The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutresolution.council.062-99 1'. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE 1999 CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLAN , Resolution No. 99-.h-V WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 31-12-105, all cities within the State of Colorado must a have a "Plan" in place to guide future annexations; and WHEREAS, the last update of the City of Aspen Annexation Plan was approved by the Aspen City Council on 28 August 1998; and WHEREAS, the AACP differed from prior comprehensive plans in that the document was a "character" based plan that did not include the adoption of a revised Annexation Plan; and WHEREAS, The AspenfPitkin County Community Development Department has initiated a process for a joint city/county review of the plan; and WHEREAS, State Statute requires this reauthorization of the plan annually; and WHEREAS, The current plan is acceptable for readoption until such time as the joint city/county AACP '98 revision process results in a revised annexation plan; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: ~. That the City Council has reviewed the proposed 1999 Annexation Plan and has formally adopted the Plan. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this Jk.. day of J 10.. 1999, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. ~ Rae el Richards, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and ccurate copy of that resolution adopted by City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held , 1999 Approved as to form -~~ Johri Worcester, City Attorney ~. ,.-.\ City of Aspen Annexation Plan r'- Last Revised July 3, 1996 Readopted August 28, 1998 Prepared by: AspenJPitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen Colorado 81621 (970) 920-5090 .,.-..,.. ~ RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEi."l CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE 1996 CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLA1'f Resolution No. 96- -; <.(. WHEREAS. pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 31-12-105. all cities within the State of Colorado must a have a "Plan" in place to guide future annexations: and WHEREAS. the last update of the City of Aspen Annexation Plan was approved by Aspen Planning and Zoning ,Commission on October i8, 1988 ;n association with the i988 Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: and , WHEREAS. the 1988 Aspen Area Comprehensive Pian was superseded by the adoption of the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan (Me?); and WHEREAS. the Me? differed from prior comprehensive plans in that the document was a "character" based plan that did not include the adoption of a revised Anne:<ation Plan; and WHEREAS. The Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department has retined and updated the previously adopted Annexation Element to be consistent with the AACP; and WHEREAS, State Stanlte allows the adoption of separate plans by City Council following review by the Planning Commission; and ~ 'l,VHEREAS, the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed and fotmally recommended the Annexation Plan for adoption at their meeting of June i8, 1996. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. -COLORADO: That the City Council has reviewed the proposed 1996 Annexation Plan and has formally adopted the Plan. . ."~ .'). ' ~SOL:'ED' APPROVED, AJ.'lD ADO~D this Y day o~e.,-;. 1996, by the City Council, for the CIty of Aspen, Colorado. ; / ' '.' ~ I?~. -:u' John S ennet!, Mayor 1. Kathryn S. Koch. duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the ftregoing is a true and copy of that ~Q ~tion adopted by the City Council of the City of A.pen: Colorado, at a meeting ; 1966. ~ ~\ r'- ;'. RESOLUTION OFTHE ASPEN PLAl.'IN1NG ANn ZONING COMMISSION RECOlYfMEl\'DING TO TI-lE ,\Sl'EN CITY COUNCIL n{E ADOPTION THE 1996 cm OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLAi.'1 Resolution No. 96-.&.. r WHEREAS, pursuant ,o'Coiomdo Revised Statutes (C:tS) 31-\2-L05, all cities within the St:lte,of Colorado must" have a "?!:m" in plac: to guide future :mne:ctions; Jnd " WEL~.EAS. the last u!ldate of the C;ty of Aspen ."".nne:<ation Plan was approved by Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Ocmaer 18. 1988 in association with the 1983 Aspen ."'.re:1 Comprehensive Plan; and W~<E.o\S. the \983 Aspen .-\re:1 Comllrenensive Plan was SU!l=ded by the adoption of :he \993 Aspen Are:! Community Plan (AACP); :md . WHEREAS. the AAC? differed from prior comprehensive ;:bas in that the document W<l$ J ~ch=c:e:-" based ei:m that did not include the acloction of: re'/ise:i Anne~.ation Plan; :md . . , WHEREAS. The ASpe:-JP:tkin C.Junty C.Jmmunil'/ !).,./e!opment D~=ent has :-efine::: :md uo~ted ,he ore'liousiv Jdooted .';'nnexanon S;ement :0 be cor.sistent with the AAC?; :md . . ... . Vol r...::.RE.o\S. State Statute ailcws the adoption of ,e;:=:e ;:lans Jy City CouncH :'0 iIowing ~'/iew . .~::>I . - .. 0;( \.ne .. ,anntng '......:;mmlSSlon. NOW, THE...'U:FORE BE IT RE<:OL'iED by:heCommission: That the Commission h:ls ccviewed the ;:roposed 1996 .-\nne:-.:ltion Plan :md re--..::lmmenas to the City CouncH_the Plan be adopted.. APPROVED by me Commission at itS oesuiar :n=ting on June !S. 1996. A rtest: n n .' , j " 1(,;) Jrl-iJ1l..1!:'c ~ ,. " .... ' , Amy Scnmid. Deputy City Clerk J Planning and Zonil1j Commiss, ion: -I . 1/' ,1~/~ , / .-' i/G~ f:;i:i (..{....'!.G.-(.. vo'1..... Sara Ganon. Chair r'- L INTRODUCTION Stmltorv ReauirementS. All annexation actions by cities in Colorado are governed by CltS 31-21- 105. These =tory requirementS include the need to produce an annexation plan for a three mile boundary around the existing city limits. The specific requirements include theJollowing: "Pnor to completion of any annexations. within the three mile area. the municipaliry shall have in place a pian for the area. which generally describes the proposed location. character. and enenr of streets. subways. bridges. waterways. warerftonrs. parkways. playgrouniis. squares. parks. aviation fields. other public ways. grounds. open spaces. public utilities. and terminals for water. light. sanitation. transporration. and power to be provided by the municipaliry and the proposed land uses jor the area. .. ~. Past .~exation Plans bv the C,tv of Asoen. The City of Aspen last updated the AIlIle.-=ion Plan in 1988. From the fall of 1984 umil the fall crf 1985, The City Council. in cooperation with the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. met intermittemlyto discuss annexation policy, and the analysis, of annexation is traditionally coordinated by the City Manager's Office. The plan adopted in 1988 has not been updated.. and has been ,the ,legislative guide for all annexations since that time. The 1988 plan was acmallyan individual element ,0 the 1988 Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, which has subsequently been amended by the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) ~in 1993. This 1996 revision has been prepared in order ,to meet the statUtory requirements crf CRS 31-21-105, as well as to update the Annexation Plan with respect to 3IlI1exations a1ready undertaken. and new policies and land use code provisions which have been implemented. However, the fP.t11ammg annexation areas identified in, this plan are essentially the same as those identified in the 1988 plan and the eonceptUal framework for .annexation remains unchanged as well. ~ The 1988 Annexation Plan stated that lhe City of Aspen is taking a proactive role in the annexation process in order to enfranchise County residents who live oUTSide crf the City of AsPen jurisdictional boundaries within the political process. Presently, there are many residents who live within ,the urban service area who do not participate in City elections. The intent of the annexation process is to incorporate the urbanized portion of Pitkin CouIlty into the City of Aspen. .SecoI1d1y, a pro-active, aggressive 3IlI1exation policy will allow the City to exert direct control upon the L/ ~' _-<<v---- -- :\.' ....... ",..- . .' \'.) , ~ ~ -- .;....... ...-----. /. ....-.... - I J- .J''''' :: { / /'.:.; '" /"~~ .,. : ~ . o : ~,~(_ ' .. :J-.....:;? : ..c /: : I. ... Z . ~/~ .: /:; S: 6 .. to. - .. "" ~ ~..;- CL. 0:;, ...., ill / ~ ~ ~'--~ ~ ~ // !- ,( 'I j;" . , .~ .I {'~ \ I,' ! i\ \", I \\ I 1 I I I I I I I i I r"'I~ oI.,'~.~.~.. '" ". '::.J.,~'..:i', ,\. I, ~, I .,w:::.~i'~~~'~ .",' I 'i, '1i.;,~"'~,,=,"~I'.'I..,II" . ~ ri~" ~Ih~' \ .' ..I~"'4! ;,"'hi.''f' .., On ~l~ I ,. I :;:::;J-~f~-L' "',',,i,.i,I)~"i', (, -P;J~ 'j-"Ji~'-_____./'~,:",,~ ~ ,,"',...\,,~ J/ "', f ", "" '; ':{~ ~ '/;'," ~!'::, ,.' 0 ""J"'. .,'" , C! \', .Ii"';--.'),:" ,( " -, " vt .' -\: ,',.,. / \. ","" ! ""(; I C-- /"., . '"''), ,,' L -:.;-..{.::~ :;1"- _' '/. !"I,:>~.r<i;...,. ! ". ~ ,;;J ,1'1\.'" V\'\ '-{} ( '.." ...._..---1 \ ,,,._,....,,.,,... ',<I'''".:'>-r,' ' . -""'~ \. \.1" "'\. /- ' \:) "'1;\' .::;;..::.~;<-:r: / ,. \~,';"'l ",' " t'/11/f..... ~// .-" .~.../ ..... ~ (. /', , , / ' {! .J ~ ./'... . /' (\ ('"''' ; "/:' \\".(".;'/ '" -:1'<:i"';-': ~~~ 'j f. .... .',,;\:.., . / .. ..... I. ~ _ \ \.-, /' '- (.//:\" _~.../ ........" -:h....".. \ , --? .' ,.... (.~ i '.' . \~ )/"'" . . "/'\ " l<C~'';,;~' L4~" / -,~'" ..../,. ,-.--;' '(.-, , '\ .\ Y'\-':>I'.- ~) --.-..:.,.-- ;::"..... "' o "" ,.{ : // \-;; 0... /' c :: ." / - 1; / <~ ~ < -' , -::1':; :: H ~ I ,.... .'1' >< _ D.. / (>:: III /1' Ie: I Ie: c..:> , ,-< , ! , <.0 I en I en I I I I I I I I I I I I \ J \ 0... e: C> ~ / , , I I:,. ( \. . , ft . .;;-:--......... . - ' " ~ /// / '-...:::-; (, -' \ \ \ \ \ \ ' \/,<:7 /.~,. '\ ........,.... ,/ ' .' I - ......... ...... ",~- --~... ~ "I - I I , \ i I,. ..' \ ,.Ii .~~ "I"''':1::'7~\-~~~:;-;~(~C:t~::~ ,....... I I / " / . / /.0 A-IOF_ (I.{Il-" ...._~.'J ,; ',,",,-' /( . , '/i \ \ \ \ -1- '! I I I ......- 7'........... / - '.. / . / . " I / ~ . . u u - ~ .' ~ .~ u_ _~ u ;,:~~"'" r'" :~~ -,,; J\. ~ Q~- =:: rf\. : "';: "":~ L,\ .: _/00-_0 l.. "";;- co... "('.-v) : ~~~;~~ ) ... Co> 0...... l:.o;;........ ."\' .:::-::: ~- ~) ,.. GO :a......"'::l:0 o _ ...u...u. - E) ~::;;:::...~ ... .. ""............... o ...""Q"":.... "" 0 0 0 G . < .:; . ~ " .- - ~ " " . ~ ~ .- ~ ~/~ .:: . . . . - - 0 - - . 0 " ~ . . ~ ~ . . . ~ . - c .:: ~ ~ ~ . . - ~. ; ~ . .- 2 ~ . - . = = . . . . . . . < - c - - 0 . . 0 0 . - - . 0 - . - .:: . - - . . . . 0 0 . . . ~ = = ~ - . - 2 - < ~ ~ 2 ::: ::: - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ - - - 0 Ii . [J 0 [] . . . . IWJ . ,., ~ r-,c "Q,) C>.. 'en = -cc :> - ~ ::1 < >-. ~ I> c.> '" = ~ " ,.' " '. 1. f...r:'':'',y~ f ." I , '~". ~'l!,. . ' I, "I.: ': ,0..... . ~/'_h____/~ .,.....f . J ,,~. ". ... ,/ ; .,'.... . }\/....... l, "= }! ,~ .Ii ~; 'I ___h) d>>~ C ~~ ...--.~~-~, ---- I I ,; "'1' I ,,~. r-.. '::-::.1 /<~;',:.- ( ~ " "-- ~- ',----- ( . City of Aspen Annexation Plan. rev. 3 July 1996 Page 2 ~. growth at the urban/rural fringe of the City. These general goals hold true forthe 1996 Annexation Plan as well. IT. AJ.'fNE.."XA nON AREA . Tne annex:n::ion area shown on E."ciribit A generally corresponds with the Boundaries of the Aspen Area Community Plan.. with a few exceptions. The shaded pomons of Exhibit A. Owl Creek. Maroon Creek.. and the east side of the Roaring Fork East and the west side of State Highway 32 Corridor, are within the bOWldaries of the Aspen Area Community Plan but outSide of the proposed annexation area. These areas have been excluded from consideration because they are ccnsidered rural in character, .Nith little likelihood for the provision orurban or municipal serviceS. Almost the entire annex:n::ion area. which contains approximately 3, i14 acres of land. is located within 3 miles of the existing City limits. Presemly there are only 1.479 acres ofland within, the currem.jurisdictional bOWldaries of ,\speno lfthe entire annex:n::ion area is annexed to the City, the geographic size crt Aspen would increase by approximately seven times. This figure is somewhat r-, misleading because the Aspen ;.;fountain and Aspen Highlands areas contain approximately 2.432 acres. lfthe ski areas are deleted. the aIlllex:n::ion area only contains approximately 6,282 acres. To simplify the analysis, the proposed annex:n::ion :lrea has been broken down into 12 smaller annex:n::ion areas which are depic::ed in Exhibit B. The boundaries for each area were developed based on the following fac::ors: e.'Iisting development patterns, physical features, and established neighborhood areas. The existing character of the annex:n::ion areas vary signiiicamly in tenns of urbanization levels and environmental constraints. Based on the 1995 Community Development Department estimates, the proposed annexation areas curremly contain approximately 1,947 dwelling units, and an estimated year-round population of 2,869. By comparison, the 1994-1995 resident populatiqn for the City of Aspen was ' approximately 5,851 and the peak population was estimated at 25,000.' ,/,,"""\ 'An analYsis of the existing zoning pattern in the unincorporated portion of Pitkin County indicates that a range of 896 to 1,130 new dwelling units can conceivably be developed in the proposed aIlllexation area. This figure includes the approvals for the Maroon Creek property, as well as the I All dwelling unit and population estimates are based on extmpolation from 1990 U.S. Census dau. , City of Aspen Anne:<:nion Plan. rev. 3 July 1996 , Page 3 ~. conceptual approval of the Highlands Base Village. The summary by annexation group is shown en Table 1. This table provides an overview of land use characteristics for each annexarion area. The land use characteristics provided a basis for aggregating the annexarion areas into' four distinct groups which share similartmiIs. The grouping of these areas are eXIllained below: Group A~UteJNortbstar. Red Butte. Shadow ~ountain Generally, rural aDI1eX3tion areas which have very limited growth poumiai due to their geographic locarion. These areas are particularly affeo-..ed by environmemal planning issues. The City's existing LandUse Code with its provisions for Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA's) now has appropriate provisions to guide1:he growth and development of these areas. Further consideration may be given to adopting the more- stringent County 1041 regulations. Group B-Roaring Fork East. Red Mountain. Pitkin Green \"" /"'"'.. Generally, suburban anne.'tation areas comprised of predominantly developed subdivisions. Several of these subdivisiOns have been already annexed into the City, such as East:vood and Knollwood. Remaining areas include Aspen Grove and ~[oumain Valley. The major land use issues affucting this group include floor area ratio and legiriIniziDg "bandit a..,..,el1ing units." AnOther issue relatiw to Red Mountain is the statIIS aiRed MOlIIIt3in Road and the ability of the City to adequately maintain and upgrade it as necessary. Group C-Meadowood. Smuggler, Aspen Highlands Base and New Development. State Highway 82 Corridor These areas contain large development parcels with signific:mt growth potential. There are numerous land use p1anning issues which need to be resolved prior to annexation, regarding appropriate development densities. The Maroon Creek Development Corporation areahas completed the CoUIlty land use proc~ and has been awarded land .use approvals. The Aspen Highlands project is currently in the County land use process. r". r'- ~, to'."J<~ r"\ City of Aspen Anne:<:llion PllIIl. P:Ige >l- rev. 3 Juiy 1996 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF ANNEXATION AREAS S' v v C I Po . j I '. Ma!".mlf' \ Anllnatilln I 1Ze' t ac:uJ: :n:an" teftua , anatlr-' . ommeD13'. . ,Are:J;.. I (;teY l' Uiuubdiridedi Silbdmded: Units.. .. ,.' ! "(ll"'). '.. .' (a",j :, , " , ' , " Group A 1 \ Ute i -1691 133 ' 69 I 7010 I Ru:ailNot I fnciuaes Little AnnIe aase: :-lorthSt2r I I Subcivided 6 I Red Butte \ t05 ! 2171 0' 9-lt I Rur.li/P:!I"Clill1y I Potential tor ?arK use I P.Jbiic iO Shadow I :84 I 1 \ .+' tOol.+1 Rural, I City ESA process I :'ftountain I I ~umerous f appropna:ce I ' minin~ claims I Subtotal I 358 : 351 i 73; :6..35 1 Group B 2 I Roaring I 66 ; 01 - I 28..33 I Suburcarv All I ).fumer;:ms bandit :;nitS Fork I ' I Subdivided , .+ Red 32.+ I .5\ :0 i 98-12'+ ' Suburbll!lJ I ~ umerous bandit 'JOlts :vlountain I I . I SubdiVIded 3< I Cnsubdivided I 5 \ Pitkin I 2191 01 21 I 89099\ Suburell!lJ 1 :-.lumereus bandit "nits Green Subdivided & Unsubdivided , Subtotal I 609 ; .5 I 44! 215..156 i Group C 3 \ Lower I 260 , .+21 tOl 37-[50 I Urbani :-.lot I E?~ requirements ,Smu~er I Subdivided 7 I Meadowood \ 366 : 219\ 231 I 93011.+\ Suourbll!lJ I Signilic::nl potential 'or 1 I Subdivided & growth Unsubdivided 8 Aspen 1-+4 I 2 15 15" f Suburban! ' Growth potential Highlands Subdivided &. dete:mined in i 996 by I Unsubdivided gencrnl submission to County 12 SH82 1536 424 '2 260-310 Urban JIld Significm1t potential for Corridor Rur.1i/ growth Subdivided :1Ild Unsubdividerl 13 I Maroon -103 62 2181 III I Suburban PUD approval in piace. Creek RETT revenue Subtotal 1.709 I 749 I 476 I 655-839 I Group D 9 Aspen 1374 0 130 0 Ski Are:JJ 9M'o 1 Sai~ ta."<. :-evenue Highlands USFS 11, Aspen, 1058 0 0 0 Ski.~':l% Fragmenled ownership Mountain USFS Subtotal 24321 01 1301 01 TOTAL 87141 1100.5 I 7231 896-1130 1 ClI to Source: AspeniPitkin County Community Development Deportment, ! 996. City of Aspen Anne.'QIion Plan. rev. 3 July 1996 Page 5 r'- Annexation of these areas would generally include reaffirming the decisions of these pro<:esses. .\11 issue unique to the Smuggler area is the impact upon the City, Coumy, and residem:s of the area relating to its designation as a "Super Fund" hazardous waste site. Group D-Aspen Higblands and Aspen Mountain Skiing Areas These areas correspond with skiing area permit boundaries. Annexation would necessitate the drafting of new land use legisiation to guide future growth and development of the skiing areas. ~. An analysis of land use issues indicare that the annexation of areas in Groups A and B will result in less complicated land use issues for the City than the anne."<ation of areas in Groups C and D. It is also possible that the Meadowood azme."<ation can be broken into smaller parts, according to existing subdivisions. For example, the :'vleadowood, Aspen HighJands, and Aspen Temris Club subdivisions are similar in IUmlre to each other and the annexation of these three subdivisions could be accomplished without addressing the question of zoning large vacamtracts of land. m. STATUTORY Ai'lNE.."'<ATION CRITERIA An area is eligible for annexation if the governing body, at a hearing as provided in CRS 31-12- 109, finds and detennines the following:2 1. That not less than one-sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality. Contiguity is not affected by the e.'listence of a platted street or aIley, a Ilublic or private right-of-way or area, public lands, or a lake reservoir, stream, or other lllltUral or man-made waterway between the annexing municipality and the land proposed to be annelted. (""", 2; That a community of interest exists betWeen the area proposed to b~ anne.xed and the , annexing municipalitY; that such area is urban or will be urbanizing in the near future; and that '. said area is integrated with or is capable ofbeing integrated with the annexing municipality. The 2CRS 3/-/2-/04. City of Aspen ADne:a1tion PI:m. rev. 3 July 1996 Page 6 ~. fuc:t that the area proposed to be =ed has the contiguity with the annexing municipality requiIed by the above requirement shall be a basis for it finding of compliance with these requirements unless the governing body, upon the basis of competent evidence presented at the hearing, finds that at least two of the following are shown to exist: a. Lass than fifty percent of the adult n!sidents of the area proposed to be annexed make use of pan or ail of the following types of facilities of the annexing municipality; RecreationaL civic, sociai. religious, industriai, or commercial; and less than twenty-five percent of said area's adult residents are employed, in the annexing municipality. lfthere are no adult residents at the time of the hearing, this standard does not apply. b. One-half or more of the land in the area proposed to be annexed (including streetS) is agricui1:ural. and the landowners .of such agriC'.lltura1 land. under oath, express an intent to devote the land to such agricultural use for a period of not less than five years. r'- c. It is not physically practicable to extend the area proposed to be annexed those urban services which the annexing municipality provides in common to of ail its. citizens cn the same tenns and conditions as such servie-os are made available to such citizens. This standard shal1 not apply to the extent that any portion of an area proposed to be annexed is provided or will within the reasonably near furore be provided with any service by at through a quasi-municipal corporation. These anneXation criteria have been used as a general guide to identifY an annexation area around 'the periphery of Aspen. IV. ANNE.."<ATION REPORT REQ{JIRL~"'lTS ~ State statutes also require that a municipality must prepare an impact.report concerning the proposed annexation at least twenty-live days before the dare of the hearing, and sha11 file one copy with the Board of County Commissioners govemingthe land proposed to be annexed. Such report shal1 not be required for annexations of ten acres or less in total area or when the municipality and the Board of County Commissioners agree that the report may be waiveciSuch report sha11 .include, as a minimum: City of Aspen Anne:ction Plan.. rev. 3 July 1996 Page 7 r"\ 1. A map or maps of the municipality and adjacent territory to show the following infbrmation: a. The present and proposed boundaries of the municipality and in the vicinity of the proposed annexation; b. The present streetS. major trUIlk water mains, sewer interceptors and outfulls, other utility lines and ditches, and the proposed extenSion of such streets and utility lines in the vicinity of the proposed annexation; c. The existing :md proposed land use pattern in the areas to be anne.,<:ec!. 2. A copy or any draft or fuJal preanne.=:ion agreement, if available; 3. A statement setting forth the plans of the municipality for extending to or otherwise providing for. within the area to be ani:1e:ted, municipal services performed by or on behalf of the municipality <It the time of anne.'<4tion; r'- +. A staIement setting forth the method under which the municipality plans to finance the extension of the municipal services into the ,area to be annexed: 5. A statement identifying e.'<isting districts within the area to be anne:ted: and 6. A statement on the effect of annexarion upon local-public school district systemS, including the esrim.......-! number of stUdents generated and the capital constrUction required to educate such stndents. . V. ISSUES AND CONCERNS This section of the annexation plan addresses land use issues and general policy concerns which are likely to arise duriIig any annexarion process. . The annexation guidelines which follow this section have been developed in response to the issues aIld concerns addressed in this section, and are intended to guide the City and County during anne.'<4tion decisions. ,"-'" City of Aspen Annexation P\:m. rev. 3 July 1996 Page 8 Increased Developll1ellt Potential within Existing Subdivisions ~ From a historical perspective. it has been City policy that, when land is 3IlIIexed, the developmem: rights of the annexed land are not increased in comparison to the development rights in unincorporated Pitkin County prior to the annexation. A fundamental policy question is whether the City will continue to pursue this policy, particularly in light of the ponmialland use changes that could occur in and around A.spen, and community goals such as aifurdable housing and the .. development of aitemarive transportation modes emering .-\spen. The continuation of the past aDllexation policy would be an indirect aclmawledgmem: that the development rights established by Pitkin County zooing are appropriate. A review of the existing subdivisions in the proposed aDllexation areas indicated that in virtUally all cases, based upon a consideration of standard zoning criteria such as neighborhood compatibility and provision of services. County zoning appears appropriate. r- A general land use policy addressing the development potential of an area after annexation should take into consideration more factOrs than just the zoned development ponmial in unincorporated Pitkin County. Equally impOrtalIt fac::ors affecting density should include: . compliance with the Aspen Area Conununity Plan: . compatibility with the existing neighborhood; . reC= or e:'Cpec::ed changes in the neighborhood or general area: . capability of the c:ommunity to provide necessary services; . environmental consuaints; and . changing goals of the community. Floor Area Ratios Floor Area Ratios (FAR) are utilized by the City and the County to delermine the maximum size: or . dwelling units permitted in zone districts. Floor area ratios represent the relationship betWeen the size of a structUre and the size of the lot. r-' P!t.lcin County utilizes fixed percentages for FAR calculations. For example the F ARs in the R-15 and R-16 are .13,.16 and .30 respectively. By comparison, the City of Aspen ntil;.....:s sliding scale FAR system. W rt:h the exception of relatively large two-acre lots. the County F A.Rs City of Aspen AI111e:<ation Plan. rev. 3 July 1996 ~9 ~, are more restrictive than the methodology applied by the City of Aspen. Therefore, in the absence of changes to the City F ARs, the annexation of outlying subdivisions will most likely result in the expansion or some dwelling units and the removal of non-ccDforrning SCltUS for some existing structures. The expansion or dwelling units mayor may not be compatible with surrounding areas and is an issue that should be analyzed during the annexation process. . Development Potential of Unsubdivided Land ,~ A summary of major unsubdivided land within the annexation area is shewn previously on Table I. In the past, both the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and the Aspen City Council have expressed frustration due to their perceived lack of control over the development or large parceis on the urban fringe orthe existing City limits. One method or addressing this concern is have large. unincorporated parcels which are located in feasible anne.'alIion locations be annexed by the City, The capability to assert direct control over such impOrtallt lands around Aspen has signifieam impact on the ability or the City to central is own destiny from a land use perspective. In almost every case. the ability to capture both sales TaX and Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) revenues are compelling reasons to pursue aggressive annexation policies. A primaIy disadvantage associated with annexing substantial amoUlItS of va=. undeveloped land , , . is that the action is generally followed by increased development expec'.mons on the part ofland owners. The community has consistemly attempted to mainrain a nuaI entrance to the City, with urbanlzation limited to and surrounding the central core. The City must weigh the costs of potential intensification of land uses with the desire to increase revenUes and exert greater land use control. These are particularly UnpOrtallt in reference to the State Highway 32 Corridor. One. option open to the City would be to incorporate an open space compOllelIt into the annexation process, partially financed by increased RETI revenues associated with individual annexations. Envirorimental Review Standards r", The Aspen City limits have begun to expand beyond the original townsite located on the primary benches above the valley floor. This has created a situation whereby future expansions will introduce significant environmental constraints in the annexation precess. The Pit.lOn COUllty Land Use Code is specifically designed to address such environmental iSsues such as slope, erosion, wildlife and floodplain constraints. In particular, the Colorado House Bill 1041 powers have . City of Aspen Anne:mtionPIan. rev. 3 July 1996 P:1gelO allowed Pitkin County to apply detailed criteria to review potem:ial developllHlllt in environmentally r'- sensmve areas. In contrast, the Municipal Code is intended to review urban-level developmentS, and does not comain the rigor of the County's 1041 regulations for man~g;ng developmem in seosirive areas. The City has made steps to address these issues, ,specifically improving the 8040 Green.line, Enviromnem:ally SeIlsirive .\rea, and Stream Margin review processes. These provisions of the City Code may not be as restrictive as those found in Pitkin Coumy's 1041 regularions. Ski Area Base Zoning ,r'- The Aspen Highlands Base Village has obtained conceptUal developmem approval from Pitkin County. If the Highlands base area is annexed by the City, the City's existing lodge <:ones may not be suitable for the Aspen Highlands base area. The potential anne:<:mon of Buttermilk presentS similar difficulties. The threshold issue with annexing either base village is the exIeIlSive area which could potentially accommodate future development, and the intensive namre of existing City zoning. Ski Area Zoning Study Area 11 includes the Aspen Moumain Ski Area. The annexation of the ski area would require the creation of a new <:one district for ski area recreation, as wen as an SPA overlay. A wide variety of issues related to ski area expansion, which are not addressed by the cumm municipal code, would have to be resolved prior to anne:canon. Pitkin COUIlty has adopted the AF- SKI zone district to regulate ski area development and elqlansion. This tool should be considered for. adoption by the City if annexation occurs in this area. Additional issues include the relative benefit of annexing federal lands into the City, as wen as the additional impact on emergency response. Utility Extensions ~ Typical annexation policies focus a great deal of fiscal analysis on the potential extensiOll of water and sanitary sewer lines by a municipality to annexed territories. WIthin the Aspen Area, sanitary sewer is provided by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, rather than the City. Therefore, City or Aspen Annexation PI:m.. rf:V. 3 July 1996 Page 11 r'- the provision of sanitary sewer is llet an annexation issue. However, the City of Aspen operates a municipal water system, and cost and engineering issues relating to the provision of potable water to developing land on the urban fringe are signilicant annexation issues. Exhibit C depicrs the boundaries oithe existing plan fur 'NaIer service areas adopted within the ,\,1pen Water Management PlllD. Cumm:ly, there are several small 'NaIer distric:s which serve residences which are located oUISide the City's boundaries but within the service area of the water system. These smail districts may present a problem for the City following annexation because their capiral facilities may net be providing acCllptable standards of service. Upgrading would be expensive, and may become the responsibility of the City following annexation. ~ As the periphery of the City is developed, the developmem commwrity is faced with a choice of joining the Aspen water system or developing their own domestic 'NaIer infrastructure. The City and County do not C'.mentiy require that new developmem join the municipal Water system. Furthermore, the City recommends that the County require new developmems which choose to provide private water systems to design those systems to meet standards which are comparable to Citv standards. When and if the City aDIlexes these areas, the water svstems would otherwise ~ ... ~ create a liability to the City. The City also recommends that the Coumy develop stancjards which act as an incentive to have developmentS initially hook onto the City. s system.. in order to avoid the proliferation of small, uneconomical often undependable pri'r.lte waer Systems in the metro area. Annexation/ZaDing Process State law requires municipalities to zone annexed land within.90 days, of annexation. In the past, wheri complex ZIlIIing issues arise, the City of AsPen has experienced problems meeting this state requirement. Failure to zone 4md within .90 days may potelItial1y permit unwanted land uses on annexed land. In orQer to assist the City in zoning newly annexed areas within the 90 day time period, the Annexation Plan should establish guidelines forthe city to follow during the anmixation process. ,.-...,. ,~) J-~/ .::> <D ) , I- ~ <C c Q> <D c.. c..> '" ..c , >- - \ l- e> ~ <D >- V"l -- l- e:..> <D ..-- '" :;;=: tC , \") "'/'~~'-'- /-~..... ( \ ,.~._- 'Y C. (' ( ) , ~ ..-.....\...... 1:. ~----_... ..:..-..... . " ~ , ' ':;'::,_:('" . .."'--~, , , , " '-:) .~Vl...,J.... . '>.--- ' . .' ~ . ' ....... : , . " " \ \ ~ ........ ' ...... --... '---1,' \ -.J7.._ ''';.(.~;;'\'...s;,~-i7 " 'I ~'-, {, --.- " '--'--- 'i. _...c'-.:, , . ('............... , /1,- -'-7'~':'-':::-'" , /,'1 V;'--:-"-':,'t- '''-.,., .J-.,;' ,.(i S r "::-:--" - <"'--'':.). .,....~" "''',-\ ~i<r: /'--?~J ~ t) ( / / ", 0:J"-, \ I, I( ~'" /r~\, '-{ '~ ~ r . indion ~ose of this chapter is to establish annexattou guidelines to assist the City of Aspen in 19 !al.~ use decisions regarding the annexatiou of new territory. The guidelines should be .0 determine when annexation is appropriate, which land should be annexed and how it should led. The guidelines will also be useful to property owners in annexed areas who are seeking . iicatiou of how their land will be treated in the land use process. The secoud purpose of this er is to propose speci:iic actions to be pursued to prepare the City for the annexation of land 1 design'll;Pti annexatiou areas. , elines Master Planning 1. Guideline ~, Generally. an adopted Master Plan for an annexed area addressing land use and capital facilities improvements should be a pre-requisite to annexation. E;-qllanatory CommentS Most of the areas earmarked for annexatiou have been master planned or developed under Pitkin Coumyjurisdictiou. The previous approvals established guidelines for zoning decisions and capital facilities improvements. Previous approvals, in combinatiou with general wiShes of property owners and neighbors, should be a basic consideratiou in the land use decision ~lcing process. Development Potential Within Existing'Subdividet:4 Generally Developed Areas ,.-,. Guideline Apply zoning to annexed areas which generally maintains the same development rights within the City as within unincorporated areas. The general idea behind this guideline is that annexation and subsequent zoning should not create a change in the character of an annexed area. Instead. the City ~ land use regulations should be'oriented to mllinfllmmg the "ciwacter of the . neighboIhood." . , 2. Guideline Strive to avoid zoning designations which make conforming [and uses and srrocrures ncnconforming. . 3.. Guideline o Consider. when appropriate. creating new [and use zone districts or formulating code amendments. which may also be applied an a City-wide basis. to address specific problems but avoid creating custom land use legislation (0 address isolated. special interest problems. / Explanatory Comments Inevitably, during the annexation process, it win become evident that new legislation may be needed to address specific problems. The legislation should be pursued if it addresses a problem for the majority of property owners in an area and is consistent with ather City plans and regulations. The City should avoid creating land use legislation for unique problems associated with a handful of properties which has adverse effects on the entire City. 4. " Guideline .~ When creating new land use legislation for annexation areas, the City should consider the e/jects of the new legislation on the remail'.der afthe City of Aspen. 1. Guideline r'- Postpone the annexation of unsubdivided vacant land which is nual in character until a development proposal has been prepared for the land by the property owner(s) or a development proposal is pending, unless the Ciry ckcicks to annex certain properties due :0 thezr value as open space or to achieve contiguity for the annexation ola developing area. E.'Cplanatory CommentS ~, It is recognized that:he anneXa--non ofilie ar"..:l around the airport may be in the best interest of :he Cty. Tne price for the anne;<ation of the airport should not be the insensitive urb~ni=rion of the State Highway 82 Corridor. The City of Aspen supportS the concept oi a greenbelt surrounding the existing City limits as described in der.ail in the Asoen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks / Recreation! . . Open Space / Trails Element. The potential future development of the Stare Highway 82 Corridor should be consistent with this concept and the State Highway 82 Corridor :vtas--..er Plan. Floor Area Ratios 1. Guideline The CiryshouId generally fry to maintain Roor Area Ratios comparable to the , Counry 's for annexed properties. unless it is demonstrated during the zoning process that the Floor Area Ratios are unreasonably high or low. Environmental Review , r'-,.. Guideline Utilize theCiry's Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations: 8040 Greenline, Environmentally Sensitive Area, and Stream Margin Review when 2. "GUideline r--,. Consider. as necessary, code amend11/J!nts to expand the scope of the City's environmental reviews to include review mechanisms which address wildlife habitat. the State Highway 82 Scenic Corridor. and other significant environmental issues. Bandit Dwelling Units 1. Guideline Use the A.ccessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) provisions ofrhe City Land Use Code. in conjunction with rhe Umform Building Code. to legalize "bandit units" as employee units. Explanatory Comments ~. Pitkin County has developed legislation to legalize "bandit units" in renun for a property owner':; agre<>..ment to upgrade the units to meet health and safety standards of the Uniform Building Code and to deed restrict the units to emClovee . .. .... housing occupancy. Since many bandit units will be encountered when the MOIIItt:'lin Valley, Meadowood and Highlands Subdivisions are annexed, the City should apply existing regulations with respect to Accessory Dwelling Units to address the problem. Utilities 1. Guideline "P~e an agreement with Pitkin County which insur~s that Pitkin County o requires small. private. utility systems to meet all City standards. Pitkin County cannot preclude a developer from im:rnlling a private water or sewer system if the system meets acceptable stmdards. However, Pitkin County may ,,..-, require potential developers to meet City standards and may serve as a caralyst to , join the public utility system. or at a minimum, insure that if private systems are developed and subsequently taken over by the public, excess costs will not burden future users. . Annexation Zoning Process 1. Guideline Pursue the anne::r:ation afCounty lantis only when a majority afthe property owners favor anne::r:arton. Explanatory CommentS o The City should continue to take a pro-active role in annexation by assisting ~QImf.S to gather anne:wion petition signatures. The City may annex property by several methods. One method is to annex UlJon receipt of a certified petition from landowners who own more than 50 percent of the land area in a proposed annexation area. Another is to call an annexation election for desigo;l1'~ annexation areas. If a majority of the residents faVor annexation, the City may annex. Finally, the City may include an a~=ment to annex as part of a Water Service ~=IJIF!nT e.'tecuted. with a developer. For existing developed areas, the City has pursued annexation by assisting residents to gather annexation petition signatures. When property owners of more than 50 percent of the annexation area have sUbmitted an annexation petition, annexation has been pursued. The City Council may utilize either annexation ~ method. The first method is considered to be preferable because it is more responsible to local em.,....,,; and a more personal approach to annexation. The City should research the pros and cons of holding an annexation election for a Qui" deline 2. Stage the anne;cation and zoning process so that the final anneration ordinance o is considered simultaneously with final zoning actions in order to insure that the majority of owners are satisfied with zoning solutions. Explanatory Commem:s In order to maintain a spirit or cooperation berween the City and property owners within anne.'ted territory, the sequencing or the annexation and zoning process is essential. Since zoning and its land use impiic:Itions are the big.,oest tmknown element orthe annexation process, it is the City's poiicy1:o postpone the final reading or anne.'G1tion ordinances until property owners are well aware of the implications or City zoning regulations upon their property. The City or .\spen annexation and zoning approach is an improvement upon the pr~ used by most Colorado municipalities in which the annexation is completed prior to the initiation of the zoning process and residents are uncertain as 1:0 how zoning issues o will be resolved. ..~nother positive eftect orthe process is that it insures that the zoning is accomplished within 90 days or anne.'<ation, as required by state law. If this 90 day requirement were not met by me City, the property could be considered '.unzoned" and might not be subject to any development limitations. City/County Sales Tax Revenue Sharing 1. Guideline The City staff shall annually monitor its costs for providing Municipal services to annexation areas on a comprehensive basis to determine additional costs . ' incurred by the City and report to the City Council. The City and County shall renegotiate an equitable distribution of sales tdi:: revenues or other methods of revenue sharing, when City costs have increased enough to wan-ane a redistribution of revenues. fn 1968 Pitkin County voters. adopted a resolution imposing a 2 perceat COUJIty- wide sales tax, including a provision distributing 47 pex.-4 of the tax proceeds to ~., Pitkin County and 53 percem to the City of Aspen. Following several annexations. it is likely that service responsibilities will shift from Pitkin Coumy to the City. At some point, sales tax distribution should also be adjusted fn the evem: the City decides to hold an annexatioo electioo for a large area. the sales tax . agreement should be renegotiated prior!o the election. The City and the COUIIty have workedjoimiyto develop an annexation model which analyzes the impaa of a specific annexation on a comprehensive basis. This model should serve as the basis for further review. Ski Area Zoning 1. Guideline Prior to annexation o..fAspen Mountain and/or Aspen Highlands. the City of (""""\, Aspen should adQpt a special zone district for sid areas comparable to the Countv's AF-SKI zone district. - . Explanatory CommentS 3 The City does not have a zone district which is ,designed to address land use issues associated with ski areas. It will be necessary to adopt-such a district if the ski areas are annexed. ;--., sed Land Use Actions llowDtg are proposed land use actions to be pursued by the City of Aspen. ~ I 1. Prepare and adopt a Land. Use/Community Facilities/Utilies PIan. which addresses all land in the Aspen area including the cmnexation areas. The Plan should specifically address the CULL4UCes to Aspen with an emphasis 011 lands in the State Highway 82 Corridor. 2. Prepare legislation for inclusion in the City of Aspen Land Use Code which includes: . 200 foot setback from State Highway 82. . Scenic FOlegIotlIld Overlay regulations. . A new Zone District for base area ski development. . code amendmentS should be adopted. as a pre-requisite to annexation oflaDd in the Highway mdor. . I~ ~ I following dccTlmfl!nt<il and reports am {'I'!I'*'M to tbisAnnexation EJP.mP.nt ,and. may be obr3ined t the AspeuiPitkin C """""miry Dewlopment Office: r"-, Npel1 Area CwwuUAityPlan. Jauuary 1993 AACP Appendix, Januaxy 1992 . AACP Phase One Report. So::fltet!lber 1991 .~. ;--.. , _l .,_ /... ;,---- -' ---.... / ( '\ ,.~.~.......- 'yJ <- ......, / J (- (/ ') .' -r \.,-) ~ en 0 Q.) L... <C c:: CI> Q.) 0- c....> CI) <C 0- " >- -- L... 0 Q.) ~ U"l ....... 0- ) L... c....:> \ Q.) .......... ~ 0 I 3:: / ) t ~ ! i I, ...-...."'"\~......, ,\ , " i i -....... \ ,..' , . .~. . 1}/ / " (...-.. .- ..~ ~ ..~:: '- .~.- "P' '. ....-.~--.__...-_.t.....-.;~~=::~<__.._~_ .' '-~_.-...... ".: Iv~ ('(:~:(") ;/""...,,- '. // \..') I . ....'...... ....r...-..."........ '... ,) I IJ ',l i '-... .........,.....! - .. , .. / / ;' '. ~ ""-'" \ .- .._-\\~ /' \ / , . '. /' \, ../' . - , . <:> <:> <0 .... / -'- y ('\ -.-;, .1,,) r.;:; j,'i,..-" V 'J.-', II -'" ... 'co . \ .. --- / / , ,. I \." '( ). "r' I' ~ .., u <>>--- --- ..... - = -- <0 \ \~-c~~~,. f >- :00-::0, ::on,..,o", ::"11"'''';:;: ",'" : "" "".", "'.......... "ZNQ >>-0 ~ ~-t:::li:) o l::::lI_> O"'Ollll! :::tJ-u.:z: _ ,..,. ""\=c "'''' ~ ""'Q 2: Q--10 ..;.. <<=:z:= -ftn OCDh't.::I:: -I >,...,=-- -0 0:;1: ""'''''a Z "'''''.::0 -t <D>:t:o- =O>-f"'U >r-c;:.2:; o ::o~ -< ""0 V>>> .... l .-' '. '. J,-/ >'\----:':,-,", (- 't . .I "'-, '1'!'ll'" r" ~...:1 / ~~.. I '" j) ), o 1'.-'" .....,. - I >> ' .. ... ......? ::,."\"'. \1'J (J"l 0> '- C> .. .... co""- "'-co <"> 0> , o ....- /' 0 / ~ - .... '''..) ,- J '. 'f /"';1 //)...'\., "" "\,. ) ,........" ..,{ , \ ----,"- ' ,~ ) ~ l' / \ " ,.) .: :)~' ).\ "--\L... - -"~\.., ' '<I ( ~\) '~,./'/ ) d' '1 '( -----...,./ /'J'I~, . h>1j" - - - -- "- \-.. . . ~'-"" '~"., I - - \\ ,-"Y.('.1. .,'t ....... '- . '.. r /?'; '... ~ " ":,..;.k,' :(..;'. '" '\ \, _..~' . ..:..---~;:> .... .\ \..,., ':\:. .t- (~-: ,,'i'~.;>:-'r.~ .....1 ". ". ,.- ,) Y'.,;: .' ~' , .>< .~~:..-,~~i 1:::./ .' .' """'~'f:.. . . ....{:,/' .....( ... .....t~..:_:......../ ......,........) /. .... . .,/ ..,,' Il:. ,.~._.. --.- - => n :r " .... 0> C> C> - '" '" - /' ",. I' , /' / ; I \ d, "';:\ ~ r ':..~ j "\ \, / I /' / ; I ~ 4, 1 ."'\ I ' . ,f .tI'... ~ ...r---...;..--.--......-,.--.~~,"1;>.... . " v> ~ ," .' ~.,:.~.. .. <'.....'.,. . .' :" ~ :.!''- ',' ~I rl " "'~ 1 . " "', . ".,', 1,:/".:: ,...;: :'!. .'; , ',' .": " ", ',,;'; ,-, ',," ;'>' /. " ;, :" ::',;', :',))' . ~. t , , " (ID l.'. r ;, " ...-...., ,.'; ! '," F ) / I / I I \ \ \ \ ~ -.... (I' , I ','\ V> ,., '"' <> 0; p.o-- "'- .. .. .., ." C'> ,'[ / I :J;:>/ :;:,1 :;:,1 c6 ; IX 0;0 -,........ /~ / en CLJ CLJ en o ....... -- ..- '" I r; ( ,.$ ..... .... .. __ -- -- t........) ,.(, _..._....J \ , I , ..... '" Q - C .., .. .. C> '" .. '< - .., -- n is .., Q .... :;: / j' '< c .., .. .. is .. C> - /' "'- .., ;;/ ,.. Q => Q "'- ~ => .., ;;0........ '" '< c ~ .." .. Q Q => =- .. .... '" =>,/ / <::> -0 CD :::J :::s -0 / .' --.- .'~ --':"I. ~, \_~.... ').......... .-'--;.' I.. ~ '-'~\'-, \ -- -- ...- ""'- --- -.... -- ~U ..:-,\F - (') /' _F , - /' Q .. a :::s / ..... -"" !~ -.--., -- ~ '-' --- '""" "'11,,\, -~<,- '-"'V " ~ ,~----- A "-, '). ~/ c. ' .I '-', ./\.. -.//' ~\I'" r,....-:~ ~ k/ '-~_L 1 ,,_ 6 :J:> :::::S' :::::s ~ C'"> (1) i . [4~ . . . . [I LJ [J . LI [J X r+- '-< 0 <C> 0> .... en u. ..... ... c-:> ... ..., co r-t- .... .... 0 -. U> ... U> ... ... -= ,., -a ,., r- = ... x on =r on on .. .. .. <> ~ <> -... ~ .. .... .. .... .... '" ... ~ ... ... .. - C> .. .. ... .. .. ... - .. <> '" '" '" '" '" '" ... ;0:: ~ 2: ... :::::s '" ... '" '" '" '" <> '" on :J> '" "" x x '" ~ '" ~ .... ~ c-:> '" "" '" ~ G'> :'/'" ~ .. en ~ '" '" .0 .0 ... .. ~ =r '" .. '" .. =r =r .. ~. ~ on -0 :J:> .. ~ '" .. ... ~ '" .. '" 7/ '" en .. '" '" --...... .. ~ """"'i ~ ... ... ~ :=J '" on on <1> U> ... 0 >- c.n ., >- ... ~ ~ C/ I ,..,-=::ao~.... G co :Z:~fT1fYl"""::C (') 0) ~-c;:~~:; -... :;::a"fYlC")"" _ <=> \CO>::cU'J......lA-=: Q:II ..-., ...... rrlfY1> ~ .~ :z: >>c::r ~ :z-t~ o c-> a,.., o. ::a"'Oz - ,..,..VJ .::a::: "'''' co ......o..z Q-....O -' c::.:::c ........., ncrt'l ::c . .... >OM""''',', -0 '., c:z: r-'T1g :z: ,..,,..,:=0'; "-t CD>> ~-~ >o-r-c::=c n ::::0-" ;..c f""In ~~ ~' ~ , o '" n =r --....... . ~ 11 ..., '" co co ... .. ~ -..... -~ c~ ~.,..- ""'....~------.__. - ~.~,....-'"\~~ , , -- " ft ;0 ..__.,:J II r- X' " ') /'(;" '---'j /f'/ -::---' : --;, If' -- ( y / \ . ../ \ '- ~/' ;r--' " - '--"---'~"\ ,. /- -..-.... o o <; '- " "-.'~-';~~ :.. " ~ i (