Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.097-00 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL READOPTING THE CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLAN Resolution No. WHEREAS~ pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 31q2q05, all cities within the State of Colorado must a have a "Plan" in place to guide future annexations; and WltEREAS, the last update of the City of Aspen Annexation Plan was approved by Aspen City Council through Resolution No. 62, Series of 1999, on July 26, 1999; and WltEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan (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 Aspen/Pitkin 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 WItEREAS, the current plan is acceptable for readoption until such time as the joint City/County efforts reflecting the newly adopted 2000 AACP results in a revised annexation plan; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLYED BY TItE CITY COUNCIL O17 THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council has reviewed the proposed 2000 Annexation Plan and has formally adopted the Plan. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 24th day of July, 2000, ~Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. ~~¢~ · IRachel E. Richards, Iv~yo~ I, Kathryn S. Koch, as duly appointed City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held July 24,2000 Kathryn S. I~l~,~it~ Clerk - Approved as to Form: f'6t~rce~er, City Attorney C/joyce/annex00 City of Aspen AnnexatiOn Plan THE CITY OF ASPEN Last Revised July 3, 1996 Readopted August 28, 1998 Readopted July 26, 1999 Prepared by: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970)920-5090 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE 1999 CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLAN Resolution No. 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 Aspen/Pi(kin 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 ~ day o£ ~__~ 1999, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado· · Ra¢e/~~'~~ ' Ra~c el~ 'chards, Ma~ I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and ~..4curate copy of that resolution adopted by City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held ~, 1999 Kathryn S. Ko~,~2l~ty Clerk Approved as t° form ~_.~~~/7'., ~..~:__ Johri WorCester, City Attorney RESOLUTION OF 'rx-~ ASPEN CI'IY COUNCIL ADOPTING TE[Z 1996 Cl'l ¥ OF ASPEN .4~NNEXATION ~M.I£RE.4.S. pursuant m Colorado Revised Stam:~s ;CRS] ] 1-12-L05. all c:ti~ within the State of Coioracio rnus: a have a "P~an" in place to ~uide futur~ anne.~ans: :ma WItEIZEA~. the lasz update of me City. of Aspen Annexanon Platt was approved by Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Oc:ober 18. [9~ll in association w~ the i988 Aspen .Area Comprehe~ive Pian: and V~.iREAS. the 1988 Ashen Area Compreheraive ?!em was m,,:erseded by the adoption of the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan .AACP); :md ~Id~RF_.%S. the AAC'P. differed .'Yom ~rior comprehensive plans in that the document was "chares:er" based p[an that did eot include the a~aounon ora r~vised Annexation Pi:m: :md WIIEPdLAS, The As~e.'u'Pitkin County, Community. Deve!o~ment D~ar~enr i~as reined and updated :he pre,Aousiy adopted Annexation Eiemen~ to be cansiaen~ wkh :he ,-%AC?: and V~i-t~IZEAS. State Smm~e allows the adoption of separa:e pians by CitT. Council t'oilowing review by the ?terming Commission: :md % ~,:REAS. the .aspen Piunning a: Zoning Commission mvie,.ved and formatly ,-eoommended .-knne.-mtion P!an for adoption at their meeting of J'une IS, 1996. NOW. THZR.EFORE BE iT RESOLVED BY TTrlZ tci-l'f CO~k'NCIL OF ~ Ci'iY ~F ASPEN, -COLO~O: ~1~ ~he CiU Council h~ ceview~ ~e pmpos~ 1996 ~on  ' ', 1996. by ~e Ci~ Council ~SOL~, .~PRO~, .~ ~0~ ~ . tbr ~e CiU of Aspera Coio~o. John S/Bennett. Mayor I. K, athryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Cl~-k do certify that th.e. ~r~going is a true and accur~copy of that ~tion adoptS; by ~he Ci~ Council or'the City. of A~pen. Color'ado, at a m~ting held' t. ga~ -~-., ,/~ 1966. Kathryn S. Ko~fi, ~ity Clerk ' , RF.~OLUTION OF TI'tE ASPEN ?I,..M.NTq'llNG TO ~iE ASPEN C~ CO~C~ Cauncil~ ?l~ be Planning :md Zonia.% Commission: ~ ' ~ ~ .,..//- ,:t.-~/~ ~, _ '" ~Ci.!.. ~' '.~/,~','t.2 C,- . .q. my $cfihaid. Deputy City. Clcrl.; Sara Garto~, Clmir L I~TRODUC't~O~ "P~or ~o compienon of any ann~,az~on~. :,rt/,t~n ;he .~hree mile arza. .*he m~nzc:pafi~, shaft in ?iace a pian fbr the area. whic,~ generait.v describes ~.he ?oposed focanon, character, a~d extent of srreet& tubways, bridges, water'/~ays, ware .r~ronrs. parkways, piaygr, ounds, s.am:res. park& Cana~on fieM& other ?ublic w~. . ground~, open spaces, pubiic unfines, a~d terrmnais.for water, fight, sca~itatton, tra-nsporrat~on, and power :o be ?mmaded by the muntC;pali~, and the . proposed land z~ses ?hr the area." Pas~ A.n_ne~n'~n- Plans by ~e City of .-Lsat. The CiU 1988. From ~e ~ of ~984 ~ ~e ~ of I9~5, Tae Ci~ P~ Co~ Baar~ of Co~ C~e~. m~ ~e~yzo ~ ~e. The 1988 plzm wa~ ac~nlly an -.ndivi&,al element so the !983 .-k.~m .~a Compr~hm~v~ Pt~ 1993. ~ 1996 ~M~ ~ ~ p~ ~ o~m m~e ~o~ ~ ~C~ H~r, ~e ~ ~e~ a~ i~ ~ ~ p~ ~ ~s~ily ~e ~ ~ ~ose i~ ~ ~e 1988 pl~ ~d ~e ~mt ~0~ Sr.~ ~s ~&~ ~ City. of..-~ Ann~Zmon Plan. r~v. 3 J'uiy [996 Page 2 growth ~ rie urban/rural fringe of~e Cky. The~e ~eral ~ hold true ~r rie 1996 Annexa~on Plan as weil. The annemm~n ~a mcwu an ~Zib/t A ~mer'aily ¢orr~sacnds with '~e ,~'~a Commumry Plan. ,a4th a ~ ~xc~s. %e ~ pcm~ of E~b~ .& ~i C,~ Ma~ Cr~ ~d ~e ~ si~ o[~e Ko~ Fo~ ~ ~a me w~ si~ Comer, ~ ~ ~e bo~ oi~e ,~< .~ Co~ Pt~ p~os~ ~e~ ~a. ~e ~ have b~ ~clud~ ~ :=i~mm ~ ~ m i~c~r. ,~ ~e !~e~ for ~e pro~sicn of.u~ or m~cip~ sedco. Based on rile 1995 Coua.wmiry Deve!cpmem Department ~m~. ~e p~ ~e~ ~ Z869. By ~ ~e 199~1995 ~ p~ ~r~e C~ ~.~ ~ ~prox~m~ty 5,851 md ~e p~ p~ ~ ~ ~ ~,000) ~ a mn~ ~g96 m 1,130 n~ ~e~g ~ ~ ccncei~ty be &~!op~ M ~e p~ ~ ~1 ~eili,g ~t ~d ~on ~m~t~ ~ ~ on c~on ~m 1990 U.S. C~ ~ c,.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.~ace~tml approval o{~e Hi~l~-ds Base VillaS. The rammary by ann~,mo~ group is sho,,xm Table I. for ~g ~e ~e~ a~ ~'~ ~ ~oups Group ]{-Roaring Fork E~st. Red Moanmim Ntt<in Green Cume~y, suburban ~e,x~cm ar~ comprised ofpredommmxty devolved ~ubdivisions. Several o£flae~e subdivi~ie~z have be~ already am~exed in:o the Cky, ~ as F. aztwood and Kaollwcod. Rern~thg ar~,~as include ,M!)e~ Grove and Mo,train Valley.. The major land use issues aff~:rrnz ~ g='oup include floor area :',mo and ! _~!klwb'-~z "bancik dwelling ,mir_~ ' Another issue relativ~ to Pad Moun~i. is the sams of R~ Mountain Road and the ability, o£'ae City. w adeq.~iy maimam and up, g~ace it as aecessaxy. Group C-Me~dowood, Smugger, .~spen Highlands Baze and New Development, State Highway 82 Corridor 'Fnese areas ¢~k~ Im~e develepmem parcels with sig~ifican: gruv~ potezu~i. There are munerous land use p lam~g ~ which need to be resolved prior r~ aane.~on, regarding appropriate developmem deasities. The Maroon Creek Development Corpor-ddon ar~ has compleri~, the County land use process and has been ay, tarried land us~ approvals. The .Mpea Highlands projec: is curre~y in the ¢oum'y land use process. rev. 3 Juiy 1:996 T.4JII. X I 5~Y OF .MVlV'~-'XATIO1V A. RY-~ Mabiic L0 Shadow 2~ I ; 10-t¢ Rm~. Suborn $58 351 ~ 26-35 2 . ~aring 66 ~ 0 5 28-~3 5~ Ail Mum~ro~ b~ait Fork 1 ~ , 1 Subdivided ~ ~ o~4 ~ .~ 98424 S~ Numero~ ~ounmin t 5~aivtde~ g Unrabeivid~ 5 P~n 319 . 0 2I 8949 5~u~ ~ Numere~ ~c~rzn:m Grin { ~ ] Subdivided & ~ - Ua~bdivide~ S~rom 609 ~ ~ 215-256 Gcou~ C ' 3 Lower 260 42 I0 37-[50 U~ Not · Smuggi~ I { [ Subdivided { ' ~ao~oa 366 [ 219 ~t [ 93-11¢ ~m~v~d~ & ] ~ow~5i~ific~t ~o~u~ for ~ A~pen l~ 2 1~ 15¢ { S~um~ O~ pot~ S~div~d~ & i2 5H ~ 1~36 · 424 ~ 250-3 I0 U~ ~a 5i~: pot~u~ for 5~aivid~ ~d U~bdivid~ Subm~ , 2709 [ 749 ~ 476 ' 655.839 G~ug D Suutum } 2~32 t 0 ~ 130 { 0 t TOTAL [ ~14 i 11~.5 I P2 I 89&I130 - C~.t7 of.-~ea Aane.~on Plan. r~v. 3 5uiy 1.996 ,aumexmmon of~hese areas would generally in¢iucb ~g d~e decisions o'fshese processes. Aa issue Umque to the Stouter area is the Lmp. a~ ~m ~he Ck7, Coum?, and residents of~e m-~ ,'eial~g ~.o ks desiderata as a "SU~er F,.md' ,hazardous w-~s~e size. Group D-Aspen Highlands snd .ts.~m .~omv~i,, Skiing .~reus These areas can'~.socnd. ,s~izi~ skiing s_rea .oerrnn: bcunoazles..-k~me.xa~lon wcuid the dra:f~g ofaew land use le!~siamon :o gmd~ fumn~ grov~ and d~veiop, m~= skiing mess. An analysis ofland use issues [ndLc,w- rhnv ~e ~e~ o~ ~ Gmu~s A ~d B '~E ~t ~ ~o possfole ~ ~e M~d~ ~e~ ~ be omk~ ~o ~er p~. ac:or~ m ~g ~b~mns. For e~le. ~e M~d~oo~ .~ ~ md .~ T~i~ Club STATUTORY .-L.NNEXATION CRITERLA An area is eiigible for enne,~on if~e ~vermng body., a~ a hearing as provided in CRS 3l-t2- 109, ,~d~ and determines ~e f~H~n~.2 The~e ~nn~x~ion cr~er(a Mve beeu used ~ a ~e.~ ~d~ m idemiC~ ~u auuex~ou area ~round 'the l~er)phery o~ .~pe~. ANNEXATION REaVORT REQU'IRF. M~ENTS City. ofA.~Atme2t~onPlm~ r,~v. 3 July [996 map or rr~ps o£~e munic/palizy and adjacem :emmry re ~ow ~ following 6. A ~r~mea~ on the stsc: of azmmxa~/on ~on [oc~/~ublic sc~eo.[ d~._~ ~ i~ctucling ~te ~'im~r~l aumber of ~,~ ~er~.ed ;md the cagital ccns~c~im ~ to edn~,'~ suck, Floor ~ Ratios FIoor 3u-ea ,:Latias (F.-LR) are u~iii~d by ~e City and :be dwelling tmi~ permi~ ~. zene dixtric~. Fl~r ar~a r~cs repr~e=~e rdation--"n~ betwe~x t~e size ora stmcrare md ~e size o~'r. he lat. Development ?or. em:i~, of Unsubdivided Land A ~-un~ry of major ,msubaivicied land wirhi~ the amnex~m are~ is aav~ pre'Aormiy on Table t. Im the p~,'a b~ ~e .~ pl~ing ~d Z~g Co~ ~d ~e .~ Ci~ C~c~ M~ ~s~ ~ ~e co ~e~ perca~ !ack of co~aol over ~e d~M~m~ of large parcsts dn ~e~ ~e. ~e ~:o ~ b~ ~ ~x md ~ E~e Tr~r Tax f~ mv~u~ am ca~e~g ~ :o p~ue ~sive ~e~ Environmental Review The ,M-pen Cky ~ have begun ro exp. ~md beyond the odgkml towmi:,~ Iccated on lhe priwm:y be=ches above the ~alley itcer. This has ~ a si~on whereby fuzure mxpansiczm will brr~Iucs si~i~ ~mvkomne=~ml c.-~wam~ b :he z~m~xa~m: precis. The Pit.id= Co~:y La~d Use Cccte is spe~ic~lly designed re addr~s ~ach envirenmenmt bsues ~uch ~s slope, erasic~ wildlk~e md ft~xiplain c~m~a~ms. In pm"dcular, ~he Colorado House Bill 1041 pawers have Ci~ o£.-~-a .~me. xmion Plato r~v. ] luly 1996 allowed Pkkin County. to apply derailed crkaria :o mwiew potential ck, velopmmx in mvlionlvm'rr=lly sem~lw areas. Ski .-~a'ea Base Zoning The .-~.. en ,r-tighlencis Base V~llnge has obr. amed ¢~ncepmal devet~, me~ .a~proval i'am ,~itkm Ca~.. If:he Hi~l=nd~ base area is annexed, by the City., ~he Ckl/s ~i.~i~i lodge zc~es .'nay be suitable for the Aspen Hi~t~nds base are~. The potentml ann~Xmnou of Btrmrmi;Ic presemrs similar cli~c-akies. The threshold issue wish. am~eXmg either base villn~ is the ~msive ~ which could ,uc~z~i~lly a¢¢ammcciaza 6.rowe d~vel~p, mem. ~nd',he [nt~mve namzm o/~msring Cky zaning. Ski .M'ea Zoning 5vady .~rea l i includes ~he ,Mpe~ Meuntaim Ski .M'ea. The aume.xa~ian office ski area would r~quir~ the cmmiicm of a n~w zme disu'ic: for ski area recmmman, as ,~eil as an SPA ~y. wide vari~-y ofisaue~ miami m ski eree e~aneic~ which ere ac~ addnmed by. the ¢~,.,,~ mUmcipal code, would hav~ to be reselved prier m ennex~ian. Pkkin Count. has edo~ the SKI zone distric~ m regulate ski area devetopmem and ~l=anmc~. This Tool should be camsidemd ~r adolxim ~ the Ck'y if ~ex,~n ~n'e in ~i~ area. A.cMkkn~l issues ind,,.Me the retem, e bene~ ~ enn~-xing federal lands inr. a the Ci~,, as well as the edd~! in~. a~ ~ emex~.~cy respeme. Ufillty Ert. ensiom Typical amev, at:ion policies f~ms a greta: deal of ~cal amI.%-is ~n the potential e..,a'~,~i,~, c~war..er amd sanimw, slX'er ~fmes by a -~mlcipaliry lo a'm'~zx~ t~rri~ries. W'~i, the A~em ~ ~ s~wer is prcMded bythe Aspe= Cansolic~ed Sm~:ati~n Dis~_, rauker th.'m the Cky. Ther~re, .M ~he pe~'. ne~ of-~e City is developed. :he deve!cp, mere c~,,,,unn? is .~c~ ,~kfi a '~",oice of joining ~e ,a~p. e~ w~er .sTsmm or devetop, mg .':heir ov~ d~rn~ac ,~a~r ;~. 'Foe C~y and Coumy do act ~urzenfly .mqun'e tiaat new deveicpme~ join :he murat, poi v~ter ~. Fu.~hernmre, '&e City mcornmends fl~at ~ae County. require ne.v devei~men~s which chcose m pro, nde pnVam ~r~r ~ zo d~sign those s.vst~ns m me~,~ standards witich are c~,.~u~ble to Ci~ s'~ndarde. When and ~:fie C~y, a~nexes t~ese areas, ~e w~.~r ~s-mms wouid othe,~hse cr~e a liabiiky to Se Ci~.. 'Foe CiW also recommends ~h,~ ~fie County develop, standards which ac~ as an mcen~we ~o have developme~s ~m~atly hook ohm Se Cky's ~ m order ~o avoid ~e prolJ~e~/ca o~n~il uneconorn~' o~ten undep, e~dabie pm~m wa~r ~systams ~n ~e me~ro area. ruction l. Gui 'cm,.'ine Generaily. an adorted Master Plan for an annexed area addressing ~ ,are and c~itat ~tia~ imp~vemen~ sh~M be a pre-re~te to ~ne~non. E~o~ Co~ ~pro~, m ~6~ ~ ~ ~ ofp~e~ ~ ~d n~bcm, ~c~d be a b~ic ~i~ M ~e l~d ~e ~ ~ proc~s. Development po*?,,*~l W'rthin ~g Subdivided, Genermlly Developed Ap?y zoning to anne:ed areas which generally maintains the sa'me deve!opment r~ghts ',,qthfn the C~r/ as within umncorporated areas. The ge~emi idea b~h~nd tl~ =~tideline is thru- a~mexm-ion and mbsequern' :cmmg should not ~ a change in the ~arac:er of an annexed area. T.~t~e}. the City land us~ r~gut,~ions ~culd be'oriemed to rn~nt=i,h,g the %5mr-e*~ of the neighborhood.' 2. Guideline Strv;e ro avoid :orang desigrtarions which make c.onformmg [and wes and srrucrares nonconformzng. 3.' Guid~t/ae Consider. '.hen appropriate, creating new !and Ye zone districts or formulating code amendments, which may. also be applied on a City-wide basts, to address spec(ftc ~robtems but avoid creanng custom [and use/egtsiarton co address isolated special interest problems. Explan~to~ Commenr~ 4. GuideLLue When creating new land use legislation for annexation areas, the Ci~. should consider rite effects of the new le=~slat~on on the rem~rder of the Ci.ty of Aspen. Pos~one the artnexarton of ansubdiv~ded vacam land ~hich is rural m character unnI a de~eiopmenr ?oposai has been grepared.for the ~ by the proper~v. ownerfs7 or a cteveiopmenr 2roposai is pemh'ng, unless the Ci~. de,des co ann~' cerrann propernes ~:~e ;o ;beer vatue as ooen st~acz or ro achteve contZg,.tz~, for the annexanon ora de,;e~opmg ar~a. E.xplan~ory Caxmnem. s Floor Are~ ~tlos 1. Guideline The C~. 'should generally cry ro maintain b'?oor Area Ra~os comparable to the CounC/'s.,:or ann~ced properties, unless it is demonstrated during the zoning process that the F~oor Area Raaos are zmreasonably high or low. Review Guideline Ut~!izz the Ci~. 's Planned Lrnit Development (~UD) re~daaons: 8040 Greenline. E,m~ironmenra!ly Sensitive ,-9'ea. and S~o. am :¥[ar~n [~ew when Con.~der. ~ necessary, code amer~menrs ro expa~l the $cope of r~e Ci~ ~ e~ronmentat r~s ro inc!~ r~ mec~is~ which a~ress wi~ife ~b~tar. the Stare ..:g.~ ~2 Scemc Co~r. ~ other ~t ~nmentai [s~s. Bandit l)weiling Uuks 1. Guideline Use the .4ccessoE: Dwelling Umr (ADC9 provtszons of the Ci~. L~.rad Use Code. tn conjuncnon with ;he O'nVbrm Su~ia'tng Code. ro [egaiz'ze "bandit units" .as employee '~tnzrs. Exp. lau~ory C e. rraueur, s 1. Ouidetiue pUrSUe an agreement with PftMn County which insures that Pftk~n Count. requires small, private, ut~fi~, systems co meec ali Ci~. stanJards. I. G~id~iine ?urs~e ~e zz~ne~,~on o.£ Co~nq~ J~d~ oniy '~en ~ masons, of'~e gro,ver? owner~ ~vor onne.v~no~. The Cik~/should ¢~.l.i~e by s~e~ ~. ~e m~ ~ ~d~ who ~ mom*~- 50 perc~ of~e l~d ~ ~ a pr~os~ ~,~,~ ~. S~ ~~ ~ ~i~ a ~er. For ~dsting developed areas, the Ckylms pursued ~-ex~on by assisting msideucs to gm:her ~exaz/on p~/ou signsuu~. When property owners of more ~m~ 50 perc~£ of the annex,~cn area have SUbmitted sm ~exa~/ m~exszicn has be~m pursued. The C~y Council may ~r~ ekher ~rr-ex~icn me~. The ~ me~hod is ¢o:-qdm'~t to be pref~mble because k is more reapcnsibte ~o local ¢~ and a more pe~cual approach m The Ck'y should research the pros and cons ofholding an ~,,nexscion etec:i~n for a Stage the an~e~',~rton and zoning process so ii, at the fi~l ~on o~n~ce is co.tiered s~it~eo~ly w~t~ fi~l zoning ac~o~ in or~r to i~e t~t the ~jon~ qf owne~ are ~a~fied with zoning coluao~. City/County Sales Tax Revenue Sharing The Ci~. sra.~shatI annua~v monitor its costs for providing Muntc:.pa[ services to ca~nexation areas on a compreher~ve bas~s to determine adrh'~onal costs incurred by the Ci~. and report to the Ci~. Council. The Ci~. and Count. shall renegot~ate an equitable distribution of sales tax reverrues or other methods of revervae sha~ng, when Ci~. costs b~tve increased enoug, h to warrant a redistribution of reve..rues. In 1968 Pifldn C~uaty voraxx ~anr~u~L ~ ~olutica i,,,,.,osiug a 2 percaut Co, mry- wida sal~s tax, inctuaiag a pruvisiou distributing 47 pm~:am of the tax pr~ Pitkia County and $3 perc-~-r m tim City of.4~peu. Followiug r.o uhe Cky..~ ~ome poi,,,' zates ~ di~i'~u:i~ ~ould also be mdjusr.,~ c,v~ut the City dzcides ~o hold an a,m~xatiou et~ion iur a {arg~ a~a. the sales tax agreem=g ahould be c~ego~ .~rior ~o the ~ieclacm. The Cky and the have workzd joimty'co daveio~, au aau~xanou mcdat win'ch ~,,~y-z~ the ;m~. a~ of a ~ec;.6~ armexamcn ou a comic, r~heusive basis. This modat ~hould sea'v~ as the basis fur furriaer Ski ~ I. Guideiiue Prior rs anne'canon oFAsz~en M'ounra~n and/or ,4~pen [-tightands. the Ci~. of Aspen shouid adopt a spe~ai zone dis~cr for ski areas comparable to the Count. 's. AF-,.gi~ zone disrr~cr. The Ci~ does aox hav~ a zone di~uic~ ~iich is desisn~ ~o address laud u~e i..ssu~s assoc',axed v~i,], !ki ar~s. Il: will be nec~,/~o adetz, such a di~uic: {~e ski sed L~nd Use Actiouz llaw~, g ~e prop. Os~[ laxld use' acric~-~ to be pm'~"a~ by ~e City of A.spen. 2. Pr~ar~ I,~?~on for inctu~i~- in ~e C~ ~,~ r~d Use C~ '~ 200 ~ ~ack ~om S~ ~y 82. · A n~ Z~e Di~ui~ ~r b~e ~ s~ ~el~m~t. ~ am~dme~ ~hould be adqx~ ,z a pr~requime ro a--ex~iva of land in the Highway. crid~)r. ~'t;eu A~-ea C~'....~;-~y Ptmm. %mzu~ 1993 AACP App~tix, J'a~,,~,~' I99'2 AACI~ P~ One R~. orr, S ~e~' 199l