Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.CR.Pitkin County Airport.0006-2004.ASLU City of Aspen Community DevelopmenU)ept. CASE NUMBER 0006.2004.ASLU PARCEL 10 NUMBER 2643-34-2-00-851 PROJECT ADDRESS 233 E AIRPORT RD PLANNER mUE ANN WOODS CASE DESCRIPTION PITKIN COUNTY REFERRAL - ASPENIPITKIN COUNTY AIRPOR REPRESENTATIVE SUZANNE WOLFF 920-5093 DATE OF FINAL ACTION 9/20/200 CLOSED BY Denise Driscoll " ......... MEMORANDUM RETAIN FOR fIeRIIAMEIIT Ja:COIID TO: FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Senior Planner Julie Ann Woods, City of Aspen Community Development Director RE: DATE: Airport Master Plan Referral February 13,2004 STAFF COMMENTS: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay Review, GMQS Exemption, and code Amendments. The Land Use Application and Draft Report are very comprehensive and appear to cover all aspects of future improvements at the airport. Due to the limited amount of time to review these documents, the Planning Staffs comments will focus primarily on the issue of the runway extension. These comments reflect staff s position only, not that of the City Council who has not yet had the opportunity to discuss this as a group. As you are aware, the City has been working on issues of Economic Sustainability for several years. The Economic Sustainability Committee developed a white paper in September 2002 that was subsequently reviewed by City Council who has since been trying to implement the recommendations of that committee. The Economic Sustainability Committee (ESe) identified a major limitation at the Airport as follows: "The availability of air access is too limited to support an appropriate level of tourism. There is a lack of competition, caused in part by the inability of the airport to serve the current types of regional aircraft used by other potential carriers. " The ESC include the following recommendation in their final report: Recommendation #2 Continue to upgrade the safety and expand the capability of Sardy Field. Discussion: Sardy Field should be improved to accommodate additional types of aircraft, which is a prerequisite to aUracting additional air carriers to Aspen. These improvements include runway lengthening and improved guidance facilities. Rather than continue the debate on bringing in the Boeing 737 aircraft, current market studies show that improvements could be targeted to address a wider variety of smaller regional jets operated by other carriers. Moreover, the principal aircraft servicing Sardy Field, the BAE 146, is no longer in production and a program to . provide a replacement aircraft has been cancelled by the manufacturer. It is therefore necessary to provide the runway length and other facility improvements that would safely support a wider variety of regional aircraft under a broad range of weather and temperature conditions. Bonding, as a financing mechanism, should be considered in order to accelerate these improvements by providing the local match to the 90% FAA funding. At the same time, it is in Aspen's interest to explore an improved relationship with the Eagle County Airport, and possibly Rifle and Grand Junction airports as well, including transportation and welcome services. Staff is encouraged by the recommendation of the Master Plan that states: "Based on a thorough examination of the potential benefits and consequences, it is recommended that a future take-off use only runway extension of approximately 1000' be shown as part of this Airport Master Plan." (Airside Alternative 2). With this improvement in place, the city could expect that an additional 4,000 passengers could be transported to our community, especially during the summer tourist season. Presuming these are primarily tourists who spend on average $230 per day*, this translates to $920,000 of revenue to our community per each day of their stay! It is our understanding that although this alternative is included in the Master Plan, it is not programmed for implementation until 2007. Staff and the ESC believe that accelerating these improvements is critical. It appears from the land use application that funding for this work will be by Federal Discretion and Passenger Facility Charge. We would encourage the county to consider this a high priority, and consider moving the improvement up to an earlier phase, even if it means shifting resources accordingly. *Source: Aspen Chamber Resort Association - ".ciP Fie: Edt Record ~ Form Reports T~ dl !;)JC\\t ". ""'ill Sl.tlfetmil$ M"" I R"'....S.""' I '''''''E", P",* I PennitTwe~ "I Address 1233 E AlRPOAT AD C~y ~~P*~ IrJOtm.aliorr Mad8l"Pemlil: .;.:,;j ROlJI:inoQueue id.! PrOject f i1 Stbtu$ lpeldl,g - 0".'(" ~iTTiirc.jUNTY REFERRAl-ASPENIPITKlN COUNTY AIRPORT MASTER PlAN '041 HA:?6.RD REVIEW, SCENIC OVEALAYAEVlEW, GMQS EXEMPTION, CODE ,t.,MENDMENTS ;1 .=; I ~~ F..S.......... I Botion,1 R_ll_ I (;onOI"'" Ptlfni U p:0::6.2004ASLU ApvSuitei S'~.I~ z;,1tl1611 '71 .sJ 'J I,~ IIJv Gl g) I" lW !ill (1) J' [!j r V~ible or. the web? CIoekIR......" D.,.f1iO PertMIO: j 30199 ...,... lOii;sl2oo,.01 Apptcwed ~ .d I,WOId 1-.01 F.. I 3 E"".. jov;vioi'g' .01 SUbn,.;""j:SUZANiiE\lIOlFF W50S3-- 0_ latt N,on-,f' ~"SPENI?lTKJN AIRPORT FwNarne Ifs33AlRPORT RD PEN COB1G11 I Phr:ww ~ Own'O'II:A,pplicant? "'App/icaf~ LdstNdh"" :ASPENIPITKlNAlRPOR-T FntNMlef Pk~',i: ] CusU 13162 'Lend.;" ! 233 AiRPORT RD ~."J" )ASPEN CO 81611 .,' ) Enlectlel . [""nNe -,,"", =-'''''' 1 ...t::""I~' - Record 1 ofl TO: FROM: RE: DATE: --.~_._,._,<,-", PITKIN COUNTY COMMuNITy DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920-5526 FAX (970) 920-5439 MEMORANDUM Engineer Zoning West Buttennilk Metro District Woody Creek Caucus Housing Office City of Aspen Community Development North 40 Homeowner's Association Aspen Skiing Co. Aspen Airport Business Center Brush Creek Metro District SUZanne Wolff, Community Developrnent Department AspenlPitkin County Airport Master Plan 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay Review, GMQS Exemption, Code Amendments (PID 2643-342-00-851 Case P009-04) January 22, 2004 Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application subrnitted by Pitkin County. The Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission will review the application on Tuesday, February 17, 2004 (Applicant's Presentation) and on Tuesday, March 2, 2004 (Staff Review). Please return your comments to me by Friday, February 13, 2004. PLEASE RETURN APPLICATION MATERIALS TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IF YOU HAVE NO FURTHER NEED OF THEM. Thank you. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport 2003 Master Plan Land Use Application List of Exhibits Legal Description......A Authorization Letter......B Adjacent Property Owner List......C Preapplication Form......D Phasing Tables (12, 13, and 14)......E ARFF/SRE Site Plan......F ARFF/SRE Floor Plans......G Phasing Plan Drawings......H Passenger Terminal Constraints Figure.......I ARFF/SRE Space Programming Table.......J Exhibit A (ABO Lease and Use Agreement)......K Lot l/Lot Concept Sketch.......L ABO Addition/Building #11 Demolition Site Sketch......M Airport Noise Overlay Zones Draft Ordinance.......N Highway Setback Comparison Plan......O List of Attachments Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Draft Report ......1 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Moster Pion, GMQS Exemption, /041 Hozord Review, Scenic Over/oy i Aspen/Pitkin COlJnty Airport 2003 Master Plan Land Use Application Table of Contents 1- INTRODUCTION...... 1 Background......l Revisions and Clarifications to Airport Master Plan Draft Report......2 II - DESCRIPTION OF KEY MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDATONS......3 Airside Development......3 Landside Development......4 Other Supporting Plans......8 III - REQUESTED LAND USE APPROV ALS......9 Recommended Improvements wIPrevious Approvals......9 Phase I Recommended Improvements Projects......l0 Phase I, II and III Recommended Improvement Projects...... 11 Other Requested Approvals...... 11 IV -LAND USE CODE REVIEW CRITERIA...... 11 Development in the PUB Zone District - Standards for Public Master Plan ......11 Description of Recommended Improvements..... .19 GMQS Exemption for Essential Accessory Uses to Existing Governmental Facilities......27 Subdivision Exemption for Parcels for Essential Community Facilities......32 GMQS Exemption for Demolition Credit for ABO Building #11......34 1041 Environmental Hazard Review.......35 V - LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS......35 3-90-040 Site Selection of Airports......35 3-90-040 Site Selection of Airports, Airfield and Landing Strips......36 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay ii Aspen/Pitkin Covnty Airport 2003 Master Plan Land Use Application Submittal Requirements 1. Summary letter explaining the request and addressing compliance with the Pitkin County Land Use Code is satisfied within the body of this land use application and the accompanying Airport Master Plan Draft Report; 2. Maps ofthe site showing existing and proposed facilities and activity areas are included in the Airport Master Plan Draft Report (see Figure A3 - Existing Airport Layout and Figures E6 and HI for proposed facilities and activity areas); 3. Proof of Ownership is on file with the County; 4. Legal description for the airport property is included in written form (See Exhibit A); 5. A vicinity map is included within the Airport Master Plan Draft Report (Figure A2); 6. The land use review fee is being handled through an internal budget transaction; 7. Two copies of the signed Fee Agreement were included with the application at submission; 8. Letter of Authorization from Airport Director is included as Exhibit B; 9. A list of Adjacent Property Owners was submitted to the Community Development Department and is included as Exhibit C; 10. Copy of the Pre-Application Form is included as Exhibit D; PART I -INTRODUCTION Background This land use application accompanies the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Draft Report. After reviewing the draft report at a public meeting on November 18th of last year, the Board of County Commissioners, acting in its role as the Airport property owner, directed the consulting team to submit the Airport Master Plan Draft Report for formal land use review and recommendation by the Staff and Planning Commission. The Airport Master Plan Draft Report, which will be referred to in this application as the Draft Report, represents the culmination of nearly two years of effort to prepare a comprehensive master plan to guide future land use and capital improvement decisions for the Airport. The 2003 Airport Master Plan reflects the work and opinions of numerous individuals and firms that participated on this project, including a Study Advisory Committee (SAC), comprised of members of a variety of stakeholder groups, which was established by the Board of County Commissioners. The SAC provided the team detailed feedback, comments and questions, as each chapter of the Draft Report was prepared. This focus group helped the drafters of the Master Plan understand important local issues, which provided a framework for considering the technical and operational issues involved in airport Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 1 planning. The comments, concerns and questions of the SAC were also relayed to the Board of County Commissioners on a regular basis for their review and consideration. Members of the Pitkin County Staff who comprised a Staff Technical Committee (STC) also provided technical oversight for the project. The project consulting team contained professionals, both local and national, including expertise in airport planning; aircraft no~alysis, airport architecture, land use planning, community relations, and landscape architecture",~jloted above, oversight and guidance was provided by the Board of County Commissioners on a regular basis throughout the course of the project. Project status reports were also presented to the Pitkin County Planning Commission on two occasions. All of the meetings ofthe Study Advisory Committee and Board of County Commissioners were open to the public and one noticed public workshop was also conducted. Notice of the SAC meetings was provided to the press along with copies of the materials being reviewed at each meeting. an e era approva s grante or t e spenlPitkin County Airport is a complex one which has made the process of reviewing improvement projects at the Airport cumbersome and uncertain inthepast.~~.. ~:n.. .=;:~. -:u . -~. - . I - . - _n' .'. - .. . Section IT 0 t IS app Ication provides a brief escription of the key recommendations of the 2003 Airport Master Plan and their relation to past approvals. In addition, upon approval ofthe Master Plan, several copies of an appendix containing a summary of the historical land use approvals for the Airport will be provided to the Community Development Department for future reference. This appendix will contain key documents, resolutions and ordinances and a brief summary of the significance of these documents. Revisions and Clarifications to Airport Master Plan Draft Report Since the copy ofthe Draft Report provided with this land use application was prepared there have been a number of revisions identified that should be noted. Tables G2, G3 and G4 in the attached Draft Report provide a list of the recommended improvements and equipment needs for the Airport for the 20- year term of the Master Plan. These tables have been renamed and modified to adjust the phasing of some of the proposed improvements since the Draft Report was prepared. The revised tables are now labeled 12, 13 and 14 and are included as Exhibit E of this document. The revised tables will be included in ~he fi~al versi~i...a~~r~~'~ ~~ ~ . '. ~ ~~ . ~ - ~n..;;:i I ... L...~- ~ - ..:A1I,. The Conceptual Development Plan (Figure E4) is being revised to melude two existing buildings located southwest of the Air Traffic Control Tower that were erroneously left off this exhibit in the Draft Report. Also, the Conceptual Development Plan (Figure E6) and Airport Layout Plan (Figure HI) in the final version of the Master Plan will show a transit corridor along the airport side of Highway 82, consistent with the recommendations of the West Glenwood Springs to Aspen Highway 82 Corridor Investment Study. There are also a few plans referenced in the Draft Report, which are in the process of being completed. One of these is the Airport Property Map. This is a drawing that will show the various tracts of land Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 2 within the airport boundaries and how they were acquired. This map will be included in the final version of the Airport Master Plan. The Draft Report also refers to a Terminal Area Plan (Page H.B) that will be part of the final Airport Master Plan. This will be a written and graphic presentation of the Main Terminal area and the alternatives studied for the redevelopment ofthe facilities in this area. This plan is not critical to the land use review for which this application is being submitted, since it is not the purpose of this Master Plan to provide a final site plan or architectural drawings for the Main Terminal redevelopment. Rather ^. .nn_ se t. This work is incorporated into Section F of the Draft Report and the Phasing Plans contained in Exhibit H ofthis application depicts the area recommended to be reserved for potential passenger terminal area redevelopment based on the findings of the passenger terminal area development study contained in Section F. With the exception of the above-described revisions and clarifications, the Draft Report provided with this land use application contains the findings and recommendations for the 2003 Airport Master Plan. PART II - DESCRIPTION OF KEY MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS The plan for the future development of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport has evolved from an analysis of many considerations. Among these are: aviation demand; aviation forecasts; a capacity analysis; aircraft operational characteristics; facility requirements; environmental considerations; input from the community as presented during the numerous meetings of the Study Advisory Committee and Board of County Commissioners and the hands-on knowledge of the airport management and staff. It should be noted that forecasts are used as a basis for planning; however, t- ^ .n. .. . The 2003 Airport aster an mcludes a broad set of recommended site and equipment improvements for the Airport. Many of these improvements have been considered in detail and granted local land use approval pursuant to prior land use applications. The key recommended improvements are summarized in the following paragraphs and are depicted on the Airport Layout Plan (Figure HI in the attached Draft Report). More detailed descriptions of these recommendations are provided in the Airport Plans chapter of the Draft Report (Section H). AIRSIDE DEVELOPMENT For the purposes of the 2003 Airport Master Plan and to coincide with FAA planning terminology, landside facilities include runways; taxiways; deice aprons; runway and taxiway lighting, and other navigational and lighting systems associated with the runway. _RUnWay System: ~- . -.. ...:, . ~ ~ . .~h. The runway extension has been identified as requiring scenic overlay review prior to construction. The runway width would remain at 100 feet, however to facilitate snow removal, paved shoulders are proposed. The shoulders will be 25 feet in width and will be located on both sides of the runway. It is recommended that the shoulders be designed to support the weight of the airport's snow removal equipment, but not aircraft. The runway edge lights will remain in their current location. The straight-in instrument approach capabilities at the Airport will continue to be associated with Runway 15 (accommodating approaches from the north). Improvements are programmed for the Runway IS Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Masrer Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 3 straight-in approach, which will lower its approach visibility minimums. The approach improvements are likely to be driven by advances in satellite navigation [Global Positioning System (GPS)] technology or other advancements in technology and/or its application to airport operations. Other facilities that are being considered to improve safety for aircraft operations include the use of runway centerline and touchdown-zone lighting. These are lighting systems that are installed in the pavement and are flush with runway surface. Touchdown-zone lighting is a series of lights embedded in the pavement perpendicular to the runway centerline at the point in the runway where aircraft are intended to touch down. Similarly runway centerline lights are embedded in the pavement to mark the runway centerline to guide pilots. These lighting system improvements will need to be reviewed for compliance with the scenic overlay regulations and a separate land use application to address runway lighting will be prepared for scenic review when more is known. Taxiway System: r . . . ~ . II- :.:j (Taxiway A), as recommended in the 1998 ALP and approved pursuant to ESID,.L ..u...~.... .n -" n. I.... .. ...- Tn;~"' uohth r~ln""~. To..;"'."""" ' ., nn'.;._ (with its centerline 221.5 feet east of the runway centerline) r 1)-"';.-'" . . " nnM n ,. .hU. _.L ' ~nM . ,. ,. - . r .. 0 As the redevelopment of Taxiway "A" continues, the need to provide improved edge and centerline taxiway lights to give pilots improved situational awareness and prevent runway and ramp incursions will likely be needed, The necessary conduit and other facilities for a system of Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITL) will be installed as each phase of the relocation of Taxiway "A" is constructed in accordance h - wit the recommendations of the ESID plan. I . '. .. . . :t . However, in order to minimize opportunities for runway incursions, a west side parallel taxiway system would be strongly recommended or required, before west side aviation development could take place. If a west side parallel taxiway system were to be constructed it is recommended that the separation distance from the runway (centerline to centerline) be the same as that which being achieved by the relocation of Taxiway A on the east side of the runway (320 feet rather than the standard of 400 feet). This would maximize the development area on the west side of the Airport and will prevent the need to relocate Owl Creek Road. Other Airside Improvements: Other airside improvements recommended in the 1998 Airport Layout Plan and retained or modified by the East Side Infrastructure Development plan are incomorated into the recommended airs ide improvements in the 2003 Airport Master Plan. . .l- v. . '. _ . The recommen e ocatton and configuration for the expanded deicing apron is the same as was approved with the ESID plan. A portion of this apron was bid in 2003 and is scheduled for construction during the 2004 building season. The recommended deicing apron is illustrated on the Phasing Plans (Exhibit H of this Application). LANDSIDE DEVELOPMENT As illustrated on the Airport Layout Plan (Figure Hl- Draft Report), areas for landside facilities are also allocated, For the purposes of the 2003 Airport Master Plan and to coincide with FAA planning terminology, landside facilities include aircraft storage aprons, hangars, terminal facilities, aviation maintenance facilities, automobile access and parking, support facilities, etc. Passenger Terminal Facilities: The Airport Master Plan Draft Report recommends that the location of the passenger terminal facilities at the Airport remain on the east side of the airport, in relatively the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 4 same location as the existing facilities. ~ __ 0 . . Conceptual layouts for future passenger terminal facilities are provided in the Master Plan Draft Report under the chapter titled "Passenger Terminal Area Development.".... .' _.L _ - "'-..... _ . I J... _ .. _ . . '-'liiilr 0;'0" I.';nn '9"'. ~r '90"" I~+ _n'" !.... -al . .. .... . o. These conceptual layouts were developed in an effort to define an area most appropriate for passenger terminal redevelopment so that this area can be reserved for this use on the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). An area for the development of future passenger terminal facilities is indicated on the ALP and on the Phasing Plans contained in Exhibit H of this application. The alternative layouts included in the Master Plan Draft Report are not intended to represent a final solution for terminal area redevelopment and no recommendation is being made as to the preferred alternative at this time, _ ., ." ~ . . -.. ....-....-...r .' -. ,. .'~ The final version ofthe 2003 Airport Master Plan Report wiIl include a Terminal Area Plan. Ordinarily, this plan would include text and graphics describing the terminal area in greater detail. However, since significant effort was expended on studying alternative layouts for the redevelopment of the main terminal area in this master plan process, the Terminal Area Plan will include a summary of the key elements of the findings for redeveloping the main terminal area. This concourse will be based on a variation of Alternatives I or 2 as described in the Draft Report beginning on pages F.38. .. - . . _ _...'u_... W .. _'n. , _.n.._..n+o"MJr.n ,., .. _ .. -' _" L ....:,- The first phase of these alternatives would be a new concourse as shown on Figures F21 and F25 of the Draft Report. iII!fff!' nn I . ;see Table 12 - Exhibit E). This project has been identified as a use requiring further review. East Side General Aviation Facilities: The general aviation facilities will remain on the east side of the airport as they currently exist with the exception that the existing ARFF/SRE building is proposed to be removed making room for additional GA aircraft parking. The 1998 ALP recommended a new ARFF/SRE facility be located on the west side of the airport runway. This project was granted GMQS exemption and special review approval pursuant to the ESID review. Relocation of the ARFF/SRE facility to the west side of the airport continues to be part of the recommended improvements in the 2003 Airport Master Plan. However, the ESID plan recommended that the existing ARFF/SRE building be retained and reused for fixed base operation (FBO) functions currently being performed in buildings #10 and #11 (see Airport Layout Plan - Figure HI in the Master Plan Draft Report for the locations ofthese buildings) and for some non-airport fire protection equipment. This recommendation was made in the ESID plan in part because buildings #10 and #11 had been recommended for removal in previous planning studies on the grounds that they are inside of the Building Restriction Line (BRL). However, careful examination of these buildings has revealed that although they are inside the BRL, they are not tall enough to be identified as an obstruction under FAA definitions (FAR Part 77 - Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace), and they are outside of the Runwa Ob'ect Fee Area ROFA), therefore, there is v' 0> no longer a mandate that they be removed. ,," ..r .... . ., \P"',-" ~. . ".. , - .h ---... ... ... - )- the r ) e reqUtre use criteria for the gmqs exemption are reviewed later in this application. "v! ~~:f;. \, J V Aspen/Pitkin COllnty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay . ..0.1 ov v. h.. . . 5 The following additional recommendations regarding general aviation use and facilities are included in the Master Plan Draft Report: . The bulk of the transient aircraft operation and the general aviation terminal will remain in the area bounded on the north by the existing aircraft maintenance hangar (building # 12) and on the south by the north edge of the commercial passenger terminal operation area. The transient aircraft parking apron is also referred to as the South Ramp. . As dictated by the relocation of Taxiway "A", establishment of an appropriate Runway/Taxiway Object Free Area, and the construction of replacement general aviation aircraft parking area, some rearrangement of the general aviation facilities in the area surrounding the ABa terminal and the South Ramp may need to occur in the future. . The exact layout of the transient general aviation ramp (South Ramp) will be influenced by the future modifications to the layout offacilities in the commercial passenger terminal area, along with commercial passenger terminal parking and access facilities; and the ultimate decision with respect to the removal of or reuse of the existing ARFF/SRE building j. The existing ARFF/SRE building is s own on the ALP as "to be removed" with the vacated spaced being utilized for transient aircraft parking. Removal of the existing ARFF/SRE building has been determined to be critical to ABa's operation since this area wilI provide important replacement aircraft parking space that will be lost once Taxiway "A" is relocated between Taxiways A3 and A5 and the OF A restrictions are enforced. However, the exact timing for the demolition of the existing ARFF /SRE building has not yet been determined due to financial constraints. . The aircraft maintenance and storage hangars, fuel farm and ground equipment service facility will remain located in the area defined by the existing maintenance hangar on the south and the air traffic control tower (A TCT) on the north. As described above, the ground equipment service facility (building # 1 0) located at the base of the A TCT may be relocated in the future and the best location for this function will continue to be within the same general zone as it exists today, though outside of the Building Restriction Line. Aspen Base Operations, Inc. (ABa) plans to demolish building #] 1(1,577 square feet) in order to take advantage ofthe growth management exemption to construct an addition to the southeast comer of the existing ABa Terminal. It is understood that the proposed addition to the ABa Terminal will require scenic overlay approval. This approval will be sought in a subsequent land use application prior to demolition of building #]1. . The area north of the A TCT will continue to be used for aircraft storage. This area currently contains aircraft parking apron and patio (open sided) hangar structures. As recommended in ESID, the aircraft storage apron is programmed to be expanded to the north. This is referred to as Future Aircraft Parking Apron (North Ramp) on the ALP and as North Ramp in Table ]2. . Expansion ofthe south GA ramp into the long-term and employee parking area, as was approved under ESID, continues to be recommended in this Master Plan. It is recognized that the aircraft operations on the existing GA apron in this area causes periodic noise intrusion for the residential area east ofthe airport (North 40 Subdivision). The primary noise concern is related to the Auxiliary Power Units (APUs) that are used during pre-flight preparations. While Airport and FBO management are currently investigating strategies to minimize the impacts of APU Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 6 . The recommendation of this Master Plan is to reserve an area on the west side of the runway to accommodate potential future aviation facilities (see Figure E6 - Conceptual Airport Development Plan and Figure HI-Airport Layout Plan). This is a clarification from the language on page of H.6 of the Master Plan Draft Report which states "If a second FBO is accommodated at the Airport in the future, its facilities will be located on the west side of the runway." While a potential future second FBO would be among the potential future aviation uses that could occur on the west side of the runway, no specific plans for a second FBO are contemplated and no approvals are sought for a second FBO on the west side of the runway. If someone were to desire to construct a second FBO at the airport, the analysis conducted during this master planning process shows that the west side of the runway is a logical location for a variety of reasons. These reason include both the obvious physical constraints of the east side as well as other functional, operational, and economic disadvantages associated with the available area on the east side of the airport (Lot 2). However, it is the recommendation of this Master Plan that the land use approvals and other mechanisms currently in place to accommodate a second FBO on the east side remain, thus preserving the option for the community to examine the best solution for a second FBO should a proposal come forward at some future date. One of the mechanisms that have been approved in the past to accommodate the concept of a second FBO on the east side of the airport is the establishment of separate lots (Lot 1 and Lot 2) to accommodate lease terms in excess of 20 years [definition of "subdivision" in Pitkin County Land Use Code specifies that a lease having a term in excess of20 years (including renewal terms) constitutes a subdivision] for FBO operators at the airport. In response to the recommendation contained in the Master Plan Draft Report that the existing ARFF/SRE building be removed once a new ARFF/SRE facility has been constructed on the west side, it is recommended that the configuration of Lot I be modified to incorporate the area of the existing ARFF /SRE so that this area can be made available for lease to ABO once the existing ARFF ISRE building has been removed. A discussion of the appropriate review criteria for the review of subdivision exemptions for parcels for essential community facilities is included later in this application. Air Traffic Control Tower: As was recommended in the ESID plan, the Airport Master Plan Draft Report includes a recommendation to relocate the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). Because of the limited acceptable location options available for the A TCT, the programmed improvement is the addition of a new cab structure (tower portion of the ATCT building) on the east side of the existing base building and removal of the existing cab structure on the west side of the base building. This will bring the tower structure closer to Highway 82. The new A TCT cab will have a top-of-structure height of approximately 75 feet. For comparison purposes, the existing tower is a similar height. Before any relocation or reconstruction related to the A TCT can take place, the completion of an FAA sponsored A TCT location study will be required. The concept of relocating the A TCT cab was approved under the ESID application leaving scenic overlay approval for a later date. Since the exact location is still not known, scenic foreground approval will be sought after the FAA sponsored A TCT location has been competed. Aspen/Pitkin Co lIn ty Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 7 ARFF/SRE Facility: Relocation of the ARFF/SRE functions to the west side of the airport, as was approved under ESID, continues to be recommended in this Master Plan. The recommended location is approximately the same as was described during the ESID review. However, the current proposal for the ARFF/SRE facility also incorporates airport administration functions from the Main Terminal building and square footage for vehicle maintenance, which is currently conducted in the county shop facility located on the east side of Highway 82 north of the AABC. The ARFF/SRE facility approved under the ESID plan contained approximately 16,000 square feet, including four studio housing units of 500 square feet each. The current plans call for a structure of29,132 square feet, including 2 one-bedroom housing units and a dormitory space. A detailed description of the proposed ARFF/SRE facility is provided in the growth management exemption section of this land use application. A site plan and floor plans for the proposed ARFF/SRE facility are included as Exhibits F and G. OTHER SUPPORTING PLANS The Master Plan Draft Report also includes a series of drawings that constitute the other required portions of an Airport Master Plan under FAA standards and criteria. These plans and drawings are listed as follows with a brief description of their purpose and the Figure number identif'ying the location of the drawing in the Airport Master Plan Draft Report: . Airport Airspace Plan Drawing/Plan View - Figure H2. This drawing provides a plan and profile view depicting the height of objects in the vicinity of the airport; . Airport Airspace Drawing/Profile View - Figure H3. This profile drawing provides a view of objects along the projected centerline of runways for a distance of 5000 feet from the end of Runway 33 (with and without 1000-foot extension) and 10,000 feet from the end of Runway IS; . Inner Portion of the Approach Surface Drawings (for both Runway IS and 33) - Figures H4 and H5. These are plan and profile drawings showing more detailed views of the inner portions of the imaginary approach surfaces and the Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) in order to facilitate identification of the roadways, utility lines, railroads, structures, and other possible obstructions that may lie within the confines of the inner approach surface area associated with each runway; . Land Use Plan - Figure G 16. This drawing depicts existing and recommended future uses of all land within the airport property boundary and in the vicinity of the airport, providing guidance to local authorities for establishing appropriate land use policies and zoning in the vicinity of the airport; . Airport Property Map - This is a drawing illustrating the existing airport property boundaries and indicating how various tracts of land within the airport boundaries were acquired (e.g. Federal funds, surplus property, local funds, etc.). This drawing will be included in the final version ofthe Airport Master Plan. PART III - REQUESTED LAND USE APPROVALS This application has two purposes. The first is to seek approval for the 2003 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan pursuant to Section 3-240-030 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. As a Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 8 governmental facility located in the Public (PUB) zone district, development at the airport is subject to the standards and procedures for a public master plan. The purpose of adopting a public master plan is to identifY those uses and activities that are considered "permitted" and those uses and activities that require further review. Another purpose ofthe public master plan is to establish any special definitions for the uses that occur on the site and to establish any variations from the dimensional standards contained in the Land Use Code, such as height restrictions and setbacks, etc. The procedures and standards for the review of public master plans are clearly defined in Section 2-240-030 ofthe Code. The second purpose of this application is to seek other required land use approvals for several of the recommended improvements contained in the Master Plan Draft Report. These are uses or improvements that have not been granted approval pursuant to any previous land use review and that are intended to be constructed over the next six years. Tables 12, I3 and 14 (Exhibit E of this application) show the improvements recommended during the 20- year life of the Airport Master Plan and will form the basis of a capital improvements plan for the airport. The recommended improvements are divided into three phases. Table 12 lists the improvements to be constructed in Phase 1 (0-6), while Tables I3 and 14 cover Phase II (6-11 years) and Phase ill (11-20 years) respectively. Exhibit H contains the phasing plan drawings, which provide a graphic illustration of the phasing plan. These fi ure . e inco orated into the fi . n of the Ai ort Master Plan. other words.. .just because its shown on the ta e oesn an It Will be built. e criteria as to whether the need for a particular improvement has been demonstrated will vary depending on the improvement. For those projects identified in this document (Pages 24 and 25) as "permitted" the need has already been demonstrated either in the ESID application or in the Airport Master Plan Draft Report, which accompanies this land use application. For all other proposed improvements, demonstration of need should be established at the time that an application for further review is submitted to the County. Many ofthe projects and activities on Tables 12 - 14 do not require land use approval either because they have already been approved via a previous action by the County or they are not subject to land use approval. Examples of improvements that don't require land use approval include the purchase of new vehicles and equipment, pavement maintenance, well repair, land purchases, rehab of existing runway facilities (shoulders and trench drains), and projects approved as part of previous land use applications. The following is a list of the recommended projects that have already been reviewed and approved in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Pitkin County Land Use Code pursuant to previous land use applications. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS WITH PREVIOUS APPROVAL . Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" (A4-A5) - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (BaCC Resolution 199-2001); . Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway '~" (AI-A2) - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (BaCC Resolution 199-200 I); . North Ramp - Recommended in 1998 ALP, Scenic Review for rough grading approved pursuant to BaCC Resolution 99-79, Scenic Review for 2-foot subgrade and pavement approved pursuant Aspen/Pitkin Co lIn fy Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 9 to BOCC Resolution 43-2000, Setback Variance for grading, pavement and relocation of 6-foot security fence approved pursuant to BOA Resolution 2000-06; . Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" (A3-A4) - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (BOCC Resolution 199-2001); . Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" (A2-A3) - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (BOCC Resolution 199-2001); . Rehab RW 15/33 w/OFA Cleanup, shoulders and trench drains-As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (Resolution 199-2001); . Landscaping and Airport Perimeter Road - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (Resolution 199-200 I); . Completion of Expansion of South GA Ramp and relocation of Long-term parking lot - As recommended in 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (Resolution 199-200 I); . Relocated A TCT Cab -Approved through ESID (Resolution 199-2001) except for Scenic Overlay Review, which remains to be approved prior to construction pursuant to condition # I of BOCC Resolution 199-2001; . Construction of a new ARFF/SRE facility on the west side of the runway - As recommended on 1998 ALP and approved through ESID (BOCC Resolution 199-2001) except for Scenic Overlay Review, which remains to be approved pursuant to condition #1 of BOCC Resolution 199-2001. Note: GMQS Exemption approval is being sought with this application since the proposed ARFF/SRE facility is larger than the project approved through the ESID review; . Construction of new Deice Apron and glycol system - Approved through ESID project (BOCC Resolution 199-2001); As a result of the demand nature and advanced timing characteristics of many of the recommended improvements, we have divided the projects requiring further review into two categories in terms of the level of approval sought in this land use application. The first category contains those improvements that are planned to be constructed within the first six years. For these projects, final land use approval is being sought (except scenic foreground overlay review which will be sought under separate land use applications once detailed designs have been completed for each of the recommended improvements). The following is a list of the improvements recommended in the Airport Master Plan Draft Report for which a previous approval has either not been granted or the current recommended improvement is significantly different from that which was granted prior approval. In this list we have identified the land use approvals sought with this application. PHASE I RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1) West Side Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF/SRE ) facility. . GMQS Exemption for Essential Community Facilities (new square footage); . Scenic Overla (to be sought pursuant to a separate land use application). 3) Demolition of Building #11 and Minor Addition to ABO Terminal . GMQS Exemption for Reuse of Demolished Floor Area; . Scenic Overlay (to be sought pursuant to a separate land use application). Aspen/Pitkin COlJnty Airport - 2003 MlJster P1IJn PUB Master Plan, CMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 10 The second category of improvements requiring further review includes those projects for which only master plan approval and no other land use approvals are sought at this time. It is acknowledged that these projects will be subject to the applicable land use code provisions and regulations in place at the time they are implemented. 1) Terminal Building/New Concourse; 2) New Terminal Building with Site Improvements; 2) Reservation of West Side Area for Aviation Uses; 4) Runway Lighting Systems (Centerline, Touchdown, and HIRL). Other Requested Approvals In addition to the approvals specified above, the Applicant is seeking amendments to Sections 3-90-040 and 3-]00 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. These amendments are intended to update the Land Use Code to reflect current terminology and to acknowledge the 2003 Airport Master Plan as the reference document for maps and other information. The purpose of each of the proposed code amendments along with draft language for the amendments is provided later in this application. This application also includes a request for subdivision exemption approval to memorialize the creation of Lots ] and 2 and to accommodate changes in the configuration ofthese lots based on the recommendations of this Airport Master Plan, particularly the removal of the existing ARFF facility and the incorporation of this area into Lot I. PART IV - LAND USE CODE REVIEW CRITERIA Development in the Public (PUB) Zone District - Standards for Public Master Plan (Section 3-240-030) A. The Master Plan shall: 1. Comprehensively address all existing facilities and identifY all proposed future site development to occur for at least the next five (5) years; Response: Section A of the Airport Master Plan Draft Report includes a comprehensive inventory of the existing major facilities and utilities on the airport property. This inventory includes detailed information regarding existing structures, runways, taxiways, aircraft parking aprons, fuel storage, glycol containment, utilities, parking, and access roads. It should be noted that airports are very dynamic in terms of their equipment, systems and facilities needs. The inventory in the Draft Master Plan is a snap shot of the facilities and utilities that existed at the Airport at the time this Master Plan was prepared. Changes to these facilities are ongoing and the inventory in the Master Plan should not be relied upon as the sole source of information, particularly as the years progress. The existing facilities inventory in the Aspen/Pitkin COllnty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 11 Draft Report includes several maps graphically depicting the location and configuration of the existing facilities and utilities. The pertinent figures in the Draft Report are listed as follows: . Figure A3 - Existing Airport Layout; . Figure A4 - Passenger Tenninal Building Floor Plan; . Figure AS - Existing Utility Locations - North; . Figure AS - Existing Utility Locations . South. The inventory also includes infonnation regarding existing land use and zoning in the vicinity of the Airport as well as a summary of the existing navigational aids, airspace restrictions, and the existing published arrival and departure procedures. The recommended improvements and activities are contained in Sections F, Hand 1 of the Airport Master Plan Draft Report and are summarized in Part II ofthis application. Figures E6 (Conceptual Airport Development Plan) and HI (Airport Layout Plan) of the Draft Report are maps illustrating the proposed future site developments. In addition, Tables 12, 13 and 14 provide a comprehensive list of the proposed improvements with a phasing schedule for these improvements. Table 12 provides a detailed phasing schedule for the next six years. Exhibit H also provides a graphic depiction for the phasing of the recommended improvements. 2. Demonstrate consideration of proposed activities in connection with County Land Use Policies in Article 2 and adopted County master plans applicable to the site; and Demonstrate compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding neighborhood and justification of the public need for the proposed activities and facilities. Response: Compliance with Applicable Master Plans The applicable master plans for the Airport are the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), 1998 Airport Layout Plan (ALP), Brush Creek Master Plan, Owl Creek Master Plan, Woody Creek Master Plan. We have discussed the ALP and the project's compliance with this plan at length in other sections of this document and will not repeat that infonnation here. Compliance with the other applicable master plans is discussed in the following paragraphs. 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan The most current AACP was adopted in February of 2000. This document establishes an urban growth boundary that includes the portion of the Airport grounds that encompass the recommended improvements. The AACP was adopted by the Aspen City Council. The plan was also jointly adopted by the Pitkin County Planning Commission and the City of Aspen Planning Commission. The AACP is an advisory document and is intended as a guide for elected and appointed officials in making land use and development decisions. There are relatively few policies that apply directly to the Airport. Perhaps the most important of these is a goal within the Transportation section ofthe plan that reads as follows: Improve the quality, affordability and reliability of commercial air service to Aspen and Pitkin County. " Aspen/Pitkin Co vn fy Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 12 The recommended improvements are based on the FAA mandated directive to improve safety at the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport. Many of the proposed improvements are designed specifically to increase safety and reliability for all aircraft operating in and out ofthe airport. In particular, the proposed runway extension is intended to improve the reliability of commercial air service. Up to a point, the provision of a longer runway will always increase safety margins for aircraft operating at the airport. An increased runway length for departures to the north will contribute to providing a safer aircraft operational environment by increasing the distance in which an aircraft can be safely stopped if a takeoff is aborted. As documented in the Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements included in master Plan Draft Report (Chapter C), a longer takeoff runway will also provide a benefit to the current fleet of passenger service aircraft (i.e., the BAe 146) in terms of allowing them to operate with increase payload weights. In addition, the landside improvements, which are required as a direct result of the airside improvements, will enhance the quality of the travel experience for residents and visitors of the Aspen area. Redevelopment of the Main Terminal building and associated parking and circulation facilities are intended to eliminate capacity shortfalls that exist today particularly in the hold room, security screening area and baggage claim where residents and visitors experience the airport most directly. The Future Land Use Map included in the AACP shows a Transit Oriented Development Node along Highway 82 in the area in front ofthe Main Terminal. This is consistent with the West Glenwood Springs to Aspen Highway 82 Corridor Investment Study (CIS), which recommends preserving a transit corridor on the airport side of Highway 82 and shows a multimodal station in the AABC/ Airport area. The Airport Master Plan continues to reserve a transit corridor through the airport property consistent with the AACP Future Land Use Plan and the CIS. The redevelopment alternatives studied for the Main Terminal area also place an emphasis on pedestrian access between the existing bus stop along Highway 82 and the terminal building. All of the alternatives incorporate space for a potential future transit station. Brush Creek Master Plan The Aspen/Pitkin County Airport is located adjacent to the Brush Creek planning area for which a Master Plan was adopted by the Pitkin County Planning Commission in the fall of 2003. This plan includes the following statements relative to the Airport. "No additional land acquisitions are suggested by the Airport Master Plan, however, more efficient use of existing land is recommended. The Airport Master Plan suggests that passenger facilities be improved to accommodate future use and that the runway be extended 1,000 feet to the south to accommodate take-offs to the north. The west side of the Airport property has been identifiedfor future development of aviation facilities. The current draft of the Airport Master Plan will be ready for review by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission by late fall 2003. The Airport Master Plan has identified areas within the Brush Creek planning area relative to land use and the influence of the Airport. " l. The County should acquire an aviation (sic) easement for all new development that is identified by the Airport Master Plan or this Master Plan as having an influence on or being influenced by the Airport. There is a land acquisition, which is in the process of being completed involving land on the south end of the airport (See Figure II Phase 1 Projects). This acquisition involves land that is currently owned by the City of Aspen. The land is being conveyed to the County through a friendly condemnation action and is Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 13 being acquired to ensure that no use or development occurs on the property, which would be incompatible with the operation of the Airport. Otherwise, the recommended improvements described in the Airport Master Plan are compatible with these statements and should have no significant impact on properties located within the Brush Creek Planning Area. Owl Creek Master Plan The Airport is located immediately east of the Owl Creek Planning Area. As with the Brush Creek Area, the County adopted a master plan for the Owl Creek Area in fall of 2003. The Owl Creek Master Plan includes the following applicable statement: "This Plan (Airport Master Plan) is currently being updated. With the exception of the northeastern most portion of Owl Creek Ranch, the majority of the Owl Creek Caucus area is separated physically from the airport by a ridge. Nonetheless, the Caucus may want to monitor the progress of the Plan to determine whether any proposed changes to the existing airport configuration or operations may impact the area relative to noise or use of Owl Creek Road. The primary issues identified here are noise and traffic on Owl Creek Road. The Master Plan Draft Report includes information regarding the noise generated by aircraft operations at the airport. This information includes maps showing the estimated future noise contours associated with the airport both with and without the proposed runway extension. According to this analysis, the projected noise associated with aircraft operations will not change significantly as a result of any of the proposed improvements at the airport, including the I OOO-foot runway extension. This is, in part, due to the fact that over the life of the Airport Master Plan (20 years) the aircraft fleet that operates out ofthe airport will be gradually transitioning to quieter equipment. In addition, the IOOO-foot runway allows aircraft to obtain a greater height more quickly. These two factors slightly reduce noise over areas along the primary flight path to the north of the airport, as indicated by the noise modeling analysis (compare Figures G II and G 13 - Draft Report). With respect to the potential for traffic impacts on Owl Creek Road, there are two issues to consider. The first is the relocation ofthe ARFF/SRE facility to the west side ofthe runway and the second is the potential future use of the west side for aviation uses. The proposed ARFF /SRE facility will result in a very slight increase in traffic on Owl Creek Road. The increased traffic will include the trips associated with the employees of the ARFF /SRE facility and airport administration staff as well as the proposed affordable housing units. The additional traffic will only affect the lower portion of Owl Creek Road, between the proposed ARFF/SRE facility and Highway 82 since virtually all of the trips will travel to and from Highway 82. The potential for expanding aviation uses to the west side of the airport would have a more significant impact on the lower segment of Owl Creek Road, from the first switchback to Highway 82. However, the recommendation of the Master Plan is limited to reserving an area for potential future aviation uses. No land use approvals are being sought for any development on the west side at this time (other than the ARFF/SRE facility). Further, the Master Plan clearly identifies development on the west side, other than the ARFF/SRE facility, as requiring further review. At the present time, it appears unlikely that there would be any additional development on the west side of the airport during the life of this Master Plan. However, in the event there is a proposal for development on the west side it will trigger a comprehensive land use review, including an analysis of the traffic impacts. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 14 Woody Creek Master Plan The Woody Creek Planning Area is located to the north and east of the airport property. The primary flight path for the airport passes over this neighborhood. The Woody Creek Caucus Master Plan (WCCMP) enacted amendments to the Downvalley Plan as it affects the Woody Creek area. The WCCMP states that it supports airport restrictions, including curfews, limited operating hours, and noise abatement. No change in any of these restrictions is contemplated in the 2003 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan. The discussion regarding noise in the paragraphs above addressing the Owl Creek Master Plan are particularly pertinent to the Woody Creek Planning Area since the primary flight path passes directly over portions of this neighborhood. The Master Plan Draft Report includes a detailed discussion regarding noise in the Environmental Review and Land Use Considerations chapter (Chapter G). This chapter includes maps that show the projected noise (day-night noise level- DNL) for the airport based on the proposed improvements, including the recommended runway extension. To reiterate, the noise modeling analysis contained in the Master Plan Draft Report shows that the projected noise associated with aircraft operations will not change significantly as a result of any of the proposed improvements at the airport, including the I ODD-foot runway extension. This is, in part, due to the fact that over the life of the Airport Master Plan (20 years) the aircraft fleet that operates out of the airport will be gradually transitioning to quieter equipment. In addition, the 1 ODD-foot runway allows aircraft to obtain a greater height more quickly. These two factors slightly reduce noise over areas along the primary flight path to the north of the airport (compare Figures GI I and G 13 - Draft Report). Compliance with Land Use Policies (Article 2) The following paragraphs are devoted to addressing those policies that are not covered elsewhere in this application. Since many of the improvements and activities recommended in the Airport Master Plan have already been reviewed for compliance with County Land Use Policies and approved pursuant to the ESID application, the responses provided in this section are focused on the new elements of the Master Plan including the proposed I ODD-foot runway extension, Main Terminal Area redevelopment and the reservation of the west side ofthe airport for aviation facilities. Ai, Quality (Section 2-130 & 3-60-020) Response: The intent ofthis policy is to permit only that development that will not degrade air quality. Section 3-60-020 ofthe Land Use Code states that a land use shall not constitute a direct or indirect source of air pollution under applicable Federal, State or County regulations. The Master Plan was referred to the State of Colorado Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) for an air quality determination. The State APCD responded with a letter from Mark McMillan (See Appendix to Draft Report). In his letter, Mr. McMillan indicates that the AspenlPitkin County Airport is located in a geographic area considered to be in attainment of the Federal and State air quality standards. The Division further states that construction permits are required for projects where ground disturbances exceed more than 25 acres of contiguous acres or last longer than six months. Another factor effecting air quality in the vicinity ofthe Airport is the potential for increased vehicular traffic. Vehicular traffic at the airport falls into three categories; private vehicles, rental cars and commercial vehicles (shuttle buses, etc.). While a traffic analysis has not been done as part ofthis Master Plan study, a few comments can be made regarding the potential for increased vehicular traffic based on a comparison of the parking needs contained in Section D of the Draft Report. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 15 The forecast data shows a projected demand for parking spaces at the airport of approximately 617 spaces to serve the potential public, employee, and rental ready parking needs. In the base year 2000, the terminal area housed approximately 659 total parking spaces including the former intercept parking lot area, which contains approximately 280 parking spaces. Since the Intercept Lot was decommissioned for use as a commuter intercept facility it is being converted for Airport use. To the extent that parking capacity is an expression of vehicular use at the airport, it would appear that the improvements contemplated with this Master Plan will generate approximately the same vehicular traffic as was expected at the time the Intercept Lot was approved. However, traffic impacts should be carefully considered in association with the development review conducted at the time the Main Terminal area redevelopment is reviewed. The Airport Administration is committed to seeking other ways of minimizing the impacts of airport operations on air quality. Some of the methods being considered include exploring the potential for using low emissions ground support vehicles and utilizing green building design and technologies in the design of new airport structures. The Airport also requires that rental car companies and other commercial vehicle operators at the Airport take measures to reduce vehicle emissions including limiting idling of commercial vehicles. The recommendations for redevelopment of the Main Terminal area contained in the Master Plan Draft Report include increasing the amount of curb frontage devoted to commercial vehicle staging from 225 feet to 775 feet. The alternative redevelopment studies all include strong pedestrian connections between the Main Terminal entries and the transit stop on Highway 82. The Master Plan also continues to preserve a transit corridor through the Airport and room a for transit station as recommended in the West Glenwood to Aspen Highway 82 Corridor Investment Study (CIS). Water Resources (Section 2-140 & 3-70) The nearest surface water is Owl Creek, which runs through the Airport property. Most of the proposed improvements are located well away from Owl Creek. The improvement nearest Owl Creek is the expansion of the north end of the General Aviation apron (see Figure HI, Airport Layout Plan - Draft Report). The north GA apron expansion is approximately 400 feet from Owl Creek, at its closest point. The land use code requires a minimum 20-foot stream setback in all cases (Section 3-50-040). This standard can be increased to 150 feet in cases where there are steep slopes, highly erodable soils or other special circumstances. In this case, both standards are exceeded by a significant margin. Owl Creek is diverted into a culvert as it passes under the runway towards the north end of the airport. The north GA pavement expansion will be designed to sheet drain toward Highway 82 where it will run into a ditch and will eventually flow into Owl Creek. The ditch that is in place and carries strormwater runoff from other areas of the Airport travels nearly 1,800 feet before flowing into Owl Creek. All deicing is conducted in the areas designed for this purpose. Deicing fluid is collected in a containment system and is removed from the Airport property and disposed of at an approved facility. The proposed improvements include a new deicing apron, which is located at the other end of the Airport from Owl Creek. The existing system is located in the area between the Main Terminal building and the taxiway and is designed to prevent contamination of surface or ground water. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport has a Stormwater Management Plan and a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan, which provide procedures for handling chemical spills. Both plans are administered by a private consultant for the Airport. The proposed facility was described in detail in the ESID plan and was approved pursuant to Resolution 199-200 I. The location of the proposed deicing apron is depicted on the ALP drawing. Construction of the first phase of the deicing apron is scheduled for 2004 as shown in the phasing plans in Exhibit H ofthis application. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 16 The other recommendation of this Airport Master Plan which will create the potential for impacts to Owl Creek is the future use of the west side for aviation uses. In order to minimize the potential for adverse impacts to Owl Creek, the Master Plan recommends that a riparian zone be preserved on either side of Owl Creek in association with any west side development other than the relocation of the ARFF/SRE facility (see Figure E6 - Draft Report). Nevertheless, the environmental analysis of development on the west side should include a thorough review ofthe potential impacts to Owl Creek, if and when development occurs in this area ofthe airport. The proposed runway extension will also add impervious surface to the Airport and will require significant grading and disturbance during construction. Surface drainage from the extended runway will be handled in the same manner as the current runway. Any airport improvement projects requiring earthwork will result in erosion and sedimentation. However, the final construction plans and specifications will require the contractor to follow the procedures outlined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-1 OA, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, which is the FAA guidance to airport sponsors concerning protection of the environment during construction projects. These procedures include the following measures to minimize impact due to erosion or sanitary waste when necessary: sediment ponds, diversion ditches, seeding, sodding, watering, and mulching. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division, has provided comments regarding water quality (see letter in Draft Report Appendix). The Division states that a construction dewatering permit is required if dewatering is to occur. The Airport has a Stormwater Management plan registered with the State. This plan specifies how storm waster from runways and other impervious surface is to be handled. A stormwater construction permit is required for construction activity and should be applied for at least 10 days prior to breaking ground. Updating the Stormwater Management Plan is required when changes to the facility occur that affect stormwater quality. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been contacted for the presence of jurisdictional wetlands and waterways potentially impacted by the projects being considered within this Master Plan. The Corps indicates that a Department ofthe Army permit is required for any discharge of dredged or fill material in waters of the United States (see letter in Draft Report Appendix). Prior to any construction projects, it is recommended that a qualified biologist perform a wetlands delineation and permit application on the area of potential effect to determine the potential impacts at that time. Noise (Section 2-150) The Master Plan Draft Report includes a detailed analysis of the existing and projected noise associated with aircraft operations at the Airport (Noise Analysis begins on page GA of the Draft Report). This analysis includes evaluation of Day-Night Noise Level (DNL), which is the noise measure prescribed by the FAA for determining noise impacts, and Sound Exposure Level (SEL), which represents single event noise. The analysis provides both the noise levels associated with existing conditions and estimates of the potential noise level that could be expected with the proposed Airport projects, including the proposed 1000-foot runway extension. The results of the analysis include a series of maps that graphically depict noise levels in the form of noise contours. The main advantage of the DNL methodology is that it provides a common measure for a variety of differing noise environments. The same DNL level can describe both an area with very few high level noise events and an area with many low level events. Sound Exposure Level (SEL) generally Aspen/Pitkin COllnfy Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 17 represents the noise level associated with one aircraft operation (a single event) of a specific single aircraft. The main difference between the SEL and the DNL is that the SEL represents what an individual "hears", as it is a single noise event, whereas the DNL represents the annual cumulative noise level, averaged logarithmically, with a nighttime penalty. The DNL can not be "heard" as the SEL can be. It should be noted that the 80 to 85 SEL noise level is where sleep disturbance normally occurs. The 65 DNL noise contour is the threshold level where the FAA recommends no noise sensitive uses (i.e., homes, schools, hospitals, etc) be allowed. The FAA, along with most federal agencies, have identified noise levels lower than the 65 DNL as not being significant in terms of residential or other noise sensitive uses. The findings of the noise analysis show that there is not an appreciable change anticipated for neighborhoods on either end of the runway with regard to aircraft noise and the possible runway extension. A more detailed discussion on the relative impacts to specific issues areas is presented in the Environs Land Use Plan section of the Draft Master Plan (Beginning on Page G.28). The areas most affected by the proposed runway extension are located to the south of the Airport due the noise generated by departures. A comparison of Figures Gl2 and Gl4 illustrates the difference in noise levels (DNL) with and without the proposed runway extension for the Burlingame (MAA) Seasonal Housing and Maroon Creek Club Employee Housing projects and the Buttermilk Ski Area Base Facilities. Avigatoin easements have been obtained for both of these affordable housing projects when they were approved. The purpose of avigation easements is to provide a mechanism for informing future purchasers of the housing units of the noise levels that exist as a result of the airport operations. The avigation easements also provide some protection for the airport from frivolous law suits resulting from noise complaints. The Airport is recommending that the County consider amending the Land Use Code to require avigation easements for all new residential development projects located within the 55 DNL contour. Impacts to Roads (Section 2-190) It is the policy of Pitkin County to preclude development which generates traffic volumes in excess of the capacity of the County road system or which causes significant service level reductions. Vehicular access to the Airport is provided directly off of Highway 82. With respect to the uses on the east side of the Airport, the response to the Air Quality policy above includes information pertinent to this policy statement as it applies to impacts to Highway 82. However, traffic impacts should be carefully analyzed as part of the further review required for the Main Terminal redevelopment project. This Master Plan includes two recommendations with respect to the west side of the Airport that will affect Owl Creek Road. These are the relocation of the ARFF/SRE facility to the west side as approved pursuant to the ESID application and the recommendation to reserve an area on the west side for potential future aviation facilities. These issues are addressed earlier in this application in the response to the policies contained in the Owl Creek Master Plan. No significant increase in traffic is expected with any of the projects for which final approval is sought with this application. Traffic studies, analyzing the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Main Terminal redevelopment, should be provided at the time the application for further review is submitted for this project. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 18 Compatibilitv with Surroundin!! Nei!!hborhood In accordance with FAA criteria for airport master planning, land use compatibility in the vicinity of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport has been evaluated. As part ofthis effort, the existing land uses within an area extending one half mile either side of the Airport runway and one mile off both ends of the runway were documented. In addition, the existing zoning for the lands within this same area was evaluated to determine the potential for future developments that would be incompatible with the Airport and the recommended improvements. The inventory of existing land uses and existing zoning are contained in the inventory section of the Draft Report (Figures A8 and A9). In general, past planning and development in the area surrounding the Airport has resulted in very few incompatible uses. This is in part due to the fact that the Airport was in place prior to the growth spurt that occurred in and around Aspen the 1980s and 1990's. Both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County also have a long history of staunchly defending their zoning regulations. These factors have been reasonably effective in slowing the spread of development along the Colorado 82 corridor where the Airport is located. The current planning and zoning policies and processes, when combined with the physical limitations, ownership patterns, and existing land uses in the area surrounding the Airport, provide a significant level of influence and predictability regarding future development. In order to further strengthen the land use policies governing the compatibility of land use proposals in the vicinity of the Airport, this application includes several recommended code amendments. The Environs Land Use Plan contained in the Draft Report (Figure G I 6) illustrates the land uses within the vicinity of the Airport and identifies specific issues areas to be considered in association with the improvements recommended for the Airport in this Master Plan. Some of the parcels discussed in this section and highlighted on the Environs Land Use Plan are located in the City of Aspen and are not in the control of Pitkin County, the jurisdiction within which the Airport is located. Therefore, some of the issues addressed in the Master Plan Draft Report will need to be implemented through dialog and agreements with the City; to the extent action is required. The Aspen/Pitkin County Airport is uniquely sited from a ski area/mountain perspective. With relatively few exceptions, Aspen/Pitkin County is one ofthe few public airports to boast substantial commercial air service, and a close proximity to a resort destination. This benefit has helped anchor Pitkin County's market share of tourism and economic sustainability. However, along with the benefits ofa convenient and central location, the Airport has also been developed in a manner to minimize impacts with its neighbors. As with most airport facilities nationally, conflicts between aircraft service and residential disturbance has surfaced as a primary concern for the Airport. In many respects the Airport is much better located than many airports, given the relatively rural densities that have developed in the County. The mixture of businesses and public serving facilities in the immediate vicinity of the area has generally been designed to compliment the airport, rather than conflict with its continued service. New residential developments, such as the North 40 and Burlingame (MAA) Seasonal Housing and Maroon Creek Club Employee Housing projects, included avigation easements and other methods to ensure that neighbors are aware of the public facility in its neighborhood, and homes are designed to minimize safety or noise impacts where necessary. Nevertheless, efforts should be made to minimize noise and other impacts associated with the airport operations as improvement projects are implemented. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 19 Justification of Public Need for the ProDosed Activities and Facilities This justification of public need for the relocation of ARFF/SRE facility to the west side of the Airport was discussed in detail in the ESID application and the issues associated with the increased size of the current proposal, including the justification for the additional floor area, are discussed later in this application. Therefore, the discussion provided in the following paragraphs is focused on the justification for the proposed 1000-foot runway extension, Main Terminal area redevelopment, and the reservation of the west side of the Airport for aviation uses. lOOO-Foot Runway Extension This issue was perhaps the most thoroughly discussed topic during the Study Advisory Committee meetings and the most carefully analyzed during the study process. The Draft Report contains a thorough discussion of the runway extension (see Chapter C, Capacity Analysis and Chapter E, Concepts, Alternatives and Development Plan). It is important to note that there were a number of assumptions and goals upon which the runway analysis was based. A few of the most critical assumptions and goals are highlighted as follows: . The restrictions related to aircraft wingspan (95 feet) and weight (100,000 pounds) that are currently in place, are expected to remain through the planning period. . The Airport's primary purpose is to accommodate aircraft operations with the greatest reliability and safety possible. Therefore, the airport's runway system should be developed with instrument approach guidance capabilities and adequate runway length and to accommodate the forecast operations as safely as possible under most weather conditions. . To the degree possible, the airport master plan should be developed to best address the needs and concerns of the entire community, including surrounding neighborhoods, business/economic development constituents, and the general citizenry. The results ofthe analysis regarding runway length contained in the Master Plan Draft Report showed the following positive aspects associated with extending the runway by 1,000 feet: . Safety. While aircraft operate safely now at the airport (with the existing runway length), the provision of a longer runway will always increase safety margins for aircraft operating at the airport. An increased runway length for departures to the north will contribute to providing a safer aircraft operational environment by providing an additional safety margin for aircraft in case of an emergency in certain situations (e.g., an aborted takeoff or a long landing run). Extending the runway by 1,000 feet would allow the aircraft that are currently operating at the airport to safely takeoff with additional payload. . Operational Capability - Existing Air Carriers. As documented in the Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements chapter ofthe Draft Report, a longer takeoff runway will also provide a benefit to the current fleet of passenger service aircraft (Le., the BAe 146) in terms of allowing them to operate with increased payload weights. This would have a positive impact on the airline's ability to increase the efficiency of aircraft operating at the Airport, particularly during the summer months when warm afternoon temperatures frequently require a reduction in payload to accommodate the reduced lift associated with warm air. Based on existing commercial passenger service aircraft that are being utilized at the airport, the BAe-146 that is operated by Air Wisconsin will be most benefited by a I ,OOO-foot longer take-off runway. Please refer to the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 20 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Summer 200 I Air Wisconsin Passenger Loading Restrictions table in the Appendix of Draft Report. With this information as background, the benefit of the I,OOO-foot runway extension can be estimated in terms of the additional summer-time passengers that might be carried by Air Wisconsin. During the June I to September I time-frame, the I ,OOO-foot takeoff runway extension would allow Air Wisconsin to carry an additional five passengers on departures occurring between 8:00 am and 8:00 pm. This would result in approximately 4,000 additional passengers being transported. It should be noted that there would also be a benefit in the winter, although to a lesser degree. . Operational Capability - Future Regional Air Carrier Aircraft. It is likely that the runway extension will also benefit some of the new generation Regional Jets (Le., the ERJ-190). Inquires have been made to aircraft manufactures and airlines regarding these new aircraft; however, until an airline actually proposes the use of one of these aircraft at Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, an in-depth analysis of the plane's operational capabilities in consideration of Aspen's specific conditions will not be completed. . Less Noise for Areas North of the Airport. As can be noted in the noise contour analysis contained in the following Environmental Review and Land Use Considerations chapter, with the runway extension to the south, noise is reduced for adjacent land uses south of the airport. Main Terminal Area Redevelopment The Master Plan includes a recommendation to reserve space for potential future redevelopment of the Main Terminal area. Redevelopment of the Main Terminal building and its associated parking, and access facilities is a complex project, which will require a great deal more study, consideration and public input before it could actually be constructed. For this reason, this project has been identified, in this land use application, as requiring further review. Therefore, demonstration of public need should be evaluated more fully at the time an application for an actual development proposal is submitted to the County for review. However, there are a number of factors that justifY the recommendation to reserve the area for future Main Terminal area redevelopment. A detailed discussion of Main Terminal redevelopment is contained in Chapter D of the Draft Report. This chapter provides information supporting the Master Plan recommendation to reserve an area adequate to accommodate redevelopment of the Main Terminal and associated parking and vehicle and pedestrian facilities. The following is a summary of the findings from the Draft Report: Terminal Building Constraints The existing terminal has deficiencies to varying degrees in a number of functional areas. Exhibit I (Figure F.14 in the Draft Report) illustrates the amount of space currently available and the amount that is currently projected for normal airport terminal operations. The existing terminal has a gross area of approximately 44,000 square feet. If a new terminal were to be built to adequately accommodate current levels of activity, the gross area would be approximately 73,000 square feet. Thus, the existing terminal is undersized by approximately 35 to 40%. The majority of the additional space is required for three main functions, additional holdroom and secure circulation space within the holdroom, airline administrative offices and airline baggage handling space, and enclosed dedicated rooms for mechanical Aspen/Pitkin COllnfy Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 21 and buildings systems use. Some of the more significant issues are briefly described in the foJlowing paragraphs. . Airline offices. Operations space and baggage make-up. Much of the baggage make-up space is not currently enclosed, which is a concern given Aspen's weather. Inadequate operations space and equipment storage space compete with office and baggage handling functions. This creates a less than ideal situation for the airline employees. In some cases there is no separation between the Airline offices and baggage make up areas. The structural column spacing of the building does not lend itself to flexibility for equipment and baggage belts. The long-tenn solution for 100% baggage screening of checked bags will place the equipment in the baggage make up area. There is currently not enough space to accommodate this function. . Departure Lounfle. Space needs to be provided for multiple departures due to frequent off-schedule operations. Existing space has also been lost to expanded security screening requirements. The existing holdroom does not have any defined circulation space for passenger movements. . Passenfler securitv screeninfl checkooint. New TSA requirements occupy significantly more space than older configurations. The location ofthe queuing area for security is problematic because it requires passengers to traverse back and forth across a ramp through the queuing line. It does not leave proper circulation area from the ticket lobby to the baggage claim haJl. It is unknown at this point what future administrative space wiJl need to be provided for the TSA personnel. . BaflflOf:e Claim. Bag claim units have approximately 70 linear feet (LF) of exposure each to the passengers. With the BAe-146 being the design aircraft at Aspen, claim units of approximately 120 LF are recommended. Space for skis and other oversized bags is also considered inadequate. The input area for baggage claim also should be brought into a weather-protected area. . Baflflafle Storafle. Due to the frequency of weather-related flight canceJlations, large numbers of late bags must be received and stored. Although the area for baggage storage is somewhat close to the programmed area, as identified on Table D3 in the Draft Report, the configuration of the spaces currently available in not very efficient. . Ticket Lobbv. At the present time, the ticket lobby and general seating areas appear to be adequate. However, the implementation of checked baggage screening has occupied a portion of the ticket lobby and displaced both ticket queuing and seating areas. Long-tenn procedures for checked baggage screening are stiJl to be developed by the TSA and will need to be reviewed/updated in any redevelopment plans. . Mechanical Rooms. At the current time, the mechanical equipment is dispersed throughout the tenninal building in rooms, on the exterior of the building, in the ceilings, and on the roof of the building. The area for mechanical equipment is one of the largest changes in space requirements, increasing from the existing 985 sq. ft. to a projected total of 4800 sq. ft. This would aJlow the majority of the equipment to be consolidated in one location and to reduce the visual impact of the equipment being placed on the exterior of the building. Surface Transportation . Public Parkin fl. To detennine the existing parking requirement, actual parking activity data was obtained from the airport from March 16 through 22, 2002, and again from August I through 9, 2002. It was detennined that the existing parking staJls (239 staJls) are deficient by about 33 staJls. The system is expected to be deficient by about 144 staJls by 2022. Aspen/Pitkin Co lIn ty Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 22 Further, the airport provides too much short-term parking relative to long-term. Today, the airport has about the same number of short-term stalls as long-term, but they should provide about 30 percent short-term and 70 percent long-term. . Emvlovee Parkinll. The Intercept Lot easily handles all employee parking needs today (according to airport staff, approximately 85 employee stalls needed). The number of employee parking stalls needed in the future increases from 94 in 2007 to 124 by 2022. . Rental Cars. The five on-airport rental car companies were surveyed to obtain the base information necessary to forecast rental car requirements (although only 3 companies responded). The results of the analysis showed that to provide an acceptable level of service, 80 rental car ready/return spaces should be provided today, although only 59 spaces are available. By 2022, the demand would be about 110 stalls. Further, although adequate today, rental car storage space will have to be expanded by about 1.5 acres by 2022 to sufficiently accommodate demand. . Private Vehicle Curb front. Information provided by staff was used to determine the current curbfront needs. Future needs were forecasted according to enplanements. The analysis showed that the existing 20 curb spaces are inadequate, with an existing need of 23 spaces, increasing to 34 spaces by 2022. . Commercial Vehicle Curbfront/Commercial Vehicle Holdinll Area. Based on input from airport staff, the commercial curb should be approximately 550 feet long, which is about twice the commercial loop road's current length of225 feet. By 2022, this length should be about 775 feet. (Addition of a commercial vehicle holding area could reduce this commercial curb requirement considerably.) Reserving Area for Aviation Uses (West Side) The Master Plan includes a recommendation to reserve space for potential future aviation uses on the west side of the runway. Although an understanding of the potential for aviation uses to be located on the west side of the airport is important, it is also critical to understand that this is a long-term consideration. Since no specific uses are recommended and no land use approval is sought, other than designating an area on the master plan drawing, we are leaving the issue of justification ofthe public need for any particular use to the time when an application for an actual development proposal is submitted to the County for review. However, there are a number of factors that justify the recommeudation to reserve the area for future aviation use. The primary reason is to preserve the option for west side development, given the limited amount of space on the east side of the Airport and the existing and forecast demand for additional general aviation aircraft parking area and storage hangars. This not only provides the County with guidance in terms of not allowing other non-aviation development on this portion of the Airport property, but it also allows the County to evaluate future development proposals on adjacent or nearby properties in the context of the potential for aviation use on the west side ofthe Airport. B. The Master Plan may include language elaborating upon the definitions of the use standards to more specifically define the unique characteristics of a specific activity proposed on a site. The approval of said definitions shall constitute a part of the development standards for a parceL Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 M8ster Pl8n PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 23 Response: Aircraft operations at the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport generates noise, the impact of which extends beyond the boundaries of the airport property. While land planning in the area surrounding the airport has resulted in an existing land use pattern that is reasonably compatible with the uses at the airport, there have been a number of affordable housing projects constructed on nearby sites in recent years. These projects include the North 40 Subdivision, Maroon Creek Club Employee Housing and MAA Seasonal Housing. In addition, there are two projects on other nearby sites that are either in the land use review process or have been approved and are awaiting construction. These include the Burlingame Parcel D and Burlingame Village Affordable Housing projects. This trend is troubling since it increases the potential for conflicts between area residents and the airport regarding normal airport operations. While the measured noise levels in the vicinity of the airport do not create any land use compatibility issues, as defined by the FAA, it is recommended that efforts be made to minimize noise impacts on surrounding neighborhoods and to require avigation easements when new development is proposed within the 55 DNL noise contour as depicted on Figure G 13 in the Master Plan Draft Report. C. Use and dimensional standards are established in Section 3-30. However, the dimensional standards in Section 3-30 may be varied during the Master Plan process, if an applicant provides clear and convincing evidence that the use or building cannot function properly within said limitations. Response: The Air Traffic Control Tower is a structure that exceeds the allowed height in the Public (PUB) zone district. This structure is approximately 75 feet in height, while the maximum allowed building height in the Public zone district is 28 feet. The location and height of the ATCT is set by criteria and standards established by the FAA to ensure maximum visibility for air traffic control. Before this building is constructed a study will be prepared by the FAA. This study can be made part of the scenic overlay review application. The reconstruction of this A TCT should be exempt from the height restriction in the Pitkin County Land Use Code. In addition, there are two other structures planned for the Airport for which the existing height restriction may be impractical. These are the ARFF/SRE facility and the redevelopment of the Main Terminal building. The ARFF /SRE building houses very large equipment used to clear snow off the runways and provide emergency firefighting and medical assistance for emergencies at the Airport. Accommodating and maintaining this equipment requires a structure, which pushes the limits of the 28-foot height restriction. Similarly, the future redevelopment of the Main Terminal building may need to be two-story structure to accommodate loading bridges and to take advantage of the significant grade change that occurs within the area that has been reserved for Main Terminal redevelopment. Since neither of these structures has been designed, it's not possible to identify a specific height variance at this time. Further, since both ofthese structures will require approval pursuant to the scenic overlay review section of the Land Use Code, the issues associated with their height, visual impacts and visible building mass can be addressed during this review. For these reasons, we are requesting that the height of these structures be allowed to vary from the current height restriction of28 feet by an amount to be determined during the scenic overlay review. Another dimensional standard for which consideration of a variation is requested is the 200-foot highway setback. Exhibit 0 is a plan drawing showing the existing 200-foot highway setback (red dashed line). Careful examination of this figure shows that numerous of the existing improvements within the Airport property encroach into the 200-foot setback. In addition nearly all of the existing buildings on the east side of the Airport, expect the Main Terminal and Rental Car Service facility, are located right up next to Aspen/Pitkin Covnty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 24 or partially within the 200-foot setback. One of the patio shelter structures is entirely within the 200-foot setback. Given the very limited room on the east side of the Airport, the enforcement of this setback allows little flexibility for relocating some of the structures that are currently within the Building Restriction Line (BRL) and will have to be relocated at some point in the future. One of the structures that will be affected by the 200-foot setback is the Air Traffic Control Tower. This building is currently located within the BRL and is planned to be relocated. Exhibit 0 shows that there is very little room on the east side of the A TCT base building to accommodate the new tower without violating the 200-foot setback. In addition, setbacks apply to grading and fencing, as a result, several of the planned improvements will require variances from the Board of Adjustment under the current setback requirement. We are requesting that the 200-foot highway setback be reduced to 100 feet through the Airport property as shown on Exhibit 0 (green line). Utilizing 100 feet as the setback corresponds well with the existing roadway and development pattern and eliminates all of the setback encroachments associated with existing structures. We believe that the scenic review process, which is required for nearly all development on the Airport property, is a more effective and meaningful way to address the visual impacts associated with development at the Airport than the 200-foot setback. Further, the Airport Administration is committed to improving the appearance of the Airport and has incorporated a recurring budget line item for landscaping in its capital improvements planning for the coming years. . D. The outcome of the master plan process shall include the listing of uses and activities in the categories and the maps described in this section. 1. Permitted Uses; Response: The following is a list of the requested "permitted uses and activities." These uses were recommended in the 1998 ALP Plan and were identified in BOCC Resolution 98-67 (Resolution approving 1998 ALP) as uses requiring further review. These uses and activities have subsequently been reviewed in detail (including scenic overlay review where appropriate) and were granted approval as part of the ESID plan or other land use applications and require no additional land use approvals prior to construction. These uses are scheduled to be constructed in Phase I (years 0-6) ofthe capital improvements plan (CIP), except the demolition of the existing ARFF/SRE building, which has not yet been scheduled for implementation due to financial constraints. PERMITTED USES AND ACTIVITIES 1) Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" including associated traversing taxiways ("AI through "A8") and Deice Apron and Glycol Collection System, in accordance with the Airport Layout Plan (Figure HI) - [A.2, A.3, A.17, A.24); 2) Construct bypass taxiway at 15 end of Runway; 3) Complete construction of North GA Ramp (finish grading and pavement) - [A.4]; 4) Complete construction of South GA Ramp Expansion (into long-term parking lot) - [A.17); 5) Relocate Long-term parking to Intercept Lot/Temporary Parking Improvements - [A.23); 6) Construct Perimeter road as depicted on 2003 Airport Master Plan Airport Layout Plan; 7) Rehab GA Apron between traversing runways "A2" and "A3" between Taxiway A and FBO hangars - [A.24]; 8) Rehab South GA Apron between Taxiways "A3" and "AS" - [A.2, A.17]; Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 25 9) Install Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting (MITL) for Taxiway "A" and Deice Apron (with each phase of relocation); 10) Rehab Runway 15/33 w/OFA Cleanup, shoulders and trench drains - [A.37); 11) Landscaping and Airfield Roadway Maintenance and enhancements - [A.8, A.9, A.22, A.42); 12) Demolish existing ARFF/SRE (east side) and reconstruct surrounding apron area for GA use (not expected to be completed in Phase I due to financial limitations ); 13) Rental Car Facility sanitary sewer extension [A.14). Note: Numbers in brackets {l correspond with projects on Phasing Table G2 and on Figures 1-12 and 1.13. 2. Uses permitted pursuant to further review and procedures in Section 4-60 (special review) ; Response: There are two categories of uses requiring further review as a result of this Master Plan. The first category includes those projects that have only been considered in concept in this Master Plan. No land use approvals have been granted for these uses and they will be subject to all applicable development regulations contained in the Pitkin County Land Use code prior to construction including the procedures contained in Section 4-60 (Special Review). The second category of uses requiring further review are those projects which have been reviewed in detail in this land use application leaving only scenic overlay approval to be obtained prior to construction (Section 3-60-040 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code). USES AND ACTIVITIES REQUIRING FURTHER REVIEW 1) Redevelop Main Terminal Building, Parking Areas, Commercial Vehicle Staging, Rental Car Ready Lot, Rental Car Storage Lot, Access Roads, and Pedestrian Paths - [B.7); 2) Main Terminal Expansion/New Concourse [A.29, A.30); 3) Develop West Side of Airport for Aviation Uses. Note: Numbers in brackets (l correspond with projects on Phasing Table G2 and on Figures 1-12 and 1.13. USES AND ACTIVITIES REQUIRING ONLY SCENIC FOREGROUND REVIEW 1) Construct new ARFF/SRE facility on west side of runway - [A.39); 2) Relocate Air Traffic Control Tower; 3) 1000-Foot Runway Extension [A.28, A.38); 4) Install runway centerline and touchdown lights and turn up medium intensity runway lights (MIRL) for use as high intensity runway lights (ffiRL); 5) Demolition of Building #11 and Construction of addition to ABO Terminal. Note: Numbers in brackets { J correspond with projects on Phasing Table 12 and on the Phasing Plans (see Exhibit H in this application). 3. Include maps and drawings at a scale of not less than one (/) inch = two hundred (200) feet unless the Planning Office authorizes a smaller scale. Response: The Conceptual Airport Development Plan (Figure E6 - Draft Report) and Airport Layout Plan (Figure HI - Draft Report) provide a graphic depiction of the recommended improvements. These maps are drawn at scales that have been selected in order to allow the airport property to be depicted on a single sheet while providing enough detail to convey the necessary information. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2001 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 26 GMQS Exemption for Essential Accessory Uses to Existing Governmental Facilities (Section 3-150-145) West Side ARFF/SRE Growth management exemption for a new ARFF/SRE facility on the west side of the airport was approved as part of the EISD project (Resolution 199-2001). At that time, the facility was planned to be approximately 15,000 to 16,000 square feet in size including four studio housing units of 500 square feet each. These housing units were proposed, in part, to provide affordable housing mitigation for the additional square footage pursuant to Section 3-150-140(B) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The planned use for the proposed ARFF/SRE building has changed since the ESID project was approved. The current plans call for a structure containing 29,132 square feet including 2 one-bedroom housing units and a dormitory space, which occupy approximately 2,000 square feet of the structure. Since the currently proposed facility is significantly larger than what was approved during the ESID review, it was necessary to reconsider growth management exemption. The proposed facility will also require scenic overlay review approval prior to construction. However, the designs for the building are not yet ready for scenic review so a separate application will be submitted addressing the scenic issues. There are several reasons for increasing the size ofthe proposed ARFF facility, most notably the fact that the building is currently planned to house uses currently located in other structures on or near the airport. The increased space needs associated with new airport security procedures mandated by the FAA since the tragic events of September 11,2001, have required that the Main Terminal building be remodeled. However, additional remodeling is necessary to provide an interim solution to accommodate airport security functions and secure hold room needs until the Main Terminal can be redeveloped or more comprehensively remodeled. The additional remodeling involves the relocation of the airport administration offices from their present location in the Main Terminal to the proposed west side ARFF/SRE facility. In addition, the new ARFF/SRE building has been designed with a full vehicle and equipment maintenance bay. Currently, vehicle maintenance is conducted in the County Shop facility across the highway from the existing ARFF/SRE site. While the larger vehicles are not considered street legal this practice has been deemed acceptable due to the short distance necessary to transport the vehicles from the ARFF to the County Shop. However, the new location on the west side of the airport will make this practice impractical and inefficient. The new ARFF will also accommodate records storage that is currently being handled by off-site rental storage space. In addition to accommodating additional uses, the proposed ARFF has been carefully programmed and designed based on a detailed analysis of the ARFF/SRE needs for the Pitkin County Airport and the criteria established by the FAA for the design of Airport Rescue and Firefighting/Snow Removal Equipment facilities. As a participant in the funding of the proposed ARFF/SRE facility the FAA is requiring that the building be designed in accordance with their standards as described in FAA Advisory Circulars 150/5210-15, 150/5220-150 and 150/5220-18. Exhibit J is a table prepared by the project team working on the design of the proposed ARFF building. This table provides a complete breakdown of the functions and spaces to be accommodated in the building and the square footage specified for each use per the above referenced FAA advisory circulars. This table also includes a column showing the square footage for each of the functions in the proposed facility and where that function is currently located. Aspen/Pitkin Co lIn ty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 27 For example, the entire fist page ofthis table represents the administrative office uses currently located in the Main Tenninal. This table allows a comparison of the square footage devoted to each function both existing and proposed, careful examination reveals that there are space efficiencies created by the shared use of some of the functions. It should be noted that there are ongoing negotiations between the Airport Staff and FAA regarding some aspects of the building functions and square footage. The result of these discussions is likely to be a building of the same size or smaller than what is represented by the table in Exhibit J. Another factor affecting the amount of square footage required for the proposed ARFF building is the decision to design the building with internal vehicle circulation. This allows vehicles and equipment to be moved around within the building without having to open the canopy doors, thus reducing heat loss and increasing energy efficiency. This design has several other advantages including enhancing the ability to design the structure to reduce visual impacts. Designing the building with internal drive aisles allows the building to be designed with fewer doors (drive through design like existing ARFF building not necessary). Reducing the number of large overhead doors reduces the initial cost of the building and allows it to be recessed into the hillside thus reducing its visual impacts as discussed in the following paragraphs. When combined, the various factors described in the preceding paragraphs create a compelling rationale for the proposed square footage. Given the size of the building extra effort is being expended to reduce its visual impacts. While the design of the building is ongoing and we intend to come back with a separate application for scenic overlay review, we know enough to be able to make the following statements regarding its design, siting and visibility. The building will be organized into two distinct elements. The larger, two-story, vehicle storage portion, which houses large snow removal and emergency response vehicles, is proposed to be recessed into the slope on the west side (Owl Creek Road side). A low sloping roof, supporting soil, native grasses and wildflowers will extend to the existing grade on the Owl Creek Road side of the building, creating the appearance of an unobtrusive landscaped meadow. As a result, this portion of the building will not be visible from Owl Creek Road. The east elevation ofthe building will only be visible from a short segment of highway 82 and from a distance of about 2,900 feet across the airport runaway area. Grading studies are being done to evaluate whether an undulating benn could be built to screen the view ofthe structure from Highway 82. The second portion of the building is comprised of a 2-story building containing the Airport Administration and Operations offices. The proposed housing units and donnitory space will be located in the second floor of this portion of the building. The lower floor of this portion ofthe building will also be recessed into the hill on the west so that only the upper floor would be visible from Owl Creek Road. The following paragraphs provide responses to the criteria for review of growth management exemption as required under Section 3-150-145 of the Land Use Code. A. General: To be eligible for gmqs exemption an applicant must demonstrate the development: 1. Is an accessory use to an existing governmental or non-profit essential community facility and provides a basic or fundamental service upon which the community is dependent for support: Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 28 Response: The proposed ARFF/SRE facility and administrative offices are an integral part of the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport which qualifies as an essential governmental facility. The proposed housing units are required mitigation for the proposed new square footage. 2. Will be available to the general public; Response: The ARFF /SRE facility and administrative offices, while not freely available to the public for good reasons, are important supporting function of the Airport, which is available to the general public. The activities at the ARFF/SRE facility include the use and maintenance of large and dangerous vehicles and equipment. 3. Serves primarily the local community: Response: The local community depends on air service for travel in and out of the Aspen area. In addition, the local resort economy depends on air service. Local pilots also utilize the airport. Evidence ofthe importance ofthe Airport to the local community is expressed in the 2000 AACP, which includes among its goals, a statement calling for improvements in the quality, affordability and reliability of commercial air service to Aspen and Pitkin County. 4. Not a growth generator: Response: The proposed ARFF/SRE building, though larger than the existing ARFF/SRE facility is being proposed to accommodate uses which already exist on the Airport grounds. The additional square footage is required primarily to accommodate uses which are located elsewhere on the airport grounds, or in nearby County-owned facilities, and are being relocated either to accommodate increased airport security functions required by the Federal Aviation Administration, or because they have been made impractical for operational reasons. In addition, as described above, the design of the proposed ARFF includes internal vehicle circulation area. This adds significant square footage to the building without generating the need for additional employees. The proposed affordable housing is intended to allow on-site housing for employees working at the Airport. The Airport is seeking approval for two small one-bedroom apartments and a dormitory space. These housing spaces are proposed to be approximately 667 square feet each. The dormitory space includes four beds and is intended to be use by emergency personnel who work long shifts and frequently live great distances from the airport. B. Mitigation of Service Demands Employee Housing During the review of the ESID application it was argued that despite an increase in overall size, no new employee generation would result from the then proposed expanded ARFF facility, rather the ARFF building would better meet the equipment and personnel needs ofthe existing staff. The housing office and housing board did not accept this argument and initially recommended housing mitigation be provided for 14 employees. However, after reconsideration, the housing board ultimately recommended that employee generation for the net increase in square footage for the proposed ARFF facility be calculated utilizing the "warehouse" employee generation standard (.4 per employees/I 000 square feet) as identified in Section 3-130-030 ofthe Pitkin County Land Use Code. This was made a condition of approval by the Board of County Commissioners and is incorporated as condition # II F in Resolution 199-2001. Resolution 199-200 I also states that the required housing mitigation, based on the warehouse Aspen/PitKin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 29 .~._--~.,-_.."--.-.. ."-"-"------ standard, be determined at the time of scenic overlay review and that an employee audit be conducted five years after the certificate of occupancy is issued for the new ARFF facility. If the audit reveals any new employees, beyond those for which employee mitigation is provided at scenic review approval, additional employee mitigation would be required for all additional employees. Given this past history, the Airport is proposing that the same methodology be used for the currently proposed facility. The following analysis is provided to determine the net increase in square footage over the existing square footage for the purpose of establishing the required employee housing mitigation requirement. The first step is to calculate the existing square footage being eliminated or converted to establish the demolition credit to be deducted from the from the proposed ARFF /SRE square footage. Existing Floor Area Demolition/Conversion Credit Existing Floor Area to be Demolished or Converted (Full Credit): . Existing ARFF: 6,630sf' . Airport Admin Office: 2,620sf Existing Floor Area to be Retained (Partial Credit): 9,250sf Total Demolition/Conversion Credit: 1,875sf 11,125sf I The existing ARFF building contains a total of7.430 square feet. Of this, 800 square feet is used to store a non-airport fire-fighting vehicle belonging to the City of Aspen. This vehicle is not being relocated to the new ARFF facility so the square footage associated with it has been deducted from the credit. Since the existing ARFF building is proposed to be demolished, full credit is being taken for its square footage (see note #1 for exception). In addition, the space currently utilized for the Airport Administration offices in the Main Terminal is being eliminated to provide more room for secure hold room space and airport security related functions. The hold room space is where passengers wait after they have gone through security. The existing hold room space has been identified as being significantly undersized even for current operations. The additional space being devoted to these uses as a result of relocation of the Airport Administration offices does not constitute new growth since these functions already exist at the airport. The space is being created to better accommodate uses that exist but are dramatically undersized due to changes in how airports are being required to operate due to the events of September 11,2001. For these reasons, we are requesting that full credit be granted for the conversion of the square footage associated with the Airport Administrative offices. The proposed ARFF /SRE facility will include separate wash and repair bays for maintaining vehicles and equipment as well as other shop related space that currently do not exist in the existing ARFF/SRE building. Vehicle and equipment maintenance is currently done at the County Shop facility located across the Highway from the existing ARFF /SRE building. The table in Exhibit J shows that the existing space utilized, though not exclusively, for this purpose at the County Shop includes approximately 3,970 square feet. The amount of space allocated to this function in the proposed ARF/SRE building is similar (3,750 square feet - See Exhibit J). The mechanic who handles this work for the airport spends approximately half of his time working on airport vehicles and the other half working on other County- owned vehicles and equipment. It is anticipated that this arrangement will continue with the mechanic working part time for the airport. No new employees will be required as a result of the proposed Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 30 maintenance space. Therefore, the Airport is requesting a partial credit for the County Shop space so that it is not penalized for sharing an employee with another department of the County. We are requesting that no employee generation be calculated for half of the space proposed for vehicle maintenance and shop functions since no new employee will be required. Based on the demolition/conversion credits described above, and the employee generation standards agreed upon during the ESID review, the employee generation for the proposed ARFF/SRE facility is calculated as follows: Employee Generation Proposed Square Footage - Demolition/Conversion Credit = Building Net Increase Building Net Increase x Employee Generation Standard = Employee Mitigation Requirement Or 27,125 -11,125 = 16,000 x .411000 = 6.4 emDlovees. The proposed ARFF /SRE facility includes 2 one-bedroom apartments and a dormitory unit containing four beds. The Affordable Housing Guidelines provide credit for 1.75 employees for each one-bedroom unit and one employee for every 150 square feet. Therefore, the employee mitigation provided by the proposed housing units is calculated as follows: Employee Mitigation Credit 2 One-Bedroom units @ \.75 employees/units = 3.5 emolovees I Dormitorv Room (667 square feet)@ \.00 emolovee/150 square feet = 4.4 emolovees Total Employee Mitigation = 7.9 emplovees The housing guidelines require that dormitory units be rented to seasonal employees in order for them to be counted as employee housing mitigation. The housing guidelines also require that the Housing Office qualify the tenant. The manner in which the proposed dormitory unit is to be used does not meet these requirements since it is not intended to be rented. Rather, the unit would be used to provide sleep and rest quarters for emergency service staff who frequently work long shifts when weather conditions and other emergency circumstances require. However, the Airport is requesting credit for the dormitory unit pending the completion ofa 5-year employee audit (as required during ESlD review). We believe that this audit will show that the 3.5 employee housing mitigation credits created by the 2 one-bedroom units will exceed the actual employee generation associated with the proposed ARFF /SRE facility. The one-bedroom units will be deed restricted for rental within the category specified by the Housing Office and in accordance with Housing Guidelines. The proposed housing units meet all other requirements of the Housing Guidelines. Aspen/Pitkin Covnty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 31 C. Mitigation of Environmental Impacts No environmental impacts are anticipated in association with this project other than those associated with the scenic impacts of the building. There are no environmental hazards or wildlife habitat areas mapped in this area of the Airport property on the County's 1041 maps. In addition, there is no surface water or other sensitive environmental conditions in the vicinity of the site selected for the proposed ARFF/SRE building. A separate land use application will be prepared for scenic overlay review prior to building permit application for the structure. Subdivision Exemption for Parcels for Essential Community Facilities (Section 3-190-050) In 1992 the Airport applied for, and was granted, subdivision exemption approval under the "essential community facility" provision. The subdivision was sought to accommodate a long-term lease with Aspen Base Operations. Any lease with a term of 20 years or more is considered a "subdivision" under the definitions section of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The 1992 approval created two lots (Lot 1 and Lot 2), one to accommodate the lease with ABO and one to allow the potential for a second FBO at some future date. Exhibit K is an attachment to the 1993 lease agreement between the County and Aspen Base Operations and shows the configuration of the two lots approved at that time. As part of the background research for ESID, it was discovered that the plat for this subdivision, which was to have been prepared in association with ABO redevelopment, was never filed with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. The 1998 Airport Layout Plan analyzed the impacts of accommodating the changes in safety standards mandated by the FAA and identified the need to adjust the lot lines approved in 1992. These lot line adjustments were approved in concept in the 1998 ALP and as part of the ESID review (BOCC Resolution #199-2001). At the time of the ESID review, the existing ARFF/SRE building was to be retained and converted to general aviation and other uses. The current recommendation is to remove the existing ARFF/FSRE structure and incorporate this area into the GA aircraft-parking apron. The boundaries of Lot 1, as described in the current ABO lease and use agreement, exclude the area of the ARFF building as shown on Exhibit K. Therefore, it is necessary to amend Lot 1 to incorporate the area of ARFF building in order to be able to lease this ground to ABa for a term greater than 20 years, since the areas leased to ABa must correspond to the areas actually used for ABa operations. A similar adjustment is necessary to provide an area to accommodate the relocation ofthe parking lot, which is currently located between the ABa Terminal and the existing ARFF/SRE building. This parking lot will be displaced when the South GA Apron is expanded into the area where the existing ARFF /SRE building is located. Exhibit L is a map showing the proposed configuration of the lots. This map identifies the existing parking area being relocated and the proposed area where the new lot would be constructed. The parking area being relocated is approximately 17,900 square feet in size. The proposed location is a similar sized area located to the east of the North FBO hangar (building #12). The boundary of Lot 1 has been expanded to encompass the area where the new parking lot is to be located (labeled "Future Pkng." On Exhibit L). Another issue, which we recommend be resolved at this time, involves the fuel farm area. When the revisions to Lots I and 2 were recommended in the 1998 ALP, the fuel farm area was divided in two, with half of the fuel farm being incorporated into Lot I. The other half of the fuel farm was proposed as part of Lot 2 though is was depicted as a separate, non-contiguous parcel. The intent ofthis action was to Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 32 be able to lease fueling facilities to a potential second FBO without having to construct a second fuel fann with all of the costs and environmental associated with fuel handing facilities. In order to accomplish this intent, it is recommended that a separate lot, labeled Lot 2b be established as part of this subdivision exemption action. Exhibit L shows the proposed configuration for Lots I, 2 and 2b. The area of Lots I and 2 are shown on Exhibit L. The area of Lot 2b is 7,985 square feet which can be pennitted under the Public (PUB) zone district since the Code allows the minimum lot size to be flexible [Section 3-40-190 (E)(I)]. Except for the addition of the ARFF/SRE area to Lot I, the proposed configuration for these lots is the same as was approved during the ESID review. It should be noted that amending the configuration of Lots I and 2 would require an amendment or addendum to the ABO Lease and Use agreement (including Exhibit A of the lease which is a map showing the configuration of Lots I and 2), since this agreement is tied to a particular piece of ground with a legal description. Since the plat for the original subdivision exemption was not recorded, a subdivision exemption plat with the adjusted lot lines, as depicted on Exhibit L, should be recorded subsequent to approval of2003 Airport Master Plan. The best approach to considering this matter under the Land Use Code, given the fact that the original plat was not recorded, is to seek subdivision exemption approval for the currently proposed lot configurations. The standards for approval of a subdivision exemption for essential community facilities are the same as those for growth management exemption for essential community facilities (Section 3- 150-140) and are reviewed in the following paragraphs. A. General: To be eligible for gmqs exemption an applicant mnst demonstrate the development: 1. Is an accessory use to an existing governmental or non-profit essential community facility and provides a basic or fundamental service upon which the community is dependentfor support: Response: The proposed lots are being established to allow long-tenn leases with Fixed Base Operators. Fixed base operators provide access to non-commercial aircraft at the airport, which is an important aspect of the overall services provided by the airport. A significant portion of airport revenues comes from fuel sales to general aviation aircraft operators. The Pitkin County Airport is a government owned and operated entity and is considered a critical element of the transportation system that serves local residents and the resort economy. 2. Will be available to the general public; Response: Fixed base operators are available to anyone who wishes to take advantage of the services they offer. 3. Serves primarily the local community: Response: The proposed lots accommodate fixed base operators, which provide access and serves to locally based aircraft. That is local residents and companies that own/lease and operate aircraft and keep them at the airport do so through a fee arrangement with a fixed base operator. 4. Not a growth generator: Response: The proposed lots are part ofthe legal mechanisms necessary to lease space at the airport to fixed base operators like Aspen Base Operations, Inc., which is a fixed based operator that has been operating at the airport for over a decade. While Lots 2 and 2b are intended to accommodate a second Aspen/Pitldn County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 33 FBO in the event someone should want to open and operate such a business airport, the establishment of these lots in and of themselves is not considered a growth generator. The primary purpose of establishing Lots 2 and 2b is to reserve the potential for a second FBO, thus ensuring that competition in protected in the FBO business at the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport. The concept of preserving the opportunity for a second FBO at the Airport was a recommendation of the 1989 Airport Master Plan and the 1998 ALP. B & C Mitigation of Service Demands and Environmental Impacts Response: No new service demands or environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of memorializing the creation of Lots I, 2 and 2b. Service demand and environmental impacts were evaluated for the ABO operation when it was established. Affordable housing mitigation was required and has been satisfied by ABO in association with its current facilities. The mitigation of service demands and environmental impacts should be required in association with any proposal for a second FBO in the event such a proposal is brought forward. GMQS Exemption for Demolition Credit for ABO Building #11 (Section 3- 150-040) Aspen Base Operations, Inc. is proposing to demolish Building # II (See ALP) and construct a small addition to the existing ABO terminal. Building # II is currently used as office, parts storage and a pilot's lounge/rest area for transient pilots. ABO proposes to move the office and parts storage area function into Building #10. The transient pilot's lounge function would then be relocated into the existing line room space, which is located on the second floor ofthe existing ABO Terminal. The existing line room function would be relocated from its existing location into the new addition to be constructed on the SE comer of the ABO Terminal. Exhibit M, is a plan drawing showing the existing square footage of Building # II to be demolished and the proposed footprint of the addition to the ABO building. This rearrangement is being proposed in response to the reorientation of the primary GA ramp. Currently, the primary GA ramp area is located west of the ABO Terminal in view of the existing line room space. However, as part of the FAA mandate to remove aircraft parking from the Runway Object Free Area, the primary GA ramp area will be relocated to the south of the ABO Terminal and will not be visible from the existing line room. The line room is the space that accommodates the need of employees who provide service to GA customers such as directing aircraft in and out of parking locations, minor maintenance, fueling, etc. Given this function, this space must have a clear view of the aircraft parking ramp. The addition to the ABO Terminal building will require scenic overlay review, which is not being sought with this application. The purpose of this application is to seek growth management exemption for the reconstruction of an equivalent amount of commercial square footage on the same lot pursuant to Section 3-150-040 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. During the ESID review it was determined that ABO had a right to growth management exemption for the relocation of 5,000 square feet of existing commercial floor area from Buildings # I 0 and # II. At that Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 34 time, it was recommended that these buildings be demolished, and their functions be redistributed with some ofthe square footage being relocated to the existing ARFF building. The current recommendation is to remove the existing ARFF building so ABO is rethinking how to utilize the square footage associated with Buildings 10 and 11, as they are demolished. Building # 11, which is proposed to be demolished to provide the growth management exemption for the proposed ABO addition, contains approximately 1,577 square feet. The proposed addition to the ABO building contains approximately 1,460 square feet. This leaves roughly 3,540 square feet of exempt commercial space associated with Building #10. Since Building 10 is actually 3,750 square feet, some of the remaining square footage (210 square feet) will not be available for growth management exempt relocation. 1041 Environmental Hazard Review (Section 3-80) There are no geologic hazards mapped for the Airport property and no areas of slopes greater than 15 percent will be disturbed as a result of the projects scheduled for construction in years 0-6 in the phasing plan. The 2000 AACP includes a "wildlife and biodiversity" map, which identifies the Owl Creek corridor through the Airport as "potentially significant habitat" for the Southwest Willow Flycatcher. Since Owl Creek is diverted into a culvert through a large portion of its length through the Airport, it is unlikely that this portion of Owl Creek qualifies as "significant." Furthermore, there is a conflict inherent in the concept of regulating or preserving bird habitat in close proximity to an airport runway. Lastly, while Pitkin County regulates development activity relative to wildlife habitat, this is not among the wildlife species identified for regulation in the Land Use Code and, therefore no mitigation is required. PART V - LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS The Applicant is seeking amendments to Sections 3-90-040 and 3-100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. These amendments are intended to update the Land Use Code to reflect current terminology and to acknowledge the 2003 Airport Master Plan as the reference document for maps and other information. The purpose of each of the proposed code amendments along with draft language for the amendments is discussed in the following paragraphs. 3-90-040 Site Selection of Airports: As indicated in the title, this section ofthe Code, which is extremely brief, addresses issues to consider in the selection of sites for airports. The current language reads as follows: Locate airports to: A. Minimize disruption to surrounding land uses; B. Minimize demands on community services; C. Complement the economic and transportation needs of the state and the area. To the extent that this section of the Code is intended to address the siting of new airports, it has limited impact on the existing airport. However, one issue that is not clearly addressed in this language is the potential impact of a second airport, small airfield or landing strip on the existing airport. While the potential for development of a second airport is unlikely, it seems prudent to include language in this Aspen/Pitkin Co lJn ty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 35 provision requiring consideration of the impacts of any new airport or airfield on the existing airport. One such impact might be the potential for conflicting flight paths. The following draft language is offered for consideration: 3-90-040 Site Selection of Airports, Airfield and Landing Strips Locate airport, airfields and landing strips to: A. Minimize disruption to surrounding land uses; B. Minimize demands on community services; C. Complement the economic and transportation needs of the state and the area; D. Avoid conflicts with existing airports, including the following: 1. Potential interference with the existing flight paths for the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport; 2. Creating electrical interference with navigational signals or radio communication for aircraft landing and departing the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport; 3. Making it difficult for pilots to distinguish between airport ligbts and otber ligbting at the Aspen Pitkin County Airport; 4. Creating a hazard or endangering the landing, takeoff, or maneuvering of aircraft intending to use the AspenlPitkin County Airport. 3-100 Areas Around Key Facilities: This section of the Code provides specific standards for consideration when evaluating development proposals in the vicinity of the airport. Currently, these standards are applied based on whether a property is located within one of several zones that were established in the 1981 Noise Exposure Plan for the Airport and the 1989 Airport Master Plan Update. These plans are specifically referenced in two places in this section of the Land Use Code. Since the Master Plan provides new noise exposure information and will be more current than the 1998 ALP, the references should be updated. Further, these zones have either been changed or eliminated by the FAA since this section of the Code was written. Therefore, the Code should be amended to reflect the current terminology. In addition, a number of the terms referenced in Section 3-100 are no longer utilized, and there are new terms contained in the current Master Plan that should be defined and incorporated in the Land Use Code. The current language in Section 3-100-030 is unclear with respect to the use or requirement of avigation easements. Presently, the Code does not define an area within which avigation easements should be considered or required. One thought would be to require avigation easements as part of the development review process for any new development or significant redevelopment when the property is located within the SS DNL noise contour. This issue has been considered previously. In 2001 an ordinance was presented to the Board of County Commissioners, the purpose of which was to establish "airport noise overlay zones" and to control land uses within these zones. This ordinance was not adopted at that time. Some of the draft language described below is taken from this ordinance and a copy of the original ordinance is incorporated as Exhibit N of this application. The scope of the currently proposed language is narrower than what was proposed in 200 I. The current recommendation is to define an area within which avigation easements would be required in association with all new development proposals. Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 36 Section 3-100-030 (E) addresses the issue of limiting the height of structures relative to the imaginary surfaces referenced in Section 3-100.10 (D). This reference limits the height restriction to the "conical surface." This provision should be revised to refer to the appropriate maps and language in the Airport Master Plan. The following draft amendment to Section 3-100 is offered for consideration: Subsection 3-100-010 Applicability This section of the Code contains development standards for areas around airports and mass transit areas. Areas around the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport are mapped in the 2003 Aspen Pitkin County Airport Mater Plan, including the Airport Airspace Drawing (plan View); Airport Airspace Drawing (profile View); Inner portion of Approach Surface Drawing (Runway 15); and Inner portion of Approach Surface Drawing (Runway 33). Refer to Section 4-60 for review procedures and Section 5-70 for submission contents. 3-100.30 B. Airport Height Zones Zones determined hy imaginary surfaces described by the following: A. Primary Surface; B. Approach Surface; C. Horizontal Surface; D. Conical Surface; and E. Transitional Surface. (prior code ~ 3-1001) Subsection 3-100-020 Standards for Areas Around All Key Facilities The standards in this section apply to development in areas around all key facilities. A. If the development of a key facility poses a danger to the public, regulate land use in the area around such facility to minimize the danger. B. Manage growth in areas around key facilities to discourage traffic congestion, incompatible uses, and expansion of the demand for government services beyond the reasonable capacity of the County to provide such services as determined by Pitkin County. C. Encourage compatibility with non-motorized traffic. D. A development that imposes burdens or deprivation on the communities of a region cannot be justified on the basis oflocal benefit alone. (prior code ~ 3-1002) Subsection 3-100-030 Standards for Areas Around Airports Aspen/Pitkin Co lIn ty Airport - 2001 Moster Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 37 The standards in this section apply to development within areas around airports. Noise Contour Maps, Airport Airspace Drawings, and Inner Portions of Approach Surface Drawings are provided in the 2003 Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan. In reviewing proposed land uses within a designated airport area, the County shall consider the frequency of flights and the elevation and convergence of flight patterns in relation to the proposed use and whether the proposal complies with general standards of Section 3-100.30 A and the specific standards for the particular designated area within which the proposal is located. A. General 1. Regulate land use to protect residential and other noise sensitive land uses from airport noise. 2. Avoid danger to puhlic health and safety or property due to aircraft crashes. B. Airport Environs Land uses or activities located in the vicinity of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport (within 60 DNL Noise Contour) should be prohibited if they result in any of the following: 1. Creating electrical interference with navigational signals or radio communication between the airport and aircraft; 2. Making it difficult for pilots to distinguish between airport lights and other lighting; 3. Glare in the eyes of pilots using the airport; 4. Impairing visibility in the vicinity of the airports; or 5. Creating a hazard or endangering the landing, takeoff, or maneuvering of aircraft intending to use the airport. C. Noise Influence Areas: In addition to complying with the standards in Section 3-100.30 B an applicant seeking approval for a land use within one of the following Noise Influence Area shall comply with the applicable standard for that noise influence area. 1. Areas within DNL Contour Sixty-five (65): In areas within DNL Contour 65, all uses other than public airport and transportation uses, short-term accommodations, office buildings, retail facilities, movie theaters, restaurants and certain open space uses (including agriculture and recreation uses not causing high concentrations of people) are prohibited. 2. Areas between DNL Contours Sixty and Sixty-five (60-65): In areas within DNL Contour Sixty to Sixty-five (60-65) uses such as schools, churches, hospitals libraries, auditoriums and outdoor amphitheaters and concert halls, are not recommended uses. 3. Areas within DNL Contour Fifty-five (55): In all areas within the 55 DNL Contour, the granting and recordation of an Avigation Easement shall he required prior to construction of any new or expanded use. Such Avigation Aspen/Pitkin Co lJn ty Airport - 2003 Master Plan PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 38 easements shall grant the right of flight over the land, together with the right to cause noise, vibrations, smoke fumes, flare, dust, fuel particles and all other effects of aircraft operations. Residential uses shall be designed and constructed to minimize impacts of aircraft noise, by utilizing tecbniques that will reduce interior noise levels by not less than 20 DbA or other suitable evidence that noise annoyance can be mitigated. D. Airport Height Zones: Before any structure is permitted to be erected, altered, maintained or allowed to be expanded above the imaginary surfaces established by Section 3- 100.10 D., a Notice of Construction or Alteration shall be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for a determination of hazardous or non-hazardous conditions and of effect on the airport operational Rules and Regulations. The Board shall not approve any such development until after receipt of the FAA recommendation. (prior code ~ 3-1003) Aspen/Pitkin County Airport - 2003 Moster Pion PUB Master Plan, GMQS Exemption, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay 39 Exhibit A I Aspen~Pit1dn County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan PARCEL A PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT PROPERTY LYING WESTERLY OF HIGHWAY 82 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1I2E1I2 OF SECTION 28, THE SW1/4 OF SECTION 27, THE NE1I4NE1I4 OF SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 8 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST AND IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH pRlNCIP AL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, ST ATE OF COLORADO; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE P ARTlCULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: coMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER coRNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A STONE FOUND IN PLACE, THE poINT OF BEGINNJ!:lG; THENCE NO! ",'lOoW ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNOARY OF SAID SECTION 33 A DISTANCE OF 1343.36 FEETTO THE NORTH SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 AND SECTION 34, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. # 15710 IN PLACE; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY S87047'43"W A DISTANCE OF 1334.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST sDCfEENTH coRNER OF SAID SECTION 33, A H/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S." 9598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE NOI '04'OS"W A DISTANCE OF 1337.21 FEETTO THE EAST slXTEENffi coromR OF SAID SEcnON 33 AND SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S." S7l 0 IN PLACE; THENCE NOO",141'W A DISTANCE OF 1346.09 FBETTO THE soU'fHEAST SlXTEENTH CoromR OF SAID SECTION 28, A 2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S #15710 IN PLACE; THENCE NOoo57'41"W A DISTANCE OF 1346.D9 FEET TO THE EAST-cENTER SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SEcnON 28, A 3-114" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. ,,9598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE NOO""'29"W A DISTANCE OF 1345.58 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3-1/4" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #19598 SET IN PLACE; THENCE NOoo54'29"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BoUNOARY OF THE NEI14NEII4 OF SAID SECfION 28 A DISTANCE OF 580.36 FEET TO A poINT ON THE WEsTERLY SlGHT -OF - WAY OF STATE HlGHW A Y NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY THE FOLLOWING THIRTY-SEVEN (37) COURSES ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY: 1. S42044'02"E A DISTANCE OF 51.34 FEET 2. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE SlGHT HAVING A RADIDS OF 523.00 fEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27'\8'00" A DISTANCE OF 212.68 FEET (CHORD BEARS S31005'02"E 211.22 FEET) 3. S19026'02"E A DISTANCE OF 484.56 FEET 4. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFf HAVING A RADIUS OF 1482.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26'48'25" A DISTANCE OF 693.62 FEET (CHORD BEARS S32050'14"E 687.31 FEET) 5. S32032'37"E A DISTANCE OF 124.19 FEET ^..,-,~,~._- 6. S210l6'39"E A DISTANCE OF 216.82 FEET 7. S43055'47"E A DISTANCE OF 284.03 FEET 8. S59042'14"E A DISTANCE OF 144.19 FEET 9. S30026'03"E A DISTANCE OF 206.34 FEET 10. S37019'48"E A DISTANCE OF 162.90 FEET 11. S22038'38"E A DISTANCE OF 654.44 FEET 12. S27002'07"E A DISTANCE OF 311.26 FEET 13. S39044'48"E A DISTANCE OF 380.71 FEET 14. S29008'10"E A DISTANCE OF 140.10 FEET 15. S52052'16"E A DISTANCE OF 244.32 FEET 16. S52052'13"E A DISTANCE OF 429.03 FEET 17. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1822.36 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25019'07" A DISTANCE OF 805.29 FEET (CHORD BEARS S40012'42"E 798.75 FEET) 18. S27033'09"E A DISTANCE OF 1780.08 FEET 19. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADlUS OF 3732.22 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08050'27" A DISTANCE OF 575.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S23007'55"E 575.32 FEET) 20. S18042'42"E A DISTANCE OF 1196.55 FEET 21. S31007'57"E A DISTANCE OF 155.94FEET 22. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADlUS OF 42.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26013'47" A DISTANCE OF 19.23 FEET (CHORD BEARS S87059'31"W 19.06 FEET) 23. S69005'35"W A DISTANCE OF 9.45 FEET 24. S29048'01 "E A DISTANCE OF 250.55 FEET 25. S49011'29"E A DISTANCE OF 103.24 FEET 26. S31010'17"E A DISTANCE OF 1689.08 FEET 27. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADlUS OF 32898.75 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00001'21" A DISTANCE OF 12.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS S30058'02"E 12.89 FEET) 28. S15015'18"E A DISTANCE OF 315.91 FEET 29. S19049'51"E A DISTANCE OF 292.63 FEET 30. S07035'33"E A DISTANCE OF 212.79 FEET 31. S04035'09"E A DISTANCE OF 97.46 FEET 32. SOl014'03"W A DISTANCE OF 394.41 FEET 33. S08041'56"W A DISTANCE OF 264.78 FEET 34. S02021'08"E A DISTANCE OF 431.37 FEET 35. S03018'45"W A DISTANCE OF 481.87 FEET 36. SOlo16'41"W A DISTANCE OF 687.67FEET 37. S03050'58"W A DISTANCE OF 1 06.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 211897 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARYN54019'57"W A DISTANCE OF 568.54 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N67055'57"W A DISTANCE OF 50.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N75033'57"W A DISTANCE OF 74.83 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N42028'57"W A DISTANCE OF 68.05 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197660 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE N29042'06"W A DISTANCE OF 160.23 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197660 N21 027'57"W A DISTANCE OF 114.67 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N31 042'57"W A DISTANCE OF 235.58 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N44001'57"W A DISTANCE OF 238.86 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY N41 o38'57"W A DISTANCE OF 153.11 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197598 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S69009'44"W A DISTANCE OF 32.34 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598; THENCE N2901O'20"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 197598 A DISTANCE OF 154.34 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N25055'53"W A DISTANCE OF 254.98 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N23032'45"W A DISTANCE OF 123.79 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N20036'27"W A DISTANCE OF 125.21 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI9040'24"W A DISTANCE OF 169.52 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI9021'23"W A DISTANCE OF 127.95 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY NI9020'38"W A DISTANCE OF 102.13 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N21 035'01 "W A DISTANCE OF 53.59 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N24024'47"W A DISTANCE OF 51.90 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27013'24"W A DISTANCE OF 186.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27042'54"W A DISTANCE OF 276.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N27042'09"W A DISTANCE OF 282.96 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY N30026'22"W A DISTANCE OF 17.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SECTION 34; THENCE S89057'58"W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 996.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE NOoo07'52"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 1311.71 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE S86004'10"E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 137.57 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S58004'36"E A DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S57044'41 "E A DISTANCE OF 140.77 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S48012'58"E A DISTANCE OF 44.49 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY S42031'20"E A DISTANCE OF 58.86 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL H-1 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 197537 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE N50014'30''E ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCELH-1 A DISTANCE OF 63.88 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF PARCEL 2 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID RECEPTION NO. 306956; THENCE N55013'01 "W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 A DISTANCE OF 205.30 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N55051 '28"W A DISTANCE OF 312.89 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY Sno10'55"W A DISTANCE OF 175.75 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S61051'43"W A DISTANCE OF 70.22 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S89019'15"W A DISTANCE OF 1105.31 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY N84026'04"W A DISTANCE OF 124.55 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NOoo13'55"W ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 34 A DISTANCE OF 1388.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 597.303 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. -.-...-- PARCEL B A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE S1I2NW1I4 SECTION 27, Sl/2 SECTION 27, N1I2 SECTION 34, SEl/4 SECTION 34AND THE WlI2SWl/4 SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, ST ATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIP AL MERIDIAN, A FOUND 2 1/2" U.S.G.L.O. BRASS CAP IN PLACE; THENCE S 04045'40" E A DISTANCE OF 127.64 FEET TO CORNER NUMBER 24 OF THE V AN CLEAVE PLACER A STONE FOUND IN PLACE, THE POINT OF BEGINNlliG; THENCE S45027'37"W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER A DISTANCE OF 483.62 FEET TO coRNER NUMBER 7 OF SAID PLACER; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER S44055'31 "E A DISTANCE OF 208.04 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 458480 OF THE PITKIN COUNT CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 45840 THE FOLLOWING EIGHT (8) COURSES: 1) S84055'16"W A DISTANCE OF 75.27 FEET 2) S12054'02"E A DISTANCE OF 323.00 FEET 3) S35041'22"E A DISTANCE OF 156.60 FEET 4) S68041'52"E A DISTANCE OF 180.10 FEET 5) N82044'47"E A DISTANCE OF 207.00 FEET 6) S51006'42"E A DISTANCE OF 158.20 FEET 7) S18000'22"E A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET 8) N86029'39"E A DISTANCE OF 67.36 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 458480 S44055'31"E A DISTANCE OF 76.37 FEET; THENCE S89046'08"W A DISTANCE OF 469.58 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE S03030'll"E ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 194.58 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20031'14" AND A DISTANCE OF 35.82 FEET (CHORD BEARS N45051'I8"W 35.62 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE N35035'41 "W A DISTANCE OF 516.32 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER; THENCE N35035'41 "W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE NORTH 40 SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 91.62 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 430.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15039'42" AND A DISTANCE OF 117.54 FEET (CHORD BEARS N43025'32"W 117.17 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLYLINEN51015'23"W A DISTANCE OF 191.50 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15023'53" AND A DISTANCE OF 53.75 FEET (CHORD BEARS N43033'26"W 53.59 FEET); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE N35051 '30"W A DISTANCE OF 572.89 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH 40 SUBDIVISION; THENCE N48059'04"W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 447848 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE A DISTANCE OF 788.09 FEET, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 447848; THENCE S58054'10"W ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 447848 A DISTANCE OF 659.03 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE N18042'42"W A DISTANCE OF 918.25 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,929.72 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08050'27" A DISTANCE OF 606.36 FEET (CHORD BEARS N23007'55"W 605.76 FEET); THENCE N27033'09"W A DISTANCE OF 873.09 FEET; THENCE N62026'51"E A DISTANCE OF 23.29 FEET, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 156437 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER THE FOLLOWING (2) TWO COURSES: 1) N80000'27"E A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET 2) N09059'33"W A DISTANCE OF 871.20 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER N45055'12"W A DISTANCE OF 777.58 FEET; THENCE N38019'30"W A DISTANCE OF 341.07 FEET; THENCE N03039'55"W A DISTANCE OF 664.67 FEET; THENCE S69038'08"W A DISTANCE OF 497.97 FEET; THENCE N70025'06"W A DISTANCE OF 256.72 FEET; THENCE N59021'00"W A DISTANCE OF 412.62 FEET; THENCE N41 009'54"W A DISTANCE OF 286.83 FEET; THENCE N22040'03"W A DISTANCE OF 301.15 FEET; THENCE N25055'27"W A DISTANCE OF 214.59 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE V AN CLEVE PLACER; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE N45022'13"E A DISTANCE OF 883.09 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE S44057'52"E A DISTANCE OF 762.54 FEET; THENCE SOoo02'08"W ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PLACER A DISTANCE OF 568.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S89057'52"E A DISTANCE OF 568.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44057'52"E A DISTANCE OF 1,458.12 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45002'08''W A DISTANCE OF 693.47 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44057'52"E A DISTANCE OF 1 ,804.42 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45004'42"W A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S44056'02"E A DISTANCE OF 2,458.52 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S45000'18"E A DISTANCE OF 180.14 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 154.975 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL C A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE El/2NEl/4 SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, ST ATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3-1\4" ALUMINUM CAP LS# 19598 IN PLACE; THENCE SOl009'10"E ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 681.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOl 009'10"E A DISTANCE OF 658.52 FEET TO THE N1/16 CORNER OF SECTIONS 27 AND 28; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOI009'10"EA DISTANCE OF 1,151.03 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE N33050'34"W A DISTANCE OF 39.58 FEET; THENCE N37030'52"W A DISTANCE OF 109.07 FEET; THENCE N41049'36"W A DISTANCE OF 145.70 FEET; THENCE NI4043'39"W A DISTANCE OF 61.31 FEET; THENCE N59053'38"W A DISTANCE OF 207.11 FEET; THENCE N44031'10"W A DISTANCE OF 318.82 FEET; THENCE N40058'50"W A DISTANCE OF 156.98 FEET; THENCE N28050'23"W A DISTANCE OF 377.73 FEET; THENCE NI9034'08"W A DISTANCE OF 430.84 FEET; THENCE N24010'22"E A DISTANCE OF 21.84 FEET; THENCE N20038'37"W A DISTANCE OF 212.67 FEET; THENCE N71 028'11 "W A DISTANCE OF 46.81 FEET; THENCE N31025'19"W A DISTANCE OF 91.47 FEET; THENCE N88050'04"E A DISTANCE OF 1,155.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID P ARCEL CONTAINING 28.160 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL D A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE Sl/2NW1/4 SECTION 27, S1/2 SECTION 27, Nl/2 SECTION 34, SEl/4 SECTION 34 AND THE W1/2SW1/4 SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, A FOUND 2 1/2" U.S.G.L.O. BRASS CAP IN PLACE; THENCE S85052'21"W A DISTANCE OF 2,051.05 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S58054'10"W A DISTANCE OF 23.04 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF- WAY OF HIGHWAY 82; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY THE FOLLOWING FIFTEEN (15) COURSES: 1) N18042'42"W, A DISTANCE OF 923.19 FEET 2) ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,907.22 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08050'27" AND A DISTANCE OF 602.89 FEET (CHORD BEARS N23007'55"W 602.29 FEET) 3) N27033'09"W, A DISTANCE OF 1,780.08 FEET 4) ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,997.36 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09038'31" AND A DISTANCE OF 336.13 FEET (CHORD BEARS N32022'25"W 335.73 FEET) 5) N18025'07"W, A DISTANCE OF 59.68 FEET 6) N40022'34"W, A DISTANCE OF 111.00 FEET 7) N44025'02"W, A DISTANCE OF 173.51 FEET 8) N49005'19"W, A DISTANCE OF 155.37 FEET 9) N63023'50"W, A DISTANCE OF 105.30 FEET 10) N52052'16"W, A DISTANCE OF 332.40 FEET 11) N39037'54"W, A DISTANCE OF 834.73 FEET 12) N08054'20"W, A DISTANCE OF 202.77 FEET 13) N41009'54"W, A DISTANCE OF 222.00 FEET 14) N22040'03"W, A DISTANCE OF 304.17 FEET 15) N25055'27"W, A DISTANCE OF 206.33 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID V AN CLEAVE PLACER; THENCE N45022'13"E ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 23.75 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE S25055'27"E A DISTANCE OF 214.59 FEET; THENCE S22040'03"E A DISTANCE OF 301.15 FEET; THENCE S41009'54"E A DISTANCE OF 286.83 FEET; THENCE S59021'00"E A DISTANCE OF 412.62 FEET; THENCE S70025'06"E A DISTANCE OF 256.72 FEET; THENCE N69038'08"E A DISTANCE OF 497.97 FEET; THENCE S03039'55"E A DISTANCE OF 664.67 FEET; THENCE S38019'30"E A DISTANCE OF 341.07 FEET; THENCE S45055'12"E A DISTANCE OF 777.58 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NUMBER 156437 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID RECEPTION NUMBER THE FOLLOWING (2) TWO COURSES: 1) S80000'27''W A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET 2) S09059'33"E A DISTANCE OF 871.20 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RECEPTION NUMBER S62026'51"W A DISTANCE OF 23.29 FEET; THENCE S27033'09"E A DISTANCE OF 873.09 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,929.72 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08050'27", A DISTANCE OF 606.36 FEET (CHORD BEARS S23007'55"E 605.76 FEET); THENCE S 18042'42"E A DISTANCE OF 918.25 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONT AINlNG 27.310 ACRES, MORE OR LESS PARCELE A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE El/2NEl/4 SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, ST ATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, A 3-1\4" ALUMINUM CAP LS# 19598 IN PLACE; THENCE SOI009'10"E A DISTANCE OF 2491.24 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOI009'10"E, ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID SECTION 28 A DISTANCE OF 41.66 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF- WAY OF HlGHW A Y 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF - WAY THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13) COURSES: 1) N33050'34"W A DISTANCE OF 73.92 FEET 2) N37030'52"W A DISTANCE OF 107.50 FEET 3) N41049'36"W A DISTANCE OF 150.28 FEET 4) NI4043'39"W A DISTANCE OF 57.37 FEET 5) N59053'38"W A DISTANCE OF 200.79 FEET 6) N44031'10"W A DISTANCE OF 322.55 FEET 7) N40058'50"W A DISTANCE OF 160.07 FEET 8) N28050'23"W A DISTANCE OF 381.95 FEET 9) NI9034'08"W A DISTANCE OF 441.70 FEET 10) N2401 O'22"E A DISTANCE OF 21.59 FEET 11) N20038'37"W A DISTANCE OF 192.70 FEET . 12) N71 028'11 "W A DISTANCE OF 44.32 FEET 13) N31 025'19"W A DISTANCE OF 112.79 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT -OF- WAY N880S0'04"E A DISTANCE OF 26.05 FEET; THENCE S31 025'19"E A DISTANCE OF 91.47 FEET; THENCE S71 028'II"E A DISTANCE OF 46.81 FEET; THENCE S20038'37"E A DISTANCE OF 212.67 FEET; THENCE S24010'22"W A DISTANCE OF 21.84 FEET; THENCE SI9034'08"E A DISTANCE OF 430.84 FEET; THENCE S28050'23"E A DISTANCE OF 377.73 FEET; THENCE S40058'50"E A DISTANCE OF 156.98 FEET; THENCE S44031'10"E A DISTANCE OF 318.82 FEET; THENCE S59053'38"E A DISTANCE OF 207.11 FEET; THENCE SI4043'39"E A DISTANCE OF 61.31 FEET; THENCE S41049'36"E A DISTANCE OF 145.70 FEET; THENCE S37030'52"E A DISTANCE OF 109.07 FEET; THENCE S33050'34"E A DISTANCE OF 39.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 1.159 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL F A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE E1/2 SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PARCEL BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 3, A 3 1/4" BLM BRASS CAP FOUND IN PLACE; THENCE S71 o40'00"W A DISTANCE OF 912.38 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S03052'13"W A DISTANCE OF 129.06 FEET; THENCE S 19055'35"E A DISTANCE OF 266.69 FEET; THENCE S69036'12"W A DISTANCE OF 623.09 FEET; THENCE N11051'57"W A DISTANCE OF 947.30 FEET; THENCE S63027'26"W A DISTANCE OF 100.42 FEET; THENCE N02051 '09"W A DISTANCE OF 343.99 FEET; THENCE N32008'09"E A DISTANCE OF 84.69 FEET; THENCE S31043'51"E A DISTANCE OF 10.24 FEET; THENCE S21028'51"E A DISTANCE OF 114.67 FEET; THENCE S29042'41"E A DISTANCE OF 160.24 FEET; THENCE S42026'51"E A DISTANCE OF 68.03 FEET; THENCE S75031 '51''E A DISTANCE OF 15.15 FEET; THENCE S63033'21"W A DISTANCE OF 27.22 FEET; THENCE S75033'00"E A DISTANCE OF 77.84 FEET; THENCE S67055'00"E A DISTANCE OF 44.38 FEET; THENCE S54019'00"E A DISTANCE OF 589.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 11.362 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Exhibit B I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan Sardy Field Aspen/Pitkin County Airport 0233 East Airport Road Aspen. Colorado 81 611 970/920-5384 FAX 970/920-5378 December Z9, Z003 Suzanne Wolff Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 To Whom it May Concern: By this letter, the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport hereby authorizes TG Malloy Consulting, LLC to represent us in matters related to the land use application for the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Z003 Master Plan for which we are seeking land use approvals from Pitkin County. This authorization includes the preparation and submission of the land use application and representation of this application before the applicable appointed and elected boards. ~~" James Elwood, A.A.E. Director of Aviation AspenlPitkin County Airport cc: Tim Malloy File P.O. Box 156 . Carbondale . Colorado . 81623 . phone: 704-0152 . e-mail: tgmalloy@sopris.net Exhibit C I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan ABRAMS FRED M REV TRUST 3101 MONET DR E PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410 AIG ASPEN LLC 950 THIRD AVE 16TH FL NEW YORK, NY 10022 ANDREWS ROSS 520 E DURANT AVE #110B ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN OAK TENNIS ASSOC C/O MC KINNON DON PO BOX 831 ASPEN, CO 81612 BARNETT FAMILY TRUST C/O SALLY BARNETT 39 POLECAT DR ASPEN, CO 81611 BRITVAR RUDI FAMILY TRUST 30% PO BOX 1791 ASPEN, CO 81612 BURLINGAME HOUSING INC C/O PREFERRED PROPERTY MNGMT SER PO BOX 2685 BASALT, CO 81621 CALLAHAN STEVEN S 4101 GREENBIAR STE 115 HOUSTON, TX 77098 COFLIN DAVID L & CHERYL J 67 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 DAVIS DON L 3917 BALCONES DR AUSTIN, TX 78731 ACDS LLC PO BOX 296 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 AEP FAMILY LLLP GARFIELD & HECHT PC 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 AMERICAN NAT'L BANK &SEELEN TRUSTEES 50% 234 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 AMICO JOYCE P 477 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN BASE OPERATIONS 69 E AIRPORT RD #A ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SANITATION 565 S MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST PO BOX 940 ASPEN, CO 81612 BARIX RANCH LLC C/O HERBERT S KLEIN & ASSOCIATES PC 201 N MILL ST STE 203 ASPEN, CO 81611 BIDGLE LLC 303 E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 BMC HOLDINGS INC PO BOX 70006 720 PARK BLVD STE 200 BOISE, ID 83707 BROOK RENEE 0847 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN, CO 81611 BURGER STEPHEN V TRUSTEE 50% PRT OF MARIL Y WEIGNERlANNUITY TRUST 20 E 9TH ST NEW YORK, NY 10003 BUTTERMILK MEADOWS LLC PO BOX 4060 ASPEN, CO 81612 BYRNE RICHARD C & MICHELE A 97 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 CHILL L TD 476 WES1WOOD DR DENVER, CO 80206-4139 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE OF COLORADO 4201 E ARKANSAS AVE DENVER, CO 80222 COLORADO MTN JR COLLEGE DIST PO BOX 10001 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 DDABC LLC 109 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER & RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILWAY CO C/O UNION PACIFIC CORP 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR S OMAHA, NE 68102-2010 DROSTE PETER C 25% INT 11 POWDER HOUSE CIR NEEDHAM, MA 02192 FRENCH JOHN R & BARBARA F 0311 STAGECOACH DR CARBONDALE, CO 81623 GIORDANI LUIGI PO BOX 2616 ASPEN, CO 81612 GROSSMAN GEOFFREY F TRUSTEE ET AL PO BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612 HECHT ANDREW V 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 HOWIE KEITH E & ELIZABETH A 47 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN. CO 81611-1065 LEWI JAMES M & LORI ANN 85 RIVERDOWN ASPEN, CO 81611 MALLORY HOWELL 210 N MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MCBRIDE JOHN P C/O THURSTON INC-STEPHEN MCDONALD 2920 E 6TH AVE DENVER, CO 80206 MCBRIDE LAURIE MACK TRUST 303E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 EAST OWL CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O DOUGLAS J MCPHERSON 514 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 GALON LISA M 615 WESTERN AVE SOCORRO, NM 87801-4449 GORDON JAMES TRUST 900 N MICHIGAN AVE - #14TH CHICAGO,IL 60611-1542 HAWKINS DUDLEY W L JR PO BOX 37 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 HEINEMAN PETER 19423 N TURKEY CREEK STE B MORRISON, CO 80465 JOSEPH PAMELA 407 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN, CO 81611 LOPEZ STEVEN TRUST 41 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN, CO 81611-2703 MARGOLIS ALLAN B TRUST 66.88% PO BOX 3102 ASPEN, CO 81612 MCBRIDE JOHN PAUL JR C/O PETROL-ASPEN INC 121 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 MCBRIDE PETER MACK C/O JOHN MCBRIDE 303 E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 FERRARA SUSAN AMELIA 105 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 GIBSON PAUL COLIN PO BOX 9545 ASPEN, CO 81612 GREGORY JULIAN ARTHUR JR & MARY MALONEY 845 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN, CO 81611-2707 HAYNIE ERIC A 143 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 HENRY CAROLINE L 117 FREE SILVER CT ASPEN, CO 81611 KLEIN MICHAEL R 2445 M ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20037 MALKEMUS CHARLES M 477 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN, CO 81611 MCBRIDE JOHN P 303E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 MCBRIDE KATHERINE HAWLEY 303 E AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 MCCARTNEY CHARLES H 421 G AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 METCALF FRANK MEAD PO BOX 32 ASPEN, CO 81612 MOORE FAMILY RANCH PROPERTIES LLC BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 OBERMEYER AABC LLC 115 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 PAEPCKE WALTER P LIFE INS TRUST C/O HOLLAND & HART 600 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 PETROL ASPEN INC 121 AABC ASPEN, CO 81611 RANSOM KENNETH & SALLY MOORE PO BOX 126 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ROGERS JANICE LEE 8 STONE BRIAR WAY FRISCO, TX 75034 SARDY MRS T J C/O MRS TED HELLUMS 4946 WOODLAND FORREST DR TUSCALOOSA, AL 35405 SHAPIRO ANDREW 0 50% POBOX 1591 NEW LONDON, CT 06320 SMITH FRANK F JR & KATHARINE LINDSAY 2506 STRATFORD DR I\USTIN, TX 78746 MEYER LOWELL & ELEANOR AS JT TENANTS PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW AGE FAMILY PARTNERSHIP L TO 70% PO BOX 1791 ASPEN, CO 81612 OBERMEYER WALTER R & ROBIN P 0490 ASPEN OAK DR ASPEN. CO 81611 PALMAZ ALEJANDRO 151 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 PITKIN COUNTY 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 ASPEN, CO 81611 REDFIELD-MCINTYRE PATRICIA PO BOX 7631 ASPEN, CO 81612 ROTHBERG ADAM B & PIPER ERIN 171 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHLlEM THOMAS ROBERT 8 STONEBRIAR WAY FRISCO. TX 75034 SHIFRIN GEORGE PO BOX 12280 ASPEN, CO 81612 SOLDNER PAUL E & VIRGINIA I PO BOX 90 ASPEN. CO 81612 MITCHELL ELSA R PO BOX 2492 ASPEN, CO 81612 NOURIAN-MENENDEZ NASRIN PO BOX 8036 ASPEN, CO 81612 OWL CREEK RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O VIDAL CHUCK PO BOX 3159 ASPEN, CO 81612 PERLMUTTER JORDON H & ESSIE L 18 HYDE PARK CIR DENVER, CO 80209 PLOTKE.GIORDANI ELIZABETH H PO BOX 2616 ASPEN, CO 81612 RENTAL CAR CONSORTIUM 0501 E AIRPORT RD ASPEN, CO 81611 SAGE LLC 303E AABC ASPEN. CO 81611 SEIDEL BARBARA G PO BOX 548 ASPEN, CO 81612 SMITH CHRISTOPHER H 50% 234 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ST JOHN SANDRA PO BOX 2598 ASPEN, CO 81612 STAPLETON CRAIG R AGENT STAPLETON ASSOCIATES COIO PITKIN COUNTY ATTORNEY - 530 EMAIN ASPEN, CO 81611 STEIN MARJORIE B LLLP 62.92% INT PO BOX 1047 ASPEN, CO 81612 WAISMAN MARGARET 4101 GREENBIAR STE 115 HOUSTON. TX 77098 ZWART JEFFREY R & TERRI L PO BOX 45 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 STARENSIER DAVE & PHYLLIS WHITMAN 161 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS TARVER KIMBERLY SWALES 315 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 TULLAR MICHAEL & JENNIFER 27 RIVERDOWN DR ASPEN, CO 81611 WEST MARIE T PO BOX 8168 ASPEN, CO 81612 WOODWARD RALPH H 105 WOODWARD LN ASPEN, CO 81611 Exhibit D I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan PITKIN COUNTY PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PROJECT: Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay Review, GMQS Exemption, Code Amendments LOCATION: Highway 82 PID#264334200851 APPLICANT: Pitkin County REPRESENTATIVE: Tim Malloy DATE: November 25, 2003 PLANNER: Suzanne Wolff, 920-5093 Type of Application: PUB Master Plan, 1041 Hazard Review, Scenic Overlay Review, GMQS Exemption, Code Amendments Description of ProjectJDevelopment: Applicant is requesting approval of a new master plan for future development at the airport. Land Use Code Section o 3-60, Environmental & Aesthetic Standards - Property is within the mapped scenic overlay o 3-70, Water Resources o 3-80, 1041 Hazard Review o 3-150-140, GMQS Exemption for Essential Community Facilities o 3-150-145, GMQS Exemption for Essential Accessory Uses to Existing Governmental Facilities o 3-220-010, Code Amendments o 3-240-030, Development in the Public (PUB) Zone District - Standards for Public Master Plan Review by: P&Z and BOCC (2 readings) Public Hearing? YES, at BOCC. The applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property at least 15 days prior to the hearing and shall mail notice to all adjacent property owners and mineral estate owners at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community Development Department (copy of notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Staff will refer to: Zoning, Engineer, Woody Creek Caucus, Housing, Brush Creek Metro District, West Buttennilk Metro District, City of Aspen, AABC, North 40 Homeowners Association, Aspen Skiing Company FEES: $11,460 (make check payable to "Pitkin County Treasurer") )> Planning flat fee; $10,140 (non-refundable; based on 34 hours of staff time; if staff review time exceeds 40.8 hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time in excess of34 hours at a rate of $2 I O/hour) o $3,360 - Master Plan (16 hours) o $2,100 - 1041 Hazard Review (10 hours) o $1,050 - Code Amendments (5 hours) o $630 - GMQS Exemption (3 hours) )> Public Notice fee: $25 )> Clerk fee: $625 )> County Engineer fee: $350 )> Housing referral fee: $320 To apply, submit 22 copies of the following information, unless noted otherwise: I. Summary letter explaining the request, summarizing prior approvals, and addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above. 2. Maps of site showing existing and proposed facilities and activity areas 3. Proof of ownership of subject property 4. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map 5. Total fee for review of the application 6. Signed fee agreement (2 copies) 7. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy) 8. List of all adjacent property owners and mineral estate owners (1 copy) 9. Copy of this preapp form (1 copy) NOTES: >> In addition to the paper copies, all text documents must be submitted in digital format. Acceptable digital formats are: .txt, .doc, . wpd, .rlf, .jpeg, .pdf. >> PLEASE SUBMIT TWO-SIDED COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS (IF POSSIBLE). >> ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED. >> This pre-application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and staff's interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. Exhibit E I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan Table 12 PHASE I (0-6 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECf COSTS (revised) Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Pian Recommended Financing Method Total Federal Federal Project Description N." Costs Discretion (a Entitlement (b PFC(c State (d Local (e 2004 Projects A.I Relocate ARFF/SRE Building to West Side (design) $400,000 $360,000 $40,000 A2 Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" (A4-A5) $1,610,583 $1,449,131 $80,726 $80,726 A3 RelocateIReconstruct Taxiway "A" (AI-A2) $3,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,500,000 $150,000 $150,000 A4 North Ramp $1,850,000 $1,665,000 $185,000 A5 Replace Runway Broom & Deicer $444,444 $400,000 $44,444 A6 Land Purchase $335,000 $301,500 $33,500 A7 Pavement Maintenance $200,000 $200,000 A8 Landscaping & Terminal Roadways Maintenance & Enhancement $80,000 $80,000 A9 Landscaping at Terminal (waste area screening) $20,000 $20,000 AIO Security Vehicle $24,000 $24,000 All Way Finding and Signage (Phase 1) $30,000 $30,000 A12 80M Skid Steer Loader/Broom Replacement $20,000 $20,000 A13 80M Landside Mower Replacement $35,000 $35,000 AI4 Rental Car Facility Sanitary Sewer Extension $450,000 $450,000 A15 Buttermilk Well Repair $30,000 $30,000 AI6 Phase II Owl Creek Tree Trimming $15,000 $15,000 Sub- T otal/2004 Projects $8,544,027 $4,975,631 $1,900,000 $500,170 $230,726 $937,500 Notes (. Federal Discretion _ FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Discretionary Grants (b Federal Entitlement - FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Entitlement Grants (c PFC. Passenger Facility Charge Proceeds (d State. Colorado Division of Aviation Grants (< Local . Current Revenues. Cash Reserves, Bonds, etc. Cost estimates, based upon 2003 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluation. Inflation factor included in Phase I projects only. Development Plan Project Costs - I Table 12 (Continued) PHASE 1 (0-6 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECf COSTS Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Recommended Financing Method Total Federal Federal Project Description N... Costs Discretion (8 Entitlement (b PFC(c State(d Local(e 2005 Projects AI7 RelocateJReconstruct Taxiway "A" (A3-A4) w/GA Ramp and GA Ramp Reconstruction $6,222,222 $4,150,000 $1,450,000 $311,111 $311,111 A18 Environmental Study - Runway Extension $500,000 $450,000 $50,000 A19 Replace Snow Plow $300,000 $300,000 A20 Replace Index B ARFF Truck & Gear $555,555 $500,000 $55,555 A21 Pavement Maintenance (Airside) $200,000 $200,000 A.22 Landscaping & Terminal Roadways Maintenance & Enhancement $50,000 $50,000 A23 Temporary Parking Improvements $500,000 $500,000 Sub- T otal/2005 Projects $8,327,777 $4,650,000 $1,900,000 $666,666 $311,111 $800,000 2006 Projects A24 Relocate/Reconstruct Taxiway "A" (A2-A3), GA Ramp $2,502,760 $2,252,488 $125,136 $125,\36 A.25 Replace Administration Jeep $25,000 $25,000 A26 Replace Operations Pickup & Plow $30,000 $30,000 A.27 Replace BGM Pickup & Plow $30,000 $30,000 A.28 Earth Work 1000' for Runwayl Taxiway Extension $6,600,000 $4,040,000 $1,900,000 $330,000 $330,000 A29 Terminal Building Design $1,500,000 $750,000 $750,000 A30 Terminal Building Expansion (new concourse) $7,300,000 $3,650,000 $3,650,000 Suh-Total/2006 Projects $17,987,760 $6,292,488 $1,900,000 $4,855,136 $455,\36 $4,485,000 Notes (. Federal Discretion. FAA Airport hnprovcment Program (AlP) Discretionary Grants (b Federal Entitlement - FAA Airport Improvement Progrem (AIP) Entitlement Grants (, PFC - Passenger Facility Charge Proceeds (d State - Colorado Division of Aviation Grants (. Local - Current Revenues, Cash Reserves, Bonds, etc Cost estimates, based upon 2003 data, are intended for preliminary planning pwposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluation. Inflation factor included in Phase I projects only. Development Plan Project Costs - 2 Table 12 (Continued) PHASE I (0-6 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECf COSTS Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Recommended Financing Method Total Federal Federal Project Description No" Costs Discretion (a Entitlement (b PFC(c State (d Local (e 2007 Projects A.31 SRE- Loader $400,000 $400,000 A32 SRE- De-Ice Equipment $300,000 $270,000 $30,000 A33 Replace Flatbed Pickup & Plow $35,000 $35,000 A.34 Replace Mower Deck $18,000 $18,000 A35 Terminal Repair and Modification (Root) $100,000 $100,000 A.36 Pavement Maintenance (Airside) $200,000 $200,000 A.37 Rehab RW 15/33 w/OFA Cleanup, Shoulders & Trench Drains $10,600,000 $8,000,000 $1,540,000 $500,000 $560,000 A.38 Paving Work 1000' for Runway/ Taxiway Extension $2,200,000 $1,980,000 $220,000 Sub- T otaV2007 Projects $13,853,000 $9,980,000 $1,810,000 $750,000 $500,000 $813,000 2008 Projects A39 Relocate ARFF/SRE Building & Electrical Vault, Constrtuct PerimeterlEmergency Roads $9,250,390 $6,400,390 $1,900,000 $475,000 $475,000 Sub- T 0181/2008 Projects $9,250,390 $6,400,390 $1,900,000 $475,000 $475,000 $0 2009 Projects A.40 Snowblower $444,444 $400,000 $44,444 A41 Pavement Maintenance (Airside) $200,000 $200,000 A42 Landscaping & Terminal Roadways Maintenance & Enhancement $150,000 $150,000 A.43 T erminallmprovement Debt Payment $1,666,667 $1,500,000 $166,667 Sub-TotaV2009 Projects $2,461,111 $0 $1,900,000 $211,111 $0 $350,000 Sub-Total Phase I $60,424,065 $32,298,509 $11,310,000 $7,458,083 $1,971,973 $7,385,500 No'" (, Federal Discretion _ FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Discretionary Gmnts (b F edcral Entitlement. FAA Airport hnprovement Program (AlP) Entitlement Grants (, PFC. Passenger Facility Charge Proceeds (d State. Colorado Division of Aviation Grants (, Local - Current Revenues, Cash Reserves, Bonds, etc Cost estimates, based upon 2003 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluation. Inflation factor included in Phase I projects only Development Plan Project Costs - 3 Table 13 PHASE II (6-11 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECf COSTS Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Recommended Financing Method Total Federal Federal Project Description Note Costs Discretion (a Entitlement (b PFC(c State (d Local (e 8.1 Replace Runway Broom $477,776 $430,000 $23,888 $23,888 8.2 Replace Sweeper (Road & FOD) $70,000 $70,000 8.3 Replace Tractor (Airside) $70,000 $70,000 8.4 Pavement Maintenance (Airside) ($200,000 x 5 years) $1,000,000 $1,000,000 8.5 Acquire Airfield Equipment ($300,000 x4 years) $1,200,000 $1,200,000 8.6 Acquire Landside Equipment ($40,000 x4 years) $160,000 $160,000 8.7 New Tenninal With Site Improvements (f $35,000,000 $10,270,000 $7,230,000 $1,375,000 $16,125,000 Sub- T otal/Phase II $37,977,776 $0 $10,700,000 $8,453,888 $1,398,888 $17,425,000 No'" (a Fedcml Discretion. FAA Airport Improvement Program (AlP) Discretionary Grants (b Federal Entitlement - FAA Airport Improvement Program (AlP) Entitlement Grants (c PFC. Passenger Facility Charge Proceeds Cd State _ Colorado Division of Aviation Grants (e Local. Current Revenues, Cash Reserves, Bonds, etc. (f Multi-year funding anticipated Cost estimates, based upon 2003 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluation. Inflation factor included in Phase 1 projects only. Development Plan Project Costs - 4 Table 14 PHASE III (11-20 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECf COSTS Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Master Plan Reconunended Financing Method Project Description Note Total Costs Federal Discretion (a Federal Entitlement (b PFC(c State(d Local (e Sub- TotaVPhase III $21,900,000 $2,100,000 $2,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000 $200,000 $4,000,000 $1,000,000 $200,000 $3,000,000 $400,000 $12,000,000 $5,000,000 $400,000 $2,400,000 C.l Pavement Maintenance Airside ($200,000 x 10 years) C.2 Rehab Runway 15/33 C.3 Rehab Taxiway A C.4 Acquire Airfield Equipment ($300,000 x 10 years) C.5 Acquire Landside Equipment ($40,000 x 10 years) $2,000,000 (f $10,000,000 (f $6,500,000 $800,000 $1,300,000 $3,000,000 $400,000 GRAND TOTALS ########## $34,398,509 $34,010,000 $20,911,971 $3,770,861 $27,210,500 No'" (a Federal Discretion _ FAA Airport hnprovement Program (AlP) Discretionary Grants (b Federal Entitlement. FAA Airport Improvement Program (AlP) Entitlement Gmnts (c PFC _ Passenger Facility Charge Proceeds Cd State _ Colorado Division of Aviation Grants (e Local _ Current Revenues, cash Reserves, Bonds, etc. (r Multi-year funding anticipated Cost estimates, based upon 2003 data, are intended fOf preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluation. Inflation factor included in Phase I projects only. Development Plan Project Costs - 5 Exhibit F I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan . ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~- ~ a !:i! ~ S ~ ~ ~ Ii Ii ~ A.LI'II:JV.{ IDIS/.{.!IlIV ! " ~<1<1<1<1<1<1 I ! I i .LlIOdlllV A.LNIlO:J NDI.LId N:fIdSV ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~~l ~ I l------- ---------~-- ---, I , ' , ' ~ I ~ ~ ------- I lri ~ u ------- W < I~-------,-----~~, ,______ I II -.j , II , " I ' " I 1---------11-------- , " I ' " , " L______-' L______ ::------- I ~J---~-- , ~ I ' ~ L__ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ " \ \ " \ ~ \ , ii \ , D 'w I ,~ I \ ~ I I L \ I \ , \ \ \ \ \ n \ ~ w It II \ ~ \ \ \ I \ I , I I I I I I 1 I I I I \ I I I \ 1 1 1 \ I \ \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I D I ~ DO W~ I~ ~~ O~ !;~ () Ii n \J I I --' Ii III I I I ~ ~: z \ Q~ "~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~! ~ 2 z ~ '- ~ ~""'".,.},-~ ~t rLJ W . ~~, . -~::J O~ Z~ [;j. I!l. l,ll.ld !! !111 ~ ~ Q , ; I [ [. ~ i [ [;! i ~ U h ~ 0 i'i~ " , I: z 1,~ <II .J ~ ~ lL I:~ Wi I- \ 1 ii'i 10 I 'l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , ~ I I t x ~ }- 1- <( W I: D ~ I z I m :> It .. t \) W ~ w m I I!l I ~ n w >- ~ '" w I I: I!l z ;:: '" ~ x I w I I I AVMNn>l r'oo. Exhibit G I Aspen~Pit1dn County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan , , , , *i I '0 ' >, , \J , > : ~ ~~ 1oJ~ ~)o ~~ ~. 0' x~ i:D;. .x ~ 8 , - 11"- ~a~n ~~.6~ a ~ ~.~ b~ ~iii ." i , '. ~.. ....~1lI ~~ .< ~i ~, ------------------------~-----------------------, m ~~ ~ > o , ~~~. ~<" 1~I.i . > , r ........'l..D!.......c.....1.f!.1 ~, : , , ----------~----------------------------- -------~ . , -----~--------------------------------, , , , , , , , , , , D~ : , , , , , , --------------------------------------1 ~~ , , , , , --------------------------------.-----~ ~~ --------------------------------.------ :1" ! ~~~~ r --------------------------------.------ .... Q,-- ~ < I.I~ . ~t....!, ..... 11 o:+--: I- ~h Q z Q---- - ~i ~ 'Z ~O . ,-- . "~ooi ,(;11 ~e; .>-j := >! ~ ~ Ii J~ I - j ~ ~ - - ~ I . ~ ~ ~ . . j .- . j j ~ ~ ~.. g n ;~ i !i~il : i~ i ~ii~ . f' I-' 91 H. ~ ~rn . i--------------------------------------' , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , f--------------------------------------~ , : , i ~~ , m D~ ~~ I : r-- : : I L______________________________________J______________----------------------i-IJll- D~ ~i ~~ I L__ Di ., , '. ". ..~ 8 )mrD~ , / -'. ..'.....,'-. O~ ~ lSd_O. ASPEN PITKIN COUNTY AIRPORT ARFF/SRE FACILITY p ~ ~ [>[>[>[>[>[>= rl I < o i ~ ~ . . ~ I ~ ~ :!= ~ ~ i ii g e . ~ - ;; , a ~ . I g ~ i ~ " ~ ~ A.LI'U)V.>I IDIS/.>I.flIV Q 0 i . II " L ~<l<l<l<l<l<l ~ ~ .LlIOdllIV A.LNfl03 NDI.Lld N:IdSV 0 == ... $H en" ~~j . ." 0" z~ ~. . IL u.., .tri l.fIl1.:u- ",oil" "'~~ "''''''' N .. . z . . tfl Q.n z ;::z Q 1Q - ,_ l- iiI- <: I-o(:ili IIlIi-w zw:Io.. IIlClQ ClQ<:.J -<J..Jw 'lUlU> 1.Il>>w ZWW..j Q.J.J1i I-liliw <:ww{ IiIlIlQ w lL n.. I a..::)=--' Qol.<:i0 -' III Z Q ;:: <: Ii ~ .~ QU,.n '1Il0 W"N ~"O Ill. Ii .. Q"- 1-' , III .J <: > Q 1: w Ii { o Z IIlIL 'ILW ILIiIi ~<:1Il <<<i.ri ..; IL \Ii o o o N , ~ III < I-W zr- ".. Ill'; ;!:.. oil.. 80 :l:!!! m 1!ld ~~ i~ld~! . ~llt ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ! r ~ ~ ;, i i 9 . ~ , .' m m m ~~ ," .- oX ~~ , ~ ~ N . ..N ~< ~ I Exhibit H I Aspen.4Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan r a , 'I 1]8 J:UJ > ~o 16 . "iii~ Cl ^ -0 IQ) E l u...J 1::).- 0 .; >0-0 0 (,) ~ l' 1]0 "- all 1 ,~ ... - D.. ... .11 llIz ~ I" (I)~ .8 \. 0; ,!.~ : ; fil --rn ~c( Q) "" i I' c 0 UJ ::J ~ -Ii Q I ! Q. eo 'C ' II ... .s:. ~ I ~ <( .. . .i' D.. c "H I ~ a; I 0 ;Hl >0- j ..' - III III . . 11., l: ~ >j- ~ lid ~ III 0 () illl l: ..sd:t I" ~ I)~! rHI := ~st~"5" i:h ll. ~ "t~' 1'\1 I ,~! ~ ~ ,It! l: \'!o"'';1lI~2 Z i/-' Oi5:S~ 9= 0 hI! ell Q. 1:~J III <( II Itlll ~I , IIIII -, !!l!! II Illl -+- III 1111 ~ ~~ II~" ~&! IIII ~~. ----I ~<C! ~ =z. < ". : Q.J~ h ~~ ~o <Cu 'j ;0.,.. ~ J , ,. "" , <:".. ",-,,"', ~\~'.. ".. ~~ >.,..~ " .~ . ,,".. '\ '\., >, ~ .,;;'" .,., I ~ ~. ~ ~ ;@ ~ u: (Y) v Ll) \0 ,... co 000000 000000 NNNNNN ~ I I I I I I LL. ~ B~DDDD 9 o u ;:'1' j.~' ~I .A r)\, r {(~l r ~. .\'t"~; , J:f/) , -c8 tilt) 5 iii~ c IQ) E -0 ~.- c u.~ c. ~ I >0 0 01 ': -CO a.. . " D.. . !. ... - 1 l'j C'llZ -- CI)~ - .. III - ~ --l/l - .. 1::<1: - 5 a ! 'i 0 - c. - . Co Q) ~ ""'~I~ m~' :II ... , .- f/) , I /~ <( . ca , %"4 . i' > a "j;; ~ .r: ~"g~!~ illl - ~ ';9'~ I c:: D.. I ~ ll'i :J Iii! 0 ~I u . ill! c:: IL .I~j :i: IIII - 'I .- wi a.. ..It . i~~ 1'1 c:: ~i, CII · .~8.f., hll Co ~~~~ . I:J II) i.giJ::I! <( :i~3~~g ,'; ~ ..' ~ ~ J;' ~".\.., ~' ,I ,. tie 1 ':41 .~!, (f,1,. ~.d,.. ~ ~ < d~ ' . . u ..j:' ;~in . '. : ~: _"'1::: - o. -- a . ~ s....' ~---I ~<Cl =z CLJ= Q.~ (1)0 <Cu illllll Illl glS" IIII ~ ~~ , ., t'" I' i t , . ..,j. .).<- ' $ . .~. ~ ~}, \ .> "P - - - - - w w ~ ~ it a.. ~ I I ~~O uW '"$\ " ~ Co ., , ..,4: t,. . "..... It~", _ ...; ~ \'.l-...."'"'1:. ., ,'" ~ fA. r)\.. 1 v....j r '-'.,. '''f./ " ,. -~-:',_~&'pdj;.""u;A:'c1Ii:':(;;it{..;;A::>_;'K Exhibit 1 I Aspen.4Pitldn County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan tt Iii Iii ol.~ ~I ~ tit 51151 ~!~ ~I':" wl.~ !5~ d~ :i~ '~i w~ 5 m!5 ~I ~~ r------- w~ ~i 1=:9 .:t~ t.1 si151 !81~ ~IQ. L ~ ;1 "~ a' ~~ 0 L C ~ t ~ c 0 v ~ ~ ~ , 0 c 0 ~ , ~ ~~ { , ~ c 0 c , L v. c $ E c . " .'" .... - ,.s < e . " '" ~ E 0 ~ v c oil c ",n . E .80 _v .!! '" < 2' , " " ~ 1! ~ . E 6 . ~ '" . .< .... ~,'i ~ !i r: !I n w~ ~ ~~ ~~ h tt Iii 1J!'I~ w.~ 1'1 ~ ~ D fiifii zz ~~ ii _N w~ n z '" ... 0. a: .-t~ ..... 0 '" :.S' e-:i: ....re:c( ~ ! ~ ii -= ~ ~ . ! ;10 CLJ ~ -0 I ~ n~ 0. ~ ~.<. V>o -,..'0 <r:U ~t ~L . , tt lUQ. "Sf ~iiI w~ ~ t G tt 51 !l~ I w. ~ h ii B or; ~ '" .;; >- ~ or; '" o U tt .51 R~ ~- OJ '" 'Ej >- (l) E- M OJ) ~ '" w ._ S .~ " X u:~ ... W~ lit: I~ .~ Exhibit J I Aspen.4Pitldn County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan E ::-'" ._ 0 ~ -0 g.. u. - '" e w _ a: " a. <Il.<l - E <Il u. " .. 1:1 u. u "" a: " - Q) <0 .. Q) E Z " a: Q) U E <II C. ~ CJ) '" 2 "- <II ~ c .S .!!!. .. !!! l!! < a. !-'--; ~ I~ [ ~ - .. :i~ 0 " = o . ;; .., " - u .. ...., c.C <IlJ!! <Il B dlB B IE .2 IE IE IE o mO 0.0 "-.."" " ru-i!:1li1ii'iO of: o.~.f:'f: a.~a..a.a.. 00000 COa)lt)NN .... --.... u. u. a: < .. CIl """" 00 !,'!!..f! 8,8, .. .. Eo C5 g1ii1i) c::gs~ XUlUlet:: ~~ffi< Clla.Q...c rr:ww~ :;"0::: 0::: :> Q.U) (f.) U o.c..c ~ u....._t'll c~~t5 I.L.I.L.LL u..u.1.L 0::: 0::: a:: <<(<e ..c..c.s::. :!::!::c ;:;: ;: ..,..,.., e ~ e .. <0 <0 .c.c.c <Il<ll<ll 00 "'"' -- -<iCll ~::)o ~e~ ~ (!) 13 <Dc~ - ",< (ll'~ ..c 't:Q,l:!: <0 Cl E U,,<Il <> 0 C C '" " ca: J!! c ~ = .ji .., ~ <0 .c en o o .. 0", ON N .. '" E 0; U'E E <Dc. J!! " ;:;~ -.. -.. -.. -.. .. 8 c me c " "w E .5 0 .. " 0 on .~ c .~ E .~ < .~ ., '(ij~ ;: E '" 0; c " UTI c t: t: t: t: t: ~ ~ ~ c 0 '" ~ >- .E " 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. " (9 .c " .. o:::e-e-e-e- 0 .. .. .. .. .., ",- .. < E ~g.5 B<<<<< B B " B " 'u c <> = OlC:~C..c::..c..c:.c..c '" IE ,2= :E S .ji -.. (lJ Q) Q) Ql:t':::::!;!::::.'t::: U. 0 ni 0 0 0 E m"'u(i):t~~~~ '" G>(;jQ)(llQ) .., "'C &.51:'0'0'0-0"0 'iii~'iijmi;i l!! CIl .5t'l1I.L.oee1l1.ee .5 0 .~ o~ .~ .~ <0= .cOQ)Ot'llt'll<<l<<lCO .~ o..$:a.Q...a. t5.~ ~U5ifEtjt5t5t5t5 w 0 0 0 00 $ '" "'N 0 0 0 N 00.0 00 '" CON NO N"<t - lOOO_ 0 0 "' 00 - - - - ....N - NJ'\l - - ...-._. I :> ~ .,.: .., o~ < 1: o t> ;;;: ::- c " 0 0.., U ~ " 0 ;go i:i:U "2 r:: " " c.c. :U !~ ~.....'. . .. l!! < n; c .2 U " " u. " .2 a .~ u ill o .. l!! < ...................- ~ ::6::5 ~.~ ,... ................ _.....,.............. :s CIl <0 .~ e 1t < 'E ::I c: OJ Q) CD .!! (Q f.f) 0.5 ~gQ) ~ ~.~ ~ E oo~ E E Ul~~~ ~Eg U5U513 0 g <~~.2 ~go::: un~Ee~O:::E Q)c:Q)~UlnO:::M ...~~o(;j~t'lIO ~~O~!~B~Q)8~~g~&u~& "'~-Q) <Q)cQ)~~O:::O:::OQ)Ul~ _ Q)~C:uU 3Q)=-oQ)Q)O::O:::~-E~ 0lc:~~~c~"'~U->>m~8~ ~'~~~Eoi~~~WE~~~E~m9 ~~m~oE~ooo,~~~~.~g~~~ ::E<{<{...JUE50UU:U..<(<{...J~;>(,)l-w o U cOO oW '=::0 ~g .~ 'is .- " E.:- "'en <]) t: " Ow c.~ ~-fi " ~::E -sg :EU " en t: o ~ ;;;: ,. C' " 0 0.., U", .~ 0 =0 Q;'-: c c " " c.c. "' CIl << 1l 0= o 5 w .1: Cl) 8.. Cl) E C):J 0 If) 0 .wE'~'~ E 0 E CfJOIll 0 == 0 n:::~ E .0 mmg8_ ~ 0 ~o 0 .~ eo II) .-0:: C co n::: ~.::.:: (;i 0 ._ <:( n::: ~mroCl) ~ ~ou> En::: E-Ecaxca Cl)~EE ~ (1)_Oca oEo~uem~ i~ 8..l! ~~ .~<E 2:'~ ~ -; -; ~3 0.& .2'~ <(:~ 0 ;"5 o.~ g...,g ~-g 0..3 ~~c ~cc: C)~2&.m u .,~ 5l::::: E J:: 0 ~ ..s=.. Of/J 0 a: ~l/) l/J-Cl) CD. Q).E . as. >-,.0) 0 'D 'i3~ 8 ~_E 'i!?~ Cll'5 m>, E'i:: .c:a an.~."6 -g~:g3 iV~~ u:J.-~.~~oClaso~~~>~~~_;_cacaxOCl) IE -~ <( > lJ..> I.. - . 0 ..:: oC > > ~ 1-.:: VJ(fJ """') -...J W 0 I- o ~ 'il . LL E i:'''' ,_ 0 C'll -0 ~ ~ N LL ..; 0 W - ~ '" ~ 0.. !!! .Q LL E !/l LL ~ .. "t:l '" 0 .>< ~ - Q) < Cl . Q) E Z ~ '" Q) u E C'll Cl. E (J) Ig - 0. C'll -;; .s ,~ .!!. .. 2! i!! < 0.. r-r. .:;:: I~ u . ~ ~ c w 0 . r- ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ - o . .~ a.c !/lj! U) w of . E ~ '" I ~ d c :; &h-c. .!!. . i!! < --;; ~ & 'E w ~-; o s w :> U ....: ~c3~ .. i!! 1: < 0 .. Eo c <( .S! i:' " c c ~ 0 ~ c o~ LL 0 u E ! .5: 0 ;So 0 c:u .. ~ 1: t: Cl ~ ~ .. a. a. i!! .. w << < i~ !~ i 0> c '2 ~ a E E EW ~ ~ (i E o 0 oJ:r 0 0 >,-0 ~ ~~&~ ~ ~ ~&. 4) 0 Cl) CDLL tJl. LL CD :2 ~ Q.l .:2 :2!b .::.::.::.::-!b :g J::: L.. Ch.c: .r:;....... c: c: LL...... ~ 8. ~~~< 'in"w ~~ u.O~.9u.u..}~ N S:u.. u.. UJ - Ulu. u.. CIl'- (lj Ill. Q) u.. a::a::t'5~-_a::a::.Eg. e e .ED:: -m ~S'€:t ~::~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m Cl)U)o$:V)CI)Qz ('I') N ()U) 010 0000(0000 oeo to "IltOmcolO N..... ..... NM NN'<t E o o '" " u :c ~ LL LL '" < CD " W o o o N ., 0", - - ~N~ '" OON -... - ~ 00 NM E _ E o ~ 0 o c 0 n:::ga:: E l!! E . ~ . <C~<C :c ~:c 5 ~o~ e ;;:~;;: 51 c _ c 0 ;; .ji ;; e- Q)"C Q) :;::J -g.~.-g 1 o~o 3 .:OO.:::! :): , ~ 0 ~. 0 Pl. 0 " E o o '" ,. . Cl g .s "" c " "" ,,~ ~o >::E N'" "'''' E o o '" ,. . Cl .E ~ " " ~ U E ~ o 1ii > . ...J .E ~ " ~ ~ U E ~ o 1ii > . ...J .E ~ " ~ ~ U E ., '" N o - - :: N_ '" ... M mO~Nv~~~~~ro~ON~~~~ .~~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNN MM~MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM 00000 ~rooU)o M......<o- E o E 00 "'0 E blOC O.c_ 0.- ('ll a::.S u e '[: ~t:::('ll .~ >-.c ".0 ~D.~ .S}:.S iii 't:l't:l"C :;::J.:;::J :;::J 000 EEE 000 N'" '" o "" '" M '" . is UiaUl w"u ~e~ ::; (!) 13 lDc- - "'<( Q) 'ii) .c -ell): . Cl E 0"", 00 " c . " c'" ~ " ~ '" '" w w ::;; Ul.() c._ 0_ :;::: u . ~ iii-= ~~ 0" LL- LLW m::;::i:: .q;:u ,Q) 1ii~ 15..: .150 ~ '" t o e- <( ,. E ~ 0 o~ u. .!: 0 ~o g;c..: c c ~ ~ a.Q. w w <(< E ;:'''' ._ 0 ~ u 0 Ui'cn 8!. '" ~ g.~ ... e w ~ E ",e", '" " ::;t!>"fi ll. ~ '" '" 1Il~- E .2 ~ '" <( III .... " .. ~; Ql "Cij ..c "0 '" u '" .. 't:Q>~ " ~ l!! c "'0 E Q) <( 0 m ~ 0,,(1) Q) E .Q Z " I!! )ij !" u 0 '" c " ~ c " '" 0. m " Q) '" '" ,,0 ~o ~'" c. u .!l 0 .Q "", g.... 11l E ~ .!::: N .~ !" ~ .. ...... ~ c. '" ." 0-" l"o: (/) e " c ~-g 0.<( " E" 0- " 0. 'Ou 0" 11l ~ Z 0 ZC OCIJ .5 00 '" 0 ggg 0 00 '" '" 0 .S .!!!. qq ~ '" "'''' '" m ~~ ~ l" <( ll. -r; ~~ '" <l:: ~ 3- 11l - .. ~ lit- O ~ ~ o Jl 00 " "'''' " ~ u m )( )( m" ~ o.C IIlJ!l Cia III NN I ~ o 0. ~ < ;:. c ~ 0 0" u !" c 0 ~o D:O '2 c- " " 0.0. .. .. <(<( '" l" <( )ij c ~ u c ~ .... .. '" ~ m E " '" ~ 'y m .... g :; ')(r-- W <=' .!!!. m l" <( r-; I~ ~ - " :i- ~ ~ o Jl :> u a; ~<3[k: c .2 15. 'C u .. " o ~ <( >- '" .c o '" )( o '" 00 o '" In 0 en cn c: c: c:c: o g ~Q .2 ~ e? 10 ai Ql Ql :v Q) a.o. a.a. 00 00e. l.J...1.L LLu...,g l.J...LL. LL.l..L.cn a:::o:: a:::n:::~ ~~ -;~~. ~(8 c1J(8E '0' 00 o '" '" !" a .... ..; '" '" 0 ... "'0 ("') "'It.M r;.;;..r--. C"i.("') ,..... '::~t::i:?i3..~.~ ('<") cfi.Mcc;;M.M M 1:: o e- ;;' ;:. c ~ 0 0" 0", .= 0 ;0 Q;~ c C " " 0.0. "' " <(<( ~ E Ui en &. gg~ mQl ~ ~~8 <(Ol'~ E In:;([lU Q)e:! 0 1U(tl_~ 020 E8 !>~;:. l! U5 m 0 Q:: 'II( (ij Q) (/) 0.... oi:oQ)(lJt:u>o te m Ie a:: .2 ~ &. i5 LL ..9:l Q) " a. ~& ~c= <( Q. J!! ~. ~ ~ Ng "S ~ "Ell) "c .~ m ~ UJ c( 1fi LLu..:! <;> ~~~~<('~"'~~::2: E LL u.. Ql E 0 U'- um wI: = (tl 13 ,g. lr O::t:: ::::l:> ~ .2 ~ 0 x :s .= 'O.!::: ::::l<<(-I->..::::(I)~CJ)w=<:5.0 D'" CIS ::::l :'::'. W:E m (f.l .. e <( ;;; C .g U C ~ ... E ;:OM .- .. ctl -.. ~ ~'" ... .; 0 w - ~ II: ~ 0.. ~ .c E III ... ~ ~ 1:l II: " ... ~ - Q) <( C .. Q) E Z ~ II: Q) u E ctl E (f) g Q: ctl 0; .5 .~ .!!. .. ~ e <( 0.. r-r,; 4= I~ u . ~ ctl '" ~ C 0 "r ~ ~ a . ~ ." ~ - " .. ..'" o.C IIlg III I , t o Eo :;;: ;:0 c ~ 0 0." U E c 0 ;go o::u c c ~ ~ 0.0. ~~ ~ i!: .. E ~ II: ~ 'u .. ... .~ 1ii ~IC .!!. .. e <( r--;; I~ ~ C ~ ~-; a s '" c c c ra cum Q. a. ,a. .... ....,..... C'll <<I'm ~~,,'~ 1()1()'l() ;i ~- ;i ib (D'G) z: Z,Z ggggggg C:OO.O~C:O co Q),Q) 0> 0> C C 'c '2 ~i!'j! ~- ~ :r--",", 0 0 LUW1i~ 'ot:((\,,;, .... (/,):rn-8; 8- ~'<<IOO LLu..I.L.l1. u:.:u...LL u.. 0::0::0:::0::: <C:(.<(< }l..'~E G)'CD;: :: ;5.5'0"0 ;c.Q",2!'Q) E E"aI, m OO';C,~ U Urn U) OOGO I() .00 ..... Cf).N " cnra E e 2< 0~ ~ " "~',ai ,,00 2!=~ 'O'i 's c: '0 0- : ee "..- m ~,o aCl),Z 00 0 00 0 on", '" " 0> E o ti5 '" -1:.- .. (L " j ." e .. " '" 8g8 q~,~ ~ ~ ........- 0 0000 00 00 .... 'V 'V V "It ........ on on >< >< >< >< >< >< >< 00 >< >< onN ~ ~ 0 on on 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N o o '" ".................................. '" ~ >->->->- co ro..tO m .0.0.0.0 0000 C\lNNN )( )( )( x 0000 '<t'<t'<t'<t 0000000 0000 co<ococ:o E >-11) en en U1 g~6a5a O::~':';::;:';::;,:';::;':';::; eu.f!!f!!I!!e ell i&& 8. 8.. <( 'ruO 0 0 0 ~::ELLu...LLu... ~z-~::t:~~ $:'3<(<<(< O~.l:,.r:::...c .5t>jjjj ." c CD .- '0 "0'0 '0 "g E! e,! 2! oo..rammm c:_.s::.s::..r:::..s:: <( (J) UHf) (/) o N ~~ 1i'G .. .. ...... c c "m'm :;;::;; ","2> c c ~ ~ 00 UU c c :.i::i: :t:::::;:: a..Q... << 00 00 ....N ~~~~~~.- 1i1i1i1i1i1i1j (1J al m,nS" m (0' m u... LL u... JL u..LL. u... :S.5:S:E c1:c m ra cu-"ra '(ij'~'m ::;;:;;::;;:;;:;;:;;::;; 2>2>2>2>2>2> c c: c:c c:c: c: ::J::I ::I,.:::I:J::J:::J 0000000 UOUUUUO c: c c:,C: c: c c: ~ j ~,j~:~-~ a... CL a...:o:.: a...'r;L' a... <<<<<<< 00000000 00000011) NOO......vv..... ...:...: :> U ...: ~c3~ .. .0 .c " " ~ N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .c .c .0 .c .,; 0 0 .,; .,; :: ~ .; ~ N N N ~ N N ~ N N N ~ N N N ~ N ~ ~ ~ M ~ M ~ ~ ~ M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M c .g 15. .<: " ~ " o .. e <( c " -- E ~ ~ c._ .2 .Sea a.. 0- w ..................... '" ~ is is E o ~ E&:g '~ g ~ ~ Q) 0::: 0 c( ClI & U) g. ~1U 1:: ~ Q) ~ ! ~ j ~ ~ ~..~ i GI ~~ G1.2 80, ~ ~ UJ ex: $:: e.8.5 ....~'i!e-c:B.... 0 GI Q) C\1Q TI"(f)owCllQ)o~c~~o~~Q)Q)C\1 ... .- tIS : 0.'- 0'0 ...J c: f! <0) Q) ....o-Q)Q)~ooe~o"'..o c_ .....N ~~;~~~ 'E~~~~c:~mro< N E:E Q) ....UJ!?2 c:.g, a1J::: >. Q).sC/'J.5;~~ ~ ~8-D~~E~~oQ)~EC0~Pu 'e;" gg a1'- ,!! C :J 0 f!: ~,c:~~g 0 'ii-:t''iii'e c: ~~~S~~'~~~~~3~'~~~~~F~ .. ~ :;; III (f) .. w e ::;; E<u)~ g~ :gt) 0:::0-=2 .... ClI .f!- 0> ',Q)(f.l E =>0. (} Q)oQ)eq.!! mOCi~wW i;'>-l!D::E:Jo::::C: m ~ 0 mo' l!:? Y> ~ ....- c: 0 a. . .~ ~;~ ~g~ ,S'~ ~'~'~~3I~:l5 " (f) 000 0011) ~N..... o .... ~ ,.: -.,.", :J ~u &e~ :J (!) 13 OOc- - '" <( Q)o(i) ~ t::Q)~ .. C E U~(f) " 0 c c .. " ~c:: .S :'1 '" M '" .. o " o e- ;;: 2> c ~ 0 0." U.. .50 ';;0 .- U Q, . c c " ~ a. a. '" '" <(<( o ~ CL en "0 ([) ([) Z ([) o III C. (/) III c .~ ([) ~ CL <::: III ~ o iZi I~ I E III ~ ~a ~2 u.... W l; ffi.c u: E u.. " '" " <.!: 1: o Eo :.;: ~ e = 0 0'0 o E e 0 ~o itO c: ~ In. o 0 << E ~ 2 0. o -" ~ .. E " '" - r;:- .!!. .. " :. -- ~ I - 0 ~- = ~ o . ;; '0 " ~ " .. ..'0 o.e enS en " o ~ .. E " '" 'u .. u.. g '" o 'x_ W r;:- .!!. .. e < ~ ~ I ~~ = l; o _ o ~.g 'Gi <0'" .. e < .. e o '" " e = u.. " o '" 0. .C " o " o .. e < >- w ~<<( eLL 0.0 ..~ bl'O ",0> )(8 In O. 'lit..... 0000 10001.0 ON..;r,.... ."f,....- ~,~= '0'0 '0 .. '" '" u..u..u.. clttl: "cuo::n:: ~<(<( ~oo C c: Q) III 5.5:2:9 mO IIJ IIJ ~.5 55 '<t~oo >< ~ :; ~ !1;<oo 0000 cocoo CONN..... N~ coC"?rel"-: MC'iMM iiJ (; w n; ::; ~ 8 m ~ ~o ~ Q) ::l <( Q) .~c7i 0> 3c:-u III c.= ~ .J!!J\? maw :a~ ! a.:J t: ~ <(<eLL li5:<(~ ~c~ ...2::r! _.!!~:E :8 C1l ,!!J-~ _ Q).I'O E ,0._ "0 (J) >0.. W:5U e ,= .q:C/J Ui'Ct~ ~ ~ g e>e", ::l (!) 13 lDe- - ",< Ill"- .J: 1::~:=: "'0 E O"W " 0 e " '" " jja:: .S ~ 00 0"' ."" on '" o o ~ '" M '" ,. is E o o '" " o e- <i' ::- " = 0 0'0 0,. " (; x'O ~ u. " " " " 0. 0. 00 << Exhibit K I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan o o o " .'- 11'('.) . - " '02' :"~ '~~ - -- "' 0 ~~ ~<i ~~ " , o 0"- ." a~ _ 0 0= ~~ "' - ,,, o ."g ",.". .})r-. - (,J "0 " '" ~. ~-; '-- " ~ 0 :'~~ G '<f ~ ,.....;1 0'0 -- - ,) V ~~~ o -' (\j r---- o ...J "i " " . o , ..~ 0 ~\l. " N " , ~.2 ~a 00 '~i~ o -' -..--.--.--.--"! . ...-r.,.'" I .......-TT""'r \ I , ............... \. \ \ \ . -....,. \ ~ \1 I I \ \. \ \ I , , l I I . I \ I . ., I 'I '", , . .J. \ ;~\ . 1,1 '- \ . , I " ~\ \ I " ,~ -.::J I I, , " \ 1 \ '\ , \ ~ 1 " \ 1 I\. , ' , ' , ' , ' , ' , ' , I I I , ' , I , I , I I I I ' \ . " /, , , --.,i , ~ , <. u. ~oaj -.... go "'"....'" a~~ .-" ~~:.: ;::...;:> ~~ ~, wW4 .- 0<0 _J~ ,u< lo- ~,~ .__1__' - --.-....- ........- " --..., ~ .~. u ~ ~ :> j ~ . ~ ~ z 0 u p u " :; ~ > ~ ~ , ,..-; r---- o --1 " \ \ , , , , , , '" - , B\\ , ,I ~ ,I g \ , I, . ~ ( , . . . . . . . . . \ .~v.., . " \.."""---', \ -~. ,.'r! " ---': _t...., \ ", \"'~"\ \ ., . \. \-:. .J ..........-...t.'\ \ \.,.,..y-, 6\____ , \ " E~ ~ "'~\~J 5;:l~;5 \ l~'\'& \ u,~o . . 0- f5....~\~ zO();:\.J w...J:;lf :.:",0-'$ Z>D04 ;!Vi'5'Y ..Jd~~\ 'SXW'5!1 ....wa: \ , , .\ " , '. ' , , " 'I " \ \ I' I' " , , ' , I, , , , , I , I . , . I , .' , \ ~ \ .' ., \ . " . " I' " , , . . . . . I I , N , , I I , , I , , , , , I , , , I I " ;. , , , - , " . p , . I'd " '2 , , , I I I ~ I , I - I I .J 'I 1 " \ \ .1\ 1" ":~1 i\ " 1 ,\ ,\ \ I \ , 1 I I , 1 . ~ I I '~ , I'" ,- , I , ., I I I , ~1 "I QI til ~. ~, -I i~ ~I I , I , I I I I 1 I 1 , 1 I I , I I , I I , , I , I I , 9 . io' o~ : , I . , , , I 1 I , I , I I I I I I I I I 1 , I , , I , ---. , , , I , I I , , , I I , , , , , I , , ! I I I I . I I , I I I , I I , I , , , I , , . , , , , , - " : , I, I' . , , , , ~ I. " I , . I I I I I " , I ; I , I II I: , I I I I I I , I I I I I ______..l I , I , , , I , , , , , , -'- , ---..._i._::":;_,, : 'I"~~, I I "" '- , , " , , , , , , , , , I , , , , Ni I ., , ~ : , ' ., , , , ~1l I , , " , ~ I i\ I c. I ~ : , I I I I I , , I , I , , , , , . I I I I I , , , , , , , , , , , , , :d , , , I , I , I , I I I I , , , I , , , , \\ , , , \':< \, , " , ., I, , , , " , " -. , , , , , , , , , , , , , f.i " " " \ ; , I \ < , ,~, -.~" 5,., \ jQ;:::3\ I iIS~~ \\ " <I: '0.:0 ," , ," d"~" \~-\.i;: ',,",~ ,~- Bz'd,';i.... :I:-~'--p WD.:IJJ :\i5=.'5~ [5.,3~"'w "'W)C,--," .~ ~~....o~ , , " \ ~ , I I , I , I ~ ~ . < , , , , , , , , , , , , , U. : , , ,,,/ I , , , , , , I , , I , , , , , I , , , I , , I , I , , , I , I , , , , , , , I , I , I , , J I I I I I I I , , , , , , , , , , lu l';i 'i< ,. ,~ I" " I. , I I I , , , , , , , , , , , , , " , , " , , , , , , , , , , , , , , I , , , I , \ I , I I , , , f- , , \ , , \ \ \\ . \ . \ \ I , 11\ \ , 0\1 I I I , ~~'i ;;oS ~~~ , I , , , H i~ ......~ ::.~. z o - I- <I Q:: W CL o (S c o WI-f- V) 7 Z <IWW !Xl::;:::;: WW "7" W ":-U-J~ W Q:: ., CL LJ '___ (/)<I<I <I I- '. W 7 >- (/) - I-:)W Z ::;: :)pO- OZO U<t...J W ZW> -(/)w :>C<IP I-WW Q:...JrY . <I . 1-(") -a' !Xl" -- I, Xc- W- ~ i! , s..., tl ,:;; ~ ~ ~~ . ~~ '- ~ ~ o~ 0 ! i5 o ((' ,-' "---,, " .~ , , , , , I , I I I , , I , , I , , , \ , , , .. I , " , , , , \ I , , , \ , I , I \ , I ,\ " , \ ; ~~ ~>, o , " , \ \.. ~ u ~ <fi '" 'd ~, z ~ .., B ii ~ z z S W '"' e: :2 '" >- ~ III lQ '" ~dH VI '$ j!: 0 -< ~ t', ~ ~ z' ~ ~B;~~~~ i\ "" J ~ z ~ u \l 0: ~ 2 , , I , , , , , , . \ ~ \ r." ~ - \ ~ ~ S \~IX lD~~ \ b 0 ~ ~ \ ~ lL (l. :t' en ex: w Z I- '" "" (l. - u ~ " ~ ~ g . . 0; ~ ~ ~, 5 ~ S ~ w 0 ;; ~ Exhibit l I Aspen.4Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan I , I I I I I I I I I I ! I ! f f . ~ J I I 3 I i f . fil I .;.j ii. I II ... l![ I ~! o. '!f ~l ~~ . . OD. ~ I I ~ ~ ~ .. I? . CD 1I II) 1 Do ... N :9 :9 :9 I [J I u: ui o o ... <If :il u.: ui II> iii N :ll . J (II 1 Do CI C ~ co Do 1! 2 :ii I 2 IL ]i ~ ... o -' r, I I I I 1.....1 ':;! J, .I - i i I, " !~ ~-1 ,~ I 1 , " .~ " u.: ui ~ N ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ II: ~III ~... = 0; . .... 0.; ,.::.t:. L- --~ ..... . .... <c ~ 1:-~' CLJ= Q.. ;:) V') 0 <cw u: ui o ... II> cD ~ CI C ~ .. II. ~ 2 :ii '2 8- 2 II. ]i ~ N r::: cd s: 15.. Q) c.> r::: o u C\I ..... .s - .... ..... .s ..... ~ , j Exhibit M I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan I . . I I l I I I I \ I I , \ I I I I I I I I I I I \ I 1 I I 1 n ". d n _.~II . . t I I e~ ~l e_ ., ~i B~ il --=-' u.. ~ <") - <I J;-~ -- "0 QJ 6 s-- QJ - - QJ QJ~ .Q QJ o - - = -- = ,....;C' ,....; '" :l:t:r- ~r- =If'l .- ... :2;::" .- = = '" U '-- ~ '" 0: <( <.:) 2 <( I w <.:) <( 0: o I- (fl c' " ~ ~ l:l ~ z '" ::t. <( . ~ ~ . ~ . . o ~ ;:( I- ~ ~ :::> "- -' D- L... ~ <.) >- ill 0 1 ! ~ ------ ~ . ~ . ~ f . ~ . . . . t . ~ ~ .0: 1-<( ~<.:) <(2 [] :;;:<( I . z :5 110 -+-' 15 __ ~ t; ~ 04 ..~ e-- ~~ ~~' O-~ ~8 . I . I I I , I . I I , -' I <( 2 :;;: 0: I W ---- I- - 2 - 0 1 -<.:) ~ <( -2 5 -~ _ 0: <( -<( I _D- - -' <( ---- 0: I --- w --- 2 I --- w ---- <.:) I ---- ....-;; ';..j;' = o .- - .- "0 "0 -< () - = = .- S - QJ ~ o = -< ::: o ..0 ;a ~ ca ::: "@ ~ o ~ .. I Exhibit N I Aspen~Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan '" Revised 07/25/01 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ADOPTING AIRPORT NOISE OVERLAY ZONES, PROVIDING FOR LAND USES WITHIN SUCH ZONES; IMPOSING REQUIREMENTS ON RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN SUCH ZONES; AND PROVIDING DEFINITIONS Ordinance No. 2001 _ Recitals I. Pitkin County, Colorado (the ACounty@) is a home rule county organized under the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Colorado. 2. The County is owner and operator of the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport, also known as Sardy Field (the AAirport@) which is located in Pitkin County near Aspen, Colorado. 3. Pursuant to Sections 30-28-101, et seq. C.R.S. 1973 as amended, and the Pitkin County Home Rule Charter, the County has authority to enact ordinances adopting zoning plans and establishing zoning districts, including overlay districts. 4, County=s current land use regulations within what is now the Airport=s 65 DNL Contour prohibit (a) all uses other than public airport and transportation uses, short term accommodations, office buildings, retail facilities, movie theaters, restaurants, and certain open space uses, including agriculture and recreation uses not causing high concentrations of people; (b) discourages uses such as schools, churches, hospitals, libraries and auditoriums within what is now the Airport=s 60 DNL Contour; and (c) requires new residences within the Airport=s current 55 DNL Contour to incorporate sound mitigation measures in their design to minimize impacts on Airport noise and permit noise reduction to acceptable levels. 5. Aspen is a resort community, and the Airport is located in a natural mountain setting with low ambient noise levels; the Aspen area is characterized by rural, low-density development, specifically in areas of open, undeveloped property, which experience noise levels typical of a mountainous environment; visitors and residents alike expect an environment with noise levels significantly below that found in urban or suburban areas. 6. The reactions of humans to aircraft noise depends upon how much the aircraft noise level protrudes above the Abackground@ noise level. 7, Studies have shown that areas within the 55 Ldn Contour are inconsistent with outdoor residential areas where people spend widely varying amounts of time, and other places in which quiet is a basis for use, and that the Ldn 55 Contour outdoor residential areas is identified as the maximum level of sound which no effect on public health and welfare occur due to interference with speech, sleep or other activity. I 8. It has been established that aviation noise can cause sleep interference; that the level of noise which can interfere with falling or waking from sleep ranges from 35 to 70 dB; and the single event energy dose of a noise event (EPNL or SEL), at not the maximum level (ENL or AL) is a better predictor of sleep interference.2 9. Studies have fOllDd that the recommended interior noise level for sleeping environments is between 34 and 47 dNA.3 10, Aircraft noise in areas surrounding airports may constitute a threat to public health in several respects: affection of well being, mental disorders, somatic symptoms and diseases.4 I I, Noise contours associated with the Airport have changed slightly, and the noise exposure maps to be recorded with this Ordinance more accurately reflect the noise contours as they currently exist. 12. The measures to be imposed by this Ordinance are designed to reduce adverse noise impacts from Airport operations, and thereby to further and protect the health, safety and welfare of residents of and visitors the area surrounding the Airport, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO THAT THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE BE HEREBY ADOPTED: Section 1 - Repealer. Section 3-100.30, D of the Pitkin COllDty Land Use Code is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 2 - Adoption of Airport Noise Overlav Zones. The following is adopted as a new Section _ to the Pitkin County Zoning Ordinance: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Section _ is to promote land uses and the design of developments in such a way as to minimize the adverse effects of aircraft noise associated with the AspenlPitkin COllDty Airport. 2. Definitions. As used in this Section, the following definitions shall apply: (a) AContour@ shall mean the 65, 60 and 55 DNL Contours depicted on the attached Airport Noise Exposure Map which shall be recorded in the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado. (b) ADNL@ shall mean the 24-hour average sound level, in decibels, for the period from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 decibels to sound levels for the periods between midnight and 7:00 a.m. and between 10:00 p,m. and midnight local time, as defined in 14 C.F.R. Part 150. The scientific notation for DNL is LeIn. (c) AAvigation Easement@ shall mean an effective easement, suitable for recordation in the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado, granting to Pitkin County and aircraft operators generally the right of flight over the subject land, together with the right to cause noise, vibrations, smoke, fumes, dust, fuel particles and all other effects incident to normal aircraft operations. 3. Areas Within the DNL 65 Contour. In areas within the DNL 65 Contour, all land uses other than public airport and transportation facilities, short-term accommodations, office buildings, retail facilities, movie theaters, restaurants, agricultural uses, and recreation uses not causing high concentrations of people, are prohibited. The granting and recordation of an Aviation Easement shall be required prior to construction of any new or expanded use. 4. Areas between the 60 and 65 DNL Contours. In all areas between the 60 DNL contour and the 65 DNL Contour, the use of land for the construction of schools, churches, hospitals, libraries, auditoriums and outdoor amphitheaters and concert halls are not recommended uses. Such uses shall only be approved upon installation of mitigation measures sufficient to reduce the adverse impacts of aviation noise. 5. Land Areas Between the 55 DNL and 65 DNL Contours, In all land areas between the 55 DNL Contour and the 65 DNL Contour, the granting and recordation of a Aviation Easement shall be required prior to construction of any new or expanded residential use. Residential uses shall be designed and instructed to minimize impacts of aircraft noise, by utilizing techniques that will reduce interior noise levels by not less than 20 DbA. The following techniques are illustrations of means which may be used to achieve a 20 DbA noise reduction: (a) Minimum 2 inch plywood or chips and sheathing should be applied continuously to the exterior side of wood studding; (b) All operable windows should be the hinged typed sash or double hung sash; (c) Roof sheathing should be a minimum 2 inch thick continuous plywood or gypsum board; roof sheathing be covered with overlapping and airtight building paper; (d) Mechanical ventilation should be provided of a type and design to provide 3 , . adequate environmental comfort with all doors and windows closed during all seasons; window and through the wall ventilation are not to be used; and (e) Vent ducts connecting the interior space to the outdoor or attic space should contain at least a 5 foot internal duct lining plus one lined 90- degree elbow; duct lining should be I inch minimum coated glass fiber duct liner. Section 3 - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon enactment by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado. Endnotes I. Infonnation on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare With an Adequate Margin of Safety, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1974, at page 22, 2. Aviation Noise Efficts, Federal Aviation Administration, March 1985, at page 54. 3. Aviation Noise Effects, Federal Aviation Administration, March 1985, at page 57. 4. Aviation Noise Effects, Federal Aviation Administration, March 1985, at page 61. 4 Exhibit 0 I Aspen.4Pitkin County Airport 2003 Airport Master Plan I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I i r u . . I . , u . . . e , . , . t , ! . . f . ! E~ :, ';,. c. " ~1 c'l, :i j! 'i-:. 11 1!A Ei z c ... a- ll: -;.... ... s.....t; = 0:; .-, ~ ~~.= ~<C =-C Q.J= 0... =- V) 0 <Cu f J ! '" OJ o o <l: Q: o --J o U " , 'I" II' \,i.i\ I' \' '0 . II, it ~~ f' ~! o'~ ~ ~~... ~ ~~ ~ ' '" .... Mal ;J ~~".o",,~ Z '" '-Ill .:... ~~ . i';C'O~~h$; z 'l~O~ ~H.h" -- l':'i;i:: ...Q~~ ~~ o ~"":i:i:Z"" ~~~~:i~~ ~ = .....lk'-=o: ~o::..,.. m . ~ "'. .....,..."''''_ _ _ _ ~ 5 1.. : ~ -' o , \' \,'\,', ; \ '\, l \ \". "- \' '\ .. , . ..... , \\.' ~\" " \\ \ \\ ,~.~ \ , ,., , '\\ \\\~ \ ., , \ '\'\ ' \ ~ , .\ , \\\.\ -~- . \. ) \'.\i \. ., \.-> . ~',~ \-t- \.. \ '\0 O. , \.,~ \0 .... . 0 \ ' c) . ,',,~\O'- \... ~ \ .,,~ Y" . 0 '.'1..> \<1' \ <Y '"7 I..> . \'O'-'f<- -;- . \1..> P " \.J "D- '-t- , v ',., ,'0 \, ( \, '(i.. \..) \ \",? is . '''':0 (!) ),' , "\y' .---- \ \\,5:-' \ ': 'i" '. " ,-":~ ' /-k~ , "'-" \, Yo '.' " #' ,\ \.~ \ - :\ ,.-;: rF ~ ~ " " " ,," ",- ",- "" ,-'- ,-" \ '- " '- '-\ '-\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , \ , '0 I I I I I I t:i o '" 'C OJ 0. a o U ..>:: <) OJ .0 ~ ~ ~ ~ -a :B I I I I I I I -