Loading...
12-17-01 Town Council Packet � � � a� » - � I SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL Nor 4* REGULAR MEETING AGENDA December 17, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AT 3:30 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 2: 3:30 —4:30 HOUSING POLICY DISCUSSIONS -- Joe Coffey. . . . . . .Pagel (Tab A) Item No. 3: 4:30 -4:45 WILDLIFE/TRAIL MONITORING UPDATE -- Larry Green. . . . . .Page 3 (Tab B) REGULAR AGENDA-4:45 P.M. Item No. 4 PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-Minute Time Limit) Item No. 5: PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING — ORDINANCE 06, SERIES OF 2001 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 06, SERIES OF 2001, APPROVING THE FINAL PLAN PUD AMENDMENT FORTHE SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: 1) CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF 21 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS INTO 1/8 SHARE TIMESHARES VIA A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION; 2) THE CONSTRUCTION OF 21, 1/8 FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CONDOMINIUMS AVERAGING 2,400 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AND CONSISTING OF FOUR 3-BEDROOM UNITS, THIRTEEN 4-BEDROOM UNITS AND FOUR 5-BEDROOMS UNITS; 3) A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW USE FOR THE CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF THE 21 UNITS IN PHASE II, INCLUDING A BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE BETWEEN PARCELS 3 AND 4; 4) A REDESIGN OF THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE TO CREATE A COMPLETELY NEW 18-HOLE CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF COURSE BEING APPROXIMATELY 7,000 YARDS IN LENGTH, INCLUDING THE RE-ROUTING AND RE- NUMBERING OF THE FAIRWAYS; 5) RELOCATION OF THE SOFTBALL FIELD AND EVENTS AREA APPROXIMATELY 250 FEET TOTHE WEST; 6) CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 5,100 SQUARE FOOT GOLF CLUBHOUSE WITH GOLF CART STORAGE BENEATH; 7) A NEW 150-SPACE PARKING FACILITY TO SERVE THE GOLF CLUBHOUSE AND SPECIAL EVENTS AREA; 8) CONSTRUCTION OF A PERMANENT INDOOR TENNIS STRUCTURE AND A TENNIS PRO-SHOP FACILITY; 9) RECONFIGURATION OF PHASE I PARKING PROVISIONS TO i 12-17-01tc Page 2 ACCOMMODATE THE PHASE II PROPOSAL; 10) WIDENING TO 22-FEET, WITH STREET WIDTH VARIANCE, AND EXTENSION OF CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO BRUSH CREEK ROAD AT HORSE RANCH DRIVE; 11) IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERSECTION AT SNOWMASS CLUB CIRCLE AND CLUBHOUSE DRIVE; 12) STREAM RESTORATION OF BRUSH CREEK; AND 13) IMPROVED TRAIL CONNECTIONS. -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . . . . . . . Page 6 (Tab C) Item No. 6: SECOND READING — ORDINANCE 21, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-42 (J), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE -- Craig Thompson. . . . . . . . . Page 57 (Tab D) Item No. 7: SECOND READING — ORDINANCE NO. 30, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 10 ARTICLE V OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF SMOKING BY PROHIBITING SMOKING TO CONFIRM THAT A PUBLIC PLACE INCLUDES A PLACE OF WORK. -- Steve Connor. . . . . . . . . . . Page 62 (Tab E) Item No. 8: DISCUSSIONIACTION SEVEN STAR RANCH PUD REQUEST FOR EXTENSION -- Gary Suiter/Joe Wells. . . . .Page 66 (Tab F) Item No. 9: MANAGER'S REPORT -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 69 (Tab G) Item No. 10: APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FOR 11-12-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 72 (Tab H) Item No. 11: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 80 (Tab l) Item No. 12: CALENDARS . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 82 (Tab J) Item No. 13: 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. TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 17, 2001 Agenda Item: Housing Advisory Committee(H.A.C.) Recommendations Presented By: Housing Advisory Committee Members and Joe Coffey Core Issues: • Pets (Rental Units) • Disabled Priority Units (Daly Townhomes) • Smoking(Rental Units) • Pets (Rental Units) Current Policy- No dogs or cats only fish and birds and caged animals are currently allowed. H.A.C. Rationale- The nature of the renter is that he tends to be more short-term in the Village than an owner. Rental units turn over more than owner units and are required to be cleaned and sometimes painted before new tenants move in. H.A.C. Recommendation- 1)The Committee recommends to keep the policy as is due to the following: the increased damage to Town of Snowmass Village property,harm to the complexes' common elements, the increased maintenance needs in units where there are pets. 2)Allowing pets will increase the workload of Animal Control Officers and housing department staff. 3)There can be potential health problems (such as pet allergies) to those who move in to units where there were pets. Staff Recommendation - The Housing Manager recommends no changes to the pet rules at this time. Council Policy Question - Does the Council believe that pets should be allowed in some rental units? • Disabled Priority Units (Daly Townhomes) Current Policy- None H.A.C. Rationale- Those who need units which are designed for those with mobility disabilities should have first priority for these units. H.A.C. Recommendation- 1)As disabled units come available, those with.proof of a mobility disability be Eiven thirty days to apply for the unit. _l_ 2)After the thirty days, the unit shall become available to all qualified Snowmass Village employees. * There was a strong minority opinion that disabled Pitkin County employees be allowed to bid during the initial thirty-day period. Staff Recommendation - The Town is currently building two handicapped accessible Daly Townhome units. The Housing Manager believes that Snowmass Village employees with a mobility disability should be given 30- day priority for these units. Council Policy Question- Does the Council want to give Snowmass Village employees and their dependents who need A.D.A. accessible housing a 30 day priority for these condominiums? • Smoking (Rental Units) Current Policy- None H.A.C. Rationale- The Town of Snowmass Village passed an ordinance last year which bans smoking on public property. The employee housing rental units are considered public property. H.A.C. Recommendations - 1) Smoking should be banned in all rental units. 2) Smoking poses the threat of fire which could destroy Town property and displace employees. 3)Those units which are occupied by smokers require more maintenance at the time of turnover. 4) Smoke cannot be contained to the smokers'units and negatively impacts surrounding tenants who do not smoke. Staff Recommendations- 1) The Housing Manager supports the recommendations of the H.A.C. 2) At a minimum, lease rules should be established to assist the Manager with smoking problems. 3)The Council may want to consider scheduling a public meeting to allow smokers to voice their opinions about the new smoking policy. Council Policy Questions- 1)Do you believe tenants should have the privilege of smoking in publicly owned housing? 2) Should the Housing Manager create lease rules to control. smoking in public housing? OW TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 17, 2001 Agenda Item: Wildlife/Trail Monitoring Update Presented By: Larry Green, Wildlife Specialist Core Issues: On February 5, 2001, the Snowmass Village Town Council passed an ordinance that removed fall trail closure dates from Tom Blake, Anaerobic Nightmare and Sequel Trails. The new ordinance also opened Powerline Trail to spring use. It was voted and approved by Council that staff would begin a wildlife monitoring study in an effort to assess any impacts associated with the removal of these fall trail closure dates. General Info: A. An infrared trail monitor and camera was set near the Powerline Trail from May 15, 2001 through June 19, 2001. Because it was not possible to determine numbers of animals being recorded, data was recorded by events. Note: Graphs depicting the recorded data will be provided at Monday's presentation to Council. Data Interpretation: 1. From tracks observed and two usable photos, most events were deer. 2. Events occurred fairly evenly throughout the recording period. 3. Fewer animals moving during the middle of the day during June. This reaction has been recorded by bear use as human activity increases,however, this data is not good enough to draw that conclusion. 4. Two separate events of elk were recorded by observation of tracks in block H-11 on different days. No elk events were recorded by Dr. Baharav during five years of monitoring block H-11. B. An infrared trail monitor and camera were set between Anaerobic Nightmare and Tom Blake Trails from October 2, 2001 through November 27, 2001. Again, data has been recorded as events. 3 Data Interpretation: 1. Bear, deer and elk sign were observed on a trail within ten feet of the monitor. 2. Events appear to favor the middle of the day during October. This is a secluded site yet is located about 50 meters from all human activity on both Tom Blake and Anaerobic Nightmare Trails. Deer were observed bedding and moving in the area near the monitor while it was being checked. 3. Animal activity appears to taper off in November. This information parallels that of Dr. Baharay. 4. Five separate events of elk were recorded by observation of tracks on two different days. This compares to 13 total elk events recorded during a five-year monitoring period by Dr. Baharay. C. As approved by Council on June 11, 2001, elk were collared to continue monitoring for 2002 and 2003. Elk trapping was conducted from 10/29/01 through 11/30/01. Twenty-one elk were successfully collared. Seven elk were fitted with radio collars, eight elk with orange vinyl collars and six elk with ear tags. One trapping mortality occurred during the collaring. When examined, this cow elk had almost no external body fat. Elk should have peak body fat at this time of year to help survive the winter. The meat was donated. The Division of Wildlife sent a letter dated 10/22/01 to Snowmass Village stating that they felt it was a worthwhile project but listed several concerns: 1. The sample size is small, limiting conclusions that should be made from the data collected. 2. Past data is anecdotal and is not directly comparable to radio telemetry studies. 3. Better information would be collected by monitoring collars from an airplane rather than from the ground. The Division pointed out that this is an opportunity to collect some baseline data about broad, general movements of these elk to seasonal ranges, provide some information on timing of these movements and provide general location of seasonal ranges and calving areas. D. The data collected by Dr. Baharav and myself are not directly comparable. However, it would appear that all �v wildlife has remained active in the area where human activity has been allowed by the February ordinance. No discernable negative impacts can be determined by the permitted human use at this time. Council Options: None. The information presented is to provide Council with an end of the year update on wildlife monitoring progress. son Staff Recommendation: No Action Necessary. �•S TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 17, 2001 LOCATION: Snowmass Village Town Council Chambers 0016 Kearns Road 2nd Floor Snowmass Center Building REASON: To Receive Public Comment on:: ORDINANCE NO. 06, SERIES OF 2001, APPROVING THE FINAL PLAN PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: 1)CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF 21 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS INTO 1/8 SHARE TIMESHARES VIA SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION; 2)THE CONSTRUCTION OF 21, 11/8 FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CONDOMINIUMS AVERAGING 2,400 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AND CONSISTING OF FOUR 3- BEDROOM UNITS,THIRTEEN 4-BEDROOM UNITS AND FOUR 5-BEDROOMS UNITS; 3)A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW USE FOR THE CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF THE 21 UNITS IN PHASE II, INCLUDING A BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE BETWEEN PARCELS 3 AND 4; 4) A REDESIGN OF THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE TO CREATE A COMPLETELY NEW 18-HOLE CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF COURSE BEING APPROXIMATELY 7,000 YARDS IN LENGTH, INCLUDING THE RE-ROUTING AND RE-NUMBERING OF THE FAIRWAYS; 5) RELOCATION OF THE SOFTBALL FIELD AND EVENTS AREA APPROXIMATELY 250 FEET TO THE WEST; 6)CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 5,100 SQUARE FOOT GOLF CLUBHOUSE WITH GOLF CART STORAGE BENEATH; 7)A NEW 150-SPACE PARKING FACILITY TO SERVE THE GOLF CLUBHOUSE AND SPECIAL EVENTS AREA; 8) CONSTRUCTION OF A PERMANENT INDOOR TENNIS STRUCTURE AND A TENNIS PRO-SHOP FACILITY; 9) RECONFIGURATION OF PHASE I PARKING PROVISIONS TO ACCOMMODATE THE PHASE II PROPOSAL; 10)WIDENING TO 22-FEET, WITH STREET WIDTH VARIANCE,AND EXTENSION OF CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO BRUSH CREEK ROAD AT HORSE RANCH DRIVE; 11) IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERSECTION AT SNOWMASS CLUB CIRCLE AND CLUBHOUSE DRIVE; 12) STREAM RESTORATION OF BRUSH CREEK;AND 13) IMPROVED TRAIL CONNECTIONS. TIME: At a Meeting Which Begins at 2:00 P.M. The exact time of the hearing will be determined by the agenda. INFO: Telephone:: 923-3777 Internet access to Council email: http://www.tosv.com Citizen Feedback Hotline: 922-6727 clerk @tosv.com Rhonda B. Coxon, Deputy Town Clerk Posted and Published in the Snowmass Sun on 11-28-01. TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 17, 2001 Agenda Item: Public Hearing, First Reading and Discussion Item: Ordinance No. 06, Series of 2001, Snowmass Club Phase II Final PUD-- Note: The resolution for the Final Major Plat Amendment (for portions of Parcels 3, 4 and 10), and the Subdivision Exemption (for the condominiumization of the 21 multi-family units in Phase II into a timeshare regime) will be presented at the Town Council meeting on January 7, 2002 as a separate application item and public hearing. Topics: Outstanding Core Issues (see enclosed staff report) Changes since Preliminary PUD Approval Subdivision Improvements Agreement Other ancillary agreements that are needed Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Community Development Department, Planning Division Core Issues: The list of the outstanding core issues below have been addressed in detail in the attached report. There is also a list of technical- related comments referenced as Exhibit A in the attached draft ordinance. Many of these technical comments should be addressed by the applicant and reviewed before staff would recommend second reading of the ordinance. Primary core issues for discussion during this meeting include: Adjacent owners concerns— Golf course grading plan as it affects Fairway Drive homeowners - Wetland ponds adjacent to Country Club Villas and Townhomes - Adequacy of driving range length north of Country Club Townhomes Nordic Council Issues- - Selection of trail alignments Concern with Nordic trails over concrete golf cart paths Allowing periodic crossing of golf course fairways Assurances that site for maintenance facility is functional and effective Site Plan, Grading and Landscaping Plans- - Completeness of plans - Tennis court additions since Phase I, and its affects on plan Brush Creek alignment and trail connections Ramp for softball/recreation field Landscape screening for clubhouse service area and parking lot Tennis Building Elevations— Design changes since Preliminary Plan review - Elevations for Tennis Center/Pro Shop mom \\NT_SERVERIBLD PLN\userVw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc t Condominium Buildings— Finished floor elevations and overall height - Building coverage Increases - Changes in unit sizes - Architectural changes Development Agreement in addition to a Subdivision Improvements Agreement Below is the proposed schedule - December 17: Discussion, public hearing and First Reading of the Ordinance, including review of outstanding core issues as needed January 7: Continuation of the public hearing, Second Reading of the Ordinance and updated plans, Subdivision Improvements Agreement and exhibits, together with a Resolution to consider the Major Plat Amendment and Subdivision Exemption January 14: Wrap up of ordinance and associated resolution. NOTE: The above schedule is contingent upon the applicant addressing the matters outlined within Exhibit A of the Ordinance. General Info: The Snowmass Club Associat6s and the Aspen Skiing ompany has submitted their Final PUD application on November 16, 2001 in accordance with the Snowmass Club Phase II Preliminary PUD authorization granted by Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001 ('Resolution 36"). Copies of the application have been placed in your council boxes for review. A model of the golf course will be available at the meeting. Separate handouts: • The application book for the Snowmass Club Phase II Final PUD • The before and after grading proposed by the applicant that was sent to the adjacent owners to address concerns about the berming on the east side of Fairway#5 next to Country Club Estates Nordic Council letter dated December 13, 2001 Correspondence and petitions from adjacent owners concerning the golf course grading received since the last meeting Attachments: • Report and comments concerning the Final PUD application following staff review of the application against the Code criteria and the conditions in the Preliminary Plan resolution • Preliminary Draft Ordinance No. 06, Series of 2001 wow \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLN\useNmsnowmassclubll\TC Memo1 12-17.01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 2 Council Options: . Consider comments from the general public, discuss Core Issues and then provide staff direction as to the language needed in the ordinance following the first reading; AND • Continue public hearing to January 7, 2002 to include second reading of the ordinance with modifications; OR • Consider public comments, discuss Core Issues and table first reading until a date certain provided by the applicant relative to when substantive completion of the matters outlined within Exhibit A has occurred; OR • Deny the application. Staff a recommends that the Applicant discuss changes to the Final Recommendation: PUD project that responds to findings, recommendations and conditions specified within the Preliminary PUD approval, including how the outstanding core issues and staff comments will be addressed. The applicant should also explain how they have attempted to address the concerns from adjacent owners. In addition, Town Council should identify changes that need to be made in the ordinance. Despite the proposed review schedule, staff does not believe the first reading of the ordinance should be acted upon by Council due to the amount of core issues and staff comments that need to be addressed. However, the preliminary draft ordinance is provided to allow a general overview of the ordinance by Council. Staff recommends that the Town Council follow the conduct of meetings per the Code as follows: 1) Summary presentation by staff of the outstanding core issues or topics for the Final PUD review; 2) Applicant's presentation of application and changes from the Preliminary Plan application and how they plan to address the outstanding core issues; 3) Questions to staff or applicant by Town Council members with subsequent response by applicant and/or staff specifically related to the core issues or topics; 4) Accept comments or questions from the public; 5) Provide direction to the applicant and staff in amending the draft ordinance; and 6) Continue public hearing to January 7, 2002, or future date provided by the applicant;when first reading of the ordinance may be able to take place, together with consideration of a resolution for the major plat amendment and subdivision exemption as a separate item. \WT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12.17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Dratl.doc 3 Core Issues concerning the Snowmass Club Phase II Final PUD application December 17, 2001 Adjacent Owner concerns: 1. Golf Course Berm. The applicant states in the cover letter dated November 16, 2001 that if the current proposed grading changes for Fairway#5 aren't acceptable to the Country Club owners, the applicant proposes to use the grades now contoured in the field. It appears that there might be further opportunity to lower the berms because there is a significant cut generally located southeast of the planned fairway for additional fill. The golf cart path could also be relocated to the west side of the fairway if desired, but it may need to be shared with the golf cart path for Fairway#6. Please see the separate handout of the before and after grading schemes that were sent to the adjacent owners by the applicant. Also see the attached letters and petition staff received since the last meeting concerning the golf course grading. 2. Driving Range. An adjacent owner called concerning the length of the driving range from units 86-88 in the Country Club Townhomes. One owner felt that the 930 feet from the tee area to the northwest corner of the affected building will likely be adequate. The concern is that a golfer may improve their drive distance using improved equipment, and if golf balls encroach upon their units, they would like the applicant to commit to moving the driving range tee approximately 30 feet farther to the north. 3. Wetland Ponds. Other adjacent owners called regarding the wetland ponds between Country Club townhomes and new Fairway#11. Their main concern deals with the possibility of mosquito infestation in the ponds. The wetlands were approved by the Army Corps in this location to serve three purposes: 1)The created wetlands are provided as mitigation for wetlands that were lost with the reconstruction of the golf course; 2) they serve as a water quality control feature for downstream drainage flow into Brush Creek; and 3)they provide detention pond capacity for the sheet flow drainage coming off the golf course to the south versus having it flow off-site. The wetland ponds are connected by a series of overflow riprap channels or swales and the last pond toward the east will be drained through a pipe. The applicant proposes to maintain water flowage through the ponds via the irrigation system and to maintain the required one-foot of water depth required for the ponds. The movement of water through the ponds should minimize the breeding of mosquitoes. Nordic Council Issues: - The Nordic Council suggests a golf course layout/Nordic Council Trails Committee to work out critical issues. - The Nordic Council wants selection of good permanent trail alignments and 20-foot widths for the tails, because some locations within the current golf course plan seem too constrained. - There is a request to traverse over golf course fairways to permit the cross-country trail to be utilized more by beginners and intermediates. - The Nordic Council wants to ensure that site for a permanent maintenance building provides functional, effective access to the Nordic trails. _ 10 _ \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\snowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 4 STAFF COMMENTS: The proposed golf course berm adjacent to the residences along Fairway Drive will likely be the principal topic of discussion during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting. Staff has endeavored to work with the homeowners that have contacted the Planning Division and will project scanned photographs and other graphic material for reference during the discussion. One overview compares the conceptual grading plan submitted with the Preliminary PUD application with the Final PUD plan. It was requested that provisions of the Comprehensive Plan relating to preserving view planes be excerpted and included within the staff report. All references to visual quality are cited as follows: ® Environmental Resources Snowmass Village shall: • Protect and enhance the visual quality of open space and agricultural lands of the Town,Brush Creek and Owl Creek Valleys. Develop comprehensive environmental design standards to protect the rural characteristics of Brush Creek and Owl Creek Valleys,and the physical and natural setting of the Town. • Require that development proposals demonstrate a balance between the quality of the scenic and natural resources in the Town and the Brush Creek Valley. These resources are a keystone to the community. In addition to the environmental resources already discussed,scenic view and air quality are important to Snowmass Village. Community input at workshops and in surveys indicates that many distant views and some foreground views should be preserved.Quality of view is one basic characteristics of the uniqueness and attractiveness of this valley and significantly contributes to the monetary value of local real estate. View quality has no direct influence on environmental carrying capacity; however,the human value placed upon view quality and subsequent valuing of property can influence the natural balance of the local ecosystem. ® Future Land Use Plan Snowmass Village shall: • Minimize the negative environmental and visual impacts of development and preserve open space for scenic,recreational and wildlife uses. The Future Land Use Plan..... d. Preserving Community Character&Creating a Sense of Place i. Site Integration \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLMusery,AASnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 5 • Mountain architecture should reflect the surrounding natural environment:its ecology,visual quality and climate. Building architecture must be adapted for the specific mountain site. Structures should not overwhelm our connection to the mountain environment. • Minirnize modification of the natural terrain and watercourses.Attend to the foreground. • The peaks in the distance may be stunning but people still look at the scenery close at hand. Streams,boulders,trees,wildflowers and other details connect people to nature. ii. Respect/Enhance Views • Take advantage of views and view corridors. Preserve important sight lines,views,overlooks and landmarks. • Recognize the importance of sequences of experiences and views. As people move from one place to another,use natural features,trail corridors,buildings and other spaces to direct visitors and reinforce the connection with the natural mountain environment. Site Planning, Grading and Landscape Plans: 1. The cover sheet for the Clubhouse Plans indicate only 50% Design Development. 100% Design Development should be submitted for a Final PUD. There should be no further design changes after Final PUD approval. This needs to be clarified by the applicant at the meeting. 2. The two outdoor tennis courts that were removed in Phase I will be replaced to bring the total number of courts back to eleven according to the application. These courts will be added on the north end of the existing tennis courts resulting in a relocation of Clubhouse Drive and the tee area for Fairway#1. As a result, the road curvature for Clubhouse Drive is sharpened. This is in contrast to the more gently meandering road curvatures in the Preliminary Plan application. The applicant needs to explain these changes and Council needs to determine if they are acceptable. 3. The master grading plan does not show the relocation of the diverted Brush Creek through the ponds per the Army Corps approval. The trail connections must also be shown on the grading plans. 4. There is no ramp from the main entrance into the clubhouse parking area to the softball/recreation field. The plans should show changes in grading that represent a ramp in order to permit service vehicles to adequately access the site. 5. There should be provided improved year round plant material screening along the north edge of the clubhouse parking lot and the service area on the north side of the AM Q \\NT_SERVERSLD_PLN\userVMSnow assClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chds Drafl.doc 6 clubhouse building. These areas will be highly visible from Brush Creek Road because the parking area is about an average of 20 feet higher than the softball field and the clubhouse sits approximately 12 feet higher than the parking lot. Tennis Building Elevations: 1. The Indoor Tennis Structure has changed from the Preliminary Plan design. The vertical articulation, on the north elevation facing Clubhouse Drive, has moved higher above the soffit lines. Secondly, the foundation walls were lowered and the building does not incorporate a landscape embankment up against the building on the north and west sides. Lastly, there is no reference to the double coursing of the roof shingles as required in the Preliminary Plan resolution. The first two changes increase the perceived height (but not the actual height from grade)of the structure and is inconsistent with previous statements made that the building will be depressed into the ground to lessen the perceived height of the building. Although authorization was given to allow construction prior to Final PUD approval, the applicant only received an "At-Risk" permit allowing excavation and foundation work to take place. No building permit should be issued unless the final architecture has been reviewed and approved by Town Council prior to the second reading of the ordinance. 2. There are no building elevations provided for the Tennis Center/Pro Shop building, unless the applicant plans to submit these later through a separate PUD amendment review process. These could be submitted later through a separate PUD amendment process. Condominium Buildings: 1. The condominium buildings'finished floor elevations have increased since the Preliminary Plan application as follows: Upper north building: From 7956.5 to 7957.0 feet (increase of 0.5 feet) Lower north building: From 7944.0 to 7945.5 feet (increase of 1.5 feet Upper south building: From 7951.5 to 7953.0 feet (increase of 0.5 feet) Lower south building: From 7944.0 to 7947.0 feet (increase of 3.0 feet) With this change, it appears that portions of the roof, especially on the north condominium building, will be above the maximum 48-foot height limit. The applicant should submit a roof plan of the structure over an existing topographic map and demonstrate that only 10 percent of the roof structure will be above 44 feet, from existing grade, up to a maximum of 48 feet. 2. The building coverage area has changed as well. The limit in the Preliminary Plan was 42,000 square feet. The applicant proposes building coverage of 5,254 square feet for the new clubhouse, 15,120 square feet for the tennis structure and 29,300 square feet for the Phase II condominium buildings, which totals 49,674 square feet. -t3 won \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLNWserWSnowmassClubll\TC Memoi 12.17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 7 It appears that the clubhouse and the tennis structure remain the same in size. The major changes occurred in the condominium buildings. For example: • The lower level footprint of the north condominium building expanded on the west side. • The four,five-bedroom units in both condominium buildings increased by roughly 153 square feet each. • The unit floor plans of A4, D3, E3, F3 and F5 differ from the tabulations on the cover sheet A1.0 per the Final drawings. Some of the other units increased in size, but not as much as the five-bedroom units. • The average condo size is 2,404 square feet per the cover sheet A1.0 and 2,490 square feet per the PUD Guide, but the Preliminary Plan referenced an average unit size of 2,400 square feet. Overall, Staff is concerned about the consistency of figures represented in the drawings. However, the floor area square footage changes don't affect employee housing calculations and the parking requirements. Also, the unit equivalency chart doesn't apply to this project. The main concern is the inconsistency represented in the Final plan set as compared to the Preliminary Plan application. The applicant should provide floor area calculations for each unit to make sure that the tabulations on the cover sheet A1.0 are consistent and to determine more precisely the average size of the units. 3. There were also slight changes in the building architecture. Some of the roof forms changed on the south elevation of the lower south condominium building, and the second level and roof form expanded on the west side of the upper south condominium building. Summary comment: Staff recommends that a separate development agreement be prepared to address the conditions which cannot be entirely demonstrated on the plans or in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the purpose of addressing all the applicable conditions noted in the Preliminary Plan resolution. Many of the technical comments in Exhibit A of the attached draft ordinance suggest that a separate Development Agreement be prepared to address these conditions. Sol.)q r \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userNMSnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Drakdoc 8 Detailed Staff report and comments pertaining to whether or not conditions in the Preliminary Plan resolution were met in the Final PUD application for Snowmass Club Phase II December 17, 2001 Below is the general findings and conditions language in the Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001, which approved the Preliminary Plan application and authorizing the applicant to proceed with a Final Plan PUD application. The findings and conditions language is followed by a staff review and comment in bold print identifying whether or not the conditions have been implemented or addressed in the Final PUD application. Response to Preliminary Plan findings and conditions: 1) As to whether the applicant satisfactorily addressed the issues raised during the Sketch Plan review regarding the softball field/events area, the Town Council finds: a) A land area dedication of approximately 220,000 square feet is acceptable for the proper size and orientation for site for recreational purposes, a softball field, events and festivals. A site plan of the affected area dated September 13, 2001 was presented with this application which addressed softball play, events and festivals, including a boundary map of the dedicated area generally bound by Brush Creek Road on the north, Clubhouse Drive to the southeast, and the new clubhouse parking lot on the southwest. It was determined that the site is of adequate size to host softball, festivals and multi-use recreation or open play space. b) The plan for the redevelopment of the golf course delineates the Independent land parcel of approximately 220,000 square feet for the softball field, events, festivals and other recreational uses. Included with this application are schematic plan options for the reorientation of the playing field to take best advantage of sun angles and event staging. This plan was offered as a recommendation to the Town as part of the plan proposal involves the deeding of this land to the Town. c) The applicant will dedicate the land to the Town following the regrading and improvements of the softball field to the substantially same condition as it exists now during this application review. The applicant and the Town's Public Works Department shall coordinate the associated improvements for the site. d) The applicant will consider stripping the sod from the existing golf course for use at the new softball field/events area, but subject to recommendations of the golf course designer. In any event, the applicant agrees to make its best effort to make the site available for Labor Day 2002. e) Such dedication of approximately 220,000 square feet shall be conveyed by the applicant to the Town by special warranty deed conveying the designated tract, lot or parcel on the subdivision plat. The final plat amendment shows Tract A containing 5.260 acres, which translates to 229,125 square feet. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement, subsection 11, states that the applicant will transfer the property by November 1, 2002 Instead of by Labor Day 2002 as desired in the Preliminary Plan resolution. The Subdivision Improvement agreement should state that the conveyance will be accomplished by special warranty deed. It should also _ IS saw \\NT SERVER\BLD PLN\user\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memot 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 9 reference an exhibit showing the planned layout of the recreation field that's to be coordinated with the Town's Public Works Department. 2) Zone district limitations. a) Height Limitations i) The Town Council finds that the Phase II development application, with a minor change from a gabled to hipped roof on the north end, meets the height variance criteria In the Municipal Code and agreed that the height rules applied to the Phase I development may be applied to the Phase II development. The height rule is a 44- foot height limit, but that 10% of the structure may exceed the limit up to a maximum of 48 feet in height. The Information presented in the Final PUD application Is different from the plans shown in the Preliminary Plan application because portions buildings, especially the north condominium building, are shown above the 48 foot high limit measured from existing grade. The area between the 44 foot and 48 foot height limits are only for 10 percent of the roof structure. Compliance with this standard needs to be demonstrated by the applicant. b) Building Setbacks and Arrangement i) The Town Council finds that the Phase II condominium buildings encroaching Into 25- foot wetland and riparian setback areas as shown in the plans is acceptable due to the following factors: (1) It allows the south condominium buildings to be placed farther away from the Villas North buildings; (2) It accommodates a fire access drive between the condominium buildings and Villas North for improved emergency access; (3) The condominium building locations are an improvement over the existing parking areas next to the creek or a proposed fire lane next to the creek; and (4) The overall impact to the surrounding environment is a net gain. The Information presented in the Final PUD application Is generally consistent with the plans shown In the Preliminary Plan application. ii) Town Council finds no unacceptable view impacts as a result of the Phase II development and finds the project is compatible with Villas North because: (1) The Phase II condominium buildings are placed a far as possible away from the Villas North complex; (2) Parking will be placed beneath the buildings; (3) There is a break between the two south condominium buildings; (4) The site sits at a lower grade than Villas North; and (5) A substantial vegetated buffer exists between the site and Villas North. ,. IP es \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userNmSnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 10 c) There is not considered a significant concern about the uses within the existing Fairways Conference Center and the old clubhouse. The applicant indicated the following uses proposed for these buildings: i) Fairways Conference Center will be primarily used by: (1) Civic organizations; (2) Villas' related conferences or groups;and (3) Public or private functions with valet parking service. The PUD Guide does not address the use limitations for the Fairways Conference Center. It should be Included as a miscellaneous Information Item since It's not part of Parcel 4, 10 and 12. ii) The old clubhouse will be primarily used by: (1) The property management for Club Villas; (2) Nordic operations; (3) Offices for existing Snowmass Club employees; and (4) Restrooms which are to remain in the building. The PUD Guide Indicates that the uses for the old clubhouse will be Offices, Nordic Operations, and Golf Course accessory building, but the Introductory description for this lot is more consistent with the Preliminary Plan condition. 3) Comprehensive Plan. a) The Town Council agrees with the Planning Commission's recommendation that the proposed 21 condominium units with 1/8 share interests averaging 2,400 square feet is viewed as acceptable and does not conflict with Comprehensive Plan policies. The average square feet of the units Is now 2,490 square feet per the PUD Guide in the Final Plans. A total of 21 units are still proposed. 4) Architectural plans. The Town Council finds as follows: a) Condominium Buildings: i) The architectural designs of the Phase II condominium buildings are acceptable and viewed as an improved design over the Phase I architecture with the understanding that there will be a change of color scheme from dark green to reddish-brown to vary the designs of the buildings and that wood shingles will continue to be used as roofing materials for the Phase II construction. The final architectural elevations don't label the colors for the condominium buildings and the applicant didn't supply and material/color _11 ow \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLMuseryw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris DraR.doc 11 sample board. li) The split in the southern-most condominium building is being retained in the design as per the Sketch Plan condition in an effort to create additional open space area, a view corridor from Villas North, and architecturally pleasing results. It is acknowledged that the improved articulation in the condominium buildings will further reduce visual impact as stated above under p)Zone district limitations. The Final plans show a split In the south condominium and a connection of the underground parking area, which is consistent with the Preliminary Plan application. iii) As per the Sketch Plan condition, the site plan shows that the south condominium buildings for Phase II are staggered and are not geometrically aligned to respond to the parking below. The access point is on the eastern side and the buildings have some curvature, which allows the buildings to respond to both grade and the location of the Brush Creek drainage way as well as take advantage of views to Mount Daly. This modulation gives the buildings and the site plan a natural appearance and reflects a site design which has responded to natural determinants rather than construction dictates. The Final plans show that the south condominium buildings will be staggered as well as split, which is consistent with the Preliminary Plan application. iv) In lieu of Sketch Plan suggestion to possibly angle the northern-most condominium building at the mid-point in order to lessen the linear appearance of the building and to create more open space between the units and the creek, the northern building has been staggered, by raising the grade approximately 10 feet for the west portion of the building, to create articulation and reduce the linearity and appearance of mass. This staggered design will allow the building to read as two separate buildings. This has the same or possibly a greater affect than what might be accomplished by changing the angles of the buildings at the mid point. The Final Plans show that the grading around the north condominium building will be revised to create the stepped appearance for the linear building. The change in grade from west to east changes from an elevation of approximately 4957 to 7945 feet above mean sea level. The building elevations also demonstrate the stepped appearance. v) As per the Sketch Plan recommendation of lowering the flat roof portion of the residential buildings, as a means to improve the separation and articulation of the roof forms, this option has been incorporated in the north condominium building design. The mid-section of the northern building has been lowered and the roofs of both buildings have been lowered at the ends to create a perception of lower buildings as viewed from the ground level. The roofs have been stepped from the center of the building so that the highest point is not viewed from the ground plane. At the pedestrian level the buildings are designed to be read as two story buildings. The Final plans Indicate that flat mid-roof area of the building was lowered In the mid-portion of the building where it changes grade. The ends of the north condominium building are transltloned in height. The third level of the north condominium building is stepped back for the most part in an attempt to have the building read more like a two-story building. These design elements are consistent with the Preliminary Plan application. _,11 00 \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userWSnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 12 vi) TOSV Land Use and Development Code Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards, references compliance with Article IV and Code Section 16A-4-340, Building Design Guidelines to Preserve Community Character. Particularly, views from neighboring developments were evaluated per subsection 5) during the review of the Preliminary Plan PUD application. See above findings for reasons. b) Tennis Structure: i) Town Council acknowledges the applicant's commitment to provide vertical articulation in the east and west elevations of the Tennis Structure. In addition, further articulation of the roof plane is to be provided via double coursing of the wood shingle roofing material to improve the textured appearance of the roof plane. ii) The north elevation of the Tennis Structure facing Clubhouse Drive is acceptable due to the increase in architectural relief elements. The building elevations for the Tennis Structure have changed with the Final plans. The vertical elements on the elevation facing Clubhouse Drive were raised above the soffit line. The foundation walls were lowered on the north and west elevations resulting in no embankment along the building as originally thought. Staff understood previously that the building would be depressed Into the ground. The changes Increase the perceived height of the building. c) Tennis Center/Pro-Shop: i) The design of the Tennis Center/Pro Shop is acceptable. However, following the Planning Commission's recommendation, the option for contingency parking shall be preserved. The applicant has agreed not to construct this facility until a final determination has been made regarding the contingency parking. Such determination shall be made by the Town after review of a parking analysis conducted by the applicant. Reference section 9b) of this resolution for further details. The Final plans do not provide building elevations for the Tennis Center/Pro Shop structure. The Development Map and the Site Plans do not Identify the contingency parking area for 39-spaces, if determined to be needed in the future. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate development agreement should specify the possible need to construct the contingency parking area by a certain date. d) Clubhouse: I) The ranch design of the clubhouse including the reduction of square footage from 7,000 to 5,200 square feet is acceptable. The proposed lounge and outside seating could be utilized for expansion of the clubhouse in the future upon application to the Town for approval. The PUD Guide states that the new clubhouse will be 5,254 square feet in size above-grade and 5,220 square feet in size below-grade for cart storage. The maximum height is 32 feet above finished grade. It notes that the lounge and outdoor seating area could be used for expansion of the clubhouse In the future. A 150-space parking lot is also shown in the Final set of plans. R \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLMuseryw\SnowmassOl \�Mem 2-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draa.doc 13 ii) Town Council agrees with the Planning Commission's recommendation to incorporate securable day lockers for golfers. The floor plans In the Final PUD indicate a locker room/coat closet In the northeast portion of the building near the main entrance. 5) Landscaping and open space. The Town Council finds as follows: a) Landscape Design: i) The density of the landscaping between Phase II condominium buildings and Clubhouse Drive is acceptable. The landscape plan for this area In the Final PUD is consistent with the Preliminary Plan application. ii) The landscape and natural design intended along the creek including the trail connection between the Phase II condominium buildings is acceptable to the extent allowed by the Army Corps 404 Permit. The landscape plan for the area along Brush Creek between the Phase II condominium buildings Is generally consistent with the plans submitted with the Preliminary Plan set. However, the main sets of new trees are Nerrowleaf Cottonwoods. Alders and Willows is the main plant material in the creek area currently. iii) The applicant provided a revised landscape plan on September 13, 2001 which showed Colorado Spruce trees ranging from 14 to 20 feet in height at Installation and placed around the tennis structure. Town Council finds the landscape plan acceptable for the purpose of"softening"the appearance of the tennis structure. The landscape plans with the Final PUD need to reference which of the trees will be 20-feet in height at Installation. The remaining Colorado Spruce trees in the affected area (i.e., south of the tennis structure) will all be 14 to 16 feet in height at installation. iv) The orchard concept and density of landscaping in and around the clubhouse parking area is acceptable as indicated on the plans. The Final plans show that the"Orchard" concept has been reduced in area. There should be clarification as to whether the "orchard" area Is the tree farm. v) The detached walkway and natural grass buffer between Clubhouse Drive and the walkway is acceptable. The Final landscape plans and roadway layout plans show the detached sidewalk with a natural grass buffer from Brush Creek Road to the main entrance Into the Clubhouse area. vi) The applicant agreed to relocate extra existing trees, affected by the construction on the site, to the berms around Club Commons and the maintenance facility to improve WMQO am \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNmSnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 14 the density of plantings on the berms. There are no landscape plans in the Final PUD to verify whether trees have been relocated to the berm areas. vii) It is acknowledged by a commitment noted in the application that upon final completion of both phases I and 11 of the project, the site will generate a total of approximately 42,000 square feet of building footprint site coverage and approximately 181,000 or 4.1 acres of paving for roadways and parking. The percentage of open space was calculated for the PUD parcels in this application. As part of the overall project and in cooperation with the neighbors and residents of the Snowmass Club PUD, additional areas were identified for deed restrictions and permanent commitment to open space. Given these considerations, all nominal and typical open space and site coverage design standards are exceeded in this application. The PUD Guide in the Final plan set indicates a building coverage of 5,254 square feet for the new clubhouse, 15,120 square feet for the tennis structure and 29,300 square feet for the Phase II condominium building, which totals 49,674 square feet. This Is inconsistent with the Preliminary Plan resolution condition. The hard surface areas are not shown in the PUD Guide. viii) It is acknowledged and committed to by the applicant that the golf course redevelopment plan calls for extensive improvement of the ponds, which will serve as both golf course water hazards and environmental features. Grading details for the ponds will be designed to create new wetlands and accommodate a new stream diverting it from Highline Road, therefore eliminating pollutants from the road and steep embankment. The creek rerouting is being designed per the Army Corps of Engineers requirements. The design process will integrate the Audubon design guidelines with the objective of reaching certification. The golf course design will create high quality wetlands as well as protection and enhancement of existing environmentally important areas. The new pond locations on the master grading plan of the Final set are consistent with the Information presented during the Preliminary Plan review and per the Army Corps permit that was Issued. The plans, however, do not show the diverted Brush Creek through the ponds on the east side of the site. ix) The stream environment of Brush Creek adjacent to the new Phase II condominium buildings will be enhanced. Willows will be trimmed to enable rock weirs to be placed in the stream channel to create fish habitat per the Army Corps of Engineers requirements. The intent of the improvements is to incorporate the natural stream environment as the principal site amenity to the extent allowed by the permitting authorities. The Final PUD plans are consistent or the same as what was presented In the Preliminary Plan application. Staff believes the Brush Creek enhancements should be addressed in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate agreement Indicating that the applicant will coordinate and cooperate with the Town to complete the Brush Creek Improvements and the nature trail by June 2002. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLMuserNw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 15 b) Lighting: i) A revised detailed lighting plan was provided with the Preliminary Plan PUD review. Due to concerns about too much lighting in the area, plans were revised to reduce the number of light fixtures and shows that a majority of the lighting will be limited to low-profile lighting, such as the use of bollard lighting, and that other lighting for parking lots will be shielded and downcast with use of low-wattage light sources. A site lighting detail shall be provided with the Final Plan review. Further, lighting for the new 150-space clubhouse parking lot shall be turned off at night after closing the facilities. The applicant has committed to installing a timer for outdoor lighting associated with the golf course parking lot. There is no development agreement or site lighting plan provided with the Final plans acknowledging these Items other than lighting details. The site lighting details show 100 watt lamps on poles that will be either black or white with pyramidal-shaped hooded lamps. Staff recommends black poles if that is the only choice. The light pole detail should also show the maximum height of the site lighting from grade. They shouldn't be any higher than 20 feet or the same as those on the Phase I site. Bollard lighting is proposed at 36 Inches in height with hooded lamps. It would be helpful to have a lighting plan that corresponds to the Final plans. ii) The applicant shall create a shielding device for all existing wall-mounted light fixtures to prevent off-premise glare from the light source. The applicant previous stated that they Installed the shielding devices. Natural hazard areas. a) The impact upon the 30% slope areas at the Golf Clubhouse and the Condominium Buildings are all in previously disturbed, manmade areas and the contemplated improvements will enhance these areas. Unchanged with Final PUD. b) The applicant confirmed that there will be no retaining wall placed along the east side of Clubhouse Drive just north of Snowmass Club Circle for the road improvements to 22 feet in width. The Roadway layout plans with the Final PUD don't show the retaining wall along the east side of Clubhouse Drive, which is consistent with the Preliminary Plan resolution language. c) The retaining wall locations, height and design are acceptable. The applicant confirmed they will use angular dry stack stone for the retaining walls. Sheet L6.03 of the development plans In the Final PUD set shows the typical retaining wall detail for the dry stack boulders proposed. The referenced grading plan Indicates that the high point of the retaining wall located south of the south condominium building will be about five feet in height on the east side and taper to about one to two feet in height on the west end. d) The Applicant has filed a FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision ("CLOMR") application to change the 100-year floodplain boundary. The Applicant agrees to FEMA compliance prior to issuance of building permits for the Condominium Buildings. ft is \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\JMSnowmassClubll\TC Memol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 16 Staff received a letter from FEMA on November 19, 2001, which states that the proposed project meets the minimum floodplaln management criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The letter also states, that based on the Information provided, a revision to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) would be warranted subject to submitting completed forms and fees upon completion of the project. Another piece of correspondence dated November 12, 2001 stated that the FIRM and work map does not tie-in the effective floodpiain at the studies downstream limit and the upstream limit. With the submittal of the November 19, 2001 letter, this Issue seems to have been resolved. 6) Natural resource areas. a) A Brush Creek Impact Report was submitted with the application. The report adequately addressed both the stream improvements and rerouting to the original drainage way through golf course, reconfigured ponds as well as the channel improvements posed for the stream as it flows between the condominium buildings in Phase II adjacent to the Club. The improvements include vortex weirs, embankment stabilization, and removal of old concrete structures. These improvements are acceptable. The Brush Creek Improvements proposes with the Preliminary Plan is the same as proposed with the Final PUD, except that the plans don't show the diverted creek Into the ponds on the east side of Parcel 10. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate agreement should Indicate the completion of 1) the Brush Creek Improvements between the condominium building and 2) the nature trail and creek improvements in coordination and cooperation with the Town, by June 2002. b) The applicant's description to reroute the creek into the reconfigured ponds on the golf course and to occasionally overflow the south pond (east of the water and sanitation district) into the existing creek, as may be determined by the Army Corps of Engineers, as a means to maintain the existing riparian vegetation. There was no Information provided in the Final PUD regarding the relocated creek and the overflow area for the south pond. c) The applicant shall use its best efforts to maintain stream flows in Brush Creek by managing its golf course irrigation system to benefit stream ecology. This will be left as a Preliminary Plan condition, unless Council desires it to be a condition in the Final PUD ordinance. d) The Town staff and applicant shall agree upon the specifications for the design features of the diversion structures. Staff received no information In the Final PUD concerning the diversion structures. e) The applicant will continue to work with the TOSV design team to explore this possibility diverting Brush Creek and exposing the creek at the entry to the Village located near the northeast corner of the site. All design work must be approved by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Town approved hydrologist. Final design is pending Army Corps of Engineers approval. The design as proposed, places a new number 1 green in the vicinity of the area previously identified for this stream exposure. The applicant will wipz sm \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryYASnowmassClubll\TC Memol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 17 continue to work through the golf course design process and bring back a detailed resolution of this plan objective after resolution of the roundabout intersection design. It is the intention of the applicant to provide this prior to the final review of final plat. In the interim, the plat should at minimum dedicate a right-of-way reservation for the future roundabout and dedicate a combination trail and stream easement for the nature trail and creek improvements along the east edge of the property in Parcel 10. f) The applicant will implement the recommendations from their wildlife report,such as: 1. Reducing the attractiveness of the property for elk, mule deer, and black bears; 2. Protecting and restoring habitat for birds; 3. Managing weeds; and 4. Creating environmental educational opportunities. The exception being that the applicant and the Town shall not be required to provide terrestrial wildlife monitoring of the site, subject to the condition below. This will be left as a Preliminary Plan condition, unless Council desires it to be a condition in the Final PUD ordinance. g) The Town will provide a three-year bird-monitoring program for four identified species, and the applicant will provide habitat improvements for those species. This will be left as a Preliminary Plan condition, unless Council desires it to be a condition In the Final PUD ordinance. 7) Grading and drainage. a) Golf Course Improvements. i) A quality golf course design was defined by the James Engh Design Group which showed a complete reconstruction of the golf course, including routing, hole locations, tees, greens, cart paths, irrigation, grading and turf development. Such a design includes a grove of trees within the building complexes and a links-style golf course design with native plant material between the fairways. A new routing and illustrative plan for the new course in the application was explained. Some of the design elements included resculpting of the golf course to create improved visual interest from all angles and to separate play from existing residents in the area. The redesign and reconstruction of the golf course is acceptable and considered a community benefit. ii) The golf course redesign of the fairways and re-routing as described by the James Engh Design Group is acceptable provided that the final drainage and grading plans, including erosion control and revegetation plans are approved by the Town Engineer. As of the writing of this report, the Town Engineer has the final drainage, grading and erosion control plans under review. _PIy _ \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNMSnowmassClubli\TC Memol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Drafl.doc 18 b) 404 Permit Application i) The golf course redesign, including the deletion and replacement of wetlands and the deletion and reconfiguration of ponds, is acceptable provided the applicant provides the Town written consent and approval from the Army Corps of Engineers prior to grading in any jurisdictional wetlands. The Final PUD application includes the conditional permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. 8) Transportation impacts. The Town Council finds as follows: a) Vehicular Access and Circulation: i) Clubhouse Drive Improvements. (1) The variance request to reduce the road width for Clubhouse Drive to a minimum of 22 feet is acceptable. It is understood that the road will vary in width from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road with a minimum road width of 22 feet on the southern end, including shoulders and paved drainage pans, to 24 feet on the northern end, including shoulders. The width of the road should be dimensioned on the site development plans and the Road Improvements Plan. Detailed cross sections should be provided on these plans showing the varied cross-sections for the road between Snowmass Club Circle and Brush Creek Road. (2) The Clubhouse Road extension to Brush Creek Road to create a four-way intersection with Horse Ranch Road is acceptable provided there is compliance with the provisions concerning the winter-use crossing of the road (see Winter- Use issues section of this resolution). The connection is provided on the Final plans as described above. However, the winter-use crossing and bollard placements should be Illustrated, described and labeled on the development plans and the road Improvements plans as defined In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. (3) There shall be no control point or gate in the middle of Clubhouse Drive in order to facilitate improved connectivity through the site and to potentially be allowed for use as a transit route in the future provided there is compliance with the provisions concerning the winter-use crossing of the road (see Winter-Use issues section of this resolution). The Final plans show no control gate on Clubhouse Drive. (4) The applicant grants to the Town a public access and fire lane easement, over the applicant's property, for the new Clubhouse Drive alignment from Snowmass Club Circle to Brush Creek Road. The Town shall have the ability to close the road between Brush Creek Road and the clubhouse parking lot entrance during special events. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryvASnmmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 19 The combination fire lane and public access easement for Clubhouse Drive should be shown on the plat. Coordination by the applicant with the Water and Sanitation District will like be needed. The Town's ability to close Clubhouse Drive between Brush Creek Road and the clubhouse should be addressed In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. (5) The applicant shall install a permanent street signs meeting Town standards for Clubhouse Drive at the affected intersections of Snowmass Club Circle/Clubhouse Drive and at Brush Creek Road/Clubhouse Drive once the street and intersection improvements have been completed. The Subdivision Improvements Agreements states that street signs will be Installed, but It would be helpful If the development plans, maps and road Improvements plan labeled the street names for all public and private roads in and around the property. 11) Traffic Impacts. (1) The extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road is viewed favorably and will divert golf and special events traffic away from the Snowmass Club core area. Traffic volumes will be reduced in the Country Club homes and Villas' area in the summer time. (2) A transportation and parking analysis was submitted with this application. This study includes an analysis of peak conditions and includes all components of the club program. The relocation of the driving range and golf clubhouse makes it possible to convert the existing golf parking to parking available for the Fairway Center, the old clubhouse and other Snowmass Club operations. This combined with expanded subsurface parking and the creation of a new 150-space golf parking area with alleviate the chronic parking shortage which the Club has faced in recent years, subject to observing the operations to determine if the contingency parking area, mentioned under the Parking Facilities section of this resolution, is warranted. A 150-space parking lot at the clubhouse Is shown with the Final plans. (3) The redesign of the intersection of Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club Circle, in compliance with the TOSV Land Use and Development Code criteria, shall be redesigned for improved sight distance and reaction time for turning movements. Such reconfiguration shall include a westbound right-turn slip lane with a center landscape island, or some variation of this design, and will be installed prior to the completion and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Phase II condominium buildings. The Road Improvements Plan shows the intersection Improvement at Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive. However, the plans don't show the landscaping planned for the Island, as required in the Preliminary Plan resolution. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement also doesn't identify the completion and the timing of these Intersection Improvements. It must be completed prior to the Certificate of Occupancy for the Phase II condominium buildings per the resolution. ia \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useN,AASnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draff.doc 20 iii) Fire Access. (1) It is acknowledged that the site plan balances the need to respect the setback from the stream and the desire to provide a fire lane and road access on the southern side of the south Phase II condominium building. The buildings are located as close to the wetlands and riparian zone of the creek as possible as requested per the Sketch Plan review. The fire access and easement shall be provided in compliance with the request from the Fire District. Therefore, the 25- foot wetland setback encroachment is viewed acceptably in order to create the fire lane access and to maintain adequate separation from the Villas North complex. In addition, the area for the 25-foot setback is already disturbed by the existing parking areas. (2) The applicant shall investigate using grass pavers versus asphalt paving for the fire lane between the south condominium building and Villas North. The layout of the condominium buildings In relation to the creek bed and proposed floodplain boundary on the Final plans are consistent with the Preliminary Plan application. The development plans Indicate grass pavers with a meandering colored concrete walkway along between the south condominium building and Villas North. However, the width of the grass pavers should be labeled on the plans. b) Parking Facilities: i) A transportation and parking analysis was prepared with the Preliminary Plan application. Due to the relocation of the driving range and clubhouse in this Preliminary Plan submission, the parking spaces along Snowmass Club Circle will be made available, year round for use by the Fairway Conference Center, the old clubhouse and other Club operations. The parking area will require a license agreement through the Town's Public Works Department. It is Town Council's view that 26 to 28 spaces along the road should remain subject to the golf crossing improvements mentioned in the Pedestrian Circulation and Trails section of this resolution. Staff has not yet received the license agreement for the parking spaces along Snowmass Club Circle. ii) See the Pedestrian Circulation and Trails section of this resolution for a list of conditions regarding improvements to the golf crossing of Snowmass Club Circle. The golf cart crossing Improvements are shown on the last page of the Road Improvements Plan. However, the detail doesn't show the plant material type for the Islands, the decorative surface treatment for the pedestrian crossing and the traffic calming required. iii) Due to the fact that the off-street parking provision proposed is fewer than required by the TOSV Land Use and Development Code (468 required versus 440 provided, including the 26 to 28 spaces along Snowmass Club Circle but not including the 14 spaces currently planned for the future Tennis Center area), the plans shall continue to show a location for a future 39-space contingency parking lot to be constructed if the Town of Snowmass Village determines that additional parking is needed for the site via the results of a parking analysis performed by the applicant during a summer peak time period. If it is determined that the contingency parking is not needed at that -a \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\SnowmassClubll\TC g 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Drak.doc 21 time, then the applicant may install the Tennis Center Pro-Shop building and the 14- space adjoining parking area as depicted on the plan. Such improvements (the contingency parking or the building with adjoining parking area) shall be completed within twelve months after determination is made whether or not the contingency parking is needed. The plans need to Identify and label the location for the future Tennis Center and 14 parking spaces along with the contingency parking area for 39 spaces. This should also be referenced In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate agreement addressing the timing for the completion of either Improvement. iv) Such determination of the contingency parking need shall be made by conducting a parking evaluation during a one-year period, which commences on the date of the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the Phase II improvements. Said period may be extended if necessary to analyze one complete summer season. During the evaluation, the applicant will collect parking data in cooperation with the Planning Director sufficient to identify the project's parking needs. The methodology as to how the data collection will occur shall be provided with the Final PUD application. The methodology has not been identified In the Final PUD application. Staff believes site visits by the Planning Director and a peak parking demand analysis performed by the applicant's traffic consultant during the 4th of July holiday weekend after completion of all the Phase II Improvements and full operation for one year should be finalized before making a decision as to whether the contingency parking is needed. c) Transit Issues: i) The applicant shall provide a bus shelter for the RFTA bus stop generally in the vicinity of where Clubhouse Drive extension meets Brush Creek Road. A detail of the shelter will be provided in the Final PUD Plan. This shelter will be Installed within 180 days after the signing of the final Subdivision Plat for Phase II or sooner. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement indicates that the bus shelter will be Installed according to the detail provided on the last sheet in the architectural drawings. The agreement states that It'll be constructed prior to the Issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the new clubhouse. Staff finds this timing acceptable. ii) The main entrance to the Club off of Snowmass Club Circle will remain in its current location instead of relocated per the Sketch Plan proposal. The Final Plans are consistent with this statement. ill) The existing pedestrian bridge will also remain and allow access to the bus stop and will provide a pedestrian connection to guests in the new south condominium building complex. The Final Plans are consistent with this statement. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\SnowmassClubll\TC MemVo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 22 d) Pedestrian Circulation and Trails: i) In lieu of the trail connections described in the Sketch Plan resolution, a new pedestrian trail will be provided beside Clubhouse Drive as described below, and will not only provide public pedestrian access to the clubhouse but will also provide a direct connection and pedestrian access for residents of Club Commons to Brush Creek Road and the bus stop. It is acknowledged that the new golf course routing plan, which is viewed favorably, will require the removal of the existing pedestrian trail which connects Club Commons to the Brush Creek RFTA stop. The new trail along the Clubhouse Drive extension will replace the existing trail. The Final Plans are consistent with this statement. ii) A minimum four-foot wide attached walkway will be constructed by the applicant along Clubhouse Drive from the Phase II condominium buildings to the clubhouse parking lot in lieu of a detached walkway due to existing improvements, site constraints, and a drainage swale. From there, a detached walkway with a native landscaped parkway will be provided to Brush Creek Road. It is acknowledged that there will be minimal landscaping at the southeast corner of the tennis structure due to existing site constraints. The Final Plans are consistent with this statement. Although, the development plans, the landscape plans and the Road Improvements Plan should label the walkway. The walkway should also connect to the meandering walkway along the south side of the south condominium building. iii) The applicant represented a commitment to construct an interconnecting trail along and between the northern-most condominium building and Brush Creek as shown on the plans, utilizing a meandering path and crusher-fines surface treatment, to connect Clubhouse Drive to Snowmass Club Circle and the existing trail located farther to the west across from the main entrance. This trail Is represented on the plans. The surface treatment will be a stone dust path. iv) To improve the appearance of the culvert crossing for Brush Creek at Clubhouse Drive, as per the Sketch Plan, the application shows a three-sided or arched culvert to convey Brush Creek in this area. This design approach was recommended by the Corps of Engineers as a way to preserve the streambed. Town Council desires an aggregate finish or integrally colored concrete with scoring be utilized for the underneath portion of the bridge crossing in combination with the stone veneer to match the materials in the Phase II units. Adequate room on the bridge crossing will be provided for a pedestrian walkway with railings next to the road. The detail for this bridge Is shown on Sheet L6.03 of the development plans for the Condominium Buildings. The stone veneer is shown level with the roadway. The concrete structure underneath Is scored, but the detail doesn't Indicate that the concrete Is Integrally colored. The plan views and the road improvements plan shows a walkway on the bridge, but It's not labeled. ow \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 23 v) Town Council finds that the existing crossing of the golf cart underpass at Snowmass Club Circle should be improved to incorporate a concrete stain or similar treatment to assist in making the concrete structure blend in with the surrounding environment. No detail of this existing bridge crossing was provided to verify whether the concrete structure will be stained. vi) The existing pedestrian bridge is being retained in the plans and will service the new units in the southern condominium building as well as provide pedestrian access to the bus stop along Snowmass Club Circle. The Final Plans are consistent with this statement. vii) The golf cart/pedestrian crossing at Snowmass Club Circle shall be improved to incorporate the following minimum improvements for aesthetic and safety reasons: (1) Construction of landscape islands on both sides of the crossing entries located on both sides of Snowmass Club Circle to improve sight distance and safety of golfers and pedestrians; (2) Provide a decorative or varied texture crossing surface, such as masonry pavers, colored concrete or similar surface material to aesthetically improvement and clearly define the crossing; (3) Utilize painting and traffic calming devices as necessary, with the exception of speedbumps,to alert motorists of the approaching crossing; (4) Retain the existing parking spaces. The golf cart crossing improvements are shown on the last page of the Road Improvements Plan. However, the detail doesn't show the plant material type for the islands, the decorative surface treatment for the pedestrian crossing and the traffic calming required. viii) The applicant has noted coordination efforts with the Town's Trails Committee including an agreement that has been reached concerning the location and alignment of all trail systems which go through the site, and staff shall coordinate a comprehensive trails map including the project site as depicted on the plans. The trails map will need to be updated later. ix) The new trail connection coming from the west or from the Brush Creek Road trail should be shifted up the hillside to improve the gradient for the trail. This trail connection Is not shown on the master grading plan for the golf course. It is, however, referenced on the overall development map. The trail betwecn Little Red SchoolHouse and Harleston Green is not shown on the master grading plan either. x) The applicant agrees to provide a future easement if necessary for a possible future underpass crossing at Brush Creek Road. This should be noted In an agreement. A) The applicant and the Town shall continue joint efforts and coordination, including studies and proper trail alignments, to provide a nature/foot trail, similar to the Mayfly a \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNvASnowmassClubll\T emol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 24 trail, along Brush Creek from Clubhouse Drive, then along the south side of the Water and Sanitation District facilities, and thence northeasterly to a point near the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline Road. The applicant shall provide the trail easement and the Town shall install the trail. This coordination and cooperation by the applicant with the Town should be addressed in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate agreement noting a completion date of June 2002. The stream/trail easement should be shown on the subdivision plat. xii) An easement will continue to be provided by the applicant along the west side of Highline Road for a commuter bike trail, which may be installed by the Town in the future, consistent with Phase I. This easement should be referenced by book and page, If existing, or dedicated on the subdivision plat. xiii) The applicant shall provide an easement for a trail connection south of Snowmass Club Circle between Clubhouse Drive(by the Qwest facility)and Fairway Drive within the Country Club Estates development. This easement is not shown on the subdivision plat. xiv)The applicant represented a commitment to grant easements for all existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle trails on the project site and represented in the Preliminary Plans prior to recordation of the Final Subdivision Plat. This has yet to be provided. It is noted in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement that It will be provided, but it doesn't Indicate when. It would be helpful if the applicant supplied copies of the referenced book and page documents (and associated exhibits or graphic illustration) noted on the plat for staff review in order to determine what type of easement dedications exist. e) Winter-Use issues: i) The applicant shall provide a license to the Town for the continued operation of winter-use activities on Parcel 10 of the property. Such license has yet to be provided. ii) A license will be provided by the applicant to the TOSV for the following: An accessible site shall be provided for a low visual impact seasonal shelter with power for housing the trail-grooming vehicle. The shelter is planned to be inset into the existing berm north of the maintenance facility. The existing but shall be made available until an alternate shelter is constructed. Such license has yet to be provided. iii) The applicant agrees that the existing underpass crossing at Snowmass Club Circle may be used for winter activities. This should be noted In some form of an agreement executed by the applicant. _at _ \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userWSnowmassClubll\TC Menno1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draa.doc 25 iv) The applicant agrees to provide an easement for an underpass crossing of Clubhouse Drive for winter-use activities if the Town desires such a crossing in the future. This should be noted In some form of an agreement executed by the applicant. v) The applicant, the Town, and the Fire District have agreed upon the following conditions regarding the winter-use of Clubhouse Drive: (1) There shall be an all-weather driving surface for 365 days of a year,.except as noted in subsections (2)and (3) below; (2) A winter-use crossing will be provided on Clubhouse Drive generally located at the mid-point between Brush Creek Road and the clubhouse parking lot entrance; (3) Such crossing to include a maximum of six inches of packed snow 20 feet wide over Clubhouse Drive with a possible unsecured matting or straw to be maintained by the Town, including four markers beside the roadway to identify the crossing; (4) The applicant shall plow the remaining portion of Clubhouse Drive to maintain year-round fire emergency access; This should be noted In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or a separate agreement,executed by the applicant. (5) Removable bollards shall be placed within Clubhouse Drive at the Brush Creek Road entrance and in a location directly north of the clubhouse parking lot entrance during winter-use trail grooming operations; and These Interim bollard placements should be shown, labeled and describe the purpose on the development plans and the road Improvements plan. (6) The crossing arrangement above is subject to a one-year review by the applicant, Town staff, and the Fire District to determine the adequacy of the operation. If such operation is unsatisfactory to the parties mentioned and a subsequent resolution cannot be reached, Town staff may refer the matter to Town Council for review. This agreement should be noted In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or in a separate agreement, executed by the applicant. The parameters of the above noted usage of Clubhouse Drive and the crossing should be Illustrated and labeled on the development plans and the Road Improvements Plan. 11111111111OU 41111111110 \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNv+\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo1 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Drafl.doc 26 9) Necessary facilities. a) The applicant has provided sufficient improvements to meet the needs for management of storm water runoff, maintenance of water quality and trash enclosures and shall be subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer. As of the writing of this report,the Final PUD application is under review by the Town's Engineer. 10) Restricted housing. Section 4-410, Restricted Housing Requirements, of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code, provides the methodology for determining the amount of restricted housing, which must be provided by the applicant to sufficiently mitigate the employee housing impacted by the proposed development. The Town Council also previously considered the quantity and quality of the employee housing constructed as part of Phase I of this development. Following consideration of the facts, the Town still finds, as described with the Sketch Plan resolution,that: a) The revised employee housing calculations, following the ratios per Ordinance No. 07, Series of 2000, are accurate when comparing the original Club with the combined Phase I and Phase II uses. b) The seven employee housing units previously provided for the original 76-unit Lodge was accepted as being equivalent to the employee housing requirement for the 30 condominium units approved and redeveloped in Phase I. The 61 employee housing units approved in Phase I was considered a Community Purpose benefit. The employee housing required for Phase II is a mitigation issue and not considered a Community Purpose issue. The Phase II employee housing requirement is 5,824 square feet following the revised employee housing ratios and calculations outlined in Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000 (i.e., the difference between the original club and the combination of Phase I and Phase II utilizing the revised rates). c) Due to the applicant agreeing to deed restrict, for employee housing purposes, the one additional manager's unit of 1,700 square feet built in Phase I, it may be credited against the 5,824 square feet of employee housing required for Phase II but not considered a Community Purpose benefit. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement states under subsection 9 that the manager's unit in Phase I will be deed restricted for employee housing and cause an Instrument to be recorded prior to Issuance of a permit for the Phase II condominium buildings. d) Per the above stipulation, the 4,124 square feet remaining for employee housing required for Phase II shall be fulfilled with a future project proposed by the applicant, successors, and/or interests. The 4,124 square feet of employee housing required for Phase II was applied to the extra employee housing on the Skico's Vehicle Maintenance Facility on Lot 44 of the Divide Subdivision pursuant to Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2001. e) In addition to the employee housing requirements for the Snowmass Club Phase II project, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994 (Under Findings, Section "o" Employee Housing, pages 16 and 17), the applicant is required to provide employee i \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memo 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 27 housing as needed for the previous ski area expansion per subsections [i & ii], under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. f) In addition to the above requirement, 1,936 square feet of employee housing per subsection [iii] of the same ordinance and section, is required for previous facility expansions within the Snowmass Ski Area, under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. g) The applicant commits that the employee housing required, per conditions d, a and f above, will be constructed by January 1, 2006. Consideration should be given to the possibility of identifying an appropriate employee-housing site within the Snowmass Club parcels. The applicant indicated a possibility of a joint venture with the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District to construct up to 50 employee housing units near the maintenance facility. These conditions will remain with the Preliminary Plan resolution unless Council desires to forward them Into the Final PUD ordinance. 11) Fiscal impact. a) The Town Council finds that this project will have favorable Fiscal Impact. Previous comments and concerns expressed by the Town's Finance Department were address via a revised Final Fiscal Impact Report delivered on August 14, 2001. 12) Energy conservation. a) The Applicant commits to having no exterior hot tubs associated with the individual units within Phase II and will use only gas fireplaces in the condominium buildings. The prohibition of no exterior hot tubs and the usage of gas fireplaces only In the condominium buildings are addressed in the Final PUD Guide. b) The Tennis Bubble will be replaced with a new, more energy efficient permanent structure. The Final PUD Is consistent with this statement, but the design of the Tennis structure is different. 13) Air quality. a) Extension and improvement of gravel-based Clubhouse Drive prior to building permits to reduce fugitive dust and provide entry for construction traffic from Brush Creek Road shall be completed. b) A dust abatement program shall be provided to include: i) Frequent watering of disturbed areas, especially during dry spells; ii) Erosion controls; and iii) Grading of the golf course to not include more than five acres at a time. _3y _ \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\MSnowmassClubll\TC Memot 12.17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 28 The above noted requirements should be stated In the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or In a separate Development Agreement, executed by the applicant. 14) Construction management plan. a) The Town Council finds that the Construction Management Plan as revised is acceptable for a preliminary stage of review with the exception of the following items: 1) That once the permanent tennis structure is completed and the tennis bubble removed, the new parking areas around the tennis structure shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permits for the Phase II condominium buildings; ii) That Clubhouse Drive be improved with finished paving from Brush Creek Road to Club Commons prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new clubhouse; and iii) That Clubhouse Drive be improved with finished paving, including the new bridge crossing, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the condominium buildings. The above noted requirements should be stated in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement or In a separate Development Agreement, executed by the applicant. 15) Community welfare. Pursuant to the Sketch Plan conditions, and pursuant to the new Code Changes and Community Purposes Criteria, the Town Council found that the previous Code revisions per Ordinance No. 07 and No. 15, Series of 2000, apply to the Preliminary and Final PUD applications for this project, with the following exceptions and conditions: a) The new unit equivalency chart (per Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), will not apply to this project. b) The new 65% threshold rule (per Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), for applicability of Community Purpose criteria, will apply to the project. The following Community Purpose items offered by the applicant were found sufficient to allow buildout of 21 fractional ownership condominiums at approximately 2,400 square feet per unit: i) The applicant has acknowledged agreement to provide a license agreement to the Town to assure the continued ability to set and use winter-use trails on Parcel 10 (e.g.,the golf course area); ii) The applicant has committed to provide a site with electric service to the Town for use by the winter activities to allow a permanent structure for housing a vehicle for winter trail maintenance as previously described in this resolution. Construction costs for the structure and recurring energy and operating costs would be borne by the Town or a third party; ill) Brush Creek improvements are proposed pursuant to the application, as previously described in this resolution, which will improve water quality and aesthetics of the creek; \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\MSnowmassClubll\TCCM/em'0112-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Drafl.dx 29 iv) A new trail easement will be provided to the Town from Clubhouse Drive to Snowmass Club Circle (e.g., between the Phase II condominium buildings along Brush Creek); v) Provision of additional trail easements by the applicant to the Town for trails shown on the Preliminary Plan PUD for which easements do not already exist; vi) Full-time residents of the Town who are employed or are full-time students in Pitkin County, and who are not golfing members of the Club will be provided the opportunity to play golf on a space available basis. Town Council finds that the fees/rates, conditions, and restrictions below are reasonable : Full time residents of the Town who are employed a minimum of 30 hours per week or full time students in Pitkin County and who are not golfing members of the Club will be provided the opportunity to play golf on a space available basis at the same rate in effect at the Aspen Municipal Golf Course, not including the cost of a cart, at the time of play. Use of the golf course shall be limited to five times per year/person on a space available basis and shall require the issuance of a golf pass at an administrative fee of$15 to qualify. Use of golf carts may be required if conditions warrant. Tee times may be made no earlier than 48 hours in advance of play and no tee times under this program will be available on Saturdays from June 15 through Labor Day weekend. The project description letter in the Final PUD application states that this is addressed in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement, but it Is not. This could also be Incorporated as part of a separate Development Agreement. vii) A new bus stop and shelter shall be constructed by the applicant for down valley access (i.e., on the south side of Brush Creek Road) near the Intersection where Clubhouse Drive meets Brush Creek Road; viii) A land area of approximately 220,000 square feet of sufficient size and orientation for recreational purposes, a softball field, events and festivals will be dedicated to the Town per the conveyance methods previously described in this resolution. It is acknowledged that the previous Option 1 proposal in the Sketch Plan will be utilized. This option did not contemplate the relocation of Brush Creek Road as originally described per the provisions of the Ancillary Improvements Agreement dated January 20, 2000. ix) Notwithstanding the above, the applicant acknowledged its commitment to grant the Town a reservation, which would allow a future improvement of the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline Road, since it does not interfere with the redesigned golf course. During the design stage, consideration of future intersection improvements will be coordinated by the applicant with the Town; and x) The applicant shall deed restrict the existing employee housing complex in Parcel 12 with the Final Plat. A) The redesign and reconstruction of the golf course is acceptable and considered a community benefit. xii) A new permanent tennis structure replacing the tennis bubble is considered a community benefit. If Council desires, the above noted conditions can be forwarded Into the Final PUD ordinance. \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC enrol 12.17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 30 16) Consideration of Minor PUD Amendments a) The Town Council finds as per the Planning Commission that the plan: i) Is generally consistent with original PUD; ii) Has no substantial adverse impact; iii) Does not significantly change the character; and iv) Complies with the applicable review standards as specified in Section 16A-5-300(c), General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code. If Council desires, the above noted findings can be forwarded Into the Final PUD ordinance. Q�Z \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\iw\SnowmassClubll\TC Memol 12-17-01 SMCII Final PUD Chris Draft.doc 31 I Preliminary Draft 2 3 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 4 TOWN COUNCIL 5 6 ORDINANCE NO. 06 7 SERIES OF 2001 8 9 ORDINANCE NO. 06, SERIES OF 2001, APPROVING THE FINAL PLAN PUD 10 AMENDMENT FOR THE SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II DEVELOPMENT 11 PROPOSAL, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: 1) CONDOMINIUMIZATION 12 OF 21 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS INTO 1/8 SHARE TIMESHARES VIA AN 13 ACCOMPANYING SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION; 2) THE CONSTRUCTION OF 14 21, 118 FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CONDOMINIUMS AVERAGING 2,400 15 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AND CONSISTING OF FOUR 3-BEDROOM UNITS, 16 THIRTEEN 4-BEDROOM UNITS, AND FOUR 5-BEDROOMS UNITS; 3) AN 17 ACCOMPANYING SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW USE 18 FOR THE CONDOM INIUMIZATION OF THE 21 UNITS IN PHASE 11 AND A 19 ACCOMPANYING SUBDIVISION PLAT AMENDMENT FOR PARCELS 3, 4 AND 20 10, INCLUDING A BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE BETWEEN PARCELS 3 AND 4; 21 4) A REDESIGN AND REGRADING OF THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE TO 22 CREATE A COMPLETELY NEW 18-HOLE CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF COURSE 23 BEING APPROXIMATELY 7,000 YARDS IN LENGTH, INCLUDING THE RE- 24 ROUTING AND RE-NUMBERING OF THE FAIRWAYS; 5) RELOCATION OF 25 THE SOFTBALL FIELD AND EVENTS AREA APPROXIMATELY 250 FEET TO 26 THE WEST; 6) CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 5,100 SQUARE FOOT GOLF 27 CLUBHOUSE WITH GOLF CART STORAGE BENEATH; 7)A NEW 150SPACE 28 PARKING FACILITY TO SERVE THE GOLF CLUBHOUSE AND SPECIAL 29 EVENTS AREA; 8) CONSTRUCTION OF A PERMANENT INDOOR TENNIS 30 STRUCTURE AND A POSSIBLE FUTURE TENNIS CENTER/PRO-SHOP 31 FACILITY; 9) RECONFIGURATION OF PHASE I PARKING PROVISIONS TO 32 ACCOMMODATE THE PHASE II PROPOSAL; 10) WIDENING TO 22-FEET, 33 ALONG WITH A STREET WIDTH VARIANCE, AND EXTENSION OF 34 CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO BRUSH CREEK ROAD AT HORSE RANCH DRIVE; 35 11) IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERSECTION AT SNOWMASS CLUB CIRCLE AND 36 CLUBHOUSE DRIVE; 12) STREAM RESTORATION OF BRUSH CREEK; AND 37 13) IMPROVED TRAIL CONNECTIONS. 38 39 WHEREAS; the Town of Snowmass Village Planning Director had 40 previously determined that the proposed Project qualified for review as a Major 41 Planned Unit Development ('PUD") application in accordance with the procedures 42 specified within Section 16A-5-300(b) of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code 43 (the "Municipal Code"); and i� am TC Ord. 01-06 Page 2 of 19 44 45 WHEREAS, Town Council Resolution No. 6, Series of 2001, was approved 46 on January 20, 1999 following review of the Project's Sketch Plan submission; and 47 48 WHEREAS, the Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001, was 49 approved on September 24, 2001 following review of the Snowmass Club Phase 50 11 Preliminary Planned Unit Development ("PUD") Plan application; and 51 52 WHEREAS, said resolution granted authorization for The Snowmass Club 53 Associates and the Aspen Skiing Company (the "Applicant")to prepare and submit 54 their Final PUD Plan application; and 55 56 WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted the Snowmass Club Phase II Final 57 PUD Plan (the "Project") application, for Parcels 3, 4 and 10 of the Snowmass 58 Club Subdivision, to the Town on November 16, 2001 and the Planning Director 59 determined that the application was generally complete and satisfied the Final 60 PUD submission requirements of Section 16A-5-370 of the Snowmass Village 61 Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"); 62 63 WHEREAS, a 15-day public hearing notice for a Major PUD Amendment, 64 although not legally required by the Municipal Code for a Final PUD, was 65 published in the Snowmass Sun on November 28, 2001; and 66 67 WHEREAS, the applicant submitted verification that 30-day public hearing 68 notices was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the site and that the 69 property was posted noticing the public hearing 15 days prior to the Town Council 70 meeting on December 17, 2001, although not required for a Final PUD; and 71 72 WHEREAS, the Town Council has now reviewed the Final PUD application, 73 heard the recommendations of Town Staff, and heard the comments from the 74 general public to consider all relevant materials and testimony in order to evaluate 75 whether the Project application complies with Section 16A-5-300(c). General 76 Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards of the Municipal Code and 77 whether the Final Plan PUD submission by the Applicant has responded to the 78 direction given by the Town as stated within Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001; 79 and 80 81 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is 82 necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. 83 84 85 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town 86 of Snowmass Village, Colorado, as follows: 87 amn PAuser\Jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC It Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 3 of 19 88 Section One: Findings. The Town Council finds as follows: 89 90 1) The Town Council generally finds that the changes made by the Applicant 91 to the Snowmass Club Phase II PUD, after the conclusion of the 92 Preliminary PUD review process, are consistent with the direction outlined 93 within Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001. 94 95 2) The Final PUD for the Snowmass Club Phase II development is generally 96 consistent with original PUD, has no substantial adverse impact, and does 97 not significantly change the character. 98 99 3) The Final PUD Plan continues to be consistent with Section 16A-5-300(c), 100 General Restrictions, of the Municipal Code. 101 102 4) The Final PUD Plan is consistent with the provisions of Section 16A-5-310, 103 Review Standards ("Standards"), of the Municipal Code. 104 105 5) The Final PUD Plan identifies land uses that are consistent with the Town 106 of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan (the "Comprehensive Plan") 107 Future Land Use Map in that the subject area is identified as being 108 intended for Mixed-Use purposes. The "Club Facility," the golf course, the 109 recreational amenities, the residential condominiums, and the associated 110 parking are appropriate uses customarily found in connection with a 111 development of this type. 112 113 6) Article IV, Division 4, Restricted Housing Requirements, of Chapter 16A of 114 the Municipal Code, provides the methodology for determining the amount 115 of restricted housing which must be provided by the Applicant to sufficiently 116 mitigate the employee housing impact of the proposed development. The 117 methodology in force and effect at the time this Final PUD Plan Phase II 118 application was submitted requires 5,824 square feet of employee housing 119 minus the 1,700 square foot credit for the manager's unit in Phase I, which 120 equates to 4,124 square feet of employee housing to be mitigated. 121 122 It was determined with Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2001, that the six 123 additional deed-restricted employee housing units of 4,800 square feet for 124 the Aspen Skiing Company's Phase I Vehicle Maintenance Facility on Lot 125 44 of the Divide Subdivision, shall satisfy the 4,124 square feet of 126 employee housing required for the Snowmass Club Phase II development 127 pursuant to Town Council Resolution No. 36, Series of 2001 [subheading 128 11 titled Restricted Housing, subsection d, page 19]. The balance of 676 129 square feet is considered a Community Purpose benefit for the height 130 variance for the Vehicle Maintenance Facility, which is needed to 131 accommodate the additional employee housing units on the second level.qFinal D 1100 P1useryMSnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 ws Redraft.doc TC Ord.01-06 Page 4 of 19 132 Therefore, the Applicant sufficiently meets the employee housing mitigation 133 requirements of the Municipal Code for the Snowmass Club Phase II 134 Project. 135 136 7) Additional employee housing requirements shall be enforced in the future 137 pursuant to previous ordinance provisions and agreements by the Applicant 138 as follows: 139 140 a) In addition to the employee housing requirements for the Snowmass 141 Club Phase II project, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994 142 (Under Findings, Section 'b" Employee Housing, pages 16 and 17), the 143 applicant is required to provide employee housing as needed for the 144 previous ski area expansion per subsections [i & ii], under the terms of 145 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. 146 147 b) In addition to the above requirement, 1,936 square feet of employee 148 housing per subsection [iii] of the same ordinance and section, is 149 required for previous facility expansions within the Snowmass Ski Area, 150 under the terms of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992. 151 152 c) The applicant commits that the employee housing required, per the 153 requirements above, shall be constructed by January 1, 2006. 154 Consideration should be given to the possibility of identifying an 155 appropriate employee-housing site within the Snowmass Club parcels. 156 The applicant indicated a possibility of a joint venture with the 157 Snowmass Water and Sanitation District to construct up to 50 employee 158 housing units near the maintenance facility. 159 160 8) With regard to the height variance request, the Town Council finds the 161 height variance in reconfigured Parcel 4, which allows 10 percent of the 162 roof structure above 44 feet to a maximum of 48 feet above existing grade, 163 is appropriate in the Final PUD Plan because: 1) it incorporates the same 164 height restrictions granted in Phase I; 2)the plan achieves one (1) or more 165 of the applicable purposed listed in Section 16A-5-300(c)(6), Community 166 Purposes, of the Municipal Code; 3) the granting of the height variance is 167 necessary for that purpose to be achieved; and 4) the development 168 approved under the Final PUD Plan is consistent with the provisions of 169 Section 16A-5-300(c)(7), General Restrictions, of the Municipal Code. 170 171 9) The Project will provide a bus shelter near the southeast corner of 172 Clubhouse Drive and Brush Creek Road. 173 174 10) The Town Council hereby determines that the Municipal Code revisions 175 authorized pursuant to Ordinance No. 07 and No. 15, Series of 2000, apply GM4' PAuser\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 5 of 19 176 to the Final PUD application for this project, with the following exceptions 177 and conditions: 178 179 a) Pursuant to an average 2,400 square feet per unit in the 180 condominium buildings, the new unit equivalency chart (per 181 Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), will not apply to the Phase II 182 project. 183 184 b) The new 65% threshold rule (per Ordinance No. 15, Series of 2000), 185 for applicability of Community Purpose criteria, will apply to the 186 project. The following Community Purpose items offered by the 187 applicant were found sufficient to allow buildout of 21 fractional 188 ownership condominiums at approximately 2,400 square feet in size. 189 190 11) The Project will enhance the pedestrian trail system which crosses the 191 property, provides trail connections to help enhance the community and the 192 neighborhood trail network, and provides better access in and around the 193 property. These trails include: 194 195 a) A trail between the Phase II condominium buildings and along the north 196 side of Brush Creek between Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club 197 Circle. 198 199 b) A trail connection from Brush Creek trail, located to the west, entering 200 the golf course property and thence connecting to the new clubhouse 201 and the tennis court area. 202 203 c) A trail or walkway beside Clubhouse Drive from Brush Creek Road to 204 the Phase 11 condominium buildings. 205 206 d) A walkway or trail along the grass paver fire lane located between 207 Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club Circle and between the south 208 Phase II condominium buildings and Villas North. 209 210 e) A trail connection from the Qwest facility across the golf course, 211 traversing around the north side of Country Club Townhomes. 212 213 f) A nature trail from the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline 214 Road along Brush Creek and thence southerly to Clubhouse Drive 215 south of the Water and Sanitation District in coordination and 216 cooperation with the Town. 217 218 g) Maintaining the existing Brush Creek trail in the plans. 219 PAuser\w\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 6 of 19 220 h) Maintaining the trail connection from the Little Red School House to the 221 end of Harleston Green in the plans. 222 223 i) Maintaining the trail connection along the southwest edge leading to 224 Yarrow Park in the plans. 225 226 227 Section Two: Action. 228 229 1) Final PUD Plan. The Town Council hereby approves the Snowmass Club 230 Phase II Final PUD Plan, as specifically described in: 1) the PUD Guide, 231 attached herewith as part of this Ordinance; 2)the Final PUD Plan's overall 232 development map, the development and landscape plans, the civil 233 engineering drawings and specifications including the drainage plans, the 234 grading plans for the club site and the golf course, the erosion controls 235 plans, the water and sewer plans, the Brush Creek stream enhancements, 236 the trail connections, the floor plans, the architectural elevations, colors and 237 materials, and the construction management and phasing plans; and 3) all 238 other documents as set forth in the Final PUD Plan application dated 239 November 2001, which collectively are incorporated herein by this 240 reference as if set forth at length, subject to the Conditions described in 241 Section 3 below. 242 243 That such plans noted above permit the development of: 1) 21- 244 condominiumized multi-family units into 1/8 share timeshares via an 245 accompanying subdivision exemption; 2) The construction of 21, 1/8 246 fractional ownership condominiums averaging approximately 2,400 square 247 feet in size and consisting of four 3-bedroom units, thirteen 4-bedroom units 248 and four 5-bedrooms units; 3)An accompanying subdivision exemption and 249 special review use for the condominiumization of the 21 units in Phase II 250 and an accompanying subdivision plat amendment for Parcels 3, 4 and 10, 251 including a boundary line change between parcels 3 and 4; 4) A redesign 252 and regrading of the existing golf course to create a completely new 18- 253 hole championship golf course being approximately 7,000 yards in length, 254 including the re-routing and re-numbering of the fairways; 5) Relocation of 255 the softball Feld and events area approximately 250 feet to the west; 6) 256 Construction of a new 5,254 square foot golf clubhouse with golf cart 257 storage beneath; 7) A new 150-space parking facility to serve the golf 258 clubhouse and special events area; 8) Construction of a permanent indoor 259 tennis structure and a possible future tennis pro-shop facility; 9) 260 Reconfiguration of the Phase I parking provisions to accommodate the 261 Phase II improvements; 10)Widening to 22-feet, along with a street width 262 variance, and extension of Clubhouse Drive to Brush Creek Road at Horse 263 Ranch Drive; 11) Improvements to the intersection at Snowmass Club no 4S a" P1useryw%SnowmassC1ubll%TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord.01-06 Page 7 of 19 264 Circle and Clubhouse Drive; 12) Stream restoration of Brush Creek; and 265 13) Improved trail connections. 266 267 2) Height Variance. The Town Council hereby approves a height variance by 268 a vote of — in favor and _ against, from the dimensional limitations of 269 the Municipal Code for the purpose of allowing a height limitation for the 270 Phase II improvements in Parcel 4 of 44 feet, with a provision that 10 271 percent of the roof structure may exceed 44 feet up to a maximum of 48 272 feet above existing grade, which is the same height restriction as applied 273 to the Phase I development, and allowing such height restriction to apply 274 to reconfigured Parcel 4 of the accompanying subdivision plat amendment, 275 which re-subdivides Lot 8, Filing No. 4, Parcel 3, as described in the Final 276 PUD Plan. 277 278 3) Subdivision Improvements Agreement. The Town Council hereby approves 279 the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the Snowmass Club Phase 280 II Amendment to Parcels 3, 4 and 10 of the Snowmass Club PUD and 281 authorizes the Mayor and Town Clerk to execute the Agreement on behalf 282 of the Town Council. 283 284 4) Development Agreement. The Town Council hereby approves the 285 Development Agreement for the Snowmass Club Phase II Amendment to 286 Parcels 3, 4 and 10 of the Snowmass Club PUD and authorizes the Mayor 287 and Town Clerk to execute the Agreement on behalf of the Town Council. 288 289 290 Section Three: Conditions. The approvals granted within Section Two above 291 shall be subject to the following conditions: 292 293 1) The property shall be remain zoned Planned Unit Development ('PUD") and 294 the development parameters that shall apply are per this ordinance and the 295 attached PUD Guide as it applies to the Phase II development. 296 297 2) The Snowmass Club Phase II project shall remain in compliance with the 298 provisions of this Ordinance and the PUD Guide at all times. Any 299 modifications shall occur only in accordance with the provisions of the 300 Municipal Code in effect at that time as an amendment to the approved 301 Final PUD Plan. 302 303 3) The building heights for all buildings shall be as now described in the Final 304 PUD Plan for the Phase II development, which is 44 feet from existing 305 grade with the provision that 10 percent of the roof structure may exceed 306 44 feet up to a maximum of 48 feet above existing grade,which is the same 307 as the Phase I height limitation. sow uN P:\userNw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 8 of 19 308 309 4) In order to minimize the level of traffic impacts from this project, the Town 310 will not issue resident parking permits for the public parking lots to the 311 members of this project. 312 313 5) The Town Engineer shall review and approve the drainage, grading, erosion 314 control plans for compliance with applicable Code standards prior to the 315 issuance of building permits for the clubhouse and the condominium 316 buildings. 317 318 6) The erosion and sediment control plan shall be reviewed periodically by the 319 Planning Director or the Town Engineer during the construction process to 320 ensure that the mitigation efforts are effectively controlling erosion and 321 sediment run-off. The Applicant will respond to any changes requested by 322 the Town that are deemed necessary to control erosion and sediment run- 323 off to the expectation of the Town. 324 325 7) The Applicant and the Planning Director shall inspect the visual/aesthetic 326 character of the reconstructed, redesigned and regraded golf course, prior 327 to seeding, to ensure that it is consistent with the improvements 328 represented in the Final PUD application. If the Planning Director 329 determines that the Applicant is not meeting the intended design and 330 grading character, the Planning Director shall bring the matter to the 331 attention of the Town Council. If the Town Council determines that an 332 improvement is warranted, the Applicant shall make the necessary 333 adjustments within a time frame approved by the Town Council. 334 335 8) The Applicant and the Planning Director shall inspect the visual/aesthetic 336 character of the reconstructed and enhanced Brush Creek, the trail 337 connections, and the remaining site development on the property to ensure 338 that it is consistent with the improvements represented in the application. 339 If the Planning Director determines that the Applicant is not meeting the 340 intended design character, the Planning Director shall bring the matter to 341 the attention of the Town Council. If the Town Council determines that an 342 improvement is warranted, the Applicant shall make the necessary 343 adjustments within a time frame approved by the Town Council. 344 345 9) The Applicant and the Planning Director shall periodically review in the field 346 the construction details associated with the project for compliance with the 347 design character standards specified within the Final PUD approval. The 348 Applicant shall make field adjustments if such adjustments are determined 349 by the Planning Director to be necessary to comply with the Final PUD. 350 The Planning Director may refer matters of this type to the Town Council for - us - PAuseryw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 9 of 19 351 direction as necessary to ensure consistency with the representations 352 made by the Applicant during the PUD review process. 353 354 10) The applicant shall implement the recommendations from their wildlife 355 report in the Preliminary Plan application, such as, 1) Reducing the 356 attractiveness of the property for elk, mule deer, and black bears; 2) 357 Protecting and restoring habitat for birds; 3) Managing weeds; and 4) 358 Creating environmental educational opportunities. The exception being 359 that the applicant and the Town shall not be required to provide terrestrial 360 wildlife monitoring of the site, subject to the condition below. 361 362 11) The Town shall provide a three-year bird-monitoring program for four 363 identified species, and the applicant will provide habitat improvements for 364 those species. 365 366 12) The Applicant shall fulfill the provisions of the Department of the Army 367 Permit #200175238, including the general and special conditions, dated 368 November 1, 2001. 369 370 13) The Applicant shall fulfill the requirements of the conditional approval 371 granted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on 372 November 19, 2001 and, upon completion of the project, as described in 373 the Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) application, and the 374 supply to FEMA, after subsequent review by the Town's Planning Director, 375 the data listed in the FEMA letter. Such data includes, 1) the detailed 376 application and certification forms, including the "Revision Requester and 377 Community Official Form;" 2) the detailed application and certification 378 forms that may be required if as-built conditions differ from the preliminary 379 plans, such as the "Riverine Hydraulic Analysis Form,"the "Riverine/Costal 380 Mapping Form," the "Channelization Form," and the "Bridge/Culvert Form;" 381 3) the processing fee required by FEMA, and 4) As-built plans, certified by 382 a registered professional engineer, of all proposed project elements. 383 384 14) Concerning air quality, the applicant shall provide the following items during 385 the construction of the Phase II improvements: 386 387 a) Extension and improvement of a gravel-based Clubhouse Drive shall be 388 completed prior to building permits for the purpose of reducing fugitive 389 dust and providing entry for construction traffic from Brush Creek Road. 390 391 b) A dust abatement program shall be provided to include, 1)frequent 392 watering of disturbed areas, especially during dry spells, 2) erosion 393 controls, and 3) grading of the golf course to not include more than 394 five acres at a time. �- i4vMW PAuseryw\SnowmassClublKTC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doe TC Ord. 01.06 Page 10 of 19 395 396 15) The Construction Management Plan in the Preliminary Plan application is 397 acceptable with the exception of the following conditions: 398 399 a) Once the permanent tennis structure is completed and the tennis 400 bubble removed, the new parking areas around the tennis structure 401 shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permits for the 402 Phase II condominium buildings; 403 404 b) Clubhouse Drive shall be improved with finished paving from Brush 405 Creek Road to Club Commons prior to the issuance of a Certificate of 406 Occupancy for the new clubhouse; and 407 408 c) Clubhouse Drive shall be improved with finished paving, including the 409 new bridge crossing, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of 410 Occupancy for any of the condominium buildings. 411 412 d) Certain refinements, modifications, or amendments to the 413 Construction Management Plan may be required by the Town in 414 response to impacts, complaints or concerns which were not 415 apparent at the time application was made. In addition, the Applicant 416 may find it necessary to notify the Snowmass Village Community 417 Development Department of necessary additions, modifications, or 418 amendments to the plan during the course of construction. The 419 changes may be permitted with written approval of the Planning 420 Director, who may refer the matter to the Town Council for final 421 determination. 422 423 16) The applicant, the Town, and the Fire District have agreed upon the 424 following conditions regarding the winter-use of Clubhouse Drive: 425 426 a) There shall be an all-weather driving surface for 365 days of a year, 427 except as noted in subsections (2) and (3) below. 428 429 b) A winter-use crossing shall be provided on Clubhouse Drive generally 430 located at the mid-point between Brush Creek Road and the clubhouse 431 parking lot entrance. 432 433 c) Such crossing shall include a maximum of six inches of packed snow 20 434 feet wide over Clubhouse Drive with a possible unsecured matting or 435 straw to be maintained by the Town or third party, including four 436 markers beside the roadway to identify the crossing. 437 438 d) The Applicant shall plow the remaining portion of Clubhouse Drive to _ y7 .. PAuser\jw\Snowrnass0ubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 11 of 19 439 maintain year-round fire emergency access. 440 441 e) Removable bollards shall be placed within Clubhouse Drive at the 442 Brush Creek Road entrance and in a location directly north of the 443 clubhouse parking lot entrance during winter-use trail grooming 444 operations. 445 446 f) The crossing arrangement above is subject to a one-year review by 447 the applicant, Town staff, and the Fire District to determine the 448 adequacy of the operation. If such operation is unsatisfactory to the 449 parties mentioned and a subsequent resolution cannot be reached, 450 Town staff may refer the matter to Town Council for review. 451 452 17) The applicant shall provide a license agreement to the Town to assure the 453 continued ability to set and use winter-use trails on Parcel 10 (e.g., the golf 454 course area). Said document shall be reviewed and approved by the 455 Planning Director and Town Attorney prior to issuance of any building 456 permit. 457 458 18) The applicant shall provide a site with electric service to the Town to allow 459 a permanent structure for housing a vehicle for winter activities trail 460 maintenance as previously described in this ordinance. Construction costs 461 for the structure and recurring energy and operating costs will be borne by 462 the Town or a third party. 463 464 19) A new trail easement shall be provided to the Town from Clubhouse Drive 465 to Snowmass Club Circle (e.g., between the Phase II condominium 466 buildings along Brush Creek). In addition, there shall be the provision of 467 additional trail easements by the applicant to the Town for trails shown on 468 the Final PUD for which easements do not already exist. All trail 469 easements shall be granted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of 470 Occupancy for any structure authorized pursuant to this Ordinance. 471 472 20) The Applicant has agreed that Full-time residents of the Town who are 473 employed or are full-time students in Pitkin County, and who are not golfing 474 members of the Club shall be provided the opportunity to play golf on a 475 space available basis. Town Council determined that the fees/rates, 476 conditions, and restrictions below are reasonable and shall be a condition 477 of this permit: 478 479 21) Full time residents of the Town who are employed a minimum of 30 480 hours per week or full time students in Pitkin County and who are not 481 golfing members of the Club will be provided the opportunity to play golf 482 on a space available basis at the same rate in effect at the Aspen oft yg - P:\user\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 12 of 19 483 Municipal Golf Course, not including the cost of a cart, at the time of 484 play. Use of the golf course shall be limited to five times per year/person 485 on a space available basis and shall require the issuance of a golf pass 486 at an administrative fee of$15 to qualify. Use of golf carts may be 487 required if conditions warrant. Tee times may be made no earlier than 48 488 hours in advance of play and no tee times under this program will be 489 available on Saturdays from June 15 through Labor Day weekend. 490 491 22) A new bus stop and shelter shall be constructed by the applicant for down 492 valley access near the southeast corner of Clubhouse Drive and Brush 493 Creek Road 494 495 23) A land area of approximately 220,000 square feet of sufficient size and 496 orientation for recreational purposes, a softball field, events and festivals, 497 known as Tract A in Parcel 10 on the associated subdivision plat, shall be 498 dedicated to the Town by special warranty deed. It is acknowledged that 499 the previous Option 1 proposal in the previous Sketch Plan application will 500 be utilized. This option did not contemplate the relocation of Brush Creek 501 Road as originally described per the provisions of the Ancillary 502 Improvements Agreement dated January 20, 2000. 503 504 24) Notwithstanding the above, the applicant shall grant the Town a reservation, 505 on the associated plat amendment, which would allow a future 506 improvement of the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highline Road, 507 since it does not interfere with the redesigned golf course. During the 508 design stage, consideration of future intersection improvements will be 509 coordinated between the applicant and the Town. 510 511 25) The applicant shall deed restrict the existing employee housing complex in 512 Parcel 12. 513 514 26) The applicable terms and conditions of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2001, 515 which granted authorization for work to commence on the golf course, shall 516 continue to apply to all aspects of the golf course construction receiving 517 Final PUD approval. 518 519 27) The applicant shall complete all actions or matters which in the opinion of 520 the Planning Director and the Town Attorney are necessary to satisfy or 521 dispense with the completion, execution and/or recording of all documents 522 necessary to implement the requirements of this Ordinance and the 523 Municipal Code. Should disagreements arise that cannot be resolved 524 between Town Staff and the Applicant, the matter will be referred to the 525 Town Council for final direction and/or determination. 526 @No 41 ! P:\user\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redrafl.doo TC Ord. 01-06 Page 13 of 18 527 28) The Applicant will reimburse the Town for all recording and land use review 528 fees associated with processing this application for the Project. Said 529 reimbursement shall extend to include costs associated with ensuring that 530 the terms and conditions of this Ordinance are satisfied. 531 532 29) All matters outlined within Exhibit A shall be satisfied within the timeframes 533 specified therein. 534 535 536 Section Four: Severability. Any portion or provision of this Ordinance determined 537 by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable shall not affect 538 or impair the validity and enforceability of all other portions and provisions of this 539 Ordinance. 540 541 542 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on First Reading by the Town Council 543 of the Town of Snowmass Village on the 17th day of December, 2001 upon a 544 motion by Council Member the second of Council Member and 545 upon a vote of_ in favor and _ against. 546 547 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading by the Town 548 Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on the 7th day of January, 2002 upon 549 a motion by Council Member the second of Council Member 550 and upon a vote of_ in favor and _ against. 551 552 553 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 554 555 556 557 558 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor 559 ATTEST: 560 561 562 563 564 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk 565 566 -�Sb - PAuser\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 14 of 19 567 EXHIBIT A 568 Ordinance No. 06, Series of 2001 569 570 571 Staff Technical Comments 572 concerning Snowmass Club Phase II 573 Final PUD application 574 to be addressed as 575 conditions per the ordinance 576 577 578 The following amendments shall occur to the PUD Guide and Standards prior to second 579 reading of the ordinance: 580 581 1. The size of each lot needs to be noted in the PUD Guide, following a thorough 582 technical review of the plat amendment. 583 584 2. All the standards for the affected areas in Parcel 4 and 12 should be exactly the same 585 as noted in the PUD Guide for Phase I. 586 587 3. The revisions to the standards show that the tree farm is now part of Parcel 10 versus 588 Parcel 12. It should be clarified whether the tree farm in Parcel 10 is the "Orchard" 589 concept planned north of the clubhouse or if it occupies another area. 590 591 4. The PUD Guide shows a total of 49,674 square feet which is inconsistent with the limit 592 of 42,000 square feet for the project per the resolution. A floor area calculation of 593 each unit shall be provided to determine consistency with the tabulations on the cover 594 sheet, the average unit size of 2,400 square feet and the PUD Guide. 595 596 5. The PUD Guide should also list the maximum hard surface areas for the affected 597 parcels and lots. 598 599 6. The PUD Guide should reference the uses allowed in the Fairways Conference Center 600 even though not a part of the parcels to be replatted. 601 602 603 The following amendments shall occur to the Site Planning, Grading and Landscape Plans 604 within 30 days of ordinance approval: 605 606 1. The overall development map shall be amended to be consistent with the proposed 607 plat amendment concerning the boundaries of Parcels 3 and 4. 608 609 2. The overall development map and development plans shall label all the public and 610 private street names in and around the property for reference purposes. 611 612 BSI � P:\user\w\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chrls Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 15 of 19 613 3. The overall development map shows the trail connections, but the master grading plan 614 does not (the connection from Brush Creek trail to the west, the connection between 615 Little Red Schoolhouse and Harleston Green, the trail connection in and around the 616 Club, the trails along the southwest portion of the golf course to Yarrow Park, for 617 example). The master grading plan shall be amended to show how the trail 618 connections will be constructed. 619 620 4. There are no specific illustrations on the plans calling out the improvements for Brush 621 Creek other than the separate information in the application book, which is similar to 622 the Preliminary Plan information. This shall be deferred and described within the 623 Subdivision Improvements Agreement. 624 625 5. The four-foot wide sidewalk along Clubhouse Drive shall be properly illustrated, 626 labeled and dimensioned on the plans next to the tennis structure and the 627 condominium buildings. 628 629 6. The four-foot wide sidewalk along Clubhouse Drive should extend to the walk that 630 follows the grass paver fire lane south of the south condominium building. 631 632 7. The width of the grass pavers for the fire lane needs to be dimensioned south of the 633 south condominium on the development plans as well as the plat. 634 635 8. The plans reference the lighting incorrectly. The legend and the plans should 636 reference 7.1 and 7.2 versus 6.1 and 6.2. The 6.1 and 6.2 labels reference handrail 637 details instead. 638 639 9. A comprehensive lighting plan shall be submitted, as required, for review and approval 640 by the Planning Director. Such plan shall correspond to the Final plans and 641 incorporate the lighting details proposed. Some of the lighting fixture placements are 642 shown on the condominium development plans, but not on the other plans. 643 644 10.The Overall Development Map and the affected development plans shall reference the 645 location boundary for 1) a future Tennis Center with 14 associated parking spaces, 646 and 2) the 39-space contingency parking area. The method for determining whether 647 the 39-space contingency parking is needed needs to be provided with the Final PUD 648 application. See the attached section of the resolution under Parking Facilities for 649 staff comments and recommendations. Completion of either improvement, after the 650 determination, needs to be consummated within 12 months. 651 652 653 The following amendments to the Final Landscape Plans shall be made within 30 days 654 of this approval: 655 656 1. The two 20-foot high Colorado Spruce ("CS") trees near the tennis structure shall be 657 called out. 658 659 2. The plant material list needs to be completed for the landscape plan around the 660 clubhouse. Symbol CS (Colorado Spruce?) isn't called out and it also references both i ` ! P:\useryw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 16 of 19 661 trees and shrub locations. 662 663 3. A landscape plan shall be provided for the identification of the relocated trees from the 664 golf course area to the berms around the employee housing and maintenance area. 665 666 667 The following amendments shall be made to the Road Improvements. Planting and Layout 668 Plans within 30 days of this approval: 669 670 1. Construction-detailed cross-sections of Clubhouse Drive, showing the varied widths 671 between Snowmass Club Circle and Brush Creek Road, shall be provided on this plan 672 for review and approval by the Planning Director. 673 674 2. The varied width dimensions of Clubhouse Drive shall be shown on the plans. The 675 Community Development Director shall receive written consent from the Water and 676 Sanitation District agreeing to the improvements proposed. 677 678 3. The street names shall be labeled on these drawings. 679 680 4. The symbols in the legend aren't called out on the Road Planting and Layouts plans 681 (e.g., the sidewalk, crosswalk, etc.). This needs to occur. 682 683 5. The walkway along Clubhouse Drive shall connect to the walkway along the south side 684 of the south condominium building. 685 686 6. A complete landscape legend shall be provided for all the plant material called out on 687 the plans. The "CS" (Colorado Spruce?) plant material is missing too and shall be 688 shown and labeled for consistency with the plant list legend. 689 690 7. The island for the redesigned intersection at Clubhouse Drive and Snowmass Club 691 Circle must be landscaped per the Preliminary Plan resolution and indicated on the 692 Final Landscape Plan for review and approval by the Planning Director. 693 694 8. The pedestrian crossing detail for Snowmass Club Circle on Sheet L7.07 shall call out 695 the type of plant material proposed for the islands (for the purpose of identifying 696 appropriate sight distance), the decorative surface treatment for the crossing, and the 697 traffic calming devices. 698 699 9. The crossing shall incorporate a decorative surface treatment other than white striping 700 pursuant the Preliminary Plan resolution condition. 701 702 703 The following copies of plans shall be provided prior to second reading of the ordinance: 704 705 1. The plan reductions of the parking level, first level floor plan, and the second floor plan 706 for the north Phase 11 condominium building (Sheets A3.1N through A3.3N) are 707 missing from the Final PUD application set. 708 406s r PAuser\jMSnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Reciraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 17 of 19 709 2. The cross-section plan reduction of the condominium buildings (Sheets A4.3N and 710 A4.4N along with Sheets A4.3S and A4.4S) are missing from the PUD application. 711 712 3. The plan reduction for the elevation cross-section for the Clubhouse (Sheet A4.3) is 713 missing from the application. 714 715 4. The plan enlargements for Snowmass Club Phase II (Sheets A1.0 and A2.1) are 716 missing from the sets. 717 718 5. The Clubhouse Sheet A1.1 is missing from the enlarged plan set. 719 720 721 The following amendments shall be made to the Building Elevations within 30 days of this 722 approval: 723 724 1. Material and color sample boards shall be provided for all the buildings, including the 725 bus shelter. Accurate color photos of the sample boards shall be provided for the 726 public file. 727 728 2. Building elevations, including the bus shelter elevations, shall call out and label all 729 colors of the exterior finishes. 730 731 3. The color for the concrete pilasters on the bus shelter shall be noted. It should be 732 integrally colored to blend with the other exterior materials. Such color shall require 733 Planning Director approval. 734 735 4. A roof plan over the existing topography should be submitted demonstrating that only 736 10 percent of the roof structure (illustrated in a shaded pattern)will exceed 44 feet to 737 a maximum of 48 feet above existing grade. 738 739 740 The following amendments shall be made to the Typical Details prior to second reading 741 of the ordinance: 742 743 1. The new bridge detail should call out the integral color for the scored concrete 744 underneath the new bridges for approval by Town Council at second reading. 745 746 2. An existing bridge detail shall be provided to verify that the concrete structure under 747 existing bridge on Snowmass Club Circle will be stained. 748 749 750 The following amendments to the Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall be made 751 within 30 days: 752 753 1. The agreement should indicate the method of security for completing the 754 improvements., 755 756 st PAuser\jw\SnowmassClubll\TC Ord.01.06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord.01.06 Page 18 of 18 757 2. The application states that the softball field will be conveyed to the Town after 758 approval of the Final PUD or after completion of Phase II. The Subdivision 759 Improvements Agreement states that it'll be conveyed by November 1, 2002 which is 760 inconsistent with the desired conveyance by Labor Day 2002 per the Preliminary PUD 761 resolution. 762 763 3. The plan layout for the recreation field shall be illustrated and referenced as an exhibit 764 in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. 765 766 4. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall also identify the completion and 767 timing for the intersection improvements at both ends, including the landscape 768 island at Snowmass Club Circle and Clubhouse Drive. It must be completed prior 769 to the Certificate of Occupancy for the Phase II condominium buildings. 770 771 5. The language describing the Clubhouse Drive improvements shall indicate the 772 timing for such improvements and that the Town shall have the ability to close 773 Clubhouse Drive between Brush Creek Road and the entrance into the clubhouse 774 during special events. 775 776 6. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement shall fully define the Brush Creek 777 improvements and the timing for the improvements. This would include the creek 778 improvements between the condominium buildings and the applicant's cooperation 779 and coordination with the Town to complete the creek improvements and nature trail 780 along the east side of the property by June 2002. 781 782 7. The trail easements shall be dedicated on the plat, or noted in the Subdivision 783 Improvements Agreement as to when they will be dedicated. 784 785 8. See the items below that could be incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements 786 Agreement or a separate Development Agreement. 787 788 789 A separate Development Agreement should be prepared to address the following issues: 790 791 1. A separate development agreement, executed by the applicant and the Town, should 792 permit the usage of the underpass crossing at Snowmass Club Circle for winter use 793 activities or note this provision/agreement in the Subdivision Improvements 794 Agreement. 795 796 2. A license agreement must be delivered by the applicant for the parking spaces along 797 Snowmass Club Circle. 798 799 3. A license agreement must be delivered by the applicant for the winter use activities 800 on Parcel 10 and for a seasonal shelter. 801 802 4. The same agreement should state that the applicant will provide an easement for a 803 underpass crossing at Clubhouse Drive for winter-use activities and an underpass at 804 Brush Creek Road if the Town desires such a crossing in the future. O . SS P1useryw\SnowmassClubl1\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redraft.doc TC Ord. 01-06 Page 19 of 19 805 806 5. In addition to the bollard placements on Clubhouse Drive, the agreement shall 807 reference and label specific requirements concerning the winter use requirements on 808 Clubhouse Drive, the Nordic crossing and the fire lane usage and maintenance 809 requirements consistent with the Preliminary Plan resolution. 810 811 6. The agreement should include the provision of an easement for a possible future 812 underpass crossing at Clubhouse Drive and Brush Creek Road if desired by the Town 813 in the future. 814 815 7. The timing of either the Tennis Center and the associated 14 parking spaces or the 816 39-space contingency parking area needs to be addressed in the agreement. The 817 Preliminary Plan resolution states that such improvements (the contingency parking 818 or the building with adjoining parking area) shall be completed within twelve months 819 after a determination is made whether or not the contingency parking is needed. 820 821 8. The program per the Preliminary Plan resolution that allows discounted golf rates to 822 full time residents of the town who are employed in Pitkin County needs to be 823 addressed in the agreement. 824 825 9. The requirements in the Preliminary Plan resolution concerning Air Quality and the 826 Construction Management Plan should be stated in the Development Agreement, 827 executed by the applicant and the Town. U r P1user\Jw\SnowmassClubl1\TC Ord.01-06 SMC 11 Final PUD Chris Redrak.doc TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: DECEMBER 17, 2001 Agenda Item: ORDINANCE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2001 —AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-420), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE. Presented By: Craig Thompson, Community Development Director Core Issues: At the October 30, 2001 Council budget meeting, the Community Development Director presented a Department cost recovery analysis. As part of the presentation, projected building revenue for 2002 was anticipated to be $44,830.50 short of 2002 building program expenses. Council subsequently directed the Community Development Director to increase building permit fees. General Info: 1. At a regular meeting held on Thursday, November 29, 2001, the Board of Appeals and Examiners discussed the proposed building permit fee increase. The Board recommendation to Town Council, by unanimous vote, is to approve the revised building permit fee schedule as provided in Ordinance 21, Series of 2001. 2. Staff has amended Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001 consistent with the Council discussion and direction at first reading held on December 10, 2001. In addition, staff has added the following language to Ordinance No. 21: a. A fifth whereas for public health, safety and welfare (line 24 and 25); and b. The building permit fee for projects with a valuation greater than one million (last item on table). This was inserted because Ordinance 21 restates Chapter 18, Section 18-42(i) of the Municipal Code. Council Options: 1. Approve 2nd reading of Ordinance 21, Series of 2001 with any amendments. 2. Not approve second reading of Ordinance 21, Series of 2001. Staff Staff Recommends Option 1. Recommendation: I TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 2 TOWN COUNCIL 3 4 ORDINANCE NO. 21 5 SERIES OF 2001 6 7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, 8 CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-420), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE. 9 10 WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the building 11 permit fee schedule and has determined that projected building revenues do not meet 12 anticipated building program operational costs; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends that building 15 permit fees be increased to fully recover building program operational costs; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Examiners reviewed the proposed 18 building permit fee increase and recommends approval to the Town Council; and 19 20 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance 21 increasing building permit fees is necessary to fully recover building program 22 operational costs; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is 25 necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare. 26 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of 28 Snowmass Village, Colorado, as follows: 29 30 1. Municipal Code Amendment. Section 18-420) Fee schedule of the Municipal Code 31 is hereby amended and restated, as follows: 32 33 a. The building permit fees shall be as follows: 34 35 36 BUILDING VALUATION FEE $500.00 or Less $23.50 BUILDING VALUATION FEE Greater Than $500.00 to $23.50 for the first $500.00 plus $2,000.00 $3.05 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 Greater Than $2,000.00 to $69.25 for the first $2000.00 plus $25,000.00 $14.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 Greater Than $25,000.00 to $391.25 for the first $25,000.00 plus $50,000.00 $10.10 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 Greater Than $50,000.00 to $643.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $100,000.00 $7.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 Greater Than $100,000.00 to $993.75 for the first $100,000.00 plus $500,000.00 $5.60 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 Greater Than $500,000.00 to $3,233.75 for the first $500,000.00 $1,000,000.00 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 BUILDING VALUATION FEE Greater Than $1,000,000.00 $5,539.50 for the first $1,000,000.00, plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof. 37 38 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 39 Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 10, 2001 upon a motion by Council 40 Member , the second of Council Member and upon a 41 vote of_ in favor and _ against. 42 43 44 45 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 46 Snowmass Village on Second Reading on December 17. 2001 upon a motion by 47 Council Member , the second of Council Member and upon a 48 vote of_ in favor and _ against. 49 50 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 51 52 53 54 55 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor 56 57 ATTEST: 58 59 60 61 62 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk s �' top TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 10, 2001 Presented By: Stephen R. Connor, Town Attorney Subject: ORDINANCE No. 30, SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 10 ARTICLE V OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF SMOKING BY PROHIBITING SMOKING TO CONFIRM THAT A PUBLIC PLACE INCLUDES A PLACE OF WORK. Overview: NO CHANGES SINCE FIRST READING. I have been contacted by an organization that follows the adoption of nonsmoking legislation. With the amendment to the nonsmoking provisions of the Municipal Code enacted by Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001 smoking is prohibited in all public places. The definition does not include an express statement that a public place includes a place of work. The nonsmoking organization expresses concern that the policy of the Town has changed. I have also reviewed the compatibility of the definitions in the Municipal Code and those in the Colorado Statutes. Although I do not believe that the definition of a public place excludes a place of work, I suggest that the Ordinance be adopted to preclude any misunderstanding as to the area where smoking is prohibited. Additionally, the Municipal Code definitions tract more closely those contained in the Colorado Statutes with the adoption of the Ordinance. Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance on second reading. sow (A;1W � 1 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 2 TOWN COUNCIL 3 4 ORDINANCE No. 30 5 SERIES OF 2001 6 7 AN ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF 8 CHAPTER 10 ARTICLE V OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE 9 REGULATION OF SMOKING BY PROHIBITING SMOKING TO CONFIRM THAT A 10 PUBLIC PLACE INCLUDES A PLACE OF WORK. 11 12 WHEREAS, the Town Council enacted nonsmoking regulations by the adoption 13 of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1989; and 14 15 WHEREAS, the Town Council amended and restated the nonsmoking 16 regulations and extended the area of prohibition of smoking to all enclosed public 17 places by the adoption of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 18 19 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that it intended that the smoking prohibition 20 be extended to all enclosed public places and did not intent to exclude places of work 21 as an area where smoking is prohibited; and 22 23 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that a clarification to the language contained 24 in Chapter 10 Article V of the Municipal Code will avoid a misinterpretation of the 25 provisions of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 26 27 WHEREAS, the Town Council ratifies and reaffirms the recitals and findings 28 contained in Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 29 30 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is 31 necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. 32 33 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of 34 Snowmass Village, as follows: 35 36 1. Smokinq Prohibition. The provisions of Chapter 10 Article V Smoking 37 Regulation of the Municipal Code that are hereinafter italicized are amended as follows: 38 39 Sec. 10-81 Declaration of Policy. Smoking and environmental tobacco s � � 40 smoke have been established to be Group A carcinogens that cause 41 cancer in humans. It is the express policy of the Town Council that 42 abstention from smoking occur in public places and in the work place. As 43 a public policy objective, the Town Council desires that smoking not occur 44 in enclosed public places and that the public effectuate this policy to the 45 greatest extent practicable. 46 47 Sec. 10-82. Definitions. As used in this Article, the following words shall 48 be construed to have the meanings defined below: 49 50 (1) Public place means any area where the public is invited or 51 permitted or an area that serves as a place of work. 52 53 (2) Smoking means the combustion of any cigar, cigarette, pipe 54 or similar article, using any form of tobacco or other 55 combustible substance in any form, other than for theatrical 56 performances by an employee of the establishment. 57 58 Sec. 10-83. Smoking Prohibited. Smoking is prohibited in all enclosed 59 public places. 60 61 Sec. 10-84. Signs. All enclosed public places shall be posted with signs 62 that clearly and conspicuously recite the phrase "No Smoking" or use the 63 international no-smoking symbol. The signs shall be of sufficient number 64 and placed in prominent locations to convey the message that smoking is 65 prohibited to the public clearly and legibly. Those enclosed public places 66 that are used solely as places of work are exempt from the requirements 67 of this Section. 68 69 Sec. 10-85. Violation and penalty. The following acts constitute 70 violations of this Article: 71 72 (1) Smoking in an enclosed public place; 73 74 (2) Failing to post signs as required by this Article; 75 76 (3) Willfully destructing or defacing signs required to be posted 77 by this Article. 78 s (p 79 2. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any 80 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provision 81 or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 82 application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 83 84 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 85 Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 10, 2001 upon a motion by Council 86 Member Virtue, the second of Council Member Manchester, and upon a vote of 4 in 87 favor and 0 against, Council Member Mercatoris absent. 88 89 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 90 Snowmass Village on Second Reading on December 17, 2001 upon a motion by 91 Council Member , the second of Council Member and upon a 92 vote of_ in favor and _ against. 93 94 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 95 96 97 98 99 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor 100 101 ATTEST: 102 103 104 105 106 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 17, 2001 Agenda Item: Seven Star Ranch PUD Request for Extension Presented By: Gary Suiter, Town Manager Core Issues: . Conversion to new code. Identifying alternative solutions. General Info: This application was extended until December 18, 2001. Attached is a letter from Joe Wells explaining the status of the application. In this letter, Joe states that the owners are willing to present further alternatives to Town Council, and convert this application to the Preliminary Review Stage of the new code. In order to formalize this request, Council should grant another extension, thereby allowing the Planning Division to draft the appropriate documents, for review and adoption by the Town Council. Council Options: Approve or deny applicant's request. Staff The applicant needs to verbally request an extension Recommendation: to February 18, 2002. Council should approve this request by motion. i��too Joseph Wells Land Planning 602 Midland Park Place Aspen,Colorado 81611 Phone:970.925.8080 Facsimile:970.920.4378 e-mail Address: WeU$Aspen®aol.com December 14,2001 Mr. Gary Suiter Town Manager Town of Snowmass Village Delivered by Facsilimile to 923-6083 Dear Gary: I am writing to you and the Town Council on behalf of Snowmass Partners, Ltd., Snowmass Land Partners, Ltd. and Seven Star Residential Partners, Ltd. ("Seven Star Group"). When I last appeared before the Town Council, I had concluded that Seven Star Group was not going to be able to resolve an easement agreement with the owner of Owl Creek Ranch Lot 10 to cross any portion of Lot 10, as called for under the Town's designated "Preferred Alignment" for access to Seven Star Ranch. Because of that,I had authorized the surveyors to expand the topographic information to the west of Owl Creek Ranch.I,,ots 9 and 10 so that we could analyze an alignment which avoided any encroachment onto Lot 10. Following our last meeting with the Town Council, I began to examine alternatives with the firm that has been doing the engineering on the road and we have come to the following conclusions: 1. We can avoid the southwest corner of Owl Creek Ranch Lot 10, near Owl Creek Road,but because we lose roughly 20 feet of elevation in getting around the corner of the lot, the extent of 12 percent grades which are required to get back up to the original alignment increases accordingly. 2. Because the northwest corner of Lot 10 extends down the hillside some 175 vertical feet below the southwest corner of Lot 10, it is virtually impossible to avoid Lot 10 and still design an alignment which returns to the original alignment across Lot 9. To do so would require a series of switchbacks on the steep west-facing hillside below Lot 9 and these would require extensive cuts and fills at the switchbacks. Therefore, the owner's standing offer to grant an easement across Lot 9 is not useful without the ability to cross the corner of Lot 30. 3. If the alignment remains below Lot 30, it must also remain below Lot 9 and the logical location to do that is through our proposed building site for Lot 2. The building site for Lot 2 would have to be shifted about 600 feet to the north, off of the trade parcel and back on to Seven Star property. This is an acceptable (though not ideal) alternative from Seven Star Group's perspective,but care widhavto be exercised at the alternative buildinx r September 17, 2001 Mr. Gary Suiter Page two of two site location to avoid structures which would break the ridgeline from the specified locations in the prior approval. Because of issues such as these, which are by no means fatal but which are less than ideal, Seven Star Group has been contemplating other alternative solutions. The owners would like.to present an alternative concept to the Town Council but for reasons which we unfortunately cannot elaborate on at the present time, do not feel that we can have those discussions at the present time. We are aware that the Town is concerned that the Seven Star Ranch Final Plat Application is the only application that is still in process under the old Code. To resolve that issue once and for all, Seven Star Group has agreed that regardless of the alternative which is formally presented to the Town in the future, the application will be re-organized to address the requirements of the Preliminary review stage of the current Town Code. By making this commitment,I believe that we can avoid the need for further meetings with the Town Council in which we consent to an extension of the deadline incorporated in the old Code (but not the new Code)by which the Town Council must act on the pending application. One final issue which we need to inform the Town Council about in the interest of full disclosure is the fact that Seven Star Group is presently involved in a dispute with Vectra Bank over some of the terms relating to a $2,000,000 loan on the property. As a result of that dispute,Vectra has filed a foreclosure action on the property. Seven Star Group is presently within its redemption period and is in the process of arranging alternative financing to resolve this dispute with Vectra. I will be available to discuss these issues at the Town Council's meeting next Monday. erely, osep Wells cc John Sullivan .w�(jeg TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: GARY SUITER, TOWN MANAGER RE: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2001 CONTRACTORS LICENSING As you are aware, the Town recently modified its Business Licensing policy to include licensed contactors who are located within the Town. Upon hearing concerns from contractors located within the Town, the Town's Board of Appeals and Examiners considered options for changing the current policy. After discussion, the Board of Appeals and Examiners is recommending to me that licensed contractors be exempt from the current business license policy. They feel that contractors are unique in that they must obtain both a contractors and business license from the Town. They also see an inequity, as licensed contractors located outside the Town are not required to obtain a business. license. I bring this to your attention so that you are aware of the Board's recommendation. At this point in time, however, I'm not considering any further modifications to the current business licensing policy. Let me know if you have additional thoughts or concerns. MONTHLY OPERATIONAL INDICATORS The September Indicators are attached for your perusal. The sales tax numbers have been filtered, per Council's request, and the budget numbers now reflect the current 2001 revised budget. You will note that the trends continue, with the Town Sales Tax holding its own, while County Sales Tax is down about 6%. Bus ridership remains strong. FYI — the Rodeo Lot service and Parking Permit system went into effect Saturday, December 15th PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES For your information, I am preparing a report to update Council on the status of the Town's Performance Standards and Annual Specific Objectives. You may recall that we have set a goal of identifying our annual Specific Objectives by January 15`h of each year. Please think about what specific objectives you would like to see accomplished in 2002. We will follow-up on this with a discussion in early January. ADMINISTRATIVE FYI — I have added to Careys Job Description additional responsibilities to include an emphasis on both Project Management and Asset Management. The Asset Management will include oversight of all Town buildings, land and i (0q _ Manager's Report 12/14/01 Page 2 of 2 leaseholds. This function is now consolidated and will be more effectively managed by one person. Also, I am assembling a Management Team with roles and responsibilities that are specific to the Base Village development application. This will ensure a professional approach and good communication among all parties, while dealing with this most important development application. *Response requested s� � SNOWMASS VILLAGE MONTHLY OPERATIONAL INDICATORS SEPTEMBER 2001 ACTUAL CUMULATIVE Versus Calender 2000 Year Versus Versus Operational Indictator Sept.-00 Sept-01 2000 Year To Data To Date Prior Year Budget Sales Tax Revenue: Town Sales Tax $37,011 $30,261 -18.24% $899,498 $912,155 -1.39% -0.24% County Sales Tax - $126,681 $108,469 -14.38% $1,699,301 $1,805,395 -5.88% 0.00% General Fund Operating Expenditures $676,836 $549,644 -18.79% $5,621,589 $5,441,852 3.30% -0.02% RETT Revenue $270,895 $82,712 69.47% $1,334,042 $1,963,073 -32.04% -0.37% Excise FAR Tax $32,972 $0 -100.00% $486,277 $784,946 -38.05% -0.76% Building Permits: 37 15 -59.46% 149 226 -34.07% 44 Number Valuation $6,618,041 $495,539 -92.51% $22.136,267 $40,497,711 45.34% `Village Shuttle Passenger Count 29,098 22,444 -22.87% 558,740 529,442 5.53% Parking Counts: Rodeo N/A N/A N/A 11,995 14,295 -16.09% Base WA WA WA 32,823 33,481 -1.97% Two Creeks WA WA WA 18,426 14,105 30.63°% Solid Waste: Waste(tons) 254 230 -9.45% 2,754 2,729 0.92% Recycle(tons) 29 22 -24.14% 337 315 6.980/6 Volume of Water Treated(Million Gallons) 62 52 -16.13% 406 512 -20.70% Snowfall Cinches) WA WA WA 102 126 -19.05% Guest Parking Permits WA WA WA 6,028 6,817 -11.57% Budget numbers have been adjusted to reflect the adopted revised 2001 budget The 2000 county sales tax numbers have been adjusted as B the RTA Contract Was in force in that year. This leaves the only difference between the 2 years as the economic impact SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 12, 2001 Mayor T. Michael Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, November 12, 2001 at 2:00 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor T. Michael Manchester, Douglas Mercatoris, Robert Purvis, Richard Virtue and Arnold Mordkin COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Joe Coffey, Housing Manager; Lisa Henkel, Housing Secretary; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Art Smythe, Chief of Police; Chris Conrad, Planning Director; Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner; Rhonda Coxon, Deputy Town Clerk; Bernadette Barthelenghi, Landscape Architect; Robert Voigt, Senior Planner; and Donna J. Garcia-Spaulding, Secretary/Records Clerk HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Rick Griffin, Mary Beth Bassett, Barbara Lucks, Robert Goldstein, Keith Kamin, Marci Jennings, Mark Stout, and Mark Hogan PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Jim France, Judy Burwell, Howell Lastion, Engel Pyles, Hal Laster, Sue Dorm, Monte Quest, Lani Quast, Larry Yaw, Jim Light, Steve Henley, Bill Kain, Victor Gerdon, and other members of the public interested in Agenda items for this Meeting. DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 2: HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HAC) RECOMMENDATIONS The HAC commended Joe Coffey and Lisa Henkel for their support and involvement. Griffin provided a brief history of the HAC and stated that the Committee was formulated to take public comment, evaluate the existing housing program, identify specific issues and make recommendations to Council. The following recommendations were provided: iw q� 11-12-01 tc Page 2 • Improve the process for applicants employed in Town for less than fifteen years. Provided three recommended scenarios; • Owners of employee housing be required to live in their units for no less than eight months per year; • Maintain the employment requirements mandated in the initial qualification process; • Employment and residential requirements be remitted to the Housing Office on a biannual basis, and all owners of employee housing meet employment requirements until the day they receive social security benefits as prescribed by the Federal Government. At that time, only the residency qualification would be required; • Individuals, not businesses or corporations, be required to meet the housing requirements in order to purchase employee housing, and businesses be encouraged to purchase free-market housing or develop their own housing to accommodate their employees; • The Town's Code be immediately changed to'state that at the time of qualification for employee housing, the purchaser may not own or purchase property— commercial, residential or vacant land - and language to that effect be contained in all contracts for future employee housing purchases. Individuals who currently own property within those confines would be forced to sell said property or vacate their employee housing units; • Section 17-10 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code be changed to include a life estate, whereby owners would own the property for no longer than the term of their lives; • Owners register their tenants with the Housing Office. Each tenant would be required to meet current employment and residential requirements and the owner would not be allowed to charge more than the fair market value for a comparable space within the employee housing rental pool as prescribed by the Housing Office; • Disputes between owner and tenant would be the sole responsibility of the owner and tenant, not the Housing Office; • Owners of the Creekside and Country Club Townhome complexes be contacted and advised that by January 1, 2001 an inspector would inspect the units with regards to the allowable improvements detailed in Section 17-3 of the Permanent Moderate Housing Code. The inspector would then identify and determine improvements qualified to be included in the resale value; • Amend current policy to ensure that all present owners of employee housing meet minimum standards prescribed by the Housing Department and that these standards would be determined by the Housing Manager and an independent inspection agency; • The seller is responsible for costs associated with a required inspection by an outside firm. If the unit is deemed unacceptable, the owner would be allowed one month to make the necessary s?3 am 11-12-01 tc Page 3 improvements, or the buyer would be granted a credit for the fair market value of the necessary improvements; • Council arrange for the development of an addendum to the standard contract, which will include residency and employment qualifications and create necessary language between buyers and sellers including a full disclosure of the condition of properties; • Applications would be valid for one year, requiring that the applicant update the application on an annual basis with current income tax return, W-2 Form and affidavit; • The application fee be increased from $10 to $25 per bid, to more accurately reflect the administrative costs and applicants complete a bid sheet for each unit they wish to bid on; • A single person may bid on a studio or one-bedroom unit; a couple with no dependents may bid on a studio, one-bedroom or two- bedroom unit and a couple with one dependent, or a single parent with one dependent, may bid on any size unit up to and including a three- bedroom unit. A couple with two or more dependents or a single parent with two or more dependents may bid on any size unit and that in these instances, the dependent children must reside with the parent for a minimum of four months each year. Definition of a "couple" would be two people with a joint interest ownership in the property or two married people; • Individuals in need of units designed for disabilities would have first priority and be given thirty days to apply for the unit. At the end of the thirty day time period, the unit would become available for application to all qualified Snowmass Village employees; • Smoking issues among owner units be handled neighbor to neighbor and smoking be banned in all rental units; • Pets (Owner Units) Policy remains the same. Pets (Rental Units) may not own dogs and that this policy be included in the Rental Condominium Declarations stating that Violation of this policy would result in cancellation of the lease; Council briefly discussed the asset and income guidelines, lottery system and unit maintenance, and stated that the reason for this meeting was to receive recommendations only and requested further discussion at a meeting in the near future. Item No. 3: SNOWMASS CHAPEL SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Jim Light spoke on behalf of the Snowmass Chapel. Hal Laster, a volunteer at the Snowmass Chapel, supported the building structure design relative to correct acoustics for the pipe organ. Sue Dorm commented on the need for additional space in the downstairs area for counseling privacy, efficiency and comfort. Lan! Quast outlined the various community uses for the Chapel facility and meeting rooms J7Y an 11-12-01 tc Page 4 Senior Planner Jim Wahlstrom outlined previous discussions held regarding this submission and requested that Council make a determination on the proposed 28,000 square foot community building, which exceeds the 20,000 square foot limit indicated in the Buildout Chart. He requested that Council establish a maximum floor area limit for this project if the application is approved. Wahlstrom explained that there is no indication that the 692 square foot housing unit currently existing within the Chapel building was deed restricted, therefore the applicant has requested that the unit be applied as the employee housing requirement for this particular application. Council majority felt this proposal was acceptable. Council and staff determined that a super-majority vote would not be required for the building height, since the structure does not exceed the limit set forth in the Land Use Code, although would be required when addressing the proposed square footage increase. Council further discussed the community purposes of public facility meeting rooms, counseling, unique architectural and cultural amenities which add to the community as a resort and inter-denominational religious services, and requested that the applicant specify all items of community purpose relative to the proposed additional square footage. Council discussed the mass and scale of the proposed structure and the height of the steeple, ridgeline penetration, and use of landscaping to mitigate the visual impact of the structure. Purvis requested that the applicant consider lowering the sanctuary where the pipe organ would be located, from the second floor to the lower level, thus lowering the overall height of the building. He also requested that the applicant consider alternative locations within the valley where the topography would support the proposed building height. Mordkin questioned the appropriateness for Land Use Code Variances of such a magnitude necessary to allow the mass and scale of the proposed structure, and the precedent that may be set by allowing the variance. Council requested that the applicant specify the community benefits proposed for this construction and the standards to which they apply, and a landscape plan that would minimize the visual impact of the structure. A straw vote of 5 in favor 0 opposed indicated Council's support of the proposed square footage increase. A straw vote of 3 in favor and 2 opposed indicated Council's support of the height variance. A draft Resolution to allow the applicant to proceed to Preliminary Review will be submitted to Council and a Public Hearing has been scheduled for the December 3, 2001 Regular Town Council Meeting. Issues that have not been addressed to date will be discussed at the November 19, 2001 Council Meeting. Staff will provide a summary of findings and conditions for Council review at this Meeting also. Item No. 4: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 12: APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FOR 07-26-01 AND 09-28-01 Virtue made a motion to approve the Minutes as listed. Mercatoris seconded the motion. There being no corrections or additions, the motion was approved by a vote U"M I 11-12-01 tc Page 5 of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council Member Mordkin had stepped away from the Council table. Item No. 13: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS Rued! Water & Power Commission (RWPC) Mordkin commented that the Intergovernmental Agreement, which provides for the method of funding, needs to be resolved. He stated that the Commission proposed to amend its Bi-Laws to provide fair allocation of water among members who have their own water departments. Suiter commented that he would need legal support at the next RWPC meeting, when he will be asking why a municipality is being asked to support this organization and not Water and Sanitation. Rodeo Site Visit Mercatoris requested a site visit to the Rodeo Lot at noon on Wednesday, November 14, 2001, in an effort to determine the condition of the property. Mordkin stated that he would call Bill Burwell and inform him of the site visit. Town Manager/Mayor Meeting Mayor Manchester stated that he would meet with the Town Manager on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 at 8:00 a.m. to discuss upcoming Council Meeting agendas. Hwy. 82\Brush Creek Road Intersection The Community Development Director reported that meetings have been held among the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Pitkin County, the State Highway Patrol and the City of Aspen regarding a request to change the island at the intersection of Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road. The Aspen Skiing Company has requested use of Cozy Point North land and also to split the island for access to accommodate parking for the X-Games and Jazz Aspen festivals. Victor Gerdin of the Aspen Skiing Company has requested a meeting on Wednesday, November 14 at 11:30 a.m. with various County and State officials to discuss specifics and design scenarios. Mercatoris stated that he would like to be a part of that meeting as well. Council stated concerns that they were not notified of the proposed changes and discussed the affect on the newly constructed Snowmass Village entrance sign and related issues. Item No. 6: PUBLIC HEARING - 2002 ROAD MILL LEVY TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE ROAD MILL LEVY FUND FOR THE YEAR 2002 Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 5:25 p.m. There being no public comments or further discussion, Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 5:26 p.m. o"74 111111M 11-12-01 tc Page 6 Item No. 7: PUBLIC HEARING - 2002 PROPOSED BUDGET TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PROPOSED BUDGETS FOR THE YEAR 2002 Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 5:26 p.m. There being no public comments or further discussion, Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 5:27 p.m. Item No. 8: FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 25, SERIES OF 2001 FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 BUDGET FOR ALL FUNDS FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE A motion was made by Mercatoris to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2001, seconded by Virtue. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 9: RESOLUTION NO. 41 SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION SUMMARIZING EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES FOR EACH FUND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ROAD MILL LEVY FUND AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR BEGINNING ON THE FIRST DAY OF JANUARY, 2002 AND ENDING ON THE LAST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2002. A motion was made by Mercatoris to approve Resolution No. 41, Series of 2001, seconded by Purvis. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 opposed. Item No. 10: RESOLUTION NO. 42, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING SUMS OF MONEY TO THE VARIOUS FUNDS AND SPENDING AGENCIES, IN THE AMOUNTS AND FOR THE PURPOSE AS SET FORTH BELOW, FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO FOR THE 2002 BUDGET YEAR Mercatoris stated that he is in favor of the Town using the Capital Reserve to balance the budget in future years. In addition, he is opposed to using Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) Funds for road maintenance. He stated that this year presented unusual budgeting circumstances and requested that a Work Session be scheduled before the next budget to discuss ways of replacing revenue sources and cutting expenditures. There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Mercatoris to approve Resolution No. 42, Series of 2001, seconded by Virtue. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 11: PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 49 SERIES OF 2001 s77 - 11-12-01 tc Page 7 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONCERNING AN ANNUAL TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO PERMIT CHRISTMAS TREE SALES AT THE WESTERLY END OF THE TOWN RODEO LOT. Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 5:29 p.m. Chris Conrad outlined the conditions of the Resolution. Council reviewed the language and requested necessary changes. Operator and customer parking will be monitored and vehicles parking on Horse Ranch Drive will be cited, terms of the Permit will be from November 20 until December 25, 2001, hours of operation will be 9:00 a. m. to 9:00 p.m., all lights will be turned off at 9:00 p.m. and a $200.00 cleanup and damage deposit would be required of the applicant to ensure satisfactory cleaning at the conclusion of the event. Staff will coordinate with the applicant regarding the signage and lighting. There being no further discussion, Mayor Manchester closed the Public Hearing at ' 5:40 p.m. Virtue made a motion to approve Resolution No. 49, Series of 2001 as amended. Purvis seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor and 0'opposed. Item No. 5: PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 16, SERIES OF 2001 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO THE ASPEN SKIING COMPANY'S VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ON LOT 44 OF THE DIVIDE SUBDIVISION. (First Reading of this Ordinance tabled from 11-05-01) Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing at 6:10 p.m. Senior Planner Jim Wahlstrom stated that all Public Notification requirements have been met according to the Land Use Code. There being no further comments from the public, Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 6:11 p.m. Council reviewed the Ordinance document and requested necessary changes regarding language referring to public notification requirements, improvements to Divide Road, cut and fill locations, revegetation, road construction on 30-percent slopes, engineer's opinion regarding ground stability, location and new access driveway and easement to the Krabloonik site, landscaping plan, building height variance as it relates to employee housing, lighting restrictions, compliance with Minor PUD regulations, skier access, outside storage, building setback, employee housing deed restriction conveyed to the Town, light pollution as well as other minor amendments. There being no further discussion or comments, Mercatoris made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2001 as amended. Virtue seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 opposed. � 79 11-12-01 tc Page 8 Item No. 14: CALENDARS No discussion was held. Item No. 15: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, at 6:58 p.m. Council Member Mercatoris made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Purvis. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Submitted By: Donna J. Garcia-Spaulding, Secretary/Records Clerk OW PLEASE TURN IN YOUR STATUS REPORT UPDATES TO DONNA BY 5:00 P.M. JANUARY 02, 2002 STATUS REPORT December 17, 2001 Town Council/Town Mana er Pro'ect/Mana # VLF/Forward Plan ■ Drafting the Forward Plan. Gary Suiter Job Description/Performance ■ Status reports are in. Standards & Specific Objectives ■ Report being prepared for Council. Gary Suiter Rodeo Acquisition ■ Closing set for January. Town Council ■ Bonds to be sold this week. ■ Lease continues to be negotiated. Public Works Housin Pro'ect/Mana t. . y U'e'dat... 4" Daly Townhomes ■ Building"B"second floor under construction. Joe Coffey Housing Committee ■ Future Council Work Session are scheduled for December 17, 2001 and January 14, 2002. Finance 2001/2002 Budget ■ Developing Budget Contingency Plan. Marianne Rako"kl Public Safet Pro evil.,. f1a .� 'U Town Clerk Ubda Business Licensing ■ Preparing Business License/Sales Tax Trudi Worline License delinquent notices. • Compiling homeowners' mailing info.for verification of sales tax remittance on short- term rentals. • Preparing mailing for notification regarding Boards& Commission Members term expiration. • Preparing for tenure recognition, Snowmass Club Membership renewals, and organizing employee Christmas party. doom 8O a 1 Communit Development De artment date ' Projiat/MIraag , , . ., ,.�,�. „ 'rts% �• Entryway Sign ■ Sign and base complete. Lighting to be Craig Thompson installed. Sign Code Review ■ Planning Commission to discuss following Chris Conrad/Robert Vol f state of the Comprehensive Plan Process. Code — Building Height ■ Planning Commission discussion January 02, Chris Conrad 2002. Ma'or Development Review U date Brush Creek Plaza Redevelopment ■ Tentative Joint meeting on 01-14-02. Sketch Plan (Conoco Redevelopment) Jim Wahlsfrom State Of Comprehensive Plan ■ Commenced with Planning Commission Robert VoigVChris Conrad review on Nov. 14'". Report to be presented to Town Council in January 2002. Snowmass Center Expansion/ ■ Planning Commission on 01-09-02. Redevelopment Sketch Plan Jim Wahlsfrom Snowmass Club—Phase II ■ Draft Ordinance and Final Plan scheduled for Final PUD Plan 12-17-01. Second Reading on 01-07-02. Jim Wahlsfrom Minor Development Review U date ProeeUl IN a Snowmass Chapel Sketch Plan ■ To be resubmitted in February 2002. Jim Wahlsfrom Aspen Skiing Company—Vehicle ■ Done. Maintenance Facility At The Divide Minor PUD Amendment Jim Wahlsfrom Offices At Snowmass Minor PUD ■ Done. Amendment Jim Wahlsfrom Communitz Enhancement Pro'ects Krabloonik Land Exchange Proposal ■ Planning Commission approved Draft Minor PUD Audit Resolution o 11-28-01. ■ Landowner di scussion on January 21,2002. Jim Wahlsfrom Parcel F — Parking Lot ■ Discussion still underway with Snowmass Bernadette Barthelen hl Land Company. Project Update Coordination -Gary Suiter 923-3777 ext. 206 Public Works- Hunt Walker 923-5110 ext. 201 Housing -Joe Coffey 923-2360 ext. 10 Community Development-- Craig Thompson 923-5524 ext. 247 Town Clerk -Trudi Worline 923-3777 ext. 202 Finance - Marianne Rakowski 923-3796 ext. 241 Police Chief-Art Smythe 923-5330 ext. 217 i to) wo 2 PDevember Packet Calendar S Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 2:00 P.M. TOSV Holiday T.C.MTG. Party Stonebridge Inn 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Christmas 30 31 New Years Eve Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 New Years Day 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2:00p.m Council Mtg 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2:00p.nL Council Mtg 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2:00p.m Council Mtg 27 28 29 30 31 1 To:Snowmass Village Town Council 7—O From:Alan Caniglia, Board of Directors, Homestead Homeowners Association Re:Tentative Agreement between Homestead Homeowners Association (HHA) and Snowmass Club Association,LLC (SCA) It is my purpose here tonight to present to the town council,for the record,the agreement reached between HHA and SCA over the last few months. An agreement between HHA and SCA has been reached relative to the final plans for relocation of the golf cart path located on the 15th hole,directly behind the building D of the Homestead townhouses,located at 3904 brush Creek Road,Snowmass Village,Colorado. The original plan as presented to the homeowners by representatives of SCA,showed that the cart path was to pass directly behind building D,in some cases within approximately 15'of the rear patios. This would have created an extreme safety issue from golf balls striking the cart path and ricocheting into the homes. A second concern was that of privacy as the golf carts and golfers would have been driving within 20 to 25 feet of the master bedrooms which are located in the rear of the townhouse on the same level us a proposed golf cart.These bedrooms have large sliding glass doors. Goff carts and golfers in such dose proximity to the townhouse would compromise the privacy of the master bedrooms. During the initial meetings,it was noted that the survey also was in error,as the survey used by SCA showed that the property line for the SCA passed through building C of the Homestead. After consultation with Chris Conrad of the Snowmass Planning Division,a revised plot plan was located in the Pitkin County administrative offices in Aspen,Colorado. This amendment showed that the property lines were redrawn and the boundary line was no longer passing through the middle of building C. (Attached please note copies of the original survey and the revised survey and new golf cart path plan.) The salient points for the record are: 1) The golf cart path will be placed at least 45 feet from the property line between HHA and SCA. 2) A berm will be installed immediately adjacent to the golf cart path between the golf cart path and the Homestead property line.This berm will not interfere with the views of the downstairs bedrooms.This berm will be constructed in such a way as not to kill the trees presently located on the slope running down onto the present golf course fairway.(Review of a topographical map shows the patios to be placed at an elevation of 8080 feet.)The top of the berm will not exceed an elevation of 808$feet. The purpose of this berm will be to place the cart path about six feet below the top of the berm,thus maintaining the privacy of the homeowners and protecting the homes from ricocheting golf balls that hit the golf cart path.In the spring when the final grading is being done,SCA will work with HHA to ensure that the final grading reflects the spirit of this agreement. 3) The berm will be planted by SCA in a type of native grass that turns brown in the summer. In the event that HHA finds this type of grass objectionable,that area of the berm facing and contiguous to the Homestead properties will,at the discretion of HHA, be planted in the type of grass now surrounding the Homestead property. In the event HHA makes this derision,the watering and maintenance of this grass with the responsibility of HHA.This decision will be made prior to planting in the spring.In the event this issue arises behind buildings A,B or C HHA will work with SCA to address the objectionable areas in a manner consistent,9 practicable,with the remedy adopted for building D. r A Homestead-Golf Course pro rty line S. Pmh i O ; • , } r 4 * now can Bee by Ill POISON Q r. t S a " . I k r ° d TMa , • q r " �( /^"'; fir- � . IJ(� � , YV.J `� Awl a *Ilk it f.. i 1 I' Z i r �� Golf Course notes (meeting with Don Schuster- 11/27): -Compromise cart path location as we discussed. -the location of the compromise cart path is no closer to the bldgs the old cart path was ,_-�o before. Old cart path was about 15 yards from Harold's deck at the closest. (???)The compromise cart path appears to be no less than 20 yards at its closest (near the comer of Unit 15). -the cart path will be about 6' below the top of the berms,thus we should only see the tops of the carts at most when they are on the path. -top of berms close to bldg D are at 80',probably a little(1-3') above current top grass, they may in fact be at the level of the first floor decks on Bldg D. In the spring when final grading is being done, Golf Course will work with us to raise or lower the berms a foot or two as we think best. There really should be no "view"implications with these berms. -the level of the center of the fairway(#15)will be about 16 feet below the first floor of our bldgs. This should also cause golfers to aim more to the center and away from the Homestead bldgs. -the area from the edge of our property line to the first rough line will be all native grass that will go brown by July or so. We can work with Al Ogren to extent our irrigation to the top of the berms to we can have our grass continue to that level, if we will maintain. Some of the same issue may exist with bldgs B&C. -S&W will want the manhole(in the path between bldg C&D)raised several rings to maintain the access. Cost $1,000. -the new tee boxes for blue and black tees on new 15a' hole are moved to the left as you look down the hole. This will tend to move the shots away from the Homestead. -the new 14s'green is moved away from bldg C and is at a lower level (about 6 to 10 feet lower) compared to the old 4th green. Golf Course notes(meeting with Don Schuster- 11/27): -Compromise cart path location as we discussed. -the location of the compromise cart path is no closer to the bldgs the old cart path was before. Old cart path was about 15 yards from Harold's deck at the closest. (???) The compromise cart path appears to be no less than 20 yards at its closest(near the corner of Unit 15). -the cart path will be about 6' below the top of the berms, thus we should only see the tops of the carts at most when they are on the path. -top of berms close to bldg D are at 80',probably a little(1-3') above current top grass, they may in fact be at the level of the first floor decks on Bldg D. In the spring when final grading is being done, Golf Course will work with us to raise or lower the berms a foot or two as we think best. There really should be no "view"implications with these berms. -the level of the center of the fairway(#15)will be about 16 feet below the first floor of our bldgs. This should also cause golfers to aim more to the center and away from the Homestead bldgs. -the area from the edge of our property line to the first rough line will be all native grass that will go brown by July or so. We can work with Al Olgren to extent our irrigation to the top of the berms to we can have our grass continue to that level, if we will maintain. Some of the same issue may exist with bldgs B&C. -S&W will wanjAhe mpfihole(in th at,4f between bldg C raised s ring,!;to maintain the abbess. Yost—$1,000Y l -the new tee boxes for blue and black tees on new 15'b hole are moved to the left as you look down the hole. This will tend to move the shots away from the Homestead. -the new 10 green is moved away from bldg C and is at a lower level (about 6 to 10 feet lower) compared to the old 4'�green. t carve tip. , �ti.� ,l i ' /-oAll lit TVI f . .., a , ,' I•A f ' Is 1 �y v ,• • • • � ' 11 I NI IX �N x /��✓ ���/ sRl F r••• -. i T�.r�x�2 A��J• SA � Cw•�'�I''��`!!`8T'. t � ) n Gov• — rt 1r i - _ - � —`' y r - i . ��1 , tt frv,. 1 � � �IJ •,f -7,-4q tt Powerline Trail - June 2001 y r � xh � 1 0 Events 0 0 7 rn I o cv 4 r 0 Date 1 Hours - Military N 01 ® 2 03 ❑ 4 05 17 6 ■ 7 Tom Events J { � 1 r ' 1 CIE ;`. ¢ . ` Day Date Co Hours - Military cj � I `1 03 S4 05 • ® • '. i • ® • 020 021 022 024 026 M27 E128 029 030 [331 Tom Blake/Anaerobic - November , r a L 29 1 25 21 17 Events 13 Day - Date 9 5 rn Hours - Military ❑ 1 02 El ❑ 4 05 RR 0 El 09 010 ❑ 11 El 12 013 N 1 015 016 9 17 ❑ 18 ❑ 19 El 20 El 21 El 22 El 23 El 24 025 ❑ 26 927 ❑ 28 9E 29 ® 30 a Powerline Trail - May 2001 Events c'Y��f5•Y� a` t sh J co 't I a/ C • ',` . C) .• Hours i • 020 M21 ■ i B26 027 028 M29 M30 031 Powerline Trail - June 2001 0 Events ° o k 7 m o rn L VII c 1 Date Hours - Military r 01 1112 03 04 ■ 5 ❑ 6 ■ 7 Tom Blake/Anaerobic - October t 1 30 27 i 24 Events 21 18 0 15 ° 12 Day Date ao 9 0 N 6 r cfl 3 Hours - Military N 03 04 05 06 07 08 ■9 ❑ 10 ■ 11 912 013 014 ■ 15 016 ■ 17 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 11128 029 0301331 Tom Blake/Anaerobic - November . � rt Yj !r 5 k J X 4 29 1 25 21 17 Events 13 Day - Date 9 0 5 LO rn C 1 N Hours - Military ❑ 1 ■ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ 4 ■ 5 R6 ■ 7 08 ■ 9 010 ❑ 11 012 ■ 13 N 1 015 016 IR 17 ❑ 18 ❑ 19 n20 El 21 0 2 El 23 0 2 ® 25 ❑ 26 O 27 ❑ 28 El 29 ® 30 U December 17, 2001 To: Each Member, Snowmass Village Town Council and to Gary Suiter It is requested that the Town Council discontinue the practice of passing special ordinances that permit contractor work to begin with only preliminary plan approval. Such ordinances are inconsistent with the provisions of the Town's land use code. The reasons for this are: 1. Preliminary only approval considerations cannot be expected to gain full consideration of either Town officials or the public. 2. Preliminary plans may not disclose the full impact of the proposed development on the Town or affected property owners. 3. Without full consideration, the consequences to the Town of construction in progress or its discontinuance may be detrimental. 4. If construction starts and investments by the developer are substantial, one will not achieve the same compromises compared to before those actions. 5. Although such ordinances may permit some projects to start sooner, on an ongoing basis the average development activity in the Town cannot be expected to increase. In addition, one consequence of such an ordinance may well be to reduce priority in the developers' design process. Jim Heyw d, Snow mass Village, 923-4229 64 OPPONENTSa �a SNOWMASS CLUB PHASE II PUD OPPONENTS BOLD = 2ND LETTER SIGNED FINE PRINT = 1ST LETTER SIGNED FAIRWAY DRIVE PROPERTY OWNERS NAME LOT ADDRESS PHONE BARNHILL, BILL CCU 1 /LOT 19 366 FAIRWAY DRIVE BURSTEN, ANDREW CCU 1 /LOT 11 321 FAIRWAY DRIVE 713-821-1286 COUTURIER, MAURICECCU 1 /LOT 24 208 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-923-5321 DARROUGH, PAUL CCU 1 /LOT 7 193 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-9235669 DURAND,JUDITH CCU 1 /LOT 9 257 FAIRWAY DRIVE 561-741-7154 FOERSTER, E. CCU 1 /LOT#18400 FAIRWAY DRIVE GOODWIN, RICHARD CCU 1 /LOT#13385 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-923-3033 HANSEN, GRETCHEN CCU 1 /LOT 23 240 FAIRWAY DRIVE 412-741-0582 KLAWITTER, FAMILY CCU 1 /LOT 12 353 FAIRWAY DRIVE 760-634-8285 LIPPMAN, FAMILY CCU 1 /LOT 20 336 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-923-4564 LOZOWICK, FARLEY CCU 1 /LOT 2 33 FAIRWAY DRIVE 3055745951 LOZOWICK, FARLEY CCU 1 /LOT 6 161 FAIRWAY DRIVE 3035745951 POLINE, PATRICIA CCU 1 /LOT 1 17 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-923-6988 SAGN,LLC;POSCHMA CCU 1 /LOT 10 289 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-920-2354 RUDOLF, JAMES CCU 1 /LOT 17 432 FAIRWAY DRIVE SALYER,EVERETT CCU 1 /LOT 14 477 FAIRWAY DRIVE 913592-3758 SMITH, BARBARA CCU 1 /LOT 29 48 FAIRWAY DRIVE 970-923-4540 ST. GERMAIN, NIKKI CCU 1 /LOT 8 226 FAIRWAY DRIVE 619-222.4819 STAFFIER, DANIEL CCU 1 /LOT 16 501 FAIRWAY DRIVE ZERDEN TRUST CCU 1 /LOT 15 SNOWMASS VILLAGE PROPERTY OWNERS NAME LOT ADDRESS PHONE ADAMS, SCARLETT 4000 BRUSHCREEK RD.#28 ADAMS, SCARLETT PRES. OF VILLAS HOA ANDLINGER UNIT#1653 ANZALONE, PETER 153 MEADOWS RANCH ARNOLD, HAROLD& KATHY 3609 BRUSH CREEK#6 ATTAS, MICHAEL HOMESTEAD#10 BALOTTI, MARCIA 96 HARLESTON GREEN 302-651-7710 BLUMBERG,MORTON 305-661-2685 BOSSELAAR, LAURIE 52 HARLESTON GREEN 970-945-8575 BRAUER,SYLVIA& RAYMOND 221 BUNTING CT. BREAUX, BAXTER 3805 BRUSHCREEK RD. CALDWELL,WILEY 46 HARLESTON GREEN CLARK 0444 SNMASS CLB CIR#13 828-6695265 COHEN,STEPHAN CC VILLAS #1524 306-679-3377 COHEN,STEPHAN CC VILLAS #1523 305-673-3377 DAVIS, SANDRA& LYNN CC TOWNHOME#3 952-931-9975 DOUGHTIE, ROBERT SNOWMASS VILLAS #9 ESPARZA,JESUS& DENISE 0408 SNMASS CLB CIR#10 FRASIER, JOHN + 5115 OWL CREEK RD.#11 970-922-0812 GIAMMARUSCO, CHIARA 5115 OWL CREEK RD.,#30 GROSS, SCOTT& PAULA 0052 HARLESTON GREEN GROSSBARD, HOWARD, ILENE VILLA#1617 HAGELBAKER 0761 SNOWMASS CIRCLE; TH 96 HEINZ,JAMES VILLA#1107 HODGES, MARGARET #1624 JACKSON, F.& LORRAINE CC VILLA#1103 KOEPPE, KAREN 1439 SNOWMASS CLUB CIRCLE KRAUSE, CHARLES LONG, GREG SNOWMASS VILLAS#1 MARGOLIN, C & M #104 POTTHORST, TITTINE 65 HARLESTON GREEN RAPHAELSON, RALPH 0500 SNMASS CIRCLE#17 RIETDIJK, JAN & BETTY 0294 SNMASS CLB CIR#1208 RENNICK, LINDA UNIT#1522 RIPPEY, SALLY 42 HARLESTON GREEN 309-2865921 RIOS,SHAWN 5115 OWL CREEK ROAD#27 ROSS, DAVID 124 HARLESTON GREEN#48 ROSS, MICHAEL TOWNHOME#64 561-488-8995 SIMMON 1101 VILLA SPENCER, B&R COUNTRY CLUB VILLAS#1616 847-441-7578 SUAREZ, JOHN & LEE #11 SNOWMASS TOWNHOME TALARICO, LOUIS&LINDA VILLA#1633 TITUS,ALAN & SUSAN VILLA#1814 TREDEAUX,JAMIE 5115 OWL CREEK RD.#16 Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5, 2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 41 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design, as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties we5e purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway, especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. Sincerely, S' tune Print Name Snowmass Address Farley Lozowick lt0 Q� G ' Mailing Address Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. Sincerely, Ai Print Name Snowmass Address Farley Lozowick 3 �� Mailing Address FROM 11COMfIG tEDAA_8_pFROM ASPEIJ FM 147. : 97119 M364 Dec. 13 2Cf01 07:SSFt1 Pi Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado W439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners..—Fairway,Drive Property owners Re: Snov=ass Club Phase H PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club_ This response was presented to the Town of Snowmim on November S,2001. As a result the Snowmass Chub was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass scut another mar7a to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the-Final Matting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I stroriOy ancoump you to attend this mating as it may affect your property value• I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowitim Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted time lots for fairway views and sold theft properties for a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,l feel that the current golf course owner should recognise these previous standards_ The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told me, will prohibit the direct view ofthe adjacent Wrwaya. The properties wme purchased becaase of drt views of the fairways: Thu redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The- obstruction of any vim to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway. is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or luuhdicap,-were looking forward to,at l oast.being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they a gwcd to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass pub is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 ThnO Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet Spacial Review Usk amongst many odor requests. This will eahanac their financial position. They should sot forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf courses They are aslang for oar approval ofthe Subdividon,Exemptiak and I Sand they should not be takigg AqFdjivs away from us I am requesting Oust the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property,owners be megored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway,views. With this cvmpleuad,I will support the'TXemption Sub&v iO.M" with this not achieved,l will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreemfrrc with the proceeding,please in."your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to meat 303.6704446_ I will present your response to the mating of Dwauber 17,2001. S rely Signature Prim Name Snownim Address ��f �ctician�� ey Mailing Addrhas d�a Tat ,,,e. �l,� ae ,1-eAeA- 7� ffe �sy✓�e.�s or �` it'1 rR�NLI•L: z'� i1 /NC,.:•.c.,te,r� 7°v �/// /7/ �/,e �v�c,:{vhgn]����� Dee 13 01 06: 26p Durand 561 741 7154 p. 1 Farley ILozow•ick,ArcLltect/Bm7der 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergre ,Colorado 80439 FAX 303-670-04Q Phone 303-674-5951-044 6 w November 27,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners--Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase U PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snawsnass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as k may affect your Property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some'view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they prompted these lots for fairway,views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 81 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purclasod because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers Play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forgd that the Snowmass Club is requesting a`Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Matti-Family Units into I/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amougst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval ofthe Subdivision Exemption,and 1 feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fnirways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat sirmilar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the PreceediM pkase indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303.670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. ;S' WrelySignature me Print Na SnowrnassAddress �aYv+c l 7t�lrN t)d2�IN (ll Mailing Address 0&7( ,J7U,M'VAo VQ Farky Lotowiek,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowrmes Property Owners---Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase lI PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 3,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly entourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass;Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fltirway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 01 for the protection of these views_ Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the cuffed golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as W.Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-cstablishrog the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at lean,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprivod of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not fotgct that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Fantily Units into 1/8 T"mhe Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet. Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should riot forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar.thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed.I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding, please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-044ti. l will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S' y r Print Name �/ Snowmass Address p- ey 'a '� Q�Q 1,2, -'r l`DWI f �i �J 73.�����'S>=/^inrs�EiC �/� Mailing Address ZO'd 68T = TO TO-£T-Z�DO Farley, Thank you for the letter of Nov. 271°. We arc unable to attend the meeting on Dec. 17*'- Attached is our signed copy of the letter and we agree totally with the content of the letter that the course should he returned to as original condition on the fairway along the fence line. My nephew is out there this week staying in our house. He is a civil Engineer and works on large road and grading projects. We are trying to see if he can stay and also go to the meeting. If so he will probably contact you prior to the meeting. Call us should you need anything else signed by us. Mary and Reiner Klawiter 760-634-8285 760-634-8248 fax iO"d d8i = iO iO-£i-BOO �e�> eae-nnen ewe ews swats 12/10/01 0Zs40pm P. 001 Farley'Lazowick,ArehReeNBuilder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674=5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners---Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5, 2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting°is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties fnr a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf cause owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design, as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in reestablishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap, were looking forward to, at least, being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into I/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption, and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition, or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed, I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preooeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S' rely Si re Print Name Snowmass Address cy c Q � Mailing Address Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen, Colorado 80439 Phone 303-6745951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5, 2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course, I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway, is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition, or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303=670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. PS' rely Si ture Print Name Snowmass Address ey wick 5 � Go110+ tS� M ��73 Mailing Address COY ' Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674=5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners -----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway, is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 118 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away$om us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owddrs be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. P S' rely Signature Print Name Snowmass Address ey wick stir . Wtd c t�v�dit� Sao Mailing Address C�l�ll vv FROM ST GERVIRIN FRX NO. : 6192224497 Dec. 10 2001 10:32W PI Fariey Lozowick,ArehitecdBuiWer 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado,80439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase H PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was prescated to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. Asa result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design, This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meetinie'is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens W some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold time properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told me, will prohibit the direct view of the a4jecem fairways. The properties were purchased because of the;rows of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowrnass Club is msigni icanf in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not atoepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of tmirat they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Tunc Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst marry other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us.I ant requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your aooaptanca by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. 1 will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S' rely Signature Print Name Snowmass Address ey wick NlX#:,I Sr (rEK.n.t/� t aiS fRle. rgy d,e. 3 ieEm e<l Mailing Address Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674=5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway, especially the adjacent fairway, is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to, at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares, averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. A►uDJ,Wr- :X-��p ►4n e� eon S' rely e- 10;nature Print Name Snowmass Addre s / 150 Ald lfuRa5 C% G'nt l ey H l l' d 1�� CDWKtMI 6+ �� A tMti f ► 33 lSnit;W~ Vi)[A69, Q6V6Ir Mailing Address INVLAU4 ►t l?PPvLf),gA `f'Ic,Pitacl Co►2p, y yy5 V. A 1A - tSauic a35' A" rJu l(A UQ 47q �U V ZXA s o m a3 y7C 4_ Q w 1i a� S g •G Low oil ts trio IF ,if. ' '� � �. �� .� a •• a �: t �5 $; �.� ��1 . • ,��•'��� � -� rim P*U Z 0MK 24,10, 2061 G- elf course, ber�n 'has nei •• hoors s :. . winging. mad sun emt wee., �oper� `�PPa� 'A d k�."I 1w�r Wie F*4kc dw beak- tlRS Siatnratla Lodrd wie t�oeEd�ed x 1Na added '16ie reiake(of tla bam)Is of Rqi bud" D+I►ro ldd ko.00A- before Ike finIPVD wu iwuod ' OoU lafla hwa cached ' ft>oaSb bl'►•" taioed that the 66 wall vuu h,axaa of Tflk flue srmrtd a z [aj portsit whNowa*fPwLDat*tgkkAomoHkul '� h*tnaowsen said Wey ataaaol IOAwt t0 dams eieoe hob "Sided oa- UNow ' iaattedby die bsaosOcd 106 stato 60 w Drive. But Palrway 01 ' w tevrow draw- Sabaake aid he wa"!a on paw of peaaiq"dta eaiPpia6 alexiatat6 vegera: -Durrough doeai'1 atiad.• It iop PAP► to 16 arthmavia& which . atilt e N yriK a floc II gad,baS dlsaeserd that o caw beast 0ml s 'began'i Basest aRer the Stawmaw down a afl of the sew rTol(coarse hoes Wo" t iW ootrrsa coo• ti<l1 own Coaeell �+Ple of Cost. Well work web iavolri I86 x7a,as dosalbnd witliui. sttitclion al►ieids hie home &oet the Pe PWfm°� Wet end be a asp*"wilb fhb Umm- We Sn*wmau.Ctubi'lase!i Profiroisary coerce A'�"h o taoath to the golf cows ts*da @ as 1 can. 14 W sofas of PUD aubtslaalm doeomats." Am d at bat Ibur other haaar wew�0 pwy�abiro or 2l Woibw cad nd thm But dm deve4w is a%*akin s ga . we.is fb8 oft"ons of appmw atbdwtl Cfta"Chib ow"are band- Dea $denier, Yoe Praidsat *f Real The Sa*wmw Chtb wa dwkmmiki- to the txwfaS OM enkw. fk WWW kg-4010dw to Paw a.aew, appmw- Edw Dmlopm m for dte , aid all of a lows oouse9'ordaw ea'efa U " merely 10-Awt bum am sane mio" �tl ttetoe, oontnescieg wok paior b Final Will cot 7+ "there drwiaps ores pubUc txNtld corimtatce eat(i on 941% ca m PUD arpioval, mWdim of-my such Soltooly block dielr view of tie aeards cad part or the review Droocsa" rocooWoeAia urd landscape;berwill duty • -Yet Derroueh is natoag the hoateeMS• • PIA'ow for P�hm I areal wl+- t roam b the Tows p WrAm'a, W ptopary vanes,a wdl, ors wfio dael bWkvs they wwe pmpedy 7hia, is spite of We fact Wet town 0 '�Appith�ba�� " oab be-4mdxd u "Pm as tlta$*If cotoat bAlm y cap a iafatatted u to the extad of tarn am'*, states that kwYtnwliuk" poifor,"Drroaeh acid Mowiy'fivm w "flie Porwdta rkroaid oot be issued Aad «heri Ike Anal PUD appliaotiw on dock *Chia' 00b` lbtrtg•WY bl� f was hti- nods tlod ap rpyltaf�lLawak the dare!- . .. PairwsY Drive tome. a Ie SuWK M to upbiU )aepead of dowtdtiN," apex Prw*W a aoaal r=11 Ax»at� a Saowmae Vitlbgb chrbb sew 5th bola 'Dan .said toisterti "M" will y� Neighbor Bill Lippmaq who sill be � ���root by beS*iq d*Iall,lbe be rev'swisS fke ddalled imclin4 plea," �n was mprtaemiq homeowner Dave fAas Soif omm w dd Im *M tereti JON ere;' said !oars pkasiq diredor Chra Ducso4(whose vmm oho an abeew by Darrow fb Nor ►uAer tttu two, amner isms. TMa C"AA wb*laded ihm 1k hoaaotraml �,� ate►c:m), saga "This is deritweb Ott a A!Ograna wUrta t dwbc m i .Ig0- iboEore securiu`real Csplenval: �p� 7vi11 be laoludod is the N Vi f N IUV 18:01 tM 1 UYU 945 8236 DALBY NENIDLAND 0001 ,4 DALBY, WENDLAND & CO., P.C. DwC Certified Public Accountants and Consultants 201 CENTENNIAL STREET,SLUE 300, P.O.BOX 1150 • GLENwOOD SPRINGS,C0 81.602-1150 TELEPHONE(970)945-8575 • FAX(970)945-9236 www.& bygs.com Offering full and comprehensive professional DATE:E_ Decnuber 6,2001 services to individuals,businesses,industries and governments,since 1948. TO: Farley Lozowick ' Tax Return Preparation For. COMPANY: Individuals REFERENCE: p� o$e�p FAX#: (303)670-046 Limited Liability Companies FROM: Gary L. Schultz Estates and Trusts Total#of pages including this one: 6 ' Audits,reviews and compilations of financial If all pages are not received or if transmission is statements not clear,please call(970)945-8575. Tax Planning and Consulting Transmitted: For approval For signature • Business Consulting and For review&comment Financial Planning As requested Please: Return * Accounting Software Call upon receipthevirw Sales and Support Call if you}lave questions • Bookkeeping/Payroll Comments: 1 wanted to let you know that I have been out of CON}IDENTIAM NOTICE town and I just returned I hope it isn't too late. This page and the accompanying documents Gary contain information intended for a specific individual and purpose. This telecopied information is private and protected by law. If you are not the Intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any disclosure. copying, distribution or the taking of any action based on the contents is strictly prohibited. 12/00/01 THU 15:51 FAX 1 970 945 9240 DALDY WENDL9ND 0002 r i Y Farley Lozowick :'28660 Douglu Park Road Evergreen, Colorado 80439 303-674-5951 FAX 303-670-0446 October 29,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase H PUD Dear Property Owners: If you are a property owner,who is adjacent to the golf course, it is very likely that a berm may be proposed that may block your view. Ifyou are opposed to any berms obstructing any views,please indicate your objection by signing in the space provided below and fax to me at 303.6704446. I will present to the Township of Snowmass village your response on November 5,2001. At this time there has been a meeting set for the Town Council to hear from us. ffyou ace in the area at this time,I would lake to encourage you to attend this meeting as well. S' oere _ F v4� I/We are in objection of any berm(s)obstructing any views. �QGt.✓C.irfE 86rsECaa� GAUk�`/��✓,� i3r¢.ow.✓ Name(s) Date Address -sue /-� c �2 r✓ 12/UU 01 THU 15:52 FAX 1 970 945 9230 DALBY ttMIAn 0003 Farley Lozowick, Architect, Custom Home Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen, Colorado 80439 303-674-5951 Page 1 October 22,2001 Mr. Chris Conrad Director of Planning Township of Snowmass Village P.O. 5010 16 Kearns Road Snowmass village, Colorado 81615 Re: Snowmass Club Phase R PUD Dear W. Conrad: I own property at 33 Fairway Drive and at 161 Fairway Drive, Snowmass Village, CO. It has been brought to my attention that the Snowmass Chub has proceeded with the redevelopment of the golf course adjacent to my property. I must first say that I was never contacted in any way regarding this development. After speaking with my neighbor,I was advised that a new tag berm has been constructed to the west of my property obstructing valuable views from my home and yard. There are many homes with this similar eoadition. I have spoken with Irlr. Don Schuster, Vice President of Real Estate ofthe Snowmass Club, and he has subsequently faxed to me a topography ofthe new design along with a notice that was presumably sent to all adjacent property owners. This notice,that I now have, specifically states the Snowmass.Club is requesting"the condominiumization of 21 multi-family unit into 1/8 share time shares via a subdivision exemption."There is no mention of golf course redevelopment on this mailing. The only mention of a golf course redevelopment is on an affidavit of posting notice for posting of 2 signs. Just 2 signs. Absolutely no notification was marled regarding this golf course redesign. This appears to have been intentionally slipped by everyone.There are marry out of area homeowners, including myself;which should have to be notified oftbis additional request. This major request of the golf course redevelopment should have been clearly noted to all property owners,whether permanent resident or not. Even if a particular property isn't directly affocted by the restricted views, all homes will all be affected by the property values along Fairway Drive going down,thus resulting in their property value also going down. 12/00/01 THU 15:52 FAX 1 970 945 9230 DALBY WENDL.AND 0004 October 22,2001 Page 2 Mr_ Chris Conrad The topography of the revised golf course, which Mr. Schuster fasted to me,depicts berms of up to 15 Feet 1E8k above the natural terrain. This berm will block precious views to the west from many homes on Fairway Drive. Ta addition to the berm blocking the views,the design of the fairway adjacent to all of the properties along Fairway Drive is in a hole.A deep canyon which is 10 to IS feet below the linear berm.You will no longer see this fairway at all,except if you are a bind. The everlasting fairway views will no longer be. It is quite ironic that when the Snowmass Club places you on telephone hold,they strongly advertise of how their newly remodeled suites have"unobstructed views." Views are what the homeowners purchased when buying their very expensive properties on Fairway Drive. They bought these horhes to see the'golf fairway on"Fairway Drive." In addition. my home, at 161 Fairway Drive, as well as others, are restricted to a maximum single story structure to atlow for views from the east side of Fairway Drive. One additional small comment: Even though I am an architeM and do not play much gold in viewing this partial topography of the golf course,I also noticed that the golf can path is between the Fairway Drive properties and the berm. After driving your golf ball, and getting into Your cart, I ask how can one see where he hit his/her ball with the berm bloeldog their view? Views are txbvMely important and valuable! At this point,I object to the entire project that Snowmass Club has commenced with and demand all work ceases until You obtain approvals from all property owners on Fairway Drive. Please notify me immediately as to your direction. AN property owners on Fairway Drive and Beaver Court shall be copied on this letter. Will all properties surrounding the golf course also be adversely affected as we are on Fairway Drive? S' arl wick Cc:Mr.Don Schuster rR01'1 - CT GQII'IR TI'1 rfiti 1'IG. Gl'J 1'1'7T La.. 07 .66a d�- '161'Y'1 1-`1 rat�eyY.vwwwyn.aAatxwautrer 2866,q Douglas Park Road JEvergneen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-5951 , November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 Re: Snowmass Club Phase It PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was prerewed ee the To.,•,of 3,Gevasare e6 Mo.+eenber s.2ooi. As a me..lt ttae 4a.owaauaa C1.%, ...at requested to revise and resubmit another design. Ibis past week the Town of Snowmass seat another mailer to you regarding the revised Ane:pn nfiha pelf rronta• Th.y.alert e.l.ria..i then 11aa''`Final lbfn.e:nan:<a..l.>.rnlo.r Cnr M..a...l...r 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may aka your property value. 1 hav,>yukru wjW bL.t).aT.Y.•hu>M ul'nni 30Vwruaaa Club W luiwyict Lbb acvl>W weay... zTS..a.ae.,.rm.. .T..,........aa..a.......a.n.n...Tw..wu.•w auw aia..a..b..luwaiyaT Vy..au uy SOtlle``'lew oarldots.n rt is n+y allt[tCrstT ndigg tlu.t ..Acu fLe 3u.rwaau» Cwy...aliwl wl1 Aar ls..TlrrT':r. w J.a ov t+ora of the.6olf oout,o adjaoont property owncra,thoy promowd d for fairway v:c.va and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain ramictionc of !`.usniry r 1ol,r T"a 111 fi.r dm im u.a-Ji —-f.hn vir..w. Since they t kgWr hatro lnterect in the golf norms,I Fuel that the wzzvat solf..oarso unman ah' JU.cug...w.tln>..ya...i.rau>Laaal>T.1>. Thu;ac !"dc>ilyr,aim Ma.Dwa 3,iw* i wld sne, will pT WWt Arc duorA .low of the agacm fniTVesya. 'tl.e lireysertidn v.ere p,TChsayd Fw-.c�Tat.nf't�.:.virvrs nrtl>t.far»ais.T4a aako:�iu submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views the once had. Tbc e.harnvNinn of paw a.iaav to nTw fnirtw.a• na.i ni0tir:t)v-n.t:armf f+:+++.ex. :a..+w .-..y-.w..i...._.------..__.. . 71c property ownors who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age aud/or handicap,U%ere 1601•.6,8 fmu and to,at least,being We to�•atch other golfwo play. 17wy chould not bc,dcprivcd of wlat flay cxp:.ctcd to enjoy, Let's not forget that the Snownuss Club is requesting a"Subdivisiou FxO,kpritw.a 77ay want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Foot; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their Spandau position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent,premium properties to the golf coupe. They are askiag for our approval of the, Suuuvlsion exemption,and 11eel they should not be taking anytimS away from us.I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or soruewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. XV:tk akin e.sanplosol,I.,,W euppew el.o"C..e...p<:o.. C..bi:Ti>iea." NVitl dais au oela:o.sd,I'.r11 nflt Support ibe MempbUll Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the prodding,please indicate your acceptance by signing to the apace pmvleed bel6 and sax bade to me at 303-.6704416. I wilt precew your raepo u the meeting of December 17,2001. S, ely Signature Print Name SnowmassAddross ey ek cll .n iN a re 4 L.C. 3 .�Rgnree -cs �u .A�.�1 � A!•.�i FROM EHXTER EPEHUX FHX 1.0. : 19153667143 Dec. 10 2001 09:26W Pi Farley Lozowick,ArchitectMullder 28660 Douglas Park-Road Phone 303.6745951 l?vergreen,Colorado SM39 FAX 303.670-0446 November 27,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase ii PUD Thank you for yourreoed response regardrog the SDOwmass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowmws on November 5,2001. As a result the Snoavamss Club was requested to revise and resubmit another des SL lbis past weak the Town of SDOW11:ass seat another mailer to You regardmg the revised design of the golf course. TcY also advised than the"Final Meeting^is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M I strongly encourage you to attend this wing ash May age yaw property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Scbusm ofb*Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. W advised rhat the berm bad been somewhat reduoed and the revised design opens up some't+iew corridors.^ h is my understanding thaw when the Snawmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and soldthese properties for a premium amounL They also developed c artain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection oftbese views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,[Rel that the current golf course owner should recognize those previous standards The revised design,as Mr.Ion Schuster told meq%,In prohibit the direct view ofibe adjaceat fairways- The Propertm were purchased because ofthe views of the tlinways-Tbo redeaigu submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificance in M-esrablishitrg the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is nor accepted. . The property owners who may not be able to play solfat ibis!;e doe to their ageand/or handicam were looking forward to,at least being able to watch other golfers play- They should M be.deprived of what they"peeted to etrjoy. Lot's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a-Subdivision Exemption" They want to change 21 Multi F le amily Units into 1/8 Tunc Shams,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Usq amongst many offer requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how We helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I fee[they should not be taking anything away from us.I am ropesting that the grade adjaceea to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,l will support the"Exemption Subdivision-" With this not achieved.I wr71 not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signigg in the space provided below and fate back tome at 303.670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S rely Sigoaturo Print Name Snowrnass Address ey wick ��( oit�au-1G �iAxT�� �Pt9uJe-39e3� sHePE'�e�C /no 3�k�N� 8�2.od.t; oDEssq , ;',r `1`1762 Mailing Address FROM :%HPLEi MILLRKI LTC FHX NO. :9709233425 Dec. OE -2001 00:5214M PI Farley Lorowick,Architett/Ruilder 28660 Douglas Park Road Phone 303-674-*5951 Evergreen,Colorado 80439 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners—Fairway Drive property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase H PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass scut another mailer to you regardng the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with W. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design- lie advised that the berm had been-somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snoum m Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf cause, I feed that the current Of course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Den Schuster gold me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is msigniRcant in re-establishing the views we once had, The . obstraction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fauway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play-golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap, were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 11 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feat; . Special Review Use, amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snow nim Corporation by purchasing the 4accat premium properties to the golf course. Thcy are asking for our approval ofthe Subdivision Exemption,and I fed they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting That the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restorod to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby reacting the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed, l will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved I will not support the Exemption Subdivision- Tf you are in agreement%with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and thx back to me at 303.670-0446. 1 will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S, y Signature Print Name Snowmass Address eY �n �+/r� �<! j3le !`�YP� .w `-3 vo S Mailing Address OEt - 3 2001 Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674=5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5, 2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some'Mew corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway, is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition, or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. P S' rely Signature Print Name Snowmass Address ey wick � _ - I1 2111 s E' Mailing Address .v—,—uey, t cemoer ub, zuui /:b2 PM Louis J. Talarico 315-732-7743 P 01 Farley Lozowick,Architect/Hmlder 29660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado MM39 FAX 303-670-0O 446 Phone 303-674- November 27,2001 To: Snownws Property Owners-----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase If PUD 771ank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 3,2001. Asa result the S his res s Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December Property value. 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`View corridors." It is my understanding that when the SnOWMWs Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course, I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent �'ro aYs• The Properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. Ile obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least, being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." "Mey want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/9 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preoeedmg,Please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S' rely Signature Print Name Snowmass Address T ey owick Mailing Address clfi iC Q , ivy 3� / 12-05-2001 5:45PM FROM JIGSAW ASPEN 970 920 9170 P, 1 )Farley Losowick.Archite"uilder 28660 Douglas Part:Road Phone 303-674=5951 Evergreen,Colorado 80439 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners—Fairway Drive Property owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snotvrnass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design.. This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may atfea your I have spoken with W.Don Schimer of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised dial the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`View corridors." It is my understanding that Kite n the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium atnotim.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 41 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course, I feel that the current golf course owner should recop=these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told rein,will prohibit the direct view ofthe adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because ofthe views of the fairways:The rodes9gn submitted by the Snotxamass Club is insigtrificaut in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap, were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to egioy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a`Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Tmx Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent preadum properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval ofthe .._ S::SdEzisicaExemption,and-Iteel.shey sk.�c'a-not lot ta1c.'>r.ang�:ag sway Scmas:l.am ._. — - _ __ requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjauait to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed.I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved, I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the precteding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. S' elv 1 Print Name/ Snowmass Address r ey owick / <frl i 4 rn M rrule a S 114-owt, crwk 10 XXt x Q .01p' v Mailing Address t�G DEC-05-01 WED 03;26 PM ZATHIS,MCCARTHY&ASSOCIA FAX NO, 5045939921 P, 01 102 ZATZKIS,MCCARTHY&ASSOCIATES,L.L.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 2750 650 POYDRAS STREET NEW ORLEANS,LOUISIANA 70130-6101 TELEPHONE: (504)S23-2266 FACSaJILE:(SO4)593-9921 L4.NNY R.ZATZIaS,LL.1L-+ YYETTE A.D'.A.UNOV KAREN D.DICCARTHY ANDREW N.LEE -I%i,�wn0 SCOTT 1.7-AT'ZUS ALSO N1.NfI1TD IT TEX04 C01.01"00 WACSIMI .F=COVER SHEET TO: FAX NO: 303 - 40 7 O — O 44 �c our file number & client name COMMENTS: PAGES: -�_ (including cover sheet) ^� date: 1-2\41 o l time sent:--C I FROM: _-_,LANNY R. ZATZKIS KAREN D. McCARTHY YVETTE A. D'AUNOY ANDREW N. LEE SCOTT I. ZATZKIS ERIN McMAHON PLEASE IF THERE IS ANY PROBLEM OR AN INCOMPLETE TIL NSMIISSION. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION(AND/OP.THE DOCUMENTS ACCOMPANYING I1)MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMIATION BELONGING TO THE SENDER WHICH IS PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY. CLIEN"f PRIVILEGE. THE INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR E\R ITY V 4\�D ABOVE. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT,YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT A'vY DISCLOSURE, COPYING, DTSTRTBL-TION, OR THE TAKING:OF AI.'Y ACTION IN RELULNCE ON THE CONTENTS OF THIS INFORMATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR. PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE OR ARRANGE FOR THE RETIiRi*OF THF. 0OCt%y4EA'T8. uto-05-t11 WED 03:27 PH ZATRISACCARTHY&ASSOCIA FAX N0, 5045939921 P. 02102 Farley Lozowick,Architect/Builder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To. Snowaass Property Owners—Fairway Drive Properly Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your reccut response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design This past week the Town of Snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Mating"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to anend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Dam Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. fie advised that the berm had boon somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors" It is try understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners.they promoted tbese lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit*1 for the protection of these views. Since they ao longer have interest in the golf course.I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as W.Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view ofthe adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in reestablishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to env fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at ibis time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expomd to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Saowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivisiou Exemption" They want to change 21 Mule Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet, Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This-AV enhancx their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us.I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision" With this not achieved,I will not support the ftemption Subdivision. If you are in with the preceoditrg,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space pro ' fax back to me at 303-670-0446_ I will present your response to the tasting of *2 .S" rely Print Name Snowmass Addy ry w;dc ,s Se �. Mailing Address DEC-05-01 WED 11:47 ANDLINGER AND CO FAX NO. 5612344952 P. 01 Farley Letowick,ArchiteWIWder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 November 27,2001 Phone?03-674=5951 - FAX 303-6704446 To: Snowmass Property Owners Frirwsy Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response`vas presented to the Town of snowrnass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was recluestod to revue and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of snowmass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 PM. I strongly eac:ourage you to aacod this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with W.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the bens had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors-ft It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premitun amount.They also developed certain restricuons.of Country-Club Unit#1 for the protection of these dews. Since they no longer bave interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told mo,will prolubit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to arty fairway,especially the adjacem fairway,is not accelrtM, The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/Or handicap,were looking forvatd to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to chance 21 Muld-Family Units into 118 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial positiem They should not forget how we helped support the Snotmass Corporation by purchasing o the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjw Mt to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct:and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. if you are in agroemeut with the preeoeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. r% e• 61 eev Ax3av�c�� a�p ' . YriaName Snowmass AI�e�s S' e1y Signature 150 v"lUbii)iuRbS ca�eb GQC�4 cy wickN .% � CILty E SAhti t 1 X33 _ S�I'ECt,rtrnr1�? .ii AG&. C.OStb/S Mailing Address Ar3zoutAck ". �tpit6L C��µ ylgv3 A(• AIA — QuIQ_ 23 Vela O`t.ct ch r4_ 3 29 6 3 11/041'001 16:24 6206656255 JACCJUELIIJE CLARK PAGE 01 Farley Lowsrick,ArchitectMuotder 28660 Doan Park Road phone 303-674=5931 Evergreen,Colorado 80439 FAX 303670.0446 November 27, 2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners--Fairway Ihive party Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase D PM Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowtnays Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowiness on November S,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit soother design, This past week the Town of Soownusas sent another mailer to You regarding the revised design of the golf muse. They also advised that the " kw Mewing"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.bi. I strongly oneourage You to attend this meeting as it may d fD your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowiness Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had bmn somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my Understanding that when the Snowru n Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount. 5 �°developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection ofthese views. Since they no 104M have interest in the golf course,I feel that the cement golf course owner should reoognizc these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told me,will probibit the direct view ofthe adjacent fairways- The properties were purchased because of de views of the fairways.The redesign.. submitted by the Snowmass Chub is iroigndiount in reestablishing the views we once Lad; The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the a�Sirway.is not accepted. The Property owners wbo may not be able to playgolfat this time,due to their age and/or ��of what o least,big abk.to watch urha BolScrs PAY- They should Let's not f onloY angel that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exenrpticm." They want to cdunnge 21 Multi-Family Units into 118 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will eohaaoe their 8ma IMI position. They stwuld not forget how we helped support the Snowiness Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course- They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feed they should to be uking anything away from us-I am requesting than the grade adjacent to the tbinvays adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete Ihirway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agrce 'M with the proceeding,Please indicate your acceptance by sugaing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S' rely Signature Print Name Snowmass Address eY wick oy�f� ✓�UowmgssC�. Mai 51 J1Rf< OF SPRING HILL 913 592 3436 P.©1%O1 Farley Losowid4 Arehiledauidw 24660 Devon Park Road Eveigras.Col"O SM9 Phone 303-674-1951 November 27.2001 FAXI 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Orhnas Fairway Drive property Owner Re: Snowmass Club Phase Il PUD Tba&you for yaw,m n'response regarding the Suownws Club. This response was presented to the Tom of Soowmass an Novanba S.2001. As a resuh the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit aaadur design. This pas wale the Town of Snowmass seat another mails to you tegardmg the revised design of the golf muse. Tbry also advised that the"Final Meeting"in sehodulad for Dcoombw 17.2001 at 4-00 P.M. I stromgty ta000urage you to attend this mceft as it may afW your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Dan Schuster ofdm Saommats Club to interpret thb rwAsed design. He advised that the berm bad been saatewbat reduced and the reviled design opm up some"view oarddoa." h is n0'rmdastandnhg that when the Snowmass Corporation sold ft properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent propaty owners,,bey promoted these lots ft fairway views and Ad time properties for a premium amount They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 41 far tic praoctieu of these views. Since they no loges b eve inures[in the golf course,I fad dodo aurast golf enure owns sbould th ire clew previous standards. The revised design,as W.Dam Zmh s told mq will prchrlhh the dicta view of the a48aar fairways. The properties wac purdwsed'oecause of the views of Ova Airways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Cdrb'is im;uificua in Ow views we once had. The oust motion,of any view to aw fi*ay,esl+si+lty dhc a4araht fikway,is not accepted. Tim pryrerty ewnera wlw,aay,rm be"w play golf at this time;due to their age xWw handicap.were looking forward t%at least.being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to e4cy. Let's not forget tbrr the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exanption." They went to change 21 Muhl-Faauly Units into 1/$Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,anwega many other requests. This will enbaoce their$naucial positlan. They sbould not forgex how we helped support the Snowmass Corpmatiom by purchasing the adjacmt pranium properties to the golf ooursm They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Dweption,and I ful they should not be taking anything away from us.i am requesting dhat the grade adjacent to the fairways 4aceut to property ownwa be ratorpi to Its' original 000dition,or somewbw suud&4 thereby restoring the direct and cornyic?4 An-way view.Y. Wob this eaaMlexed,I will support the"Exanption Subdivmoo." With this not achieved,I will not support the Fno"ou SubdrAwaL If you are in ageampu with the pte000digg,please Me=your acceptance by signing in the space providod below and fix back to me at 303-6700446. 1 will presa►t your response to the meeting of Deamber 17,2001. S* Print• lame_ Snow mass Addmss !Y ,.� V G 1` G ... ra TOTFi P.01 Lt�_-03-�Lri31 1357 ST E1ti4K OF SPRUNG HILL 913 592 3446 P.01.01 -COMM- SOLPNA-- *** *+****'bM*****# DATE DEC-03-2001 w**** TIME 13:30 * * P.01 MODE = MEMORY TRANSMISSION START-DEC-03 13:12 END-DEC-03 1330 FILE NO.- 0% STN NO. COM ABBR NO. STATION NAME/TEL.NO. PAGES DLRAT10N 001 BUSY a 13136'700446 0001001 0000'00" -ST BANK OF SPRING HILL - **+r*****+K***+►*******+k+t****#******** -ST HK SPRIN0 NIL- * *** - 913 592 3446- *******" Farley LozovrW ArsbheNBuilder 2x660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen.Colorado$0439 Pbone 303-67445951 November 27.2001 FAX)-303-470-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owmrs--Fairway Drive Property Owma Rc Snownacs Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your reomt response regarding the SDowroass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on Novernber 3,2001. Asa result ibe Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit snout design This past week the Town of Snowmass scot another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Mecdog^is scheduled for Dooanber 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meedns as it ruy a8w1.your prop ww vahte. ' I have spoken whb ltlr.Don,Schuster Oftbe Snowinass Club to interpret this revised dcsiga Re advised that the beta had boon sonamd at reduced and the revised design optas up some'Wi eorridees.- It is an.'tmdesssaediag that vebem the Saowenass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course a4i aava property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these pprropcttm*for a pfe®um amount.Tbey also developed certakn restrictions of Country ry Club Unit Ml for the protection ofthese views. Since they no logger have in&=A in the golf Course.I feel the the wnent golf Bourse owner should recognize dress provwui stamdamds. The revised dls4so l as Mr.Don Stbuster told tae,will prohibit the direct view o rthe a4ae= fairways. The prope*sas were purtbatad beoase ofthe views otthc airways.The rodeskgn submitted by the Snowmass Chrb'is insr�itipmt in reeibblisbmg the views vso oOCe had T1r obstrueban,of any view to any Lirway,mPeeialiy the a4aoeat Sirway,is ant aoaepta& The property owners who asay ant be able to play golf at this time,,due to their age and/or haadieap,were looking forward to,at least,bdq$able to watch other golfers plq. They should Doe be deprived of what they expoatad to*Way. Let's not forgot this the Snownum Club is requcating a'Subdivisim E=m;xtiom- They want to claw 21 Multi-Faanly Units biro L$Time Shares,averaging 2.400 Square Feet; Spacial Review Use,aawq$st many offer requests. This will eabanee thei Srmteial posmCn They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by peas the adjacaa pranium properties to the golf coutx. They are sAd for our approval of the Subdivision Exoryroon.and I foci they should act be taldug attythigg away ben us.I am .aLtueY4ing that the grade adjaodtt to die fainrsys sdjseeat to property oevners be ratnrcd m its' original condition.or somcwtxd sha Bar,thereby reatorms the direct and complawf faitw'ay woo. With this completed.I will support the-Exemption Subdivision.- with this not adeiev4 I will not support the F_x®ption Subdivision. If you are in agroemmat with the preceeding.please indicate your acceptance by aigoirl$ in the space provided below and fax back to tno at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S ly Print Name. Snowmass Address ry j.�+s- - .s -r V G MarhDg •c-,,, TOTHL P.Oi • ......� ..�.. .,o� roo-oiai io:raven sus"iwaa5 Date: 12/32001 Time:2:06:58 PM Page l oft Farley Lososeidr,AreblteetBuilder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreea,Colorado 80039 Phone 303-674-5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: SnOw,nass Property Owners---Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase 19 PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. Ibis response was Presented to the Town of Snowmass on November S,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past weer the Town of Snowmsss seat another Bane,to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Matting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`View corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Den Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The rodesigr submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they espeded to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. , This will enhance their financial position. They should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I Sod they should not be taking anything away from us.I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exanption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. 1 will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. S ly S' Print Name Sraowmass Address loon Mailing Address 17Pirs/Ireuwo die, dze RgJ,, Fc ��Y FROM A+C FRO FRI14T FAX VD. : 570-523-3511 Dec. 03 2001 01:11F11 Fl Farley Losoa'ick,ArthitectBulder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 3U3�74=5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snownum Property Owners----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for 3rour recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. Asa result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another dcaiggL This past week the Town of Suowrnass sent another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Moo ling"is schoxiWed for Duentbet 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourW you to attend this matt as it may affect 3 our property value. . I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster ofthe Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm bad been somewhat reduced and the revised design op.ns up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairwa% views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have intemo in the golf eourse, I feel that the current golf course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowinass Club is insignificant in re-establishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway.is not accepted. The property ownners who may not be able to play golf afthis tine,due to their age and/or handicap.were looking forwaid to,w least,being able to watch other golfers play: .They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption," They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet, Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This sill enhance their financial position. They should riot forget how we helped support the Snewmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course. Thney are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I feel they should not betaking anything away from us.I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be rostored to its' . original condition,or sommbat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision" With this not acbieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preceeding,Please indicate your acceptance by si8nirng in the space provided below and fax back tome at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17,2001. S, ely �Siig�nature.,� / print NAM Snowmass Address ry wick C /_ � �? /cR.¢s�/y�� %A2r1;,I71�C.—jig'k X. eJ CG V ! :jZ2-r, . �. 'i'yL, ✓ , Coo _ -'Mailing Address Address Dec 03 01 06: 16p P. 1 Farley Lozowick 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen, Colorado 80439 303-674-5951 FAX 303-670-0446 October 29,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Dear Property Owners: If you are a property owner,who is adjacent to the golf course,it is very likely that a berm may be proposed that may block your view. If you are opposed to any berms obstructing any views,please indicate your objection by signing in the space provided below and fax to me at 303-670-0446. I will present to the Township of Snowmass Village your response on November 5, 2001. At this time there has been a meeting set for the Town Council to hear from us. If you are in the area at this time.I would like to encourage you to attend this meeting as well. S' cer Far wick I/We are in objection of any berm(s) obstructing any views. 'IaWrA2�1 fl �L Names Date Address,5J 1 ( )t,31 creek 12/0 /2001 01:12 2029665099 MAP.GARET HODGES PAGE 01 I X� i Farley Lotowick,ArchkeetMuRder 28660 Douglas Park Road Phone 303-674-5951 Evergreen,Colorado 80439 . FAX 303-670-0446 November 27,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase 11 PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Chub. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001, As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past weds the Town of Snowmass sea another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. 7bey also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M, 1 strongly encouWe you to attend this meeting w it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. fie advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`view corridors." It is my underataudmg that when the Sum"ass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjaccort property owners.they promoted these lots for fairvvay views and sold these properties for a premium amount. They also developed co.41ift restrictjous of Country Club Unit rsl for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf Coors,I feel that the current golfcourse owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised desiM as Mr.Don Schuster told me,vwn prohibit the direct view of the adjacent ftyvmYs- The Pry wrxe purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by die SruwAn ass Club a iosignilicam in reestablishing the views vva now had. The obstruction of any view to any fairway,especially the a4acemt fairway,is not 800epte& The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,doe to lbW age andtor handicap.were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expeemd to enjoy- Let's not forgo that the Snowmasa Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They wam to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/$rum Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review Use,amongst many other mlimsts. This will enhance their financial pomom 'Ivey should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties to the golf course- They an asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemptiak and I fed they should not be taking anything away from us. I an requesting that the grade a4aam to the 8nways adjaorrrt to property owners be restored to its' original coedit ion,or somcwfiat similar,thereby restorvrg the direct and complete&rwav views. With this completed, twill support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,l will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the preweding,please indicate your acceptance by sigmirrg in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001, S rely, Signature Print Name Snowmass Address tviek y E/_W, r C6 2 Mailing Address — FROM :John Suarez FRX 110. :31,45692020 Dec. 03 2001 12:05PI9 P2 Farley Loaowick,Architect/BuDder 28660 Douglas Park Road Evergreen,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674=5951 November 27, 2001 FAX 303-670-0446 To: Snowmass Property Owners----Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phase II PUD Thank you for your recent response regarding the Snowmass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snowmass on November 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass seat another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course_ They also advised that the"Final Meeting,,is schodulod for Dec 17, 2001 M 4:00 P.M. I strongly en00nr8ge you to 9Rp�ells mating 89 it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr. Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. He advised that the berm had been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some`view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount_They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit 01 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course, I feel that the current golfoourse owner should reooppizc these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Srtowmats Club is insigni5eant in reestablishing the views we once had The obstruction of aW view to any fairway,especially the ajar kirway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet., Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. 7bey should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacurt premium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption.and I feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade adjacent to the&innys adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this COMPle eel,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing is the space provided below and fax back to me at 303670.0446. I will present your response to the meeting of December 17, 2001. S ly Ile Print Name Snowmass Address ey �• ecv Jc><jq Jciar¢Z . r� i/ 940U-,Mgs5 el 3� la Mailing Adaren Td WcG0:ZT IWZ £0 '»p 0(Z6Z6?Sbt£: 'ON W.3 zv. ens u40t: 1408.1 11/29/2001 211:12 303-766-4093 DANIEL M STAFFIERI PAGE 01 Farley I.oso.ick.ArWteNBullder 2"0 Douglas Park Road Phone 303-674=5951 EvcrV"S,Colorado 80/39 FAX 303-670-0446 Novembor 27,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners—Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: Snowmass Club Phan it PUD YOU 6f Your meeg response regarding the Snowmass Club. Ibis response was Presaged to the Town of Snowmass on November S,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was requested to revise and resubmit another design. This past week the Town of Snowmass seat another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting-is scheduled for Deoember 17,2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr Den Sdmster of the Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design. IIe advised that the berm had bow somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridors." It is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course adjacent property owners,they promoted these lou for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount. They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit#1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I feel that the current of course owner should recognize these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr.Don Schuster told mo,will prohibit the direct view ofthe adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways. The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insigai8cam in reestablishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any Ihirway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,due to their age and/or handicap,were looking forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to egjoy. Let's not forgo that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Fat; Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should tat forget how we helped support the SnewnhaSa Corporation by purchasing the a4mccutpremiumpropartiestotbegolfcourm They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I fed they should ant be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade 4acent to the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original eondit ion,of somewhat similar,tbaeby restoring the direct and complete&uw;dy views. With this ooenpleted,I wr71 support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved,I will not support the Exemption Subdivision. If you are in agroaneat with the pmceeding,Please indicate your acceptance by signior in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your response to the treeing of December 17,2001. S S' Print Name Snowmass Address �. 6/.Ap. CIV Q--ft I4;A,r Cho ko/S Mailing Addtess Sent byeCNLDWELL WILEY Dec-01-01 041e6cpi frog. 847256607013076700446 Page 1% 1 Farley Lozowick ArchhedMuildv 28660 Douglas Park Road Phone 303.67445951 Evergreen,Colorado 80439 FAX 303-670.0446 November 27,2001 To: Snowmass Property Owners---Fairway Drive Property Owners Re: SDOWTWs Chili Phase R PUD Thank You for your reornt response regarding the Snowo ass Club. This response was Presented to the Town of Snownrass on November S,2001. As a result the Snowhuass Club ass requested to revise and resubmit another design This past week the Town of Snowmass son soother mailer to you regarding the revised design Of the golf course. They also advised that the"Final Meeting"is scheduled for December 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strongly encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affect your property value. I have spoken with Mr.Dan Schuster of due Snowmass Club to interpret this revised design, He advised that the berm bed been somewhat reduced and the revised design opens up some"View corridors." It is my uoderstanduq;that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf course sitaoent property owners,they promomd these lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.171ey also developed oatain restrictions of Country Club Unit*1 for due protection ofthese views. Si»u they >m Ymger have iraeiwvt is the golf course, I feel tbat the current golf course owner should rea�these previous standards. The revised design,as Mr. Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because oftere views of the fairways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insignificant in reestablishing the views we once had The obstruction of any view to nay fairway,especially the adjaoMa fairway,is not eeoepaod. The property owners who Wray not be able to play golfat this timer due to their or and/or handicap,were 1001=8 forward to,at kart,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived ofwhat they ea4neeted to enjoy, Lot's not forget that the Snowrnass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." Tbey want to dAW 21 Multi-Faumly Units into 1/8 Time Shares,averagarg 2,400 Square Feet, Special Review Use,amongst niany other requests. This will enhance their financial position They should not forgot how we helpod support the SDOwmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent premium properties m the golf course. They are ask S for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and I foe]they should not be ��g that taking anything away from restored I am C�adiaoent to the fairways adjaoeaht to property owners be reatornd to its- Original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fai vmy views. With this corlytleted,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision." With this not achieved.I will not support the Exemption Subdivision If you are in agreement with the preceediub,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303-670-0446. I will present your respon to the meeting of December 17,2001. S Signature Print Name Snowmass Address ey ck L' / 4 . tJ./J C>��,><1/ #4 6 E r 7 Mailing Addreea )G . @ , f 4, boa •F3 FRO I A+C FRO PR I HT FAX NO. -: 970-"-3511 tJu�.�. 30 �n3�31 04:SSFf•i P2 LLr aVr ul q6U 14.1V pyp JUJUMV44e AHl HtbriH.1M1C. 19002 Farley Loseukk ArchhonnhOder 2UW DeupW Park Read Evervow Colorado ti" Pbooe 303674-5951 November 27,2001 FAX 303670-OW To: Stwvwaacs Property Owners- Fairway Ddvc Property Ormm$ Re: Snommom"Club Phase II PM Thank you foe your twent resparse rsp rft the Slaw wu pub. This mspotim was pravAted to the Town of Snowmass on November 3,2001. As a molt the Smowmm Chub uw re*ucsud to revise and resubmit soother desipa. Ibis past week*0 Town of Snowmass scot another manor to yon regarding the revised design of the Solt course. They also advised lbm the"Final ModaB'k erbedded for December 17,2001 st 0:00 P.M. I auoo*vxm mpe you to mtmd ibis maedep a h may affoet your . property value. I have apokeo whh Mr.Dm Schoen of the Snowmew Club w itderprst d&revinod design. lb advised 60 6e berm bad beep smwwbat radaeed and the revised dacipo opens up aarate'tbty oorrrdon.^ It is my tmdenundiag drat wbm Go Snowmass Corymadm sdd*A prtpatics m the ownes of the pif coun0 adjame property owners•dory peancrod taros lute fat!Airway view$ and sold where proper"lbr a pramiam amo mt.Tlwy also developod certain rsstriedms of Country Club Unit N1 for**prola+den oftbm vkms Since they Do longer Maur latorest in the golf ooarse,I Rd that tho carom pelf cmm owmf oboAl reoopaiae d)cm previews armdards. 7%mvbW demM as Mr.Dow Sebow mld ms,will prohibit too dbed dew oftho a 8mv fairways, The properties wore purdused beenmu of roc views aft*fairways.Ths todecign subudaed by the Snowmass Club is ios;PMcam is rotstabW ift the vim we mee bad. 11rc obaractien ofany view to any&hwsy,ospw-raliy The otooem 9lnvayr is not wxgrwed. The pwperty owners woo may not be able to play solf st this timq due to rods nee and/or handicap,west iovbng famead to,at U"%beieg able ID weedy DdW r6to Play 1b y should no be deprived of v&d d W expeead to old0Y• i„at,'s not 1%rget tbu the Swwrwo Club is rr WcstiDg s"Subdivision Rxemptlar" They was to cbanee 21 Muki-Family[hits im 1/8 1500 Shares,sv nmftg 2,4t Square Fret;. Speoisl Amew Use,amongst Duey adw Mquesm. This wiU enbanee drdr mnancisI position. racy sbmo trot foram hots we baped nopm rho Smwmus Corporscim by pumdosing dre adjaceid ptmaum pt�m to the golf ootwfse. ZDe3'are a$kie��our approval of the Subdivisioa Dwowtim and I feel they d mld mt be taking am6iag awsy H+om us.I am roWaatieg tam to wade adjacent to the lAitiatys adjaeem to propotlY otvna$be»$tOred to in' ortied cmdmm or somowhat simular.drmaby rostoring the&W sad oow*UM WMW view's. .vim ties oompkred,I w M wppm too`Meempbon Subdivision." Wah this nor w kUtd.I will not rapport 6o Excroptim.Swbdivisim if you an m apmanomwiththeprocxftnp,ploaas indicate your aortptattee by sisDing in drs space provided below and lox back to me at 303670-0446. 1 wM pmod your response to the mootias of Dwatuber 17.IWL' Sn>o y. tut Name Snowmeec Ad9 drtns y rWL)t- G. t7ABA N l '> 1=131i�tv9 FuleyI.oeawiek ' -7, Mailing J'o. lL G C��6 L• -�Jyvt,J�/i1S 5 ✓Jl-L�G�, C C> �ri�i 5 FROf9 RODERT Ie_l"TIE FkX NO. : 3037516710 14o -. 30 2001 05:_3ft•I Pl Farley Losowi*ArcLiw Bulld, 28660 Douglas Park Road Phone 303-674-5951 Evergreea,Colorado 80139 FAX 303-6704446 November 27,2001 : Re Sn""Ass PrOP�Y Ovmers--.-Fa y Drive Owners �= S"Owns Club Phase U pUD Presented The Tows 'or f u¢. n3c r�rd 49 the SuOmnass Club_ 71.response was Nuestod m revise and November s,80 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was resubmit another design. design of the Past Town of Snowmass sent annilj"mailer m you regar the revised 17, 2001 at 4:00 P.M. I strrongly �that oa"Final Meeting"is schedal�December Property value. encourage Y�m attend thus me as it may affect your I have spoken wizh Mr-Don Schuster of the Snowanass Club m interpret this revised design He advisod that the berm had bow sommcw 1w reduced and the revised design opens up samae"view corridors . $is my tmdetsaadogg that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the owners of the golf oa rse adjacent propedty otvnets properties to the and sold these properties fora rrmitop �9 promoted these lots for Airway views Country Club Unit 111 far the P amain They also developed certain h aaietio�of golf Protection of these views. Sin«they no longer have interest is thtc g oot I feel thar the current golf course owner should reeogrM these previous standards. The revised desigq as Mr.Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direa view of the adjacent fairways- The.Properties were purchased bccausc c(the views of the favways.The redesign submitted by the Snowmam Chub is insignificant in re-establishing tie views the owe Obstruction of any view',to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted The Properw owners who may not be able to playgolfat this time,due to their age and/or hands ,were 8Ibmard to,at l east,beigg able m watch ocher golfers play I 'Y should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy_ Let's not fntget that the Snowmass Chtb is requesting a`Subdiviaon E.xemptwa^ They want to change 21 Multi-Family Units into 1/g 7i1ne Shares,averaging 2,400 STmw Feat; Spacial Review Use,amargst many other requests. This will enhance their f mncial posmon- 7bey should not forget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent Pnm'wn properties to the golf course. ThcY are asking for our approval of the Subdiv oa Exuupnm,WWI fed tbey should not be taking anything away£none W. I. requesting that the grade adjacent to the fairways ad' cent to r orisival condition,m soomewhat similar, o p operty d come et rmton d m its' With this Y restoring the dirtxt and complete fairvcay vievvs- cotnplaed I wall support the"Exemption Subdivision_" With this not achieved,I will not support the Exampbon Subdivisiw. If you are in ag mncut with the prcccding,Please indicate your acceptance by s- in the space provided below and fax back to me at 303.670-0846. I will present your response To the meeting of December 17,2001_ S eiY S Priqt Tame SnowmassAddress ey. Aral ' t` vQ7R��. J. dJ Marling Address UWZW iyyv uJ::,i J03-722-6000 GORDON RIPPel PAGE 01 Farley Losewick.ArehiteetlBuilder 28660 Douglas Park Rod Evavven,Colorado 80439 Phone 303-674-1951 November 27,2001 FAX 363470:0416 To Snowmaw PrWaW Owners—Fairway Drive Property Owners Rs: Snowmius;Club Phase H PUD Tbank you for your react response regarding the Snowman Club. This response was prosoased to the Town of Snowmass on Novanber 5,2001. As a result the Snowmass Club was request I so revise ad resabntit another design 'fins put wak the Town of Snowwass am another mailer to you regarding the revised design of the golf Course. They abo advised that the"Final MoetW is scheduled for December 17,2001 as 4:00 P.M. I strmgiy encourage you to attend this meeting as it may affoot your ply vvus. I have spohca with Mr.Don Schuster of the Snowmass Club to iuterpra this revised design. He advised that the berm had been someAm reduced and the revised design opens up some"VkW Corridors." h is my understanding that when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf maw adjacent property owners,they promoted tMsc lots for fairway views and sold these properties for a premium amount.They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Unit k1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have interest in the golf course,I floor that the current golf course owner should recognise these previous standards. The revised detiga,as Mr.Don Schuster told me,will prohibit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because of the views of the fairways.Tlw redesign submitted by the Snowmass Club is insigoifieam in reestablishing the views we once had. The obstruction of any view to any f i nwray,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. Thw:property owners who may not be able to play golf at this time,duo to their age and/or handicap,were looioag forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They sbould tot be deprived of what dtry expected to enjoy. Let's not forget that the Snowmass Club is requesting a"Subdivision Exemption." They want to change 11 Muld-Family Units into i/8 Time Shares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet. Special Review Use,amongst many other requests. This will enhance their financial position. They should not£ergot how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the adjacent pmmium properties to the golf course. They are asking for our approval of the Subdivision Exemption,and 1 feel they should not be taking anything away from us. I am requesting that the grade djsceot to tbo fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' original condition,or somewhat similar,thereby restoring the direct and complete fairway views. With this completed,I will support the"Exemption Subdivision" With this not achieved, I will not support the Httamption Subdivision If you are in agreement with the proceeding,please indicate your acceptance by signing in the spa"provided below and fax back tome as 303470.0446. 1 will present your response to tho moetb*of Member 17,2001. m S S' ,Prim Name uY SSn�oarnsss Address (VI MI--.-K:�Lla bil.iftAddtaaa P'hont� C�o3� 388— I(�36 Atli 1Alt BELL F&F 0001/001 Farley LozowicI4 ArchitecwDuilder 28660 Douglas Park Road Phone 3U3 674-3551 Even,Colorado 80439' November ,2001 FAFAX 303-G70-0-46 27 To: Snowmas:Property Owners—Fairway Drive Property Owners Rc: Snowmas:Club Phase II PUD Thank yoi i for your recent response regardmg the Snowmass Club- This response was Presented to the Ty"of Snowmass on November 3,2001. Asa result the Snowmass Chub wet requested to mvist and resubank another design Tbis Past Nock the Town of Snowmass seat another matter to yiou regarding the revised design of the golf.:on=. Tbey also advised that the'Tinal Meeting"is scheduled for December 17,2001 at 4:00 I.M. I strongly,,,,,O,,nW you w attend this mweting as it may affea your property value. I have spc ken with.Mr.Don Schuster ofthe Snowmass Club to imerpret this revised design. He advise i that the berm had been sornewbat reduced and the revised design opens up some"view corridxa.° ft is my m idcrstanding tbat when the Snowmass Corporation sold the properties to the owners of the golf cause adjacent property owruers,ibcy Promoted these lots for fairway views and sold these prq)erties for a premium amotruL They also developed certain restrictions of Country Club Uni k 1 for the protection of these views. Since they no longer have itmmen in the golf course,I feel-hat the current golf ecutse owner AMU recognize these previous anndaoda The revised design.as Mr.Don Schnstertold me,writ prole-bit the direct view of the adjacent fairways. The properties were purchased because ofthe views ofthe fairways.The redesign submitted by the S nowmass Club is insigofficaut in reestablishing the views we once had The obstruction of any tiicw to any fairway,especially the adjacent fairway,is not accepted. The ProPVtY owners who may not be able to play golf at this time, due to their age and/or handicap,were hoc king forward to,at least,being able to watch other golfers play. They should not be deprived of what they expected to enjoy. Let's not f orget than the Snowmaw Club is regnastiug a"Subdivision Exemption" They want to cbauge 21 Multi-Family Units into U8 Tzme Sbares,averaging 2,400 Square Feet; Special Review U:e,amongst many other requests. This will Mhance tbe.financial positiaa They should not fit rget how we helped support the Snowmass Corporation by purchasing the a4aOMA Premium poperties to the golf oo>iisa: They we askmg for our approval ofthe Subdivision Ex"�,and I they should not be Uldng anything away&em us.I am Lequ that 8�e a4i 10 the fairways adjacent to property owners be restored to its' ongmal condition, or somewhat are thereby restoring the direct and oomplcw&irway views. With this oomPlete d,I will the`TxeoolAion Subdivision" Wi&this not achieved,I win not support the Ex ion If you are m agreeanmd "th the Proceeding;please indicate your acceptance by sugntng in the space provid ed below and fan back to me at 303.670-0446. 1 will present your response m the meeting of Dec ptber 17,2 1. S / S Print Name Snowmass Address ' ` ^ ey owiar tip q I