HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.104.1985 :�.:.
:a.- , , � , -
��.�- ; � ; � < _'- ;
� ,�' � .'��. x lx�; .�-� � ,«f -
..�''�'�'`~�'�,�. �.�;:�:...,-� <_. , ..3C e.�-.�..t�,liari� `.'�'��.�
1tB.40T.liTIOli OF THg BOARb OF CWttPY COplIISSI017ffiLS OP PI?XIN C001TrY
COLORIlDO, DBNYING TBB GBNffitAL SU8lQSSION APU GROff'�9 lY1liAGBMBNT
APPLICaTIOp OF T8B ASPBN gIGBLl11iDS lidRLD CLA5S RBSOItT
Reeolution Po. 85- 104
Md�t�'A3, oq September l0, 1985, the 8oard of County Commisgioners
of Pitkin County, Colorado (herein�fter "8oard")� reviewed an applf�a�
tion submitted by che Agpen Highlanda 5kiinq Corporation (heteinaftpr
"Applfcane"), requ�sting Ceneral Submiseion approval foc the As�en
Highlands itor�d Cl�ss Regort; and
Mgtlt�ll8, the Board conducted a public hearing on the lOth day nf
�
Sgptemb�r, 1985, upon thr gucation of whethec the above described
Cenerel Submiasion Bhould 6e granted or denied. at which hearfng the
public and interested pereona were qiv�n th@ opportunity to expresa
their opinione reqacdl�q the isaueace oE said application� and
XBRR6118, on JunQ 16, 1985, tAe Pitkln County Planning and Eoning
CoNanission conductQd a hearing on aaid app3icnlion and made a cecom-
mendation oE denial to the Doard� and
MBRRQAB, the Boacd on ebo baslo of the evidence produced at '
- the aloramentioned heacing, �oade tbe tollowing determination oE
Eact:
l. The �oacd encouragee and is in eupport o! a physlcally
approprtato darrelopoaent plan at tbe baee o! Aepen Highlanda.
2. The proposed s;lte design ie incompatible with the uses
existi�g in !ha surroundi�g acea. The propo sal requests an
=F i�►apptopriate resoning from R-30 to AR-1 for an area vhich
- curcently serves As a buff er batween exi sting J►R-1 zoned
psoperty artd the Aepen Hlghlands Subdivision and residan-
tial outpareels zoned R-30.
3. That the proposaZ xauld eseate sigt►iftcanC unmitigated
secondacy kraffic impacts on the City of 1lspen.
' 4. That the proposal �ails to address oc adequately study air
quality and vill cceate unm3tigaked impacts on the air
w quality of the Maroon Creek Valley and is not conslstent
with tbe Air Quality provision of the Pitkin County Land Ose
� Code Section 2-1T and Section 5-1a6(a) and (b).
. 5. The height variance requests of the propasal initiated
thraugh the request for rezoning ko FOA are cantrary to the
_ intention of the H1D height variance pcovision Section 3-
7.1 and 3-7.2(cl of the Pitkin Couoty Land Ose Code.
- ripfi, i'B�SFORB. B$ 1? RBSOLVBD by the Boacd that, based on the
- `'� above noted findings, the Board does hereby deny the Aspen eighlands
r:''�,,:� World Class Resort Lodge Growth Fanagement Project General Submission
I proposal.
;�:�;,:
��as�`".
',�-'�'..
z:-�
���.
_a-<-�,r*x
, .�:
� f� � �� i � 'F� �'��`��x L(
. �''f.'��F,-c��� . �=...s � _ -fi...!c^3����Pi���� �'^�1..� r._ �
fi�iM�. ._ ... :��
�
Resolation Nn. 85- io4
, Page 2
Sg IT FUI��t RBSdLVHD by the Baard that it does encourag� the
applicant to resubmit a nev appli�ation �nci that the applic�nt prpspnt
theic ideas to the Planning Couvaissian at a pte-applicatfon hearing.
BB 1T PIHALLY RBSOLVBD by the Boacd thge iC wi11 consfder moving
the LoBge Growth Managem�nC Campetition �ub�isgidn deadlinp clete
t
EO[M8fF1 to a date no latet than Januacy 1, 1986, to the extent that a
� change inche (�!'BCjl�flp fs deemed to b� in complianre with lew.
- -� APBROVBD by the goard a� its reguler m�eting on September 23,
1985.
HQI�RD OF OOOtltY WMlrL88I0116R6
Or PISRIN QOOR!'t• OOLOR11D0
� /�. ���..
Tom Blake, Cheicpecson
71d'1' :
Law 8canian� Deputy County Clark
R�NRNDED !OR ABPRaYALt •
_ � �^''
J►lan Rich�an, Plonning and
, Developoent Diroctoc
APPltOYlID AS SO tORNt
�` �� �
T-h��as F. Smi h t ]►tt e
t , Coun y orn y
Clt.{71
;.�;:':
���'
�'k,i::�
a..�s
���3
�..�._
�;:-!;=,
;�
-�f,�.
-�-�.:�.i,�:
'.:J-�+r.`
�.k
s�.'Y�^. � � .
���� �
_�ti�}
� >_" 2
;�-��
�:
�_ -:;'
"eS':15;:._eR:,
r�.