HomeMy Public PortalAboutTBP 1996-08-07
e e
TOWN OF FRASER
"Icebox of the Nation"
P.O. Box 120 /153 Fraser Avenue
Fraser, Colorado 80442
(970) 726-5491
FAX Line: (970) 726-5518
TOWN BOARD AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 7, 1996,7:30 p.m.
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of 7/17 minutes
3. Open Forum
~. Catherine Ross, Chamber of Commerce Update
AS:~~ Marianne Klancke, Art Olson, and Cheri Sanders will be present to discuss the Citizens'
Growth Committee's vision statement.
\,
6. Rich Nipert will be present to discuss Maryvale, LLC's intent to form a Metropolitan
District pursuant to C.R.S. 32-1
7. An ordinance deeding certain real property to the Fraser Cemetery Association.
8. Special use permit: Fallfest Liquor License
9. Maryvale discussion
10. Staff Choice
11. Board Member's Choice
12. Executive Session to discuss negotiations {C.R.S. 24-6-402 (2) (e)} and a personnel issue
{C.R.S. 24-6-402 (2) (c)}.
MEETING SCHEDULE REMINDER
August 14th: Fraser Planning Commission special meeting
August 21 st: Fraser Board regular meeting
August 28th: Fraser Planning Commission regular meeting
August 29th & 30th: Fraser Board advance workshop
September 4th: Fraser Board regular meeting
\ - e
€
TOWN OF FRASER
"Icebox of the Nation"
P.O. Box 120/153 Fraser Avenue
Fraser, Colorado 80442
(970) 726-5491
FAX Line: (970) 726-5518
Manager's Briefing: August 4, 1996 ,
New Things
Wednesday's agenda is full. Here are the highlights and some background information:
The vision statement drafted by the Fraser Valley Citizens' Committee (Cheri, Marianne
Klancke, Art Olson, Jon DeVos, Joel Bronson, Ron Jones, Tyson Dearduff, Jay Clough,
and Jim Coleman) is enclosed. Cheri. Marianne, and Art wiU,JJQpefJ,!J1y be present
Wednesday night to discuss their process and outcome with the Board. The committee
has asked that the Fraser Board adopt this vision statement by resolution. . .
Rich Nipert will be present to discuss Maryvale. LLC's intent to form a metropolitan
special district as an infrastructure ftnancing tooL The Town of Fraser has the authority
to review and approve the district's proposed service plan.
The ordinance that will deed the old Eastom Cemetery to the Fraser Cemetery
Association is on Wednesday's agenda. I asked Lurline Curran ifthe County applied the
criteria in the Fraser Valley Land Use Plan to this County subdivision application and she
assured me that they did -- which means that development should be away from the
ridgelines. This project has been fun to work on and I'm glad that the Town could assist
the Cemetery Association.
The Chamber of Commerce has request a special use pennit for the Village at Winter
Park Ranch property that the Town has leased. The pennit will allow them to sell beer at
Fallfest, which is scheduled for September 14th and 15th.
A memo has been included that outlines options available to the Town in our discussions
with Maryvale regarding decreasing densities. Please come prepared to take items off
the "potentially negotiable" list so that we can quickly move from analysis to action.
The current list is simply too long. If you would feel more comfortable you can request
that we discuss this topic in executive session.
Finally, I have been experiencing some frustration based on my relationship with the
Board. As such, I pulled some infonnation that was prepared last year regarding joint
Board and manager expectations and would appreciate spending some time discussing
this during the requested executive session.
.. e e
.
Other things:
The "growth tools" workshop held last week at Silver Creek was infonnative and should be
useful as we wrestle with all sorts of new issues.
The second meeting regarding the Leland Creek underpass went very well. This will be a very
slow process but looks promising!
The Fraser River Trail is looking great!!!
The Planning Commission will consider a subdivision exemption application for PA 28 on
Wednesday, August 14th.
Dave Sladek from Walsh Engineers will probably be back to see the Board and the fonner Fraser
Mustang's neighbors in September with more infonnation about the remediation process.
Things are progressing nicely. . .
c~ ~ e e
TOWN 80ARO
.JULY 17, 1996
The regular meeting of the Town Board was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Board pregent. were
l\fayor Johnston, IIavem;, Klancke, McInlyre, Sanders, Wirsing and Swatzell. Also present w~l'e
Reid, Skelton and Winter.
Mlnut.es of the flrevlo"~ meeting were apfll'Oved R!il written.
Open forum- none
NWWCOG- ", ATER QUA LlTY IQUANTITY COI\1MITrKF:
Monique Gilberl from CC )G/()() discussed Ihe purpm:e of Ihe committee, gave the History
behind the committee, cUtTent Legislative interests and the organization of Q(.}.
Gilbert slated that QQ slall could help wilh vmious projecls the Town might have upon request
f)F~Ii:1J REAL PROI'ERTY TO THE FRASF:R CEI\'IKrF;RY ASSOC.
Reid reviewed the property thaI the Town wilt be deeding to the Cemetery Assoc., and the.
Cemetery's negotiations with properly owners acljncenllo Ihis land that are requesting gnmting of
a ROW cagement. McInlyre moved to pursue an Ordinance 10 allow the deed hut 10 ask Ihe
Cemetery to negotiate with the developers that building envelopes be behind the trees, 2nd
Havens, carried.
FRASER VALLEY PARKWAY
McIntyre wanled fmlher discussion on the Patkwav issue and discussion on the Fraser Winler
. '.
Park ROlld Network Plan. Mclntyre hmlded out excerpt~ from the road plan, I1ndprepl1red a flip
chari demon!;traling the plans assumed growlh nnd went through the different scenmios.
McInlyre staled that the growth pH~;ecliot1s are unrealistic and thaI il might be thaI the Parkway
through the Jone'g property is not nceded. ~ldnt}le m3dc :t motion to keep working with the
County and various properly owners to find an allctnale route [or a road and to put the Parkway
plan on hold at this time.
!\Iayor Johnston staled to McIntyre IIlat. as unrealislic 3S the growth seems in the plan, these were
actual numbers that came fhml polential developments that were known or being discussed at the
County level. and maximum buildont potential of already zoned properties. Johnston agked for
COn11l1cttt~ {hUlt C:lch Tru!::tee 3nd 3udicnce commentll. Cnm:etunJl'l tv31'l th3t the f'O:ld ill needed
OUl Ille Town SllOtJl<110ol< nUlller fO see If an allemme rome can he nmnd. Reid said nun
M:nyvnl~ will he. Jlre,R~nfitls :1 nc,w tr:tm~ Rlmly Ih:tl r.:m he, t~"ie.wf:c1 :1nc' '::noo~,::te." tlt:ll the. .1
p.,nf~M of rh~ 10 1\ rn~r 10 dtsclIss r'le lOal' I"itml'ng Wi,,, 2 plannIng persons and 2 'f1llsu~es rlorn
each party. McIntyre and Wirsing would like to he on the c(lmmittee.
... e e
10
I
WAPITI MEADOWS GATE ISSU":
Wapiti l\l\.:adows would like a gate itS the amuunt of traHie and speeding through Willow Lane is
not a salc sitmltion. The gate would route the tranic to Wapiti Drive South. The Town is not in
Javor of it gate he will work towanls trying 10 reducing spced and directing trallic out to Wapiti
Dr. South.
KINGS CROSSING ROAD
Reid reviewed this ROWand ownership of the now. As valious annexations etc. have
happened over the past several years the Town of Winter Park docs nol have a clellJl casement for
the road. Winter Park is planning 10 make improvements to tlus road this sumUM'. Documents
have been prepared for Fraser to sign that accomplishes clean easements for the road. Board
gave approval to sign the necessary documents to accomplish this.
OTIIER
A ltitler was received ii-om Alpine Peaks, representing Twin lHvers Condos, stating that they had
installed some 30 new gas stoves that replace wood buming stove. They would like to be
l:Onsidt:fl.ld Ii.U' reimbursement ml will be stllted in an Ordinance the Town is considelillg. Board
discussed this and will consider some response that recogillizes Twin River's efforts.
llavens made a motion to go into executive session to discuss propel1y acquisition and
negotiations, 2nd SwatzeJl, canicd. Havens moved to a(ljoum executive session at 10:58 p.m.,
2nd Sanders, carried.
No filrther business meeting adjourned at 11 :00 p.m.
.
. e e
' . " .
VISION STATEMENT
for
:
THE FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
of
THE FRASER V ALLEY
AS DEVELOPED BY
THE CITIZENS OF THE FRASER VALLEY
and
THE FRASER V ALLEY GROWTH COORDINATION COMMITTEE
. -1-
. . e e
, .
THE VISION
TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE
THE SMALL TOWN, RURAL QUALITY OF LIFE
FOR THE V ALLEY'S PRESENT AND FUTURE
RESIDENTS AND VISITORS
while
MAINTAINING AND DEVELOPING A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY
tllfough
THE PROMULGATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
of
APPROPRIATE GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT, AND PRESERVATION
POLICIES, REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES
. -2-
. e e
.
Purpose of This Report
The Fraser Valley Growth Coordination Committee was appointed by Grand County, and the Towns
of Fraser and Winter Park to advise and consult with the respective governments and the Growth
Management Consultants as to the attitudes and desires of the Fraser Valley residents towards
growth and its related issues. At the request of the consultants, this committee has prepared the
Vision Statement and Objectives Relating to Growth based on a careful evaluation of the definitive
Growth Survey and comments of Valley residents in the Public workshops and day to day life. An
analysis of survey questions that the Committee found particularly compelling is attached as the
"Survey Analysis."
This report is devoted solely to the Vision of The Fraser Valley residents, i.e. mmt residents do and
don't want to occur relating to growth. This report is run designed to answer the "how" of growth
management which is the next step in the growth management process.
OBJECTIVES RELATING TO GROWTH
1. PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT INCLUDING WATER QUALITY,
AIR QUALITY, WILDLIFE HABITAT AND VEGETATION.
The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall not:
A. Negatively impact water quality, minimum stream flows or the pristine nature of the area's
mountain lakes and streams.
B. Negatively affect air quality
C. Negatively impact wildlife habitat, breeding or migration corridors
D. Adversely impact significant vegetation features
2. PRESERVE AND PROTECT OPEN SPACE, UNIQUE VIEW CHARACTERISTICS,
ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS AND IRREPLACEABLE SCENIC ASSETS.
The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall not:
A. Degrade or destroy the feeling "wide open spaces" inherent in the rural character of the
Valley.
B. Be allowed in the meadows between Winter Park and Tabernash as these meadows are
particularly pristine and environmentally sensitive and are an integral part of the identity and
character of the Fraser Valley.
C. Damage or Destroy identified view corridors, scenic points of interest, or significant natural
features unique to the Fraser Valley visual experience
. -3-
ýÿ
. e e
I .
I
! D. Limit or reduce public access to public lands, waterways, lakes or recreational facilities A
I
, public lands access trail plan should be enacted and necessary easements should be acquired as part
I of any future development approvals. All public roads should have sufficient right of way to allow
for the construction of a sidewalk or trail to facilitate non-motorized transportation.
, E. Introduce urban factors which contradict the preservation and enhancement of the
I natural, western, alpine character of the Fraser Valley.
I 3. MAINTAIN A SENSE OF COMMUNITY WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF LONG
RANGE DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND LIMITATIONS
I
I The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall not:
A. Result in Ropulation growth which adversely impacts the essential and unique rural character
of the FraserVa ey.
, B. Result in growth or development which negatively impacts the quality of life as for the
i majority ofresidents of, or visitors to, the Fraser Valley
!
C. Be implemented in a manner which tends to create or support the trend towards an elite, one
I class community. We must insure that we maintain a diverse community comprised of persons from
, a wide range of economic, social, political, cultural, philosophical and intellectual levels.
4. ENSURE SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS FOR PRESENT AND FUTURE
RESIDENTS OF THE VALLEY.
The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall:
A. Be based upon development guidelines and controls which discourage boom and bust
construction; unplanned or uncontrolled growth. TIle total build out of the Valley as determined
by this Growth Management process should be managed so that it occurs no faster than what
would be projected on a fifty year time line.
B. Encourage the development of commercial enterprises or other activities which produce high
quality, sustainable employment opportunities, otherwise complement the seasonal nature of the
local tourism based economy, and provide solid economic benefits to the communities of the
area.
C. Never be considered paramount to the other aspects of the objectives listed in this report but
rather economic growth shall only occur hand in hand with these other objectives.
S. MAINTAIN AND DEVELOP SUITABLE TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE
AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall not:
A. Result in the creation of traffic volumes which cannot be comfortably and effectively
accommodated within the framework of existing or enhanced transportation systems, which
systems, if developed shall not create the urban feeling that is referred to in Objective # 2.
B. Adversely impact infrastructure systems, including schools, water and sanitation, and police
protection.
C. Encourage additional growth in order to pay for enhanced infra-structure.
. -4-
ýÿ
. e e
, .
6. DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN A HOUSING BASE WHICH IS ATTAINABLE BY, AND
AFFORDABLE TO PERMANENT AND SEASONAL RESIDENTS ACROSS A WIDE
RANGE OF ECONOMIC MEANS AND ACCOMMODATION PREFERENCES.
The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall:
Be implemented in a manner which both encourages and requires the development of, and
effectively maintains, a broad based housing stock which is both affordable and attainable by full
time and seasonal residents.
7. PLAN FOR AND DEVELOP HIGH QUALITY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.
! The continuing use and future growth of the Fraser Valley shall:
i
Permit and encourage the development of an educational infrastructure which offers the highest
I quality education experiences possible to the widest practical range of residents.
I
I
I 8. GOVERNMENTS WORKING TOGETHER
The success of the implementation of this Visioning Statement is in no small measure dependent
upon the Governmental Entities in Grand County being able to work together in enacting consistent
regulations throughout the Fraser Valley. Tough legislation must be enacted consistent with this
Vision and our governmental officials must put their own philosophical ideas aside to address the
overwhelming desires of their constituents.
.
i
I
~
i
i IMPLEMENTATION
I
I The Committee feels strongly that the greatest risk to effectuating the goals of the Fraser Valley
I Vision Statement is a lack of a quantifiable basis to evaluate "How Much Is Enough?". We feel that
. the following information must be gathered in order to answer that question.
I
I 1. Study of Other Communities -The carrying capacity of our infra-structure is not, in and of
ii itself, the measuring stick for the appropriate amount of development in the Fraser Valley. Our
I
I residents strongly feel that the total number of people that are utilizing the resources of the Valley
" is the paramount concern. In other words, in order to maintain our small town, rural character, we
must have an objectively determined, maximum number of people in the Valley. In order to
determine this number, we request that our consultants provide examples of other resort communities
which have successfully and unsuccessfully grappled with growth issues. This report should
include: the current population, number of visitors in the winter and' summer, summary of any
critical environmental problems, tools used to manage growth and address "local" housing needs,
and a short subjective paragraph evaluating whether this community was effective in managing
growth and it's impacts while preserving a small town, rural character. In short. we believe the
residents of the Valley know what they don't want but may be less certain as to what they do want.
Studying these other communities may provide insight to answer this question.
. -5-
ýÿ
. e e
2. Environmental Carrying Capacity - In spite of whatever population goals are derived through
the Study of Other Communities, it is essential to determine the scientific carrying capacity of our
fragile mountain environment. Studies should be commissioned to determine how many people,
cars, homes, etc. can the Valley support until our water, air, traffic, and wild life are detrimentally
impacted. In other w;ords, even if we determine that we can have a certain amount of growth without
destroying our rural <i:haracter, this amount of growth must not negatively impact our environment.
I
3. Analysis of Growth Management Tools - After quantifYing our vision with a maximum number
of people in the Vall~y over the next 50 years and determining our environmental carrying capacity,
we must implemertt appropriate growth management tools to ensure that our objectives are
achieved. These tools should be proposed and selected in conjunction with our Growth Management
Consultants.
SUMMARY !
The Fraser V alley Vi~ion statement should not be construed or interpreted in any manner that would
undermine the overwhelming sentiment of Valley residents which is a passionate desire to maintain
a small town, rural mountain resort community. It is irrefutable that the vast majority of residents
do not want a community with as many residents, visitors, or commercial development as, for
example, currently e~ists in Summit County. As a community, we call upon our elected officials,
working together in j~sdictional harmony, to enact tough regulations to insure that the total amount
of development alloY{ed in the Fraser Valley over the next 50 years does not compromise the values
as expressed in this Vision statement.
Respectfully submitt~d by the Growth Management Committee, Fraser Valley Representatives
Town of Fraser
Marianne Klancke !
Art Olson
Cheri Sanders
Grand County
Jay Clough
Jim Coleman
Town oeWinter Park
Joel Brownson
Tyson Dearduff
Jon de Vos
Ron Jones
. -6-
.' e e
. .
SURVEY ANALYSIS
The Grand gounty Planning Survey response rate of 40% was the highest on record,
according to RRc A~sociates of Boulder, which makes the results particularly valid and indicates
to the Committee tha~ County residents feel very strongly about growth and its related issues. After
carefully reviewing the survey results from Tabernash, Fraser and Winter Park, we found certain
responses to be vel)\ persuasive in forming our Vision statement. The Committee also relied on
input received at the public meetings and workshops as well as impressions formed in everyday life
to assimilate the me~sage contained in the vision statement.
Balancing economic security with other quality of life issues is one ofthe most difficult issues
facing any evaluation of community attitudes toward growth. No specific question in the survey is
controlling on this is~ue, however, the multitude of comments contained in the Comment Addendum
to the survey make it clear to the Committee that Fraser Valley residents are passionate in their
desire to maintain their pristine small town, rural resort atmosphere even if the maximum of
economic developm~nt is not achieved.
Message: Growth slhould not destroy our rural, small town resort character.
Question: How would you describe the condition of your area in Grand County? (T -31-b)
Answer: 61%-70% Qfthe respondents indicated that there area was either already too developed or
just about right
Message: Although a small majority feel that growth over the past 3-5 years has been about
right, other questio~s in the survey indicate that the concern is for the amount and impacts of
future growth.
Question: Over the last 3-5 years Development in Grand County is: (T -31-b)
Answer: 55% to 64% answered about right or too slow and 33% to 41 % felt it was too fast.
Question: Land use r~gulations: Limit the Number of permits issued in year (T -44-b)
Answer: 54% agree $nd 23% - 30% disagree
Message: Growth shpuld not create an elite, one class society nor make housing unaffordable
to a diversity of VaUey residents.
Question: Personal Iwportance: Affordable Housing (T-59-b)
Answer: 70-72% hel this issue to have a degree of importance
Message: Growth s~ould not have a significant negative impact on the environment is a belief
of an overwhelming Bumber of Valley residents. The willingness to allow some environmental
degradation is a divlded issue.
Question: Describe ypur opinion concerning environmental protection. (T-23b)
Answer: 52%-54% f~el that the environment should take precedence over economic expansion
while 42%-46% feel I that the environment is important but should be balanced with healthy
economy and human ~eeds.
. -7-
ýÿ
. e e
, .
Question: Environmental Priority: Water Quality (T-19-b)
Answer: 96% feel that this is a priority
Question: Environmental Priority: Wildlife habitat (T -20-b)
Answer: 96% feel that this is a priority
Question: Environmental Priority: Air Quality (T-19-b)
Answer: 90%-96% feel this is a priority
Message: The feeling of Wide Open Spaces including undeveloped meadows along highway
corridors should be preserved as well as providing public access to public lands and
waterways.
:
Question: Open Space Priority: Meadows along highway corridors (T-28-b)
Answer: 88%-91% feel that this is a priority
Question: Personal Importance: Stop Development on Highway Meadows (T-71-b)
Answer: 66%-69% feel that this is important while 15%-16% do not feel this is important
Question: Personal Importance: Open Space AcquisitionlProtection (T -64-b)
Answer: 87%-91% feel this is important
Question: Land Use Regulation: Strict regulations for US 40/ Hwy 34 Development (T-47-b)
Answer: 74%-76% agree and 10% disagree
Question: Open Space Priority: Visually prominent parcels (T-27-b)
Answer: 87%-93% feel this is a priority
Question: Environmental Priorities: Scenic Visual Quality (T -21-b)
Answer: 94%-97% feel this is a priority
Question: Environmental Priorities: Open Lands (T-21-b)
Answer: 94%-96% feel this is a priority
Question: Open Space Priority: Wildlife habitat (T -24-b)
Answer: 96% to 98% feel that this is a priority
Question: Land Use Regulations: Require Access to Rivers and Streams (T -45-b)
Answer: 75%-77% Agree and 8%-13% Disagree
Question: Land Use Regulations: Require Access to Public Lands (T-46-b)
Answer: 77%-82% Agree and 6%-10% Disagree
Message: A sound economy is important to the residents of the Valley, however, the other
issues addressed in the Vision statement are of equal or greater importance.
Question: Personal Importance: Commercial and Industrial Development (T -65-b)
Answer: 55%-60% held this issue to have a degree of importance
. -8-
ýÿ
. . e e
~ .
. .
Question: Personal Importance: Economic Development and Diversification (T -65-b)
Answer: 69%-74% held this issue to have a degree of importance
Question: Rate Economic Development: Light Manufacturing Industry (T-34b)
Answer: 16%-32% Support and 43-54% Oppose
Question: Rate Economic Development: Ski Resort (T-36-b)
Answer: 62%-76% Support and 11%-14% Oppose
Question: How do you feel about resort expansion: Winter Park Base (T-38-b)
Answer: 16%-18% Oppose while 76%-78% support with conditions.
Message: E~ucation must be of high quality and keep pace with growth.
Question: Rate Economic Development: Educational Facilities (T-33-b)
Answer: 76% Support and 5% Oppose
Note: In tabulating survey results, if a question that was answered Low Priority to High Priority
(1-5) or Not Important to me to Very Important to Me (1-5), then the committee felt that all
responses of 3,4, or 5 indicated a degree of priority or importance where a lor 2 indicated little or
no degree of priority or importance. If a question was answered Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree
(1-5) , then the Committee felt that a 3 response indicated no opinion, whereas the other responses
indicated a degree of agreement I disagreement. The page number of the survey is listed in
parentheses after the question in this report.
. -9-
ýÿ
- .
TOWN OF FRASmJ
"Icebox of the Nation" '., I
P.O. ~x 1201 153F_~ru'
" Fraser, Colorad 80442
(970) 7 6.5491
FAX Line: (970) 7 6.5518'
, , ' ,," I'
'.11
"
11
~I
MEMORANDUM 11
.,1 '
To: Mayor JO'~wn Board Members
From: Chuck Reid ~
1 '
Date: . AUgllst 7, 1996 :
Subject: Additional Personnel,!
I
~l
'1
~e're $waIIl~and we need helpl J ... . .. ..
I'd like YOllf autho~~tio~, to hire a . !art-timec~ntractual, employee to assist us for !he next four
or five months. This lsanunbudgettd request 1n a year that has been more expensIve than
expected and budgeted; butjtis~lretuest thatIDayproye critical to Fraser's,planning efforts.
~er~is alot "at s~e"rightn~~ x:idI feel like wewoul~ be able to better address some of the
l~sues on the table Wlth an ,additlo ,short-,erm ahdpart:-tune employee.
, ", I! ",
'. " . '"., !I, ' , '" ," .". ,
The cost of adding this employee wquld be'around,$7 ,000 and I anticipate that asupplemental
, budget will be brought forward fotcprtsideration a~some future date.
. ,;1,'"
~ '
I
I
"I
,I
L
~i
,r
j!
JI
l
,[
r
JI
'I
'.jl
11
'1,
,II
,t
~I
. .
~ /
~''-
TOWN OF FRASER
"lcebo" of the Nation"
P.O. Box 120 /153 Fraser Avenue
Fraser, Colorado 80442
(970) 726-5491
FAX Line: (970) 726-5518
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Johnston and Town Board Members
From: Chuck Reid
Date: August 4, 1996
Subject: Board/Manager/StafT relationships
I have been frustrated recently by my relationship with the Board, I would like to discuss goals
and expectations during Wednesday night's executive session to see if things have changed that
much since a similar conversation was held at this time last year.
I look forward to hearing from you Wednesday night!
,) (! G\\\ ~ 'II rll C a.. -h 'm. I ..u. (,')1 ~ k ,',) (M/II\"^1 tiM-J k.tc",Uf"I ~....J MfNA h.u ~
1) cl~\~'c.J J;.,tt-h<1Yl ~ ~4-'( -- p"-MO~ J w.,:h~ bAt-l
~) 11QS' p',.lu~~~ ~M
" t.
1
,
. .
, ,
I
!
f ,.-.-.-. -_._~- - ......
04 .. 1J_._I\(1U\!Hfl."*"""~....~...."~,..'"...!'!lt"!~,~,!_~",,,,~,,, ,~~,.",
I
I
..
" ,
;.
,
I
i
! I
,
. '
:1
. ' .
, .
,
"i. .
.
') ,
.
.
!
I
:
I
!
,
.
I
j
"
t
.
ýÿ
. .
Town Board Goals
. Preserve, enhance, and promote sense of cOl11munity
survey; volunteer recognition; neighborhood gatherings; improved communication
. Develop Upper Fraser River Valley Growth Management Goals and Strategies
housing; open space; environmental issues; transportation; safety and security;
infrastructure capacity.
. Improve land use and facilities planning
update community plan; "3 mile" ordinance; subdivision regulations and zoning
,regulations amendments; regional planning commission
.
. Improve partnership with business community
improved communication; aesthetic improvements; economic developtilent opportunities
through outside agencies.
Individual Board 1\Iember Issues
. Improve intergovernmental relations
. Improve neighborhoods
. Improve existing housing stock and keep housing attainable
. Develop side streets
. Pave roads
. Enhance park system
. Clean-up town
. Develop design review standards
. Improve/enhance landscaping throughout town
. Develop a "home community" in the upper Fraser River valley
. Provide good customer service
. Streamline the decision making process
. Increase/improve the level oftmst on the Board -- recognize specialties
. Improve communication
. Market the community and the Board
. Maryvale Meadow
. In-fill development
. Fraser Valley Parkway
. Commercial development
KW'. 4~fl t\LtdA ~ ~ w~Iu'''~ Ol\ ~(Md J.'lAtcJecl a.c~ ~~ ml~
,
. .
,
,
,
r
--....-".~_.-;-~=-~ .'
""~J~ -J::,LU JL ._.''''f-~;:;;-;:; .~"..._
. " a '" ,.. 1Il.-.11~I;...
I :, ij!:II'~
,', '.. I~
,,: ;:1' ,
: ::
. '.:
: I
1YP\C ~L SU rmR1\~E. COOtJCI L
. i
; I
I -
i '
.
;
"
~
,
.
oj
I
, i :
. I
.
"
i I
j ! '
~
"
:i , .
I. t .'
; '.
j , "
,
j ,
I
ýÿ
. .
Expectations
Board of Chuck
To prime the pump, IhefiJllowing are items Ihal I Ihink you expectfhmlme.
. Our relationship is based on trust.
. The Manager and staff shall conduct all onicial business with the Board as a whole, and not
with portions of the Board or individual Board members.
. The Manager shall operate under the terms of complete communication.
. The Manager and staff will make staff recommendations based upon what is best for the
Town of Fraser.
. The Manager will be available to discuss any and all issues that affect the Town of Fraser at
any time. r
- .MIA ~ cW.- 1r Ii/. ~'" ~ ~MLl fttt(~.{.,C7\i\k~p~ ?
II ~ r
, 1'i\\'l wit( ~ Jlo(.Ju;( fr ftl d(1(;(/~~0'Y\ 1 ~~.
, .\1A ~6W\tt wHl td l lwJ IN ~ Mt iA (OI!Uw.
i ~~~ WI~ ~ ~p ~~ ~f1;?t.5 ~~ ~aul.
Mavor of Chuck
. The Manager will stay in frequent contact with the Mayor regarding all issues surrounding
the Town's management.
ýÿ
. .
Expectations
Chuck of Board
. Our relationship is based on trust.
. The Board's role is to give counsel, make judgments, set policy, and oversee the
commitment of Town resources. The Board is responsible for assuring the Town's health.
. The Board and Manager will work to create a dynamic team.
. The Board will support the Manager and stafT.
. The Board is a team: a divide and conquer approach with staff will be deemed inappropriate.
. ^ clear statement of expectations regarding the Manager's performance and personal
qualities will be established, updated, and followed.
. The Board will channel concerns, complaints, and criticisms about the Town or its staff
through the Manager.
. The Board will provide continual feedback to the Manager.
. " s.
-
~ Individual Board Member concerns (new or otherwise) will be studied and evaluated by stan'
only at the direction of the entire Board.
. The Board will honor communications from executive sessions as privileged and will not
discuss these items in public.
Chuck of Mavor
. The Mayor and Manager will work closely to create a dynamic team.
. The Mayor will onen serve as an initial sounding hoard f(lr items the Manager is considering.
ýÿ
\ e e
t .
TOWN OF FRASER
ORDINANCE NO. 8. I
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF ANY INTEREST THE
TOWN OF FRASER MAY HAVE IN A PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, by Deed recorded September 1, 1909, in Book 41 at
Page 37 of the Grand County real estate records, A. P. Smith
conveyed to the Cemetery Committee of the Town of Eastom,
Colorado, the following real property located in Grand County,
Colorado, to-wit:
A tract of land being a portion of Section 17, Township 1
South, Range 75 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Corner No.1, an iron rod eighteen (18) inches
long driven into the ground, whence the Southeast Corner of
the Southwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter
(SW1/4SW1/4) of Section 17, Township 1 South, Range 75 West
of the 6th Principal Meridian bears South 80.59 feet;
thence North 00'00' East, 278.98 feet to Corner No. 2, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence South 85'26' East, 627.08 feet to Corner No. 3, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence South 36'45' East, 378.44 feet to Corner No. 4, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence North 85'01' West, 854.83 feet to Corner No. 1, the
Place of Beginning.
Said Tract being a portion of Parcel A, FOUR WAY ESTATES
SUBDIVISION, UNIT NUMBER ONE I according to the Plat thereof
filed August 10, 1972, at Reception No. 123701.
Said real property being referred to herein as the "Cemetery
Parcel" ; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Eastom was subsequently incorporated as
the Town of Fraser, Colorado; and the Board of Trustees of the
Town of Fraser has succeeded to any right, title or interest of
said Cemetery Committee of the Town of Eastom in and to said
Cemetery Parcel; and
:
WHEREAS, although said Cemetery Parcel was previously used
as a cemetery, it has not been actively used or operated as a
cemetery since the incorporation of the Town of Fraser; and
\ e e
c
WHEREAS, the Fraser Cemetery Association was organized as a
nonprofit corporation and is the owner and operator of the
property now used and known as the Fraser Cemetery, located on
County Road 72; and
WHEREAS, the Fraser Cemetery Association has expressed an
interest in acquiring said Cemetery Parcel, in order to preserve
and manage the pre-existing cemetery located thereon; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees believes that transferring
said Cemetery Parcel would be in the best interests of the
citizens of the Town of Fraser, because the Town of Fraser is not
actively engaged in the operation of public cemeteries and said
Fraser Cemetery Association is best suited to care for and manage
the pre-existing cemetery located on the Cemetery Parcel; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby finds and determines
that said Cemetery Parcel is not being used or held for any
governmental purpose of the Town of Fraser.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, THAT:
SECTION 1. The Board of Trustees hereby approves and authorizes
the conveyance of any right, title or interest that the Town of
Fraser may have in the above-described Cemetery Parcel to the
Fraser Cemetery Association, and the Mayor and the Town Clerk are
authorized to execute and deliver a deed for said Cemetery Parcel
to the Fraser Cemetery Association to evidence such conveyance.
SECTION 2. The Board of Trustees finds and determines the said
conveyance of the Cemetery Parcel, as authorized by this
Ordinance, is made pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. 31-15-
713, and that all requirements of said statute have been complied
with.
SECTION 3. The Board of Trustees further finds and determines
that this Ordinance is necessary to the immediate preservation of
the public health and safety in order to assure that said
Cemetery Parcel is properly owned and managed by the Fraser
Cemetery Association; and this Ordinance shall therefore take
effect immediately upon adoption.
READ, PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES AND SIGNED THIS day of, , 1996.
- 2 -
) e e
.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO
BY:
Jeff Johnston, Mayor
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Virginia Winter, Town Clerk'
Published in the Winter-Park Manifest on , 1996.
- 3 - C:\WP\FRASER\ORDIN\CEMET-OR.WPD
!
. .
BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the
State of Colorado, and formerly known as the Town of Eastom
("Grantor") , for the consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and
other good and valuable consideration, in hand paid, hereby sells
and conveys to the FRASER CEMETERY ASSOCIATION, a Colorado
nonprofit corporation ("Grantee") , whose address is P.O. Box 426,
Fraser, Colorado, 80442, the following real property in the
County of Grand and State of Colorado, to-wit:
A tract of land being a portion of Section 17, Township 1
South, Range 75 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Corner No.1, an iron rod eighteen (18) inches
long driven into the ground, whence the Southeast Corner of
the Southwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter
(SW1/4SW1/4) of Section 17, Township 1 South, Range 75 West
of the 6th Principal Meridian bears South 80.59 feet;
thence North 00000' East, 278.98 feet to Corner No. 2, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence South 85026' East, 627.08 feet to Corner No. 3, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence South 36045' East, 378.44 feet to Corner No. 4, an
iron rod eighteen (18) inches long driven into the ground;
thence North 85001' West, 854.83 feet to Corner No. 1,
the
Place of Beginning.
Said Tract being a portion of Parcel A, FOUR WAY ESTATES
SUBDIVISION, UNIT NUMBER ONE, according to the Plat thereof
filed August 10, 1972, at Reception No. 123701.
with all its appurtenances.
This Deed is made and executed by the Town of Fraser
pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of Section 31-
15-713, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended.
SIGNED THIS day of , 1996.
GRANTOR
THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO,
a municipal corporation of the
State of Colorado, formerly
known as the Town of Eastorn
BY:
Jeff Johnston, Mayor
ATTEST:
(TOWN SEAL)
Virginia Winter, Town Clerk
ýÿ
. .
STATE OF COLORADO )
) SS
COUNTY OF GRAND )
The foregoing Bargain and Sale Deed was acknowledged
before me this day of , 1996, by Jeff
Johnston, as Mayor, and Virginia Winter, as Town Clerk, of the
Town of Fraser, Colorado, a municipal corporation of the State of
Colorado, formerly known as the Town of Eastom.
witness my hand and official seal.
My Commission expires:
(S E A L ) Notary Public
~
I
- 2 - C:\WP\FRASER\DEED-FCA.WPD
ýÿ
e
e
August 5, 1996
Catherine Skelton
Town of Fraser
153 Fraser Avenue
Fraser, CO 80442
RE: Construction of detached homes on R-2 lots
Dear Catherine:
Thank you for your assistance with my
inquiry and request for
clarification.
As we have discussed over the p~~t several weeks, my desire is to
build and provide affordable, quality housing in the town/area.
Pursuant to this intent, I would prefer to build two detached units
per R-2 lot with the understanding that set back requirements, open
space, parking, zoning, etc. are met. If this is not permitted, I
will proceed with more typical, attached duplex construction.
I have enclosed four photographs of the unit that I would like to
put on the lots. I believe that these homes are quite attractive
and will provide the buyer with quality
and value. These are
modular homes built to high quality, UBC standards with upgraded
snow load and insulation. They will be
built this Fall for
occupancy in November of 1996 pending
timely local and county
approvals as well as land closing.
I trust that this information is useful
and will further the
approval process and overall project process. If you or the Town
have any further questions or stipulations that you would like to
discuss, please contact me at 303-796-7815(best) or locally at
726-9316.
I
SinC~Y .
~!::t,t
Bob Howe ,
ýÿ
.
. .
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Jeff Johnston and Fraser Board Members
FROM: Chuck Reid
DATE: August 4, 1996
SUBJECT: Maryvale's new PDn plan
Last Tuesday when Rich Nipert was in town, he met informally with Nat, Becky, Kit and Liz in a
posted meeting. During the discussion, the Board reiterated the point that densities on the
anticipated new POD plan are still too high given the current political tenor. In response to this
observation Rich suggested that a committee be fonned to work with Maryvale by providing a
list of items that the community would like to see incorporated into the new PDO plan.
Based on several public hearings and meetings, and extensive discussion with the Fraser Board
and Planning Commission these items boil down to two key "wants":
I) Decreased densities throughout the project --.,~{..(, et-s ~lRJ
2) As little development in the Maryvale Meadow as possible I ~ t Ai> ck
Rich also asked that a list of regulatory or negotiated concessions be prepared in order to make
Maryvale's project (assuming decreased densities) an "economic reality". Finally, Rich asked
that we present this information in the next two weeks in order to meet their time frame for
submittal of a new POD plan.
Due to the short time frame in which we are working (although I think the "two weeks" can be
stretched) and the offices for which you have been elected to hold (along with the fact that many
of you have sat through many Maryvale meetings for a ~ long time), I suggest that the Fraser
Board comprise this committee. Assuming that this is something you would like to pursue, staff
has prepared a list of cost concessions generated from the annexation agreement, POD ordinance
and subdivision regulations, along with other cost saving or revenue enhancing concepts. In our
compilation we first "brainstormed" ideas; then we went back and separated them into those we
felt would be acceptable to negotiate and those that are non-negotiable. (We also had a "yes,
but" list, [identified] but we decided you would most likely cover these Wednesday night. If you
don't, we will.) This list includes a very brief explanation of why the non-negotiable items were
dismissed. Neither list is exhaustive but this should serve as a good springboard for discussion
Wednesday night.
ýÿ
. .
Rich Nipert may be in attendance at Wednesday's meeting. Ifhe is, we may want to discuss
these items in executive session, or ask him to excuse himself for this portion of the agenda.
Potentially Negotiable Items
From the Annexation Agreement 2iv~ At~U A~~'e~ Il"'1I\ d~~iy rtuWl ~
l.~j!. all (jj.L o-l - Linear park dedication, other park dedications (yes, but) . l)iZ.
~ -=.. - Open space dedication, especially with additional annexed land (yes, but)---? "" ~ ,. CD'I\.cPf4
~ Sllt.,... Recreational amenities clause (50,000 s.f required in the "Village Center") ~
- Other special district service
- Community center 5 acre site
~~ ~ Fraser Valley Parkway construction costs, !~catiou, alternatives (yes, but)
Time fFame eut8Rsi9n L ., ~ ~. ~ . --.J' ~l.u.sr..&
'" A ,Arc-\ \II Co&- ...
From the POD Ordinance
- Almost everything (Le. setbacks, height process, parking, etc.) (yes, but)
From the Subdivision Regulatioos ~
1- Master pathway plan (yes, hut) I ~~(/::~'" ~ ~
- Park impact fees (yes, but) u(e. '~
- Dedicated lands, open space reqUireme~ #5 .
r- Smgle subdivision access (yes, but) J
Other Options
- Future annexations
- Leland Creed underpass financing
l~ Pursue a conservatIOn eve opmen purc ase
Purchase development rights
- Disconnect certain properties from town
- Privately backed land trades
- Scenic land overlay district
- Scenic corridor/view protections
- Special district formation
- Town subsidized water rights
. .
Non-negotiable Options
From the Annexation Agreement
- Infrastructure financing responsibility
From the Subdivision Regulations
- Paving (precedent) - - c,~lr ~ ~
- Road widths (precedent)
- School impact fee (bad public policy)
Other Options
I
I
- Transferable development rights (from where? to where?)
Land acquisition (no money) c<
-
Again, this list is not exhaustive but it's a good start.
Staff looks forward to discussing this with you on Wednesday.
I