The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutTBP 1996-08-21 e e TOWN OF FRASER "Icebox of the Nation" P.O. Box 120 /153 Fraser Avenue Fraser, Colorado 80442 (970) 726-5491 FAX Une: (970) 726-5518 , TO\VN ROAR" A(a:NI)A RF,(;(JLAR I\IF,ETIN(; AtJGUST 21, 1996,7:30 I,.m. t. Roll Call 2. Approval of 8/7 minutes 3. Open Forum 4. . Ace Hardware variance request: Board recommendation 5. Maryvale: P ^ 28 Subdivision Exemption 6. Mary.vale Metro District discussion 7. Staff Choice Grand Recycles request 8. Board Member's Choice Mcintyre: Maryvale densities compared to Summit County -- -------- -~---._.._---_._--_.__._---- -- - -~_._-------- ---- MEETING SCJ IEDULE REMINDER August 28th: Fraser Planning Commission Regular Meeting August 29th: Fraser Board "Advance" 3:00 - 9:00 p.m. August 30th: Fraser Board "AdwlI1re Jr' 7:30 a.m. hrenklnst, 8:00 - 12:00 work session Septemher 4th: Fraser Board, "Ianning Commission, & Sla If picnic, 5:30 lUll. Fraser Board Regular meeting Septemher 18th: Fraser Bmird Regular meeting September 25th: Fraser Planning Commission regular meeting October 3rd: Joint Fraser/Winter Park hudget request workshop ~ { , . . FRASER TOWN BOARD AUGUST 7, 1996 The regular meeting of the Fraser Town Board was called to order at 7:30 pm. Board present were Mayor Johnston, Havens, McIntyre, Klancke, Swatzell, Sanders and Wirsing. Staff present were Reid, Skelton and Winter. Ivfillutes of the previous meeting were approved as wlitten. CHAMBER Cathy Ross reviewed the previous months events and gave a schedule of upcoming events. Fall Colodest is Sept. 14th and 15th. This event wiD be held at the fishing ponds in Fraser. Ross is requesting more money for tIllS activity as the change in location will cost more than expected. Swatzell moved to fund $2500 for this event, 2nd Wirsing, carried. Special Events liquor license application by the Chamber for the Fallfest event was reviewed. Chamber will be providing the Insurance for the event. Havens moved to approve the Special Events liquor license for the event, 2nd McIntyre, canied. OPEN FORUM Board bliefly discussed the Growth study. A workshop wiD be scheduled to review all of the information at a later date. MARY V ALE METROPOLITAN SPECIAL DISTRICT. 'Maryvtllo ownons and Spocial District attornoy Rick Kron roviowod a proposal to fonn a Spooial Dishict tor funding measures for the infrastructure costs associated with the development. Boundary is the Maryvale property with total liability for paying of the debt the Maryvale property owners. Two distlicts are proposed, residential and commercial. The Town wiD need to pass a Resolution by August 31, approving the formation of this District in order to allow a election process OIl the November ballot. The Resolution can haw a great many conditions attached so that further review can he made and the town could deny the Di~trict even after the Resolution. R",id wmmented that I\/Iaryvale has agreed to pay the Town for review costs. Reid further commented that he does not believe that the Town has enough time to review any ofthe infolluation that has just been presented at this meeting. After blief discussion I Iavcns moved to table this to the next meeting, 2nd McIntyre, carried. ORDINANCE 224 Reid presented Ordinance 224 for review. TIlls Ordinance allows the Town to deed the Eastom C\;}mQt~ry pal"oel to the Frailer Cemetery Association. ~tfcIntyrQ moved to adopt Ordinance 224, motion 2nd Havens, carried. ;, . . .. lVIARYV ALE PDD CHANGES AND NEGOTIATIONS The Town Board asked staff to prepare a list of items within our rules and regulation that may be looked at with regards to lessening the burden to the Maryvale Developers in trade for more open meadows. Staff prepared a list of items that might be comddered. Maryvale asked to have the Board fwther fe\iew the propm;ed new POD plan and address conceptual site problem, they could then see how and if any planning could be changed and how it could be accomplished. Monday Aug. 12th at 5 :00 p.m. was set for a workshop on tlus. STAFF REPORTS " Reid stated that the USGS will be placing monitoring wells at various locations to monitor water quality. Reid i~ looking at a Regional Planning Commission concept and will report back to the Board. Skelton reviewed a request for detached single family homes on single lot. This particular request will be a modular home design in Ptg. subdivision. Board did not express an interest in detached housing on single lots. Reid asked for an additional temporary staff person to facilitate planning document changes that are needed but present staff can not get done due to work load. McIntyre made a motion to approve hudget for this position, 2nd Wirsing, carried. Town needs an appointment to Board of Adjustment. Skelton has a contract pending for the Historical survey of the Town, through the grant that was given to the Town. BOARD CHOICE Havens is interested in the new removable speed bumps that Winter Park has and would like the Town to' see if Winter Park likes them and see if they work. Havens moved to go into executive session regarding negotiation positions, 2nd Wirsing, carried. Adjourn executive session at 11 :45p.m. Adjourn meeting at 11 :46 p.m. e e The Town of Fraser needs to fill a position on the Fraser Board of Zo~ing Adjustmenl (3 year lenn).The appointee must be a resident property dwner in the Town of Fraser. The Board of Adjuslment meets on an as neede~ basis. There is no compensation. Please submit letter of interest to: The jrown of Fraser, Planning Depl., P.O. Box 120, Fraser, CO. 80442 by Septetnber 2nd. 1996. I I I ! ~ e e .f 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 TO: Mayor Jeff Johnston & Town Board Members FROM: Catherine E. Skelton Qe5 DATE: August 14, 1996 ' RE: Board of Adjustment Recommendation Ace Hardware has submitted an application for a variance to the Fraser Board of Adjustment. The public hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday, August 28th at 7:00 P.M. The Town Board is required to make a recommendation to the Board of Adjustment. The applicant is proposing to build a new Ace Hardware Store in a part of Block 7, Lots 3-10, lying westerly of the southwesterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 40 in the Town of Fraser. Please see attached site plan. The site is approximately 0.561 acres, with a building footprint of 8064 square feet (112' X 72 '). The applicant is requesting a variance to provide 25 parking spaces instead of the required 40 spaces for a building of this size. The parking regulations in Section 13-8-12 "OfT-Street Parking" of the Fraser Zoning Code require that for a retail sale establishment, one (1) parking space is needed for every two hundred (200) square feet of area devoted to sales and display. Ace Hardware conducted a survey on Saturday, May 4, 1996 to determine how long the average customer was parked at the Fraser Valley Ace Hardware. The applicant stated that the survey was taken during a two hour period and fifty five (55) cars were counted and the average time for each car was seven (7) minutes. Oox 445 ,mrr.1f"'! ING. CO! OPM)('l ~(),\SC) Cl,lr:lIlA!eO 0'(. ....... ".....--..----...--- OAT[ ---..- "---'-'-' ~ . (303) 724.3670 .. . . J .. A-s- ~ ' _ J CllrCKrD IIY _.. Jk./.... .__--..- DATf _~__....z.~ .--. -.- ";"48\\/ ! .: 1'~(,(J'.._.':,.:y::.,J:''-~f'~t.?i.';(>. . , '.... . SCAlF...._... '.. ............. ----.- .,.,..- -.--.-..---. .,-..--,.-..... --(j(1--::iO' '--'\--:--- :, ':~II/1I r/). -'7- _.- -I-I . 't' 'j \ i 'I" I ;. '.. \ i i : I I i .J \'. j ~l~ ..../ : I ! 1 I ';1::.0 1._ /' , I ; ! . _. . _' . I ~ ../ .... . /0 : / I 12 , I. . .. . I 'I \)\ / \ I. I ; , :!: O. :306 Ao'(!!:. .".r : II I '.': .:t /3.332.3 31SF ~ ...... ....'.. ""',' '" .,. ,. "I' ,. ':' . ;'T'" ,.. T ll~' .'...:1 .! I.. I ! I .' I : , "... ..: ,. .' .. : . I .,. ..' . 1'\'" " " .,... .', '... 't........, ,'. ...... ~,'~ld;! ; I \i I ii' I I I' I', : - . I '. . .' I . I . ; 1 ,,' I: .., .;~,'y_.: ...~',...... I' ;'''':'''''i'' ~\'!"'''II'''''i' "...i. ':.'....1 ........ ....tr...~.!..~...l:... , t ... . '. t.. .,... .....".~ ". ... ._. f "0: I " '.' I . ..! . .. 1', //~02"" '.............."!..".r....!.....! .....i...',............T....r.".."........!...lr-..n'...~...., .........".., .-'i.......t~., '. --~-. ..\ .....t.......!......t.. '~"-'-i"".''''r:::-.::~..~::;:::.+:-c-,..,:...:../t:-:--~'7::-::::7:':''''-:::';':.:~:::''''' ._..,:.....:;\.:.......,~..,.ALL(.YS3s::~/8'W ,!, :......~....,t ....','..... ;... ,:... t. ...r:L9~h,:1.Q.,.,.,....,.~,.._._-_..:.... . ~'~ -- ---_.,,- ---...\....' , ,. ~."..~:.. _. ': ....,:.. ,,,......../22~4.... , . , '! Ii; ,1/1(11 n; '. I It: I L,\, ; i; j, ., '; .. ;... tB: .. IT.... i ....1\.......... ....I... . t.~... t.l....t.....r.. ...; . ! I.... ___1..._... C'i, . ..._; ':""':1'''' :,:...";' ......... ' ,:',,'" I' 1 I I I' I, 1 , I "~ . I "';, ....." 1"'" ...+ r'" .. '.. ,... /............ ..... ..t. .. I .1""'" ....1",. "......, ........ ,....,t....I. .. L ,. I '1-"- :", I 1 I "i : G: I : I ,. I" , ' I ".....:..... .;..1"$' ;, i)' ",i,.~ ,.. ....:....L...,t .."..I. \,' .....:.........t..;....:.~! ....,..:,.....;..."....,' ,.....,:, ,.,..~,..... ..'.......1.. ! ..,-i':, ~. :..; ;..., I --" I' "l I' V' I I,. ......' . ?< .. I ..., I ,;. ....". ..:... ;, I 1 1/':--" I I \: i .: I I I '! I . i II 8;: ,. I : 01S I' '" ; . ~.::.... \).. :........;- '''..~ .', :.... '1''' '"l''' .! .. !".. .,... .1. !.... ...1 !"'. "1""'... . ~;...... n'.., ~., . ;.,,:... ~ 52 I 5 J, 50 .49.! 4-8," ,~~ :,......L.... ~; .. i..... L......, :1z. ..it..: 10 ':...... <., ~~..... !:> i I.') , I.... _,.., ! I !.) : .:..z, I I 1 I i I : . "..; r; .......:~,r'... .', __ :~9//Jt:n:?$ .. I : , I ' I I I ., , , , ,. . I .' . . . · ~\ /, " ,. ... ,- . .... ... . ' .. . Po ' ,....... .... - .. --:--. - -. .....~.:. I , I' · ~:.:J. . . i '(" ! ..\/.,="t...,v.:.J<.)oJ.Jr' I ~ I b ' ;\ Iii I I l ' . ..'.. .....' ...... ..~. ,..... . . ," : V), : ..... " I I . I . .' .. f.. ',.. ... . f ... I . . .... ...,' ........, ......... , .. ...... . .:.... . . ,v . I" . . , , ., I ,":" I ';! I I.' I' I Ii; .. ...._~ ...... :.... ...._... .' ...... ..:. I...... \ I : It. I i ~: : ,t~ ,I 1 I ! I j ..:,l....j... I ~Jb'~1q?~y . .. .... '1'.......';. t-- -- -r l--l-:-jdm; r- I r~ I. . I ' .. I ..... , . 1'1 ..,,' 'I ,. , u,. . r ........ ,.....' "..........,..., '1'" ~ .., 5~~C 'W}' I~a C> ' , ,'''y . Nr5nt' ,7) ..-I.'./~" . 0' ': .- i ...;;:-."9.,,. -::'0'-':' .. '~'... . -, . . ....?.~ "!" .' ... ;..... .., I. I" , .... I" .. r-..-....~ -.------..,'------'.~I..~.-...... ----.-.'.-., I I . ,.^..,.,.,......, . It' ,~ '. ~.' . ... ~: ,;",.,.:.......l .._" !......l:..~\lr\' /.'. t.' ,....., ...."... I ,.. ..;, ...:...... ;..,/ ..............j.. ...1...... ...5 89, ~b' IV ..... '''4' , . ' ". , . t{ , " /" II l ' j ...... : i " It- :,:.:' ..'~:.,..;'.,.',1 i c, 'r.. ,'\I, !' I' t I Ii: I .......... ." .... ...... .,..... "" :f.. ":'" I ',.~~ :"1'/' it.:..'::... ' " a ' I .. pP I I . . ., ! ~' ~ ! : '~,; ; : i f\,:"'j. I ,~Co ~:\ . ''');/, ..; 'T'. '''-' "'''-' .....~; ail-o,,; AVE .........,. ....,....,....._.. ........1..... ~ ,......,."J.... ........ ......." l:, . ., , 7.;. .. , 1 r~ ,t...t.,' 0,.." ...,"--' ,.........!. ...,\.....1'.....1....... ......... ...--.1--............... .......... '. .. I ~ I :', JI,I\';..! .' I" , ...,.:' tl.,J:'" I~. __;..._... . 7.4. / /' '\h/~ ! ....Ii..... 11..\ I... ... L ..) ....... L... . ...! ....I.. ,,:.-- .~.... I -J' ",.,..- ...,.~ ---.,.--. .-. \:. I ' ' : ,. "'- /,...... ',t, }~~'i9\' -)!8 ..". , I 1 .- r-"-' .---' ..,. ;, 0 , .' ",.,.' ".' /,',.,~ - I 1\" , ,'f, :' I r~: ~. ..',........ ',/ ~ .. .' , "1 .. .........,\..\..... ....1.,.1<4~ r i . .. ....... " . .. ". .,.., . I I ,. ,t . , : U): .J .' "t'. ,,:;>"', 1 : ' , I" j \{ I I . ....._... .. . '.. ~,......., . I i 4. /-, t · .) " · ,.,~ .. I' ': . ,.,. ., . .\,.... ,........,. .. I ., ..., .. I... I ~ . (So! / tn ~ Ul 0:" '.0 I' i i I : I >.\O'.....;.;-I~: .....' ~:"-' " , . I~ ' r I'~e"':) ,...:' ~ t, }L~ "."'f ., ._~ ~". ).' ...... . ~ ..I,.. ,..,...,. ...... ,-I....... i' ..... 0..f.7 ... ''''- .. : :> 0'1 ~r ~'H i~ ::. "':0 ': ~ ; ..' : I \ . C4PIi/I-:'5 .... c:; t-i ,u~". .1.~' ,.~~ ..: " , .:,.. d.: ,: l . I, .... t/) 1\ .... '. . .. ........ I ~ . .... ...,.... I It' i ' I cY. ':h. ,".,~. I 2~ \(\ , ~ ' . . I -\ ., ....' U) w ;~ . ......,.. ~"', 1... ; ~, ',;,," ."..~.........~ \.....!.........., ..:.,. : ,.. ..... :,. :.:.... . Hex:' . ':t // f\. ' , ' '\ I \ . : 0 I "~~;:-:-~,,. \ : ) ; ~" ; I I . . Ii, .; ! .....,'... ~ ...".!.. . .' . ~g Q ! I b I ...., ~..~,... ." :....~ ".\ r I;'" ......... I I ,I. . I '~ ,~ .........: ',.... I' ~ ..,.~ ,\:................. ..,........~......, , u. 0 -+_ ~, . ' '. " . I , I \ ,! .., . ,o.~ ~ .......;..,.,....:::," ~ ; " .; I \" o ,'0' ....... "......"".......,."......., ,...' ..... .... U . ' . 'V. ' . ..... ~v : I I' -<.. '. i .\:" ft., I I I ' , '\ . ... -<.. " . ..... ~ f:;:.. ~. .. ... ._.1.._......... .. '.. ..,. ~ ',' 6"9 [U rll . '. . ~ ,.. . .... .. ... '. ........ ........-.....- ....- .,... t I.... 0 ~ ~ ~A~~' ,.. - ~ . .; . .,. cY.::;::. ~ :! " v89 '0"'0<- i.:. /a2.?~'V t ,.::"",.,.:.", , I: I d" B ~":.o:: . .....":.. .":' .... """':" "'1" ... 1 l' ;' ...' . /V00;2'11/9.9$)1 :{l89~18'E ro"{8:3., \ .....:... ..: ..... i .. t -. I - . . It' II.... I '. I .. -. ,." -. - - .' ~ . . : I ...... ........ ....... I {l I ,.. r- .... ......-.....,. ... .... .:t . \J ..... ~ ~ ..! I : 'B~'-~ ' ' I Nd~Z'W:..:~~ . , . . . Ct: ..'. -,.....-., , r < 1 ' " .. l() I' ,.,.. ...... ......... ...... ~' .. ~U ,-I . I '11 . , .. :c ~ :; I; ~ 43, 42' .1/ ,;,,,:, .~~ 38 ". : ' ::> .. t .......--.. " ... . . . .. , I . I H 0 ...., I'.' I I....: I': ,'. -. ' .' :....;. . . " . I . '.1..:. ". t . __ __ __ ._........:....~_. ,S6-~.:1l~V---~::-~ -tV<:'t.pn' ,rllu ,~. A........ ~_ .'N, ''',y."", lo~."nd ...... bl4lG tIi '.___. ....~._.__ IlJmAc.it:..lV In:r/Tl .~ut}'~,Y;iJll/f~ro' .".~!..'/~"M(IV./~..,..? ..---- . ---...--.. - _.! . e . l' vY) rL-r-\--\ - ..,JI .. (~ ~ . ~.J) \ ..)-. ')?- 0 .~ ~ /' ~I - -- ~ '- .- "" . ~rO Pt4ct~ , - 01'0. Y c~,v ~_\( ) \(". C ("~ C r" ~ c ,/ ."~\ ~ "'.' 'Ace H'ARdW~Re ~--.; (,-, \ ()(::> , --- ---J - ýÿ 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 TO: Mayor Jeff Johnston & Town Board Members FROM: Catherine E. Skelton {l ~ s:: DATE: August 15, 1996 '_~. RE: Maryvale Subdivision Exemption Plat - Planning Area #28 Maryvale has submitted several revisions of a subdivision exemption plat for P.A. #28. With their latest submission, all technical issues that staff had been concerned with have been addressed and corrected. The Planning Commission reviewed the plat at their special Planning Commission meeting on August 14th. The Planning Commission gave conditional approval to the exemption plat with the stipulation that a quick claim deed for the property area in dispute ("Tract A") is presented to staff prior to the Town Board meeting on August 21 s1. This quick claim deed would convey "Tract A" to the Fraser Cemetery Association. Please note that the attorney for the Fraser Cemetery Association, Mr. Ross Libenson, has brought other items of concern to the table regarding the actual subdivision development proposal for P.^- #28. 11,e Item Oil t',e agellda at t',i.t poillt III time is all ex.emptioll plat mid II0t a subdil'isloll plat. Teel",ieal isslIe.t relatillg to tl,e sllbdit';sioll of tI,e lalld will be reviewed at a future meetillg. ýÿ ~ I . . > ., , .. . ROSS LIBENSON P. C. ATTORNEY AT LAW 2737 MAPLETON A VENUE, SUITE 103 BOULDER, COLORADO B0304 (303) 449-0700 August 21, 1996 By Hand RE: Maryvale Planning Area 28 Subdivision Exemption Board of Trustees Town of Fraser 153 Fraser Avenue P. O. Box 120 Fraser, Colorado 80442 Dear Trustees: On August 21, 1996 the town board shall consider the subdivision exemption application of Maryvale LLC concerning Planning Area 28. As many of you are aware, this parcel is adjacent to the Fraser Cemetery. On August 14, 1996 the Planning Commission voted to recommend the subdivision exemption over the objections of the Fraser Cemetery Association. The recommendation is conditioned upon Maryvale LLC / Ozaukee granting to the Fraser Cemetery Association a quitclaim deed for the area involved in a boundary dispute on the north and west sides of the cemetery either before or at the town board meeting on August 21, 1996. The objections raised by the Fraser Cemetery Association are as follows: 1. The subdivision fails to comply with Article X of the Annexation Agreement allowing a division of the "Property consistent with the Planning Area boundaries" not to comply with all the Subdivision Regulations or Articles IV, V, VI, VII, VIll, and IX of the Annexation Agreement. The area being subdivided is 50% larger than the original planning area boundaries. It is not consistent with the boundaries in the either the zoning agreement of the annexation agreement. Therefore, the subdivision requires compliance with all subdivision regulations and Articles IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX of the Annexation Agreement. ýÿ . . . . Town Trustees August 21, 1996 page 2 2. As imposed by Article X of the Annexation Agreement, the exemption plat fails to comply with sections 2.2.4 (9) and (10) of the Fraser Subdivision Regulations which requires the plat to contain "all... apparent easements on and/or adjacent to the property," and "dedication and depiction of access rights-of-way to adjacent lands if necessary." The exemption plat fails to show the cemetery service entrance and the service access road from County Road 72 to service entrance or pipe gate of the cemetery on the south side of P. A. 28. As such, the exemption plat fails to comply with 2.2.4 (9) and (10) of the Fraser Subdivision Regulations and me Annexation Agreement. As well, the exemption plat fails to properly dedicate the main entrance of cemetery as an exclusive easement; and therefore, the exemption plat fails to meet the requirement of the Subdivision Regulations and the Annexation Agreement. 3. Contrary to the Subdivision Regulations the exemption plat was presented to the Town only 9 days before the hearing by the Planning Commission, and not the minimum of 20 days. 4. The hearing by the Planning Commission was not a regularly scheduled hearing. There are no provisions in subdivision regulation for a "special hearing", 5. A certificate of review and approval of the form and content of the application by the Town Attorney was not received by the Commission on or prior to their review as required by the Subdivision Regulations. The Fraser Cemetery Association was willing, and remains willing, to remove these objections in exchange for written protections concerning the entrance to the cemetery and screening and visual corridors in the form of negative easements. These requested easements, or ordinances with a private right of enforcement which allows for attorney fees, are contained in an AugustJ4, 1996 letter to the developer which is attached for your review. These written protections are necessary since (1) any agreement effecting an interest in real propeny must be in writing to be enforceable in Colorado; (2) the site plan "filed" in the F.P.D.P. apparently has the access to upper portion of P.A. 28 on the exclusive entrance of the cemetery; (3) the site plan presented to the cemetery board on July 30, 1996 shows four multi-family units in the nonh visual corridor; and (4) the revised Plan Development Plan ýÿ " . . Town Trustees August 21, 1996 page 3 (5/30/96) presented at the Maryvale Workshop on August 12, 1996 ~ade no reference to either open space or existing trees on P. A. 28. At the Planning Commission hearing on August 14, 1996 Mayor Johnston asked the question why the recommendation should be delayed. While responding with the four reasons immediately above, the more proper questions is why the Town must rush the exemption plat approval, or any other portion of this development, when the project is, even by the admission of the developers, of such a large magnitude and scale that it will , , forever affect the Town of Fraser and all its residents. Due to its impact, the Town and its residents deserve full compliance with all agreements and regulations. If the exemption plat is not in compliance with all requirements and procedures, there is no legal obligation to grant approval. Very truly yours, Ross Libenson P.C. fl { .f.L- Ross L. Libenson encl. . . , . < ROSS LIBENSON P. c. (C(0)U2>V ATIORNEY AT LAW 2737 MAPLETON AVENUE, SUITE 103 BOULDER, COLORADO 80304 (303) 449-0700 August 14, 1996 BY- FAX RE: Fraser Cemetery Association access, boundary, visual corridors, screening, and setback Mr. E. Rick Watrous, Esquire Maryvale LLC 3609 S. Wadsworth Blvd., #210 Lakewood, CO 80235 Dear Mr. Watrous: On August 12, 1996 I received your correspondence of August 8, 1996 under a postmark of August 9, 1996. I am disappointed that you continue to attack the character of my clients, your neighbors. Based on our hour long conversation on August 5, 1996 I had sincerely expected this matter to be resolved prior to the August 14, 1996 Planning Commission hearing. However, my clients and I patiently waited for you to deliver your site plan to the town during the week of August 5, 1996 as you promised not only to me on August 5, 1996 but also as you stated on the record at the August 6, 1996 Sanitation Board meeting. Most importantly, your written proposal is different than our discussion of August 5, 1996. I have, nevertheless, sent a copy of your letter to the Cemetery Board. However, because you have waited to the last minute, I am without authority to respond to your proposal. I will suggest to my cli~nts a response which follows our discussion of August 5, 1996. Boundary: we agree that Maryvale LLC shall grant to the Fraser Cemetery Association by quit claim deed the area between your survey lines and the #4 and #5 rebars which establish the true corners of the Cemetery Boundary. I I ýÿ r . . . Mr. E. Rick Watrous, Esq. August 14, 1996 page 2 Easements: (a) main entrance - Maryvale LLc shall grant to the Fraser Cemetery Association an exclusive easement from County Road 72 to the main entrance. This shall confirm the property right which the Fraser Cemetery Association already owns. During our August 5, 1996 telephone conversation you agreed to this if you are allowed to move your entrance to the upper portion of P .A. 28 further north. (b) service access - I will recommend to my clients the abandonment of their valuable property rights of not only the service access and service road from County Road 72, but also the continued usage of land to the north of the pipe gate for snow and debris removal. In exchange we shall expect visual corridors, as you promised to be reflected in the site plans, have already discussed with the Planning Commission and are in the process of negotiating as ordinances, but which you now want to "defer." Maryvale shall never be permitted to use any portion of the cemetery for access, emergency or otherwise. (c) visual corridor easement - as you agreed, Maryvale LLC and Ozaukee Land & Financial Corporation shall maintain the Cemetery's view down the valley to the north and to Byers Peak to the west. To do so you shared that your site plan shall have no b~ildings on the "upper" portion of P.A. 28 from County Road 72 to a point east of the present pipe gate. To effect your promise, we expect Maryvale LLC to grant to the Fraser Cemetery Association a written "negative" easement, with measurements taken from the #4 and #5 rebars, providing for an unobstructed visual corridor to the north from County Road 72 to the east side of the pipe gate. Alternatively, the Cemetery shall agree to rely on town ordinances which provide these written guarantees on the condition the Cemetery has a reasonable enforcement mechanism and an opportunity to review and comment on these prior to our assent of your exemption plat. This is necessary since (1) it appears the site plan you promised last week is unavailable, (2) the site plan presented to us on July 30, 1996 without a land swap shows footprints for four multi-family dwellings in the view corridor, and (3) the revised Plan Development Plan (5/30/96) presented at the Maryvale Workshop on August 12, 1996 made no reference to either open space or existing trees on P. A. 28. Screening: (a) northeast corner of cemetery fence to pipe gate - You shared that the road on to the upper portion ofP.A. 28 shall be a dedicated public road. As such, the right of way shall have built in footage 'for snow removal, The figures you shared were a 36 . . . " . Mr. E. Rick Watrous, Esq. August 14 1996 page 3 foot right of way with a 20 foot paved or travel portion. If these figures are accurate, the road will provide at least eight feet of snow shed between the cemetery fence and the road. This area shall include at least a single row of the current trees and accomplish mutually beneficial screening. The promise to maintain at least a single row of trees between the road and the fence from a point east of the pipe gate to the northeast corner of the cemetery needs to be reduced to an enforceable writing either in the nature of an easement or a town ordinance. (b) pipe gate to County Road 72 - As well, you stated you have no objection moving your entrance from County Road 72 to P. A. 28 north to the site of the present cemetery service road which leads to the pipe gate. This shall pennit the visual conidor, mutually beneficial screening and prevent your destruction of the grove of trees north of the cemetery main entrance. This grove of trees, and any between your access road and the cemetery fence need to receive written protection in the form of an easement or town ordinance since they provide unique and nonreplacable screening. Finally, all agreements must be in the form of written instruments (deeds, easements and/or ordinances) that shall be recorded to confirm what the Cemetery already owns. We shall require these prior to our "withdrawing" objections to your exemption plats which presently do not comply with the Town of Fraser Subdivision Regulations. If you have any questions or comments, please so not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Ross Libenson P.C. I ~Q!u~r cc: Town of Fraser Planning Commission ýÿ e e Grand Recycles l' .~ Your Community Recycling Program P 0 Box 446 Fraser CO 80442 970-726-8435 To the Trustees of the Town of Fraser. Grand Recycles met with the Mayors, Managers, and County Commissioners on August ] 9th to update everyone one the programs status and to request assistance for medical insurance for Grand Recycles full time employees. ( see Biannual Update Report) Howard Moody proposed that each government contribute $60,00 per month, beginning in September, to insure the full time staff. Health insurance will cost approximately $400,00 per month, The warehouse staff are a married couple with two children. One policy will suffice, They have no other benefits and work 40 hours per week in a cold and cramped warehouse. Please contact your meeting representative with any questions regarding the Grand Recycles presentation, warehouse tour, and request. You may also contact me if you have other questions or if you need additional information, Thank you for considering this request for support, Please contact me by mail or phone regarding your decision. Respectfully, / j" ;; (J./l \. ___ rJ (C--O Katie Soles Executive Director ýÿ . - "',- . . Grand Recycles .~ Biannual Update Prepared for Grand County Government & Municipalities By Katie Soles Executive Director 726-8435 v.,'t;} ~.... . ~pply';'~ "..).1,1 .~"'- " {(..{,.4 - 1~b/"''''+1.{eu..j;<Iy ~ '1to r t1~ C,k,,~~ b ~"C:.~~ ,'. .. . Grand Recycles, Inc . 07/29/96 Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1996 Jun 30, '96 ASSETS Current Assets Checking/Savings Grand RecycleCD 7,070.87 Grand Recycles Checking 8,613.76 Grand Recycles Money Mrkt Acct 5,112.76 Total Checking/Savings 20,797.39 Total Current Assets 20,797.39 Fixed Assets Computer Equipment 3,033.00 Equipment cost battery charger 209.95 cost Glass roll off container Accumulated depreciation -1,000.00 cost Glass roll off container - Other 4,600.00 Total cost Glass roll off container 3,600.00 ' cost Stack Pack Accumulated Depreciation -5,000.00 cost Stack Pack - Other 9,000.00 Total cost Stack Pack 4,000.00 Rotater 3,333.00 Total Equipment 11,142.95 Office Equipment 170.56 Total Fixed Assets 14,346.51 Other Assets Assest owned by County Clark fork lift 11,000.00 Excel 60 Baler 30,000.00 Pallett Jack 500.00 Semi Trailers - 5, 40ft 20,000.00 Total Assest owned by County 61,500.00 Total Other Assets 61,500.00 TOTAL ASSETS 96,643.90 LlABIUTIES & EQUITY Equity Opening Bal Equity 81,353.74 Retained Earnings 23,924.63 Net Income -8,634.47 Total Equity 96,643.90 TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY 96,643.90 ',I,: - -- ------.---- Grand Recycles, Inc 08106/96 P&L Budget Comparison January 1 through August 5, 1996 Jan 1 - Aug 6, '96 Budget - q ~ $ OVer Budget % of Budget Ordinary IncomeJExpense 1'"'otc.1S Income Cash Reclept 14,786.31 54,CXXl.oo -39,213.69 27.4% Contributions Fraser 2,100.00 Granby 1,CXXl.00 Grand Lake 931.50 Hot Sulphur 200.00 . Krernmllng 1,182.00 WP, 2,316.CE Contributions - other 0.00 15,007.00 -15,007.00 0.0% Total Contributions 7,72!iJ.58 15,007.00 -7,277.42 51.5% Gift Received 0.00 2,CXXl.00 -2,CXXl.00 0.0% Invest Inc Interest 118.59 Invest Inc - other 210.00 200.00 10.00 100.0% Totallnvestlnc 328.64 200.00 128.64 164.3% Total Income 22,844.53 71,207.00 -48,362.47 32.1% Expense Advertising 361.00 720.00 -358.40 50.2% Cash out Granby 450.00 Valley Recycling Pick Up Svc 1,198.69 Cash out - other 0.00 3,&XJ.00 -3,&XJ.oo 0.0",(, Total Cash out 1,648.69 3,&XJ.00 -1,951.31 45.8% . Depreciation Expense 2,500.00 3,CXXl.00 -500.00 83.3% Dues & Subsrlp 89.00 180.00 -91.00 49.4% Education Community 74.96 Contest$ -300.00 Education - other 0.00 1,320.00 -1,320.00 0.0",(, Total Education -225.04 1,320.00 -1,545.04 -17.0% Insurance 523.00 1,400.00 -877.00 37.4% Legal Fees 0.00 240.00 -240.00 0.0% Maintenance Trash Disposal 348.00 Warehouse repair 515.79 .. ^ Maintenance - other 0.00 1,020.00 -1,020.00 0.0% Total Maintenance 863.79 1 ,020.00 -156.21 84.7% -t> Meals & Entertn 0.00 300.00 -300.00 0.0% Meetings 29.00 100.00 -71.00 29.0% Mise 11.91 , '~-'-'. '~-'-'. .--""...,-,~ T_~__._'-' _.~~--._--, .-- ýÿ ~ Grand Recycles, Inc .. dtto5/96 P&L Budget Comparison ~ January 1 through August 5, 1996 Jan 1 - Aug 6, '96 Budget $ OVer Budget % of Budget Repairs Equipment 314.ro Repairs - other 0.00 1,em,00 -1,em.00 0.0% Total Repairs 314.ro 1,em.00 -685.10 31.5% Supply Aluminum 14.80 Center 525.28 . equipment 1,143.89 OffIce 208.07 postage 92.&1 Volunteer 52.36 Supply. other 0.00 2,400.00 -2,400.00 0.0% Total Supply 2,036.99 2,400.00 -363.01 84.9% Telephone Granby 2S7.5IJ Office 327.28 Telephone. Other 17.19 1,BOO.00 -1,782.81 1.0% Total Telephone 641.97 1 ,BOO.OO -1,158.03 36.7% Travel 0.00 400.00 4XI.00 0.0% utilities 385.31 480.00 -94.69 8O.3l'AJ Wages Fed 4,717.04 State 259.40 SUTA 28.49 Wages. other 18,400.66 53,247.00 -34,837.34 34.6% Total Wages 23,414.59 53,247.00 -2S,832.41 44.0% . Total Expense 32,595.71 71 ,'1!J7.00 -38,611.2S 45.8% Net Ordinary Income -9,751.18 0.00 -9,751.18 100.0% Other IncomelExpense other Income In Kind donations Pay Gran Disposal -1,ll5O.00 'DOf\~nO"'~ ~ Rent -3,em.oo Snow removal-County -536.54 Transport~rand Co -8,799.25 trash -720.00 WPRA -1,75/J.00 Total In Kind donations -15,854.79 Total Other Income -15,854.79 other Expense ýÿ . -'\#. . . . ' 1995 -1996 Baled Price arTon Month Co at Ne WhiteL Office Pac Computer Color Ld r Aluminum Jan-95 100 90 209 165 285 110 1180 March 115 95 237 230 285 125 1180 Ma 160 98 237 210 300 175 1180 Jul 145 117 260 190 300 125 1180 Set 105 90 250 185 390 125 1000 Nov 35 90 130 185 290 65 850 Jan-96 50 40 160 90 200 60 975 March 70 40 160 100 255 65 975 Ma 45 25 80 50 180 30 925 June 50 25 80 50 180 30 925 Jul 41 30 80 46 180 30 925 1986 -1898 Price Per Ton 4X) IIJan-s6 . March ~\t)""') 360 CLky~ /' 3D EJ July . sept 2m .Nov 19) . Jan-96 tJ March 100 . May 9) . June 0 . July Corrugated Newspaper WhlteLedger Office Pack Computer Color Ldgr Aluminum Price per Ton 1200 l'm 800 60D ' .. 4X) 200 0 AlumInum .......- July It Page 1 '. ,,- .~ ýÿ 4-...... oil: . Sheet6 . 1995/1996 Six Month Comparison Haul Date Revenue Pounds Tons Haul Date Revenue Pounds Tons 1/9/95 $1,499.4 28,825 13.38 9-Jan 899.61 29,773 14.89 1/24/95 $1,887.6 26,960 13.48 1/12 coors 14.340 7.17 213/95 $ 833.3 29880 14.96 1/16/96 $ 535.7 26,816 13.41 * 2/23/95 $ - 15,060 7.53 1/24/96 $ 785.0 29,905 14.92 2/21 &21204 $3,353,0 63,205 31.59 2/8/98 $ 730.5 19,903 9.95 3/14/95 $1,991.0 32,455 16.21 2/13196 $ 877.4 32,395 16.18 3/24/95 $1,729.4 29,110 14.57 i-Mar $ 877.3 21,956 10.99 4/4&4/14 $3,513.0 58.365 29.18 3/2/96 $1,069,0 30,735 15.39 * 418/95 $ - 14,980 7.49 3/8 coors 14,900 7.45 5/2 95 $1,778.0 32,845 16.42 3/11/96 $ 375.5 19,293 9.65 5/18 &6/1 $3,758.7 87,740 33.84 3/27/96 $1,480.2 31,100 15.53 *5/31/95 - 13,800 6.9 3/29/96 $ 448.7 16,477 8.24 6/21/95 $2,224.5 33,990 17.04 4/10/96 $ 811.0 36,560 18.3 6/28/95 $1,886.4 27,555 13.78 4/22/86 $ 504.5 23,130 11.57 24416.18 472, 770 238.35 4/26 coors . 15,000 7.5 4/30/96 $1,059,9 39,340 19.67 5/23/96 $ 731.1 17,176 8.59 5/29/96 $1,123.0 41,852 20.92 Revenue 5/31 coors 15,280 7.64 95 1st half 24,416.0 6/5/96 $ 189.6 11,270 5.65 96 1st half 14,788.0 6/20/96 $ 953.3 39,725 19.88 Tons 6/28/96 873.71 30,270 15.1 95 1st half 236.35 Ipast due -s 681.47 96151 half 278.59 Total 14786.31 557,196 278.59 An... ":). J" Tft~" C>I . "wl~ 1990 $1,505.7 70,298 35 87.5 1991 $5,720.0 390,592 195.3 488.25 1992 $10,859 725,634 362.8 907 1993 '9,300.0 740,438 370.2 925.5 1994 $17,180 896,658 448.3 1,120.75 1995 51,553.9 1104404 552.19 1656.49 1st half 96 13625.00 557,196 278.6 835.7 Totals 109743.9 4,485,220 2242.39 6021.19 f- Revenue '- Tons collected i-- 25,CXX).O i' , i-- 3D .. " 2O,(XX).0 'J' '> i" ,"_ Revenue I i-- 250 , :', ~ j 15""""0 ',: ;, I,' ", ' ",I L.._ ~ ' , if " ........ !' ,~" r- 3JO ," '[ "1'+ '! 10,(XX).O ' " , ',: ,j I-- Uil ""_,>' j ','l, 6""""" -, . j _ , .".., '. ........u !" 'F :f ..., 100" "'l' , ,.' ! .; '.' ,,': fl _ " ,IJ ',,:1 95 96 _ 50 :. ~..,~ ", 1 if :1 ,.. ,.. f- 0 ,I" " U half half I-- &61 st half 961st half 39.4% decrease In revenue I I T18% Increase over 1,995 Page 1 . ~ ,: ýÿ 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 Manager's Briefing: August 15, 1996 Quick notes. . . The agenda is pretty self-explanatory. The only thing that doesn't have detailed information is the discussion on the Maryvale Metro District. Rod McGowan is checking the legal issue surrounding the "conditional approval" that the statute allows for metro district service plans. Staffwill have a recommendation based on Rod's legal opinion on Wednesday. If the legal issue does not provide adequate protection for the town staffs recommendation will be an unqualified "no." If the legal issue provides adequate protection, staff will recommend that the Board conditionally approve the metro district in a manner that allows the Town to pull the District from the November election for any reason. As staff understands it, the only acceptable reason to allow the metro district to go to vote (assuming the service plan is legal and feasible) is that it will result in a substantial decrease in Maryvale's proposed densities. I'm sorry J can't be any more definitive than this at this time. . . Liz McIntyre dropped-off some information she sought and received about the number of housing units that exist in Summit County as of 1/1/96. It's an eye opener. . . Have a grand weekend! See you Wednesday! ýÿ "',_..,-"'" .., .~ \ . . 1'" ''a 'io ." .i/ : \' \ Table C 4 HOUSING AND LODGING UNIT SUPPLY Summit County Incorporated and Unincorporated Areas/January 1.1996 (Units In Structure) , , S FAMIL V DUPLEX CONDO APT EMPLOYEE MOBILE TOTAL LODGING TIME AF::A UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS HOMES HOUSING UNITS SHARE INCORPORATED AREAS BRECKENRIDGE 427 86 2,807 63 42 5 ~~Jf.f:~1j~~~ltlfg~ 503 171 r."'~.:..?, ,;t.:, ,. "" ,.;11: ,"~,:I..',' .', ,..... y'.,'0!.. BLUE RIVER 437 8 24 ..:>;!,~:~.l?'>".I,')I;.o........ . 12 .~ .. .... f.~~~j;;j~:mf~jt;i' ..l'~~~ .. DILLON 143 40 801 63 .. m,:,:,v"'r:dil"'~ 123 21 1 ~ f(iilii\~j!::.;k:l;~;!~t FRISCO 370 226 1,366 122 2 i,,~>...,.,~J~;,~.*. 552 10 MONTEZl,lMA 31 1 ,:*:::#~J.?l~:~~~~:~ .- .. ~. .. tj..'o!<-:..'..~.;;.,..!>. .," . .'.'. .. n Sit VERTHORNE 500" 115 266 1173 17 ~~~. 328 .. -~~~.""- . ~'.,..~\:,,-; ,~.'--;f!;L 1,908 475 5,264 421 61 1.506 214 ...--..._~..._--._.""-,.-.. ----"--.=>,. Uf'JF~CORPORATED AReAS ":.'".:~~>>,.":~.I":':.;:::; f""""ll.I' I' UPPER BLUE AREA 1,543 116 851 36 3 92 ~~.~':.~~ 93 69 .~.,:...: ,. ~ :':!. ";:'~"'~"'" t. ................. .....l~.<:..........~.}.. ....,....~.',.?.,. FFilSCO AREA 240 .. -. 3 .. 4 r~:f;:~m~:*::~~!4:~t~ n .. ~~:;;:;.::::~...I,..:-.. ., . ,..l.....~ SNAKE RIVER/KEYSTONE 719 81 1.555 12 252 17~ li,'i,tilf! 317 18 DILLON/SILVERTHORNE AREA 941 201 2,122 84 4 1'~;)"'~~J."~":>"'ll 8 29 TEN MILE/COPPER MOUNTAIN 4 14 697 .. 192 .... ~~~~li.~~1" ". ~"i;i;.~ 225 .. ~':':'~'*:"'~':~~Ii'j; LOWER BLUE 327 0 .. 3 8 17 ~~~~r:ili~~~:~I~:' ~~ .. n .<:..:::.;;>~.l'.:::...>:., . r' .:o:~ I )' I ~rl} I III SUBTOTAL 3,774 412 5,225 138 459 292 r""nnu>.tr" 643 116 i~1:!~:) ::(~:;"VC ,';~! TOTAL SUMMIT COUNTY 5,682 887 10,489 559 520 429 !:*:,,~:u~...m,::*: 2.149 330 I 11 Duplex units that are part of a condomlnium project are now Included In this category, Source: Summit County Planning Depaltment. 1996. { ~iJ-f L "7)fl....- S~ et- fvw- ;:!:F's I'M ----- 10 (jtl "'~ ';) +- ~. i~ ~+~ -Me (l;f;J fl VdlLs ] f [f) YI, - I I , ( C -('1, . , " r Table 14 Housing Units by Type of Structure . Grand County and Towns-1990 GRAND FRASER GRANBY GRAND HOT Kremmling WINTER PARK COUNTY .. LAKE SULPHUR SPRINGS . # %of # %of # %of # %of 1# %of # % of # %01' T olal Total Total Total Total Total Total ------ -------.---- ----- --- Single-Family 4,932 49.4% 101 18.1% 263 53.5% 508 67.4% 128 69.20/0 351 62.-;0/0 187 13.7% Detached Units Single-Family Attached 405 4.1% 72 12.9010 8 1.6% 34 4.5% II 5.96/0 IS 2.-;0/0 8 0.6% Units Multi-Family Housing 3,120 31.2% 332 59.6% 135 27.4% 171 22.7% 14 7.6% 74 13.2% 1,109 81.5% Units (2 or more units in structure) Mobile Homes or 1,528 15.3% 52 9.3% 86 17.5% 41 5.4% ~? 17.3% 120 21.4% 57 4.2% )- Trailers . SOURCE: Census ofPopuJation and Housing, 1990. Demographic & Economic Reconnaissaru:e Report Clarion Associates Grand County Growth Coordinali()n Plan Page 2/ ýÿ f.I' '. . BOU.ingUn. its ~..nGr.nl C..~.t Y. ftam 199" .c.n.u. Bou'.ing. Unit Co.U. n.tl 9.985 July 1994estimatEi!: If,327. (T:rranslates into a 3.4% growth rate) .."I'{OSousi,ng unit.s in Frasl]:lr: 'l'Q't/iJ,l; 557 Qooupied:257 S~al!lonal, reoreati,onal, 'or Oooasional use: 223. ~raser Population: 19t6 estimate 6~6 ;.Divide 0". nd.om!. nium 0.0 Pl.ex .= 38 units VintAge Sotel= 118 un ts S~:fe~ay PIAza~ 7o,0001squ$.t:"e fee;:!f oPtnrnE!l+Oi~l spao~ Sd\Y'r~,F~,z -f;;>(~-vr'1 rf-t.re_c.::=-l50,OC-b .S[i.'.,;J{e M txisting PDOis equiv~lept to: 145 ~i"ict,. ......1....1 26 Vintag"$ .9 S~feway Plazas I ~visect Concept plan ir equivalenttOI I -_._-~--- - "1 ~ . < d Ile primarily through clear-cutting practices) and more back-country '..J recreation uses. Under the preferred alternative (as designated in the draft E vironmental Impact Statement), allocated timber harvest in the Arapaho- R osevelt Forest would drop from 24 million board-feet/year (permitted UI der the current 1984 plan) to 6 million board-feet/year. [1] T e USFS has a good working relationship with Grand County rc arding development activities adjacent to forest areas (there are very few pr vate inholdings in the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest). The USFS In nagers in Granby think the Three Lakes Area Design Review Standards Br working well. 3. .. . -, . The New i\Volford Mountain Resen'oir Recreation Area opens in 1996. The reservoir i. a 60,000 acre-foot reservoir located just four miles west of the Town of Kremmlin , Camping will be availab!e, ll] 01 or/unifies: New trails; boating; commercial ventures. However, local sel timent seems in favor of keeping commercial uses out of the area (Le., en jourage public boat launches as opposed to commercial marinas Ii la Three La: es Area). ~ I I > I - . Winter P rk Resort's Planned Base Village Expansion: The expansion is seen I as critical ~o keeping Winter Park Resort competitive with other Colorado mountain resorts. 'I he resort's aims are to: (1) Increase the number of destination skiers. particularl international visitors; (2) Rectify underutilization of the mowltain during the week; .ld (3) capture higher-income visitors. The resort also hopes that the base village ex iansion will act as a catalyst for supportive, new development in Winter Park and d. wn vaHey. (Table 30) I , (subject to negotiations wI developer and town [I] 543 residential units at the base village (undefined by type), plus an addItional 66 residential units on the city parcel near the Vintage Hotel (agin. undefined by type). [2] 70,00 to 75,000 square feet of new commercial space. [3] Ti eframe for build-out::;: 8 to 15 years after construction starts. Demographic & Economic Rec . nnaissance Report Clarion Associates \.,I Grand County Growth Coord/n · tion Plan Page 46 ýÿ . -----------------~ , .. . 4 ' ... ''''.'' ~ J mpact~ [1] [2] . The best.case $cenario envisions an additional 60,000 skier days/year; equivalent to about 120,000 new skiers visiting the sort during the I 52.day ski season. Thisi maximum forecast assumes that ew residential units are all occupied by new skiers/visitors. and that the new l nits are not simply cannibalizing skiers wbo previously stayed in older units i Winter Park and down valley. ., (3J . Approximately 1,160 new employees to service the new ase village residential units and retail/sto~es. . Winter Park Resort's Mountain Expansion oolto Vasquez Ridge: Because the current ountain is substantially underutilized, particularly during the week. the addition of new runs on Vasquez Ridge is unlikely lin the near tenn, and will wait at I ~ least un il the impacts of the base village expansipn are measurable. When and if built, it 's projected that the Vasquez Ridge expansion would increase the resort's uphill c pacity from 18,000 skiers per day to atout 28,000 skiers per day. i L- Demographic & economic econn, /ssance Report Clarion Associates Grand County GroWlh Coo d'nal/o~ Plan Page 47 i i I ýÿ (- , r (' :. I . GRAND COUNTY PLAN'UNG SURVEY 1996 .. . . OVERALL UllERE DO TOll LIVE lREMllltG HOT SUlPIIUR I GlWf& LAKEI GRMBY I TAllERfASH I UP FRASER I UlMTER PARr: I OTHER i PARSllAll I SHADOW ImII SI t VEl tItER HIGltlMDS I fIIEMKl" RIDGE I AREAS ~ WllLlMS FK COl~Uff lAKE YMCA ltEBOX ESTATES !lOW IiIWlD TClI OESCRIBE THE tQNDITION _u -vr--TQJR -MEAJWGRAlID All"e8dy too dewloped 19% 11% 131 m 131 211 m lax 34% Juat ebout rtght 44% m 48X 47% 42X 49% 42X 43X 40X Growing nicely 26% 21% 23X 261 26X 21% 28% 351 19% tauld use SOllle gNNth 1a 31% 15% 41 19% 9% 7% 4% 8% TOTAl. l00x 100% 100% 1001 100% 100x 100% 100l 1001 n= Z, 1 11 237 124 m 370 246 484 188 53 OVER LAST 3.5 YEARS DEVELOPMENT IN GRAIIl) COOItTY ! S: Too slow 6X 13% 6X 4X 8% 4X 6X 4% 5% About right; 49% 42X 46X 511 52% 51% 47% 59% 34% Too fast 39% 35X 41X 41X 35X 41X 41X m 57% I No opinion 6X 10% 7X 5% 5% 4X 6% 4% 4% I TOTAL 100% 100x 100% 1001 100% 1001 tOOl 1~ 1001 f n" 2,122 238 124 312 369 248 485 190 56 TItE AVAIlABILITY OF STORES/tOIIERtlAl DEV. II TClJR AREA IS: Low-doeB not serw needs 38X 61% 37% 35% SOX 29X 30% 29X 32% About righ1: 56% 37X 60X 60X 48% 63X 61% 611 63X Kigfl-too llIWIy stores end CQIIIIereie\ develap1lent 6% 2X 2X 41 2X 8% 9X lOX 5% TOTAL 100% 100x 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% tOOl 100% n- 2,114 239 126 369 369 249 417 189 56 <::....~~... IPIPI" "....ociaTes - Boulder. CO T-31 . e e ~ Table C 4 HOUSING AND LODGING UNIT SUPPLY Summit County Incorporated and Unincorporated Areas/January 1. 1996 (Units In Structure) S FAMilY DUPLEX CONDO APT EMPLOYEE MOBilE TOT Al lODGING TIME AREA UNITS UI~lTS UNITS UNITS UI~ITS HOMES HOUSING. UNITS SHARE INCORPORATED AREAS BRECKENRIDGE 427 86 2,807 63 42 r"W' 603 171 5 iii!)!\~~i3::~. ::. Ji ....;..~..~~...,.i'.:.~J.~!>..>..j'1. BLUE RIVER 437 8 24 .. -- -- ~~~~~~~~~~~"~~i; .. 12 143 40 801 .':!'~'f'!":<':'~;'~"'~ DILLON 63 .. ..r~ 123 21 .:.!.,:.:!. ~"r' ..:.... r044N-tt6 FRISCO 370 226 1,366 122 2 :;:!''*:'ii'''i:~I:!: 552 10 18 ~~Jf~rr~f ..~~..~:~:~:. :~~ MONTEZI,lMA 31 1 ............~l"~ .~... .... .. -- .. .. ::1f.~J~~~*~~. ,t:.. .il! .. .- tf.~.w...,..,,~.;I........1 SIl.VERTHORNE 500 .. 115 266 173 17 113 fr""':;;::l'l; ,...W,' 328 f:~~*i1r:j;~!;;I:f~ . ,JI.~i~ .. SUBTOTAL 190B 475 5,264 421 61 137 i~::'!i::"::'Jft'(ni:ill' 1.506 214 UNINCORPORATED AREAS i.~~;~i~;ii:!~;:~;:~i~i;'if~ ~"""'i''''~I'''''''''<~' 92 Ii.*i~i~', '('r~ UPPER BLUE AREA 1543 116 851 36 3 <;~~::i:::ri .;' :, It\~.: 93 69 r~'K""'!"> '~""':"!;Z FBISCO AREA 240 3 4 f."~""""21"'" .. .. .. .~~.., :~'M~:,' ".... .. .. ~;.~::::.::$:li:::::.., 0" ~:~::' SNAKE RIVER/KEYSTONE 119 81 1,555 12 252 175 r- 317 18 DILLON/~I:I:ITUf"lr:u,": AR~ ..>....F'.'.I...........:......~..1 941 201 2,122 84 4 4 ~j1~~~~~ll*:~.Bli:~. 8 29 4 14 697 192 j!~!~!!.*lm":':, 225 ,.." \, R I .. .... .(f,~:f*{I::: . ,~'i!' .. 1.::I:~:.>>.!I:,,::~..:~:;1l! LOWER BLUE 327 0 .- 3 8 17 :~M;i~;~!~i"'[~ .. .. ,.,:::...l.....*'~.... ..... l~ 111111111111111 . SUBTOTAL ,774 412 5,225 138 459 92 ['::::]Cr~()d:l'" 643 116 TOTAL SUMMIT COUNTY ,682 887 10,489 559 520 2 ;;~!~:~ (,',J:....,,,.. 4 2,149 330 429 fi,*:::!:J fM~.~~::!i;: I 1/ Duplex units that are part of a condominium project are now Included In this category. Source: Summit County Planr Ing Department, 1996. --- ~.1- vl\i-h/D-~ ;.. . ; - . r it-f <- CD . {- f"Vi 41-- \ <S '~r ---Jf (, ~)r/V lit.( 1- " L-,\ .--- /{)C> (L ; ^\ ~\-- .-te> ~t -J '{~i!.1 -~ Mllfl,i)(t<;. P /.. 1"\ ---... I ~ r c c' " Table 14 Housing Units by Type ofSlJ'Ucture . Grand County and Towns-- i 990 GRAND FRASER GRANBY GRAND HOT Kremmling WINTER PARK COUNTY LAKE SULPHUR SPRINGS e .. %of # %of .. I %of .. I %of u I %of u /' %of u I %of ... .. tr ... tr If' T oral Total Total T olai Total Total T oral I 4,9321 101 I. 18.1% I 351 I Single-Family 49.4% 263 53.5% 508 67.4% 128/ 69.20/0 62.7'/0 187 [3.']0/0 Detached Units Single-Family Aaached 405 I 4.1% i2 12.90/0 8 I 1.6% 34 4.5% II I 5.~1o 15 , 2. ']0/0 8 I 0.6% Units I MuJti-Family Housing 3.120 31.2% 332 59.6% IJ5 27.4% 171 22.7% 14 7.6% 74 13.2% 1,109 81.5% Units (2 or more units in stI1JCtlUe ) Mobile Homes or 1.528 15.3% 52 9.3% 861 17.5% 41 5.4% 32 I 17.3%\ 120 I 21.4% 57 I 4.2% Trailers SOURCE: Census of Population and Housing. 1990. e Demograpizic &: Economic Reconnaissance Repol'l Clarion .-issociates Grand COllIIlY Growth Coordinatllln Plan Page 21 , e e Housing units in Grand Copnty from 1990 Census Housing Unit Counts 9985 July 1994 estimate: 10,327. (Translates into a 3.4% growth rate) "I'iO Housing Units in Fraser: Total: 557 Occupied: 257 Seasonal, reoreational, or Oocasional uses 223. Fraser Population: 1996 estimate 626 Divide condominium complex = 38 units Vi~tage Botel= 118 units - Safeway Plaza= 70,000 square feet of commercial spac~ ':,..; ,..)- "..: / '~.....:, , l.. " ,) , ! !it I t:.'((l .' " ,. 'f t (~iil.:l, r "j ':'.,tl.\ ,'''.. . "'l.' \, " ',, (.. ti.~: Exi$tin9 PDD is equiv~lent to: 145 ~ivid, co~plexes 20 Vintag.a;J 9 S~fewa, Plaza. Revised Concept plan is equivalent to: ýÿ - , e e done flrhlUlt'i1" through clear-cutting 11I"aetices) and more back.countt}' ~ recreation uses. Under the preferred uhemative (as desigrutled in the druft EnvilOnmentallmpact Statement), allocated timber harvest in the Arapaho- Roosevelt Forest would drop from 24 million board-feet/year (permitted under the current 1984 plan) to 6 million board-feet/year. (1] The USFS hns n good working relntionshll) with Grand Coun.y rcgnrdillg dcnlu(JlUclI' ncfi\'ltles ulljncent to fOJ est areas (there ale very few private inholdings in the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest). The lJSFS managers in (hnnhy think the Three Lakes Area Design R~view Standards are working well. 3. New and Planned FacilitlQs . . The New Wolford J\lounhlin Hesen'oh' Itecrcafloll ArtR opens In 1996. The reservoir is a 60,000 acrc-f()()t reservoir located just lour miles west of the Town of Krenunling. Camping will be availab~e. II] Oppv,.wlli1ies: New trails; boating; commercial ventures. Ilowever, local sentiment seems ill favor of keeping commercial uses out of the area (Le., encourage public boat launches as opposed to commercial marinas a In Tluee Lak'es Area). '-ti .~-- "--'-7 . "'Intcl' Pari" ncsor"s l'lallltcd IJasc Village Expansion: The expansion is seen as critical to keeping Winter Park Resort competitive with other Colorado mountain lesolls. The resort's aims are to: (I) Increase the number of deslination skiers, pnrticularly international visitors; (2) Rectify underutilization of the llIountnin during , the week; and (3) capture higher-income visitors. The resort also hopes that the base village expansion will act as a calalyst for supportive, new development in Winter Park and down valley. ('rable 30) Tentative Scop~ ~Ydn~ (subject to negotiations wI developer and town approval) includes: 'II ) 543 residential units at the base village (undefined by type), plus an additional 66 residential units on the city parcel near the Vintage lIolel (again, undefined by type). (2) 70,000 to 75,000 square feel of new commercial space. PI Timeframe for build-out = 8 to 15 years aOer construction starts. Demofraphlc & Economic Reconnaissance Report Clarion Associates ."-ti Grand County Growth Coordination ria" Page 46 , e e ~ ~ Impacts: [ I] l'kW-Uill~ An additional 3,000 - 3,300 new pillow to add to the current 10,000 base (includes new residential units planned for the city parcel near the Vintage Ilotel). [2] AddjtjQtUlLJl~w-:1kj'r~~ The best.case scenario envisions an additional 160,000 skier days/year; equivalent 10 about 120,000 new skiers visiting the resort during the I 52-day ski season. This maximum forecast assllmes that new residential units are all occupied by new skiers/visitors, and that the new units are not simply cannibalizing skiers who previously stayed in older units in Winter Park and down valley. ., (3] lliw.~llll!lnms.:. Approximately J, 160 new employees 10 service the new base village residential units and retail/slores. . \\'hller 1)llrk ncsol'l's Moun lain Expansion on'o Vas(Jllez Ridge: Because the current mOllntain is substantially underutilized, particularly during the week, the addition of new runs on Vasquez Ridge is unlikely in the near term, and will wait at ~ least until the impacts of the bllse village expansion are measurable. When and if built, it is projected that Ihe Vasquez Ridge expansion would increase the resort's uphill capacity from 18,OnO sldcl'S per day to about 28,000 skiers per day. L Demographic & Economic ReconnalsSClnce Report Clarion .4SJocialeJ Grand County Growth Coord/llntloll Plan Page fZ"- - -' --- -' -' ..>- I. t r I ~ . GRAIIID aMITT PLAIaI'"G DIVET 1996 . DVERAU UIIERE DO TaU LIVE DBIIl...II1G ROT SUlPtU I GRAIl) 1R.E1 GRA1IBT I T~ I UP FRASER I IllIITER PaRI: ~ DTIER i PARSIIAU. I SIWJCII fIJIl SILVER tREK RIIiIILABS I M!ADGIl RIDGE I ARBS .... I I VILLIMS FI C'DUI8IE LAKE na ICEBOX ESTATES I I IIUl UWIJ) TaU DESCRIBE TIlE alDITIGII I OF TaUR MEA II GRAID , /AtM!8lty too dewtaped 19% 11% 13% Z3X 13% 21% Z3: 18% 3C I !Just .tIaut rttht 44: m ~ 47% 42% 49% 42: OX ~- iG"*;", nicety 2Q 21: m 26: 2Q m 2B: m I 'Could use __ VrartJl 12% 31% 15: 4: 19% 9% 7% 4: 8% I TOTAt 100: 100: 100% 100: 100% 100% 100: 100x 100x 1 n= 2,'1' Z57 124 371 370 246 'B4 188 53 I lOVER LAST H YEARS DEYEUlPlllE1T Jll . , I GRAIl) cr3WTT IS: I Too stGlf &: 13% 6: 4% 8% Q: 6: Q: s: I I /- ..... 49% ~ 46% 51: S2% 51% 47% 59% 34: Too fast I 39% 35% 41:: 41% 35% 41% 41% m 57% "0 ooinion 6% 10% 7% 5: 5: Q: 6: 4% 4% I I TOTAL 100% 100: 100% '00% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% i ! n= 2,122 238 124 37Z 369 ZQJ '85 190 56 I I TIlE AYAIUBILITT OJ' snltES/allERClAl I DEV. JI lIlUR AREA IS: l--aoes not Ilene needs .3B% 61% 37X 35X so:: 29% 30% 29% 32X I About ,"iIM 56% 37% 60% 60% ~ 63% 61% 61% . Hiptt-too ..". stores end c:a.erciel I ae.el ClEIIII!ftt 6% 2% 2% 4% 2% II: 9% 10% s: I TOTAl 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% i n . 2,'"' 239 t26 369 369 249 477 189 56 I ~-- "In" A<=SIX:i81:es - Boulder. CD T-31 I ~ -;. , .-.:" ~ -. ýÿ