HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.010-11 RESOLUTION NO. 10
(Series of 2011)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, FINDING
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -105, C.R.S., FOLLOWING PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE "BMC WEST PROPERTY."
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2010, the City Manager on behalf of the City of Aspen, the
owner of the property proposed to be annexed, did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a
Petition for Annexation of territory to the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2010, the City Council did adopt Resolution No. 98, Series of
2010, finding substantial compliance with Section 31 -12- 107(1), C.R.S.; establishing the date for a
public hearing to determine compliance with Sections 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -105, C.R.S.; and
authorizing publication of said hearing; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 24, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt its findings and determinations following
said hearing in the form of a resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That having heard and considered the testimony, comments, exhibits and arguments of all
persons appearing at the public hearing, the City Council of the City of Aspen makes the following
findings and determinations in accordance with the Colorado Municipal Annexation Act, as
amended:
1. The City Clerk, in accordance with Resolution No. 988, Series of 2011, did
give public notice pursuant to Section 31 -12 -108, C.R.S., of the public hearing, by causing
to be published once a week for four consecutive weeks in The Aspen Times, a newspaper
of general circulation in Pitkin County, the first publication being at least thirty (30) days
prior to the date of the public hearing. In addition, the City Council did send to the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners, to the County Attorney of Pitkin County, and to
the Aspen School District, a copy of the aforesaid resolution and petition.
2. That the property proposed to be annexed consists of unincorporated area
which has more than one sixth boundary contiguity with the City of Aspen.
3. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be
annexed and the City of Aspen; that said area is urban or will be urbanized in the near
future; and that said area is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City of
Aspen. The basis of compliance with the foregoing is the finding by City Council that the
area to be annexed exceeds the one -sixth contiguity requirement and:
a. None of the owners of the area proposed to be annexed have
expressed an intention, under oath, to devote over 50% of the land to
agricultural use for a period of not less than five years; and,
b. It is physically practicable to extend to the area proposed to be
annexed those urban services which the City of Aspen provides in common
to all of its citizens on the same terms and conditions as such services are
made to such citizens.
4. The property proposed to be annexed was not divided into separate parts or
parcels from any other tract or parcel of real estate without the written consent of the
landowners thereof to establish the boundaries of the property described in the annexation
petition. (One hundred percent of the owners of the proposed area to be annexed have
consented to the annexation.)
5. The owners of the property proposed to be annexed have consented in
writing to the annexation. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(b) is
not applicable.
6. There is no other annexation proceeding, other than the one under
consideration herein, which has been commenced either in the City of Aspen or any other
municipality which affects the property proposed to be annexed. Accordingly, the limitation
set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(c) is not applicable.
7. Annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would not result in the
detachment of any area from any school district and the attachment of the same to another
school district. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(d) is not
applicable.
2
8. Annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would not have the
effect of extending the boundary of the City of Aspen more than three miles in any
direction. Accordingly, the limitations set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(e) relating to the
extension of municipal boundaries by more than three miles in any one year is not
applicable.
9. The annexation of the property proposed to be annexed would be consistent
with the "Annexation Element to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan". Accordingly, the
requirement set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(e) relating to the requirement that a "plan" be
adopted for the property proposed to be annexed has been met.
10. In establishing the boundaries of the area to be annexed, no portion of a
platted street or alley is proposed to be annexed or the entire width of the alley or street is
proposed to be annexed. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31- 12- 105(0 has
been met.
11. The City of Aspen does not intend to deny reasonable access to landowners,
owner of an easement, or the owner of a franchise adjoining any street, alley, or highway,
upon annexation. Accordingly, the limitation set forth at Section 31 -12 -105(0 has been met.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the
day of Jr, . , 2011.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
3
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a
true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. /
% t om �LcZ „ j 7(
Ka n S. Koch, City Clerk
4