The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutTBP 1996-11-06 . . 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 NOVEMBER 6, 1996, 7:30 p.m. 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of 10/17 and 11/01 minutes 3. Open Forum 4. Catherine Ross, Chamber of Commerce Update 5. Fraser Valley Partnership for Trails: grant sponsorship request 6. Library District exemption plat 7. Maryvale FPDP 8. Staff Choice .J.i.Rl Roy Visitors' Center request: ~:ctA ~ I)A : Fraser Valley Parkway update 5.6 acre annexation request Board and staff dynamics and expectations 9. Board Choice MEETING SCHEDULE REMINDER November 13th: Planning Commission regular meeting November 20th: Town Board regular meeting .- . . 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: November 4, 1996 \ Although not listed on the agend~, I would like to meet at 6:00 with the Board to consider .the 1997 proposed general fund ~dget. Please bring your budgets. ' While the agenda looks long, the items are fairly perfunctory so things should move along. The grant sponsorship request by the Fraser Valley Partnership for Trails is to have Fraser and Granby jointly apply to GOCO for a planning grant that is being administered by the Fraser Valley Partnership for Trails. The planning grant would be for a non-motorized, offUS40 trail between Fraser and Granby and only towns can apply for planning grants (no non-profits). I'm confused by the relationship between the Partnership for Trails and the Headwater Trails Alliance: this application as advocated by the Partnership for Trails seems opposite of the Alliance's goals. Diana Lynn Rau will be present to address all these questions. The Library Exemption Plat will be brought in front of the Board. Catherine assured Nat (at the last Planning Commission meeting) that the plat will be 100% complete before it came in front of the Board so. . . Staff Choice includes a request from Jim Hoy (please see his letter), an update on the Fraser Valley Parkway (please see the letter from the Corps of Engineers), a question to the Board relative to a contact staff has had requesting annexation of a 5.6 acre parcel, and I would like the opportunity to further discuss staff and Board dynamics and expectations. See you Wednesday a~ 6:00!!! V~. Mi'~UJ t- <tL I'f'" (1(, ~ wi~ ~ ~dtcI..~t 'rlt.Jt\e,cIAY f.",~t . . MINUTES OF THE TOWN BOARD SPECIAL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 1996,3:00 p.m. Mayor Johnston called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. Trustees Sanders, Klancke, McIntyre, Swatzell, and Havens were present. Staff included Skelton, Reid, and Attorney McGowan. Open Forum Several people addressed the Board relative to the Final Plan Development Plan. During the course of discussion which included comments by the Fraser Mayor and Board of Trustees, Attorney McGowan suggested that the Board discuss this issue in executive session as the subject matter may involve future litigation. At about 3:40 p.m, Swatzell moved that the Board meet in executive session, Havens seconded. Motion carried. Executive Session Wirsing moved to adjourn the executive session at 4:45 p.m, Klancke seconded. Motion carried. Motion to Adjourn Mayor Johnston requested a motion to adjourn the Special Meeting of November 1, 1996 at 4:46 p.m.. Motion carried. ýÿ -~ , . . October 23, 1996 Fraser Town Board, & Manager Chuck Reid Dear Friends, When frustrated by adversity, we tell ourselves that problems are actually disguised opportunities. It's a challenge to see how vandalism can be viewed as a lesson whereby all of us will benefit, but here's my best effort. We (Town, state, and myself) worked hard and went the extra mile to make the park and western heritage exhibit a success. But having recognized that, let's assume that vandals, rain, snow, the suns's ultra violet light, and people who climb on things are all trying to tell us something. We thought of the exhibit as an educational, artistic, and western history traffic stopper, but it's now obvious that unless changes 'are made, the outdoor exhibit will fall to ruin from atmospheric elements, vandalism, or both. I believe this exhibit and the park is a success, all of the things everyone had hoped for and with proper leadership" capable of receiving national attention. But hindsight indicates wood as a sculpture medium is irreplaceable if seriously vandalized; but even without vandalism, wood requires costly and continuous annual maintenance. A different medium must be utilized, incorporated into both future and past sculptures, preserving artistic and historic continuity. Ironically, the proper choice of'a different medium could produce a significant cost reduction by eliminating maintenance. The new medium must also make replacement simple if vandalism were to occur again. Bronze, resin or acrylic are the best alternative mediums. Bronze is cost prohibitive, leaving resin or acrylic. Further investigation is necessary, but I lean strongly toward resin to achieve low cost and artistic integrity. Pouring a figure in either resin or acrylic requires that I initially create the sculpture in a malleable compound such as clay. This could be accomplished on site in Fraser, but I'll address that later. A mold is then "pUlled" off the clay figure, and when reassembled, the mold serves as a cavity from which an exact replica is produced. The mold could be used again to re-create the exact figure again if vandalism was experienced, and insurance could cover such foundry replacement. I estimate that each mold would cost the town about two thousand dollars. Pouring the resin sculpture, assembling, and finiShing the sculpture artistically would cost about three thousand -. ~ . . dollars each(one/eighth the cost of pouring in bronze). These are preliminary estimates, but they give an indication of what will be necessary. Molds would also be pulled from the present wood sculptures, replacing the wood sculptures at the rate of one or two per year. The community, through the Town Board or its newly created 501 C3 non profit trustees, will recognize these changes as a necessary cost reduction for maintenance reasons alone. It's possible the 501 C3 Corporation would find outside funding, but I need to know if that is not forthcoming, will the Town guarantee the funding of the molds and poured figures so I can continue work this summer. I will continue to guarantee creation of the initial sculpture each year in clay such as I did in wood. Doing any more sculptures (outdoors and unattend~d) in wood is out of the question. Assuming for the moment that you agree to the above change in sculpture medium, I wish to return to the idea of my sculpting summers, in Fraser, either in the Town maintenance building or on site in the park. The site would require some degree of security from theft or vandalism if in the park. Specific public lecture time would be available during the day, and though people would be encouraged to watch me work, I need to be shielded from verbal contact at all other times or nothing will ever get done. Without a glass wall or some such thing the rest of the time, it simply won't work. otherwise, I will simply deliver the finished clay sculptures to the mold maker. That would be simpler and far less costly for me, but I want you to know I'm willing to spend my summers in the valley working on the exhibit. One thing for sure, I can no longer afford to subsidize a studio work area in the valley as I did the previous eight years. j In conjunction with sculpting there, I have been investigating summer housing in the valley. Condos are running 900 a month or more. As you're aware, I own a nice motor coach (5th wheel system). Does the Town own a place where I could place it while working in the summer? Access to water and electricity would be necessary (20 or 30 amp). Access to sewer hook-up is not necessary but would be nice. I would pay for such expenses myself, but thought it sensible to at least investigate this possibility to save money over renting a condo for $3,600 each summer. As an aside, the Chamber of Commerce has sponsored or proposed to sponsor a resident summer artist in the past, (asking the town of Fraser to participate in its cost). What is this program, and would my working on site qualify me as the visiting resident artist during summers?... and is there a stipend for such a thing so as to lower my expenses? Seems worth a call by the Town to investigate this under these circumstances. All of these things are connected in one degree or another, and I need to make plans as soon as possible.... no later than the end ýÿ , . ~ . . of December with respect to housing. Need to know about the resin sculpture commitment at the same time, as it controls whether I will even need summer housing. I will assume the maintenance building will work for clay sculpting if the resin change is agreed to. "y performing the work in the park could be something for later summers, if at all. Thanks for letting me know your thoughts as soon as possible, Jim Hoy P.o. Box 9046 Grand Junction, Co. 81501 Phone 1800 234 4231, Ext. 55186 . "'- OCT -2'3-1'396 10: 1E. .C1f':AHD COUIH'" . P.01 .~ ..' . \ EI DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.$, ARMY ENGINEER DISTRiCt, SACRAMENTO CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1325 J STREET REPLY TO SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 85814-2922 Al'TliHTION 01' October 23, 1996 Regulatory Branch (199675396) Mr. Clark Branstetter Grand County Road and Bridge Department 467 East Topaz Post Office Box 9 Granby, Colorado 80446 Dear Mr. Branstetter:: , We have received comment letters on our public notice for I your proposed Fraser Valley Parkway project in Fraser, Colorado. The property is located adjacent to St. Louis Creek ~n Section 19, Township 1 South, Range 75 West, Grand County, Colorado. We have enclosed copies of these comment letters for your review. A vast majority of the comments from the public are not in favor of the proposal for a variety of reasons including impacts to high quality wetlands and wildlife habitat, the presence of less damaging alternatives, the lack of need for the project, and the a perceived need for a bypass around Winter Park as opposed to the Fraser bypass. You will need to prepare a response to these concerns especially concentrating on the presence of alternatives. Apparently the public, at least the publio that responded to our public notice, is satisfied with the current alternative routes or would prefer minor improvements of those routes. The U.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U. S . Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) commented that practicable alternatives to the proposed alignment are available, and that you have not clearly rebutted the presumption that these alternatives exist. The FWS also ~e~ested a survey for boreal toad habitat as this spec'ies is known to inhabit nearby wetland communities. The boreal toad is a candidate species under the Federal Endangered Speoies Act. The requested ~urvey can be conducted next spring. If boreal toad habitat is located on the project area during the survey, adjustments to the road alignment would be r~quired to avoid that habitat. Those adjustments may be minor but you may also be required to modify construction , techniques to mitigate. impacts to the toad. We will determine if. you will be required to conduct this survey as we continue to process your application. - Post-it" Fax Note 7671 ~ To Co, Fax II Fax' 1- , ýÿ .. OCT -29-19'36 10: 16 .GRAIID COUI'IT'i' . P,02 .. < You should prepare a response to the comments we received within 15 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions, pl~ase write to me or telephone (970) 243-1199. Sincerely, ~ Michael Claffe Project Manager 'f Northwestern Colorado Regulatory Office . 402 Rood Avenue, Room 142 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563 Copies Furnished: Mr. Keith Rose, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servioe, 764 Horizon Drive, South Annex A, Grand Junction, Colorado 81506-3946 Ms. Sarah Fowler, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 8EPR-EP, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466 Mr. William Clark, Colorado Division of Wildlife, 711 Independent Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 61501 TI-ITHL P. C1~~ . . 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 October 31, 1996 Ms. Alta Gesselman Fraser Cemetery Association Secretary 186 Byers Avenue Fraser, Colorado 80442 Dear Ms. Gesselman: As promised during the many public meetings held by the Town of Fraser on Planning Area 28 we are forwarding the documents identified below to you, as the Cemetery Association's Secretary. We have made copies of each document -- except the Subdivision Exemption Plat -- and mailed them to your attorney, Ross Libenson. We did not mail Mr. Libenson a copy of the Subdivision Exemption Plat as the Town does not have a copier that can replicate this document. . A copied of recorded Ordinance 225 . The original Quit Claim Deed for Tract A as shown on .the Maryvale Planning Area No. 28 Subdivision Exemption Plat from Maryvale, LLC . The original Quit Claim Deed for Tract A as shown on the Maryvale Planning Area No. 28 Subdivision Exemption Plat from Ozaukee Land and Financial Corporation . A copy of the recorded Maryvale Planning Area No. 28 Subdivision Exemption Plat . The original Bargain and Sale Deed for the former Town of East om Cemetery located on County Road 8 given to the Cemetery Association by the Town of Fraser. If I may answer questions about these documents, do not hesitate to ask. Sincerely, O~L Chuck Reid Town Manager copy with enclosures specified above: Mr. Ross Libenson copy without enclosures: ' Fraser Cemetery Association Fraser Board of Trustees ýÿ . . PJcOPOSED lJcASEJc TO GJcAl'fBY MlJI.lI-OSEJc TJcAD'. PJcOJ'ECTED PLATmD'f'G m.t::Er.INE Project Milestones 3/97 4/97 5/97 6/97 7/97 8/97 9/97 1 0/97 G rant Notification XXX Appointment of Planning Coordinator XXX Determing Property Owners XXX Contacting landowners XXX XXX XXX XXX Filing of Easements XXX XXX Trail Route Proposal XXX Public Meetings XXX XXX XXX Map Production XXX XXX Materials Needs Assessment XXX XXX Publication of Trail Plan XXX Project Completion XXX ..-- . . . fJ au b 1Jftof' . Planning Grant Application Participant Infonnation Applicants: Town Of Fraser Town Of Granby Third: Fraser Valley Partnership For Trails Contacts: Chuck Reid John Pritchard John Sevier Town Mgr. Town Mgr. President Addresses: Town of Fraser Town of Granby Fra Val Partnership for Trails PO Box 120 PO Box 440 PO Box 568 Fraser CO 80442 Granby CO 80446 Fraser CO 80442 970-726-5491 970-887-2501 970-726-8916 Project Infonnation Project Title: Proposed Plan for Multi-use Connector Trail from Fraser To Granby U. S. Congressional District: 3rd ColQr Senate Dlstrict; 8th Color House District: 56th County: Grand Brief Description of the Project: The Grand County Headwaters Trails Master Plan proposes a corridor connecting the towns of Fraser, Tabernash and Granbyvia the Fraser River corridor, county road right-of-ways and/or US HWY40 right-of-way. The best path must be researched and selected, landowners identified and contacted, the path adjusted mapped and surveyed, easements acquired, and environmental impact assessed and noted, with specific consideration given to animal migration routes and wetlands impact. We will invite public, town and governmental agency input. Consideration will be given to the initial trail surface used (with future considerations in mind) and user groups to be allowed Project Funding: Grant Request: $ Local Match: $ Total: $ Source & Amount of Local Match : Town Fraser $ 500.00 Town Granby $ 500.00 Headwaters Trails $2000.00 Fraser Valley Metropolitan Recreation District $ 500.00 Gr Co Board of County Commissioners $3000.00 In-kind Total: $ Authorized Signatures:Fraser Date: Granby FVPFT . . . . I. EUgjhility Requirements A Project Types: 1- Multi-Jurisdictional Planning -- The proposed trail corridor would connect the towns of Fraser, Tabernash, and Granby , while passing through unincorporated acreage composed of private recreational areas, Denver Water Board lands and other privately held parcels. This corridor was previously proposed by The Grand County Headwaters Trails Master Plan, but no action has been taken to date. 2- Multi-Objective Planning --This trail would serve as a connector between the towns of Fraser and Granby. The trail would eventually connect to the existing Fraser River Trail which extends from Fraser to Winter Park and the Winter Park Resort. In the future, the network could extend to Grand Lake and Kremmling connecting the main towns of the entire county. In addition to serving as a scenic recreational corridor for the sports enthusiasts that live and vacation in this area, the trail would also provide a safe alternate commuting route off US Highway 40. B. Recipients: The joint applicants of the Town of Granby and the Town of Fraser are both Colorado Municipalities, while the third party applicant, the Fraser Valley Partnership For Trails, is a 501 (C)(3) non-profit organization with trail preservation and new trail planning as its primary purpose. C. Required Matching Resources: Cash Town Of Granby $ 500.00 Town of Fraser $ 500.00 Headwaters Trails Alliance $2000.00 Fra Val Metro Rec District $ 500.00 Gr Co Board of County Commissioners $3000.00 Total Local Cash Match $ % of Project Cost In-Kind Environmental Impact Planning - Sally Edwards $ 30000 Surveying and mapping $ 1000 Public meeting facility and facilitator $ 1000 Staff, administrative and governmental agency time For research, fieldwork and coalition building $ Office space and telephone, supplies $ 2000 Travel of volunteers $ 3000 Public Service announcements by press $ 1500 Total In-Kind Match $ % of Project Cost D. Eligible Costs: Land appraisals Legal fees for easements and other agreements Trail surveying and mapping Public meeting room and facilitator for public sessions Staff time to research property owners and initiate contacts, verify amenability of . . . . proposed routes, walk proposed areas, create a needs inventory, and enlist various organizations and public support to ensure volunteer labor and donated materials during construction phases.. Environmental studies to assess impact in the corridor. Telephone costs and office space Supplies and postage Publication and copies Newspaper and radio advertising to relay information to the public. E. Maximum Grant: Project Total Requested... F. Project Period: Commencing April 1997 until final public approval December 1997. II. Selection Criteria A Characteristics and Need for the Project 1. (a) Need for and Benefits of the Planning Activity (I) There is a great need for an alternative transportation corridor to cover the 15 miles (see attached Map A) between the towns of Granby and Fraser. The project would interconnect with the existing trail system from Fraser to Winter Park as well as link recreational centers along the route including the Silver Creek Ski Area, YMCA of the Rockies, Devil's Thumb Cross Country Ski Center, the Pole Creek Golf Course, and the Fraser Valley Recreation Fields. U.S. Highway 40, the second most heavily traveled east-west artery in the state, is currently the only corridor connecting these areas and is both unfriendly and dangerous to other transportation users (i.e. bicyclists, equestrians, hikers, skiers). With the large disparity in property values in the area, a large portion of the work force for Winter Park Resort and the towns of Winter Park and Fraser, by necessity, must live in the cheaper rent environs of Granby and points north and west. Additionally, both middle school and high school students living in Fraser and Winter Park must commute to school in Granby. Therefore, a planning effort that results in a safe and friendly viable alternative transportation corridor between Fraser and Granby would provide a needed commuter/connector route for the people who live and recreate here. (2) A corridor was previously proposed as a specific project in the Grand County Headwaters Trails Master Plan developed in 1995 by the Grand County Department of Planning and Zoning (see attached Maps E and F). The proposed project was to "build a paved pathway connecting Fraser, Tabernash, and Granby along Fraser River, county road right-of- ways, and/or U.s. 40 right-of-way. This section of pathway should also include connections to Silver Creek Ski Area and the YMCA of the Rockies. This corridor is included in the Colorado State Recreational Trails Master Plan." (page 29 of Headwaters Master Plan) However, no specific planning towards this proposal has been done to date. (b) Specific Objectives of the Planning Effort A trail between Fraser and Granby would traverse a number of different properties, designated for a number of different uses. Likewise, the terrain traversed is varied and includes open meadows, sloped woodlands, and some wetlands. The purpose of this planning proposal would be to examine and set several alternative routes. The plan would accomplish the following objectives: ýÿ . . . · Research property ownership: the proposed trail would traverse a variety of private parcels. Determining ownership and the amenability of current owners to the trail's route is imperative. · Secure easements when possible: the granting of easements solidifies the trail's permanence, while lessening liability concerns for property owners. · Survey and map alternative routes: alternative routing, especially over critical sections of the trail, will provide more flexibility in seeking fmal approval. · Determine environmental impact: this is a necessary step in the effort to forsee the potential impact of the trail on animal migration routes and wetlands. Define user groups: determination must be made as to what recreational uses the trail will be open to including whether or not motorized recreational vehicles should be permitted. Needs Assessment: an inventory list of required materials and resources will be needed to acquire future funding for implementation of the plan. ... Enlist the support of volunteer organizations and public and private entities; in order to assure community support and to lessen construction costs through the utllization of volunteer labor and donated materials. · Organize public forums: this will help secure broad community support for the trail by publicizing how it will enhance the residents' quality of living and visitors' recreational experiences. Given the length of the route and the diversity of the property traversed, planning for this project is beyond the scope of a single municipal entity or volunteer organization. For this reason we are applying jointly for a Planning Project Grant to research and describe this project. (c) Potential Threats and Urgency of the Project The major threat facing the planning of this trail is the accelerated pace of development taking place in the Fraser Valley. The likely route of the trail traverses several large land parcels that are either , currently for sale or in the process of being developed. Based on informal contacts, most of the landowners who will potentially be affected are of the opinion that the proposed trail would be a welcome amenity and are willing to discuss the project. However, as some of these parcels are on the market, the attitude of future landowners cannot be predicted It is imperative that discussions begin and easements be secured as soon as possible. While Grand County Planning and Zoning gives consideration to trail use when developers plat a new development, the County will not become involved in securing trail easements in any other circumstance. For these reasons, it becomes important to begin planning while the land remains in the hands of friendly landowners. In the last two years, the importance of alternative transportation has become a major issue in the local community. While the area is blessed with a large amount of public lands, access to these domains is being rapidly compromised through development. The recent completion of two major alternative routes (trails) between the towns of Fraser and Winter Park, and the strong utilization of these routes points to the need for a more extensive system extending to the town of Granby and beyond. Trails are one of the only amenities that can be enjoyed by all residents and visitors alike, regardless of income level or physical ability. Trails bring people together and are an important counterbalance to the isolating nature of the automobile. Trails are environmentally friendly and a safe alternative to biking or hiking on roadways. In addition, local residents have strongly endorsed the construction of new trails via local recreation surveys. The overwhelmeing success of the Adopt-a- Trail program and other volunteer efforts has also proved their willingness to help build and maintain trails. . . - 2.(b) Multi-jurisdictional project: Neither the town of Fraser nor Granby currently have any proposed plan to define this corridor other than that proposed in the Headwaters Trails Master Plan (see Selection Criteria section IIA l.a)(2) ) We are undertaking the first phase of this effort. (c) Multi-ohjective project: This corridor will connect the towns as an alternative transportation path for commuters and students. The trail will also connect the towns to several private recreational areas via a scenic outdoor recreation corridor that is friendly and safe to all users. B. Impact of project 1. Project results Completion of the planning project will result in a trail plan that ensures protection of wildlife and the environment while providing an outdoor recreation/commuter corridor ina scenic and friendly setting. A project coordinator will be appointed to lead the planning effort. This person would be responsible for insuring that the objectives defined in section II., A, 1., b. of the grant application are achieved Such widely encompassing duties will likely require the coordinator to chair a committee which would assisst in reaching these goals. Success can be measured as each of the objectives are met. Public forums led by a facilitator would be held to assess support of public and private entities as well as to secure their approval for the project. 2. Likelihood of Implementation: With either financial and/or volunteeer support pledged by the main towns of Fraser and Granby, the Headwaters Trails Alliance, the Fraser Recreation District, US Forest Service, and FVPT (see letters of support), the main players are already in place for future implementation. Should the plan coordinator be able to secure further pledges of in-kind donations for equipment, labor and materials from local contractors, suppliers and potential trail crews, during the planning stages, future success of the implemenation effort is virtually guaranteed. 3. Catalyst or Demonstration Value This multi-jurisdictional proi-ect is in keeping with the objectives of the Headwaters Trails Masterplan and the Colorado State Trails Masterplan in that it links municipal and recreational areas through trails. It is designed to be a collaborative effort between municipalities (the towns of Fraser and Granby), recreational centers (Silver Creek Ski Resort, the Pole Creek Golf Course, YMCA of the Rockies, the Fraser Valley Metropolitan Recreational District), and private land owners and agencies (the Denver Water Board and others). It is also designed to serve as an example project to other groups wishing to link Grand County towns and recreational areas through trails. It is our intent to extend the expertise gained in completing this project to others within the county who may wish to undertake similar projects. This trail will be an important amenity to the residents of the area as well as the many visiting recreational enthusisats. This trail will serve as a primary artery that will link towns and developments that are currently growing along the proposed corridor. As such, we anticipate that it will serve as an impetus to develop secondary trails to serve these growing population centers. By developing this major corridor at this time, both existing and future developers will have a stronger motivation to design residential areas that incorporate and take advantage of a contiguous trail system This is a reasonable, cost-effective mechanism to expand the current trail system by giving residential developers a impetus to integrate trails as part of the overall subdivision platting process. ýÿ , . . . C. Lever~gin.g and Partnerships A Leveraging of Funds Fraser and Granby each have line items in the budget for trails work and have pledged at least $500.00 cash plus labor, equipment and materials as available. The grant requesting $2000.00 from the Headwaters Trails Alliance has been submitted this fall with verbal approval only to date. A similar grant has been requeted from the Fraser Valley Metropolitan Recreation District. The Board of County Commissioners has already committed $3000 cash with staff time, equipment and materials as available. Grand County Road and Bridge plus The Planning and Zoning Department at the discretion of the County Commissioners offers surveying and mapping assistance. The towns both have public meeting facilities that have been offered for public forums while trained facilatators have stepped forward to volunteer their time. Local newspapers and radio offer publicity for such meetings as public service announcements. Jim Coleman Constuction has offered to assist in route planning, marking and engineering. The entire Fraser Valley Partnership for Trails committee has agreed to assist in negotiations with landowners and public recreations facilities, walk the proposed routes, and aid in procuring easements. The county attorney will assist where possible. The coordinator hired specifically for this purpose will facilitate all of these volunteer and reduced cost efforts. As a result of other non-related projects, most of the environmental studies have already been completed in the impacted areas and Sally Edwards is offering the studies at a portion of their regular cost. B. Partnerships and Support 1. US Forest Service has pledged manpower support and tecnical assistance when possible. 2. Grand County Resources for Youth (GCRY) has volunteered their youth to assist in actual trail construction. 3. The East Grand Middle School "CHAMPS" program is currently organizing their program to support both the planning and construction phases as a part of their school program 5 The High County Hikers have volunteered their services to assist with trail layout and field work. 6. The Headwaters Trails Alliance sponsors one county-wide trail construction project yearly in conjuntion with the USFS and other governmental agencies. This project has been recommended for their sponsorship by all parties involved. Their projects have a excellent track record for volunteer assistance from the community. Note: The Headwaters Trails Alliance is composed of representatives of the Board of County Commissioners and each town and recreation district in the county with advisors from governmental agencies and public traUs partnerships. All have made a financial committment to the organization for the purpose of identifying, maintaining, and expanding an accessible interconnecting trail system in Grand County for multi-user groups...To link and protect significant resources along trails though the support of volunteers and public and private partnerships. ýÿ , ~ . . 4 TOWN BOARD OCT. 16, 1996 6:00 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Johnston opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. Board present were Wirsing, Havens, McIntyre, Swatzell and Sanders. Staff present were Reid, Skelton, Winter and attorney McGowan. Swatzell moved to go into executive session pursuant to CRS 24-6-402 (2.3)(e), developing strategy for and receiving reports on the progress of negotiations; and instructing negotiators, motion 2nd Wirsing, carried. Havens moved to come out of executive session at 7:30 p.m., motion 2nd Wirsing, carried. 7:30 p.m. Regular meeting opened. Havens moved to approve the minutes of Sept. 18th and Oct. 9th, table the minutes for Oct. 2, motion 2nd Wirsing, carried. OPEN FORUM Ron Jones commented that there had been approx. 200 comments filed with the Corp. regarding the Parkway. Ross Libenson asked at what point the Clerk would have the proposed referendum petition would be proofed. As of this date the Town had not received the registered voter list (as of 9/25/96) required by Statute from the County. When this is received a date will be set. Jon Devos asked consideration for a yes vote on Measure 18. MARYV ALE PROPOSED NEW PDO PROPOSAL Town Board commented to Maryvale that the review of this new proposal (with regards to how much densities have decreased) will determine how the Board will proceed with the review of the Metro Dist., and other regulatory exemptions, as it was expressed that this Board expects to see densities decrease by a sizable amount. Maryvale is being asked to present information at this meeting so that the process of review can start before the Feb. deadline of approval or denial of the Metro District. ýÿ .. ~ . . Rick Nipert and Andy Bush presented the new proposal. They also handed out material with charts depicting the existing densities allowed, previous proposal and current proposal. Board will be considering this at length over the next several months. MARYV ALE FPDP FILING DISCUSSION Reid reviewed for the Board and the audience, the various Ordinances and agreements that were reviewed with regards to determination of a FPDP filing. Reid stated that it is statTrecommendation that the Board consider the filing for FPDP on Maryvale PA 28 to be substantially complete pursuant to the requirements of the various regulations ofthe Town. Various questions were asked by the audience with regards to a complete filing and comments that asked if further review could be done on the documents by other planning professionals on behalf of the Town seeking an opinion as to a complete filing. Board discussed this. McIntyre made a motion to forward the documents to Clarion Assoc. for a review and opinion as to the completeness of the filing before any determination was made by this Board that the filing was complete, motion 2nd Sanders, carried. Reid, Skelton and McGowan made it clear that since they had reviewed and made a determination of a substantially complete filing, they could not be involved with any review made by Clarion. WOLVERINE RIDGE AS BUILT PLAT Skelton presented the history of the project as it has taken some time to solve problems created in earlier years. Skelton listed items that would need correction prior to the town signing the plat but recommended approval for signature when these items were shown to be corrected, also a 2nd page needs to be completed showing air space as required for a Condominium plat. Wirsing moved to approve plat and allow town signatures when correction have been made and staffhas given approval, 2nd Swatzell, carried. BYERS PEAK TOWNHOUSE CONDO PLAT Skelton presented plat for Byers Peak TH Condo. plat. Skelton recommended approval of the plat. Havens moved to approve the plat, 2nd Swatzell, carried. OTHER BUSINESS Reid discussed that the River Contract is substantially complete. Town is doing some finish work for the season. ýÿ r , r . . .. Reid has a company interested in placing bus shelters in the town. This company installs them and sells advertisement that is placed on the shelter. Mayor Johnston asked that a letter be written to the Commissioners in support of Enterprise Zoning. Mayor Johnston stated that he and Reid would be attending a meeting with the Denver Water Board to discuss future land use attitudes on the Water Board property. A letter was received from Jim Hoy with regards to a possible solution to limit vandalism on the statues. Reid discussed the vandalism of the statues. EXECUTIVE SESSION Wirsing made a motion to go into executive session to discuss real estate negotiations, 2nd Swatzell, carried. Havens made a motion to come out of executive session at 11:45 p.m ,2nd Wirsing, carried. No further business, meeting adjourned at 11 :46 p.m. . 'I . . . TOWN BOARD NOV. 6, 1996 The regular meeting of the Town Board was called to order by Mayor Johnston. Board present were Swatzell, Wirsing, Havens, McIntyre, Sanders and KIancke. Staff present were Reid, Skelton and Winter. Minutes of the 11/01/96 were approved as written. MSP Havens, Swatzell. Minutes of the Oct. 2nd meeting discussed. With regards to a motion to ask Maryvale to ~ present information on the revised POD plan as it relates to the Metro Dist. review, Havens ~ moved to amend the motion to read Mclntrye made a motion directing the Town Manager to ~ ~~\~ Maryvale that the Town wants information on Residential and Commercial densities as well as layout of densities to the staff by Oct. 11, 1996 so that the Town can proceed with necessary reviews or the Town may yank the Metro Dist., 2nd Havens, carried. Minutes approved for Oct. 2nd meeting as amended above. GRAND COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT EXEMPTION PLAT An exemption plat, revising a lot line for the Library District was submitted for approval. All issues the Town had have been addressed. Plat complete except for a signature from the School Board. Havens moved to approve the exemption Plat, 2nd Wirsing, carried. PARTNERSHIP FOR TRAILS GRANT APPLICATION Diana Lynn Rau is asking the Town to sponsor, along with the Town of Gran by a grant application to GOCO for planning a trail between Fraser and Granby. Only Town's can apply for these grants, but if received the Trails partnership will administer the planning effort, the Town of Granby will administer funds.. Board discussed the Trails Partnership and the Headwater Trails group with regards to goals and differences. Rau is also asking for consideration of$500 in ]997. the Town portion of this grant. McIntyre moved to approve the Town of Fraser sponsorship of the grant application, but application will be reviewed and approved by staff prior to submittal to GOCO, also to see if the $500.00 request for the 1997 expenditures can be put in the budget, 2nd Wirsing, carried. -. . . .. MARYV ALE FPDP Mayor Johnston and Manager Reid gave a history of the documents that are relevant to a determination of filing of a FPDP on the Maryvale development. Preannexation agreements, zoning applications and PDD applications and the PDD Ordinance signed in 1986 are documents that control this development. These documents call for a filing of a FPDP by a date certain that was Oct. 15, 1996. Maryvale has filed a FPDP application. Various Town staff as well as an outside consulting land use firm has reviewed the filing as to substantial filing status. On Nov. J, 1996 the Town Board held a executive session to review all information received in regards to review of the filing of a FPDP. Reid asked the Town Board for a consensus of has Maryvale filed a substantially complete FPDP application. Consensus of the Board is that the application has been filed. Town Attorney Rod McGowan made it clear to the audience that the town Board has processed the FPDP documents and a decision has been made solely on the review of the documents that were submitted, not by any threat or comments made by Maryvale in a recent letter. Reid made it clear that this is a filing not an approval of the plan. The plan will now be processed per regulations. A referendum petition has been filed against the Ordinance that allows the mixed use. The FPDP application was filed in 3 separate parcels, therefore the Town will not be reviewing the mixed use parcel if the referendum is sucessful. Johnston reviewed that work needs to take place on amendments to the Subdivision Regulations, POD regs, etc., that could address the communities concern on many issues regarding growth. Audience had various comments and questions. Staff will work on a time frame to work on the various tasks ahead. OTHER BUSINESS Reid would like the Town to have an opportunity to comment with regards to punishment of the vandals of the Hoy sculptures. Skelton advised that an inquiry has been made with regards to 5.6 acre annexation. Proposed use would be single family modular that would be affordable. Board indicated they would be interested in annexation if the use was single family affordable housing. Skelton will have a draft of an annexation policy! 3 mile plan at the next planning commission meeting. '. . . . Reid stated that the implementation tools are still being worked on from the growth meetings. Reid reported that the computers file server had a major crash and it would costs around $3000 to retrieve the information. An Insurance claim would be filed. Reid also reported that the County had pulled the Parkway plan from the Army Corp. review. If might be a next step to have a traflic study so that some location can be determined. No further business, meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. ~' MAR~- A BOON OR ALBATROSS? Y.ECIDE. , Projected revenue property tax 5,650,000 vehicle fees 912,375 total 6,562,375 (Town of Fraser share approx. 621,500) --------- ----------------------------------------------------------- Projected net income/cost for each taxing district East Grand School District -5,570,794 Grand County Library Dist - 28,051 East Grand Fire District 0 Fraser Valley Met Rec Dist 0 Grand County undetermined negative amount Colorado River Conservancy 27,158 Middle Park Water Conserv 9,570 Town of Fraser info not available Net cost of proposed units to us -5,562,117 per year ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------- Projected figures are based on the following asslDlJPtions: 4055 residential units proposed $200,000 value per unit 60% of units have auto registered in Grand county 1.5 vehicles per unit $250 fee per vehicle .5 East Grand student per unit --------------------------------------------~------------------ The annual property tax on a $200.000 unit breaks down as follows: $237 Grand County 137 East Grand Fire District 61 Fraser Valley Metro Recreation District 42 Grand County Library District 155 Town of Fraser 6.70 Colorado River Conservancy 2.36 Middle Park Water Conservancy 756 East Grand School District ------------------------------------------------------------ Present re'9"enue property tax 29,058 (Town of Fraser share approx. 3000 ) Present net income to taxing districts The total amount is essentially income as no services provided Net income to us now 29,000 per year - ,. Grand County: The ne~esult was determined to ~egative, but unable to arrive at a figure. The areas most adverse~y impacted would be social services and nursing services, especially during construction. It was indeterminate if other areas of county services would be adversely impacted or maintain status quo. East Grand Fire: They feel if they can remain volunteer and continue to maintain enough active volunteers, there would most likely be no change. FVMRD : No net effect based on available information. Increased usage and fees probably offset increased staff and costs. Residential development is not a windfall to the district because of Bruce and Gallagher. East Grand Library: Based on 1995 per capita cost and only property tax income shows a .shortfall. Town of Fraser: Never supplied info requested, so cannot determine if the $155/unit would meet costs. We can only hope the Town makes sure they do what is fiscally responsible for the community. Co River Cons: Would realize additional income Middle Park Water: Would realize additional income East Grand School: This is where we (all of us in the district) really suffer. The income is based on property tax and state aid. The expense is based on 1996-7 cost per student of 4635. Income 3,826,668 Expense 9,397,462 The projected figures. were arrived at based on the above information obtained from staff or board members of the various entities. Not considered: water and sewer services - .- ýÿ . . CHAMBER SPEAKS OUT IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSIBLE GROWTH November 19, 1996 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE P.O. Box 3236 It is the mission of the Winter Parklfraser Valley Chamber of Commerce "to ensure a high quality of life in the Fraser Valley by promoting year-round business opportunities and responsible economic growth." The WINTER PARK Chamber Board has confirmed this mission statement each year at the Board's annual retreat. However, COLORADO 80482 due to the minimal growth of our community until recently, the words of the mission statement may have seemed to many an aspiration to an ideal rather than firmly grounded in reality. Times have changed. Talk of new developments and population increases seems to be at the forefront of virtually all of our thoughts and discussions. land use planning issues are occupying an increasingly significant portion of the agendas of our elected officials, and the debates among members of our community seem to be taking on a decidedly divisive tone. The Chamber Board has watched the proceedings within the County's court of public opinion with increasing concern that the views of a significant portion of the Fraser Valley's business community are not being aired and considered. The Board also recognizes that potentially irreversible decisions concerning the long-term economic vitality of our community may be decided based upon the opinion of a vocal segment of our citizens. The Winter Parklfraser Valley Chamber of Commerce represents a diverse group of businesses that understand and appreciate the need for responsible, controlled growth in the community. Haphazard, poorly planned, improperly executed, or insensitive development should have no place in the Fraser Valley. On the other hand, well-planned and implemented growth that results in moderate, sustained expansion of our business base is central to the Chamber's mission. Many of the community amenities that our member businesses wish to see developed in the Fraser Valley - cultural and recreational facilities, schools, libraries, improved transportation systems and attainable housing - all depend in one way or another on an increase in our community's assessed valuation. Without sustainable growth, the tax base will never rise and the significant benefits of spreading facilities costs over a wider populace can never be realized. Further, without a vibrant business economy, wages cannot be expected to increase. The Chamber Board encourages the County and the Towns to push for the prompt completion of theCoordinated Growth Study. Collectively we can begin the process of carefully evaluating the applicability and efficacy of implementing the proposed growth management tools within each of the diverse regions of Grand County. We challenge our County's elected officials to consider the proposition that growth management should not - and cannot - be a "one-size-fits-all" solution. Each section of the County should be given the right and responsibility to choose the tools it feels are most appropriate to realization of the needs, desires and goals of its unique constituency. Similarly, the Chamber Board PHONE: believes that implementation of regulation changes should not occur on an ad hoc basis, but only within (970) 726-4118 the framework of a carefully structured and coordinated growth plan. . DENYE:R METRO: The Chamber looks forward to the delivery of the final report to the County Commissioners and Town (303) 422-0666 officials. We, as a community, will have much work to do once the report is delivered. Each of us must . become actively involved in crafting the solution we want in order for the entire process to be successful. FAX: It has been said that you can dream, create, design and build the most wonderful place in the world, but it (970) 726-9449 requires people to make the dream a reality. The Chamber Board encourages its members to commit to . WEB srn:: the realization of the dream of quality, sustained growth in the Fraser Valley and throughout Grand www.w1nterpark-lnfo.com/wpfY County. . . September 18, 1996 Mal"vvale LLC Town of Fraser items for discussion fo help with density ..educti!~cf.!nSider~tion: I(. .... ()I.c... / -:f. 1.. -b ~ .. 1/ (.j : 1- w b - ~ I. I ?OO' Cui de sac and flag lot distanc~ cri~ria that i.s generally accept.ed in Orand County. . ..f\o~ lot.. lV\i n iWIl VI'\ vim. ~ et-(ll WlvW\ V\VYrI b.t.L : ~ eu 1- J, -10.. -- Jl<,', oat>' 1-',. ~, ~ {) 2. Divided roads allowed ~ dnal accesL 1 . ~".f; ~ l.A".(... ro o-d tJ " d ') QA.4. C<..,' . c ~ vv- ) )e.po.1.~ Irk. vi. CA.1 C j~r,J~ 3. Main bike path system along Fraser Parkway and connecting to current Ilighway 40 i." V" & "alh via Village CenlerD,ive (Leland Creek). Nn requiremenl fill' hike IlAths u, (~\\ \".,.. side\valks in planning areas I IW. 12W. IE 2E. 3E. 4E, 5E, 6E. 7E. SE, lJE. nnd I IE. X Bike paths and sidewalks in all other planning arens will be reviewed on a case bv case basis. ftM..1'VI-ktU. t~U'5+~ a.cu.~~s . 4. Fraser Parkway to he responsihility of Town between parcel 7W and 5W. Two lanes ~~\t nom the north of parcel 7W and two lanes nom the south of parcel 5W will he the ~~ obligation of Maryvale. All land necessary HlI (hur filII lanes, bike path. sidewalks and median per existing right-or.way requirements will be dedicated to the Tm\in. 5. Parcels I E through 7E dO, he served by a gravel road and w~1 and septic systems. ~'/(,l /l.oq.,J o\v d ~ fAIl.~ ~'-h'.fA 6. Chip and seal to he allowed within any planning areas. Asphalt will he used on Fraser P(t9y, Village Center Drive and within planning areas I Wand 4W. 7. Town of Fraser to aggressively assist in ohtaining necess npproval notn Winter Pnrk u~s emssing Rund numl,nrce1IIW nnd 12W wesl ufthe rnilmnd. 8. Work with Maryvale in discussing agreement with Grand County Water & Sanitation txerve via. intergovernmental agreement. -t ~ I 1'\1\ ea.c....!- o'V' I'i,,-"tt~ c1 /'77;) c.... 9. Allow a sales tax rebate of approximately IA% fiom the golfcomsc Rnef relail husinesses that locate in Maryvale. This rehate will he used to pay Hn specific inn'aslmclu... ns '~Ieed 1(1 by Ihe de!I,er .nd Ihe Tu"n. . :t. t fR.N'd .,:.") ~''''''''c..i />JY" c~ ~ nre. ti. d I " 'L (J)"~ ~ . '. '. REFERENDUM PETITION PROTESTING TilE EFFECT OF ORDINANCE 225 Ordinance 225 accomplishes two things. The Ordinance allows and also places restrictions on a mixed use zoning on the lower half of P A 28 and also adds various development restrictions that were not found in the subdivision regulations for the protection of the Cemetery. A valid petition has been filed protesting the effect of the Ordinance. The petition has 68 signatures, registered voters in the Town of Fraser number . The entirety of the Ordinance is protested. Ordinance 225 is not in effect due to the petition. Colorado State Statues requires that the Town Board shall promptly reconsider the Ordinance. If upon reconsideration the Ordinance is not repealed, the Town shall submit the measure to a vote of the registered electors at a regular or special election held not less than 60 days and not more than 150 days after the petition is declared sufficient, unless otherwise required by the state constitution. Prior to reconsideration of the Ordinance we have asked that Maryvale address the Board as well as a representative of the petition regarding the petition. The Town will either repeal the Ordinance or submit the Ordinance to the voters. '. //.,._-'~ \. ,_~ ~ J"',_, ./ ,- / t::t \ / ~ ~ '\c 4 _~ --/ . .-4 f). /- ...... ,--,- -........ / '.....---; ---- T?I~~o~~r~;::~^ve~2~j~~wv~"~'~ Fraser. Colorado 80tl42 ~) ~. ), ,(/f)~ ~~> (970) 726-5tl91 - - - ..- ..- FAX Une: (970) 726-5518 Nov. 15,1996 AIIll Oc~~elll1nn Box" 26 f~tnset Co. R(H42 Mr. Kilk Klnllcke Box 82 Fmscr Co. 80"tJ2 HE: IU~fiI~nl~NIH '!\II'Kln ION l'nul fi:STING IIIE EJi"Hi~( 'T OF (H")lNt\N(:t~ 225 Arter exnminnfion or .h(' likd I'cWiml if is "'~' deh'nninntifln Ihn' fin' nhon' pelitinn hns 'he I"('fl"ired nllmher or nltid signnhnes. The I'rfifiOll will he rorw," dcd 1'01' hnthrr ffJIIsidt'rnliult to tilt, nnnlfl '11' Trll~h'(~s nt Ihe re~lIlnr meeting Oil Nol'. 20, 1996. If is ml "nd(~rsh1JHlin~ .hnt n I ('IIH'S('II'"Ii\'(' fruIII 1\1:"'~'nlh' nnd 11 I"qJlrscn(:I.he or the Iwtifiolt \\ ill he prc:qe"Ii,,~ inronllnlinlt tn the BUlu d nt Ihis m('('lill~ IHior to the cOllsidcHlfifJII h~' 'he TnwII nUl" d. If lOll tunc nn}' 'I,,('sfions, '('f me Imow. SiIlCC'-cl}', Vie,..)' Win tel", Ton-n CI('I"'" ýÿ . . l..iVL1~ UO~~~ I4a.J FRASER ANNEXATION/DISCONNECTION CALENDAR - c.( ('., e. u., ~1rV\ r1'l J"9t!~VI.~"'~"""': "X..f ~~.~ ktAA~ 1J1 November 20th /' - QrElinallC~s fer DillcgJ;Jnp~tion - first Reading - Annexation Resolutions November 21 st - Notice of Public Hearings to Manifest Manifest must publish 4 times: November 27 December 4 December 11 December 18 Must also send notice to the Clerk for the Board of County Commissioners and Jack DiCola December 4 - Ordinances for Di~nnection - ~Public Hearing Beee1':l.1beI 18 - A.:B:IWx:ation Ordinances First Reading January 8 - Findings of Fact Resolutions 1 ?vb l,'to ~ e.-:""") Annexation Ordinances - Second R-eading al\cl~nt..lru Hearing I" ' . . . TOWN OF FRASER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN APPLICATION FOR DISCONNECTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST U, SOUTHWEST U OF SECfION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRAND COUNTY, COLORADO, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 5000 SQUARE FEET, AND DISCONNECTING SAID LAND FROM THE TOWN OF FRASER. WHEREAS, the Town of Winter Park, Colorado, as owner of one hundred percent (100%) of the property described and depicted on Exhibit A hereto (the "Property"), has submitted an Application for Disconnection of said Property; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees at its regular meeting on , 1996, reviewed the Application for Disconnection; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has examined the record in this case; considered the request, the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendations of the staff; and based upon the record which has been made concerning the request, has arrived at its decision; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has found and determined that the applicant has complied with all of the procedural requirements as provided in Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S. in connection with the request for disconnection; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Board of Trustees that the best interests of the Town of Fraser wiII not be prejudiced by the requested disconnection. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, THAT: PART 1: The Application for Disconnection for the property described therein, is hereby accepted and found to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. PART 2: The above-described property is hereby disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. PART 3: The disconnection of the above-described property from the Town of Fraser, Colorado, is complete and effective on the effective date of this Ordinance. PART 4: SEVERAB ILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shaIl not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town of Fraser hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.A ýÿ . . . subsection, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. PART 5: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage, adoption and publication thereof as provided by law. READ, PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AND SIGNED THIS DA Y OF , 1996. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO BY: Jeff Johnston Mayor ATTEST: (S E A L) Virginia Winter, Town Clerk Published in the Winter Park Manifest on , 1996. lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.A ýÿ . At ;. ..... - . . . KING'S CROSSING ROAD OISCONNEC nON/ANNEXA nON PARCEL A . - ..... LEGAL OESCRIPnON OF A TRACT OF LANO TO BE KNOWN AS -DlSCONNEcnON/ANNEXATlON PARCEL A.. BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN OF FRASER AND ANNEXED TO THE TOWN OF WINTER PARJ<, BEING A PORTION OF THE NWI/4SWI/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, R4NGE 15 WEST..OF TH~ 6TH P.M., GRAND COUNTY, CaORADO. AND MORE PARTlCULARL Y OESCRIBEO AS FCiL OWS: Beginning at 0 point being /.ie SWI/16rf'1 Corner of sOia Section 28: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for (] dis/once of 316.62 feet along the East-West centerline of 'he SW/ /4 of said Section 28 to a pomt; THENCE North 81 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds East for 0 distance of 30.53 feet to 0 point,' THENCE North 89 degrees (X) mmutes 05 seconds East for a distance of 129.25 feet to a point,' THENCE North 86 degrees 18 minutes 41 seconds East for 0 distance of 112.25 feet to 0 point: n-tENCE along a curve to the Jeft having 0 radius of 161.31 feet and an arc length of 81.99 feet, being subtended by a chord 'of North 63 degrees 56 minutes 20 seconds East for a dislance 0' 85.99 feet to a point: THENCE North 15 degrees 51 minutes 01 seconds West for a distance of 25.01 feet fO a point being on 'he southerly Ime of Tract A -I at Reception Number 280221: THENCE along a curve to the leff haVing a rodius of .' 14.31 feet and an orc len'gth of 36.56 feet, being sub/ended by a c.iora of North 61 degrees 41 minu.'es 14 seconds East for a distance of 36.41 leet to a point being on me easterly line of said NWI/4SWI/4,' THENCE South 00 degrees /9 minutes 20 seconds West for a distance of 10.48 feet along said easterly line to 0 point.' THENCE South 00 degrees OJ minutes 40 seconds West for () distance of 5.45 leet along said easterly line to a point: THENCE South 00 degrees 03 minutes 31 seconds West for 0 disfanc; 'of 8.09 fee! along said easterly line to the POINT OF . BEGINNING. . . Together with and subject to covenants, easements, and restrictions of record. ~ .. . Saki prop~(ty contaif15 5COO 5quare feet more or less. . . EXHIBIT I A -I . x . . APPLICA TION FOR DISCONNECTION TO: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO RE: PROPERTY KNOWN AS: "DISCONNECTION/ANNEXATIONPARCELA," A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NW}(SWU OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 5000 SQUARE FEET. The undersigned landowner, in accordance with the provisions of Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S., as amended, hereby applies to the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado for disconnection from the Town of Fraser of the following described area situate and being in the Town of Fraser, and State of Colorado, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.) Petitioner further states as follows: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. 2. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser is adjacent to the boundary of the Town of Winter Park, Colorado. 3. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser will be aIlIlexed by the Town of Winter Park. 4. That Petitioner owns one hundred percent (100%) of the land sought be discoIlIlected from the Town of Fraser. 5. That the best interests of the Town of Fraser will not be prejudiced by the discoIlIlection of the above-described land. Therefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado, approve the disconnection of the land proposed to be discoIlIlected. TOWN OF WINTER PARK, COLORADO .-' / ?l/ By: -p . ..J ,;'.. ':7/ . -":" ~-,,~ , Daryl Shrum Town Manager 9/JO/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\PETDIS.A . . - . 1- .. KING'S 'CROSSING ROAD OISCONNEC TlON/ ANNEXA TlON PARCEl. A .. LEGAL OESCRIPTlON OFA TRACT OF LAND TO BE KNOWN AS .OISCONNECTlON/ANNEXATlON PARCEL A,. BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN OF FRASER AND ANNEXED TO THE TOWN OF WINTER PARK, BEING A PORTION OF THE NWI/4SWI/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 15 WEST..OF THE. 6TH P.M" GRAND COUNTY, CaORAOO, AND MORE PARTlCULARL r OESCRIBEO AS FaLOWS: Beginning at 0 point being t.lJe SW 1/16,'1) Corner of SOia Section 28: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for a distance of 316.62 feet along the East-West centerline of 'he SWi /4 of said Section 28 to a pomt,' THENCE North 81 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds Eas' for a distance 01 30.53 feet to a point,' THENCE North 89 degrees 00 minutes 05 seconds East for a distance of 129.25 feel /0 a point,' THENCE North 86 degrees 18 minutes 41 seconds East for a distance (}f 112.25 feet to a point: THENCE along a curve to the left having 0 radius of 161.31 feet and on arc length 0181.99 feer. being subtended by 0 chord 01 North 63 degrees 56 minutes 20 seconds East for 0 distance Of 86.99 feet fa a point: THENCE North 15 degrees 51 minutes 01 seconds Wes' for 0 distance of 25.01 feet 10 a point being on the southerly Ime of Tract A -I at Reception Number 280221.' THENCE along a curve to the left havmg a radius of .' 1<.31 feet and on arc len'glh of 36.56 feet, being subtended by a c.70rd of North 61 degrees 41 minules 14 seconds East for a distance of 36.4 I feet to a point being on tl)e easterly line of said NWI/4SWI/4,' THENCE South 00 degrees 19 minutes 20 seconds West for (] distance of 10.48 feet olr;ng said easterly line to a point: THENCE South 00 degrees 03 minutes 40 seconds West for a disfancB of 5.45 feer along said easterly line to a pain,: THENCE South 00 degrees 03 minutes 31 seconds West lor a disfanc; 'of 8.09 feet along said easterly line to the POINT OF . BEGINNING. . . . , Together witll and subject to covenants, easements, and restrictions of record. - .... Saki P'()P~rty contains 5COO square feet more or less. . . EXHIBIT I A .. ~ . . TOWN OF FRASER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN APPLICATION FOR DISCONNECTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST J4, SOUTHWEST M OF SECfION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRAND COUNTY, COLORADO, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 12970 SQUARE FEET, AND DISCONNECfING SAID LAND FROM THE TOWN OF FRASER. WHEREAS, the Clifford G. Dimmitt Revocable Trust, as owner of one hundred percent (100%) of the property described and depicted on Exhibit A hereto (the "Property"), has submitted an Application for Disconnection of said Property; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees at its regular meeting on . 1996, reviewed the Application for Disconnection; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has examined the record in this case; considered the request, the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendations of the staff; and based upon the record which has been made conceming the request, has arrived at its decision; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has found and determined that the applicant has complied with all of the procedural requirements as provided in Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S. in connection with the request for disconnection; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Board of Trustees that the best interests of the Town of Fraser will not be prejudiced by the requested disconnection. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, THAT: PART 1: The Application for Disconnection for that property described therein, is hereby accepted and found to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. PART 2: The above-described property is hereby disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. PART 3: The disconnection of the above-described property from the Town of Fraser, Colorado, is complete and effective on the effective date of this Ordinance. PART 4: SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.D . - . . of Fraser hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, clause or phrase thereof. irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections. subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. PART 5: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage, adoption and publication thereof as provided by law. READ. PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AND SIGNED THIS DA Y OF . 1996. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER. COLORADO BY: Jeff Johnston Mayor ATTEST: (S E A L) Virginia Winter, Town Clerk Published in the Winter Park Manifest on , 1996. lO!24!96-pss U,\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.D ýÿ '0 - 4 .4 . . KIIVG'S CROSSING ROAD DISCONNECTION/ANNEXA nON PARC9- C LE~ DESCRIPTION a= A TRACT CF LAND TO BE KNOWN AS -DISCONNECTION/ANNEXA nON PARCEL C,. BEING DISCONNECTED FROM TrlE TOWN OF TOU'N OF FRASER AND ANNEXED TO rrlE TOWN CF WINTER PARK, BEING A PORnON OF THE NWI/4S'III/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH,- RANGE 15 WEST CF THE 6TH P.M., GRANO COUNTY, ca.ORADO, AND MORE PARnCUARL Y DESCRIBED AS FQJ.OWS: Beginning Of a point bemg on the South 1/ 16th line of said Section 28, WHENCE the South 1/ 16th Corner of Sections 29 and 28 bears South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West 0 distance of 143.61 feet,' THENCE along a curve to the right having a radius of 170.30 feet and an arc length of 86.31 feet, being sub fended by a chord of North 51 degrees /3 minutes 19 seconds East for a distance of 86.23 feet to a point; THENCE along a curve to the ng/Jt havw; a radius of 166.49 feet and an arc length 01 208.69 feet, being subtenaed by a chord of South 83 degrees 39 minutes 44 seconds Eost for a distance of 195.30 feet to a point; THENCE along a curve to the left having 0 radius of 388.18 feet and an arc length 01 35.71 feet, being subtended by a chord of South 50 degrees 23 minutes 19 seconds East for a distance 01 35.10 feet to a point being on said 1/ 16th line: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West lor a distance of 294.14 feet alonq 50id 1/ 16th line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Together with and subject to covenants, (J(]sements, and restrictions of record. Said properry conrams 12970 square feet more or JeS$. EXHIBIT i A ~ , ~~. . . . APPLICA TION FOR DISCONNECTION TO: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO RE: PROPERTY KNOWN AS: "DISCONNECfION/ANNEXA nON PARCEL C," A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NWU SwU OF SECfION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 12970 SQUARE FEET. The undersigned landowner, in accordance with the provisions of Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S., as amended, hereby applies to the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado for disconnection from the Town of Fraser of the following described area situate and being in the Town of Fraser, and State of Colorado, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.) Petitioner further states as follows: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. 2. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser is adjacent to the boundary of the Town of Winter Park, Colorado. 3. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser will be annexed by the Town of Winter Park. 4. That Petitioner owns one hundred percent (100%) of the land sought to be discomlected from the Town of Fraser. 5. The best interests of the Town of Fraser will not be prejudiced by the disconnection of the above-described land. Therefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado, approve the disconnection of the property proposed to be disconnected. THE CLIFFORD G. DIMMITT REVOCABLE TRUST , ,y, I, L Ii irl~ By: ( ':. il ~j . I) r' , ~ I'd (.1 ') f' t.' (~'. . . lO/2196-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\PETDIS.D ýÿ . - - - .. . . . KI'VG'S CROSSING ROAD OISCONNEcnON/ANNEXA nON PARCE!.. C LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF A TRACT CF LAND TO BE KNOWN AS -DISCONNECTION/ANNEXATION PARCEL C, - BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN OF TOWN OF FRASER AND ANNEXED TO TNE TOWN CF WINTER PARK, BEING A PORTION OF THE NWI/4SWI/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 15 WEST ex: mE 6m P.M., GRANO COUNTY, caORADO, AND MORE PARnCUARL Y DESCRIBED AS FaLOWS: Beginning 01 0 point bemg on the South 1/ 16th line of said Section 28, WHENCE the South 1/1 6th Corner of Sections 29 and 28 bears South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West a distance of 143.61 feet: THENCE along a curve to the right having 0 radius of 170.30 feet and on ore length of 86.31 feet, being subtended by a chord of North 51 degrees /3 minutes 19 seconds East for 0 distance of 86.23 feet to a f)oinr: THENCE along a curve to the rig/7t havlfl~ 0 radius 01 166.49 feet and on arc length of 208.69 feet, being subtenoed by 0 chord of South 83 degrees 39 minutes 44 seconds East for a distance of 196.30 feet to a point: THENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of 388. 18 feet and on ore length of 35.11 feet, being subtended by a chord of South !50 degrees 23 minutes 19 seconds East for a distance of 36.10 feel to 0 {X)inr being on said 1/ 16th Ime: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for 0 distance of 294./4 feet along said 1/ 16th line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Together with and subject to covenants, e~sements, and restrictions of record. Said fJroperty contains 12970 square feet more or less. EXHIBIT J A fI '\ . . TOWN OF FRASER u - -- .- ~[i) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN APPLICATION FOR DIS (t/vltf,"f~ r-o oW) PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORT"" ~~ }( OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WESi Mt/,C, ~ t.J P GRAND COUNTY, COLORADO, CONT AINING APPROXIMA~ FEET, AND DISCONNECTING SAID LAND FROM THE TOWI' ~ WHEREAS, the Town of Winter Park, Colorado, as owner of one I of the property described and depicted on Exhibit A hereto (the "Pr an Application for Disconnection of said property; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees at its regular meeting on reviewed the Application for Disconnection; and m -- WHEREAS, the Board of Tmstees has examined the record in this case; considered the request, the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendations of the staff; and based upon the record which has been made conceming the request, has arrived at its decision; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has found and determined that the applicant has complied with all of the procedural requirements as provided in Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S. in connection with the request for disconnection; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Board of Tmstees that the best interests of the Town of Fraser will not be prejudiced by the requested disconnection. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, THAT: PART 1: The Application for Disconnection for the property described therein, is hereby accepted and found to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. PART 2: The above-described property is hereby disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. PART 3: The disconnection of the above-described property from the Town of Fraser, Colorado, shall be complete and effective on the effective date of this Ordinance. PART 4: SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town of Fraser hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.C . ~ . . subsection, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. PART 5: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage, adoption and publication thereof as provided by law. READ, PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AND SIGNED THIS DA Y OF , 1996. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO BY: Jeff Johnston Mayor ATTEST: (S E A L) Virginia Winter, Town Clerk Published in the Winter Park Manifest on , 1996. lO124196-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\DISRES.C ýÿ . - ~ ,-- . . KING'S CROSSING ROAD DISCONNECTION/ANNEXATION PARCEL 0 LEGAL. DESCRIPTION OF A TRACT OF LAND TO BE KNOWN AS -DISCONNECTION/ANNEXA TlON PARCEL 0,. BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN ex: FRASER AND ANNEXED TO THE TOWN CF WINTER PARK, BEING A PORTION CF THE NWI/4SWI/4 CF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 weST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRANO COUNTY, Ca.ORADO, AND MORE PARTlClLARL Y DESCRIBED AS Fa...L CWS: Beginning at a point being on the East-West centerline of the SW 1/4 of said Section 28, WHENCE the S 1/ 16th Corner of Sections 28 and 29 bears South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West a distance of 46.80 feet: THENCE;aiong a curve fO the right having a radius of 830.30 feef and an erc length of /11,93 feet being subtended by a chord of North 54 ~egrees 29 minutes 52 seconds East a distance of 111.62 feet: THENCE along a curve to the right having a radius of 226.49 feet and on ore length of 283.90 feet. being subtended by a chord of South 83 degrees 39 mlnu~s 44 seconds East 0 distance of 265.68 feet: . : THENCE along 0 curve to the left !'1aving 0 radius of 328.18 feet and an arc length of 129.58 feet being subtended by 0 chord of South 59 degrees 03 minutes 53 seconds East 0 distance of 128.74 feet to a point being on said East-West centerline: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for a distance ~f 123.21 feet along said East-West centerline: THENCE along a curve to th~ right having a radius of 388.18 feet and an arc length of 36.11 feet being subtended by a chord of North 50 d~grees 23 minute, 19 seconds West a distance of 35.70 feer: THENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of 166.49 feet and an arc length of 208.69 feet being sub/ended oJ a chord of South 83 degrees ,39 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 195.30 feet; THENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of 770.30 feet and an ore length of 86.31 feet being subtended by a chord of South 57 degrHs 13 minutes 19 seconds West a distance of 86.23 feet fO a point being on said East-West centerline: THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for a dIstance gf 56.81 teet to me POINT cy: BEGINNING. Tqgelt1er ttifh and sub/ect to covenants, easements, and restrictions of record. Said property contains 26940 ,qucr~ leet~ mOf~ or ItH. ," EXHIBIT I A ýÿ 4 ".lo . . APPLICA TION FOR DISCONNECTION TO: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO RE: PROPERTY KNOWN AS: "DISCONNECfION/ANNEXA TION PARCEL D," A PARCEL OFLAND LOCATED IN THE NWX' SWX' OF SECfION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 26940 SQUARE FEET. The undersigned landowner, in accordance with the provisions of Title 31, Article 12, Part 5, C.R.S., as amended, hereby applies to the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado for disconnection from the Town of Fraser of the following described area situate and being in the Town of Fraser, and State of Colorado, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.) Petitioner further states as follows: I. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be disconnected from the Town of Fraser, Colorado. 2. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser is adjacent to the boundary of the Town of Winter Park, Colorado. 3. That the property sought to be disconnected from the Town of Fraser will be annexed by the Town of Winter Park. 4. That Petitioner owns one hundred percent (100%) of the land sought to be discOlmected from the Town of Fraser. 5. The best interests of the Town of Fraser will not be prejudiced by the disconnection of the above-described land. Therefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado, approve the disconnection of the property proposed to be disconnected. TOWN OF WINTER PARK, COLORADO (;' . , :/ ...--- ../'. .-' ~I' ,..^.~..... By. ._~). , :/ ,'/;t, '\_ /- . ,----- .r Daryl Shrum Town Manager lO/2/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\PETDIS.C ýÿ - L .. . . KING'S CROSSING ROAD DISCONNECnON/ANNEXAnON PARCEL D LEGAL DESCRIPnON OF A TRACT OF LAND TO BE KNOWN AS -DISCONNECnON/ANNEXAnON PARCEL D, - BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN ex: FRASER AND ANNEXED TO THE TOWN a: WINTER PARK, BEING A PORnON a: mE NWI/4SWI/4 CF SEcnON 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRAND COUNTY- Ca..ORADO, AND MORE PARnCUARL Y DESCRIBED AS FCLL OWS: Beginning at a point being on the East-West centerline of the SW 1/4 of said Section 28, WHENCE the S / / /6th Corner of Sections 28 and 29 bears South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West a distance of 46.80 feet: THENCE: along a curve to the right having a radius of 830.30 feet and an ere length of /11.93 feet being subtended by a ch()rd of North 54 degrees 29 minutes 52 seconds East a distance of 111.62 feet; THENCE along a curve to the right having a radius of 226.49 feet and an arc length of 283.90 feet being subtended by a chord of South 83 degrees 39 mlnuf9s 44 seconds East 0 distance of 265.68 feet: . THENCE along a curve to th~ left having 0 radius of 328.18 feet and an arc length of 129.58 feet being subtended by a chord of South 59 degrees 03 minutes 53 seconds East 0 distonce of 128.74 feet to 0 point being on said East-West centerline; THENCE South 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for 0 distance of 123.27 feet along said East-West centerline: THENCE along 0 curve to th-J right having a radius of 388.18 feet and an orc length of 35. T / feet being s ubtended by a chord of North 50 dfgrees 23 minute, /9 seconds West a distance of 35.70 feet: THENCE along a curve to the left having 0 radius of 166.49 feet and on arc length of 208.69 feet being sub/ended by a cMrd of South 83 degrees ,39 minutes 14 seconds West 0 distance of 195.30 feet; mENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of 170.30 feet and an arc length of 86.3/ feet being subtended by a chord of South 57 degr~s 13 minutes 19 seconds West a distance of 86.23 feet to a point being on said East-West centerline: THENCE SQuth 89 degrees 32 minutes II seconds West for a distance of 96.81 teet to me POINT a= BEGINNING. T~gether tfitn and subject to covenants, easements. and restrictions of record. Said property contains 26940 square feet. more ()f ItH. EXHIBIT I A A '- . . TOWN OF FRASER RESOLUTION NO. 11-1~q(, SERIES 1996 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST }{, SOUTHWEST }{ OF SECfION 28, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2190 SQUARE FEET. WHEREAS, Maryvale, L.L.C. , as owner of one hundred percent (100%) of the above- described property, has submitted a Petition for Annexation of said property; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees at its regular meeting on J,&"tA\\~ ttJ , 1996, reviewed the Petition for Amlexation and various documents submitted in support of the Petition for Annexation of unincorporated territory; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has examined the record in this case; examined the various exhibits; considered the request, the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendations of the staff; and based upon the record which has been made concerning the request, has arrived at its decision; and WHEREAS, it has been found and detennined that the applicant has complied with all of the procedural requirements as provided in Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. in connection with the request for annexation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: l. That the Petition for Annexation for that property described therein, is hereby accepted and found to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. 2. That a public hearing to consider the said Petition for Annexation is scheduled for ,~at , at Iff1- PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS DA Y OF , 1996 by a vote of to lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\ANNACC.B ,.. ... . . BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO BY: Jeff Johnston Mayor ATTEST: (S E A L) Virginia Winter, Town Clerk Published in the Winter Park Manifest on , 1996. -2- lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\w.p\KLc\ANNACC.B ýÿ ~ o 0 . . PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO RE: PROPERTY KNOWN AS: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SW1/4SW1/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRAND COUNTY, COLORADO, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2190 SQUARE FEET. The undersigned landowner, in accordance with the provisions of Title 31, Article 12, Part 1, C.R.S. known as the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, as amended, hereby petitions the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado for annexation to the Town of Fraser of the following described area situate and being in the Town of Winter Park, and State of Colorado, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.) Petitioner further states as follows: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the Town of Fraser, Colorado. 2. That the area sought to be annexed meets the requirements of Sections 31-12- 104 and 105, as amended, of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, in that: a. Not less than one-sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed will be contiguous with the existing boundaries of the Town of Fraser, Colorado. b. A community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the Town of Fraser, Colorado. c. The area proposed to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future and said area is integrated or is capable of being integrated with the Town of Fraser, Colorado. d. No land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one (1) tract or parcel of real estate or two (2) or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate: i. is divided into separate parts or parcels without the written consent of the landowner or landowners thereof, unless such 9/26/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\PETANN.B , . . . tracts or parcels are separated by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. ii. comprising twenty (20) acres or more and which, together with the buildings and improvements situated thereon, has a valuation for assessment in excess of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00) for ad valorem tax purposes for the year next preceding the annexation is included within the area proposed to be annexed without the written consent of the landowner or landowners. e. No annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation to another municipality of part or all of the territory proposed to be annexed. f. The annexation of the area proposed to be annexed will not result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of same to another school district. g. The annexation of the area proposed to be annexed will not have the effect of extending the boundary of the Town of Fraser more than three (3) miles in any direction from any point of the Town's boundary in any one (1) year. h. If a portion of a platted street or alley is to be annexed, the entire width of said street or alley is included within the area to be annexed. i. Reasonable access shal1 not be denied to landowners, owners of easements or the owners of franchises, adjoining any platted street or alley to be annexed that will not be bordered on both sides by the Town of Fraser. 3. That attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference are four (4) prints of the annexation map, containing the following infonnation: a. A written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed. b. A map showing the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed. c. Within the annexation boundary map, a showing of the location of each ownership tract of unplatted land, and, with respect to any area which is platted, the boundaries and the plat numbers of plots or lots and 2 9/25/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\PETANN.B - . . . blocks. d. Next to the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed, a drawing of the contiguous boundary of the Town of Fraser and the contiguous boundary of any other municipality abutting the area proposed to be annexed. 4. That the petitioner is the landowner of more than fifty percent (50%) of the area sought be annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys. 5. That the petitioner signed this Petition for Annexation no more than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the date of the filing of this Petition for Annexation. 6. That this Petition for Annexation satisfies the requirements of Article II, Section 30, of the Constitution of Colorado in that it is signed by persons comprising more than fifty percent (50%) of the landowners in the area proposed to be annexed who own more than fifty percent (50%) of said area, excluding public streets and alleys and any land owned by the Town of Winter Park. 7. That upon the Annexation Ordinance becoming effective, all lands within the area sought to be annexed shall become subject to the ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations of the Town of Fraser, except for general property taxes which shall become effective on January 1 of the next succeeding year following passage of the Annexation Ordinance. 8. That, by the date that is ninety (90) days after the effective date of the Annexation Ordinance, the petitioner will request that zoning be granted. Therefore, petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado, approve the annexation of the area proposed to be annexed. Whenever from the context it appears appropriate, each term stated in either the singular or plural will include the other, and pronouns stated in either the masc"QIine, feminine or the neuter gender will include each of the other genders. MARYVALE L.L.C, a Colorado Limited Liability Company ~ '1'1\" , ..' " ..j.. "- By: . (- )., ~ ! -\, r) . ___ ~~ '[ ~ {~ .lIt: ilCCL {.it: >U."7 '-)1\ ~"I. 3 9/26/96-pss U:\USERS\w.p\PETANN.B . . . . AFFIDAVIT OF CIRCULATOR The undersigned, being of lawful age, who being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says: That he was the circulator of the foregoing Petition for Annexation of lands to the Town of Fraser, Colorado, consisting of four (4) pages, including this page and that each signature thereon was witnessed by the affiant and is the true signature of the person whose name it purports to be. I) / ( - -. ,'''',,' , /,', i". I /\ i,' i I. . l' ( r l I, l. 'i ;~- /i, /1 i ,'/, ( . , Circulator I" . I_ 14 . STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ;':(.t\l.y ,~.'~ The foregoing Affidavit of Circulator was subscribed and sworn to before me this l1tt: day of \\F""'-<"_\-~" ,'" , 1996, by \. {~ ,/ L"\ \ ' '( \, Q < ',- ~ " ' My Commission expires: 'j - 1'\ .'\ t\ [SEAL] C --'T lit l :-~ /f ' .'"' .r.... '...' : Notary Public 4 ~/26196-pss U:\USERS\WP\PETANN.B . .- . . . . .. . KING'S CROSSING ROAD DISCONNECTION/ANNEXATION PARCEL B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF A TRACT OF LAND TO BE KNOw'lV AS "OISCONNECTlON/ANNEXATlON PARCEL 8," BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOWN OF WINTER PARK AND .ANNEXED TO THE TOWN or FRASER, BEING A PORTION CF THE SWI/4SWI/4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP I SOUTH, RANGE 15 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GRAND COUllrr, CaORAOO, AND MORE PARTlCUARL Y OESCRIBED AS FaLOWS: " .i. Beginning at 0 point being on the South 1/ 16th line of said Section 28, WHENCE the SWI/.16th Corner of said Section 28 bears North 89 degrees 32 minutes /1 seconds East 0 distance of 316.62 teet: - ~ ,THENCE South 81 degrees 13 minutes 21 seconds West for 0 distance of 205.49 fee! to 0 point of non-tangent curve; THENCE along 0 curve to the right having 0 radius of 110,00 fefJf and on ar~ length of 28.40 feer, being subtended by 0 chord of North 18 degrees 41 minutes 46 seconds West for 0 distance of 28.36 feet to a point: THENCE along a cur,;e to the rigM having a radiUS of 328. 18 feet and an ar~ length of 20.82 feet, being subfended :;y a chord of North 12 degrees II minutes 38 seconds West for 0 distance of 2.,0.81 feet to a point being on said 1/ 16th line: THENCE North 89 degrees 32 mmutes II seconds East for a distance 01348.16 feel along said 1//6th line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Together with and subject fO .covenants, easements. and restrictions of record. Said property contains 2/90 square feet more or Jess. . . EXHIBIT I A c. ... . . TOWN OF FRASER RESOLUTION NO. ~qv SERIES 1996 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST !4, SOUTHWEST !4 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1010 SQUARE FEET. WHEREAS, Maryvale, L.L.C. , as owner of one hundred percent (100%) of the above- described property, has submitted a Petition for Annexation of said property; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees at its regular meeting on ---f'lo~YM~ W , 1996, reviewed the petition for annexation and various documents submitted in support of the Petition for Annexation of unincorporated territory; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has examined the record in this case; examined the various exhibits; considered the request, the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendations of the staff; and based upon the record which has been made concerning the request, has arrived at its decision; and WHEREAS, it has been found and determined that the applicant has complied with all of the procedural requirements as provided in Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S. in connection with the request for annexation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Petition for Annexation for that property described therein, is hereby accepted and found to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of Title 31, Article 12, C.R.S., and 2. That a public hearing to consider the said Petition for Annexation is scheduled for _ , ~ at , at 11~+ PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS DA Y OF , 1996 by a vote of to BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO BY: Jeff Johnston Mayor lO/24/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLc\ANNACC.E . . . .. . ATTEST: (S E A L) Virginia Winter, Town Clerk Published in the Winter Park Manifest on , 1996. . lO124196-pss U:\USERS\WP\KLC\ANNACC.E ýÿ . . . . PETITION FOR ANNEXATION - ---- TO: 1Jli> 'tJ (B THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ~ -tJ RE: \)\ M.~\ t PROPERTY KNOWN AS: "DISCONNECTION/ANN A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SWI/4S tA 1)..(; TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 75 WEST OF TH COUNTY, COLORADO, CONTAINING APPROXIM, ? FEET. ~ ~~.~~" The undersigned landowner, in accordance with the provisions \ Part 1, C.R.S. known as the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, as ame ~~~ ~\ ~ iPlO do-t . the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado for annexation \ ~ of the following described area situate and being in the Town of Win1 Colorado, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.) Petitioner further states as follows: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the Town of Fraser, Colorado. 2. That the area sought to be annexed meets the requirements of Sections 31-12- 104 and 105, as amended, of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, in that: a. Not less than one-sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed will be contiguous with the existing boundaries of the Town of Fraser, Colorado. b. A community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the Town of Fraser, Colorado. c. The area proposed to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future and said area is integrated or is capable of being integrated with the Town of Fraser, Colorado. d. No land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one (1) tract or parcel of real estate or two (2) or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate: i. is divided into separate parts or parcels without the written 9/26/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\PETANN.E ýÿ , . . . consent of the landowner or landowners thereof, unless such tracts or parcels are separated by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. ii. comprising twenty (20) acres or more and which, together with the buildings and improvements situated thereon, has a valuation for assessment in excess of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00) for ad valorem tax purposes for the year next preceding the annexation is included within the area proposed to be annexed without the written consent of the landowner or landowners. e. No annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation to another municipality of part or all of the territory proposed to be annexed. f. The annexation of the area proposed to be annexed will not result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of same to another school district. g. The annexation of the area proposed to be annexed will not have the effect of extending the boundary of the Town of Fraser more than three (3) miles in any direction from any point of the Town's boundary in any one (l) year. h. If a portion of a platted street or alley is to be annexed, the entire width of said street or alley is included within the area to be annexed. i. Reasonable access shall not be denied to landowners, owners of easements or the owners of franchises, adjoining any platted street or alley to be annexed that will not be bordered on both sides by the Town of Fraser. 3. That attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference are four (4) prints of the annexation map, containing the following infonnation: a. A written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed. b. A map showing the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed. c. Within the annexation boundary map, a showing of the location of each ownership tract of unplatted land, and, with respect to any area which 2 9/2S/96-pss U:\USERS\WP\PETANN.E ýÿ , .. , . . - is platted, the boundaries and the plat numbers of plots or lots and blocks. d. Next to the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed, a drawing of the contiguous boundary of the Town of Fraser and the contiguous boundary of any other municipality abutting the area proposed to be annexed. 4. That the petitioner is the landowner of more than fifty percent (50%) of the area sought be annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys. 5. That the petitioner signed this Petition for Annexation no more than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the date of the filing of this Petition for Annexation. 6. That this Petition for Annexation satisfies the requirements of Article II, Section 30, of the Constitution of Colorado in that it is signed by persons comprising more than fifty percent (50%) of the landowners in the area proposed to be annexed who own more than fifty percent (50%) of said area, excluding public streets and alleys and any land owned by the Town of Winter Park. 7. That upon the Annexation Ordinance becoming effective, all lands within the area sought to be annexed shall become subject to the ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations of the Town of Fraser, except for general property taxes which shall become effective on January 1 of the next succeeding year following passage of the Annexation Ordinance. 8. That, by the date that is ninety (90) days after the effective date of the Annexation Ordinance, the petitioner will request that zoning be granted. Therefore, petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fraser, Colorado, approve the annexation of the area proposed to be annexed. Whenever from the context it appears appropriate, each term stated in either the singular or plural will include the other, and pronouns stated in either the masculine, feminine or the neuter gender will include each of the other genders. MARY V ALE L.L.C, a Colorado Limited Liability Company /, . \ e ,. (1"1\ . ,-' By: .' ,)\\)~ vi .... ., \li.\(U~ tt l.ui:-*1l.tt-7' Hp. 3 9/26/96-pss U:\USERS\w.p\PETANN.E ýÿ . . . . ,- AFFIDAVIT OF CmCULATOR The undersigned, being of lawful age, who being frrst duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says: That he was the circulator of the foregoing Petition for Annexation of lands to the Town of Fraser, Colorado, consisting of four (4) pages, including this page and that each signature thereon was witnessed by the affiant and is the true signature of the person whose name it purports to be. l I 'I I ,. " ", ,; ,- . ; ~' -, ~-- " - (, I , Circulator I I ~, " ,j . .. J, (~ t .! STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ;\~\_~J. r';ih-) The foregoing Affidavit of Circulator was subscribed and sworn to before me this 'J~~ day of \it \0'-,'-' ... ),~ . ,1996, by \, " \, l\. \....., ( \..tl.;; . ,," ,~~\ ' M~ ;~~ion expires: q . 1'1 . '\ '\ ,.~,., ,~.., " /..~../:. '- ... .. ~, [S~AL] C) r~~"~,,~,,,---,\/}_,\-;==t \ Notary Public , . '. ""111 4 9/26/96-pss U,\USERS\WP\PETANN.E ýÿ . . - . * . .. I(ING.S CROSSING .ROAD O/SCONNECTlOIt//.4NNEXATlON PARCEL E LEG:!.:... DESCRIPTiON OF A TRACT O~ LANO TO BE KNOWN .4S .OISCONNcCTlO^,/ANNEXA TlO~ PARCEL E, . BEING OISCONNECTED FROM T>-fE TOW'" (F WINTER PARk AND ANNEXED TO THE TOl1W OF J-""RASER, BEING ~ PORTION OC' THE SWi /4SWI /4 OF SECTION 28, TOU/NSHIP I SOUTH, RAVGE 75 "EST cy: THE 6TH P.M" GRAND COUNTY. Ca.ORADO, ,JND MORE PARliCULARL r OESCR/BED AS Fa.L OUtS: Beginnmg 01 a /Jom! bemg the S()ut!l 1/ 16th C()r.ner of Sections 29 and 28: THENCE North 89 degrees 32 minutes II sec()nds East f()r a distance of 46.80 feet oiong fhe South 1/ 16th line of said Section 28 to a pomt: THENCE a/onl) a curve to the left having a radIUS of 830.30 feef and on arc length of 64.41 fee', being subtended by 0 chord of Sou'h 46 degrees 20 mlnur,:s :: seconds Wesr for 0 distance of 64.46 fee' to o/Jomt; T.4ENCE North W degrees 13 mmutes 01 seconds West for a distance of 44. Ie feel tl) I,ie PO/NT OF BEGI/.iNING. Toget.ier WIth and sub/eCf ta covenants, easements, and resmclJOns of record. Said property con:ams 1010 square feer more or less. EXHIBIT l A . . TIME FRAME SCHEDULE ( OBJECTIVE ) MAJOR CHANGE TO PDD ~XATIONANDZOMNG METRO DIST. APPROVAL (FEB. 19, 1997) NOV. 15 , 1996 APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON PDD AMENDMENT ~XATION PETITIONS DEC. 16 OR 17,1996 HEAmNGATP~GCO~S~ONONPDD AMENDMENT DEC. 18TH BOARD CONSIDERPETmON AND PASS RESOLUTION FEB 5TH OR 19, 1997 HEAmNG AT TOWN BOARD PDD AMENDMENT ~XATION ZOMNG METRO. DIST. ýÿ . . Bast Grand Schools P.o. Box 125 · 299 County Road 61 · Granby, Colorado 80446 Telephone (970) 887-2581 · FAX (970) 887-2635 Robb E. Rankin, Ph.D., Superintendent November 5, 1996 Rick Watrous/Rich Nipert Maryvale, LLC . 3609 S. Wadsworth, Suite, 210 Lakewood, CO 80235 Dear Mr. Watrous and Mr. Nipert: Let me take a brief moment to Introduce myself. I'm Robb Rankin, the Superintendent of Schools of the East Grand School District, who assumed the responsibilities around the first of August. In my new role, I've had the opportunity to try and learn an awful lot in a short period of time regarding a myriad of Issues. Obviously, one of the things which has major concerns for our School District Is the continued growth which we are experiencing and which will impact the District. I recently had the opportunity to meet with Chuck Reid, the manager for the Town of Fraser, and to do a follow-up conversation with Sheri Williams, the former Superintendent of the School District. This was done In an attempt to get as much background Information as I could regarding the proposed Maryvale development and the relationship between the development and the school district. You may be aware that there has been a facilities committee in operation for the past two years to look at current facility needs and a possible ~ond issue for November, 1997. Along with this, we are examining the long-range planning regarding our facilities and building needs. In the conversation I had with Dr. Williams, she indicated that an oral agreement had been reached regarding setting land aside to be available for school buildings within the Maryvale development. As Mr. Reid had shared with me the revised development plan, I did not notice any accommodations to that effect being made. The School District is definitely interested in having land set aside for a future school 'site, most likely a middle school to serve the needs of this end of the District. This is long-range and would probably not come into consideration regarding a building being constructed for the next ten to twenty years. However, the allocation of the land would need to be made to make that planning possible. As your plans proceed, I believe it would behoove all of us for the conversations to continue to exist and I would welcome such opportunity at your earliest convenience. I believe that a mutually agreeable conclusion can be reached for the benefit of the community and the students of the East Grand School District, as well as enhancing the viability of your development. I look forward to your contact and the ensuing dialogue. Sincerely, ~~~ Robb E. Rankin, Ph.D. Superintendent RR:hs Copy: "11 rr....-...~.~Dd .Gbun....JiI~.wAwr.\.nf ,hra&~, ýÿ .. ~ . LLC The Historic Cozens Ranch E. Rick Watrous, Manager November 12, 1996 Robb E. Rankin, Ph.D. Superintendent East Grand Schools P.O. Box 125 Granby, CO 80446 Re: Maryvale project verses school needs Dear Mr. Rankin: Thank you for your letter of 11/5/96. As you may know, I have previously had a meeting with Dr. Williams, your predecessor, to discuss the development of the Maryvale project and its potential impact on the East Grand school system. That meeting took place approximately a year ago. Much has changed in the intervening time. When I met with Sheri Williams, we discussed, in a very general sense, the overall number of residential units which would be involved in our development and the rate at which they would be likely to be constructed and occupied. At that time, Dr. Williams initial reaction was that at least in the short run (2-4 years), the District was not likely to pursue an added school site in the upper Fraser Valley, but would probably wish to expand the existing elementary facility or Fraser and higher grade level schools in Granby - e.g. the District would be more interested in a monetary contribution than in receiving land. We were all aware that the matter needed more study - especially from along term perspective. As time has moved forward, Maryvale has also been establishing a clearer picture of its proposed development. Suffice to say our prospective residential density has fallen since my meeting with Sheri, although it is still significant. From the tone of your letter, I take it that the District is now leaning toward obtaining a future school site. Rich Nipert or Jeff Kirkendall and myself would be glad to meet with you to discuss your 3609 S. Wadsworth Blvd., Suite 210 · Lakewood, Colorado 80235. Phone 303-989-3203 . Fax 303-989-6506 . . . .. ~ Robb E. Rankin, Ph.D. East Granby Schools November 12, 1996 Page 2 plans and needs. My secretary will call you sometime next week to set up a time and place for a meeting. Sincerely, ~YV ALE, llC { C. E. Rick Watrous Manager ERW III cc: Rich Nipert Chuck Reid