�� G�sL.�t2-t� G2''�,f_ �/ SZt,/'i f/y�.e%]� _�,� �`'fl`"�-� 4.[e- �GC��LtZLC2sC.�c.�� /� , . . �� , t��,C �c �L� �r-zc Q,� �c a-o-�� t,c.L�. � �/f �--d�7/J � � .�` /� � i � � �� "�`" v �r „ rr CYJ-.�t��.C-c d•tL�. ,Q��c �2... 1 l�[�L.c-r-�ta� Gr2.�-�T�� Q�L�I/J �� G�-�'z�c�+.t2-Z� Q-ct� �-�z.�.-a,c.�� a� -�e-� o�i�,c�� ,� -� �-- � i1 � i��. ,�� Q_ /5o r-� ;�-nt��z_ U � .,� .., 2.cc,� ��—,�—� �-,(-� ��_t��. � ��-. �2�--�►--z�.� )�ur�z�-�-L C' � . (�it.tc� lJ.c.�"-��c.c��.�� Q2.e.,c� ��—�-u.E''� �-� �"o .l-� ��ca�-u-�� a2 � ��t�yc� �iC c--c-�..�� 1.�._ <w�t:lc: , .-.�,��.��_ ,�.��-�� .�� -C'. — ,�Le- ��. .��-�� .,�1�e... ..Lti��• � G�G L(.,1��, .l�ST/J'Z_,L-E-� �' .!�� C��/.�C!1'�'C..�/L i,C�-c�u.i . • � �� -��.c� ti��. ,�� .�x.��._ .�.��.� �1�.�-�, �` �� . � 1 �,��t2.� d-r_ti�-�F�c. �-�k..�� wc��.. ,c�� -�'� a�t�. .� �� . �C.t.�T�,t.�t,_(_C! ..Ll�� c� ,ct�z. C�,n.�-u�h..rt,.� �.�b.e�t�a� �c.�(,�J — d ��nL ��L �.�`c.�� . Y��z.�.�l �-� �. �z�.-�•� ,�-�•c�G�C(�'� �.o�-j» - � - _ / • �� -� `l'ic.�t� iC�l✓ ,�eQ.�1.�(.-u� ,C•LC��iL.. �f_ �,j-L'�.GZC�v1� /LE'/..LC� - 0 (J (/e� b � ��c�t.�� L�u,n..i`�',. llz�-� Z�CP_ �c-�1,, Z��. Cyr-�c. �-e�" 7 d � 0 L r/ �� , � .e��l-�y��C.�.�v.J. r ___ �� . ' July 15, 1985 � HAND DELIVERED Ms. Suzanne Caskey � Planning & Zoning Commission • 130 S. Galena Street ' Aspen, CO 81611 , Re: Highlands' Expansion Application Dear Suzanne: / I was informed today that High2ands will be presenting its expansion plans to the Plunning and 2oning Commission, tomor- row, and I am writing as a concerned homeowner of a Highlands Villas condominium unit. When Hiqhlands' expansion plan was first made public, the homeowners were invited to attend a presentation at the home • , of Whip Jones. Alth• I was unable to attend, I was informed " � by another homeowner that there were assurances from Highlands' representatives that the Highlands' access road which runs through our, property would not be a primary access to the project, and we were given the impression that the use would be no different than the existing use. As it is, all of the second floor bedrooms in each of these units face the road, which I was told today that Highlands does intend to use as access for this project. Even with the limited use that road has now, every time a vehicle trave�s over it, it sounds as i£ it is coming through the bedroom window, and headlights at night r�ould create an additional problem. Also, we have a number of children living in the units now, and have posted a 10 m.p.h. speed limit sign on , Glen Dee Road, which most users of that road ignore. I am concerned about the safety of my son and other children if the � use of the G1en Dee Road is expanded. i i I am also concerned about additional drainage problems jin the event that road is widened at all. We have experienced , severe problems with drainaqe, where the crawl space under the first six units has filled with water, thus eliminating the � ability of those unit owners to use that area for storage. Zf any excavation occurs, the drainage problems could worsen. I am secretary of the Condominium Association, but given the time constraints, was unable to contact the unit { ' � . Ms. Suzanrie Caskey July 15, 19a5 Page 2 owners to present the Association's view. My personal feeling, though, is that any expanded use of the road which runs through our property would substantially interfere with the quality of life we have thus far enjoyed at Highlands Villas, and I strorigly object to any use of that access for the expansion project. Sincerely, � 1�� _—� Deborah Quinn DQ/mis � cc: Lee Cassin Jim True DQ7.07 . j . ' � � ! ' � � . i I ' i i - � 'I • ' i ' • • � . �� July 15, 1985 CityJCounty Planning Department � and Planning & Zoning Commission . Aspen, CO 81611 • Ladies and Gentl.e.mPn: We the undersigned owners of Unit No. 16, Highlands Villas, wish to er.press not only our concern but opposition to the proposed expanded use of Glen Dee Road for the purpose of accessing the project proposed by Highlands Ski Company. All of the units at Highlands Villas are located adjacent to Glen Dee Road and, in addition, each unit has a bedroom facing Glen Dee Road. Increased daytime use of Glen Dee , Road will increase automotive r��-^ levels which are current- ly disruptive. Additionally, a.,r ,�ighttime use of Glen Dee Road causes headlights from ascending and descending vehicles to retlect off those bedroom windows. Although I have been advised that Glen Aee Road will be a 'restricted' roadway, any additional traffic will create problems for us. Further, those working at the ski area will most certainly avail themselves of this access, rather than drive a little bit farther to access through the main . entrance. Your consideration of our concerns is appreciated. ' Sincerely yours, . Phyllis Kenny , �/��) �� Charles Varonen i � July 15, 1955 � Ms. Susan CaskPy ' Pitkin Covnty Planning & 7,or_ing 130 S. Galen4 Aspen, CO. 8161i Deur Susan: Ps FresidPnt of the Highland� Villas Homeowners Associatioi�, please be advised that the Board of Directors has ask_efl me to notify you ihat al? res�dents of the Highlands Villas are opposed to the propo�al by Aspen Highlands Skii.ng Corporation to use Glen Dee Fuan as an access to thr:ir r.PV: development. vter. Dee P.�zd ;� currently access to Highlands Villas and several single family homes. VIe would like to see this road remain a private acce��. We feel that access to the newly proposed development shot:ld be limited to the main entrance on riaroon Creek Drive. Thank you �or lc�ur ur.c.erstanding. Sincerelv, . �a�� • LAP'CE L. LUCKETT, PRESIDENT HiGH.ANDS VILLAS HOMEO[V1�FR.S ASSOCIA^tION C/O Y. O. ECX 1389 ASFEI�i, COLORADO II1612 cc: R�ard of Directors �n�v ornces or D JACK JOI-iANNLS �S ASSOCIATES � OUO KIRtlY 11UII.U�NG 1500 MAIN AT AK/Vlb , . ' DALLAS,TE%AS 75201 . 7AII-@Jl.l June 6� 1985 �ktn con�a�n Ms. Suzanne Caskey, Chairperson Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Comm. 506 E. Main Street • Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Aspen Highlands World Class Resort - General Submission Dear Ms. Caskey; The Doolin Trusts, who are represented by this office, • OWI1 property at 0034 Glen Gary Road, Aspen, �Colorado. The purpose of this letter is to oppose the application .. of Aspen� Highlan�� Lodge Development: Placing of a� 300� unit ' ..,. . ... .lodge i,n...this a_�_. .where the Doolin Trust property- •is•• located, �•• toyether with other beautiful hones, would have the effect of damanging the neighborhood and devaluing .the• property home owners. � We sincerely urge your refusal of the development's request for this large lodge. • Si rely yopr , Git'��( �� Jack �"ha es �iZ��/ti'�� r JJ/sm cc: Ms. Mary Kathryn D olin 6723 Forest Lane • • Dallas, Texas 75230 � Mr: W. Lamar Lovvorn Secretary-Treasurer Frito Lay, Inc. � P. O. Box 45562 • • Dallas, Texas 75245 �e�,�. ��S �� (��,�.c�.�-� �r�.a, c.�.� vr.. ��.� t�-s �. �1�«�� ^^� t� � ��.a� /�-� � w Cu � �-�-'~� . a� � � �� . . � o� � I tc.C'1�-�- (�1 C'c' c� � �� a� � s � ��_ ?`-� �� . y � Z a � C� ;P._.�,.. . ,. . . � ��'i � ��'�n,i,s r c.,r. � G�� !N�' ��r�.riY� � � . � � , � �.- 3 0 � a�� rn�- �.'�-' � �� —i . � ��or-� � � � � � � c;a� � �� `�` �' � s v r1,o �.e� Qo �1�� /� �-c � Uu�r� � �n�c ,� �-d ��m�- t,�s-� � �. -Q�C r�'"� �'Y` � � ;�� d� �-�- � � �t,t.a. �i�nd /_�►-� �-H- � �. �, . , . . . . . � . .. . . �� w� �� t�,� e-��,�., �r� c� �v�d � ��c� �<vr,�� t.c c� -�o . �'`� h��a-� - 7 ji.� �-p b r-ca� lt.a� Co �� n�no� U.u.� �e ��t�-c�t.eh�1�v��.c;� a�-�� '-.�,�,�.� • �-' �i ""-y � `�;. �o�w�, ,,u- � a.� � �- ..e� ,�,� �� °� . � �� ` -�.,t;s-�- e��-e� � �-,�'-�2 - . ��,c,�-�� - - - . .- . _ ; . � _ ' c,�-- �-�� r�,�,,,� c-e�^- . . �� d.�,;�,d, �a. C�-� �'�� u�� ' � � �� I � . ' � � � � �� q�1 .F:�W.. � •, ., ,. .; ��;' . . , ��+��u� �� . ; ' � .�� o��d� � �,;� � ,� ��,�w�� ,�� ,�. � , :.�' h„e.� oL� ..°l-�.° ��°Y''`�v' `'�j �r''`.c.� �uu d-�.v� �c.�.tv� �►-� r�� a��,r.. ' : .(i►�t' �.��;��" . _.. G��• � � � �F-�oi�� 1�lt�.e � - , -ti :,•:� : -,.�� , = . ,:Phck2s 303- qtis;=34y6 ��'t�3�- Srb- 3s3�3 --. , .... :--�j� ----- -- . . . _--. .. .. ---- _ _ .. . �v �i"t•s---. 9 ll.�l/lf. ._. _ --• --� .._ __..__ . .. �.S/CFc, ._ .. ---..__ __ . _.... . . . . . ._.. .._ . ._ . . . .. . . / � � C� _ .�--. ..__-------- ._____._..___.---- ...._._._..._.__....... .. -- ----�-�---..._ . . __ __. ..__.__. .. .__..__... .. � , -----...__------'--�--� --- _ _ , e _.._..__.---...... __-- -= ---------�------__----- ---...------.__. -- . , /�o 5,-- (�ler�_a 5�-------------------=—-- --=�-�-=----=�------- . —�_ A . -----!-f��_�o _�i�v.i� __...- - .._. :..---�-�--�---�-------- � , . . , . ,, . .. . , _,__ . __...__ .__.._ .__. .... _._._..__ . .---_ __ . ....._._._............__.._..__:___�----... -- � - ------ . , ._ ' _ -r.�. --_./��.. . . ..... .. ... ... . _ .. . . � --------_._.../_. . .._ _. _ . . . ....- - . _...._... --- , .---�-�----/ � . � s-�----------- .. .----�----._.: ._(. �L�1'►..� l/'V-I'� �. _. - - ��5s � �G5'1.12/'/1 ./.f Z.CI�.�.._.- -- ._.._._..-�--�--..__. _. /.7� �� '>�r/. � . . ,� . i�v .�i�`5/ �� d .... . �� /��i'f�.�LG�C�/ /� �� i� � . <B� �C d' . . �7�i . _.---------- -�--� . - . �,� _ r � ------ =--�c�v�u s� P1�. ��Gt C 5 � _�: l �`22 � - --._._ __..._.. . . . ----- -___.. . /7�p �G l f�5 . .` �s--_.G �/ �P ._ � �ee� ._... . --. _--../ �� • . / �L�...--a---�'',e��? � �?.. �1a.�5--.._. _._._..--=------ i/�QS � �us.. l!�dd_ vc��rs.-._.� c`�j .�`��1�. .�.------ - - -- ��'"' --_ .-- ------- �-------- ------------- ------__..----_..-----.. ' ---_----- __._.._._ _ _----- ------- ---------�-- ----------- -----=�- ----� - __�..'U_ /_�N-- wE�._.-P-��j�-�src�G-un�_ C�?'i C��__... G��i � �--�_._-.-. --�_ �-.. . . CO�rr► ..CAi. Q55�.�1ii�_l/_.LG.s > .-'-�L .--�?-��---- = =- . -� y,---�� --=- �1�G�' d -��.e�fy�..:_,�.�_cr.eys .:-/_ _ .�i�. __. liri��._ �crn��--- /i? --.._ __7.LQ ------s�-!I_CQ.��_�722�..GZ'a��?GLQ.G_��--�---=----- � � . _ �..� --�-- -'QI'�L-%'/lGc-�y---J��-,? --�'��--� . s. ._c_'-c---- ._ . - - -- . __�f �y-... �ne.��----/y---�_��c�ss---- - --=----- --- � � : �.��s�Q%/y-:��C��_�,�� --------c�� . . n� �� _ z_�� s._---/!a_z� l�?wi��_- -_---- �' � —/�'-�-�--- � . � � -/_� �f.---� �f eGta��o_�--.�a�z s/�°,�-__�.��z__�. -" -��r%��.s._./�� _ �-�-- ---G�iG7!L �.--- --- � . � -- --- y -- ---�`O�[2 55 . -C!)/-- - t,e/I?.--�---------- -------: --�---_____---:------.-.-...-�---------- _ _.... . : _.. .-- ---- � ------ --.A_..----�-- -- --- -------- ------�---�------------- . __��_y�__ ,�-_y.��-___________________,___..___�_. . __.-_ . ._._____ _ ___ . __.________.____._____- _._ �_ . ___ . -- � _..��/5--�-/��_---- -----• --------- ----•---._ ... _---._.. - �--�l�`d---��=s-------�------=---—^._:_---.- _—=---�-- � - -�!��s./_ ------ ----- � . �' .- -=--! , � .�O _.��1 Z-.- - � . -- - � __'._�-�h�`5�l��s--.�`1�- � __ --- - ; ✓ --��.--�-� �� 3 ,� . ;�,�,-�;�-��-��nl;� i �-. 1' .,-S5- ��-�� ;. � � '♦< <V '�• � �: l;;�i; .-�`. �.:1 � ` �� b �'�'_ _ . • _ �. ,__ . _ . _ . . _ . . . _ _ . . . ._.z��e o-,-r�.�� G�u�! r/, _,��,c1�� li,�l�, _.. .��n �� Sj �� -- �..� � �� -r- � .�j� ,..� �R�1-� .�� 4�;�..ec� . .. LGj •� _ . ,.L�fj�l-c..� �ic�-�.-��c.e. .J�%1�fc-Z��jC�%�,� c-� � ��%t.d��:-. l� ��a.�� _ � . .��- �'cr q.�.-� �s. � � �j�1'� �2.: �`�2 c;c -G C�i�..� � lt�c . . W�-' �,/ � 05 %�CZC��P � �J��%rL a'�2� �q.� �� y�� a-,--�- '�. �� G�� ./'��/ c� l�f�rc�� a ' � � G��.� � � �� s�`� ��.�- . r�o5'v f )-jC�+-� � �c.� �� G?�C�e:GI// �cLv--„�jc� � ��;v� /� �/��j� �.-� Cs�-'��.rt� G,�'O�Q� l��l� /.j C�/dZ X///��G y � �rn- �.�o��.�� ,�,�,� � a��4� ��l � �CL'.��(�Cs�P� '�u CL�S l � �(C�Lc�� GU�x.4�r1`r-U� ��'P ��Ll/L� � Gt/�'JO� � �'� �. /� � ;�''r��l� ;�"' c.l � �701�-�' O'c�c ��a��n%r� ��4�-� - ' —� .��-�CJ?�c.h° �yG�� c�ic—e. ��f.��P �c�rlG�� „G�i/tc� �-��C'.6�.��f ��D��l' - i7`�'/�.. !.� T�� l�� (-�,i�KSG' � � ��'`c,t� ��CY GL�� --�%�/' ��; �� ;�u� ,�_ o�:�. , . �l� c�� .� �� ' rr / � �/ S�i.i /l�o� �;-' � �1��l �o > �-( i`rr,,o(�L c� ��Z%�/'cJ��'��v`�iu' . � �� .�oc��r � c�c��.�� - ��?.� y��.� y`��.�.J� �.� -�'� ..s �� .z �� c� � s�� - �.�'�;� - �G� � o�i' . c�. � D o � �, .� �-o��, �C4� ��,:�i�r r� �G�u�.�p .��r- o'ytJi�� Cze�-�. J ,.. 'j' • �,...E::..:: . _ _ . _.. r.�... , � � � .� . �. � �4. - ,_ t .r � . ' � � � .�/ ��'n,�� +/ /�. / �` .fLqr's'y��-�T� � %�fJ ,�� f % 1Y.:�j G//'`-/ . �d�=CXr//V�� C � � J /t'��`C��>`GV �e��o � � � . . �� /f a�u`P �� .---� �jalr� . c2_ .9�-� ��c,/ ��rn �ei.�/��%��o�� . v�r�J�'1 '� � ' �,r� fG�/I' /� ��'�� . ��;"� � ,) .- . •_ l�aF2� �_ ._ �`�cJ_ � SG�1� Qi'�Pl/�1 �° l � . �/ `1 4 eC .o'X% l.(�-/fJ��r i� y��-c �'IL-e �34.-�,�r��o� r�cze � /J 7`�. �1"� ��i�o ��c�Pi; Q�c� .�. .7�-. yJ'J ,,.l�v-/ - . . . - . y-� �-,� . �- ' -'�� - . �� . ?��'�� . � . � .� __ ' _ . . � . � _ _ _ , _. . �Guh�. l . . . . : .... _ :_ e � - . . . � , . � � . . � '. � � . � . � . .. - _. � . . .. • . _ - . ., .. . . . � : � � . . . .._.-- '-': _, _._ . . � . ._ . ._ _ .. . .. . . . . ..�_. .. . _�._, . ` . . . . _ . . . . _.....__.� . ... _. . .. . � . .. . _ _.. ...1 . -. . . . • `.,., . �- . � \ �. : . . .. . . _. _..�_. _._ " .. , ..__ . . . -' 1 . ` � ......_ ._... ..._._�__._._.. . . ... .. . �� ! . .� ..,_� . .. . . � ;-,� :�� . 9/9/85 � << : ., _ 1. �.0��: .. cl:Lj:.ct : —�y ` -- Dear Commissioners, � I am concerned about the proposed "world class" develop- ment at the base of Aspen H�ighlands. I've lived on� Glen� Eagle Drive for the past 12 ,years. During that time ttiere has been a lot of development in th'is area- almost all of which� has been� of a quality and on a scale that fit into the cYlaracter of this valley. I am rrot against- development- at� the base of�� H�igh�lands- I'm just very� concern�ed about tYi�is pa.rticular plan. My� mairr concerns are these � AIR POLLU'rIOiV-I don't know why city• council isrr't� concerned about air pollution� in� Aspen. I can�� see the cloud over town� most winter mornings and I db nvt want� to see the Maroon Creek valley generating a cloud of its own: I know that in the revis- ed plan they've cut back on� fireplaces, but I believe they still have an outdoor incinerator.I am worried about pollu- tion from cars because they� have n�ot proposed to upgrade the public transit system to }iarrdle the increased rrumber of people at Highlands. Idling trucks servicing the hotel could a��so contribute to a problem, NbISE POLLUTION'-This is a narrow valley and noise bounces around. The increase in traffic agairr� is my.r main con�cerrr here. Please make a good public transit system and if possible a limit on autos, a pa.rt of any plarr you might approve for the base of Highlands. I•m also concerned about an� outdoor dance floor that I've heard is pa.rt of the plan�: My guests,and I'm sure the visitors at the lodges up the road,always delight' im r _2_ the quset of this vaZley.I�'s special to be so near Aspen; and be in such� a peaceful and rural setting. That would be one of the main attractions of lodging at Hi�}ilan�s rather than in town. Why allow a lodge to be built that destroys one of it's own best potential assets- not` to mentiorr destro,y- ing the peace and quiet of this valley for the rest of us? V�SUAL POLLUTION- I've heard that the planners- im response to their recegtion from Cit,y CourrciZ- have gotten• ri8 of ttis tower that was part of the plan-. Thank God- t5ut' I Yiave to�• ac�finit that if ttiey�were capab].e of comin� u�p with� somet}izng-- like that to begin� with• I•m con�erned with� what their idea of a well designed resort i's. I� bo�hers me that in- their eagerness to get going they�are willing to just patch u� the old plarr, and slap dash sometYi�ng� together that° they� YYope will slide by geople's ob jectiorrs. If they�are so cor�ern�ed wit}i� doing a first class resort tYiat will tie n�othin�g but arr a.sset to the commun�ity wh,y� dic3n,'t they.� think� of th�ese thi"rrgs (air, rroise, visual pollution� etc. ) to begim witYi��. and why� aren't the,y now �oing back to the drawin•g��board to come up with a new proposal in� which the solutions are n�ot� just tacked on� tiut are iM�tegrated irrto the whole plan�? I'm curious about all these proposed new and renovated old hotels, Skiing is no� a growing sport. Where are the people coming from who are going to fill them and wh,y wiZl they sta,y� at H-ighlands rather than�• im town-� ift' its just� annther overdeveloped mess ? If there's to be a rrew hotel complex aft the base of Highlands, it' should Yie kept� small and urrique ! � -3- and in scale with this valley= to attract� the guests it� wi:•11 need to keep it solvent.Better to have a full, small, well planned development, compa.tiBle witri� rat}ier tharn overwh�elm- ing the lovel,y setting its irn,ttiarr• a half empty� overdeveloped complex that might go broke. and would be more appropriate to Snowmass or Keystone than-� to a heretofore primarily- resicierr- tial community, Please rememb�er that apa,rt from being a special home for the people who live here, this is also th'e gateway to a popu2ar wilderness area. Irresponsible dev�elop- ment here negatively impacts the interests of a lot of people and benefits ver,y few. If there's ever to be a rrew hotel com- plex at the base of H'ighlan-ds it should be a well plann•ed little jewel, wi�;h mirrimal impact om the surrounc3ing area. TYie proposed plan- is none of the above- please do not approve it. Ttiankyou for taking the time to read thi's- Sincerely.�� Debora Bradford .,.��r�i ......�._..e._...,..._.._.._..._.__.......... _ � / 2`� � , r^ , 1 (,_' (�!1. C.!'. .�'l��.i .-;• _.-., c<� . ! . . . . �. �:.�... � .. . �...�.j • 1683 Lochridge Road _. , ,, : :.._..„ ; ._._.._.v................... Bloomfield Hills, ; ;_.:: :;cct : �� :[��5 Michigan 46013 September 9, 1985 Commissioner Robert Childs Aspen Pitkin County Planning Commiasion 506 E. Main Aapen, Colorado 81611 Dear Commiesioner Childe: I am encloaing a copy of the documente from George Lloyd and A1 Rhoada regarding the Aapen Highlands development propoaal. As you can see, these documenta ahow a major relocation of the town houaee to move them downhill, the elimination of Che tower, a reduction in height of the restaurant, and revisiona to the uae of Glen Dee Road. All of these iteme have been of concern to me, especially the firat and the last. It was on this basis that I said to you in our phone conversation of September 9th that the de•�e�opere have ' satisfactorily addressed my concerne regarding direct impact on my property. I also commented at that time that the combination of the propoaed development p2us the previously approved development made far too many dwelling uniCa for the environmental situation and for the aize of the mountain. It was for these reasons that I stated I atill do not support the project. I appreciate your interest in my views on this subject. Yours truly, -}�o u, � K� G�.�..Q Enclosures ; l � _ �. .. .__M _ W _ � � HOWAAO NEEDLES TAMMEN 8►BERGENOOFF September 5, 1985 Mr. Noward Kehrl 1683 Lockridge Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48013 ASPEN HIGHLANDS - PROPOSEO DEVELOPMENT ASPEN, COLORADO HNTB PROJECT N0. 9214-21-00 It was a pieasure meeting you and your wife in your beautifu1 home in Aspen on September 4, 1985 to discuss proposed modifications to the Aspen Highlands project. I trust you can see from the sketch studies that we sincerely desire to work with you and your neighbors to address the concerns that have been previously raised. I am enclosing one copy of 2 sketches shown to you at our meeting as you requested. Three major modifications to the plan are: 1. Relocation of cottage units to provide a minimum of 300' physical separation between the nearest cottage and your house which would be landscaped with trees and vegetation to provide a "screened buffer" . between the proposed deve7opment and the existing residential area. 2. We are showing a restricted, on-site circuTation road system for the hotel project which does not connect to Glen Dee Road. We do not wish to provide a secondary access to the hotel and ski-base area from Glen Dee. Hawever, if for emergency reasons the local fire department desires a second means of gaining access to the development through Glen Dee Road, we can provide a link that would be controlled by acceptable barriers (gates, chain, etc.) that would allow only emergency access and prevent any hotel traffic on Glen Dee. As you will recall at our meeting, Aspen Highlands is willing at your request, to participate in maintaining Glen Dee (snow plowing, etc.). 3. We have also proposed lowering the height of the restaurant and the elimination of the clock campanille as an alternative with some minor revisions to the hotel lobby - to address concerns for height. We believe that your principal views from your home have been preserved and that the aforementioned items should satisfy the concerns that ;/ou've raised. ArchlUds Enpim�n Pl�mm� 9200 W�rd paAcwq�P.O.9os 49i,Nanu�Clly,Mla�ouH Wl�t,!16 93�-�E00 P�An�n James F.Fnn PE,Paul L He�neman PE.Geram F Fo■PE.Biowrong Crow PE.Charles T Hennigan PE.Eaga�B Jannson PE Ddroe1 J Yla�tms PE. DarnMJ SpgaiPE.JOh[L ColtonPE.FranaSX HaiIPE.flobe�IS ComaPE.DonalOA.6up�esPE.Wdi�amLoveAIA.ROberID M�uc�7E,JamesL Tuutc.Jr PE.Hu9nE ScnauPE. Cary C,Gooaman AIA.Goraon H S�aney.Jr.PE NwcldM Damel J Appel PE.Foberl W R�cnartls PE.Oon R Oq PE.Fretlenck M Slerpeni PE.Roberl 8.Koumar PE.Kenaall i Lmcoln CPA Jack P S�eao PE. Robe�ts W Smahem PE.Jack C Tnompson PE.R�chartl 0 Beckman PE.Harry D Benossa PE.Ralph E Robaon PE Cec�1 P Coums PE.Slepnen G Gotlaam PE Harvey K.Hammon0.Ji PE.Slanley I Masl PE.Robert W Antia PE.Waller Sharko PE.James 0 Hu55e�1 PE.Ross L Jensen AIA.Frank T lamm PE.Alexantler F S��aay PE JohnW WighIPE.ThomasK DyeiPE.ROnalaW AaionsAlA.H dCrome9utle�PE.8laiseM.CarnerePE.M¢haelP Ingaia�aPE.Bernaitll PrmcePE.5lepnen8 QmnnPE. Saul A.Jacobs PE.James A.Smdn.Ranala F.Tu��er AIA.C F�ank Harscher.III.Ewmg H.Mdier.FAIA.Oougias C.Myh�e PE Oflln� AleRantlna.VA,Alianta.GA.Austm.TX.8ato�Rouge.l.A.Bostan,MA,Gasper.WY,Cha�leslon.SC.Chadesloe.WV.Chrcaqa.IL C�evelana.OH.Da��as.T1C. Denver.CO Faidrel0.NJ.Houston.T%.Ind�aaapohs.IN.Kansas Cdy.MO.4exmgton.KY.Lexmgton,MA.Los Angeles.CA.M�am�.FL.M�Iwauxee WI.M�nneapoi�s.MN Newark.OE.New Yark.NY.O�tanao.PL.Over�an0 Park.KS.Phdadelpn�a.PA.Pnoen�:.AZ.Ra�eph.NC.SealOe.WA.Tampa.fL.Tulsa.OK.Pena�q.Ma�ays�a. - - i _ �._._rr _ _ Mr. Howard Kehrl September 5, 1985 Page Two We would appreciate ynur sending a letter to the County Commissioners stating that you have no objection to the proposed development incorporating the proposed amendments outlined herein. We look forward to working with you and shall keep you apprised of the project progress. � RT . NOADS, A A PRINCIPAL ARCNITECT AFR:dmk cc: George Lloyd Bruce Maxwell Jim Gustafson e v�� e..�, �" 5' )'� ��' ' �� R �` • � , � , � ` �� .l . . t .� ^ . �n � `{ r- _.-, �- �� ., �� 'b� R-U^ . , � �� :, �-1� -S;�G G�,�-- �=�' 8 �� lr �: ., _. . _�....._...- --(�,�+�s � � �. C�, �'� L- ?-,v �,..,�y�, r�} w�---.'� c� 6 .. . � ��`�,,.._. l�c� '��'�''s'v`' � � ,:..�.�.-�;.;""S : � �,.�.1"� �-z,,, �.,� �,,,�.�.�,,,�,...L� �-�,•.� �-�� -�. � ��..�� .� � � � / .�!,, r } � c..r�� ,f-v S!�'t n,�c-+S.c �-"�,el '�"``�"-c �^N'(y�-I`�.,�. �.nJ,� N f•••r 6 • : �, ` �.`' �� ,�u c..�-,.,�.�, . 1 - ( �� 1.�s � �r�--�� a,��-. y"�� .:1 j�L.t-� �""�� !� �L� 1 , � . I �"`( �..,�.�-� � : �-il TC 3 � �o ; + ; � ; ; --- -�� i 2� LANCE L. LUCKETT �/�` P.O. BOX 1389 • ASPSN. COLORADO BIB12 O �" ` D � : � M / � / � � � � ; Tom Blake, Chairman r�,;--, �,-. , , � Pitkin County Commissioners , , 506 E. Main St. ��;�:;-;� ;. , . . , Aspen, Co. 81611 n _ �Y �� C,�-I D�::c (} '�L'U�/�{,(�, st:�,:;��t . � S Dear Mr. Chairman, - __._ I would like to take this opportunity to express my opposition to the proposed World Class Resort at the Highlands Ski Area. I do not feel that the Highlands should be allowed : to use Glen Dee road as an access to this new development. Specifically I question if any type of siqns used would deter traffic. Once motorist have knowledqe of this access they will use it! Currently, the motorist who use this road speed, causing dust to fly everywhere. If this road were to be improved it would have to widened, which at night sounds like they'll drive right into my bed. , I feel the only access to the new project should - be on Maroon Creek. Thank you for your understanding. �� , Lance L. Luckett Highlands ViZlas � 6 � � � 1 � ,� � I �� Q], HEATHERBED ��, , �� .t:,� � �t f ia p� ' �, , II 't ��`` J' ''��..' 1 ; � �;i :�� i'� p! .� , �,' ,�� , Lod e & Guest Ranch " �` '��I�1r�� 1',� �`� -�n g �' ' -- .a�--� r�;�, `;� Maroon Creek Rd. "�.� - � �� _ � . ` �,, ,�� ` P.O. Box 530 _,,h � � - - - f�� - Aspen, Colorado 81611 � , �r w �_ � . .; � � ,a�A��r -�1 . Tel: (3031 925-7077 �`'�`� '_'�,r--:�tt�a,�� ,� � �, -1 �� -� �� y�� , � �f �, ��IVED �F a 9 1985 Cc'� C�� . _........ . �.�. �d�� _ G ,5--a b .�-�.�L 7��--�-~� �,/d// l-IG�v5 , � �'o ,�� v . I'-�fcrr,,,,.l�c (�,�s�.�s- c��. � :� � ��.�-� �� _� 7�� ,�___J � �-�- �/�c, dG �fl--� r.� , u�'' �G� � ' � • ,,..�.a�cJ /� �c 7` �� '� � . - � L�e-v�-�a't� � �t/.-�-�-� C�.r � �!3[.�-�',,� f�- �c_�� o_.� /��1 ,�`�— ��f��, ,,L �j .�,�� . �/� ,_.c�t� �D�/�� ?� . � O ' �i�� .�L�—,4/��• _/��i�� j � �� G� //' C/ -�� `t� • / . / ,/I ,' ,�`� �t�� d'C./' 7 ��i(�'i`� �� --°� � ��"� 1 iC.�.-e� �/�c�--�i c�ci( . GC./ ! C�/-�,,e-�"�� >.�-�.�� ,� . y ,- / � �.� ' /G�C LG J ��C��i`� / � � � � � ` �ezay �. l�e9an, 1�.1�.eS. R�CEIVED . ��ets�d� l�cnEac ec�n« SEp 9 1985 �.C�. J�ox I !z5 � 333 �Wy• 82 ADMiNIS7i�ATION �41act, eoca�ado 8,6z, 927-3776 •---- �,�:�. c�.�� CA,��,�,oK� : - ,. . . � :- ,��,�... �1 � -. ^ � _�►..��............../.�. � (�. ,'.. j _.. . -i.L.��LIGGt� C��. . __�x__._.,.____ 1 0.� (Nv a� �N�.o '�.t�� 1� �'LS �►�t� C Q KCQ�� oL�ooti�li i� rQ.00.w�.�l ��►T' owT' �Eti� —D � ('�2 1�"� �� 1� Gvo�+lZ ��4es �•�� "��''0e.� __.. �� a� � ;� ! Car� �r�c�..�, i� eokcQ�.wo U `1 V` �la�� a �.Q�� °� � � � �, � � I�o��- �.� ;� eo�.�P � � � � � � �� ,�� , �.,�..� �: � � ►1 i� Jt �o♦S do� °'^ � Jor1 h.e� a.e�� - pe�- �e�sv�1 � 1 � N�r f� �..�C �O��oeb _ `2� � �� w.h..ow� � rMOK�1.� `�,.� w�o�L� �°'l �� .. l� .i,.�.�..w, `�Z �..�`�. ,12,e,okou� � �o a� �1 � � ca�-s r�..��':.y., G,�x�h„se /e L+�.� tM o��c�.�w �L �2. 3,I ;�.:-.. � r � o ��,,� �o ct(lo c��i �..•, � G�,� i s cN^ �U � _ `�.S --�;�, i U � ve�.,j:�I.��S %�"', � 1�,�Q�, � �,.�, ;� .,.� �,. � ;- �� . ��.o � �.� w� ko � � � �� -�r. . L� I� Jes�.�Ls ti., �^ Ca.� ho 1Q�t�i� �� V o � `� ��.,��",� --� -�t.�k �"`� 'D��• S�C:.� � -- ;� � -�- � �. Q��S�� n�.�%•si3 w ,� � _ ,'T -c�,: `�''�j�' = �°��- �4�.. `�° .� �`�If° v�,. � �,.�, c, ; � L�E�,:�.��i�Ep � SEp y � 3 j :. ADMINIS7RATION � c 5��' S/�� i � 'lfNr. . �U Y� �� n�� S�� f, �'1a�;�., ��, i .,..-',;� ,. r.,�_ : : .. . �� _.. . . P7;'i;.x,.l �., , J )�� CC� l�' 1(>1/ �i'.c t;eari:>r '.: ::,, ��. � - • . �—�Q; c`SS_. � � � . � _� . ___.:. ��5 �� ,,...--- - -;�----_ (r-) � ��} - !LP 3�,.Q�z-�. � � �� -�r�-- I�S�G,..,.,f S',,,Q d - � . (� , w��.,� G,��,4� � , 1�i.w �3 C �..r �� :�.�'"`['Q.nc^wti,c /U�2,u,,, `�.,qa,�.�,,�.( � � �q� � � �Y'"C �►�QS , � �� s,n-�• ati,� 3 '`t .��.- U �S{.�r( /tw,V;� � �� / ��r� � � ; ��-. �='�� .�,1�►-:.s ,�t,��- � ,,,�,�,�-�.. •J C� � � S�•S �;, r,..,n�-'�►�/"��. ', I ! . S� �,�,,, . C� � �I � ,�� - ; , ; ; � , ....�..�w- .-_ .� � _ _. ��.r- � . 1 � . 1 � i . :. . � ' , _ �f �d�a�d .C�. ��,�taKQ . .:s;:_�. ��.:,;.,. �: , � ?� , ,: . , ;. ,. , , ,. eoX 96, 3 -. . : _a_. _�.�. .. ' Hazard, KY 41701 ' ` `° �� .`;;:!'�j:;C t �-� � - - -- . I _.. . . ---- �� :I August 2s, 19$S '! .� l � � ; Pitkin County Commissioners . � S06 E, Main Street � Asperi, 'Colorado 816I1 ' Dear County Commissioners: I am a resident of Pitkin County. My home is located at the base of Aspen Highlands Ski area next to Smuggler Lift. My 'i living room windows face into the base of the ski area and � there are few people who would be more visually impacted than myself. I have reviewed the site plan submitted by Aspen Highlands and feel renovation of the Highlands base area is a must. The site plan as submitted may have some problems but it is a j great starting point. i The most appropriate way to address these proble�s and con- � cerns is to allow Highlands the opportunity to mitigate and � improve the proposed project. To outright reject the sub- � mission would not be in the best interest of our subdivision, � Pitkin County or Aspen. I urge you to allow Highlands the opportunity to continue { through the approval process by granting general submission � approval. I P.espectfully, � � �� , Edward . Clemons � ELC:ef ( � I � �:�:=—`------ — - —=-..n=s-.a..._........._. __._ .__ . � � r.:.. :��_�_ �� . + • ' r-uUli.c r�;. _ ( ' LU l.O .. ._..• - l a vv � � � y Subjcct . _ . �� "�' ( �, �: Y•yt , '- T - '- .,'lJ�lf/1 � i�N 1 CO�ORAOJ d+S �Jy - .��{P�1�. CY"� / � �/..-��. -- � - ..�. i G�� , � � � �� -- G� �-�.. �°e— ' �`�'.�" — � �%�� f�� - �`�LGw`�' ..�v�� ,�._...� ' , �f �. U �4�— �-.�� ,, ti �� ' �� :;c clRCULATE i r� 0� � �.�.`" , i , ._.,._ , �.� � ; 6,��uciis � ��---��,J � F=.� �::erud ,+r. � � t�':. --�n � .� ��k. . c �ic�:�r�� to Administrat�on � �I i , � . ..........._ ....._._ .._. i. . � ' i i--;.-;) '�T1�`;�� c" - - , 'PLEASE CIRCIA.AT� ��` � ' 1 ...J...r i::;tlr_%:_ � � �1 � �r I /"1 :� `.�..-.� � Blake :� ' � - •n " ♦ I ��;� �:.�� .� t- - ... Child -�_ �'� ; . - -____---- -- -----� Braudis .�i i Kiande�:��' ' — i Mac�., . ;/�^.-------- Elii��t � ; _^ , . i 111r. Tom Hlake R�_��:'": _ ..�:tM�nistl'8�Of1 ; County Commisaioner i Pitkin County Cour'thouse `. 506 E. ;•iain Street ' Aspen, CO 81611 � � �eptember 5, 19ti5 ' i R.N.: Aspen Highlands Base Area Master Plan. � There seems to be descrimination in tne way Aenen Hignl�nds � was given anort shrift by the Pitkin County P & Z. It' s , not the firat time that Highlands got the underdog treat- i ment� �lhen the giant bse-of-ths-Aspen i�ountain hotel (which will � have a deadly 3mpact directly on the City, from visual to i auto pollutionj was being considered, all those envolved ` with the application were repeatedly sent back to the � drawing board for changes and improvements. � It is t:�erefore hard to understand wi�y Aspen Highlande � representatives were given a flat NO -- "come back next � year". Whatever the "proper`' proceedure ie ( I admit I � know little about it) it is not fair to let Aspen Higi'�lands I waste �. year, wnile cltf-county kEeps diacussing improvecoents. � It ia tne oni;� pr�posal for that area, after z�any years of � statue quo. I As to the complalnin� ad�acent homeowners - t'r.ey are fust j - lixe tY�ose who ouild homes around an existing airoort and � then complain about the noise� i I w�nder how many would 'nave lived there wnen the aromatic ; �make from the ola city dur�p drifted aver. Well, �s�en ; rii�=�lands livecl witn ine stencn Gnd survived. So did t�s ; BKj.@X'S. Today's �r�na4ltants sr�uldn' t have mucri tr�ucle ' wi�h som� trai�ic in �1I�•T� , a i ter tne cruncii tnis suLc�er i ; � i 1 � � � , ; � � ; � ' I , � As�en hi�yhl&nds - pa�� 2 . � I hope you will give the proposed Aspen Highlands World � Class Resort and Ease �srea rdaster Pl�n and even break and ; proceed t� consider tr.is propoeal witnout further delay. � Thank you. ' Sincerely, � �i�� , � u �� 2�t , � • I i 1 i �c�eorgie Leighton ' F.O. Box 1431 j Aspen, CO 81612 . ! � i I � . i ; i � � ; � a � ; - . , . ('� - �:.L�ASE CIRCULA'T� . . .,. .� :� ,_ E��!%e � - - :.... . _ -. ---- C�;> � ��.r �t�i.dis � September 3, 1985 ;..� � '��ud f ' . . .'�t County Commissioners E:;.. ..�i � 506 East Main Street � Aspen, Co. 816I1 F,:::�.us�� to Administratiol�. Dear Commissioners: I am writing in support of the Aspen Highlands Base Area Project. Their sound and viable idea offers much to improve the overall� out- • look for Aspen as a competitive ski and resort area. It is time we a7.1 realized that we are living in a resort community. We are dependent on tourist dollars to keep our own local economy on the rise. Recently, the Planning and Zoning ruling against the Aspen Highlands Proposal (along with City Council 's approval of a no-smoking ordinance) causes justifiable concern as to whether it is the interests of the community or of a few certain individuals that are being served by our local government. The Highlands also deserves more consideration for their undying comit- ment to serving the local skier by providing a season pass when it would be very easy to follow the competition by doing away with it. The High- lands Idea deserves our support - if not for what it will do to enhance the Aspen vacation experience, then for what it will do to improve the competitive position of Aspen Highlands against a ski company that seems to have lost all concern for the local skier. Please, let '� not again lose sight of the forest for the trees! Sin r y, /'�., Roger Rabalais Aspen, Co. _ . i ; .. � , , . .. � -� � . _.. : � , � 3 Mr. Alan Bush � � � . 210 E. Hyman # � - , . Aspen, CO 81611 .,. _ , _ .�-,Q � . : , . _._. .__ A� _..1��-"`''`.�' August 21, 1985 ___. C�unty Commissioners 506 E. Main Street Aspen, CO " 81611 Dear Commissioners: . I am a S year propery owning full time resident of Aspen and Pitkin County, and 10 years in Colorado. Aspen has only recently begun a long, long overdue face lift and upgrading that is essential and necessary if we hope to regain our World Class image or to. even hold on to our fading one. The rest of the sIci industry has grown moaern and convenient. Many skierS want this as the success of Vail and 5nowmass document. Aspen and most of Pitkin Count}� does not. There£ore we have a much more difficalt task. We must find a way to regain our lost lustre without destr•oying the p esr 1.. We have major decisions to make regarding parking, transportation, air quality, smoking� image and still attract the new and the returning visitor - the econom3.c basi.s of our area. A.spen Highlands has long been a quaint, somewhat shabby but fri endly eyesore, with great skiing most people {visitors) pass by. It continues to treat lucaZs with respect and care - it still provides a reasonably priced true season pass. Now Aspen Highlands wants to move into the 20th century with a conceptually grand idea which could help revitalize our whole community. What reward does this faitliful friend of the 1oca1 receive? They are told to shove ii; off the ill fated clock tower and wait a year before even beginning again. Pitkin County :►as too many ottier problems just now. The probl�n with this approach is tl�at the econom3� NOW allows a project such as this to be started. Delay, as Dave Farney and Little Annies� ski area testif;, too long and the opportunity is 1cst� possibly £orever. The blanket rejection from the P&Z is not what this community needs. Even dirty pearls can be polished. Those thrown away are rarely found again. _ . _ ---�-� { . _ ....__.... . .. . ;.i ':. page 2 August 2s, 19$S I therefore request that you the County Commissioners find a way to reconsider the already upgraded proposal for redevelopment of Aspen Highlands. If it is flawed, then work to remove the fla�vs and improve the specifics. Work With Them. To be trite, but accurate, '� Don�t throw out the Baby with the bathwater�� . • Pitkin County must accept tourism - even encourage and promote �t - it is our l:ifeblood. At ��he same time, we must work to mitigate the impact on the residents ar.d the rest of the corununity. But neither goal requires standing still in a moving world. I sincerely hope that the County Commissioners realize that without some exciting new projects such as the Aspen High2ands proposal� Aspen will loose f orever its once shinning status and its source • of economic vitality. If th�t is lost, then we need not co ncern ourselves with growth limitations - A Ghost Town Needs None. Very sincerely concerned, �� ''� Alan Bush I , 3� August 13, 1985 Whip Jones, President �' (.Q_'� , Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. 1600 Maroon Creek Road Aspen, CO 81611 Dear [Jhip: I have followed with great interest the plans for developing the base area lodge/hotel at Highlands. It was certainly a disappointment to learn of the P&Z decision. Any of us who have been associated with resorC association activities or are tuned in at all to the economic structure of this community are aware of the need for high quality lodging and meeting facilities. I personally support your efforts and am most hopeful you wilZ be able to achieve reconsideration. Having been privy to the plans for the hotel, I am indeed impressed and am most hopeful that you and your staff will be successful in convincing the persons who make the decisions to favorably consider your enterprise. Not to be critical of any past efforts or facilities at Highlands now, but in my opinion, new facilities are certainly in order and would be a great enhancement to your excellent ski area. If there is any way that Z• can assist in he2ping make your project become a reality, I stand ready to do so. Sin ely, Glenn Scott GS/wa i I i � 3 August 15, 1985 County Commissioners Pitkin County Court House Main Street �-�� -� Aspen, CO 81611 . � � Dear Commissioners, � - - The purpose of this letter is to support the Aspen Highlands Wor1d Class Resort Submission. I am a resident o� Pitkin County. Bef ore I Wd5 a resident of Pitkin County I was a resident of FrankZin County in the State of Massachusetts. While a resi8ent there I served in the Office of Selectman for a three year term from 1981-1984. As a Selectman I also served as the Planning and Zon�ing Board for the �•own of Warwick. On a ffrst hand basis I know the responsibilities and considerations that come into play when dealing with the submission and approval process. It is a fine line tha� sometimes determines approval or deniai. In these cases we always: 1. thoroughly examined, ourselves, the application, and 2. gave opportunity to listen to public input so we were responding not only from the codes but also f rom the present needs and concerns of the community. I f eel confident in your commitment to responding to and serving the needs of the county as a whole. I support your eff orts in taking the time to review the Aspen Highlands World Class Resort submission- yourselves. As a resident ot Pitkin County, I personally see this proposal as beneficial to all of us here. We are competing in a world market to maintain ourselves as a top notch resort area. Highlands response to World Class f acilities and its f ocus on year round service`s will benefit this community, and i f or one, support them. Sincerely, C�� / . Linda Rurkoski Snowmass, CO iCCz_ Aspen Hi_ghlands�Skiing Corp. � Pitki,n� County Planniiig�'& Zoning Board ,_�_ ____��__._ ��.LL..��..�� - �5�0 Ep„o� ta L ��a��s � � RECENTLY THE PITKIN COl1NTY PLANNING AND ZONING CONfMISS]ON REJECTED PLANS BY THE ASPEN HIGHLANDS SKIING .COPORATION TO BUILD A WORLD CLASS RESORT AT THE BASE OF THE HIGHLANDS, THE PLANS CALLED FOR A BAVARIAN—STYLE RESORT COMPLEX FEATURING AN INfV WITH�300 ROOMS, . , � MEET I NG ROOM FAC I L I T I ES� AND� A EURQPEAt�—STYLE� 150�CLOCK TOWER AS THE FOCAL POINT F�R THE COMPLEX, , ,ALL THE INGREDIENTS NECESSARY TO BR1NG I NCREASED BUS 1 NESS A�lD CONT I NUED PROSPER I TY TO OUR COi�il�{UN I TY, THE UNAN I�10US DEC I S I ON BY' THE PLANN I NG AND ZOfV I NG COh1t�I SS I Oi� TO FLATLY REJECT THIS PROJECT 4�AS IRRESPOSIBLE, THE COMMISSQN CLAIMED THAT THE PROJECT FAILED TO MEET THE STAP�DARDS OF THE COUNTY'S PLANNING CODE� AND HAD CONCERNS OVER SUCH ISSUES AS POLLUTION FROM INCREASED TRAFFIC� AND COMPLAINTS OF PROFERTY OWNERS LIVING NEAR THE SITE. ;' 1T WOULD SEEM IiJ THE BESt INTREST OF THE COMMUNITY AND IT'S ECONOMY, TO OFFER THE NIGHLANDS A CHAfJCE TO AMEND OR I�9PROVE ANY OF THE ELEMENTS OF TNE PROJECT THAT WERE NOT 11P T0 STANDARDS. , .RATHER TNAN REJECT TF{E PLANS, THIS ACTION COMBINED WITH THE ATTITIlDE OF HOMEOWNERS NEAR THE PROJECT SITE WNO COMPLAIPJED OF PO5SIBLE NOISE. . ,BRIGHT LIGHTS� AND VISUAL POLUTION ARE ALL APART 0� THE PROVINCIAL AND CAVALIER ATTITUDE THAT STYMIES GROWTH AND PROGRESS IN THE ASPEN N�� AREA. j� TNIS IS NOT A COMMUNITY THAT , IS SELF SUSTAINING. . .WE ARE1 A RESORT CENTER THAT THRIVES OFF THE � ACTIVITIES I��I�CH CENTER IN "AND FiROUND THE f•i��iVTAINS SliR�OUidD1f�G ASPE«, IT IS IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE THE NATURAL BEAUTY THAT WE NAVE BEEN �� BLESSED. AND SO LONG AS IT IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATIOPI WITH PROJECTS � THAT ARE WELL PLANNED AND TASTEFl1LLY DONE� THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE SHOULD TURN OUR BACKS ON PROGRESS. THE ASPEN HIGHLANDS DESERVES A CHANCE TO CONTINUE TO BE A THRIVING ENTERPRISE SO THAT IT �1AY HELP TQ MAKE ASPEN WHAT IT TRULY IS, . ,A WORLD CLASS RESORT. . J G1-(O , .� � �� __r _. .� . _ PLEASE ciF�i;n a�p�' �`�+ �/ . ,�du<and .C�, e�e�xa�cd Blake -� � . aox s6� Child �� Hazard, KY 41701 � Bravdi� K[•�,. � (V� �2 August 28, I985 /�...�` E U F�...w... ... ,-�:::ninistration` Pitkin County Commissionexs �✓{O � , 506 E. Main Street � �� Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear County Commissioners: I am a resident of Pitkin County. My home is located at the base of Aspen Highlands Ski area next to Smuggler Lift. My living room windows face into the base o£ the ski area and Ghere are few people who would be more visually impacted than myself. I have reviewed the site plan submitted by Aspen Highlands and feel renovation of the Highlands base area is a must. The site plan as submitted may have some problems but it is a great starting point. The most appropriate way to address these problems and con- cerns is to a11aw Highlands the opportunity to mitigate and improve the proposed project. To outright reject r_he sub- mission would not be in the best interest of our subdivision, Pitkin County or Aspen. I urge you to allow Highlands the opportunity to continue through the approval process by granting general submission approval. Respectfully, �` �' � �� _ Edward . Clemons ELC:ef ,�..,.�_ _ � _,_.� _. . _ ;�' �� r,-- _ _ ` ,� , � �$ f �L -L�� ,� � . �- ' /'-�`l�� rr�im.a � � �„ �,�5 �� 3 ; . � �c _ . � � ` �-� ' G � . _ _ � ... . � � - ;prr C�'e � u��m l'� ... D� lc�� :� ��dz. ��.�, .�� :.�5'.'°��° � " ��„ J ' ` ' � n,� . EXHIBIT . (i0� • �.Gl/� {�Yl/L(�..�.P . I,J/ ,�'(� V�� - .. . G�. � DO l,vn.�.�" CO � �lv �ae .�,1�-�� ;�� t�� : �" - a .. o� � br,�e. U .�c-� ��' t �C�� =� - . �.�. n2�n . � . �� rn s . �1 -� C� r� � a�-e . � ��- ��,�, -. �� wv�� . . �.e ��u.a1� d� � G-oc�� . �.,� �-. �-�,,�.:e�0 � �b . ��'� �nn�,� ,��-� z�.e� a�;,�.e�� c,�, �t;� �� -e� : ..e� /�'�� .� ' . �o a nu�-�.� � .�'� ��-►� , � � � �� . -�;�� -� . � � . ��,-f � .�-� �-r�-a�-�c e._.�.�-� : _ u.�1�o ./1.�� ` � � �d � � � '�.��, � '� �Zc-� 4� ��.Q 1L2��u-� � �.� � l . . �: � �� .; . � �-�� - �� ;. � J � �-e. � a ��s � �� a�-�-c,�,� � . l � oJ�.e -�-b � ��u.�- h� � , R � -5 ' ► � � '' •i 1 ✓ V 1. . �, . � �d.��, �� .. �; � G ,. .. ___._ .._.. _.. -- - _-__'_'__'.,_. .r... . .. .. ._._.___. .. . .. . . . i..�2 ��d ,c.-1-�c.�. .� � : c�.� -��— r�, � S :�..:�.�.- � _ . -- -�..��m. � � �� - . � ;.. t� �,.a(-�:�~�-e � i s ' � ` s ; , - � . :�v � . �j : . ��-�.,r ��-- ��.�-�..�--� � .� Qurl��t ,�G(�„�GG� ...� �d i,bi� .�it� ./1�� C� r.�J�.�., -�� P O � P�- ... C�-� �0 C'� ,�.�v�c..e,� �-� ��`� . . � � 1�Q-S�'-�'C,�Q^ . � . . . �� c�- `,�/ -�',� ��` , . . . ��.� a� �� . ` � �� (� c.�-� �� .��;�, � � ��; �� r C�-�,-�-c,� mr -�v d��-,,� �,r,-�.� ��.,-�-e • �.-¢-� ; �,,.,..e.p �''�-- � �,1.e� � .��..Q� i . ... .v-�t� �e C�,�i� .e.st�i.. a-r...� �� . i . �� a � , . r�� J .� ,�� C� �-�--C� i Y'n 1 . �j ' . ,'(��e �'C.' a� � ,e,+�-��t�-� � � ..�..�� o . �-°� ��.�, �.- � . �o ��,�.��_� e� t�:c-�..� �..��-� d� . � �c,7,,..� ,r� � l�- E , ,��--� . 1�' 1� � � � : • �! �� .'t/�l �I �x-�'�� hV`YJ�W'^'' 7J .� ` a�-d1 �'G , . ��►�► S ��-�d �� 1 �� . � o?'.� � � re� � �� r�J . � , - Yct�rr �-cv !t-��-�fs �u�,�.�n�-c�` - ac �u'�`�- . i .....:.�,w. _..._...__ .... . __;:. - -- .- -- - - ---------- � ---- . . , ; r,�r ��r---�.� : � - ... .- . _ . . __ . _..------ ._ ... _.. . . . . ..--- . ._ (,� � � .��.� �� . ( . , .. � �� . � .. �s � ' ,�.U,��..�-P c��.� �;. �� ' • , a ... .c� �'�;►� �:�.,�,�- r� � . ` tn 1 ;: �`.�... ' ` . � .�� ; , ... ,�,� ,�s�.�.`�r`r" � �� + ...,�.��6�,�— GQ.�e G�� G,� G�� i . . �� Ab ►�-�Qy�� h�- �.Q p } : l.J ��,c�C�p V , V � i�`-'� �K. !�, �ZV � �f t) �2?� C'�''� �T1Z,�� !. _ � �1�2 �?�n�rnc�i��-�- � �a`.`'-�-. ` r�r� ��,��."��i-�,.-�.� � -v ' �rf��m �D �l�e� �. ._ ; . ; � w!l i�"��w'"L��Fi'w �/.��i�� ✓" `�-^' 13� r ' �� . �n� P�r�� =� v�- v�-r�,b� �. � r�� . � F•. � � -� ,��'� � �� a.�� . . � C�e?�� -�e� „�.�Nj-�-�yl, �� ' _ � d2 � �t� -�-�, l�—�- � � �,� {�.�.,�.� . � : .. ,��.. �.�1-�..C.�:�—j �, �.,; ' �1 (��y,..e� -h �,v ; ��}-�� .. ;�.� � ,� � , '� ` � . . � i�G � � � Q�n��.c��-�-��-- ; . �e c�''`�'.�— "�,'�`'" �C..e �°�-e �� `�" �� _. ��.� � �..�.��,..,_ . • ...__.-�--. ;� D� .. .: �9� � -3°�e� � ��,�,,, . �a � . --- --__ �� 5�� . . .,��,,��i+�,', "1��-e . u-.-� ---- �� . � �� . : �� b{ - _ �� ... �.--� �•.e C�-nC� �o-� f,��'� �t.e�u�Co , : �11� p a � � �- �, �,,,; ,�,�� , ... �'t�e.�-�..e� .�,�,. '} '"-� � 1� �`e a rr �c�� . �..-� c,��- q,,r,�,�,.,�� a ��,,,.,Q ,�,.��,....�— � ��-�,�� . , ��-`,�-� . . �- �� h..e�.os o� �.��-- � l��.. G✓�,Q,� �e.�.�,� .�. � �� -,� � �4-C � dr� � �� _, . �'1�e../' �4�0 � � _ . . �- 1 �-e �r�� -�t ,� .��--�- f -� ,�� . � �.�' ,.��-- �� c�le�- � � -�� v � �� - � � � ... � � �� .. �I-�P �- �� , �`,° � � : .- �.�-�,w-. �- ,;� �.,��—�- /� �� .�.�p : S . Gi�,�,,, ' _. �.-1� : ... . i�;� �l�?� h�— �„�� ,d-i,.a.,� -J-� ,�e.. :` ... . � G�, m �t�-�►' � Yk-S�b 5�:�-Lo-� �� .. _ � � � � ,;�. �Q,� , ; .. S .� . . W �- c� l.��c�,.�-�.. � � . � c�� -� �-� rz� �, y�'.,� �''� �,��- � c,�-� - `�` W Q �-`'-�`-- '�°�" �'`'�"�7 " U . � n� �m��-r�-s I,c� c�.e . �a� � a_ .. .�..�. __ -- -- --- , „ L ... ---�-- ----�_— w-64J�., _.�-2. ��,�� .�e _ _ ... �� ,� �� .e . � �� , . _ _ .. �� ... �/ � �� — � �� - �� I �C� OtG St�,.-e.� GJ �-4� , ; � ,�'�-� �� , ' ; t+�nc� ' � �� =� l�n� ? � � ---. �?�-� ��,�,�zL � L�� .��e, �.�'R-e�.-D `�` 5 . �in?�`'�''�'"'� � �.�� t�� J/�J,I�/�L4// �j,�jw./(L��/// � I ... �'�. ��-�� _V� I I �... �C��7 � � �z-C.. ��.C,� �j� G1-�-� � . . �� v�e-.�- � a8 ` ,��- �.�_�J � � 1��5� ��--�. oa ;1�:.� �.�-d�c u� � � , � . �c�s�'i�....�,�--f .�,.,� ��(��,-,�,� ' ; o � �r-n.e� � �yreo4 , Q-,-� �� i�'�� `�n°��-- e� ,�.t� ��,,,��r,?�J � � � a�-�-c�� r-a-� �/o �t �c��Q�� ; ✓� ��v ? � ,s � �.. /� � i ... �'" �'m� • �°a� -�..�- • : �, � �'�� C 5��..' �.�,, ', . . :, , � �� iI��Z�-� ,� ° . . L�--� .� � �'i'ie !�-v�`t'--,--C_ � � .�--=� ', w'f�c.� /'7,d�3 `, �� '(.�'-' G� ,T9-C� L� , -�. � o� G1� ��- ��z✓�t.G.�� .�� k�� • ti �-r� c � � �� 'C�- , �l �'�..�-7` �rr�� e ,� � � , �z�-Q.--`� G�-f-d�Y�.--� .�.�� . . �� _ � . �ti�,� � �, . �.`�." � � - s�.;�.e- � �� -�%� ��?-� .�. .� . t�� . � �� I � . .. _._. . ._-•---- .._.. ---- -__ - ---__--_—___ ;i .._ ... � ��J ��C� � :�.� �� _ , . ___._. -- - --.__ ._ � r�� . � ��_� � . _ _ . _ ,.. - � p�,� w� co �,�-�- _ .. ._...... :.. �i��J - -�..a�R �� -c.�-� - '� i� ''G`� �.eJ . ,--, t�� .. �j,�r� . �-� �7��" G�-�•J - -l-�-�l,Q� .. �� -� �� - � � � � .� :; ... � . . ; + :, v,n..t,�. ��'� — -��. �-o� b'o �„ro�-�--� r�-C�,-�— '�D (�n i`Z U l�vn-t�� D�¢-� . � �2_ . �' o c� P G _ c1-Y� v,�--L.� y��, C�. . �,�� '�'� �� '1N�'b ��.,�.p-C.�� Lyt,e.� (�.�'rt �V U'" - )` � ; . ��— .� � r�� l�� . ✓�- ' .�,�� -v 1ra"�. , . � ��?;�,P .��, � �-�' Lf" 1�� . . � . . � c c�� . '� D�}�'}2�s r.�.c-• -�� o�� '�.� ��- � N.� � � �,,,�,�,— w � .�, �,,,�,� �, . �� 1 � ,� � a� � �. �.� �-� . � � . . : � � � ' � h,�-�,o a� -- �f t�.-� �'� �`�� U�'(,f,P c� ,(.� ,��..e. l.� �w� �� . ,� t��,e...o c� � �� ? °�� c�--�G.c� o�-r�P.�� - � o�,�, r ,w�e G��-¢" �/,►'i,b7� • `' - �� o �. .C.,�� . . ; �tl'ri�r'►�r�" co � � ,; .�i _ _ .�.w,..�..� . . �.� ..� _ .� -,_-�-- ---------,_-� _ D�.. � � (1-oz�--� �-.�-�,- r - . --G�-� .__.. ...__ �� I :.. tt� � e e,c.�� tm . _ .._ ..._ _ . _ - -- ---- .. . . � � �� ;r�^i'�''"' ... . .. - ; � � �m.c�es►�.g �.�es��l lL,, ��-c. Po �—�( � --d�e� � � -�.-�-� -�,�-� � tM=�,�:.� e-� � c�..� , .�n.� ov+,v' ` • . . . - i .1� • ffi � �.e S Y��'`�"' ' �-�-2> �� " � . � �` •�,�,��'v�-e �'u ,ti�.� � • �e�k.G1,a-�s ,o�-a� �'i.��— . � a�l.cJ�.�--- �� 7� a� • � �A f�. ��--- L�"o�.�-d �_ . pv-c�-1 .�..e. C��.-�-- , -- 0� _ r�cl . (,c,,,�c..c,�--� � �ra..f. r,� � k�-� ,v� p , . `��c � ,�,c, .l��c--d � G�- 1�18 �-- �-.ct ..��--� _ lan � C� �� t.re.�, ' . �}--b� 1� �. . � �`�—� � � (�'(p,,,. ,�� ►1 .�,,,� �..,, ��,,� � 1�{,,,:� u d�� .. ��--�.-�-�.-�j , �� .�.n�m ��;, sa�--� o�� bt�.�,�t� -� r� �s '+��d t�-��e. ' �--�a--�-�(� �� 1�$�- � � � S�� , r 5�. r-e,�..� , 5 1�--0� ��+ � � 4 0�0 �1' p � .�-� c�e o,� ��.�-�' �s �s �. �� ` �) a�-- .�1..�, �.�� C�, � , � �''�-�-e r�..�e r-o, �� t,��-�-�G,- 1�-� 1�� , �'��' . . � m�'- �-.� �u�'�� - �� .- �- �° �.-p��-,re� �. ;v�-.'c,�-�-�--� 1 � . . _._ lo,p � �1 . . _ . _ _ . .. . ----__ _ ... �' ___0U�f� Q�..,.� �"D � "�S� �"'e't'� � -�-U � . � �� ..- - - __ j °`�� --�(,�.-c.ai t��o�,� c�.�..s� , �.. :� s �c� � 'ys �,� .. , � � �'� LnC.rzey� :.. ' � b� V-Q-�-�-c� �,..�- 0.�,5� 'd"D -��...-c_ ` � . ... ��-C�'�,Q•►,�c� 11,,rY1-(71,�,-....�" � ' �- � � . - � ... _ � � „r.e ,� � . ... �ti�� • �� '� � �c�.t C � � . _ --� ��- J { ... �.�-� ��-- �.�� '� � � ► ... -� � � w�,�,-� �,,..�.n-�, _�' � � , , � �:. _ . . �-d � �� - .,� �:�� -� � ° �y�y�� -��,.� t - . �o� z�� a-�� ,�-�-Q� . �'�� ,;�-,�.e, o.,+,�' ` - i -''� . --� �.�-Cr— � a oq'o . �/-r� ��Z�(' • �G'^o-e>. 1/�/� tin .�.�C�� ° i 3 ... G,r?ld� �.(�. V ��-�-+�'C �-- sU'.",�S'�---�-r� � G�P�-�, • U �o �� r� � I �. �-�-c., �,,_. . . � . ... � s �� w�-�� aC�-.�--�� , . - ��,,�..�o t� 7`�/�i.� �-,y2.�,.�-- v� �/� '' ,� �,.��. t�-�.(� �.c�--�%-�� s�-� � �� ..� �-a1�e� �-c� �-o � . (�,;�-�(�l..a=-�-�� . ��-e�t (� . L�- c�-P-`-�.. C,�.�..� � ��I . � �.,r � �,____� . � �i . o�, �� ' � ..� �� -�--�-� �� - a .� �`.,Lr(,�� ' D u. _..a _.... . I �i' -. _.. � ' ..__ ';._� � � . . . ...__... _.__�__�___ ... ` ,�� -�2 � ..�-� �h�,�.. '�P ` � _ __---- .---------- : � �� .�- �e � �.�,� ��1�--�� .__ - :, /1, . . . � :; ... v`"p �'.Qir�(�� un �'-P%�2✓�--0' r--�.�_ ? ;I � f . ,�-,l,..e, �,�,�,��I � .� ... ��1 � s-� � � �- �.,.:��_..�Q ' .�..�� ., ... �,.`�e' °� G�-�-v� ',� �--e— � i a - � � � ., .. J- � � , ,�--� ��.1 c�.�- �ul.s�m�z : . z(� . ; .; � ; �Q �--�� "`.�� ,� -�1 � ! . � Q , _ �, (��-� GL�-J�-(��(,^d_.__�__� �C �.rt.�--t� .� � � r�- - - s . � ft.�C�rr�-�--�� ,, "��`�7�7�"�-� �C.�,.._ � � �j �- ��. �.� , y�.c,c-�'-� ��n-o c� �rz�a-a��-P 2!-�` `-�-----� �--zD . � ... � �� . �h. �� ' �,o-Cr�zL( �c.��-=a � � � j'''�1 j�� ,a:7�--c,�9-P ('�1..�—� r .. .��.� �� .a��-f- . - �2�,�c�..r- �.�'� �e ��`� � l�- 7� � �1�� .L �-��-. _. _ , � - '✓� �`? . rz� �� =e. - �.l`:�� . .��=�--� a-� ��. y��. _ �� _ Q . . -� �� _r�.i(/+ni-► G'lJ�j��/'jf/ I�.7 i . G TO '�.�yt v �.� G�E '��C '�e- /LC' (/'�e,..� �� 0 � � � ,�� E��- �. ��,�.e � ��- ,��c�_ r��.�- ,Gc�-� c�. � , � , . _ , " C,��_ ,� , _ -��.a ` � ' �= ,�� ,�'�. �o-� w�.� .� �c �--��c�e. � ��. � Ge .. _ f C. �Y� � . _ , ,, . : ,. . „ ��'� � � �� f � ----.. ._------- ---_. . . -------- � . � �-. - - _ _ --- -- ---�-- _..--..{../�i� f�(/vr�r"'�"'""-' ' Q�(`2' ` . � . _--...�_ :��..�,,.,c ��.e ,� p . :��.e, � e--� . _ J .� , ___._ ._ .,�, (�l, I�r�`�,.e �b r-PS�'� . � � �,� , a � ' - ; . �., .�� . � �� . ,� �� ` . � � �,,�, �,�,�- . �� Z�G � . . ...�'�.-,-' d� P� ... � , . .