Loading...
01-17-00 Town Council Packet "'--bft06R "?4C SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION 01-17-2000 1:00 -2:00 P.M. EMPLOYEE HOUSING RESALE GUIDELINES -- Joe Coffey/Steve Connor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 1 2:00 — 3:55 TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS (FARAWAY RANCH SOUTH) PRELIMINARY PUD • Geotechnical Issues • Draft Resolution No. 06, Series of 2000 -- Chris Conrad. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 7 3:55 —4:00 BREAK *k****kkk*k*******k*********kk*****kkk*************k*********k*kkkk************************* SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 01-17-2000 CALL TO ORDER AT 4:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-Minute Time Limit) Item No. 3: RESOLUTION NO. 10, SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO TOM DUNLOP FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS -- Mayor Manchester. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 55 Item No. 4: PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1999 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO HOLY CROSS ENERGY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN FOR LIGHT, HEAT, POWER AND OTHER PURPOSES AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF -- Leslie Klusmire/Steve Connor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 57 Item No. 5: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING — ORDINANCE NO. 23, SERIES OF 1999 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND SECOND READING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 01-17-00tc Page 2 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE INTERIM AMENDMENT PROCEDURE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE -- Victoria Giannola/Steve Connor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 58 Item No. 6: PUBLIC HEARING — DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 06, SERIES OF 2000 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 06, SERIES OF 2000 CONCERNING THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS (FARAWAY RANCH SOUTH) PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN SUBMISSION, INVOLVING PARCEL K, FARAWAY RANCH GROSS PARCEL PLAT, AND THE GRANTING OF AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT A FINAL PUD PLAN APPLICATION -- Chris Conrad. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 63 Item No. 7: PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION — RESOLUTION NO. 07 SERIES OF 2000 TO RECIEVE COMMENT AND COUNCIL ACTION ON AN APPLICATION BY THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS, LLC, FOR AN ANNUAL TEMPOARY USE PERMIT -- Dean Stahman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 64 Item No. 8: RESOLUTION NO. 04, SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO, EXTENDING A FRANCHISE TO HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC., ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, UNTIL APRIL 30, 2000 -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 75 Item No. 9: RESOLUTION NO. 12, SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS TO RURAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY LAW -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . Page 79 Item No. 10: MANAGER'S REPORT -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 82 Item No. 11: DISCUSSION/ACTION ROARING FORK RAILROAD HOLDING AUTHORITY DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -- Hunt Walker. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 86 01-17-00tc Page 3 Item No. 12: APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION SUMMARY FOR 12-20-99 AND MEETING MINUTES OF 12-20-99 AND 01-03-00 . . . . . . Page 112 Item No. 13: DISCUSSION REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (RTA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No Packet Information Item No. 14: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS Item No. 15: CALENDARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 129 Item No. 16: ADJOURNMENT NOTE: ALL ITEMS AND TIMES ARE TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. PLEASE CALL THE OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK AT 923-3777 ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING FOR ANY AGENDA CHANGES COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: 01-17-00 BY: STAFF: Joe Coffey SUBJECT: Deed Restricted Housing Resale Guidelines Discussion OVERVIEW: The following Housing Guidelines will be discussed today: • Resale inspections and price reductions. • Capital Improvements/Renovation Allowances • Crossings Resale Restrictions FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BOARD OF COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Changes need to be made to the Housing Guidelines. Steve Connor and 1 would like some direction to change the guidelines based on my recommendations today. PROPOSED HOUSING RESALE GUIDELINE CHANGES RESALE INSPECTIONS I PRICE REDUCTIONS Objective: Make sure each unit that sells for the Maximum Resale Price is in average to above average condition. Listed below are ways to accomplish this objective: A. The mind set of people owning a deed restricted unit needs to change. I believe making the resale procedures stricter will give the new buyer a unit in better condition. Units that do not meet the requirements listed below will not receive the Maximum Resale Price. B. The Housing Manager believes that the Town should use an independent consultant for resale inspections. This will assure the seller that the inspection is not biased. The inspection grade will determine the resale price for each unit. A unit must be in average or above average condition to receive the Maximum Resale Price. C. Change sales guidelines to allow sales price deductions for items that are in below average condition. For example, if the carpet is worn out the estimated cost of new carpet will be deducted. Owners who live in their units for a number of years and who do not keep up with the routine maintenance will not receive the Maximum Resale Price. You must maintain your unit to receive the Maximum Resale Price. D. The rules have to change to make homeowners more responsible for maintaining their units. E. The seller needs to understand that the following conditions must be completed before the contract closing or a price reduction determined by the Housing Manager will be applied to the selling price. • The seller must provide the buyer with a professionally cleaned unit from "Top to Bottom" on or before the contract closing day. • All holes in walls must be filled and all appliances and permanent fixtures must be operative. • All carpets must be cleaned. • The seller will complete a Seller's Property Disclosure form for their unit and provide this form to the buyer before closing. • The buyer will inspect the unit before closing to insure the unit is in acceptable condition. Sales contracts must not be signed before a final inspection is performed. • If the unit is left in an unsatisfactory condition or has permanent fixtures which need repair, a price reduction will be given to the buyer in an amount to be determined by the Housing Department. HA-SALEVRESALE/GUIDLRJE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS / RENOVATION ALLOWANCE Currently the Housing Guidelines do not allow compensation for Capital Improvements if the unit was purchased after July of 1991. After many hours of considering a Capital Improvement Allowance, I must now say that I do not recommend these allowances. Listed below are the reasons for my decision about not allowing Capital Improvements. • The Capital Improvement Allowance or Renovation Allowance with a depreciation schedule would be very hard to track and administer fairly in future years. • I have been suspect to certain invoices received over the years for Capital Improvements. It is very easy to have product prices adjusted on invoices. • The determination of what is an acceptable Capital Improvement is very subjective and difficult to establish. I foresee many future problems with product selection and colors. • Sometimes products do not last as long as expected and this will create future complications when computing a final resale price. • The amount of use certain products receive and the wear factor can be very different with each owner. Some products will be in similar condition and others will not. Lastly, I believe that giving the homeowner the C.P.I. rate or three percent a year is a fair incentive for the owner to make the Capital Improvements he or she may desire and not what we dictate. The Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority feels this is a fair return for deed restricted employee housing owners. Allowing Capital Improvements will raise the cost of all deed restricted units by thousands of dollars in future years. The added improvements may not be what the next buyer wants, but will still have to pay for! The goal of the town should be to keep these units affordable and require owners to maintain these units and not just live in them. I believe a resale inspection program with the ability to reduce resale prices from the maximum will go a long way in creating a "Pride of Ownership". I have attached a copy of the Pitkin County Capital Improvement Guidelines for your review. I believe that the Town of Snowmass Village should adopt similar guidelines. CROSSINGS RESALE GUIDELINES In 1995 when The Crossings homes were sold there were 11 homes on subsidized lots and 24 homes on non-subsidized lots. The 24 homes on the non-subsidized lots did not have the income and asset guidelines applied to them. The subsidized home purchasers had to qualify within the income and asset guidelines. The Council and the developer did not want restrictions on 24 homes that might jeopardize the sales of these homes. I believe that all The Crossings homes should now be subject to the housing income and asset guidelines. This will limit the future buyers of these homes to employees who may not be able to afford other homes. At the present time with no income and asset guidelines in place anyone who is a employee may buy one of these homes. I do not believe this is helping the people affordable housing is suppose to help. I have attached the Maximum Income and Net Worth Guidelines for your review. If the Council desires, I will review the Income and Net Worth Guidelines because I am not sure the Town should sell affordable units to individuals with an annual income of $252,000. Ha-salestresaletcapital Al -- c 1. The term"Permitted Capital Improvement"as used in the Agreement shall only include the following: a. Improvements or fixtures erected, installed or attached as permanent, functional, non- decorative improvements to real property, excluding repair, replacement and/or maintenance improvements; b. Improvements for energy and water conservation; c. Improvements for the benefit of seniors and/or handicapped persons; d. Improvements for health and safety protection devices; e. Improvements to add and/or finish permanent/fixed storage space;and/or f. Improvements to finish unfinished space. 2. Permitted Capital Improvements as used in this Agreement shall NOT Include the following: a. Landscaping; b. Upgrades/replacements of appliances, plumbing and mechanical fixtures, carpets and other similar items included as part of the original construction of the unit C. The cost of adding decks and balconies, and any extension thereto; d. Jacuzzis, saunas,steam showers and other similar items: e. Improvements required to repair, replace and maintain existing fixtures, appliances, plumbing and mechanical fixtures,painting,carpeting and other similar items;and/or L Upgrades or addition of decorative items, including lights, window coverings and other similar items. 3. _ All Permitted Capital Improvement Items and costs shall be approved by the APCHA staff prior to being added to.the Maximum Resale Price as defined herein:--- �-- WOW TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE HOUSING AUTHORITY EMPLOYEE HOUSING BUYER RULES AND REGULATIONS QUALIFICATIONS 1. The maximum annual income and net worth of an applicant or combination of applicants shall not exceed the amounts set forth below in relation to the applicable purchase price. Purchase Price($) Max.Annual Income($) Net Worth ISl 40,000...............................................22,400................................................ 52,800 50,000...............................................28,000................................................ 66,000 60,000...............................................3 3,600................................................ 79,200 70,000...............................................39,200................................................ 92,400 80,000...............................................44'800.............................................. 105,600 90,000...............................................50,400.............................................. 118,800 100,000...............................................56,000.............................................. 132,000 110,000...............................................61,600.............................................. 145,200 120,000...............................................67,200.............................................. 158,400 130,000...............................................72,800.............................................. 171,600 140,000...............................................78,400.............................................. 184,800 150,000...............................................84,000.............................................. 19 8,000 160,000...............................................89,600.............................................. 211,200 170,000...............................................95,200.............................................. 224,400 180,000............................................. 100,800.............................................. 237,600 190,000............................................. 106,400.............................................. 2 50,800 200,000............................................. 112,000.............................................. 264,000 210,000.............................................117,600.............................................. 277,200 220,000.............................................123,200.............................................. 290,400 230,000............................................. 128,800.............................................. 303,600 240,000............................................. 134,400.............................................. 316,800 250,000.............................................140,000.............................................. 330,000 260,000.............................................145,600.............................................. 343,200 270,000.............................................151,200.............................................. 356,400 280,000.............................................156,800.............................................. 369,600 290,000.............................................162,400.............................................. 382,800 300,000............................................. 168,000.............................................. 396.000 310,000.............................................173,600..............................................409,200 320,000.............................................179,200..............................................422,400 330,000.............................................184.800.............................................. 435,600 340,000.............................................190,400.............................................. 448,800 350,000.............................................196,000..............................................462.000 360,000.............................................201,000.............................................. 475,200 370,000.............................................207,200.............................................. 488,400 380,000.............................................212,800.............................................. 501,600 390,000.............................................218,400.............................................. 514,800 400,000.............................................224.000.............................................. 528,000 410,000.............................................229,600.............................................. 541,200 420,000.............................................235,200.............................................. 554.400 430,000.............................................240,800.............................................. 567,600 440,000.............................................246,400.............................................. 580,800 450,000.............................................252,000.............................................. 594,000 �� 1 ■omm TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: January 17, 2000 BY: Planning Department STAFF: Chris Conrad SUBJECT: Work Session and Public Hearing concerning Resolution No. 6, Series of 2000, a resolution regarding the Timbers at Snowmass (Faraway Ranch South) Preliminary PUD Plan submission, involving Parcel K, Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat, and the granting of authorization to submit a Final PUD Plan application. TOPICS: 1) Geotechnical Issues 2) Discuss Draft Resolution/Direction to Staff BACKGROUND: The above topics were selected at the January 10 Town Council meeting for discussion during this work session. Dennis Lambert, P.E., with Lambert and Associates, had been retained by the Town to evaluate the Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary Plan Geotechnical information prepared by CTL/Thompson, Inc.. A copy of the Lambert report has been included within the packet and Mr. Lambert should be available at the meeting to discuss their findings and to respond to questions. John Meckling with CTL/Thompson will also be available to respond to the report and answer questions. A "very rough" draft of Resolution No. 6, Series of 2000, has been prepared for discussion during the meeting. Staff comments will need to be presented at that time. Staff had previously requested that the applicant provide copies of any materials distributed or displayed during council meetings. You may recall that computer generated image of Building D showing what the northerly view plane would be from the adjacent Ridge Condominiums when the top level is removed. There were also some display boards shown at the January 10 meeting. Reduced copies of the images have been provided and may be found in your Town Council box. P:\user\cconredWS Word Docs\The Timbers\The Timbers Prelim TCMemo13 1-12-200 6:26PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 2 M99262GE 1.0 INTRODUCTION We were requested to review the geologic hazard and geotechnical engineering report for the current proposed development plans . A .copy of the request Memorandum dated December 9, 1999, submitted to . us by Mr. Chris Conrad, is attached as Appendix A for reference. We were asked to review The Timbers at Snowmass CTL/Thompson, Inc. March 25, 1999 report in relation to consistency with the Town of Snowmass Village standards and criteria. This report presents our geotechnical engineering comments based on our review of the geotechnical engineering aspects of the Proposed Timbers Project in Snowmass village, Colorado ,as presented in the CTL/Thompson Inc. March 25, 1999 report which is titled "Geotechnical Investigation, Faraway Ranch South, Snowmass Village, Colorado. The review was conducted at the request of Mr. Chris Conrad, Senior Planner, Snowmass village, in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services dated December 8, 1999. The comments presented in this report are based on our review of project documents provided by CTL/Thompson, Inc. , Stryker Brown Architects and the Town of Snowmass Village with respect to the geotechnical engineering aspects of the Land Use and Development Code. The documents available to us for reference during our review are tabulated in the Bibliography to this report and is attached and incorporated into this report . The comments presented are based on our review of existing information prepared and presented by others. we did not obtain nor generate new study information. our review did not include a review or assessment of the correctness of the calculations, analyses or assumptions made by CTL/Thompson, Inc. or others during their preparation of the planned development documents. This review was requested by Mr. Chris Conrad, Senior Planner, Town of Snowmass Village Community Development Department and is intended for the use of the Community Development Department only. No other use of this .report is appropriate. our review is not an endorsement of the documents or reports. Our review presents our comments based on our opinion from our review only with respect to the current Town of Snowmass Village regulations as provided to us by Mr. Chris Conrad. lambert ana gosoriatto oow.tin�o o42•■c:.:Kx e..a�ew wMo w-eu.�+ean�o 1-12-200 6:27PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 3 M99162GE 1/12/2000 Page Two It is our understanding that the developer' s report is to address the Town of Snowmass Village criteria for development as outlined in the Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code. 2. 0 DISCUSSION The following sections of this report present comments,. considerations and questions which arose during our review. These are discussed in the approximate order as is suggested by the December 9, 1999 Memorandum to us from Mr. Conrad. Many of our comments are phrased as questions that you may or may not want to pursue. We suggest that the Town of Snowmass Village consider these questions during their review and, if appropriate, ask the design team to provide answers which satisfy the Town staff and the project design team. 3 . 0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS In 1974 the Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 1041. The purpose of the bill, in brief, was to designate potential geologic hazards which, if present, may pose a threat to the loss of life and property. We assumed that the outline and geologic hazard characteristics in H.B. 1041 were used as the guiding criteria for the Land Use and Development Code. The geologic hazards as outlined by House Bill 1041 are discussed briefly in_ Appendix' B. We did not review the geologic hazards study report for the project . We assumed that the geologic hazards have been assessed to the satisfaction of the Town. We assume that a geologic hazards report for the area has been conducted in accordance with House Bill 1041 or acceptable to the Town. 4 . 0 REVIEW OF SOILS STUDY A portion of the report, titled "Geotechnical Investigation, Faraway Ranch South, Snowmass Village, Colorado" dated 25 March 1999 prepared by CTL/Thompson, Inc. addressed the existing surface and subsurface soil characteristics. The Land Use and Development Code, Geologic report, b. Soils study states "A study prepared by a qualified professional describing existing surface and subsurface soil characteristics on the site, and evaluating the suitability of such soils for the planned construction. " The intent of this criteria appears to be to obtain suitability information regarding the site materials for use for the planned construction which we interpret as general foundation consideration discussions for planning for the site Rambert anb g,ssodates CQN1 LTM0 Gt0T9CMNI L{"OMiSM A"*. w16"L1UTW6 1-12-200 6:27PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 4 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Three structures . The following paragraphs present comments from our review. The geotechnical engineering report by CTL/Thompson, Inc. , dated March 25, 1999, Page 1, states it is a preliminary report and additional studies are recommended. Have these additional studies been completed to provide final design recommendations for the planned site development? The geotechnical engineering report indicates that .man placed fill exists on the site. The geotechnical engineer, structural design, and construction drawings, etc. , may need to address the existing fill on site. If man placed fill material is encountered during construction in locations or depths where it is not expected, do you want to have in place some sort of protocol for the encounter? We suspect that settlement will be important to the design team. Page 33 notes that the "foundation settlement should occur relatively quickly■ . Is there a possibility that structures may be founded in an area that is not underlain directly by the site granular soils? In the gravelly soils with a clay matrix, is settlement an issue? Has this been assessed, discussed and addressed? Is the anticipated potential post 'construction foundation settlement acceptable to the architect and the ' structural engineer and to the Town? The site materials are Mancos Shale and derivative materials. our experience has shown us that the Mancos Shale may consist of, or weather to, clay soil materials which have very high swell potential . Has the design team addressed swell potential with respect to slab on grade floor and other lightly loaded foundation members and retaining wall design? Site excavation for construction may result in deep excavations, up to about forty (40) feet deep. The Mancos Shale will, when overburden pressures are removed, experience rebound. Will the foundation and slab on grade floor subgrade support soil materials experience rebound from unloading by excavation? If so, is this a design issue? What is the anticipated influence of subgrade . rebound associated heave on foundation members and slab on grade floors? The parking garage floor elevation is currently planned at elevation 8280 with the bottom of the footings below that elevation. How does this current plan influence the table discussed on Page 27 of the CTL/Thompson Inc. report and the subsequent recommendations? Rambert ana gLssociateo CON\VliNa 6\M\WNI('j,.{MAIN((\{YIO 1-12-200 6:28PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 5 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Four Page 27 of the geotechnical engineering report indicates that the portions of the proposed structure in the areas of Buildings A and C will likely be located in areas of claystone, weathered claystone or clay soil materials. The report recommends that the material be removed and replaced with -structural fill to a depth of about four (4) feet below the foundation in these areas. will this result in a portion of the structure being founded on materials with differing support and response characteristics? what will the influence be on foundations of varying support characteristics for the portions of the structure supported on structural fill and the portions of the structure supported on natural undisturbed site material or possibly portions of the foundation supported. oil existing fill material? Page 28 of the geotechnical engineering report indicates structural fill material may be manufactured by mixing two (2) loads of three (3) inch minus aggregate and one (1) load of on site clay soil materials. This will potentially result in a compacted structural fill material with nearly one third (1/3) clay content. It has been our experience that materials containing greater than about ten (10) to fifteen (15) percent clay material begin to respond like the clay material portion of the mix and therefore may be expansive. Is the expansive character of the material of interest to the design team? Has this blend been tested for swell potential under remolded/compacted conditions to verify that the blend will result in a material which the structures will accommodate? The CTL/Thompson Inc. report recommends that "a ground water study should be undertaken to estimate quantities at this site. " and "field testing to estimate hydraulic conductivity are highly recommended. " Has the ground water study and the field testing of the hydraulic conductivity been completed? what are the implications of the ground water study findings on the in slope forces and the stability of the slope? Page 30 of the geotechnical engineering report provides passive lateral earth pressures of 300 pounds per cubic foot, however Page 35 provides passive lateral earth of 400 pounds per cubic foot. What circumstances or conditions apply to determine which passive lateral earth pressure value to use by the design team? What will be the influence on the design of swell pressure on the active and at rest lateral earth pressure design values? 5. 0 REVIEW STANDARDS Section 16A-4-50 is contained in the December 9, 1999 memorandum attached for your reference. Item (c) discusses geologic hazard Lambert ana gosociatts CONSULT.»¢"ao"oww—•• eway.FA"Iwo u.nNUL tCSnNo 1-12-200 6:28PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 6 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Five areas. It is our understanding that the hillside of which The Timbers development is located at the toe has been assessed and'the steepness, stability and conditions are acceptable to the Town of Snowmass Village. 6 .0 SLOPE STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS A cursory review of the topographic map supplied indicates to us that the entire slope area above and adjacent to the development site shows an overall inclination of about two to one (211) (horizontal to vertical) which is about 50b (fifty .percent) slope. There are also some topographic characteristics that .typify landslide remnants. There exists the possibility that the existing hillside, prior to any additional development at the toe, is marginally stable. The piezometer data from 1974 indicates that the fluctuating subsurface water level may have uplift pressures that could influence the stability of the near surface slope soil mantle during high ground water times of the year. It is our understanding that this is being studied. The May 28, 1982 letter prepared by Chen and Associates discusses site conditions with respect to slumping, surface seepages, and the potential influence on future slope stability. We do not know the area addressed by this letter but it appears that some of the site characteristics have been observable over a long time period. Many of the past reports have discussed and recommended subsurface drains. we concur that an effective and sufficiently deep designed subsurface drain system will be part of a successful site development. The installation of an effective drain system will increase the stability of the entire hillside which will tend to decrease the gross loads on any toe structures. Pages 7 and 8 of the 1979 Chen and Associates report present a discussion of the adverse dip of the underlying bedrock and the near parallel surface slope and the potential for artesian subsurface water and the inter-relationship of these with respect to the stability of the hillside. The bedrock underlying the site and the hillside above the site is reported to have a dip down to the south at 20 to 30 degrees (36 to 58 percent slope) . The surface topography has an inclination in the same range. It is' reported that the hillside is covered with a soil mantle about fifteen (15) to forty six (46) feet thick. The 1974 Cheri and Associates report states on Page 8 "there is some concern of a massive slope failure during the periods of the S lambert anti gAsaciatea GO"lYlTNO 41O ,GNNMAL•"W""00 ANO ' MA'lNAI TlSTiNQ 1-12-200 6:29PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 7 M99262CE 1/2/2000 Page Six year when ground water reaches the surface" . Page 4 of the same report indicates that the "Bedrock is covered by surficial soil deposits consisting of alluvial fans and glacial till, some of which have been involved in landsliding. ° Measurements by CTL Thompson, Inc. , indicated that Slope Inclinometer 12 showed a general small trend of potential movement at a depth of between about thirty-five (35) and forty-five (45) feet in a four (4) month monitoring period. If slope creep is occurring would a longer monitoring period of inclinometer 12 potentially identify this movement? A longer period of monitoring may be needed to provide evidence of deep seated slope movement or to remove this as a possible current mechanism. The "Global" Stability analysis discussed on Page 19 of the CTL/Thompson, Inc. , report indicated a calculated theoretical factor of safety between 1. 1 and 1.3 using the laboratory test results discussed below. The report indicated that the generally accepted minimum factor of safety, which is the ratio of resisting forces divided by the driving forces, is I.S . The Town of Snowmass Village and the Town Staff and the project design team should discuss the implications of the calculated theoretical factor of safety and what criteria is acceptable for site development. The CTL/Thompson Inc. report indicates that several strength tests were performed of soil samples obtained from the proposed development site. The soil strength parameters are discussed. on Pages 17, 18 and 19 of the CTL/Thompson report . The 'report indicates that the soil strength parameters used in the slope stability analysis were based on the authors knowledge of soils in the area and experience. The soil strength parameters used in the slope stability analysis were generally stronger, or larger, than the actual soil strength parameters obtained by laboratory tests of samples obtained from the site. You may want to pursue the influence on the slope stability analysis if soil strength parameters used in the analysis are based on actual, i.e. lower, tested strength .parameters obtained from laboratory tests? Is it possible, since laboratory test samples demonstrated lower measured strength parameters, that the in situ soil materials, may demonstrate soil parameters similar to the laboratory test results? Should additional slope assessment be performed? Are you interested in a sensitivity analysis of the slope. stability assessment which will help understand the relationship of the assessment with respect to changes in the strength parameters, such as slope height, soil cohesion, soil internal angle of Lambert anb g000ciatro w"su\n1YC OZOTOGN"I f.ehatmz 4 hNO WTNIAI TQTINp 1-12-200 6:30PM FROM LAMBERT MID ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 8 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Seven friction, pore pressures and phreatic surface? The soil material, labeled soil 3, which described as organic clay with bedrock, on Figure 8 and soil 4, on Figure 9 appears to be the material for which the triaxial strength test was performed. The analysis parameters used are phi 21 degrees and cohesion 200 psf. The actual laboratory triaxial strength test parameters are, phi 16 degrees and cohesion 100 psf. Laboratory triaxial strength test data is usually a good representation of the actual soil strength parameters . The layer of soil characterized by this material appears to be a very significant influence on the overall stability analysis. Is it of interest to you to perform a sensitivity study of the slope stability by changing the strength parameters between those used and those tested to compare the influence on the stability analysis using the differing values? The geotechnical engineering report by CTL/Thompson, Inc. , and earlier reports by Chen and Associates indicate that the bedding planes dip downward to the north at about 20 to 30 degrees and at angles near the slope inclination of the ground surface. As indicated in the 1979, 1974 and 1973 Chen and Associates reports this condition has the "potential for deep-seated sliding or translational failure" and "that there is concern for a massive slope failure during the periods of the year when ground water reaches the surface . " This consideration as presented in the Chen reports should alert the developer and the Town that the design of the tie back wall or any other toe structure is critical to the stability of the entire hillside and that excavation without the tie back wall or similar is not recommended. What are the influences of the development o. the hillside, 'which includes roadways, utilities, structures, landscape, which exist now that did not exist at the time of the Chen and Associates reports? it is our opinion that there are three issues of slope stability that may be of concern for the project site development. These are: -the short term or temporary stability of site excavations during construction, -the long term site specific slope and slope retaining structure stability and -the influence of toe activity on the entire hillside. It appears from the previous reports that the hillside stability may exist at a calculated theoretical factor of safety that may be in a range that may or may not be acceptable to the Town. It is our opinion that thorough analysis and prudent and careful construction in the toe area can result in a toe project .that will increase the stability . of the entire hillside above the current existing level of stability. We feel that this potential low Rambert ana RAsodates CO"Mlle:"O OGOTSC""4"S"OW VIK AND , TZMAL run"O 1-12-200 6:30PM. FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 9 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Eight characteristic of The Timbers development at the slope toe could benefit the entire hillside. The geotechnical engineering report and plans provided by Coggins and Sons indidates 'that a tied back soldier pile and lagging wall may be constructed to provide needed stability of the site slopes during and after construction. If properly designed and constructed a tie back soldier pile and lagging wall or any of several other toe area construction options will increase and aid in the improvement of the site slope stability. we anticipate that any slope toe development will include, a very thorough and deep subsurface drainage system as mentioned in several of the previous site reports. We anticipate that any toe construction design will need to address temporary construction stability, the stability . of the adjacent site area and the stability of the gross stability of the entire hillside. Each of these characteristics will be assessed differently and each assessment will influence part of the toe treatment design. We anticipate that if the toe treatment extends and is securely fastened to the underlying competent formational material it will interrupt the potential failure plane of the soil mantle and will, ' with drainage, help the entire hillside. we anticipate that the toe treatment will be a rather significant structure. In order for the toe treatment to increase the stability of the hillside it should be designed to provide support that will increase the resistance to sliding of the soil mantle overlying the steeply dipping underlying formational material and the adjacent soils to result in the desired theoretical calculated factor of safety. we suggest that the design of the tie back pile and lagging wall or similar toe treatment provide adequate resistance to slope movement to increase the calculated theoretical factor of safety to at least 1.5 as recommended in the CTL/Thompson report. The calculated theoretical factor of safety of 1.5 is typically. accepted by the geotechnical engineering discipline as the minimum factor of safety for slope stability. We suggest that the shoring or similar toe treatment scheme support whatever slope driving forces or loads such that the existing slope soil strength plus the added support of the toe treatment divided by the driving forces of the slope materials are greater than a theoretical calculated factor of safety I.S . If the Town is willing to accept a lower calculated theoretical factor of safety then the design need only reflect the minimum factor of safety acceptable to the Town. lambra ana . 1-2ff-AOclatfo Wnhwnr,a w 020 r ice"'a'Neefs * 1-12-200 6:31PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 10 M99262GE 1/12/2000 Page Nine Construction excavations and excavation slopes must be designed and constructed so that the excavation is safe for workmen and for the upslope hillside stability. Construction excavation,' if improperly conducted, may result in excavation slope failure which may influence the stability of the entire hillside slope above the proposed project site as well as the actual construction excavation. OSHA has construction excavation criteria that will be applicable . to construction excavations . Has an excavation and construction plan been developed to insure slope stability during excavation and construction of the tie .back wall system or any other toe treatment? The developer and Town should recognize that the slope . . configuration and slope, geology as defined by others indicates that the potential for slope movement exists for the site and the steep slopes well above the site whether development occurs or not. The existing structures on the slopes above the site may -experience some future movement due to the existing site considerations even if the Timbers development site is left as is. Appropriately - designed and constructed development on this site may increase the slope stability on the site and the slopes above the site. we understand that the developer would like to begin construction as soon as possible. The CTL/Thompson, Inc. , report indicates that unsupported excavation will have a calculated theoretical factor of safety of less than 1, which indicates a slope in a failure mods. It is our opinion that once construction of the tie back wall or any other toe construction is initiated it is imperative that the design feature be completed as quickly and safely as possible. We feel that if an incomplete excavation or toe treatment_ is left unfinished for even a short period of time overall slope failure may be anticipated. we suggest that a plan or strategy be in place in the event of a rapid unexpected large scale slope movement or failure. .We suggest that the existing condition of the hillside and the improvements, such as roadway, structures, slopes, etc. , be very thoroughly documented with photographs and survey data prior to initiating construction activities. This information can be used for monitoring during construction and it may reduce the likelihood of claims after construction. lambert ana R000da-te,s CON&ULfINO ObO"CNNN'dL INOINLiM ANO wrawt tasnNe 1-12-200 6:32PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 11 M99262GE 1/23/2000 Page Ten 7 . 0 LIMITATIONS Lambert and Associates has performed a review of existing material provided by others only. Our review did not include a review, check, or verification of the field or laboratory findings, data, calculations, analyses or assumptions which were used in the development of the reviewed material. This report is not an endorsement of the recommendations or design presented in the material reviewed. It is intended to present review comments regarding the geoteehnical engineering aspects of the reviewed material. This review was requested by Mr. Chris Conrad, Senior Planner, Town of Snowiness Village Community Development Department and is intended for the use of the Community Development Department only. No other use of this report is appropriate. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance please contact us. Respectfully submitted, LAMBERV AND ASSOCIAT Ste[ Reviewed 3 /NWJ/7nr W. J on, P.E. mbert, P..E. lam bert ana gosociates C0Niut7..0 OfD?6D.NjCAj(MWN(Itl.ND • �.-sw�♦urmo . 1-12-200 6:32PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9762493262 P. 12 BIBLIOGRAPHY Current Documents 1) Report by CTL Thompson,, dated March 25, 1.9.9.9 2) Letter by CTL Thompson, dated July 20, 1999 3) Letter by CTL Thompson, dated November 18, 1999 4) Letter and 30% slope may by Sopris Engineering, December 11, 1999 5) Architectural Drawings by Stryker Brown, dated November 29, 1999 including: Cover .1, Cl, C2, C31 C4, C5, C6, C71 C8, C9, C10, .Cll, AS4 .1, AS4 .2, AS4 .3 , AS4 .4, Ret-1, Rat-2, Roof-1, trails-1, L1, L2, WWE1, WWE2, WWE3, WWE4, Far-A1, FAR-A2, FAR-A3, FAR-A4, FAR-B1 through B4, FAR-C1 through C4, FAR-D1 through D4, FAR-K, FAR-L, FAR-E1, FAR-FI,AP-2.1, AA-2 .1 through AA-2.4, AA-2 .6, AA-2-7, AA-3 .1, AA-3 .2, AA-4 . 1, AB- 2 . 1 through AB-2.5, AB-2.7, AB-3 .1, AB-4.1, AC-2 .1 through AC-2 .5, AC-3 .1, AC-3 .2, AC-4 .1, AD-2 .1 through AD-2.5, AD- 3 .1, AD-3 .2, AE-2.2, AE-3 .1 AE-4.1, AF-2.2, AF-3 .1, AF-4.1, AJ-2 .2, AJ-3 .1; AJ-3 . 2,AJ-4.1, AK-2 .2, AX-33 .2, AK-4 .1, Al- 2.2, AL-2 :3, AL-2 .4, AL-2 .6, AL-3 .1, AL-3 .2, AL-4 .1 and AM-- 6) Plans by Coggins and Sons, Inc. , dated 12-13-99, XB5-1 through XB5-8 7) Approximate 200 scale topographic map provided by the Town, no author or date 8) Areal photos, June 7, 1995; 80 . 130, 80.132, 80, 134, 80 .,136, 80.138, 80. 140, 80.142, 80 . 144, 80 .153, 80.155, 80 .157, 80.159, 80 . 161 Note: Photos were very dark and stereo pairs were not provided ■our review of the listed documents was not a detailed design review for endorsement for • acceptance of the accuracy of the project design. The documents were reviewed to provide a better understanding of the construction concepts. " Lambert anti 2000dates C0NWlTNO 0IMCNNI"L CNO1"ea" r.rcmu*cmNu 1-12-200 6:32PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 13 Previous Studies 1) Report . "Preliminary Subsoil Study, Townhome Development, The Club at Snowmass Village, Faraway Ranch South, Parcelk" Job Number: 197 435, September 24, 1997 Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 2) Letter: Water Level Readings in Observation Wells, The Ridge at Snowmass,. Phase I Job Number: 23,229, October 22, 1985 Chen and Associates, Inc. 3) Letter: Roadway Embankment Ridge Drive, The Ridge at Snowmass Job Number: 17,331A, September 28, 1984 Chen and Associates, Inc. 4) Letter: Subsurface Profiles, Roadway Embankment, Ridge Drive, The Ridges at Snowmass Job Number: 17, 331A, July 27, 1984 Chen and Associates, Inc. 5) Letter: Proposed Grading, The Ridge, Parcel 1, Snowmass Village, Colorado Job Number: 17,331A, May 8, 1984 Chen and Associates, Inc. 6) Letter: Review of Subsurface Drain Recommendations, The Ridge, Parcel 1, Snowmass village, Colorado Job Number: 17, 331A, April 25, 1984 Chen and Associates, Inc. 7) Letter: Review of proposed Site Development, The Ridge, Parcel 1, Snowmass, Colorado Job Number: 17331A. February 8, 1984 Chen and Associates, Inc. 8) Letter: Recommendations for Stabilization of Cut Embankment along Ridge Drive, The Ridge at Snowmass Job Number: 17,22A, July 16, 1982 Chen and Associates, Inc. 9) Letter: observation of Roadway Embankment, The Ridge at Snowmass Job Number: 17, 1331A, June 7, 1982 Chen and Associates "Our review of the listed documents was not a detailed design review for endorsement or acceptance of the accuracy of the project design. The documents were reviewed to provide a better understanding of the construction Concepts. " - 149 Lambert anti associates GONYUITIN"OlOTICNN�1N9IM66"♦MG. MATMVAAL TGTNIO 1-12-200 6:33PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 14 Previous Studies Page Two 10) Letter: Observation of Roadway Embankment, The Ridge at Snowmass Job Number: 17, 331A, May 28, 1982 Chen and Associates, Inc. 11) Letter: Water Level Readings in Observation Wells, The Ridge at Snowmass Village Job Number: 23,299, March 8, 1982 Chen and Associates, Inc. 12) Letter: Water Level Readings in Observation Wells, The Ride at Snowmass Village Job Number: 23, 259, January 18, 1982 Chen and Associates, Inc. 13) Letter: Fill Compaction Recommendations for Roadway Fill, The Ridge at Snowmass Village Job Number: 17, 331A, August 15, 1980 Chen and Associates, Inc. 14) Letter: Installation of Observation Wells, The Ridge .at Snowmass Village Job Number: 23, 299, december 11, 1981 Chen and Associates, Inc. 15) Letter: Proposed Fill for Connector Road Between Ridge Road and Faraway Road, The Ridge at Snowmass Village Job Number: 17,331A, August 6, 1980 Chen and Associates, Inc. 16) Letter: The Ridge, Snowmass Village Job Number: 17, 331A, May 28, 1980 Chen and Associates 17) Letter: Sewer Underdrain Detail, Faraway - The Ridge, Snowmass, Colorado Job Number: 17, 331, May 15, 1980 Chen and Associates, Inc. 18) Letter: Summary of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations for Faraway Ranch Relating to Proposed Parcel J, Faraway Ranch, Snowmass Village, Colorado Job Number: 17,331A, January 16, 1980 Chen and Associates "Our review of the listed documents was not a detailed design review for endorsement of acceptance of the accuracy of the project design. The documents were reviewed to provide a better understanding of the construction concepts. " Rambert ant gssociatts OONWLTINO OEOMHNN kENGINEERS AND NATCAIAL TCinN" 1-12-200 6:33PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 15 Previous Studies Page Three 19) Report : Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Faraway South, Snowmass, Colorado Job Number: 17,331, August 31, 1979 Chen and Associates, Inc. 20) Letter: Faraway Project Job Number: 9719, March 15, 1977 Chen and Associates, Inc. 21) Letter: Draft of Stability Analysis at Faraway South, Snowmass at Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Job Number: 10, 271, September 25, 1974 Chen and Associates 22) Report : Slope Stability Investigation, Faraway South, Snowmass at Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Job Number: 10,271, September 20, 1974 Chen and Associates, Inc. 23) Report: Preliminary Geologic and Soils Analysis, and Radiation Evaluation Report, Faraway Ranch South, Pitkin County, Colorado Job Number: 9719, August 22, 1973 Chen and Associates, Inc. "Our review of the listed documents was not a detailed design review for endorsement or acceptance of the accuracy of the project design. The documents were reviewed to provide a better understanding of the construction concepts. ■ Rambert ana g,anociateo CONSULTING GeGTOCH"rY ewa"eERS wG "..eau TC&TNG 1-12-200 6:34PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 16 Doc - 1099 03: 33A Planning DwpC TOrV 970-923 . 1851 P.01 Post-it,Fax 1Vele 7671 on•1 " ovp..a t Qr MEMORAN eta"' sos: c'rpdJ rvnrC "0"' 974 Z+M-21 P1HAp' 0 1921-5 4 Fp a 4 0 2MR- 62 "• 0 92 TO: Norman W. Jolulston, P.E. Lambert and Associates PROM: Chris Conrad,Scnior Planner Snowmazs Village Community Development Dept. DATE: December 9, 1999 SUBJECT The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD 3N Party Ceotechnical Review of Geology Report I have included below various excerpts front the Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code which relate to what the applicant's report needed to contain and applicable review stundurds by which the development proposal is cnduata- Geologic repurL A report evaluating geologic and soils conditions.including: a. Potential geologic hazards. A site specific analysis of the geologic characteristics on, or in the vicinity of the site that could have a significant impact on the proposed development shall be conducted. It shall be prepared by a Zoologist or engineer who is qualified to map and evaluate geologic hazards and to assess their potential impacts on the development. T1 shall discuss any recent activity associated with the geologic hazards and shall provide an expert opinion as to the degree of scvotily of the potential geologic haunts. It Shull also include recommendations as to how the development will avoid or mitigate any dangers posed to life or property.from these hvardc. b. Suits study. A study prepared by a qualified professional describing existing surface and sub- srtrfacc suil characteristics on the srle. and evaluating the suitability of such soils for the planned' cotlstructiun. The development proposal must be found to Have satisfied certain review standards. The two(2) that relate to what you are n;vrcwirig are: A proposed PUD shall comply with the following review standards: (4) Comply with development evaluation standards. The PI TD shall comply with all applicable provisions of Article IV of this Developmut Code, Development Evaluation Standards. (See Sec. 16A-4-50.Below) (5) Suitability for development. The property propwcd for the PUD shall be suitabW br development, uumidcnng its topography. environmcniul fcatruu and any natural or ma"WA hazards that affect its development pututtial. a,;. WNW 1-12-200 6:34PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 17 Oec 30 99 03: 34A Planning DQpt TOSV 970 -923 1861 V ,02 Norman W luhnstor. The Timb ers al Snuwltn ss I keemher 9. 1999 Sec. 16A-4-50. Geologic hazard areas,steep slopes and ridgeline protection areas. (a) Purpose. Steep slopes are prone to erosion and soil instability, arc difficult to revegerate and may 4150 he suh)elet to geologic hwards. The purpose of this Section is to ensure that development dues not occur on slopes that are excessively steep, unstable or hazardous. Applicants am Wso refemd to Section i6A-4.320. Landscaping. Grading and Other Design Standards fNut Applicableja to ensure that development which is permitted on slopes that are more stable is done in a manna that minimizes environmental and aesthetic impacts on the Town. (b) Applicability. The standards in this Section shall apply to all development proposed within the Town. (c) Development Prohibited in Geologic Hazard Areas. No dewclopment proposed in uty FUD, subdivision or special review application shall be approved in any arcs that the Town Council Brads, on the basis of competent engineering or geologic data, to be unsuitable for the proposed activity or use due to the potential harm to the public health,safety or welfare that would be posed by mud flow, rock slide, avalanche,steep or unstable slopes or soils,or other geologic hay ads,features or conditions. (d) I)evclupmcnt Prohibited on Slopes Greater Than Thirty Percent(30%). No development shall be allowed on any slope greater than thirty percent(30"19),except in the following circumstances: (1) Ski area improvements. Construction of roads, driveways, ski nails and related ski area improvements including, but not necessarily limited to lift towers, but excluding restaurants and similar structures that arc intended for human occupancy.may be allowed on slopes greater than thirty pe7ee nt(30%). (2) Lou subdivided prior to January 1. 1987. Ievelopment may be allowed on lots and within approved building envelopes containing areas of slopes greater than thirty percent (30"/0) if the lot was subdivided prior to January 1, 1987. (3) Man-matte slopes. Development may he permitted on slopes greater than thirty percent(3U7s) that are the result of minor mat-made cutting or filling of un otherwise continuous natural slope. (4) Other circumstances. The Town Council may authorize development on slopes greater than thirty percent (30%) in eircunnstaaces not listed above if at least three-quartets (%)of the members of this Town Council present and voting approve an ordinance, identifying the reasons why the development is unable to avoid the steep slopes. (3) Engineer's opinion. For the Town to allow development under any of the AOf circumstances, the applicant shall provide an opinion f1oa1 a proftvional goultrchnical engiMr, lic:;nsed in the State stating that the slope is not prone to instability or fitilure, the p development will not cause gmater slope instability or increase the potential for slope!'allure, :: oat therefore, there will be no significant risk that damage to atfiteccnt property will result from 'the proposed construction. if any risk to adjacent property is found. the gectechnieal engineer shall describe the design considerations or enstruction technique$ that will be incorporated within the development to mitillate the risk of damage to udjaecnt property from the proposed development- 1-12-200 6:35PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P• 18 Dvc - 10 .99 O3: 34A planninq Dept TOSV 970 923 . 1861 P.O3 Norman W 1e1141�rva ncv Tin*erf at�aowmas< December V, 1999 Page (e) Activities Discouraged on Slopes Greater Than fifteen Percent (lie/,). oevelopment activities that decrease the stability of any slope that is greater than fifteen percent (15%) shall be disc puraged. These activities include, but arc not limited to, activities that add water to a slope, activities that add weight to the top of a slope and activities that stcvpcn the existing grade of a slope. I have entailed Martin Matu with the Timbers group and requested that he provide you with u nap they had submitted which identified thirty percent (30%) slopes and classified whether those areas were natural or roan-trade. I believe there is also a letter which explains the mclhndology used. The resulution which granted sketch plan approval for this development proposal contained two (2)sections that apply it)your scope of work. The preliminary plan submission netts to be found to have . 'responded to the direction given by the Town concerning the sketch plan-" For this reason. 1 have provided Ilnan below: Section Two: Issues.Concerns and Additional Information Needed. 7. Slopes. Steep slopes arc prone to erosion and soil instability. are difficult to re-vegetate and may also be subject to geologic hazards. For these reasons. development activities that decrease the stability of any slope greater that fifteen perc4mi (IS%) is discourage! and . development on slopes greater than thirty percent (30%) arc prohibited except.in certain specific circumstances as specified within Soction 4-140 of the Development Code. The Applicant has submitted a topographic slope analysis map which identities that a significant portion of the development activity will be located within areas containing, greater than thirty pcament (30%)slopes. No duvrlupment should be located within these areas unless sufficient qualified information is submitted with the Preliminary Plan application to demonstrate that said areas un the result of minor man-made cutting.or tilling of an otherwise continuous natural slope and which has been determined by a professional geotechaical cnLoneer that the slope is not prone to instability or failure, that the proposed development will not cause greater slope instability or increase the potential for slope failure, and that there will be no significant risk that damage to adjacent property will result from the proposed construction. '11tc Town Council understands that the Applicant bars generated field information, and the Town Council has reviewed said information, that suggests that many,of the thirty (30)' percatt slopes areas within the property are caused be man-made disturbances. The Town Council fonds the information acceptable for the purposes of conducting a Sketch Plan level of evaluation and review but that the Applicant must demonstrate during the Preliminary Plan application that such disturbance are in fuel the cause of the man-made disturbances. The Applicant most provide information frum a qualified professional geotechnicul cmgineer. with the Preliminary Platt application that demonstrates that this development will not cause gn-atcr slope instability or increase the potential ter slope lailure immediately up hill from 1-12-200 6:35PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 19 Ove - 10 -77 03 : 34A Planning Dopt TOSV 770 723 1861 P.04 VOrman W.loluiseon The Tuttbers at Snowniass t)cccmhcr 9. 1999 Nut J the ficc market mwnhomes, restricted housing. surface parking, driveways, underground parking garmge. :md Buildings A, B, and C and that there will be no significant risk that damage to adjacent property will result from construction of improvements within this., property. [Note- Building C cited above is now Building D and Building B cited above is now the 6cmx3l location of Buildings L & fit.] Section Four: Conditions. The authorization granted pursuant to this resolution shall be subject to the I•ullowing conditions: S. Suitability for Development. The technical information required as part' of the Preliminary Plan submission is necessary to fully evaluate whether the property will he suitable for development to the extent proposed by the Applicant, considering its topography. environmental features, and any natural or man-made hazards that affect its development potential. 'Ihc applicant has retained engineering consultants to commence farther investigation of the site geologic and groundwater conditions. Detailed reports that fully identify potential geologic hazards as well as surface and sub-surface soil and hydrologic characteristics on the site will be submitted with any Preliminary Plan application. Any potential impacts upon surrounding properties shall also be discussed. Thu Town Council is concerned about the ecologic and geutechnical conditions. particularly regarding slope stability and groundwater problems which exist within the site and recommend that a third party geotcchnical engineer be retained by the Town at Applicant's expense, if the Town Engineer is unsure of the conclusions and recommendations of the Applicant's Vittechnical engineer,to review the reports and recommenndations submitted by the Applicant. Pleasc review the Timbers material in relation to it's consistency with the above standards and criteria. The proposal faxed to me on December 8 was acceptable with the following requested additions: 1. Please include that you will also he reviewing the material in relation to the above standards and criteria. 2. Include or attach your hourly rate schedule and mileage charge amount. }, we may wish to forward to you retaining wall and garage structure construction drawings and documents for your review. Would you.be able to accept the additional work and what would be the extent to which you could be involved in commenting an this materiar? The material should be completed early next week. What would you estimate to be the time Frame within which you could review it and what would you estimate would be the cost for your review? I will he out of the office until vlonday. I stmt an email to Dcaa Gordon today asking him to be available on December 15 at 2:t)Opm at our offices.s. Please feel free to call or fax me and we can discuss the project further when 1 return. Thanks in advance for your assistance. �' Slow 1-12-200 G:38PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702A932G2 P. 23 M99262GE APPENDIX B This Appendix is intended to discuss the various geologic hazards which are not necessarily site specific which may be encountered when developing any parcel of land. The explanations are brief and are only intended to familiarize the reader with the definition of the basic generally formed hazards and the context in which they are discussed. The information is not intended to be site specific to the proposed development . In 1974 the Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 1041. The purpose of the bill, in brief, was to designate potential geologic hazards which, if present, may pose a threat to the loss of life and property. This Appendix provides a definition of these and other geologic hazards which are typically included in hazards studies for development sites. The definitions presented below are a paraphrased version of more lengthy discussion presented in Colorado Geological Survey Special Publication 6, "Guidelines and Criteria for Identification and Land-Use Control of Geologic Hazard and Mineral Resource Areas" . 1 Radioactivity Several locations in western Colorado' have been mined for radioactive elements and by-products such as, uranium, Thorium, and vanadium. Tailings from these mines are one of the chief sources of hazards due to radioactivity. Other sources of , radioactive hazards are natural surf icial deposits of ore laden with radioactive elements and the sun. The emission of radiation may consist of the release of Alpha or Beta particles or Gamma rays. The radiation is released as part of the decay of a radiometrically unstable isotope. As this decay occurs, by products are 'produced. Gaseous radioactive substances, such as radon, are common radioactive hazards. 2 Seismic Effects Hazards from diastrophic (earth movement) activity are any effects that may be directly or indirectly related to earthquakes. The effects of a formidable earthquake may be ground displacement, ground shaking, ground 'failure, abnormal water wave action and a host of other less prominent effects. Most of the State of Colorado is classified as a Zone 1 seismic risk on maps in the Uniform Building Code and other references. Zone 1 seismic risk areas are considered as low risk areas for hazards for seismic effects. A small part of Colorado, in the vicinity of Pagosa Springs, is Zone 2B, most likely because of a recent event centered in Dulce, New Mexico. B 1 r.n. to lambert ana 20isociates CONWATINC OtOTtGNNICAL CND Hf.4AS AND MATZINAL T0nkQ 1-12-200 6:38PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 24 M99262GE In general, Colorado has had various sequences of seismic activity in the past. Initial seismic activity was 'associated with the relief of stresses during the uplift of the ancestral Rockies, during Paleozoic times. During the Cenozoic period little seismic activity occurred. Many of the fault trends associated with the uplift of the ancestral Rockies were fractured during the Neogene in association with the Laramide orogeny. An orogeny is a mountain building episode. The Laramide orogeny occurred about 68 to 75 million years ago and is credited with the formation of our current Rocky Mountains. 3 Ground Subsidence Ground subsidence may be caused by man or natural processes. subsidence of the ground surface may be attributed to collapsible soils, failure of subsurface voids, removal of subsurface fluids, or mining activities. Collapsible soils may cause settlement of structure, however, geotechnical analysis and foundation design have advanced considerably in the past decade and engineering . procedures for dealing with collapsible soils is available. Subsurface voids may be caused by hydrothermal or mining activity. The presence of subsurface voids may be recognized through subsurface exploratory drilling and often surficial topographic evidence of such voids may be observed. 4 Landslides "Landslide" is a term that is used in an extremely broad scope: Generally speaking, a landslide is the mass movement of a unit of material as a somewhat singular body. Commonly a landslide will move, or fail, on a semi-circular arc or plane. Features that are common to most landslides are; the main scarp, which is where the upper portion of the failure plane intersects the ground surface; transverse or extension fractures, this is the area of the slide that is usually in the lower 'third of the mass where bending of the materials occur; and the toe, this is the bottom of the slide which is often a lobate bulge in the ground surface. Landslides can encompass very large masses of soil, some covering several acres in size while others only encompass a few hundred square feet . Smaller movements are often referred to as slumps. 5 Avalanches Avalanches are a common process in the Rocky Mountains and adjacent areas in the high country of Colorado. There are three primary zones within an avalanche path. The zone of accumulation and failure exists at the highest elevation in an avalanche path (usually 20 degrees to 45 degrees slope gradient) . This is the area where the avalanche begins . As the snow moves downslope it travels through the track which can be a relatively . B2 ` it Rambert ana Roocciates CON"TIN0 Oi"1"cNN4"MINCE"AN* ___. w,T[MALfesn"a 1-12-200 6:39PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P• 25 M99262GE narrow chute which may be easily identified in the field, on topographic maps, and on areal photographs. The snow looses velocity and subsequently stops in the runout zone (usually less than 20 degrees slope gradient) . The runout zone may, also be easily identified in the field, on maps or photographs. Avalanches commonly occur at elevations in excess of 8, 000 feet above sea level . 6 Rockfall Rockfall is a hazard that may occur in areas where a rock becomes detached from a larger rock body or slope and moves downslope by the force of gravity. The movement of a singular rock may trigger the movement of other rocks downslope. Hazards from falling rocks generally occurs in areas beneath steep slopes or cliffs. 7 Flooding Flooding of streams occurs when the gradient and size of the stream channel is not large enough to accommodate the amount of water flowing in the channel, therefore, water flow outside of the channel occurs. 8 Mudflows and Debris Fans Mudflows are the mass movement of saturated soils downslope under the force of gravity. Debris fans occur under the same set of conditions, but the shape of the flow will be wider at the bottom due to decreased energy from elope gradient changes which gives the flow a "fan" appearance when viewed from above. 9 Expansive Soil and Rock Expansive materials are soils or rock that will experience volume changes as conditions such as moisture content and load are varied in or on them. Materials with clay are usually the most likely to exhibit expansive characteristics, however, a soil that is predominately sand, which is typically non-expansive, may exhibit expansive characteristics. A small amount of clay within the material matrix can expand and exert expansion forces throughout the sand. There are several design and construction techniques that may be used to reduce the effect of expansive soils . 10 Slopes An unstable slope may be. considered as a slope that, due to . natural factors, exhibits deterioration or movement of the materials within the slope. The movement of a slope, is distinguished from a landslide in that a landslide will have a distinct failure plane which may or may not be evident in slope movement. Generally speaking, slope movements is a slow, continual ' 83 lambert anb.. 2Asociates CONCY�TMC OCOTCCMNKLI CN NCCN{WO MATJNA�TUS Q 1-12-200 6:40PM FROM LAMBERT AND ASSOCIAT 9702493262 P. 26 M99262CE movement whereas a landslide will be relatively rapid and occurs in intervals as the stresses required to cause failure become large. The natural factors often concerned with the destabilization of a slope are; slope angle, surface and subsurface ' water, seismic effects, and the nature of the material involved. Slope stability may be further influenced by construction and engineering. Careful planning, engineering, and construction may promote a more stable . condition within a slope while unplanned development may decrease the stability of the slope. B4 lambm anb 2sootiate,a co"UNTino DfDy4cftm GL SmalMfiM AND uAT[MU"Sn"D SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 6 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS (FARAWAY RANCH SOUTH)PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN SUBMISSION, INVOLVING PARCEL K, FARAWAY RANCH GROSS PARCEL PLAT, AND THE GRANTING OF AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT A FINAL PUD PLAN APPLICATION. WHEREAS, Faraway South LLC submitted a Sketch Plan Application for a project referred to as the Faraway Ranch South Specially Planned Area to the Town for review and consideration; and WHEREAS, said Sketch Plan was approved by the Town Council on January 18, 1999 in Resolution No. 3, Series of 1999 (Resolution 3"); and WHEREAS, said resolution conditionally authorized SM Partners, LLC, as the Sketch Plan Applicant,to submit a Preliminary Plan application for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village provided Faraway South LLC with direction in Resolution 3 related to the development of the property and identified specific information and studies which were necessary to properly review a Preliminary Plan application for the Project; and WHEREAS, SM Partners, LLC had submitted on behalf of Faraway South, LLC and The Timbers at Snowmass, LLC (the "Landowners") a request for Preliminary Plan submission review of the Faraway Ranch South Specially Planned Area (SPA) involving Parcel K and N, Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 5 in the records of the Pitkin County, Colorado Clerk and Recorder; and WHEREAS, the application was reviewed for completeness and accepted by the Town of Snowmass Village Planning Director("Planning Director") for review on April 13, 1999; and WHEREAS, Parcel N was subsequently conveyed to the Town of Snowmass Village (the "Town")and withdrawn from the Project at that time; and WHEREAS, The Timbers at Snowmass, LLC (the "Applicant"), which acquired the controlling interest in the Project from Faraway South LLC, continued with the Preliminary Plan Application to the Town for its review and approval of a project then renamed from "Faraway Ranch South Specially Planned Area (SPA)" to"The Timbers at Snowmass" (the"Project'); and WHEREAS, Faraway South LLC has consented to the Preliminary PUD Application by Applicant on its behalf; and WHEREAS, the submission also involves: 1) a request to rezone the property from SPA- TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 2 1, Specially Planned Area, to MU-PUD, Mixed Use PUD; 2) subdivision of the parcel: and, 3) a Subdivision Exemption application to permit condominiumization (including a time share regime) of the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director had previously determined that the proposed Project qualified for review as a Major Planned Unit Development ("PUD") application in accordance with the procedures specified within Section 16A-5-300(b) of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the"Municipal Code"); and WHEREAS, said procedure requires an initial Public Hearing and Preliminary PUD Plan review by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, posted, mailed, and published notice of public hearings held before the Planning Commission on June 9, July 14 and August 18, 1999 were provided in accordance with the public notice requirements of Section 16A-5-60 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Project at public hearings which commenced on June 9 and August 18, 1999 for the purpose of receiving public comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted their review of the Project between June 9 and September 1, 1999 to consider all relevant materials and testimony in order to evaluate whether the Project application complies with Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code and whether the preliminary plan submission by the Applicant has responded to the direction given by the Town as stated within Resolution 3; and WHEREAS, on September 1, 1999, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 16, Series of 1999, which contains their findings and conditional recommendation for approval of the Applicant's Preliminary Plan submission; and WHEREAS, upon receiving the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Town Council, in accordance with the posted, mailed and published public hearing notice requirements of Section 16A-5-150 of the Municipal Code, commenced a public hearing before the Town Council on September 7, 1999, to receive written and verbal public comment on the Project and to provide due process in accordance with the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the public hearing remained open and additional public testimony was received during the October 4, October 18,November 1, November 15 and December 6, 1999 Town Council meetings; and WHEREAS, in addition to reviewing the application, receiving public comment and recommendations from the Town staff and consultants on the above dates, a site visit and work - 31 - TC Reso. 00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 3 session occurred on September 13 and additional work sessions were held on September 27, October 11,November 18, December 13, and December 20, 1999 as well as on January 3 and January 10, 2000; and WHEREAS, following receipt of a more detailed and consolidated set of submission documents on November 29, 1999, the public hearing was closed on December 6 and a new public hearing was scheduled for January 17, 2000 to receive public comment regarding the updated application; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the posted, mailed and published public hearing notice requirements of Section 16A-5-150 of the Municipal Code, a new public hearing commenced before the Town Council on January 17, 2000, to receive written and verbal public comment on the updated Preliminary Plan application; and WHEREAS, the further review of the application and receipt of public comment continued during public hearings and/or work sessions held before the Town Council on February 7, 14 and 21, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Town Council closed the public hearing on February_ 2000, completed it's review of the Preliminary PUD application for the Project on February_ 2000 and, in doing so, has fully considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission, Town staff, independent consultants hired by the Town to assist in the review of the Project and the relevant written and verbal testimony provided by the public during the course of their review of the Project application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, as follows: Section One: General Findings. The Town Council finds generally as follows: 1. The Applicant submitted the Application for Preliminary Plan review of the Project in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code. The Planning Director accepted the Preliminary PUD Plan application after determining that it provided the "Minimum Contents" required pursuant to Section 16A-5-40(b), and included written and graphic materials pursuant to Section 16A-5-350, in sufficient detail to deem the application complete for review. Supplemental information had been submitted by the Applicant during the review process in response to staff, public and Town Council requests, comments, and concerns. To the extent, if any, that the original submission was different from the information used by the Town Council in the preparation of this resolution, the amended submission material had been reviewed and accepted by the Planning Director as meeting the intent and satisfying the requirements of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code. - 3 Z- - TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 4 2. The Town Council finds that all Municipal Code requirements concerning the provision of public notice related to the project and public hearings thereon, including publication, posting, and mailing of notices, have been satisfied and that all Preliminary PUD application materials have been made available to the general public within a reasonable time to permit adequate review of the project. The Town Council further finds that the changes made by the Applicant during the Preliminary PUD review process were generally in response to directions and suggestions offered during the Public Hearings and that the public, Planning Commission and Town Council had ample opportunity to consider such changes. 3. The Town Council, during the Preliminary Plan review, considered alternative development design and architectural schemes for the property. These alternatives included ..... - Snow melting Faraway Road - Removing top floor of Building D, eliminating the town home units and surface garages within Buildings L and M to be replaced by condominium four-plex buildings utilizing underground parking - creating waterfall and improved trail linkages - considering different color and materials schedules - investigating whether to participate in the creation of the employee housing in order that the project be owned and managed by the Town The amended Project, which was considered by the Town Council at the conclusion of the Preliminary Plan review and determined to be most consistent with Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code is as generally described below. The specific location of the structures and more detailed development parameters for the Preliminary Plan are shown and more fully described in Exhibit A of this resolution and the larger scale file documents and plans retained within the Planning Division records. A. Free Market Residential and Related Support Structures: 4 Four bedroom Townhouse units @ approx. 3,586 S.F. ea. 14,344 S.F. 36 Three bedroom suites @ 2,000 S.F. 76,634 S.F. Circulation, Service&Common Area 44 472 .F TOTAL: 150,617 S.F. B. Free Market Residential Parking: 85 Underground parking spaces for Regular Club Members,Employees and Vans 50 Underground parking spaces for Associate Club Members 8 Parking spaces in town home two car garages 0 Surface apron spaces in front of town home garages - 33 - TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 5 7 Surface plaza spaces 150 TOTAL Free Market Parking Spaces C. Restricted Employee Housing: 9 One Bedroom Units @ 557 S.F. 5,013 S.F. 9 Two Bedroom Units @ 1,057 S.F. 9,513 S.F. 18 Units (27 Bedrooms) TOTAL: 14,526 S.F. D. Restricted Employee Housing Parking: 41 Parking Spaces(1.5 spaces per bedroom) 3. The subject area is identified on the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Sensitivity Map as being within the Brush Creek Impact Area. As such, the Applicant submitted a report that evaluated the potential impacts of the development on Brush Creek and its associated riparian habitat and wetlands. The Town Council has reviewed the report and evaluated the recommendations to determine whether consistency exists with the development evaluation standards found in Section 16A-4-30 of the Municipal Code. Specifically, the Town Council finds: a) The Municipal Code states that development shall not take place within twenty-five (25) feet from the channel of Brush Creek or the edge of any riparian or wetland areas; however, certain exceptions are permitted. The small stream channel that traverses the site has been previously altered and has historically transported sediment from the areas uphill from the Project to Brush Creek. The Applicant intends to enhance the stream condition by relocating and installing underground detention facilities to better regulate spring run-off flow rates and contain sedimentation so as to mitigate impacts onto Brush Creek. The proposal addresses existing off-site impacts beyond what would strictly be the sole responsibility of the applicant. In this regard, the Town Council finds that the applicant's proposal will be beneficial to Brush Creek. b) The original proposal was to pipe a segment of the stream underground within the area between Building "A" and the ski slope, return to the surface to create a water feature/pond near the Woodbridge Bridge and then be piped underground to the existing discharge pipe which outflows into Brush Creek. The stream segment between Building "A" and the ski slope has now been brought to the surface. In addition, a pond has been created within the interior Club project area and a waterfall feature has been added proximate to the Brush Creek/Faraway Road intersection. The Town Council finds that these aspects of the enhancement plan to be desirable. c) The Applicant's US Army Corps of Engineers ("Corps") Section 404 permit -3�f - TC Reso.00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 6 application has been approved and the Applicant has agreed to mitigate the loss of approximately 0.13 acres that cannot be restored on site with 0.25 acre of wetlands within Brush Creek. The Applicant has indicated that the Corps has verbally agreed to allow this to occur. The applicant and Town Staff should continue to work with the Corps to develop a suitable solution that is beneficial to wetlands within the Town boundary. 4. The current zone classification for the Subject Property is SPA-1 Specially Planned Area. Section 16A-3-40(5) of the Municipal Code discusses the general purpose for the Specially Planned Area(SPA-1 and SPA-2) zone districts and specifies that development proposals within those districts are to be submitted and reviewed pursuant to the provisions of Article V, Division 3, Planned Unit Developments, and that those provisions will apply to establish and define the zoning parameters for the development. General Restriction No. 3 of the PUD regulations, however, states that"The land uses permitted in a PUD shall be limited to those uses that are allowed, or are allowed by special review, in the underlying zone district." Planning Commission Resolution 3 stated that the appropriate zone district for the proposed project was MU-PUD, Mixed Use PUD zone district and the Preliminary Plan application currently proposes rezoning to that district or as recommended by staff. As a result of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999, the Town Council now finds that it is more appropriate to rezone the property to the MF, Multi-Family zone district. The MF zone district permits all of the uses now proposed in The Timbers Preliminary PUD application, including multiple family dwelling units, associated office, recreation, and other related uses, and the associated underground parking which will be limited to the multiple family uses and Associate Memberships. The rezoning of the Project to MF will be approved at the time the Town Council approves the Final PUD plan for The Project. Additionally, the Applicant proposes that the "open space" areas be secured by a conservation easement in gross to preserve the open space within the MF zone district. The Town Council supports the Applicant's proposal. 5. Chapter Six, Future Land Use Plan, of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject area as the Faraway Ranch South (Parcel K & N) Comprehensively Planned Area ("CPA"). As such, the preferred development plan identified these elements: a) Employee housing could be included. b) Low-density, high occupancy, multi-family residential housing units could be included. c) A mixed-use recreation center at the base of Assay Hill could be included. d) Enhancement of the skier and pedestrian trails shall be included. e) Faraway Road/Brush Creek Road intersection improvement shall be included. f) Grouped development that provides for the maximum preservation of open space --3J-- TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 7 shall be included. g) Connection to the Snowmass Center and the Base area shall be included. The Town Council finds that, with the exception of providing a mixed-use recreation center at the base of Assay Hill, which is only identified as an element that "could be" considered and as noted within Finding 6 below, the above elements have been satisfactorily incorporated into the development proposal. 6. Section 16A-340(6)b. of the Municipal Code specifies which of the above elements of the Comprehensive Plan shall be accommodated in the development of the Faraway Ranch South (Parcel K & 1) CPA, namely: (1) enhancement of the skier access and pedestrian trails; (2) Faraway Road/Brush Creek Road intersection improvement; (3) clustered development that provides for the maximum preservation of open space; and (4) connection to the Snowmass Center and the Base area. The Town Council finds that the Project will accommodate these elements as described above, subject to the Applicant agreeing with the conditions below relating to the pedestrian trails and Ridge Condominium owner's ski slope access skier. Conditions to add: - Working with the Ridge Association to "field adjust" the new trail following two (2) ski seasons after Final PUD approval in order to develop the best trail design solution prior to snowfall for the next season. 7. Section 16A-340(6)b. of the Municipal Code also identifies elements of the Comprehensive Plan that could be considered in the development of the Faraway Ranch South (Parcel K & 1) CPA, namely: (1) Low density, high occupancy, multi-family residential housing; (2) Mixed use recreation center at the base of Assay Hill; and (3) Employee Housing. The Town Council finds that these are not required elements that must be provided but notes that the Project will accommodate elements 1 and 3. Low density is defined within the Comprehensive Plan as being up to ten (10) units per acre. The free market residential component of the project will be units per acre. 8. The "Comprehensive Plan" Build Out Analysis identifies the potential for up to 50 free market and 50 Affordable Housing units on the subject property if the PUD complies with Section 16A-5-300(c)(6), Community Purposes for PUD's, and other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The development proposal involves far less than 85% and, therefore, no benefits are required except as may be needed for the height variation request. 9. Article IV, Division 4, Restricted Housing Requirements, of Chapter 16A of the Municipal TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 8 Code, provides the methodology for determining the amount of restricted housing which must be provided by the Applicant to sufficiently mitigate the employee housing impact of the proposed development. The methodology in force and effect at the time this Preliminary Plan application was submitted requires: CLUB FACILITIES 1,022 S.F. Office Area X 3.78 jobs per 1,000 S.F. = 3.86 jobs 3,456 S.F. Ski Locker Area X 1.47 jobs per 1,000 S.F. = 5.08 jobs 2,955 S.F. Health Club Area X 1.47 jobs per 1,000 S.F. = 4.34 jobs 1,295 S.F. Lounge ???? [Discuss at meeting] 40 Multi-Family Units X 0.5 0 jobs per unit = 20.0 jobs TOTAL: 33.28 jobs 33.28 Jobs Divided By 1.3 Jobs per Employee= 25.6 Employees 25.6 X 411 sq. ft. per employee = 10,522 sq. ft. Restricted Housing Required The Applicant has proposed to construct a minimum of 14,525 sq. ft. (not including storage units) of restricted housing, as further described in Exhibit A. Of that amount, 10,522 sq. ft. will be constructed in fulfillment of the Applicant's obligation to mitigate the employee housing impacts of the Project. The remaining 4,003 sq. ft. are offered as a "Community Benefit" in connection with their height variance request. The Town Council finds that the Applicant can sufficiently meet the employee housing mitigation requirements of the Municipal Code for the Project. The Town Council has reviewed the Applicant's employee housing proposal but finds it to be in the best interest of the community to publicly participate in the creation of the housing and to proceed with structuring an agreement with the Applicant whereby the Town ultimately owns and manages the eighteen (18) employee housing units proposed by the developer. The initial discussion parameters were: 1. Rent levels (Revenue) were to be calculated based upon what the Mountain View Phase II rent would be for each unit type at the time of final PUD approval plus ten percent (10%). 2. The Town would proceed with public financial participation by obtaining voter approval and securing funds through bond issuance(20 year term) in an amount that can be financed from the net operating income derived from collected rents. 3. The applicant will then be responsible for the remaining costs of constructing the proposed employee housing units. When completed, the employee housing project will be conveyed to the Town. .-3 '? TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 9 4. Upon completion, the Town will own, manage and maintain the project in accordance with Town guidelines, except as provided below. 5. While the Town Council finds that it is appropriate to make a certain amount of the housing available to the employees of the project,the Town Council finds that the majority of the project should be available to any employee that qualified under the Town's guidelines. The Town and applicant will continue discussions to mutually agree on a percentage of the project (by specified units and which may include a portion of the mitigation housing) that the applicant shall be entitled to priority use by executing an employer master lease with the Town for the use of the units by employees working within the Timbers Club free market project. Matters involving rent collection, enforcement of housing guidelines and eviction of tenants residing within the master leased units shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 6. The applicant shall receive first priority to rent additional units should the Town be unable to rent them pursuant to the Town's Housing Guidelines. The Town Council also chose to develop a Plan `B" should the bond issue ballot question not be approved by the voters. The alternative plan will be: [TO BE DEVELOPED] The Town Council was requested by staff to provide their interpretation of Section 16A- 4-400, Purpose, of the Municipal Code which states: Recognizing the shortage of adequate housing for persons of low, moderate or middle income, adequate provisions for comfortable and affordable housing in suitable locations shall be made to accommodate such persons and their families employed as a result of the construction, operation or use proposed in a subdivision,PUD or special review application. The Town Council finds that this section of the Municipal Code should be interpreted to apply solely as the preamble to the regulatory provisions, being Section 116A4410, Restricted Housing Requirements, and Section 16A4420, Methods of complying with requirements, that follow and that the "Purpose" section has never been applied and should not be interpreted to mean that any required employee provided by the developer pursuant to the above sub-sections are to be made available exclusively or on a first priority basis for employees of the development in the manner which the applicant describes within their application. Further, does the Town Council feels that the legislative intent of the"Purpose" section was simply to express the basis or reason for adopting the regulations that follow which specify the manner in which additional affordable housing is to provided by developers within the community. TC Reso. 00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 10 10. The Town Council has, to the extent necessary for and pertinent to a Preliminary Plan level of evaluation and review, determined that the application is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, of the Municipal Code ("Restrictions"), as discussed below and/or subject to satisfying the applicable conditions contained within Section Three of this resolution. Although one (1) of the primary purposes of the PUD regulations is to provide flexibility in the land development process, the Restrictions are intended to define the limits of that flexibility. The following Restriction warrants comment: Dimensional Limitations and Community Purposes. Only certain dimensional limitations may be varied within the PUD process. The Applicant has requested approval to exceed the thirty-eight (38) foot maximum allowable height limit, as specified within the MF zone district, for Club Building "A". One of the review criteria for allowing the variation is that the Project must achieve one (1) or more of the applicable purposes listed in Section 16A-5-300(6), Community Purposes for PUD's. The "purposes" achieved are often referred to as "Community Benefits". The Town Council finds that more than one (1) of the purposes specified within Section 16A-5-300(c)(6) will be achieved. The Applicant has offered to provide 4,004 sq. ft. restricted housing in addition to the amount required to mitigate their employee housing impacts. In addition to the housing, other Community Benefits, as more fully specified within the variance request (see Section "L" of the November 29 application packet), are being offered in connection with their height variance request. The Applicant must also demonstrate that granting the height variation is "necessary for that purpose to be achieved." The Applicant proposes specific community benefits that are tied to the variance proposal. In addition, the Applicant relates the need to exceed the height limit for Building A in order to accomplish an intended purpose to "encourage better design". The Applicant has cited the underground parking and their desire to incorporate roof forms that are compatible with mountain design concepts. A lesser factor involves the evolution of the project to reduce the number of larger stand-alone town homes and converting the town home "units" into smaller condominium suites contained within four buildings. The first fundamental question before the Town Council was whether the additional height being granted for Building A is reasonable and appropriate for the better architectural design that is being achieved and to achieve the other community benefits proposed. It was felt that the intent and purpose for granting any height variation should relate directly to the purpose being achieved and not entirely on the Community Benefits being provided by the Applicant. 39 TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 11 The second question was whether the Town Council should accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding the manner in which building height will be calculated within the Project. The Municipal Code defines grade as the elevation of the ground in existence prior to the initiation of development or if it is determined that the existing grade has been altered prior to an application for development, then the Planning Director shall establish what had been the existing grade prior to the alteration. The Town Council finds that this site has been altered substantially over time. Detailed studies also show that the majority of the 30 percent slopes which now exist on the site are, in fact, man made. The Town Council has determined that there is inadequate data to accurately establish and define the topography which would have existed on the site prior to its alteration. The Town Council and the applicant agreed that the real issue relating to height is what the project will look like from various vantage points. For this reason the applicant submitted a substantial amount of computer generate imagery to demonstrate the related mass and visual impact of the project. The Town Council, based on Planning Commission and public input, has determined that the visual impact of the project now described in the Preliminary PUD application is acceptable and consistent with the community and neighborhood image and character. Therefore, for the purposes of calculating height and related variance request, the Town Council finds that it is appropriate to use the topography which existed on the property at the time of Preliminary PUD application. FINDING REGARDING HEIGHT VARIANCE: (1) The request to exceed the height limit for Building A, as specifically shown in the Preliminary PUD application is appropriate. The building is situated on top of the underground parking structure, which is considered to be a desirable feature of the project. The pad created by the parking structure is above the existing grade of the site, thereby adding additional height to Building A. (2) While the height of the building could be reduced by lowering the pitch of the roof, the Town Council finds that the proposed roof pitch is more characteristic of traditional mountain design. (3) The project includes smaller scale buildings in the foreground, as viewed from Brush Creek Road and the Woodbridge neighborhood which provides the appearance that the overall design will step up to hillside and that the height of Building A will be minimized by TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 12 the placement of 38 foot tall buildings in the foreground. (4) Although Building A will exceed the 38 foot height limit, the Town Even Council finds that this is the appropriate location for additional building height within the property and the proposed design will as is shown in computer imagery provided with the Preliminary PUD application, protect the desirable view planes from surrounding residential projects. 11. The Town Council finds that the project will provide certain improvements that, under Section 16A-5-300(c)(6)constitute benefits to the community. These benefits are as follows. A. The project will provide either enclosed or underground parking for the 40 free market units. While this is a benefit to the project, the elimination of surface parking does produce a certain level of visual benefits to the community and surrounding B. The Timbers project will provide a number of infrastructure enhancements that will be directly applicable to assisting the development of the Town's employee housing site on Parcel N, including the extension of utilities and roadway and intersection improvements that mitigated the impact of not only The Timbers project but also mitigated the impact of the Parcel N employee housing. C. The Project will relocate the Brush Creek Road transit stop and shelter, now locate on the west side of the intersection, to a more suitable location east of the intersection. Relocating the facility for the purposes of improving sight distance and providing an adequate space for the Town and RFTA is a mitigation requirement. The project will, however, provide an enhanced shelter and landscape and aesthetic improvement. D. The Project will establish a suitable kiss and ride facility to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood. The facility will ensure that, in the future, all drop-offs and pick ups can occur off of the public road. The drop off and pick up activity now occurs on private property. E. The Project will enhance the pedestrian trail system which crosses the property and provide crucial trail connections to help enhance the community and neighborhood trail network and provide better.access to the Base Village area. These trails include: ..�. ) wow TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 13 (1) The Brush Creek Trail will be realigned near the Faraway Road- Brush Creek Road intersection. A Class I trail right-of-way will be established and the trail reconstructed to the standard of 8 feet. The relocation will move the point of the Faraway Road crossing further from the intersection, thereby improving safety. Environmental and landscape enhancements will improve the aesthetic qualities that now occur along this section of trail. (2) A Class I trail will be established along the north side of Faraway Road, connecting The Ridge neighborhood to the town shuttle stop area and the Brush Creek Trail. (3) A Class_trail will be provided along the south side of Faraway Road, connecting The Ridge neighborhood to the town shuttle stop area and the Brush Creek Trail. (We need to check to see what a paved trail will to to the hill side, will it require undesirable retaining etc., and the input of The Ridge Association from January 28 meeting) (4) A Class II unpaved summer use trial will be established along The Ridge Condominiums existing ski egress trail to the westerly property line. This trial will be only for pedestrians, bicycles, and equestrians. Use will be prohibited in during the ski season to ensure that the trail continues to provide proper ski egress for The Ridge Condominiums and does not interfere with the Aspen Skiing Company's winter operations on Assay Hill. F. The Timbers at Snowmass will undertake significant improvements to the site drainage, which has undergone major alteration over time. The improvements are required to not only mitigate the on-site development, but also help to control the adverse impacts on water quality caused by previous improper development practices that actually occur off site and above the Project. G. The Project will remove the existing railroad tie retaining wall near the Brush Creek-Faraway Road intersection. The project will provide significant aesthetic improvement at this location, including boulder walls, water feature, and enhanced landscaping. This will be a desirable aesthetic enhancement to that area. H. The Project will provide restricted employee housing in an amount that 4 X -. TC Reso. 00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 14 exceeds the requirements of the Code. The Developer will construct 15,167 square feet, thereby exceeding the requirement by 4,646 square feet. 12. The applicant has also requested approval of two (2) additional variations from required provisions of the Municipal Code. These are: 1) a request for an exception from Section 16A-4-30(e)(1) in order to change the horizontal setback requirement from the edge of a riparian or wetland area; and 2) authorization to reduce the number of parking spaces required by Section 16A-4-310 to allow the required parking for the 36 Club Suites to be reduced from one space per bedroom (3 spaces per unit)to a maximum of 2.0 spaces per unit. With regard to this request, and given the level of community benefits provide by the project, the Town Council finds the following. Applicable variances will be approved in conjunction with the Final PUD Plan. A. Stream/Wetland Setback (1) The subject property is identified on the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Sensitivity Map as being with the Brush Creek Impact Area. The Town Council reviewed the Applicant's impact report and evaluated the recommendations therein and determined that the project will comply the development evaluation standards found in Section 16A-4-30 of the Municipal Code. (2) Section 16A-4-30 permits certain exceptions to the setback requirements. Specifically, a variance is allowed if it otherwise produces an enhancement to or restoration of the stream (Brush Creek). This Project will affect wetlands and an existing minor stream channel. However, the Town Council finds that the wetlands and stream channel in question have been altered considerably over the years. The Town Council finds that the Project will produce significant overall enhancement and restoration measures related to Brush Creek that will far exceed the benefits which would otherwise be produced as a result of adhering to the setback requirements of the Code. (3) The setback variance will result in not only better Project design, a criteria identified in Section 16A-5-300(c)(6) of the Code, but the variance to the setback will also allow significant enhance to habitat and open space. The Project will substantially aid the improvement of the water quality and aquatic habitat of Brush Creek and replace the impacted wetland with more and better TC Reso.00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 15 quality wetland elsewhere on site and in the community. 13. The Town Council has, to the extent necessary for and pertinent to a Preliminary Plan level of evaluation and review, determined that the application is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards, of the Municipal Code ("Standards"), as discussed below and/or subject to satisfying the applicable conditions contained within Section Three of this resolution. a) The Preliminary Plan generally identifies land uses that are consistent with the Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan (the "Comprehensive Plan") Future Land Use Map in that the subject area is identified as being intended for Open Space/Conservation and Multi-Family Residential uses. The "Club Facility" and the associated parking would be appropriate accessory uses customarily found in connection with a development of this type. b) It is believed that Building D does partially extend into the area shown as being Open Space on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map; however, the Applicant has committed a southerly portion of the parcel to Open Space that is larger in area than what has been identified for "Open Space/Conservation" on the map. The Applicant needs to provide a copy of the conservation easement document and supply sufficient information within the Final PUD application to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town Council that there will be no net loss in Open Space from the amount currently identified on the Future Land Use Map. Although not a requirement to the processing of the application, the Town Council will then direct that the Future Land Use Map be amended to be consistent with the Final Plan approval. 14. The Town Council finds that the proposed project generally complies with the directions established by the Town in the Sketch Plan approval resolution and with subsequent guidance from the Planning Commission during Preliminary Plan review, as discussed below and/or subject to satisfying the applicable recommendations contained within Section Three of this resolution: a) Retaining Walls/Finished Grading. b) Geotechnical, Groundwater and Drainage. c) Town Shuttle and RFTA Pullouts. �� � wow TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 16 d) Fractional Ownership. -The Town Council finds that the fractional ownership nature of the project will help ensure a relatively high occupancy level within the Project. The Project satisfactorily complies with the requirements of the Municipal Code with regard to fiscal impacts. The Town Council finds that the Applicant has used generally conservative assumptions in the fiscal impact report provided with the Preliminary PUD application. As a result, the Town Council has determined that, with no more than a 55 percent occupancy, the project will generate sufficient revenue, in the form of taxes, fees and other revenue sources, to offset any fiscal impact that it creates on the community. A higher'occupancy level produces a net positive benefit to the community. - Add provisions that can help ensure high occupancy if ownership occupancy does not meet 55% occupancy levels as shown to be the "break-even" point within the Fiscal Impact Analysis. -Provisions regarding the "Associate Membership" parking: - Lease spaces for years to evaluate actual parking needs of the Project - Priority lease and/or sale provisions for: 1) Faraway Road residents; then 2) Snowmass Village residents; then 3) Pitkin County residents; and finally 4) all others. -Whether to permit more than 50 spaces (terms and conditions) - Changes that need to be made to the Condo. Doc's. 15. The Town amended the Land Use and Development Code in Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999, which will affect the manner in which floor area is calculated for the project. While the Planning Commission and Town Council have thoroughly reviewed the amount of floor area proposed in the Preliminary PUD application, the Town Council recognizes that the applicant will be required to provide with the Final PUD application revised floor area calculations that are consistent with the amendment to the Code approved under Ordinance 11. 16. The Town Council considered the applicant's proposed options related to improving the lower portion of Faraway Road. Generally, one options included a wider driving surface and a second option included a narrower pavement width with a snowmelt system. The Town Council has determined that the narrower pavement surface and r.� TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Prelirmnary PUD Page 17 snowmelt system is not appropriate. The wider pavement surface with all related improvement described in the Preliminary PUD application is the most desirable traffic mitigation solution. 17. The applicant has requested that the Town Council approve an excavation permit to for the purposes o£ 1) preparing for employee housing utilities and preparing a staging area, 2) establishing a temporary stream diversion, 3) creating a shoring wall at the back of the parking structure, 4) commence construction of the parking structure and 5) commence construction of Building A. The Town Council finds that while they are under no obligation to issue an excavation permit, there are appropriate reasons to do so at this time The Town Council finds that sufficient understanding has been gained during the Preliminary PUD review to permit such improvements to commence. Geotechnical studies have considered on-site and neighboring property conditions. Related engineering requirements have been established through the geotechnical studies and reports prepared by the applicant's consultant and the recommendations generated by the Town's independent geotechnical consultant. The Town Council also finds that it is desirable to commence this excavation during the winter months and prior to the Spring run-off and rising water tables. No authorization should be granted, however, until acceptable detailed construction management and interim erosion control plans have been developed which carefully minimize visual, environmental, noise, traffic and operational impacts on surrounding properties, roadways and Brush Creek during the period when the ski area is operational. 18. The Town Council finds that the applicant's request for a subdivision exemption for the purposes exempting a condominiumization and time share estate from the subdivision regulations of the Town is appropriate. The Code defines a time share unit as "the ownership or use of which is subject to an arrangement . . . . . which provides for or allows the exclusive use or occupancy of the dwelling unit by one(1) or more co-owners or co-users during any annually recurring period of time if said agreement is in any way binding or effective on any assignee or future owner of the unit or any fractional interest therein." The Timbers at Snowmass request approval of an exemption from subdivision regulations of the Town for the following purposes of condominiumizing 36 Club Suites and 4 Club Townhome units; creating a time share estate, including a total of 302 fractional ownership interests in the 36 Club Suites and 4 Club Townhome units; and condominiumizing parking spaces within the parking structure, as specifically described in the Preliminary PUD application. One condominium unit will include all of the parking spaces owned and managed by The Timbers Association. There will be 18 to 28 spaces individually condominiumized parking space that must be initially owned by the Developer but leased to the Master Association. (The specific number will depend on the interior engineering .M. Al & 0� TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 18 design of the parking structure.) Finally, there will initially be 50 individual condominiumized spaces for the Associate Members. The subdivision exemption request is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and is necessary to further the objectives of the PUD plan. The subdivision exemption will be approved in conjunction with the Final PUD Plan. Section Two: Action. 1. The Preliminary PUD Plan submitted by the applicant on April 13, 1999, as amended November 29, 1999 and as more fully described within Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved subject to the requirements of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code and the findings and conditions contained within Section Three below. The Project use, density, and development configuration, which is described in the Preliminary PUD Plan, includes the following Land Use and Development Program: A. 36 three bedroom Condominium, Timeshare Estate Units S.F. B. 4 four bedroom Condominium, Timeshare Estate Units S.F. C. Reserved interior Unit space within building footprint S.F. D. Interior common area, lobby and service space S.F. E. Office S.F. F. Health Club S.F. G. 9 one bedroom employee units S.F. H. 9 two bedroom employee units S.F. I. 7 plaza level parking spaces J. 8 enclosed townhome parking spaces K. 5 townhome apron parking spaces L. 150 underground parking spaces M. 41 employee surface parking spaces N. Trails and sidewalks O: School bus and RFTA kiss and ride drop-off P. Exterior pool and spa Q. Open space 2. The Town Council authorizes the Applicant to submit the Final PUD Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Code for consideration by the Town Council. 3. The Town Council hereby approves an excavation permit solely for the purposes o£ 1) preparing for employee housing utilities and preparing a staging area, 2) establishing a temporary stream diversion, 3) creating a shoring wall at the back of the parking structure, and 4) commence construction of the parking structure. This approval is specifically conditioned upon minimizing the number of truck trips to and from the site _ 47 - TC Reso.00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 19 during the remainder of the 1999-2000 ski season by stockpiling as much of the dirt as possible on- site; 2) limiting equipment start up to no earlier than 7:30 A.M. during the remainer of the 1999-2000 ski season; 3) any requirements and conditions established by the Town Building Official, Police Chief, and Town Engineer; 4) compliance with all of the recommendations of the Project Geotechnical Report and the recommendations of the Town's consulting engineer, Lambert and Associates; and 5) compliance with all other aspect of the construction management plan included with the Preliminary PUD plan and as further described in Exhibit _. The applicant/developer shall proceed entirely at its own risk, as the Town Council has not granted Final PUD approval. Section Three: Conditions of Approval. 1. The Final PUD Plan shall comply with the revised Preliminary PUD application approved pursuant to this resolution, except as otherwise noted in these conditions. 2. The Applicant shall recalculate all floor area approved in the Preliminary PUD plan in a manner that is now consistent with the provisions of Ordinance 11, which amended the procedure for calculating floor area. The revised floor area calculations shall be included in the Final PUD application. Because of the complexity of the project, the Planning Director and the applicant shall review and agree upon the floor area calculations included with the Final PUD application. 3. The building heights for all buildings shall be as now described in the Preliminary PUD application and as further described in Exhibit_. The maximum building elevations shall be documented in an appropriate manner in the Final PUD approval. 4. NOTE: Applicant's Proposal: The final employee housing plan shall comply with the following requirements and procedures for providing such housing. The condominium documents will be revised in a manner that reflects this condition and submitted with the Final PUD application. It is the intent of the Town Council to purchase, own, and manage all of the employee housing as described here. This requires the Town to gain approval of an appropriate housing finance bond no later than November, 2000. Failure to obtain such bond approval by the voters required that the Town and the applicant to maintain a suitable fall back procedure for providing such housing. These procedures shall be as follows: A. Procedure for providing employee housing assuming approval of a housing finance bond no later than November . 2000. (1) The applicant will submit a request for subdivision approval along with the Final PUD application, the purpose of which will be to subdivide that TC Reso.00.06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 20 portion of the property located east of Faraway Road from Parcel K. If the Town completes the purchase of the employee housing project, it shall be detached from The Timbers Master Association. (2) Prior to Final PUD application, the applicant and the Town shall agree upon an estimated annual budget for the employee housing project, including operations, maintenance, and capital reserve needs. (3) Upon Final PUD approval, the applicant/developer shall construct the employee housing in accordance with the plans described in the Preliminary PUD application and approved with the Final PUD Plan. The employee housing shall be constructed in accordance with all plans and conditions of the Final PUD approval. (4) The applicant/developer shall construct the employee housing in Phase II of the Project and as specifically described in the Phasing Plan included with the Preliminary PUD application and shall obtain a building permit for the employee housing either before or in conjunction with the first building permit issued for Phase II of the Project. (5) The applicant/developer shall obtain a certificate of occupancy for the employee units prior to obtaining the final certificate of occupancy for any units in Buildings L and M in Phase II. (6) Immediately upon issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the employee housing, the Town shall purchase the entire employee housing project from the applicant/developer. Closing shall occur on the date of the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for the employee housing unless other arrangements are agreed to by the applicant. The purchase shall include land, structures and other improvements, and all construction and improvement warranties and the Town and applicant will enter into a hold harmless agreement at that time. The purchase price shall be equal to the amount which can be financed over 20 years by the available net project rental. Rental income for one and two bedroom units shall an amount equal to the estimated amount of rent that will be charged by the Town for the Mountain View Phase II units at the time the final certificate of occupancy is issued for the employee housing units. The estimated rents and the purchase price shall be agreed upon by the Town and applicant prior to Final PUD approval. (7) The Town will guarantee The Timbers Master Association for the life of The Timbers project an employer lease arrangement, comparable to that WWWW 1 4 TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 21 now used by the Town in other projects, the priority use of three(3)one bedroom units and three (3)two bedroom units within this employee housing project. The applicant and Town shall enter into an agreement at the time of final PUD approval specifying those units for which The Timbers will be granted priority use. If The Timbers is unable to place a qualified employee in the priority unit(s), then the unit(s) will be made available any employee qualified by the Town guidelines and identified by the Town Housing Department. At the end of the lease period of such employee, The Timbers shall regain the priority use of the unit if it can place a qualified employee in the unit. The Timber's units will be subject to the Town's employee housing rules and regulations for this project. B. Procedure for providing employee housing assuming an unsuccessful attempt by the Town to gain approval of a housing finance bond, which shall occur no later than November, 2000 unless otherwise approved by the applicant. (1) The applicant/developer shall construct the employee housing in Phase II of the Project and as specifically described in the Phasing Plan included with the Preliminary PUD application and shall obtain a building permit for the employee housing either before or in conjunction with the first building permit issued for Phase II of the Project. The employee housing shall be constructed in accordance with all plans and conditions of the Final PUD approval. (2) The applicant/developer shall obtain a certificate of occupancy for the employee units prior to obtaining the final certificate of occupancy for any units in Buildings L and M in Phase II. (3) The applicant/developer shall retain ownership of the housing, unless conveyance to a third party is approved by the Town. (4) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the employee housing units, the applicant/developer shall establish a deed restriction to the benefit of the Town which limits the use in perpetuity of each unit within the employee housing project to affordable employee housing. (5) The Timbers Master Association shall retain for the life of The Timbers project the priority use of three(3)one bedroom units and three (3)two bedroom units within this employee housing project. The applicant and Town shall enter into an agreement at the time of Final PUD approval specifying those units for which The Timbers will retain priority use. If The Timbers is unable to place a qualified employee in the priority unit(s), __ 45-a SOM TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers at Snowmass Preliminary PUD Page 22 then the unit(s) will be made available any employee qualified by the Town guidelines and identified by the Town Housing Department. At the end of the lease period of such employee, The Timbers shall regain the priority use of the unit if it can place a qualified employee in the unit. The Timbers' units will be subject to the Towns employee housing rules and regulations for this project. (6) The applicant/developer and Town shall enter into an agreement at the time of final PUD approval specifying those units for which The Timbers will be granted priority use. (7) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant/ developer establishes a deed restriction to the benefit of the Town to ensure that those units not subject to The Timbers priority will be made available any employee qualified by the Town guidelines and identified by the Town Housing Department. These units shall be subject to all Town rules and regulations for employee housing. (8) Rents charged by the applicant/developer for one and two bedroom units shall be equal to the amount of rent that will be charged by the Town for the Mountain View Phase II units at the time the final certificate of occupancy is issued for the employee housing units. The applicant/developer, at its option, may institute annual rent adjustment in an amount comparable to those instituted by the Town for Mountain View Phase II or other Town employee housing project. 5. The project shall maintain a 22 foot unobstructed emergency access through the project. The project also shall comply with the requirements of the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District, as described in project review memorandum dated December 9, 1999. 6. The Timbers Master Association shall provide four vans, as described by the Applicant in the Preliminary PUD application, to project complimentary transportation service for the benefit of the Club Members, including but not limited to transportation to and from the Pitkin County Airport. The Timber Association shall in its Reservation Policies and Procedures include a notice to all club members and guests regarding the availability of Club and public transit options. 7. The applicant shall convey a Conservation Easement in gross to the Town that limits the use of that portion of the property located above The Ridge ski egress trail to open space, passive open use recreation, trails, and the Deerbrook access in existence on the date of the Final PUD approval. The conservation easement shall be conveyed by the applicant within 90 days of the effective date of the Final PUD approval. 8. The applicant shall mitigate the project's wetland impacts in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit for the project. The applicant shall provide .16 acres of wetland TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers Prelim.Plan Page 23 mitigation occur off-site within two years from the date of the permit to complete the off-site mitigation, as required by the Corps of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers will permit the applicant to either mitigate its impact by purchasing a mitigation site at the Colorado Rocky Mountain Institute wetland bank in Snowmass, Colorado, for the amount of$10,000. To mitigate this impact, The Timbers will make a $10,000 contribution to the Town within one year of the issuance of the first building permit for the project. Provided, however, the Town must assure The Timbers at Snowmass and the Army Corps of Engineers that the Town's mitigation project will be completed within two years of the date of the permit. If the Town is unable to provide such assurances that a project will be competed within the specified time, The Timbers at Snowmass will purchase wetland mitigation at the Colorado Rocky Mountain Institute wetland bank. 9. All site lighting source will appropriately shielded from view. While up directed accent lighting will be permitted it shall be minimized to as not to create an excessive amount of light pollution. Exposed wall-pak lighting and other similar fixtures are prohibited. 10. In order to minimize the level of traffic impacts from this project, the Town will not issue resident parking permits for the public parking lots to the members of this project. 11. The shall be a minimum of 191 parking spaces provided in the project, including 41 employee parking spaces and 150 Club and Associate Member parking spaces. The actual number of parking spaces may be up to 201 depending on the final engineered design of the interior of the parking structure. The following restrictions shall be applied to the parking. A. With the exception of the seven plaza-level parking spaces provided near the porte cochere, exterior parking will be time restricted and controlled by The Timbers Association. B. The applicant/developer shall initially maintain 1 space per bedroom for the 4 Townhomes. The owners of each townhome will own the two spaces in garage that is attached to the dwelling unit. The Timbers Association will own two related spaces within the parking garage. C. The Timbers Association will own four (4) parking spaces for Club vans and eight (8) parking spaces for employees. D. The applicant/developer shall provide 2.0 spaces per unit for the 36 three bedroom Club suites. Of this number 0.5 spaces per units, (18 spaces and possibly up to 28 depending on the final engineering design), will continue to be owned by the applicant/developer and leased to the Master Association for only the prorated cost of maintenance and liability. A two year parking evaluation period will be established, commencing upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for those units in Phase I, to determine the actual needs of the Club Suites. During this time, the Developer and the Town Planner will project the parking needs for an individual Club Suite. It shall then be determined whether any or all of the 18 to 28 units are required to meet the needs of the Club Suites. The applicant/ wa� J;L NNW TC Resa 00-06 The Timbers Prelim.Plan Page 24 developer will convey each space required to meet the needs of 36 Club Suites to the Master Association. If the Town Planner determines that any or all of these spaces are not required, then the Developer may convert said spaces into additional Associate Member spaces. E. The applicant/developer may provide up to fifty(50) associate member parking spaces during the two year parking evaluation period. During this period the applicant/developer may lease said spaces to Associate Members. The Timbers will offer each Associate Membership created on a priority basis. Property owners in Ridge Run will be given first priority and property owners within Snowmass Village in general second priority. If at the end of the parking evaluation period it is determined that the projected parking needs of a Club Suite exceed 2.0 spaces per unit, up to a maximum of 3.0 spaces per unit, then the applicant/developer shall reduce the number of Associate Member parking spaces accordingly to ensure that the Club Suite requirement is met. Based on the determination of need, the Town Planner shall specify the amount of the reduction necessary. The applicant/developer will convey each space required to meet the needs of the Club Suites to the Master Association. F. Upon completion of the two year evaluation period, and once the applicant/developer determines the final number of Associate Member spaces that will be available, then the applicant/developer may either continue to lease or sell any space designated for an Associate Member. Associate member spaces that have not been allocated as described in subsection (E) above will be offered on the same priority basis, except after one year any unallocated space may then be made available to resident of the Roaring Fork Valley. G. The Master Association will assign within the parking structure one (1) parking space per Club Suite and two (2) parking spaces per Townhome. The location of the assigned spaces will be based on proximity of the parking space to the unit. All other required Club Suite parking spaces will not be assigned. 12. The applicant shall provide reasonable security in the development improvements agreement to guarantee the construction of four bus shelters. The design of each bus shelter shall be approved with the Final PUD Plan. Generally, the design will be enclosed on three sides, with appropriate glazing material, and benches. The Town and the applicant shall continue to study the need for and design of a bus shelter at the uphill location along Brush Creek Road. A determination as to the need and/or design of this shelter shall be made prior to Final PUD approval. 13. The applicant shall use a textured concrete at each bus pull out location to differentiate the pull out from the roadway. The final details shall be approved with the Final PUD Plan. 14. The engineering plans related to all roadway, intersection, retaining, and drainage shall be consistent with the Preliminary PUD application and as further described in Exhibit— The final engineering details shall be approved in conjunction with the Final PUD Plan. TC Reso.00-06 The Timbers Prelim.Plan Page 25 15. The landscape plan shall be consistent with the Preliminary PUD application and as further described in Exhibit— The final landscape details shall be approved in conjunction with the Final PUD Plan. 16. The applicant shall design and build the down hill bus stop on Faraway Road, the kiss and ride facility, and related pathways and landscaping in compliance with the plan provided in Exhibit _. The kiss and ride facility will be conveyed to the Town as part of the employee housing parcel, as described in Condition 4, and the Town will be responsible for controlling parking at that location. 17. The applicant shall revise the condominum documents to require only a simple majority vote the property owners to allow short term rental of a unit or portion thereof. The final condominium documents shall be submitted with the Final PUD application. 18. The applicant has moved The Ridge ski egress trail in a manner that is consistent with the Preliminary PUD application. If it is determined during the 1999-2000 winter ski season that the trail can or should be improved from the now current alignment, the applicant shall make such improvements prior to the commencemen t of the 2000-2001 winter ski season. 19. The recommendations of Town staff and consultants, attached hereto as Exhibit _and incorporated herein by reference as conditions of approval, must be fully addressed or satisfied within the Final PUD submission. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on this day of February, 2000 by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on a motion made by Council member seconded by Council member , by a vote of_to TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk HAlShared\Clerk\reso.tc\TC 00-06 The Timbers Prelim PUD �� �� Wom COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: January 17, 2000 BY: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk THROUGH: Gary Suiter, Town Manager SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 10, SERIES OF 2000 EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO TOM DUNLOP FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS OVERVIEW: Due to other commitments, Tom Dunlop has submitted his resignation as a volunteer from the Board of Appeals and Examiners . Tom has served 18 and % years on this Board for the Town. He was first appointed to the Board of Appeals and Examiners in 1981 . Dunlop' s fellow Board members have been contacted, some of which have served on this Board as many years as Tom or longer, and may attend this meeting as an expression of their appreciation also. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BOARD OR COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval . p:\shared\clerk\boards TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE RESOLUTION NO. 10 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO TOM DUNLOP FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS. WHEREAS, Tom Dunlop was appointed as a Member of the Snowmass Village Board of Appeals and Examiners on June 1, 1981;and WHEREAS, Mr. Dunlop dedicated 18-112 years of volunteer service on the Board of Appeals and Examiners; and WHEREAS, in his position as a member of the Board of Appeals and Examiners, Tom contributed his expertise and knowledge for the good of the community;and WHEREAS, Tom Dunlop submitted his resignation on December 14, 1999;and WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village wishes to formally express appreciation for Mr. Dunlop's tenure on the Snowmass Village Board of Appeals and Examiners. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: The Snowmass Village Town Council Members extend a unanimous vote of thanks to Tom Dunlop for 18-112 years of outstanding service to the community as a member of the Snowmass Village Board of Appeals and Examiners. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the l7th day of January, 2000 with a motion made by Council Member Mercatoris and the second of Council Member Costello and by a vote of 5 to 0. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE ATTEST. T. Michael Manchester, Mayor Trudi Worline, Town Clerk TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING WHEN: MONDAY, JANUARY 17, 1999 WHERE: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 0016 KEARNS ROAD 2ND FLOOR SNOWMASS CENTER BUILDING WHY: TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON: TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1999, AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO HOLY CROSS ENERGY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN FOR LIGHT, HEAT, POWER AND OTHER PURPOSES AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF TIME: AT A MEETING WHICH BEGINS AT 9 : 00 P.M. THE EXACT TIME OF THE HEARING WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE AGENDA. INFO: 923-3777 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk Posted and Published in the Snowmass Village Sun on 12-08-99 httpp: //www. tosv. com clerk @tosv.com ...r 07 vamp TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING WHEN: MONDAY, JANUARY 17, 1999 WHERE: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 0016 KEARNS ROAD 2ND FLOOR SNOWMASS CENTER BUILDING WHY: TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON: TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 23, SERIES OF 1999 AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE INTERIM AMENDMENT PROCEDURE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE TIME: AT A MEETING THAT BEGINS AT 9 : 00 P.M. THE EXACT TIME OF THE HEARING WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE AGENDA. INFO: 923-3777 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk Posted and Published in the Snowmass Village Sun on 12-08-99 http: //www.tosv. com clerk @tosv.com MEOW 5wv �� TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: January 17, 2000 Presented By: Stephen R. Connor, Town Attorney Victoria Giannola, Planning Director Subject: Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999 Overview: This Ordinance extends the Interim Amendment Procedure allowing the Town Council to process amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the text of the Land Use and Development Code in an expedited manner. The current authorization for the expedited process expires on December 31, 1999. Town Council approved the Ordinance on the first reading of 6 December 1999. The Planning Commission recommended approval at its December 15, 1999 meeting. This is the second reading before Town Council. Recommendation: Approve the Ordinance on second reading. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 23 SERIES OF 1999 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE INTERIM AMENDMENT PROCEDURE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WHEREAS, amendments to Chapter 16A contained in this Ordinance are being processed under the provisions of Section 5-210.C.7 of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Town Council directed the Planning Staff to propose amendments Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code, and to prepare this Ordinance to formalize the amendments; and WHEREAS, the Town Council referred the amendments to the Planning Commission after first reading for comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the amendments and made its recommendations regarding the amendments to the Town Council at its meeting occurring on December 15, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Town Council reviewed the recommendations of the Planning Commission on January 17, 2000; and WHEREAS, notice of a Public Hearing to be held on January 3, 2000 was published in the Snowmass Sun, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5-60 13.1. and 5-210 C.6. of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Town Council received comment from the public at the Public Hearing held in accordance with the provisions of Section 5-210 C.6. of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code on January 3, 2000 and January 17, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has considered the application, all relevant support materials, the report of the Town Staff, the Planning Commission recommendations and public testimony given at the Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this Ordinance complies with the provisions of Section 5-210 E. of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code; and �..� Q go- Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the procedure and requirements set forth in Section 5-210 of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code have been satisfied; and WHEREAS, as to the provisions of this Ordinance that do not amend Chapter 16A, the Town Council has review the provisions and has received the recommendation of the Town Staff and comments from the public; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: 1. Amendment. The following provisions of Chapter 16A of the Municipal Code are here by amended and restated as follows: a. Sec. 16A-1-50. Comprehensive plan. (e) Interim Amendment Procedure. From the period following the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan until December 31, 2000, the Town Council may initiate amendments to clarify, extend or otherwise revise the Comprehensive Plan without first having the Planning Commission accomplish a periodic review and without the submission of a written report on the "State of the Comprehensive Plan." Such amendments shall be accomplished by ordinance, following referral of the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission for their comment and recommendations. b. Sec. 16A-5-210. Amendments to text of Development Code. (7) Interim amendment procedure. From the period following the adoption of this Land Use and Development Code until December 31, 2000, the Town Council may initiate amendments to the text of this Code without compliance with the provisions of Section 16A-5-210(c)(1) through (c)(5), provided that the Town Council shall refer such amendments to the Planning Commission following first reading of the ordinance for comment. Comments of the Planning Commission shall be delivered to the Town Council at the public hearing on the ordinance. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999 Page 3 Except as expressly amended and restated herein, the provision of Chapter 16A shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 2. Severabilitv. If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 6, 1999 upon a motion by Council Member Mercatoris, the second of Council Member Hatfield, and upon a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against. Council Member Brady was absent. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on Second Reading on January 17, 2000 upon a motion by Council Member , the second of Council Member and upon a vote of_ in favor and _against. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND AND COMMENT. WHEN: January 17, 2000 TIME: During a meeting which begins at 4:00 p.m. WHERE: Town Council Chambers 2nd Floor, Snowmass Center 0016 Kearns Road WHY: To receive final public comment regarding The Timbers at Snowmass (Faraway Ranch South) Preliminary Plan submission, involving Parcel K, Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat, as recorded March 18, 1985 in Plat Book 17 at Page 5 in the records of the Pitkin County, Colorado Clerk and Recorder. The submission also involves a request to rezone the property from SPA-1, Specially Planned Area, to MU-PUD, Mixed Use PUD, subdivision of the parcel and a Subdivision Exemption application to permit condominiumization (including a time share regime) of the project. INFO: Contact the Snowmass Village Planning Department at 923-5524 for additional information. Trudi Worline, Town Clerk Published in the Snowmass Sun on December 8, 1999 MAWpdata\P1anning\Phnotice\TC The Timbers PHNotiee02 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 17", 2000 TO RECIEVE COMMENT ON AN APPLICATION BY THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS, LLC, FOR AN ANNUAL TEMPOARY USE PERMIT. THE MEETING WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL AS NOTED BELOW. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND AND COMMENT. DATE: January 17th, 2000 TIME: During a meeting which begins at 4:00 PM WHERE: Town Council Chambers 2nd Floor, Snowmass Center 0016 Kearns Road Snowmass Village, CO WHY: To Receive Public Comment on an application by The Timbers at Snowmass, LLC for an Annual Temporary Use Permit to install a trailer at Parcel K (formerly Faraway Ranch South) and to operate it as a sales office for the Timbers Club at Snowmass. CODE: The application will be processed as an Annual Temporary Use Permit pursuant to Section 16A-5-260 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code. INFO: Additional information regarding the proposal is available for inspection at the Snowmass Village Planning Department or by phone at 970-923-5524 during normal business hours. Written comments prior to the public hearing may be submitted to: Snowmass Village Planning Department P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Att: Dean C. Stahman Published in the Snowmass Sun on December 29 , 1999 Published in the Aspen Times on January 06, 2000 P:\shared\Clerk\Council.tc\00-07pn.doc /Al 4q �— COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: January 17'" 2000 at 4:00 PM Presented By: Dean C. Stahman, Planning Technician Subject: Timbers at Snowmass, Sales OfficeTrailer, Annual Temporary Use Permit Overview: The Timbers Club at Snowmass has applied for an Annual Temporary Use Permit (ATUP), to allow the placement of a trailer at Parcel K (see Exhibit "A"). The trailer will operate as a sales office. A model home trailer was approved by the acting planning director in October and already exists on Parcel K, on the other side of Faraway Road. The Planning Commission reviewed the application on January 5t', 2000, and recommended approval (see Exhibit "B") Recommendation: Approval EXHIBIT "A" Sales Trailer Location QP r ?g myo�'F V c e4,4yy 'OpgN /NVTAycy� /ye nw b 14' DIP w_—_ _— __w_ w 5 / _ ss .— i SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ANNUAL TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS TO ALLOW THE PLACEMENT OF A TRAILER AT PARCEL K, FARAWAY RANCH SUBDIVISION GROSS PARCEL PLAT, AND TO OPERATE IT AS A SALES OFFICE. WHEREAS, The Timbers Club at Snowmass ("Applicant') has applied for an Annual Temporary Use Permit to allow the placement of a trailer at Parcel K, Faraway Ranch Subdivision Gross Parcel Plat ('Parcel K") and to operate it as a sales office; and WHEREAS, the trailer will be used solely by the sales staff for the Timbers and their prospective customers; and WHEREAS, the sales staff consists of people from the area who have worked in this capacity before; and WHEREAS, the trailer will have minimal impacts on surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the application meets the review standards for Annual Temporary Use Permits set forth in the Town of Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"); and WHEREAS, the applicant will apply for a building permit prior to the placement of the trailer; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Town Council on January 17th, 2000 to receive public comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Annual Temporary Use Permit application, heard the comments of the TOSV Planning Staff and has recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the Annual Temporary Use Permit application and heard the recommendations of the TOSV Planning Staff, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of Snowmass Village, Colorado: � 7 - RESO. 00-07 Page 2 of 4 Section One: Findings Based upon the information submitted and testimony in the record, the Town Council finds as follows: 1. The application has been submitted and public notification has occurred in accordance with the provisions of Section 5-260, of Chapter 16A, of the Municipal Code. 2. The Applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that the proposal meets the review standards contained in Section 5-260 (D) of the TOSV Code. 3. The Applicant has successfully demonstrated the need to have such a facility at Parcel K. Section Two: Conditions 1. The term of this permit shall be for one (1) year from the effective date of this resolution. The hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m., seven (7) days per week. The office shall be occupied by no more than 6 employees at one time. 2. Applicant shall provide and maintain a safe means to access the subject facility and adequate off-street parking during the entire term of this permit that will include barriers and/or fencing the subject operation to separate visitors from any staging and/or construction areas on-site. Additionally, the Applicant may wish to consider providing a minimum of one (1) handicapped accessible parking space within the parking area and have suitable clear and level surfaces which provide barrier free access to the facility for handicapped access. 3. One (1) wall mounted, non-illuminated sign, with consistent colors, no larger than three (3) feet by four (4)feet, is permitted. Outdoor safety lighting will be directed downward and inward. 4. The primary intent and purpose of this permit is to allow the use of the subject trailer to function as a sales office. No other use is permitted without Town Council approval. 5. Certain impacts which may affect surrounding properties or the community as a whole may not have been apparent at the time this permit was issued. The applicant acknowledges that the Town has RESO. 00-07 Page 3 of 4 a responsibility to be responsive to the complaints and concerns of the community. Accordingly, in the event that the Town receives any complaint arising from the use of the subject trailer, the Town shall immediately transmit such complaint to the applicant for resolution. Any matter involving a potential life/safety issue, or a violation of the conditions of this permit, will require prompt attention. Regardless of whether the applicant or Town receives the complaint concerning the trailer, the applicant shall exhibit due diligence in attempting to resolve the problem. Failure by the applicant to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to resolve a significant majority of any such complaints relating to the trailer shall be cause for termination or modification of this permit at the direction of the Town Council. 6. Applicant shall promptly notify the Snowmass Village Community Development Department of any necessary additions, modifications, or amendments to this permit or proposed use of the subject facility. Any such changes should not be in conflict with the findings and Review Standards relative to this Annual Temporary Use Permit and are not permitted without approval of the Planning Director. 7. The Applicant will follow up with obtaining the necessary permits from the Community Development Department as well as the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District prior to commencement of operations. 8. The trailer must have Colorado State Department of Housing approval. 9. Except as provided below, the term of this permit shall be from the effective date of this resolution. The Town of Snowmass Village shall be granted a permanent access easement to Parcel N, Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat pursuant to the "grant of temporary easement' recorded on July 2nd, 1999 at reception No. 432961 in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The term of this permit is for a period of time up to but not exceeding one (1) year from the effective date of this resolution, or for a shorter period of time: 1) If the trailer, parking and appurtenant above grade improvements are removed from the area of the aforementioned permanent access easement subject to Planning Director review and approval pursuant to condition No. 6 above; or 2) If authorized by the Town Council. — b9 - RESO. 00-07 Page 4 of 4 The Planning Director may refer any administrative modification requests to the Town Council for final determination. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED as amended, on the motion of Town Council Member and the second Town Council Member by a vote of _ in favor and _ against, on this 17`h day of January, 2000. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk .._. 76 mom EXHIBIT "B" page 1 of 4 SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. 1 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ANNUAL TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS TO ALLOW THE PLACEMENT OF A TRAILER AT PARCEL K, FARAWAY RANCH SUBDIVISION GROSS PARCEL PLAT, AND TO OPERATE IT AS A SALES OFFICE. WHEREAS, The Timbers Club at Snowmass (Applicant) has applied for an Annual Temporary Use Permit to allow the placement of a trailer at Parcel K, Faraway Ranch Subdivision Gross Parcel Plat ("Parcel K") and to operate it as a sales office; and WHEREAS, the trailer will be used solely by the sales staff for the Timbers and their prospective customers; and WHEREAS, the sales staff consists of people from the area who have worked in this capacity before; and WHEREAS, the trailer will have minimal impacts on surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the application meets the review standards for Annual Temporary Use Permits set forth in the Town of Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"); and WHEREAS, the applicant will apply for a building permit prior to the placement of the trailer; and WHEREAS, a public hearing will be held before the Town Council on January 17th, 2000 to receive public comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Annual Temporary Use Permit application and heard the recommendations of the TOSV Planning Staff NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings Based upon the information submitted and testimony in the record, the Planning Commission finds as follows: / ) EXHIBIT "B" page 2 of 4 1. The application has been submitted and public notification has occurred in accordance with the provisions of Section 5-260, of Chapter 16A, of the Municipal Code. 2. The Applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that the proposal meets the review standards contained in Section 5-260 (D) of the Municipal Code. 3. The Applicant has successfully demonstrated the need to have such a facility at Parcel K. Section Two: Recommendation The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Council authorize the issuance of an Annual Temporary Use Permit to the Timbers Club at Snowmass. Additionally, this approval should be subject to the following conditions: Section Three: Conditions 1. The term of this permit shall be for one (1) year from the effective date of this resolution. The hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m., seven (7) days per week. The office shall not be occupied by more than 6 employees at one time. 2. Applicant shall provide and maintain a safe means to access the subject facility and adequate off-street parking during the entire term of this permit that will include barriers and/or fencing the subject operation to separate visitors from any staging and/or construction areas on-site. Additionally, the Applicant may wish to consider providing a minimum of one (1) handicapped accessible parking space within the parking area and have suitable clear and level surfaces which provide barrier free access to the facility for handicapped access. 3. One (1)wall mounted, non-illuminated sign, with consistent colors, no larger than three (3) feet by four (4)feet, is permitted. Outdoor safety lighting will be directed downward and inward. 4. The primary intent and purpose of this permit is to allow the use of the subject trailer to function as a sales office. No other use is permitted without Town Council approval. 5. Certain impacts which may affect surrounding properties or the community as a whole may not have been apparent at the time this permit was issued. The applicant acknowledges that the Town has G:\WPDATA\RESO.PL\00\PC 00-01 ATUP Timbers.doc Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT "B" page 3 of 4 a responsibility to be responsive to the complaints and concerns of the community. Accordingly, in the event that the Town receives any complaint arising from the use of the subject trailer, the Town shall immediately transmit such complaint to the applicant for resolution. Any matter involving a potential life/safety issue, or a violation of the conditions of this permit, will require prompt attention. Regardless of whether the applicant or Town receives the complaint concerning the trailer, the applicant shall exhibit due diligence in attempting to resolve the problem. Failure by the applicant to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to resolve a significant majority of any such complaints relating to the trailer shall be cause for termination or modification of this permit at the direction of the Town Council. 6. Applicant shall promptly notify the Snowmass Village Planning Department of any necessary additions, modifications, or amendments to this permit or proposed use of the subject facility. Any such changes should not be in conflict with the findings and Review Standards relative to this Annual Temporary Use Permit and are not permitted without approval of the Planning Director. 7. The Applicant will follow up with obtaining the necessary permits from the TOSV Planning and Building Department as well as the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District prior to commencement of operations. 8. The trailer must have Colorado State Department of Housing approval. 9. Except as provided below, the term of this permit shall be from the effective date of this resolution. The Town of Snowmass Village shall be granted a permanent access easement to Parcel N, Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat pursuant to the "grant of temporary easement" recorded on July 2nd, 1999 at reception No. 432961 in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The term of this permit is for a period of time up to but not exceeding one (1) year from the effective date of this resolution, or for a shorter period of time: 1) If the trailer, parking and appurtenant above grade improvements are removed from the area of the aforementioned permanent access easement subject to Planning Director review and approval pursuant to condition No. 6 above; or 2) If authorized by the Town Council. G:\WPDATA\RESO.PL\00\PC 00-01 ATUP Timbers.doc Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "B" page 4 of 4 The Planning Director may refer any administrative modification requests to the Town Council for final determination. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on the motion of Planning Commission member Jim Gustafson and the second Planning Commission member Arnold Mordkin by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 against, on this 5t' day of January, 2000. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE P NING COMMISSION Geo ge P. uggins, C ers n ATTEST: &jAal�e, t3w4 Deborah Baird, Planning Commission Secretary G:\WPDATA\RES0.PL\00\PC 00-01 ATUP Timbers.doc Page 4 of 4 COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: January 17, 2000 BY: Gary Suiter STAFF: Leslie Klusmire/Steve Connor SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4, Series of 2000 Holy Cross Franchise Extension OVERVIEW: The Town Staff has been meeting with the Staff of Holy Cross Energy in an effort to resolve many of the outstanding issues. Staff believes the issues surrounding the Franchise Agreement can be further condensed and summarized prior to bringing this to Town Council for Second Reading. More time is required and this resolution extends the existing Franchise until April 30, 2000, which should allow enough time to resolve all remaining issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval. p:/shared/clerk/ma nager.xsctcmq.2000/ TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 04 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY EXTENDING A FRANCHISE TO HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. TO APRIL 30, 2000. WHEREAS, the Town Council enacted Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1979, granting a franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. to furnish, sell and distribute electrical energy to the inhabitants of the Town, and fixing the terms and conditions thereof; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance granted a franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. for a period of twenty (20) years to August 9, 1999; and WHEREAS, Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., has applied to the Town for a new franchise in accordance with the provisions of Section 5-2 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has not granted a new franchise Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., although negotiations are continuing; and WHEREAS, the Town Council granted a temporary extension of the current franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. until November 9, 1999, by Resolution No. 32, Series of 1999; and WHEREAS, the Town Council granted a temporary extension of the current franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. until December 31, 1999, by Resolution No. 43, Series of 1999; and WHEREAS, the Town Council granted a temporary extension of the current franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. until February 9, 2000, by Resolution No. 44, Series of 1999; and WHEREAS, the completion of negotiations of a new franchise require additional time; and WHEREAS, to facilitate the completion of the negotiations, the Town Council desires to temporarily extend the current franchise to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. in accordance with the provisions of Section 5-10 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Resolution is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. 71O _ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: 1. Temporary Extension of Franchise. The franchise granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. under the terms and conditions contained in Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1979 is hereby extended to April 30, 2000. 2. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of The Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, on January 17, 2000 upon the motion of Council Member the second of Council Member and by a vote of_ in favor to _opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk _ 77 -- ACCEPTANCE OF EXTENDED FRANCHISE Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., hereby unconditionally accepts the grant of a continued franchise to operate a system for the purchase, generation, transmission and distribution of electrical energy within the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, and to the inhabitants of the Town of Snowmass Village, under terms and conditions set forth in Resolution No. 04, Series of 2000. Executed this _ of January, 2000. Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. By: Title: Attest: Secretary COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: January 17, 2000 BY: Gary Suiter STAFF: SUBJECT: Resolution No. 12, Series of 2000, Supporting Amendments to the RTA Law OVERVIEW: This Resolution identifies proposed amendments to the Rural Transportation Authority Law to be considered by the State Legislature this session. The comments are as proposed by the RTA Steering Committee. The resolution will be forwarded to Russell George for his support. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval p:lshared/clark/manager.xsdcmq.991 - 79 - SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 12 SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS TO RURAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY LAW WHEREAS, the Rural Transportation Authority Law enables counties and municipalities to create, through public vote, rural transportation authorities and to provide for the joint exercise of transportation systems and facilities; and WHEREAS, cities, towns and counties in the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers Valleys (Highway 82 and 1-70 corridors) of western Colorado are currently discussing the intergovernmental agreement necessary to put the creation of a Rural Transportation Authority (hereinafter "RTA") to a vote of the people in the year 2000 for the purpose of financing, constructing, operating and maintaining rural transit systems within the region; and WHEREAS, several amendments to the existing Rural Transportation Authority Law would provide more clarity and flexibility to local governments as they work toward the creation of a RTA; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED-that the Town of,Snowmass Vi lage supports the following amendments to the Rural Transportation Authority Law Amendment 1. - Include in the revenue raising powers of a rural transportation authority the ability to implement the following: • Visitor benefit fee (an assessment on overnight visitors to enhance the visitor experience by helping to mitigate the impacts of tourist recreation on traffic patterns, employment, and transit. The fee will support transit service and provide incentives to visitors to use transit more often -- e.g., free transit passes, discounts to local amenities.) • Growth impact fee (an assessment on new development to help mitigate its impacts on transit and traffic patterns. Fees must correlate to the incremental cost of specific improvements required to support the development.) • Raise the sales and/or use tax limit from 4/10 to 314 of 1% in all or any designated portion of the members of the authority. Amendment 2. - Revise requirement that communities interested in joining the RTA after it is formed be contiguous to the RTA boundaries. Communities in the mountains are generally not contiguous, which -- 8'0 '- Reso. 00-12 Page 2 makes it difficult for neighboring communities to join an established RTA unless their county has also joined. Amendment 3. -Add language specifically permitting differential sales tax rates in different areas that can be approved in a single ballot issue. This amendment would facilitate more equitable taxing arrangements given that some communities already have transit sales taxes. Amendment 4. - State that the TABOR spending base for a newly created authority is spending during the first full fiscal year. For example, if a region forms a RTA during a mid-year election, spending will be much less during the first partial year than during the following full year. These circumstances could cause the first full year spending to grow too fast compared to the previous partial year and require a rebate or a revenue retention vote. Amendment 5. -Add language making it clear that the intergovernmental agreement can be amended after the formation election so long as the amendment provisions in the agreement are followed, INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the day of , 2000 by a motion made by Council Member and seconded by Council Member and by a vote of_ in favor to _ opposed. ATTEST: TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TRUDI WORLNE, Town Clerk T. MICHAEL MANCHESTER, Mayor _Rol 2 TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: GARY SUITER, TOWN MANAGER RE: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: JANUARY 14, 2000 *WOODRUN V DUMPSTER ISSUE On January 4u, I met with John Michelman, President of the Woodrun V Homeowners Association. According to Mr. Michelman, the Woodrun V HOA is most interested in obtaining a firm commitment from the Town Council on a date by which the existing trash facility will be removed. If the Town Council will commit to a date certain, Woodrun V promises to work with us in a reasonable manner. The Woodrun V Board remains firm in their position that construction of a new facility in the same location is not an acceptable solution. We also discussed the possibility of berming, aesthetic improvement, landscaping and discontinuing use of the circular drive but the board remains firm in their position. They believe a protracted legal battle over adverse possession of the property would benefit only the attorneys. Staff would recommend a two-stage process to resolve this problem. First, we should relocate the facility to a temporary "home" in the Base Village area where there is adequate turnaround space for the trucks. This will require coordination with the Aspen Skiing Company. Second, we can commit to a date by which this temporary facility is operational. Fall of this year should be doable. Finally, the Town should continue to work with the Snowmass Village HOA and other private property owners in order to secure a permanent location for the facility. As you know, available property in this community is scarce and acquisition of a suitable parcel for this facility will probably be controversial, regardless of location. Staff, therefore, recommends that we provide Woodrun V with a date certain as to removal of the existing facility, establish a temporary facility at a suitable location and continue to work with the Homeowners on a permanent site. Please let me know your thoughts. WEBSITE UPDATE Leslie Klusmire is currently working with a website consultant and Nick Tucker, the Town's Computer Systems Manager, to develop the enhanced website. As of today, the Towns existing website has been fixed and we are moving the site to one local host (versus four). The information for the new site has been developed by staff and the consultant is developing a storyboard for the new site. After the storyboard has been developed, the site will receive a final review by staff and final information will be included. This process should take approximately three months. Please let me know if you have any additional thoughts or comments on the development of our new website. *TOWN MEETING As you know, the Town meeting is scheduled for February 2ntl at the Anderson Ranch Shermer Meeting Hall. Refreshments and hors D'ouvres will be provided. We will place an ad in the Snowmass Village Sun. Attached is a list of possible topics. Please review this, let me know your thoughts and spread the word. TWO CREEKS SHUTTLE SERVICE Attached is a letter from Doug MacKenzie outlining a change in the Two Creeks Transportation and Parking Plan. Due to poor ridership, the Aspen Skiing Co. (ASC) is proposing to suspend RFTA qpfi� 01-14-OOMR Page Two service to Two Creeks for this season. Busses will be added to cover possible increases in ridership at the Mall. With free parking proposed at Two Creeks, the Children's' ski program can operate from there. I have reviewed Ordinance 9, Series of 1994 and find this proposal generally consistent with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. The proposal will also save the Town money in this low snow year. After discussing this with Hunt Walker and David Peckler, I have authorized the ASC to proceed with this plan for this year only. If Council has questions or concerns with this proposal please feel free to bring them up at the meeting. *ASPEN HIGHLANDS TOUR The bus for the Aspen Highlands Tour will be leaving Town Hall at 10:30am on Friday, January 21 If you are taking your own car, we will meet at the Sales/Preview Center for Aspen Highlands Village at 11:00am. We plan on a group of about ten people. Please let me know if you are unable to attend. "TOWN COUNCIL RETREAT The Town Council Retreat has been set for Wednesday, January 26th afternoon through Friday, January 28th at Copper Mountain Resort. We will arrange for transportation in Town Vehicles. If anyone wants to take their own car, please let me know so that we can plan accordingly. MALL TRANSIT PLAZA I have signed a contract with MK Centennial to provide services for final conceptual design and field investigations. The schedule is fairly aggressive and should be completed by mid-July. There are multiple deadlines and decisions that will require action by the Town Council. We anticipate this will appear regularly on Council agendas through June. We will be interviewing Council Members individually to determine overall level of commitment and specific "hot-button" issues. We hope that Council Members will become involved on those issues that are of greatest importance to you, individually. We will soon have a kick-off meeting with the Mall partners and are scheduled for the Town Council Meeting of February 7, 2000. WOODBRIDGE/OFFICES AT SNOWMASS ISSUE Joe Hanauer has submitted a proposal to the Woodbridge Condominium Association in an effort to resolve the long-standing issues with these properties. I will stay in touch with Joe Hanauer and John Srofe as this matter moves forward. Hopefully, there will be agreement that results in a minor development submission from the Offices at Snowmass that reflects the terms of the agreement and provides a long-term solution to these issues. 'Response requested Potential Topics for Town Council Visioning Meeting Department of Community Development 1. Employee Housing 2. Rodeo Grounds 3. Mall Transit Plaza 4. Entryway 5. Base Village 6. Trails/Open Space 7. Parking/Transportation 8. Wildlife/Environmental 9. Year round economic base (activities) �► V #k- ASPEN SKIING COMPANY January 6, 2000 Gary Suiter TOSV Town Manager P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village,CO 81615 Dear Gary, This letter is a request to modify the Two Creeks Transportation and Parking Plan. As expected, December figures indicate we will not meet our projections. We have adjusted our budgeted skier numbers downward. If these new projections hold true, it would mean a substantial financial shortfall for the Town of Snowmass Village and us,as the formula for our contribution to the Town is predicated on the number of skiers. Two Creeks will open as soon as conditions allow, however in response to the financial situation and reduced demand for a second portal, 1 would like to suspend RFTA service to Two Creeks. 1 will add buses to the mall to cover the Two Creeks riders. Mall buses operate at about 80%capacity, while Two Creeks efficiency is less than 20%. We can carry the same number of riders and reduce buses by 12%, saving up to 20 trips per day between Aspen and Snowmass. This change would drive more business through the mall and take vehicles off the road. Currently,the Town runs a shuttle between the Rodeo Lot's free parking and Two Creeks. I propose free parking at Two Creeks and the elimination of the Rodeo Lot/Two Creeks shuttle. This would save the Town considerable dollars and allow Village residents access to Two Creeks parking. Under the USFS Equal Access Guidelines, Village residents' permits are not valid at Two Creeks. I have spoken with Dave Peckler, the USFS and Jim Wells, all of whom gave their blessing. RFTA also embraces this program as they are short of drivers. Gary, I think there are many positive ramifications of this program. I would be happy to meet with you or appear before Council for discussion. Please advise on how to proceed. Thanks for your attention. �Sincerely, Doug Mackenzie J. General Manager Snowmass Ski Area DM/nc cc: Pat O'Donnell -- Dave Peckler `lY Post Office Box 1248•Aspen, CO 81612 970.925.1220 ® �cnnibRiW a .skiaspen.com COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE MEETING DATE: January 17, 2000 STAFF: Hunt Walker SUBJECT: Draft RFRHA Comprehensive Plan OVERVIEW: Before the RFRHA Board and the member governments formally approve the RFRHA Comprehensive Plan the member governments are invited to comment on the Draft CP. Find attached a five page memo from Tom Newland outlining RFRHA Board comments on various issues contained in the first nineteen pages of the CP, also attached. If any Council member wants to review the CP, the complete plan including Exhibits A-F, is located in the Town Manager's office. The first nineteen pages of the CP contain summaries of the Recreational Trails Plan, Corridor Access Control Plan, and the Corridor Investment Study. Although the Council is welcome to comment on any element of the plan, the Council should pay particular attention to the policies regarding hunting (Wildlife Values, page 7), Preservation of Conservation Values (pages 6, 7, top of 8), and modification of the Conservation Easement (middle of page 18). FINANCIAL SUMMARY: NA BOARD OR COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NA LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: NA STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council read Tom Newland's 11/3/99 letter and the first 19 pages of the CP, and make comments on the plan to be forwarded to Tom Newland, RFTA Executive Director. MEMORANDUM TO: Suzanne Konchan, Pitkin County Amy Margerum, City of Aspen Mike Copp, City of Glenwood Springs John Hier, Town of Carbondale Tom Baker, Town of Basalt Gary Suiter, Town of Snowmass Village George Roussos, Eagle County Ed Green, Garfield County Joe Tempel, Colorado Department of Transportation Andrew Wallach, Great Outdoors Colorado FROM. Tom Newland, RFRHA RE. Draft Comprehensive Plan Accepted by RFRHA Board DATE: November 3, 1999 At their last regular meeting, the RFRHA Board accepted the attached Draft Comprehensive Plan for the railroad corridor. The Board directed staff to send the plan out for comments from the member governments prior to considering a final draft. Enclosed with this cover memorandum is a copy of the Draft Comprehensive Plan for your review and comment. During their meeting on the Comprehensive Plan, the Board discussed the following issues that are listed below. Additions to the plan requested of the Board at this meeting are described in this memorandum and are included in the draft plan as lightly shaded text. Deletions requested of the Board during their discussion are included within the draft plan with "strikeout' lines through the text. • Page 5, Signage Plan: The Board felt that any signage plan for the property should consist of "appropriate" signage as described within the Recreational Trails Plan. • Page 6, Scenic Values of the Corridor: The proposed policy regarding prohibition of new roads would run counter to the Glenwood Springs Bypass route if the route is not included within the Comprehensive Plan. Because of this, a new section under "Approved uses" (Page 1 n has been added regarding the Glenwood Bypass. ..._ 7 - • Page 7, Historical Values of the Corridor: The Board discussed the existing ) historic rail cars and rail car restoration building on the property in Woody Creek (milepost 391.5). The discussion centered upon whether or not the rail cars and building should be considered historic in nature and worth preserving as a part of the Comprehensive Plan. • Page 7, Wildlife Values of the Corridor: the Board discussed the policy proposed regarding hunting access and hunting on the corridor. All Board members agreed that hunting should be prohibited on the property. However, the Board felt that access to public lands for hunting purposes might be acceptable if it is restricted to non-vehicular (pedestrian) access and firearms are not loaded or operable while using the property for hunting access. Another suggestion raised by the Board was to form a user group who could come up with a recommended policy for hunter access. • Page 16, Approved Uses: The document originally proposed an approved use entitled "Public Telecommunications Use". The Board discussed this at length. The result was to change the heading and description to "Anticipated Future Uses Appropriate to the Corridor". Use of the corridor for existing transit use was also discussed by the Board. Some felt that such a use might erode the integrity of the corridor. As a result of discussion on these two points, the following sub-section is proposed to replace the Telecommunication and Existing Transit sub-sections within the draft document: Anticipated Future Uses Appropriate to the Corridor: There are some emerging local issues in the Roaring Fork valley that may, at some future point in time, require the use of the corridor. Such use of the corridor will not impact the conservation values or the approved uses of the corridor, but could enhance the nature of the corridor as a public asset. Two such uses are public telecommunication and existing transit use. It is becoming apparent that rural access to broadband telecommunications technology is to a large extent being ignored by the private sector, primarily because of it's poor economic return. As a result, rural areas may find themselves forced to provide their own access to this broadband technology if they want to keep pace with their urban counterparts. As a result of this need to stay abreast with new technology, it may be necessary for the railroad right-of-way to be available as a corridor for a future regional telecommunication system. Any use of the corridor for these purposes would likely come - 2 - in the form of buried cable or fiber optic lines, and should not be undertaken unless it is a part of an overall regional telecommunication master plan. Another possible future use of the property could be for placement of facilities needed under existing transit use prior to implementation of rail transit. Use of portions of the right-of-way, as designated within Exhibit DA Transit Oriented Development Study, could be used for existing or enhanced transit. This use of the property will consist of park-and-rides and/or stations for bus improvements to facilitate existing Roaring Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) bus service or to facilitate the Enhanced Bus/fSM transit alternative if this alternative is carried forward as a phasing option within the Record of Decision (ROD). Any future anticipated use of the corridor deemed appropriate by the RFRHA Board will be reviewed, discussed and considered for adoption into the Comprehensive Plan under the methodology described below. As mentioned above, the approved uses also need to be expanded to allow for placement of a bypass in Glenwood Springs. The following sub-section is proposed to be added to allow the Glenwood Bypass alignment as an approved use within the draft document: Glenwood Springs Bypass Route: On October 21, 1999, the Glenwood Springs City Council adopted Resolution #99-11 designating the Railroad right-of-way from the Colorado River to the vicinity of 23' and 27'h Street as the preferred bypass alternative for Highway 82. In addition, Glenwood Springs' participation in RFRHA had been conditioned upon the possible use of the railroad right-of- way for a vehicular bypass provided that such a bypass would not preclude the use of the right-of-way for rail or trail purposes. Attached as Exhibit F: City of Glenwood Springs Bypass is a copy of Resolution #99-11 and a copy of the conceptual study conducted by Glenwood Springs regarding the various bypass alternatives proposed. The use of the railroad right-of-way for placement of a bypass route is still in the early stages of design. In addition, no funding for the project has been determined. The cost for a bypass along the railroad right-of-way is estimated at between $55 and $100 million. Pursing the ultimate placement of the bypass is seen as a joint effort between Glenwood Springs and RFRHA. As plans are refined and finalized, both partners will work together to insure that the project fulfill the mutual goals of each entity. � � .� - 3 - • Page 17, Physical Modification of the Conservation Easement. The Board discussed the advantages and disadvantages of reducing the physical scope of the Conservation Easement on the property. • Page 17, Other: The Board requested an additional section that defined the methodology for re-opening the Comprehensive Plan to modification. The following additional sub-section is proposed to be added to Section VI: Procedure for Modification to the Comprehensive Plan: Every five years, the RFRHA Board shall review the Comprehensive Plan and make changes to it if deemed necessary. In addition, RFRHA staff or Board members may propose to initiate a modification to the Comprehensive Plan because of a perceived need to do so. The RFRHA Board must approve the initiation of the modification process before it is to proceed. After approval to proceed, any amendment to the Comprehensive Plan will be initially drafted and presented to the Board. After receiving comments from the RFRHA Board, the draft will be distributed to all member governments, including Great Outdoors Colorado and The Colorado Department of Transportation, for their comments. A final draft of the amendment(s) will then be brought back to the RFRHA Board for their final acceptance. Once accepted by the RFRHA Board, the amendment(s) will be sent back to the member governments for their ratification. All member governments must approve of the amendment(s) before they are incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. Page 17, Other: The Board also requested an additional section that defined the Comprehensive Plan as a transferable document in the event that ownership of the rail corridor was transferred to an agency other than RFRHA. Proposed language is as follows: Transferability of the Comprehensive Plan: In the Intergovernmental Agreement forming RFRHA, it is anticipated that ownership of the rail corridor may be transferred to another public agency. If this is the case, the Comprehensive Plan will be tied to the property and will transfer with property ownership to that new ownership entity. • Generah• The Board asked that any reference in the document to the "control and administration of RFRHA" be modified to allow for a successor entity to assume the control and administration if RFRHA were to be replaced through a new intergovernmental agreement. - 90 - -4- At the end of discussion on the draft Comprehensive Plan, the Board directed staff to compile their comments into a cover memorandum and distribute the Comprehensive Plan to all RFRHA governments for their review and comments prior to redrafting the document. We are hoping that approval of the Comprehensive Plan can be accomplished by December 31, 1999. In order to meet this deadline all member governments need to review the document and have their comments available by the next RFRHA Board meeting scheduled for November 19, 1999. RFRHA staff will be available to attend any meetings you may wish to schedule regarding the Comprehensive Plan. Please contact me at 704 9282 if you have any questions or want to talk about scheduling a meeting. 5 - DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 1 11/03/99 DRAFT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE ASPEN BRANCH OF THE DENVER & RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD CORRIDOR PREPARED FOR THE ROARING FORK RAILROAD HOLDING AUTHORITY Table of Contents Page I. Introduction.......................................................................... 2 II. Compliance of the Comprehensive Plan with the Requirements of the Conservation Easement........................... 4 III. Summary and Key Findings of Recreational Trails Plan............. 9 IV. Summary and Key Findings of Corridor Access Control Plan... 11 V. Summary and Key Findings of Corridor Investment Study/ .Draft Environmental Impact Statement..................................... 13 VI. Changes to the Conservation Easement Required by the Comprehensive Plan......................................................... 16 ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Recreational Trails Plan Exhibit B: Corridor Access Plan 1) Listing of All Utility Easements Exhibit C: Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement Exhibit D: Additional Technical Information as Requested by the Local Decision Making Process: 1) Project Objective matrix and Explanatory Memorandum 2) Environmental/Biologic Inventory 3) Transit Financing Options 4) Transit Oriented Design Study 5) Socio-Economic Forecasts for the Study Area 6) Performance Characteristics of Proposed Rail Vehicles n Location and Size of Retaining Walls 8) Instantaneous Noise Levels By Location and Temporal Attributes 9) Rural/Regional Transit Agency Information Exhibit E: Reading the Roaring Fork Landscape: An Ideabook for Interpretation and Environmental Education Exhibit F: City of Glenwood Springs Bypass C? a .�� RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 2 11/03/99 DRAFT I. Introduction In September of 1991, eight local governmental entities resolved to purchase the Aspen Branch of the Denver & Rio Grande Western railroad right-of-way from the Southern Pacific Transportation Company to preserve the corridor as a public asset. In December of 1994, the eight local governments signed an Intergovernmental Agreement to purchase the property. The urgency of the purchase was realized when the merger of Southern Pacific and Union Pacific railroads was announced. With the dissolution of Southern Pacific, Union Pacific could have abandoned the rail corridor and the land reverted to possible residential and commercial development. The result would have been the loss of the corridor and any opportunity to preserve it for recreational and transportation use. On June 30, 1997, the corridor purchase was finalized. Traffic congestion on State Highway 82 is and will continue to be a problem as the valley continues to grow and develop. Traffic congestion causes a negative impact on the economic and personal well being of the local communities. It leads to longer commute time and slower freight movements, and it reduces the convenience of travelling throughout the valley. In addition to the recreational opportunities mentioned above, one of the objectives of the purchase is to reduce the amount of traffic congestion by increasing the transportation choices within the valley. " A large percentage of the Roaring Fork valley is in public domain as Bureau of Land Management (BLM), White River National Forest or state holdings. Within recent years, increases in population and resort development, and the escalation of land values have dramatically increased growth in the valley. With this growth, lands available for trail and recreational use along the valley floor are diminishing. Currently, there are numerous trails throughout the valley but there is limited continuity between these trails. in addition to the transportation opportunity mentioned above, the other major opportunity and objective of the purchase is to develop a continuous non-motorized trail along the corridor. Recreational activities define the lifestyle and economy of the Roaring Fork valley. Skiing, hunting, hiking, rafting, bicycling, and wildlife viewing are just a few of the recreational opportunities in the region. The population in the valley is more active than most regions and as the population and number of visitors grow, so does the demand for outdoor recreation facilities. Wildlife species are abundant in the valley with approximately 160 species throughout the region. All species of wildlife are important for viewing, photographing, and balancing the ecosystem of the valley. The purchase of the right-of-way provides an opportunity to develop environmental and wildlife educational programs and enhance access to public lands and the Roaring Fork River. RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 3 11/03/99 DRAFT The Roaring Fork River through its scenic and recreational opportunities ties the valley together. It is currently used by residents and visitors for a number of recreational activities including fishing, rafting, and kayaking. The river is designated as a "Gold Medal" resource because it is one of the highest quality aquatic habitats in the state. Over 15,000 anglers use the river annually. Proper access points to the river are important for the safe use of the resource. Currently there are six designated boat ramps for watercraft. The purchase of the right-of-way presents the opportunity to provide additional river access and parking on public land to continue and expand the use of this resource. All of these issues deal with the overall quality of life of the residents, visitors, and guests in the Roaring Fork Valley. The purchase of this corridor has presented an opportunity to develop an integrated transportation and recreation solution to future problems before they are even fully realized. As a part of the agreement to purchase the corridor in 1997, it was required that a comprehensive plan be prepared that would determine the future uses of the corridor. The specific language within the Purchase Agreement requiring the development of a Comprehensive Plan is as follows: "The Governments shall develop, consider and approve the Comprehensive Plan for the Property within twenty jour(14)months of the date this Amended Agreement is signed, unless the Governments mutually agree to extend the time period for the formulation and adoption ofsuch a Plan. The adoption ofthe Comprehensive Plan and any amendments thereto shall be consistent with the grant conditions set forth in the grant documents referenced at section S. above. It is anticipated that when the Comprehensive Plan for the Property is approved by all participating Governments, anew Intergovernmental Agreement will be negotiated and become effective to implement the Comprehensive Plan." The specific language within the Purchase Agreement the defines the Comprehensive Plan is as follows: "The Plan shall include the following: I A listing and description ofpossible uses for the property, including but not limited to such improvements necessary to place and operate a public transportation system,public trail, and/or access to public lands: 1I. A detailed improvements and operations plan for the ultimate preferred uses(s)on the property, including a recommended management and funding strategy;and Ill. An interim plan which incorporates the interim use of the rail corridorfor a temporary trail following approval from the Surface Transportation Board ofa certificate of interim trail use pending the re-establishment of rail service." - 9S"- RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 4 11/03/99 DRAFT In addition to these specific requirements, the Conservation Easement placed on the corridor also outlines additional requirements regarding access and retention of the property's conservation values. The purpose of this document is to set out a Comprehensive Plan for the corridor that-will be adopted by the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority and its member governments. This Comprehensive Plan will be used to guide all future use of the corridor and its findings will be incorporated into the existing Conservation Easement on the corridor to insure strict adherence to the uses set forth herein. IL Compliance of the Comprehensive Plan With the Requirements of the Conservation Easement A Conservation Easement was placed on the railroad corridor when it was purchased in 1997. The Conservation Easement is located along the property from the terminus of the "Wye" (approximately 12th Street in Glenwood Springs), to the end of the tracks in Woody Creek. The purpose of the easement is to assure that the corridor will be maintained as a linear, open space corridor, appropriate for recreation (including trails), wildlife, environmental and educational purposes, while permitting the construction of trails and trailhead facilities and the continuation and construction of rail facilities. The easement also prevents any use of the Property that will significantly impair the "conservation values" of the corridor. The conservation easement contemplates a change in uses, and therefore a modification to the easement once a Comprehensive Plan for the corridor is adopted. The "conservation values" of the corridor are defined in the conservation easement as follows: "The Property possess natural, scenic, open space, historical, educational, wildlife, trail and recreational values (collectively, "Conservation Values")of great importance to Grantor, and, in particular, the people of Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield Counties, the Cities of Aspen and Glenwood Springs, and the Towns of Snowmass Village, Carbondale and Basalt, and the People of the State of Colorado." Paragraph 5.c. of the Conservation Easement outlines 12 requirements that the Comprehensive Plan must fulfil in order to be considered for approval by the State Board of the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund (LOCO) and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDoT). Listed below are the 12 requirements and an explanation of how the Comprehensive Plan addresses these requirements: 1. "Location of both a permanent continuous public recreation trail running along the entire length of the property and the location of a continuous RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 5 11/03/99 DRAFT interim trial within the Pitkin County portion of the Property, in accordance with Ordinance 97-7, as amended, of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County and the location of an interim trail outside of Pitkin County;' Exhibit A. Recreational Trails Plan, provides a map and written description of a continuous, permanent trail within the corridor. In addition, an interim trail within Pitkin County is also shown on the mapping. It is proposed that the permanent trail alignment shown on the map be used to place an interim trail on the corridor outside of Pitkin County. This interim trail will consist of a 4 to 6-foot wide dirt surface and/or 10-foot wide paved surface cross-section. 2. 'location and description of trailhead facilities;" Further shown on the mapping and described within Exhibit A. Recreational Trails Plan are locations for potential trailheads along the corridor. Exhibit A also depicts a typical site plan for the trailheads on page 10. 3. "identification of public access points over the Property for the purpose of gaining access to the Roaring Fork River and other public lands along the Property for public recreation;" Included on the mapping in Exhibit A Recreational Trails Plan are potential points of access to the Roaring Fork River and federal lands. Access to federal lands are depicted as green, dashed arrows on the mapping. Access to the river are depicted as fish symbol with the letter "R' on them. 4. "description of proposed wildlife and environmental education programs on the Property;" Attached as Exhibit E is a document entitled Reading the Roaring Fork Landscape: An Ideabook for Interoretation and Environmental Education. This document outlines RFRHA future efforts to conduct wildlife and environmental education programs on the corridor. Interpretive elements are also discussed within Exhibit A Recreational Trails Plan on pages 12 and 13. 5. "a signage plan for all activities to be developed within the Property;' A signage plan is discussed and presented within Exhibit A Recreational Trails Plan on pages 12 and 13. 6. "location and existence of historic structures or areas;" Within Exhibit D: 1) is a memorandum dated September 2, 1999 from MK Centennial Engineers. On page 6, paragraph 12, of this memorandum, seven potential historic sites are identified. These potential sites are: RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 6 11/03/99 DRAFT a. The old DRRGW Railroad bed (milepost 360.91 — 393.33); b. Town of Basalt (indirect, milepost 383.0 — 384.0); C. The Town of Catherine (indirect, milepost 376) d. The Town of Rathbone (indirect, milepost 393); e. The Satank Bridge (County Road Bridge, milepost 371.48); f. The Emma Historic District (indirect, milepost 381.92); g. The Glenwood Ditch (indirect, milepost 393-394). 7. "a biologic inventory of the Property to amend and update the Baseline Documentation;" Attached as Exhibit D: 2) Environmental/Biologic Inventory for the corridor. This information is also summarized within the Criteria matrix and explanatory memorandum found within Exhibit D: 1). The inventory discussed within these Exhibits describes potential impacts of the transit and trail systems on wetlands, wildlife movements, river crossings, noise levels, vehicle miles traveled, flora and fauna, water quality, fisheries and energy use. 8. "identification of criteria to be considered in implementing the Comprehensive Plan to protect and preserve the Conservation Values of the Property to the extent reasonable and practical," 4�The Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority is committed to uphold the values and 'goals of the Conservation Easement on the property. To that end, the following criteria will be used by RFRHA for evaluating proposed plans for uses of the corridor. These criteria will take the form of a policy statement and shall government the RFRHA's Board of Director and staff in their decisions regarding the development of uses on the property: Natural Values of the Corridor: • The degree to which a proposed use disturbs or otherwise changes the natural, existing topography, vegetation and landscape of the corridor will be considered and mitigated in the area(s) where the use will be placed. • The degree to which the proposed use will enhance or improve the existing site conditions so that they better conform to the surrounding topography, vegetation and landscape of the corridor will be considered when reviewing a proposed use. Scenic Values of the Corridor: RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 7 11/03/99 DRAFT • No new above-ground structures or buildings shall be allowed on the corridor other than those proposed as a part of the rail or trail/recreational uses defined within the Comprehensive Plan. • No new roads or other surface disturbances shall be allowed other than those proposed within the Comprehensive Plan. • RFRHA will request that future development on adjacent lands consider the scenic values of the corridor when designing development proposals for approval by local land use authorities. Historical Values of the Corridor: • New uses will consider the historical nature of adjacent properties and the rail corridor itself when final design of improvements for those uses are developed. • Interpretive and informational signing regarding historical community assets will be placed as a part of the trail and recreational improvements. Educational Values of the Corridor: • RFRHA shall encourage educational use of the corridor whenever feasible, provided that this use is passive in nature and does not leave permanent impact or change to the property. • Interpretive and informational signing regarding educational attributes of the corridor shall be pursued as a part of the trail and recreational improvements. Wildlife Values of the Corridor: • Impacts of the use of the property on wildlife habitat and migration corridors will be avoided or mitigated if necessary. Mitigation will be provided at the cost of the use that impacts wildlife sensitive portions of the corridor. • Wildlife viewing opportunities will be pursued by RFRHA and adjacent property owners agreeable to such activities. • No hunting or access to hunting will be allowed on the property. Trail and Recreational Values: • The trail plan described within the Comprehensive Plan will be pursued by RFRHA with the goal of completing a trail on the corridor by 2010. _ qq sow RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 8 11/03199 DRAFT • Access to the Roaring Fork River and adjacent public lands will be opened to public use whenever practicable. 9. "description of structures and facilities necessary to place and operate a rail transportation system and their location within the Property;" Exhibit C Summary of Draft Environmental Imoact Statement and Exhibit D. items 1). 3), 4), 6). 7). and 1 describe the required structures and facilities necessary to place and operate rail transit within the corridor. 10. "the identification of all areas other than Pitkin County where the Property will not support both trail and rail uses (In these areas the Comprehensive Plan will identify alternate routes for trails);" Based on Exhibit A: Recreational Trails Plan it is possible to place both a trail and rail transit within the entire length of the corridor. There is a section just south of Glenwood Springs (milepost 362.7 — 363.8) where topogr^hy and proximity to Highway 82 make it difficult and somewhat detrimental tc ie environment to place the trail in the corridor. In this area, an initial, alternate route has been found between 23d Street in Glenwood Springs and Garfield County Road #154 (Buffalo Valley). This alternate route would leave the railroad right-of-way and follow the Atkinson Ditch along the Roaring Fork River. The alternate route will avoid potentially adve- impacts and would provide abetter trail experience. 11. identification of all utility easements and facilities, both underground and above surface, including, but not limited to, telecommunications facilities; and" Attached within Exhibit b: 1) is a listing of all utility easements and facilities currently located within the railroad right-of-way. 12. "a detailed improvements and operations plan for all uses, including a management and funding strategy." An improvement plan for the trail element of property use can be found within Exhibit A: Recreational Trails Plan, Sections 4. Trail System Elements, 5. Trail Descriptions and 6. Phasing Recommendations. Section 7 of this document addresses management, maintenance and operations envisioned for the recreational use of the corridor. Development and management of the valley-wide trail is both a local and regional endeavor with local segments forming the most heavily used portions. An effective operating relationship between the local participants is essential for funding and implementation of trail improvements in a reasonable timeframe. The organization of a management entity with overall responsibility for RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 9 11/03/99 DRAFT trail funding, implementation and perpetual management makes the most sense in the long term. One approach would be to extend and maintain the existing Intergovernmental Agreement authorizing RFRHA to provide this management function. Another approach would be to form a non-profit corporation with tax- exempt status and a Board of Directors. Costs for the initial, ultimate and Pitkin County interim trail are provided within Section 8 of Exhibit A: Recreational Trails Plan. Funding will likely come from a variety of local, state and possibly federal sources, with the local funding representing the "local match" for state or federal cost sharing. Local funding can come from general or recreation funds already established within the local entities and/or from the formation of a recreation or transportation district. The transit system selected for the corridor envisions a commuter or light rail system in the rail right-of-way from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale. At the Catherine Store Road east of Carbondale, the preferred system would leave the railroad right- of-way and cross over to the Highway 82 alignment to more directly serve El Jebel and Basalt. East of basalt, the transit system would again connect with the railroad right-of-way and continue up the valley to the Gerbazdale area. Here, the transit system would again cross over to the Highway 82 alignment and follow it into Aspen. Nine stops are anticipated with service every half-hour throughout the day and evening. Management of a transit system in place on the corridor must be under the supervision of a regional or rural transportation authority. The state legislature has passed enabling legislation to allow for rural transportation districts that can include some or all of participating counties. If approved by the voters, a rural transportation district can generate funding through a $10 vehicle license fee and a A-cent sales tax. It is anticipated that overall management will be the responsibility of a transit system will come from this rural transportation authority. Attached as Exhibit D: 9) is documentation describing the proposed rural transportation authority currently being considered by the local governments. Included within Exhibit D: 3) are two documents that describe the funding strategy for the proposed transit system. The first is a one-page listing entitled "Capital Funding for the Rail Alternative". This listing shows the a possible mix of local, state and federal funding that could be used to fund the capital costs of a transit system. Currently, the funding is in place for 85% of the capital costs. However, nearly $28 million still needs to be raised in local funding to make the project a reality. Further included within Exhibit D: 3) is a memorandum dated September 10, 1999 that discusses the various funding options available to cover this 15% capital funding shortfall and ongoing operations/maintenance costs. III. Summary of Key Findings of the Recreational Trails Plan RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 10 11/03/99 DRAFT The overall intent of the Recreational Trails Plan is to develop a trails and recreation plan for the corridor that provides a wide range of public recreational opportunities including trails, river access, wildlife viewing, habitat conservation and educational and interpretive activities. The purpose of the Recreational Tails Plan is as follows: • To provide a continuous trail between Glenwood Springs and Aspen on the railroad right-of-way that will be environmentally cleared through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process; • To meet the expressed community recreational needs; • To develop trails programming and design principals that will provide a quality trail experience • To plan for support facilities such as trailheads and parking; • To minimize impacts on adjacent landowners; • To develop implementation costs. A summary of key.findings-within-the-Recreational Trails Plan is as follows: Design Details: The plan describes an "initial" and "ultimate" frail design along the corridor. The intent of the initial trail is to establish a 3- to 6-feet dirt surface that will extend the length of the corridor. Establishment of this initial trail will allow for public access to the corridor in an expedient manner. The "ultimate" trail identifies what the facility may look like in the long term at final buildout. The plan envisions a 10-foot wide hard surface and a 4-foot wide soft surface as the platform for the ultimate trail. It is likely that the initial trail will be built as one project, connecting Glenwood Springs to Aspen with a multi-use recreational path. The Ultimate trail will likely be built in segments as demand warrants. For example, the ultimate trail will probably be constructed in and around the more urban areas of the valley (Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, and Basalt), with the rural areas being filled in as time progresses. However, there may be some rural areas that for various reasons such as safety or need, are built to the ultimate trail specifications more rapidly than others. A facility investment plan has been included as a part of the Recreational Trails Plan that prioritizes various segments of the alignment in an attempt to illustrate where and when construction of the ultimate trail makes the most sense. The Recreational Trails Plan also defines the following policies with regard to trail design: • Every attempt will be made to maximize separation of trail and transit on the corridor; • Grade-separated intersections will be pursued where the trail crosses the tracks or major public road crossings; RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 11 11/03/99 DRAFT • Soft-surfaced pedestrian paths will be established from the trail alignment to public lands and the river where appropriate; • A common theme for construction of trail amenities will be encouraged provided that local governments may modify these themes within their own jurisdictions; • Natural , salvaged and recycled materials will be utilized during the course of trail and facility construction; • The facilities will be designed for low maintenance and reduction of potential vandalism. Trail Use: The trail will be designed and operated for multi-purpose use. Uses include walking, running, biking, skating, equestrian and cross-country skiing. The ultimate trail will be designed and operated with the potential for commuting in mind. Local entities will have control over use of the trail in their jurisdiction. No camping or open fires will be allowed on the railroad corridor. Linkages: Every effort will be made to allow for easy, convenient and direct access to the trail. Connection to existing and proposed trails will be encouraged and coordinated. A regional recreational experience will be stressed as a part of the trail experience. Environmental Impacts/Mitigation: The overriding goal of trail design and management will be to protect the natural quality of the railroad corridor. This will be done through minimization of impacts to the natural environment through design, management and education. Sensitive areas will be identified and mitigation measurements will be implemented where appropriate. This may include seasonal trail closures on portions of the right-of-way, for example. Safety: Safety of the trail user and the adjacent landowners will be assured through design and management techniques. This will include providing adequate width to avoid user conflicts, situating trail access points so that they are sensitive to safety, and providing barrier protection where appropriate between trail and transit. Perimeter fencing is also proposed to reduce conflicts with livestock and wildlife. As mentioned above, grade-separated crossings at major intersections will be considered, as will solar-powered call boxes in rural portions of the corridor. Implementation: Implementation of the overall trail system will be a regional effort that will include the local governments, state government and possibly the private sector. A collaborative final design process including all affected parties will be completed prior to construction of any segment of the trail. This process will include the public, local governments and interest groups. IV. Summary of Key Findings of the Access Control Plan - / 08 - RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 12 11/03/99 DRAFT The overall intent of the Access Control Plan is to promote the stewardship of the corridor by the owner (RFRHA), adjacent property owners, the conservation and trail easement holder and the local governments. In addition, the plan strives to facilitate coordination between RFRHA and the local governments, the Colorado Department of Transportation, and the Colorado Public utilities Commission. The purpose of the Access Control Plan is three-fold: • To protect the health and safety of the public using the railroad corridor; • To preserve the value of the transportation/recreation facilities by minimizing new crossings, ensuring safe operation and maintenance of existing crossings and consolidating crossing wherever practicable; • To preserve the open space and trail values of the corridor by avoiding adverse impacts to the open space, recreation, scenic and wildlife values, by avoiding impacts to the public enjoyment of the corridor, and when impacts can not be avoided, mitigate those impacts to the greatest extent possible. A summary of key findings within the Access Control Plan is as follows: Policy for Existing Crossings: The plan acknowledges, to the best extent possible, all existing crossing on the corridor. It finds that there are at least 102 crossings, 37 public and 65 private. Changes to or creation of new, public crossings will be under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Public Utility Commission (CPUC). The CPUC has procedures in place to deal with proposed changes to or additions of public crossings. Private crossings under RFRHA control will be allowed by permit as opposed to easement or license, and must meet the standards for construction defined within the Access Plan. Existing private crossings shall be allowed to continue on the corridor. If the existing crossing is already licensed, that license shall be adhered to unless it is mutually determined by the licensee and RFRHA that modification of the license is warranted. If an existing crossing is currently not licensed, or a change of use of the existing crossing is requested, the user of the crossing shall apply for a license or license modification under a permitting process administered by RFRHA. Policy for New Crossings: New crossings of the railroad corridor shall be generally prohibited. There are exceptions to this policy, including: • A new public street or road crossing, which is administered through the CPUC; • A need for a new crossing to provide access to a private property that otherwise cannot be reasonably provided by an existing permitted crossing or another route (i.e. connection to an existing public road). Parties interested in pursuing a new crossing under the exceptions stated above must apply for such a crossing through either the CPUC procedures or through the _ io4 _ RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 13 11/03/99 DRAFT permitting procedure administered by RFRHA. It is the burden of the parry proposing a new crossing is necessary under the hardships described above. If a new crossing of the corridor is pursued, the following standards shall be followed: • A grade-separated crossing will be preferred; • The new crossing must be shown to have no adverse impact to rail operations or to the trails and open space values of the corridor. • Consolidation of existing crossings may be required as a part of any approval of a new crossing; • Coordination with local agencies will be a part of the review/approval process. Policy for Crossing Consolidation: Consolidation of existing crossings is an effective method of reducing conflicts on the railroad corridor. To that end, RFRHA will encourage the consolidation of existing crossings wherever and whenever practicable. RFRHA may also require crossing consolidations as a part of any new crossing application, proposed development activity, or in conjunction with joint railroad/other transportation facility improvements. For example, if a commuter transit improvement is conducted on the railroad property, some public road crossings may be consolidated as a part of the public works project. Opportunities for Crossing Consolidation: Opportunities for crossing consolidation will be based on the following criteria: • Minor crossings within %:-mile of each other; • Major crossings within 1-mile of each other; • "Paper" crossings (i.e. crossings that are licensed but are not physically located on the corridor); • Private crossings where alternative access to public roads are available; • Crossings that can be combined via frontage roads. The corridor mapping included within the Exhibit B: Access Plan shows crossings that are suitable for potential consolidation under these criteria. RFRHA will pro- actively pursue crossing consolidation by meeting with license holders individually, evaluating potential consolidations on a case-by-case basis based upon transportation, trail and open space values, conducting safety analysis where applicable, and monitoring development activity on adjacent private lands. V. Summary and Key Findings of the Corridor Investment Study The purpose of the Corridor Investment Study (CIS) is to determine the best, locally feasible, long-range regional transportation system for the Roaring Fork valley. The RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 14 11/03/99 DRAFT CIS will also answer the questions posed in the Comprehensive Plan regarding transit on the railroad corridor. A summary of key findings within the Corridor Investment Study is as ;.;flows: Technology Alternatives: Through an intense public process, 46 technology options were considered. At the end, rail was selected as a "build" alternative for further study. The build alternative was compared to two other alternatives during the more detailed, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Process: The "No-build" alternative, which looks at our transportation future with only projects that are currently approved or budgeted (also known as the committed projects alternative); and the "Transportation Systems Management" (TSM) alternative that looks at improving the existing RFTA Bus system (also known as the Enhanced Bus alternative). Alignment Options: Five potential alignments (A through E) were developed and combined with the rail/build and bus/TSM technology options. Each of the alignments followed either the railroad right-of-way or a combination of the right-of- way and the Highway 82 alignment. All five alignments survived the Phase 1 reality check and fatal flaw screening process. As a result of the Phase 2 comparative evaluation, Alignment C (with a crossing option at Catherine's Store, the northern crossing option at Gerbazdale and the Alignment 8 option south of Gerbazdale) was chosen for the rail/build alternative to be evaluated for the DEIS analysis. However, Alignment A, which follows the railroad corridor from Glenwood Springs to Woody Creek, will be considered in the Final Environmental Impact Statement process as a possible phasing alternative. All five alignment options are fully described and illustrated within Exhibit C: Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Propulsion Options: Of the 19 total propulsion options determined, eight were selected to be continued for detailed study. They include diesel, gasoline, hydrogen internal combustion, liquid propane, natural gas, electric battery, electric overhead catenary, and electric/gas hybrid. Station Location Options: Sixteen potential station locations were determined through the initial screening process. Of the sixteen discovered, nine were carried forward into the DEIS for comparative purposes. They are: • West Glenwood Springs • Downtown Glenwood Springs • State Highway 133 (Carbondale) • Downtown Carbondale RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 15 11/03/99 DRAFT • El Jebel/Willits Lane • Basalt • Brush Creek Road • Pitkin County Airport • Galena & Main St (downtown Aspen) Significant Environmental Impacts: Through the Draft Environmental Impact Statement Process, The following environmental impacts were determined for the rail/build alternative: Beneficial Impacts: • Reduced air pollution • Increased transportation capacity • Safer transportation • Improved quality of life • Greater potential to concentrate growth through transit oriented development • Increased transportation choices • Reduction in buses Adverse Impacts: • Relocation of or encroachment on households and businesses • Increased noise levels • Potential for encroachment on bald eagle buffer zone • New structures creating visual impacts Public Involvement: An intense public involvement process, funded and staffed over and above the work conducted within the Draft Environmental Impact Statement process, was conducted by RFRHA. In addition to a nested task force/policy committee structure, open houses, public meetings, workshops, focus groups, elected official briefings, newsletters and media outreach programs were conducted. Capital Costs.. Capital costs for the rail/build alternative has been determined at $194 million. This cost was derived using Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) trains running on Alignment C and stopping at the nine stations listed above. This cost also includes the feeder bus routes, park-and-rides and station improvements required. Operation and Maintenance Costs: An annual operations and maintenance cost of $10.8 million for opening day, 2003 and $20.85 million for the year 2020 (planning horizon) was determined for the rail/build alternative. This cost is based on a transit schedule that operates every half-hour between 6:00 am and 12:00 am � � RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 16 11/03/99 DRAFT every day. These costs also include the feeder bus systems, stations and maintenance facilities. This cost does not include revenues obtained from fares. Next Steps: After the Draft Environmental Impact Statement is published in January, 2000, a public comment period will begin on the DEIS that will last 90 days. Work on the Final Environmental Impact Statement will begin in March/April of 2000. The HIS will respond to all of the comments brought forward during the public comment period and will also determine financing and governance for the system. As a part of the financing work, phasing of the system will also be considered. It is anticipated that a HIS will be completed and a Record of Decision issued for the project by November, 2000. If the required local financing is accumulated and a regional entity capable of managing the system is approved by the voters by November, 2000, a system can be built and begin operating by September, 2003. VI. Changes to the Conservation Easement Reaui red by the Comprehensive Plan Based on the information and definition of uses contained within this Comprehensive Plan, it is recommended that the following modifications, additions or deletions to the scope of the Conservation Easement be approved by the RFRHA Board, member governments and participating state agencies: Approved Uses. The following uses are determined to be appropriate for the property under the Comprehensive Plan: Trail and Recreational Use: A regional trail, with associated side trails to access the river and public lands, trailheads and signage program as defined within Exhibit A: Recreational Trails Plan. In addition, placement of interpretive and environmental educational facilities as described within Exhibit E: Reading the Roaring Fork Landscape: An Ideabook for Interpretation and Environmental Education. Rail Transit and Freight Use: Placement of all facilities, including trackage, stations and associated structures, for a rail transit system in some or all of the corridor, as described within Exhibit C: Summary of Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Exhibit D: Additional Technical Information as Requested Through the Local Decision Making Process. Glenwood Springs Bypass Route: On October 21 , 1999, the Glenwood Springs City Council adopted Resolution #99-11 designating the Railroad right-of-way from the Colorado River to the vicinity of 23"' and 27" Street as the preferred bvpass alternative for Highway 82. In addition, Glenwood Springs' participation in RFRHA had been conditioned upon the possible use of the railroad right-of-way for a vehicular bypass provided that such a bypass would not preclude the Use of the right-of-way for rail or trail purposes. Attached as Exhibit F: City of Glenwood RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 17 11/03/99 DRAFT Sorin s Bypass is a copy of Resolution =99-11 and a copy of the conceptual study conducted by Glenwood Springs regarding the various bypass alternatives proposed. The use of the railroad right-of-wav for placement of a bypass route is still in the early stages of design. In addition, no funding for the project has been determined. The cost for a bypass along the railroad right-of-way is estimated at between 555 and $100 million. Pursing the ultimate placement of the bypass is seen as a joint effort between Glenwood Springs and RFRHA. As plans are refined and finalized, both partners will work together to insure that the project fulfill the mutual goals of each entity. Existing T-reRsit Use! Wse ei penieRs ei the Fight ef Way, as desigRated withiM Anticipated Future Uses Appropriate to the Corridor: There are some emerging local issues in the Roaring Fork v.illey that may, at some future point in time, require the use of the corridor. Such use of the corridor will not impact the conservation values or the approved uses of the corridor, but could enhance the nature of the corridor as a public asset. Two such uses are public telecommunication and existing transit- use. It is becoming apparent that rural access to broadband telecommunications technology is to a large extent being ignored by the private sector, primarily because of it's poor economic return. As a result, rural areas may find themselves forced to provide their own access to this broadband technology if they want to keep pace with their urban counterparts. As a result of this need to stay abreast with new technology, it may be necessary for the railroad right-of-way to be available as a corridor for a future regional telecommunication system. Any use of the corridor RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 18 11103/99 DRAFT for these purposes would likely come in the form of buried cable or fiber optic lines, and should not be undertaken unless it is a part of an overall regional telecommunication master plan. ,mother possible future use of the property could be for placement of facilities needed under existing transit use prior to implementation of rail transit. Use of portions of the right-of-way, as designated within Exhibit D: 4) Transit Oriented Development Stuciv, could be used for existing or enhanced transit. This use of the property will consist of park-and-rides and/or stations for bus improvements to facilitate existing Roaring Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) bus service or to facilitate the Enhanced Bus/TSN 1 transit alternative if this alternative is carried forward as a phasing option within the Record of Decision iROD). Any future anticipated use of the corridor deemed appropriate by the RFRHA Board will be reviewed, discussed and considered for adoption into the Comprehensive Plan under the methodology described below. Removal of the Access Plan from the Conservation Easement: Because the Access Plan sets out policies, standards and procedures for existing and new crossings, as well as for consolidation of crossings, the oversig: and approval of crossings on the corridor can now be managed by RFRHA. Physical Modification of the Conservation Easement: The conservation values of the corridor are defined as being the natural, scenic, open space, historical, educational, wildlife, trail and recreational values. The Comprehensive Plan addresses and preserves all of these values with the exception of the natural and open space values. It is therefore proposed that the conservation easement, which now covers the entire corridor, can be reduced in physical scope to cover only those areas where natural features, such as riparian areas, critical wildlife habitats and prime wetland areas. The criteria proposed to protect the conservation values on the remainder of the corridor can be used by RFRHA to govern use (or non-use) of the property in the future. Retention of the Trail Easement: It is proposed that the trail easement be retained by the easement holder. The trail easement will burden the entire property until the trail is actually placed, at which time it will be reduced to a 20-foot wide easement, 10-feet either side of the centerline of the trail. Procedure for Modification to the Comprehensive Plan: Every five years, the RFRHA Board shall review the Comprehensive Plan and make changes to it if deemed necessary. In addition, RFRHA staff or Board members may propose to initiate a modification to the Comprehensive Plan because of a perceived need to do so. The RFRHA Board must approve the initiation of the modification process before it is to proceed. After approval to proceed, any amendment to the Comprehensive Plan will be initially drafted and presented to the Board. After _ r � o — RFRHA Comprehensive Plan Page 19 11/03/99 DRAFT receiving comments from the RFRHA Board, the draft will be distributed to all member governments, including Great Outdoors Colorado and The Colorado Department of Transportation, for their comments. A final draft of the amendment(s) will then be brought back to the RFRHA Board for their final acceptance. Once accepted by the RFRHA Board, the amendment(s) will be sent back to the member governments for their ratification. ,-\II member governments must approve of the amendments, before they are incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. Transferability of the Comprehensive Plan: In the Intergovernmental Agreement forming RFRHA, it is anticipated that ownership of the rail corridor may be transferred to another public agencv. If this is the case, the Comprehensive Plan will be tied to the property and \\ill transfer with property ownership to that new ownership entity. - SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION SUMMARY 12-20-99 The Work Session began at 2:00 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor T. Michael Manchester, Doug Mercatoris, Kevin Costello, Jack Hatfield, Mark Brady COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Victoria Giannola, Planning Director; Steve Connor, Town Attorney; Joe Coffey, Housing Manager; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Chris Conrad, Senior Planner; Rebecca Harlowe, Records Clerk; Jennifer Worth, Deputy Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: John McCarty, Bill Cunningham, John Dresser, Scott Smith, Carolyn Sackariason and other members of the public interested in today's Agenda items. THE TIMBERS AT SNOWMASS (FARAWAY RANCH SOUTH) PRELIMINARY PUD DISCUSSION Chris Conrad outlined discussions for this meeting that included the Fiscal Impact Analysis, Brush Creek Impact Report, landscaping and architecture. He explained that the applicant submitted new sales values for the different types of sale units based on changes made to the development program and submitted a revised Fiscal Impact Analysis to indicate current information. Bill Cunningham, of Leland Consulting, explained that the number of fractional interests for the condominiums and townhomes has been increased and the number of affordable housing units has decreased, creating a more positive Fiscal Impact Report. Cunningham stated that the reduction in employee housing units will create less of an impact to the Town since they will house less full-time year-round employee residents. The yearly turnover of the increased number of fractional interests will create additional Real Estate Transfer Tax for the Town. The Club portion of the development now consists of 4 Townhomes and 36 Suites. Townhomes will consist of 8 fractional ownerships per unit and the suites 7.5 fractional ownerships per unit. 12-20-99ws Page 2 Hatfield requested a fiscal analysis from the Finance Department that includes the current numbers. Council conducted a thorough discussion of the revised Impact Analysis. Mercatoris requested that the applicant provide Council with the employee housing development costs, if appropriate. Manchester requested the amount that the Town's valuation would be increased from property tax revenues generated by construction of the free-market units. Cunningham stated that the numbers presented in the current charts do not include the current Town Road Mill Levy or the recently acquired Droste property. Council requested that the part-time homeowners be considered as residents rather than tourists. The Public Works Director stated that solid waste numbers will need to be revised. Council requested "worst case" scenario revenue projections and revised financial numbers based on 50-percent condominium occupancy without the inclusion of Real Estate Transfer Tax numbers. Council also requested impact information, excluding and including the employee housing project, to determine the impacts if the Town were to purchase the employee housing portion of the project from the owner. John McCarty of Otak, stated that he has conducted a thorough review of the Timbers development relevant to the Snowmass Village Development and Land Use Code. Council discussed McCarty's fincaings and recommendations outlined in his memo to Council and included in the packet for this meeting. Council discussed wetlands mitigation and agreed with McCarty's recommendations. McCarty complimented the applicant on their site drainage plan. Council requested that erosion control be included in the applicant's Construction Management Plan, that landscaping improvements become a condition of approval and that staff meet to determine if the applicant agrees with McCarty's recommendations. Discussions will continue on January 3, 2000, at which time the applicant will provide information related to the employee housing portion of the project, a revised Fiscal Impact Report and revised architecture information. PARCEL "N" EMPLOYEE HOUSING DISCUSSION Joe Coffey provided Council with suggestions to choose a name for the Parcel "N" employee housing development. Scoff Smith of Gibson Reno Architects presented a revised site elevation plan and explained how the buildings will relate to the neighboring Ridge Condominium. He explained the view planes from each building and the visual impact the project will have on the neighboring homeowners. Council requested that the neighboring homeowners and the public be notified of the Town's plans to construct employee housing on Parcel "N" and that story poles be located on the site to identify building locations at a time when the neighboring homeowners are in Town for their January Homeowners Association meeting. Council discussed possible funding sources 12-20-99ws Page 3 for the project, garage space and the height of the project buildings. The Town Attorney explained that the property will need to be rezoned to `Public" and a Special Review conducted. Coffey explained that Alan Richman will develop the Land Use Plan. After further discussion, Council requested proposals from Smith and Richman to identify preliminary costs. They directed staff to proceed with the schematic design and the development of a Land Use Plan with staffs assistance. They also requested a report from the Town Manager proposing possible funding sources and a budget and timeline for construction as soon as possible. Council requested additional suggestions of possible names for the development. The Work Session ended at 6:22 p.m. Trudi Worline, Town Clerk SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 12-20-99 Mayor T. Michael Manchester opened the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, December 20, 1999 at 4:45 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor T. Michael Manchester, Doug Mercatoris, Jack Hatfield, Mark Brady, Kevin Costello COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Steve Connor, Town Attorney; Victoria Giannola, Planning Director; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Joe Coffey, Housing Manager; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Trudi Worline, Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: Carolyn Sackariason, Jim-Wells, and other members of the public interested in today's Agenda items. Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 7: RESOLUTION NO. 60 SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT TO PERMIT A SKI TRAIL WITHIN THE WOOD ROAD RIGHT-OF- WAY ADJACENT TO LOT NO. 9, WOOD RUN UNIT II The Town Attorney explained that this ski trail is located in a portion of the Wood road right-of-way and is outside of the paved area of the road and connects to an existing ski trail described on the Wood Run plat. Hatfield made a motion to approve Resolution No. 60, Series of 1999, seconded by Mercatoris. There being no further discussion, the Resolution was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. 12-20-99tc Page 2 Item No. 3: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING — ORDINANCE NO. 11. SERIES OF 1999 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 11, SERIES OF 1999, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTERS 2, 5 AND 16A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 10, SERIES OF 1987 Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 4:48 p.m. Suiter explained that this Public Hearing has been advertised in the Snowmass Sun in accordance with the Snowmass Village Municipal Code. There being no comment from the public, Mayor Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 4:49 p.m. Manchester made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999, seconded by Mercatoris. The Town Attorney explained the contents of the Ordinance. Council discussed the Ordinance and requested necessary changes. Mercatoris made a motion to amend the Ordinance to include the requested changes. Hatfield seconded the motion. The motion to amend was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. After further discussion, a roll-call vote was taken and the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999 was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 4: FIRST READING — ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1999 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO HOLY CROSS ENERGY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN FOR LIGHT, HEAT, POWER AND OTHER PURPOSES, AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF Mercatoris made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1999, seconded by Costello. Council discussed underground placement of cable and pedestals, relocation Holy Cross facilities, contributions made to the Town from PUC authorized tariffs, Amendment No. 1 (Tabor) implications from contributions and new legislation related to these issues. The Town Attorney stated that he has requested a copy of Holy Cross' undergrounding policies. After further discussion, First Reading of Ordinance No. 15 was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 5: RESOLUTION NO. 58, SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ENTRANCE INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOWMASS LAND COMPANY CONCERNING RELINQUISHMENT OF ANY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE COURT AT ALPINE SPRINGS, PARCEL A i 12-20-99tc Page 3 BASE VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING THE RELEASE OF A GUARANTEE MORTGAGE SECURING A SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT FOR THE COURT AT ALPINE SPRINGS The Town Attorney explained that the Snowmass Land Company has discovered that a Guarantee Mortgage exists encumbering Parcel A in Base Village Subdivision which is securing a Subdivision Improvements Agreement concerning the Court at Alpine Springs. The SLC does not wish to develop Parcel A as approved, and has requested the Town's consent to a relinquishment of any development rights, to cancel the Subdivision Improvements Agreement and to release the Guarantee Mortgage. He further explained that approval of this Resolution cancels the development approval and the improvements agreement and authorizes the release of the mortgage. After further discussion, Mercatoris made a motion to approve Resolution No. 58, Series of 1999, seconded by Costello. The Resolution was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 59, SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY, THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD, THE ARTS ADVISORY BOARD AND THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS Mayor Manchester entertained a motion to table this Resolution to the January 3, 2000 Regular Town Council to allow time for staff to revise the 1999 Boards and Commissions attendance records and to provide Board members and staff time to submit letters or comments regarding meeting absenteeism during 1999. Hatfield made a motion to approve Resolution No. 59, Series of 1999, seconded by Mercatoris. Mercatoris made a motion to table the Resolution to the January 3, 2000 Regular Town Council Meeting, seconded by Hatfield. The motion to table was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Hatfield requested that in future years, attendance records and the Boards and Commissions Resolution of appointment be presented to Council at the first Council Meeting of the new year. Item No. 8: MANAGER'S REPORT Council Retreat Council scheduled a Retreat for the week of January 17, 2000. The date and location of the Retreat will be determined in the near future. A Council tour of base areas located in other ski towns will be scheduled at a later date. Council !�i 12-20-99tc Page 4 discussed Retreat dates and requested that the January 17, 2000 Regular Town Council Meeting be moved to January 24, 2000, and the Retreat be scheduled for January 18, 19 and 20. Item No. 9 DISCUSSION/ACTION SEVEN STAR RANCH PUD REQUEST FOR EXTENSION The Town Manager explained that he received a letter from Joe Wells, representing the owners of Seven Star Ranch, which requested an extension of time for Council's final review of the Seven Star Ranch PUD application. He explained that previously Council granted an extension to December 31, 1999. Hatfield made a motion to grant an extension for final review of Seven Star Ranch PUD application to February 8, 2000. Mercatoris seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 10 APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION SUMMARIES FOR 10-18-99 11-01-99 AND 12-13-99 AND MEETING MINUTES OF 11-01-99 12-06-99 AND 12-13-99 Mercatoris made a motion to approve the Work Session Summaries and Minutes as listed above. Brady seconded the motion. Hatfield requested changes to the Work Session Summaries of 11-01-99 and the Minutes of 11-01-99, 12-06-99 and 12-13-99. Hatfield will submit his list of changes to the Town Clerk for review and confirmation. The Minutes were approved as corrected, by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Hatfield requested that Meeting Minutes be submitted to Council within a month following the meeting date. NOTE: The following four items were discussed at this time. Item No. 11 STAFF STATUS REPORT Item No. 12 COUNCIL COMMENTS Item No. 13 COMMITTEE REPORTS Item No. 14 CALENDARS Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority Meeting (RFRHA) Hunt Walker reported that he attended a RFRHA Meeting on Friday, December 17, 1999 and will include a report on the meeting in the next Town Council Meeting packet. 12-20-99tc Page 5 Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Manchester reported that he recently attended an RTA Meeting, which is in the process of defining accomplishments necessary to meet their goals for the year 2000. He outlined the various committees and participants involved in the RTA process. Manchester explained that a series of work sessions will take place in various sections of RTA jurisdictions including Snowmass Village. He requested that the RTA Steering Committee be officially recognized as a representative committee of Snowmass Village Town Council in order that they can attend meetings and make decisions as Council representatives. The Committee will report back to Council on a regular basis. The Mayor stated the need to appoint two representatives from Snowmass Village to serve on this committee as well as a staff contact person. The Policy Committee will meet on the second and fourth Thursdays of each month. The group is now searching for a facilitator to assist Alice Hubbard and a consensus negotiator to address each jurisdiction's concerns and draft an RTA Intergovernmental Agreement. Manchester explained the long-term goal of the RTA is to merge the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority and the Regional Transportation Authority into one entity that will be in control of regional transportation in the Roaring Fork Valley. An effort is in progress for the adoption of new legislation as well as amendments to current legislation, to allow for funding sources and other necessary amendments. Two informational questionnaires/flyers will be distributed to government entities and to the public to solicit input. Manchester stated that he has requested RTA discussion be listed as a regular Council Meeting Agenda item. Annual Snowmass Homeowner's Meeting Manchester reported that he attended the annual Snowmass Homeowners Meeting. The group discussed the Wood Run dumpster shed location. The owners of the sites designated as "3" and "3A" have been identified as owned by Tom Fuller. A meeting with Mr. Fuller eliminated these sites as possible locations for the dumpster shed. Hatfield requested a copy of the memo from the Town Attorney to the Town Manager regarding this issue. Council requested Work Session time be set in the immediate future to further discuss possible locations for the dumpster shed. Manchester also reported a concern from a Village Run Circle resident, who requested modifications to the road to eliminate a traffic hazard in that area. A concern was also expressed regarding the number of occupants at a residence on North Ridge Lane where resident vehicles continue to park on Town right-of- way land. This being an ongoing issue, the Town Manager explained that the Chief of Police has reported that this parking issue has been actively enforced by the Police Department by issuing tickets and towing cars and improvements have 12-20-99tc Page 6 been made. Long-term solutions would involve a survey, re-establishing the right-of-way, and possible road reconstruction or ordinances enacted requiring homeowners to construct parking spaces on their property. Walker stated that vehicles parked in the right-of-way have caused problems for snowplowing. He explained that current Town legislation disallows vehicle parking in Town right-of- ways. After further discussion, staff was directed to continue towing the cars parked in the right-of-way. Further action will be determined based on the outcome of continual towing of the vehicles. Keep Snowmass Beautiful Manchester reported that Ben Rawlins, who developed the "Keep Snowmass Beautiful" program, is relocating out of Town and the Homeowners Association is requesting a volunteer to continue the program. Manchester asked Council Members if they wish to continue supplemental funding for the program. Council directed that the work be continued by the Town's landscaping crew. Monies donated to the "Keep Snowmass Beautiful" program will be used to hire additional staff if necessary. Holiday Events Manchester informed Council and the public of the events planned in Snowmass Village during the holiday season. He listed a Torchlight Parade on December 23 on Fanny Hill, a Millennium Parade on the Mall on December 28, fireworks and Torchlight Parade on Fanny Hill on December 29 on Fanny Hill and a Snowmass Village dance at the Conference Center on December 30 as some of the events planned to take place. Boards and Committees Attendance Records Mayor Manchester requested that the Boards and Committees Attendance Records be reformatted and submitted to Council at the January 3, 2000 Regular Council Meeting. Community Forum Meeting Mayor Manchester reported that the Community Forum Meeting Communications and Technologies Task Force is in the process of developing methods to improve community and youth interaction throughout the Valley. The group is requesting that the public participate in this effort. Manchester will provide Council with the Forum's Web Page address. First Quarter Sales Tax In response to a request from Brady, Council requested that they be informed on a continuing basis of the first quarter sales tax status as it relates to the Town's budget. Mercatoris reported that the Town's current occupancy rate is 12-20-99tc Page 7 approximately 50-percent as opposed to previous year's occupancy rate, which averaged 90-percent during this same time of year. Employee Housing Financial Information Mercatoris requested that Council's request for Employee Housing financial information be provided at the January 3, 2000 Regular Council Meeting, for the purpose of discussions with the Timber's PUD applicant. Town Meetings Hatfield requested Council host a series of informal Town Meetings to gain public input on current and future development and construction for the purpose of developing a vision for the community's future. In agreement, Council directed staff to identify dates and locations for a Community Meeting. Fairway Drive Sign and Landscaping Hatfield requested that staff investigate the use of funds donated by Council to the Fairway Drive landscaping project. The Town Manager explained that since the Homeowners had not provided the money to pay the contractor for construction of the sign, he had been contacted with a request and gave his approval for the Homeowners to use the money to pay the contractor, with a requirement that the landscaping be paid for by the individual Homeowners. Council directed staff to send a letter to the Homeowners, requesting that the landscaping be completed as soon as possible. Landscape Architect Position Vacancy In response to an inquiry from Hatfield, the Community Development Director reported that he is continuing to advertise to fill the position of Landscape Architect. Divide Parking Lot In response to an inquiry from Hatfield, Council requested that staff respond to a letter from the Divide Homeowners Association regarding the state of the parking lot. Council also directed staff to clean the parking lot of debris. Sanders Ranch Comments Council agreed to a request from Hatfield to provide comments to Garfield County regarding the Sanders Ranch Project, as a part of the Valley's Regional Planning effort. Hatfield will provide Council Members with copies of comments from Pitkin County and Basalt. East Village Residential Housing Mercatoris reported that he met with Richard Shaw of Design Workshop as well as Anderson Ranch and 12-20-99tc Page 8 Snowmass Land.Company representatives regarding a proposal to construct residential housing in East Village on land designated for golf course use. He advised that this land not be considered as a possible location for housing until after the Snowmass Club submits their request to construct Phase II of the Snowmass Club plan. Council Holiday Social Event . Mayor Manchester informed the public that Council Members will gather for a social event at the Snowmass Club immediately following this meeting. Hills Lawsuit The Town Attorney stated that Mayor Manchester was served a Summons and Complaint regarding a lawsuit relating to a 1998 Town Shuttle Bus accident. CIRSA, the Town's insurance company, will be notified of the lawsuit in which Thomas R. Hills is suing the Town for injuries he suffered as a result of the accident. Item No. 15 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Hatfield made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mercatoris. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The meeting adjourned at 6:22 p.m. Submitted By, Trudi Worline, Town Clerk SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 01-03-2000 Mayor T. Michael Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, January 3, 2000 at 5:04 p.m. Item No.1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor T. Michael Manchester, Doug Mercatoris, Jack Hatfield, Kevin Costello, Mark Brady COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Steve Connor, Town Attorney, Victoria Giannola, Planning Director; Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director; Trudi Worline, Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: Don Schuster, Carolyn Sackariason, Bill Kane and other members of the public interested in today's Agenda items. Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 3: PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION —ORDINANCE NO. 22, SERIES OF 1999 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 22, SERIES OF 1999, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, INCLUDING THE LAND USE MAPS AND BUILDOUT CHART. Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 5:05 p.m. The Planning Director explained that this Ordinance adopts the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety, including the Land Use Maps. She explained that when the Comprehensive Plan was previously adopted, it did not include the Land Use 01-03-2000tc Page 2 Maps. The Planning Commission has reviewed the documents and recommends adoption with a request that a review of the Comprehensive Plan be initiated following adoption of this Ordinance. There being no comments from the public, Mayor Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 5:06 p.m. The Planning Director explained that the Buildout Chart included in the Ordinance will be amended to correct the number of employee housing units included in Parcel 12 of the Snowmass Club Property. Discussions regarding changes to the Buildout Chart as it relates to the Land Use Code and establishment of community benefits will begin at the February 1, 2000 Town Council Work Session. Article IV and V of the Land Use Code will be discussed with Council in January and February respectively. Staff will provide Council with copies of the newly revised Land Use Code Review Schedule for review and comment. Council suggested additional Work Session time be set to expedite the Land Use Code review process. Council reviewed the maps and requested changes to the Faraway Ranch North Comprehensively Planned Map and Parcel "N" within Faraway Ranch South. After further discussion, Hatfield made a motion to amend the Comprehensive Plan maps by designating Parcel "N" located within Faraway Ranch South as "Public" and amend Faraway Ranch North Map to clarify the amount of multi- family potential development per Council direction. Mercatoris seconded the motion to amend. The motion to amend was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Hatfield then made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1999 as amended. Brady seconded the motion. A roll-call vote was taken and Second Reading was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 4: EMERGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04, SERIES OF 2000 AN ORDINANCE CONDUCTING AN ORDINANCE REVIEW AS PRESCRIBED BY THE HOME RULE CHARTER, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY The Town Manager explained that this Ordinance re-adopts the Municipal Code through Supplement 5. The Home Rule Charter requires that Council examine and readopt the Municipal Code every 5 years. It also requires the affirmative vote of 3 out of 5 Council Members. The Town Attorney explained that Council's continual review and revision of various sections of the Municipal Code has eliminated the need to repeal any Ordinances at this time. Mercatoris made a motion to approve Emergency Ordinance No. 04, Series of 2000. Costello seconded the motion. The Town Attorney explained that the Ordinance is being adopted as an Emergency Ordinance for the orderly administration of government. After further discussion a roll-call vote was taken and Emergency Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2000 was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. 01-03-2000tc Page 3 Item No. 5: DISCUSSION 1999 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ATTENDANCE RECORDS Mayor Manchester explained that at the December 20, 1999 Regular Council Meeting, the Town Clerk was requested to amend the Attendance Record document for clarification purposes. The Town Clerk explained that the attendance records reflect all meetings through December 13, 1999. Council requested that future Attendance Records include a full calendar year and that the Attendance Records and Resolution reappointing Board and Commission members be submitted to Council for review and approval in January of each year. Council discussed and stated concerns regarding low attendance records. Staff provided insight for attendance records in question as well as qualifications as outlined in the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code states that all members of Boards and Commissions, except those specifically designated as advisory, shall be residents and registered voters of the Town. Council expressed their appreciation to the volunteers who serve on the various Boards and Commissions. Council requested that a message be relayed to the Board and Commission members, stressing the importance of commitment and attendance. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 59, SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY, FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD, ARTS ADVISORY BOARD AND BOARD OF APPEALS AND EXAMINERS (Tabled from 12-20-99) The Town Manager stated that Tom Dunlop has resigned from the Board of Appeals and Examiners after 18 and '/2 years of service. Council stated their appreciation to Dunlop for his valued service since 1981. Council requested that Ex-Officio Board Members not be included on the yearly Attendance Records. Mercatoris made a motion to approve Resolution No. 59, Series of 1999, seconded by Costello. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 7: RESOLUTION NO. 01, SERIES OF 2000 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING LOCATIONS OF OFFICIAL PUBLIC NOTICE BOARDS FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE The Town Clerk explained that this Resolution designating the locations of the Town's Official Public Notice Boards is a requirement of the Colorado Revised Statutes. She stated that the Town's Public Notice Boards are located on the first and third floors of the Snowmass Center building. Hatfield made a motion to approve Resolution No. 01, Series of 2000, seconded by Costello. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 01-03-2000tc Page 4 opposed. Mayor Manchester requested that all Public Notices be included on the Town's Internet Home Page. Item No. 8: DISCUSSION REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (RTA) UPDATE Mayor Manchester stated that no meetings were held during the holiday season. In response to an inquiry from Hatfield, Manchester stated that due to time constraints for deadlines to meet necessary legal requirements, the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Steering Committee decided not to hold an election, which was previously planned for May, 2000. The decision was ratified by the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) Board and the election question was deferred to a future election to request voter approval to create a Regional Transportation Authority. Item No. 9: DISCUSSION COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Council reviewed the list of various Boards and Commissions and Council Members who have volunteered to serve on each. Council discussed the document and requested changes. Hunt Walker, Public Works Director, will remain as Council representative on the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (RFRHA) Board. Council requested that all Mall Transit Plaza meetings be public noticed to enable any interested Council Members to attend. The Town Clerk will make changes to the list, as requested, and distribute copies to the Council. Item No. 10: APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION SUMMARY FOR 11-22-99 Brady made a motion to approve the Work Session Summary of 11-22-99. The Town Manager requested a change to the report on the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District discussion. There being no further additions or corrections, the Work Session Summary was approved as amended, by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. NOTE: Council discussed the following three items. Item No. 11: COUNCIL COMMENTS Item No. 12: COMMITTEE REPORTS Item No. 13: CALENDARS 5-Mayors' Meeting/RTA Meeting Mayor Manchester stated that he will attend a 5-Mayors' Meeting and a RTA Meeting on January 6, 2000. '�. ' ... 01-03-2000tc Page 5 Mayor's Interview Costello stated that the recent interview in the Snowmass Village Sun with the Mayor addressing visions for the Town's future, did not reflect the fact that the Mayor had received substantial input from all Council Members in preparation for the interview. He stated that it would have been appropriate for this fact to have been included in the article. Mayor Manchester stated that it had not been his intention that the assumption be construed in this manner. Y2K/Low Snow Effects Brady stated that he felt the Y2K issue had been damaging to the Town business community as well as to other communities during the months of December and January, as many visitors had cancelled their plans to travel. In addition to negative results from low snow accumulation, the Y2K issue has resulted in some Mall business owners considering the sale of their business. He recommended that visions for the future of the Town as a resort and issues that have negatively affected the Town this season, be thoroughly discussed as Council plans for the future. Hatfield requested that this issue be discussed during the upcoming Council Retreat. Council Retreat The Town Manager explained that he is obtaining prices from Breckenridge, Copper Mountain and Telluride in an effort to identify a site to hold the Council Retreat. Council discussed possible dates for the Retreat and decided to move the January 17 Regular Town Council Meeting to January 24, and to schedule the Council Retreat for January 19, 20 and 21. Request from Crested Butte In response to an inquiry from Hatfield, the Town Manager stated that information included in a letter from the Crested Butte Town Manager was derived from a survey conducted by the Colorado Municipal League. Snowmass Village did not participate in the survey. Hatfield requested that staff provide the requested information to the Crested Butte Town Manager. New Year's Eve Community Dance Hatfield stated his appreciation for the New Year's Eve dance provided by the Snowmass Village Resort Association. He suggested that the community dance become an annual event with funding support from the Town. Highlands Tour Council requested that a tour of Aspen Highlands be scheduled in the near future. The Town Manager will obtain tour information and contact Council Members. Brady requested that Council Members be provided with information concerning the Ritz Club fractional ownership. Sanders Ranch _ ;L7 - 01-03-2000tc Page 6 Hatfield stated that Garfield County will discuss Sanders Ranch at a meeting scheduled for January 5, 2000. He will advise the meeting group of Council's desire to submit comments on the proposed development in the near future as a part of a regional planning effort. The development in question is planned for a location near the Cattle Creek area between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale. Hatfield will gather information on the proposal for Council Review. Community Meeting Council requested that a Community Visioning Meeting be scheduled for the first week in February. The meeting will be advertised as soon as a date, time and place are confirmed. The Town Manager will provide a schedule of topics for discussion at the meeting. Item No. 14: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Hatfield made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Costello. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m. Submitted By, Trudi Worline, Town Clerk Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday I Thursday Friday Saturday Januar y 2000 2 13 4 15 ii6 7 8 i 2:OOpm-TO WS 4:OOpm-TC Reg 9 110 it 12 13 14 15 2:00pm-TO WS I Silverthome- ! Silverthorne- CAST Mtg. CAST Mtg 4:OOpm EOTC Aspen CC Chambers 16 17 /8 19 20 21 22 2:OOpm-TO WS Highlands Tour 4:OOpm-TO 11:OOam- Reg. 1:OOpm I i 23 24 25 26 27 ' 28 29 Town Council Town Council Town Council Retreat-P.M. Retreat 'I Retreat j Copper Mtn. Copper Mtn. Copper Mtn. i ' I I i i 30 31 do i i i I Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday I Februar y 2000 I I �i1 1213 4 1 5 6:OOpm Town Mtg. Scherer Mtg. Hall Anderson Ranch i 6 17 8 9 10 .,, 11 12 ! j 2:00pm-TC WS 3:OOpm 4:OOpm-TC BOCC- PH Reg. Aspen Village Homeowners ICI Plaza One- Aspen I II � I I 13 14 15 III 16 17 18 19 2:OOpm-TC WS 4:OOpm-TC Reg. I 20 21 122 I'I 23 24 25 ^26 2:OOpm-TC WS 4:OOpm-TC Reg. i 27 28 29 I Requested Budget for 2000 �W EOTC Transit Project Funding Current I Requeste d Actual I Actual Actual Actual Actual Projection Budget 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 EOTC SOURCES: a) Pitkin County 112%sales tax 2,455,143 2,526.855 2,641,380 2,826,666 3,052.234 3,055,445 3,175,000 b) Pitkin County 1I2%use tax 208,982 335,456 299,414 341,193 391,128 419,000 390,000 c) Grants 5,000 5,000 4,600,000 1,000,000 d) Investment income&misc. 22,653 62.177 118.635 131,671 150,284 182,000 217,000 e) Reimbursement of expenditures 17,377 10,981 25,000 Total EOTC Sources 2,686,778 2,929.488 3.081,806 7,910,511 3,618,646 3.656.445 4,782,000 EOTC USES: 1) 5 RFTA buses-debt service 75,554 145,710 142,884 146,232 143,000 145,828 145,153 2) Expanded RFTA bus service 700,000 735,000 772.000 826,152 892,081 893,019 927,847 3) RFTA operating shortfall 146,000 150,000 400,000 4) Airport Intercept lot constr. 635,376 5) Intercept lot landscaping 124,102 38,585 6) Intercept lot shuttle service 308,000 218,000 150.747 106,138 7) Intercept lot maintenance 19,592 9,579 7,830 13,000 13,000 8) Project design,mgmt,&admin 700,537 39,987 63,480 112,679 88,674 42,477 41,124 9) Entrance-to-Aspen desigrllengineering 30,080 149,908 138,025 10) Aspen reimbursements 65.824 30,000 18,000 11) Snowiness transit center design 29,764 87,671 100,000 300,000 12) Use tax collection costs 51,834 15,074 34,400 27,063 60,000 80,500 13) ROW acquisition efforts 42,987 53,864 177,787 151,623 14) ROW acquisition-EOTC(56%) 1,624,000 15) ROW acquisition-grants 5,593,075 16) RFRHA budget share 172,999 396,833 597,848 385,121 17) RFRHA CIS advance 118,125 56.875 (175,000) 16) RFRHA CIS contribution 618,000 19) RFRHA enhanced public process 127,000 20) Moore Open Space appraisal 3,000 21)Regional Transit Authority Plan 75,000 22)Brush Creek Study 125.000 23)RFTA mitigation of roundabout construction up to 40,000 24)Roundabout loan 1,624,519 Total EOTC Uses 2,154,454 1,700,085 1,715,073 8.990,691 2,688,402 3,604,716 2,292,745 EOTC ANNUAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) 532,324 1,229,403 1,366,733 (1,080.180) 930.244 51,729 2,489,255 EOTC CUMULATIVE SURPLUSI(DEFICIT) 532,324 1,761.727 3,128,460 2,048.280 2,978,524 3,030,253 5,519,508 Notes: sae W". Actuallprojected increase in sales tax revenue 2.9% 4.5% 7.0% 8.0% 0.1% 3.9% Projected inflation rate 2.5% 3.3% 2.3% 1.7% 1.7% 2.0% Projected investment earnings rate 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 5.0% 'projected sales tax increase for 1999 if one-time revenue from sale of Ritz Carlton Hotel in 1998 is excluded from base 2.0% expenditure detail: 1997 1998 1999 2000 8) is composed of the following: 14,099 16,556 17,477 16,124 financial admin.and insurance 9,668 21,487 25,000 25,000 meeting support and facilitation 21,962 50,631 transportation linkages workshop(112 reimbursed by Aspen Skiing Co.) 30,000 match for Regional Transportation Partnerships grant 36,950 rail demonstration project 112,679 88,674 42,477 41,124 1117/00 Hlfcot00