Last Updated on Friday, 21 August 2009 16:29 Monday, 15 June 2009 15:20
Board Members in Attendance: Bob Throm, Michael Kinsley, Tim McFlynn, Patsy Bacheldor,
I. G.R. Fielding, County Engineer
G.R. was invited to the meeting to discuss the County’s capital improvement and maintenance program
as it pertains to our area.
Snowmass Creek Road
There have been complaints that the last, unpaved section, is not maintained properly.
The
Caucus’ recommendation in the past was to not use Mag Chloride, because
of the perception that it could be harmful to livestock and plants. The
Mag Chloride acts as a binder, and road grading and putting down new
base/gravel does not last long without a binder. There are alternatives
to Mag Chloride such as Ligno Sulfate…but it takes 24 hours to set
up…and the roads would need to be closed off and coated in sections….a
labor intensive (expensive) proposition.
Holly said she would be
ok with it being used only once or twice a year, as a binder, NOT a
de-icer, and would watch her horses carefully for any adverse affects.
She also preferred it not be used near her irrigation ditch. Holly also
suggested the County put a culvert on SM Creek Rd. by the Harvey’s
Ranch, which would help keep the Mag Chloride intact. The Board
enthusiastically supported Holly's recommendation and Mr. Fielding
seemed reassuring that these improvements could be undertaken.
Watson Divide Rd.
Watson
gets about 600-800 cars per day. With this traffic, it is on the
County’s list for improvements, but the capital budget was recently
reduced from $1.9M/year to $400K this year. Mag Chloride is already
used on Watson. Before any major improvements, the road would need to
be realigned. Other improvements could be installation of guard rails
and paving. Some Caucus members expressed opposition to any
improvements at all, feeling this should be left as a rural/gravel
road. Tim recommended we let the County know that we understand
further improvement to Watson is on their Capital Plan, and we would
like to participate in such discussions.
Upper Capitol Creek Rd.
G.R.
said this road is supposed to be at a lower level of maintenance. Steve
mentioned the road is now 5’ wider than what it used to be. Snowplows
have knocked over trees and fences. Steve felt it would almost be
better for the County to let residents plow it themselves. The same
issue exists on East Sopris. G.R. said the Road & Bridge crew has
had a lot of turnover and management is addressing this. He is trying
to have them pull back in on E Sopris Creek. There were drainage issues
on Capitol Creek. He has been trying to look at the roads in the summer
with their new operators. They also spend time in the summer cleaning
out the ditches. He has 9 operators; 3 started in Jan./Feb. Please be
patient. Let G.R. know if you see any maintenance issues.
Snowmass Creek Rd., T Intersection to Conoco
Some
residents have asked for improvements on this stretch of road to make
it safer for bikers. G.R. said this is further down the priority list.
There is no budget for widening this road. Ideally, we should also
straighten out the severe curve by the bridge. Tim asked about
installing speed dampening, traffic calming devices, which might make
it safer, but cost less.
Motion: Michael moved to ask the County
to study the installation of traffic calming devices on Snowmass Creek
Rd. from the T to the Conoco. Bob seconded the motion. All approved but
Kathy.
G.R. suggested the Caucus put in writing their latest
positions on these issues, especially the go-ahead to try the Mag.
Chloride, and that this would help him move forward. Holly will write
the letter and send it to G.R.
G.R. also commented he is studying
signage in the Caucus area. He did a survey and mapped all the
inconsistent signage and speed limit signs. He may change a couple of
speed limits.
II. Approval of Minutes.
Motion: Frieda moved to approve the minutes from May 18. Bob seconded. All approved.
III. SnowCap Website, Jan Martin
Jan
reported the new website had over 1,284 hits since inception. Tim
commented it is beautiful and functional. Holly and Jan went to the
Little Elk Creek homeowner’s meeting, and welcomed them to participate
in the Caucus. They will attend the Shield-O meeting next. Please let
them know of other meetings in the area if you know of any.
Tim
suggested we could do a bulk rate mailer to every address publicizing
the website. Patsy and Holly will work on the Wheeler party.
IV Treasurer’s Report, Amy Doherty
We
received 2 contributions. Also a refund of $55 from lawyers. Our tax
returns were filed on May 30 – thank you Peter Van Domlen! Amy will
send him a thank you note.
V. Land Use Applications, Steve Child
Silverman Site Plan Review.
5720 Snowmass Creek Rd., Hidden Meadows
Applicant
proposes to demolish the existing house and construct a new house (up
to 5750) on the same site. Steve recommended approval. Steve, Frieda,
Kathy, Tim and Jan have all seen the site at one time or another and
the proposal looks fine.
Motion: Bob moved to approve. Holly seconded the motion. All approved. Steve will write the letter.
Rogers Site Plan Review and Activity Envelope with Vesting,
Watson Divide Road (near Hedges) 6.135 acres.
Applicant
proposes to add activity envelopes for future development of a pasture,
pond and solar collector array (on the other side of their access road)
and to extend their vested rights. An existing activity envelope for
the house was previously approved. The County may be inclined to exempt
the property from Ridgeline Review as it was not specified as a
requirement of a past court ordered settlement.
Caucus members
said they would like to have a site visit to examine the parcel. They
asked Steve to arrange a visit with Francis Kirzmanich, request a
ridgeline review, learn about the position of the solar collectors, and
examine the source of water.
Watson Divide Ranch Application for Minor Amendments to Prior Permit,
Wheeler, top of Watson Divide, 830 acres.
Applicant
proposes to enlarge the boundary of the Pond Development Envelope. This
would accurately reflect what was actually constructed and landscaped
(the pond envelope would be increased by 0.8 acre and the upper
hay/pasture development envelope would be decreased by the same
amount.) They also want to revise the Landscape Plan to reflect the
landscaping that was installed last year.
Motion: Frieda moved that the Caucus approve the amendments. Bob seconded. It unanimously passed.
Steve will write the letter.
VI. Board Election.
Emily will put together a postcard soliciting candidates, also promoting the website.
Tim indicated that Jan had suggested we discuss the pros and cons of staggered terms for Board members at the next meeting.
VII. Committee on County Regulations, Jan Martin
Jan’s
committee (Jan, Holly and John Clark) had their first meeting with the
County. County representatives from Community Development, Cindy
Houben, Joanna Schaffner and Suzanne Wolff were very cordial and
receptive.
Fences. The fence issue arose because of a
perceived position by the County requiring wildlife-friendly fences at
the cost of domestic animal safety and security. The Committee found
out the criteria for fences comes down to the County from the Div. Of
Wildlife – Kevin Wright. The design is predicated on the ability of the
elk to be able to migrate. The group also found out the regulations are
applied only in areas designated as elk, deer or mountain sheep
habitat. They reviewed maps that indicated that the valleys within the
Caucus area have not been designated as elk habitat. The requirement
also does not apply to any property assessed as agricultural. In those
areas where the requirement is applicable, both the County and DOW have
given wildlife a priority over domestic livestock. Although different
standards for wildlife and livestock would make their job more
difficult, the County indicated a willingness to work with anyone for
whom the fence requirement might pose a problem. Kevin has a design
that may work for both ranchers and elk. The County will get this from
him.
Horse shelters. The area devoted to them is
included in the allowable barn area, a requirement that can be changed
only by the BOCC. The County is frustrated with those who obtain a
permit for a three sided shelter and then choose to improve it with
doors on the fourth side and turn it into a dwelling
Jan’s group
suggested the problem might be minimized by requiring a dirt floor and
imposing specific height limits. Her group will study the matter
further and provide Community Development with a proposal.
Jan’s
group will run any such proposals before the Caucus Board for their
approval in advance of presenting them to the County. Overall, they
felt the meeting was productive and successful.
VIII. “Snowmass”
At
the last meeting, Sue H. was concerned when the papers reported
Related/WestPac was starting to call Snowmass Village, “Snowmass”. Tim
consulted with one of his attorney friends who is an expert on
intellectual property. A primarily geographic term is not protectable.
The exception is if the term acquires secondary meaning over many
years, so it means something other than geographic. We could use the
term, “Old Snowmass”, but that’s not the proper use on maps, etc. Tim
suggested a ski symbol be placed on the Snowmass Village sign on
Highway 82.
IX. Bylaws.
Frieda and
Michael have been working on revising the language in the Bylaws
concerning Conflict of Interest. Everyone received copies of the new
language.
Motion: Holly moved to approve the Bylaws changes. Steve seconded. All approved.
The meeting was adjourned. Next meeting: Monday, July 20.
