DOCSLIB.ORG

August 7, 2019 Aspen Meadows Resort Pre-Retreat Packet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
August 7, 2019 Aspen Meadows Resort Pre-Retreat Packet Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) August 7, 2019 Aspen Meadows Resort Pre-Retreat Packet Table of Contents Part A: Retreat and EOTC Summary, Goals, and Background Page 2 Part B: Background Sections 1. Retreat Agenda Page 5 2. EOTC Formation and Structure Page 7 3. Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan Page 9 4. EOTC Funding and Budget Page 10 Part C: Background Data and Document Summaries 1. Regional Demographics Page 15 2. Traffic and Bus Ridership Trends Page 23 3. Projects in Progress within Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan Area Page 27 4. Highway 82 Records of Decision within Pitkin County Page 30 5. Accomplishments and Milestones Page 38 Part D: 1. 1993 Intergovernmental Agreement Attachment 1 Page 41 2. EOTC Budget – Updated Through June 2019 Attachment 2 Page 55 3. 1998 Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision Attachment 3 Page 57 1 Part A: Executive Summary and Retreat Information Summary (See Part B Section1, below, for retreat agenda) The EOTC allocated funds in 2019 for a planning retreat to bring all members of the EOTC together and discuss major themes affecting our collective communities. The purpose of the retreat is to develop strategic planning elements that will guide future EOTC efforts. The goals of the retreat are: 1) To establish a baseline understanding of the EOTC purpose, requirements, structure, funding and operations; 2) Identify the strengths, opportunities and challenges facing the EOTC today; and, 3) Create a priority list of themes, major topics, and/or projects to help guide the EOTC’s next steps and vision. Background (See Section 2, 3, and 4, below, for more detail) The EOTC was established after the voters approved a 0.5% County Transit Sales and Use Tax in November 1993 for the purpose of Financing, Constructing, Operating and Managing Mass Transportation System within the Roaring Fork Valley. The use for these funds is outlined by both State Statute and the ballot language. In addition to the ballot measure, Pitkin County, the Town of Snowmass Village and the City of Aspen adopted the 1993 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) establishing the structure of the EOTC and further define the allocations of the funds (See Section 4, below). The IGA expanded upon the enabling legislation and ballot language by adopting a Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan as a means to guide future allocations. The IGA includes: Structure: • Establishes a Committee (i.e. Elected Officials Transportation Committee or EOTC) comprised of all jurisdictions within the Transit Sales and Use Tax administration area, including Pitkin County, Town of Snowmass Village, and the City of Aspen. • The EOTC is a recommending body only for expenditure of 0.5% Transit Sales and Use Tax. • That, for any EOTC action, all jurisdictions must have a majority vote to progress a recommendation. • That the only actions that must be approved (rather than recommended) are annual and project budgets, and that approval requires a quorum within each of the member jurisdictions. EOTC Mission Statement (adopted 1992, updated 2014): “Work collectively to reduce and/or manage the volume of vehicles on the road system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multi-modal, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.” 2 Implement Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan: • Separated, Dedicated Transit-Way between Aspen and the Airport and between Aspen and Snowmass, and; • Operation of Park-n-Ride Lots at Brush Creek, Airport, and/or Buttermilk. Where We Are Today The EOTC has made significant progress in implementation of the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan in the 25+ years of the Use and Sales tax including [For example, participation in Entrance to Aspen ROD, creation and continued support of the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA), operation of the Brush Creek Park n’ Ride, acquisition of the Denver Rio Grande right-of-way, Highway 82 bus lanes, AABC pedestrian underpass, Basalt underpass, etc. (see full timeline at end of packet)]. With successful progress made toward implementing the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan, the EOTC is uniquely situated to look to the next 10 to 15 years to address mobility in the Roaring Fork Valley. The EOTC has demonstrated significant commitment to upper valley mobility with the establishment of the Regional Transportation Administrator position in 2018. The Regional Transportation Administrator position consolidates the administrative functions of the EOTC and provides additional staff resources that were not previously available. And since this position does not represent any one entity, the Administrator is able to support the Committee with a unified voice and more regional approach. The EOTC currently has two significant projects underway that have been contemplated for many years: enhancements to the Brush Creek Park and Ride facility and the Town of Snowmass Transit Center. While these two projects are still several years from completion, at this point they are both moving forward with funds allocated in 2020 and 2022, respectively. As these projects continue to progress, the EOTC is at a critical juncture on how it would like to proceed in the coming years. The collaborative discussions and direction amongst the EOTC members from the retreat will help create a framework to guide the Committee in future decision-making to achieve its mission and obligations established under the enabling legislation and voter approved ballot requirements. In summary, the EOTC currently has an opportunity to reevaluate how it is functioning, where it would like to go within the bounds of the enabling legislation and ballot language, and how it would like to get there. Key Discussion Considerations • The Committee is governed by an IGA and guided by the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan that were adopted in 1993 and have not been amended since. Does this governing IGA and adopted Transportation Plan still adequately advance the purpose of the EOTC? 3 • Current funding allocations are guided by the Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan. Does the plan still represent the current vision? What could help facilitate Committee decision-making? • With some exceptions, the EOTC has been focused on upper valley infrastructure projects from Basalt to Aspen and Snowmass such as components of the Entrance to Aspen, Snowmass Transit Center, pedestrian underpasses and park and ride facilities while providing financial support to RFTA to plan valley-wide transit from Aspen to the Colorado River Valley. What type of efforts (e.g. tactical infrastructure / technology and operations, strategic planning, or combination) would you like to see the EOTC prioritize moving forward? 4 Part B: Background Sections 1. Retreat Agenda 2. EOTC Formation and Structure 3. Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan 4. EOTC Budgeting and Funding Part B, Section 1 EOTC RETREAT AGENDA Time Topic Lead Outcome 8:15-8:30 Gathering, coffee, mingling Participants agree to process Introductions, Overview of Retreat 8:30-8:45 Stephanie Zaza and expected outputs of the agenda, Ground Rules day’s work Presentation: 1. Participants are familiar with the purpose, • EOTC History, Accomplishments requirements, structure, • Current Operating Procedures David funding and operations of 8:45-10:00 and Role of New Coordinator Pesnichak the EOTC • ETA ROD overview 2. Participants have an environmental scan to use • Environmental scan during the SOC analysis 10:00-10:15 Break Strengths/Opportunities/Challenges (SOC) Analysis • Individual work (10 minutes): 1. Main categories of strengths, Personal vision opportunities and challenges 10:15-12:30 • Small group work (30 minutes): SOC Stephanie Zaza 2. Specific strengths, opportunities, and • Full group (90 minutes): challenges within each category o Report out from small groups o Consolidate and prioritize within each SOC category 12:30-1:00 Lunch 5 The SOC will be well understood Review SOC and how to use it for the next as a tool for identifying a priority 1:00-1:15 Stephanie Zaza exercise goal and transportation projects to achieve that goal Identification of Transportation Projects and Themes 1. Participants produce a • Individual work (10 minutes): Write priority list of themes/major top 5 – 8 very specific transportation topics that can be used by projects on sticky notes staff to develop a strategic vision statement 1:15-3:45 • Small groups (30 minutes): sort and Stephanie Zaza group sticky notes into themes – give 2. Participants produce a each group a theme title; post themes priority list of projects that and projects around the room; can be used as a starting consolidate across groups point for EOTC future decision-making • Full group (105 minutes): prioritize themes and projects Facilitator will provide a summary of the day’s work and 3:45-4:00 Wrap-Up and Next Steps Stephanie Zaza outline of next steps to be executed by staff and EOTC members 6 Part B, Section 2 EOTC FORMATION AND STRUCTURE Enabling Legislation Detail C.R.S. 29-2-103.5 (Colorado Revised Statute) provides that the county is authorized to levy a sales and use tax "for the purpose of financing, constructing, operating, or maintaining a mass transportation system within the county." Local jurisdictions "may enter into intergovernmental agreements with any municipality or other county ... for the purpose of providing mass transportation services either within the county or in a county in which the county mass transportation system is permitted to operate." “Mass Transportation” is defined as “any system which transports the general public by bus, rail, or any other means of conveyance moving along prescribed routes, except any railroad subject to the federal "Railway Labor Act", 45 U.S.C. sec. 151 et seq” Ballot Detail 1993 - The sales and use tax ballot measure further defined the purpose of the tax. Most significantly it limits the purpose to “increasing and improving the public mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork Valley” and requires that such mass transportation system improvements “be approved by the City of Aspen, Pitkin County and the Town of Snowmass Village”.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Limited Service Area Roads
    PITKIN COUNTY ROAD MAINTENANCE AND MANGEMENT PLAN COUNTY ROADS AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS 2016 2 Public Works 76 Service Center Road Aspen, CO 81611 970-920-5390 Fax: 970-920-5374 www.pitkincounty.com PITKIN COUNTY ROAD MAINTENANCE AND MANGEMENT PLAN 2016 COUNTY COMMISIONERS: Michael Owsley Rachel Richards George Newman Patti Clapper Steve Child 3 PURPOSE STATEMENT The purpose of the Pitkin County Road Maintenance and Management Plan, hereinafter known as the RMMP, is to provide specific maintenance and management information to Pitkin County residents and to assist County Staff in prioritizing maintenance and setting expectations for County roads. The RMMP also establishes certain rules that have the force of law; violations of these rules are punishable as provided for herein and in the Colorado Revised Statutes, as they may be amended from time to time. DEFINITION OF A ROAD A Road as defined by Colorado Revised Statutes ([§42-1-102(85), C.R.S.]) "Roadway" means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the sidewalk, berm, or shoulder even though such sidewalk, berm, or shoulder is used by persons riding bicycles or other human-powered vehicles and exclusive of that portion of a highway designated for exclusive use as a bicycle path or reserved for the exclusive use of bicycles, human-powered vehicles, or pedestrians. In the event that a highway includes two or more separate roadways, "roadway" refers to any such roadway separately but not to all such roadways collectively. Pitkin County considers all appurtenances to roadways, such as parking, drainage structures, and snow storage areas to be part of the roadway.
    [Show full text]
  • All Grants Awarded Through Fiscal Year 2020 INTRODUCTION and KEY
    All Grants Awarded Through Fiscal Year 2020 INTRODUCTION AND KEY This report is a list of all grants awarded by the Colorado Historical Society’s State Historical Fund (SHF) since its inception in 1992 (state Fiscal Year 1993) through the end of Fiscal Year 2020. The amounts listed are the original award amounts. If for some reason the entire grant amount was not used (i.e. a project was terminated or was completed under budget) the full amount awarded will appear. In other instances grant awards were increased either to enable project completion or to cover the costs of easements. In these instances, the additional award amount is shown in a separate entry as an increase. In those cases where no work was accomplished and the funds were either declined by the grant recipient or were required to be returned to the SHF through rescissions, no entry will appear. For this reason, projects listed in one version of this report may not appear in later versions, and the financial information shown in this report may not be comparable to other revenue reports issued by the SHF. Grants listed in this report are identified by project ID number. The first two characters in the project ID number represent the fiscal year from which the grant was scheduled to be paid. The state is on a July 1 – June 30 fiscal year. So, for example, all grants made between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007 will be coded “07”. The next two characters identify the type of grant. In the case of grants that are awarded based on specific application due dates, the grant round in which the project was funded will be paired with either a letter or number.
    [Show full text]
  • Division 5 Water Court-August 2011 Resume
    DIVISION 5 WATER COURT-AUGUST 2011 RESUME 1. PURSUANT TO C.R.S., §37-92-302, AS AMENDED, YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE FOLLOWING PAGES COMPRISE A RESUME OF THE APPLICATIONS AND AMENDED APPLICATIONS FILED WITH THE WATER CLERK FOR WATER DIVISION 5 DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2011. 11CW115 MESA COUNTY, SALT CREEK, PLATEAU CREEK, COLORADO RIVER. Applicant - Frederick L. Lekse, Jr., 6104 Bascom Dr, Summerfield, NC 27358, [email protected]. (336) 399-2431. Applicant’s Attorney: Mark A. Hermundstad, WILLIAMS, TURNER & HOLMES, P.C., P.O. Box 338, Grand Junction, CO 81502, (970) 242-6262, mherm@wth- law.com. Application for Surface Water Right. Structure: Lekse Spring; Legal Description: The spring is located in the SE1/4 NW1/4, Sec. 10, T. 10 S., R. 94 W., 6th P.M., at a point approx. 2,300 ft E. of the W. section line and 2,600 ft S of the N section line of Sec. 10. See map attached as Exhibit A to the Application; Source: A spring tributary to Salt Creek, tributary to Plateau Creek, tributary to the Colorado River; Appropriation Date: June 1, 2011; Amount: 0.033 c.f.s., conditional; Uses: Wildlife watering, stockwatering, and irrigation of up to five acres of natural vegetation to enhance forage for wildlife uses. The land to be irrigated will be land owned by Applicant in the vicinity of the Lekse Spring. The legal description of Applicant’s property is set forth on the deed attached to the Application as Exhibit B; Names and addresses of landowner: Applicant. (6 pages) YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE until the last day of OCTOBER 2011 to file with the Water Clerk a verified Statement of Opposition setting forth facts as to why this application should not be granted or why it should be granted in part or on certain conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resources Technical Report
    Historic Resources Technical Report State Highway 82 / Entrance to Aspen Environmental Reevaluation Project No. STA 082A-008 February 28, 2007 Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 3 and Federal Highway Administration, Colorado Division Prepared by: Dawn Bunyak Bunyak Research Associates 10628 W Roxbury Ave, Littleton, CO for HDR Engineering, Inc. Contents 1.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................1 1.1 Background ..........................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Description...............................................................................................1 1.3 Purpose and Project Study Area ...........................................................................4 1.3.1 Purpose...................................................................................................4 1.3.2 Project Study Area .................................................................................4 1.4 Methodology ........................................................................................................8 1.5 Regulatory Overview............................................................................................9 1.6 Agency Coordination and Consultation..............................................................10 1.7 Description of the Existing Condition ................................................................10 1.7.1 Field Survey Results ............................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • System Management Technical Report State Highway 82 / Entrance to Aspen Environmental Reevaluation
    System Management Technical Report State Highway 82 / Entrance to Aspen Environmental Reevaluation February 20, 2007 Colorado Department of Transportation, Region 3 and Federal Highway Administration, Colorado Division Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 1.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................1 1.2 Regulatory Overview............................................................................................1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING CONDITION .........................................2 2.1.1 System Relationships .............................................................................2 2.1.2 System Management ............................................................................10 2.1.3 Conclusions..........................................................................................16 3.0 AGENCY CONTACTS AND COORDINATION ...........................................16 4.0 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................17 5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...............................................................................18 APPENDIX A: FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS ..........................................19 Tables Table 1-1. Historic Commercial Enplanements at Aspen/Pitkin County Airport...............5 Table 1-2. Incremental TM Program Implementation Process .........................................12
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Introduction and Key
    History Colorado Colorado Historical Society State Historical Fund All Grants Awarded Through Fiscal Year 2010 INTRODUCTION AND KEY This report is a list of all grants awarded by the Colorado Historical Society’s State Historical Fund (SHF) since its inception in 1992 (state Fiscal Year 1993) through the end of Fiscal Year 2010. The amounts listed are the original award amounts. If for some reason the entire grant amount was not used (i.e., a project was terminated or was completed under budget) the full amount awarded will appear. In other instances grant awards were increased either to enable project completion or to cover the costs of easements. In these instances, the additional award amount is shown in a separate entry as an increase. In those cases where no work was accomplished and the funds were either declined by the grant recipient or were required to be returned to the SHF through rescissions, no entry will appear. For this reason, projects listed in one version of this report may not appear in later versions, and the financial information shown in this report may not be comparable to other revenue reports issued by the SHF. Grants listed in this report are identified by project ID number. The first two characters in the project ID number represent the fiscal year from which the grant was scheduled to be paid. The state is on a July 1 – June 30 fiscal year. So, for example, all grants made between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010 will be coded “10”. The next two characters identify the type of grant.
    [Show full text]
  • Pitkin County Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018
    Pitkin County Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 2018 Pitkin County Hazard Mitigation Plan Pitkin County Hazard Mitigation Plan April 2, 2018 1 2018 Pitkin County Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter One: Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning ............................................................. 9 1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 9 1.2 Participating Jurisdictions ...................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Background and Scope .......................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Mitigation Planning Requirements ...................................................................................... 10 1.5 Grant Programs Requiring Hazard Mitigation Plans............................................................ 10 1.6 Plan Organization ................................................................................................................ 11 Chapter Two: Planning Process ..................................................................................................... 13 2.1 2017 Plan Update Process ................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Participation
    [Show full text]
  • THE WEST of MAROON CREEK WOMP Pitkin County, Colorado DRAFT September 2013
    THE WEST OF MAROON CREEK WOMP Pitkin County, Colorado DRAFT September 2013 Contents INTRODUCTION 1 Plan Intent . 2. Policy Direction from the AACP . 4. Existing Land Uses and Current Zoning . 6. How the WOMP is Organized . 8. CHAPTER 1: LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS BY AREA 9 Section 1: West of Maroon Creek & Highway 82 Corridor . 11 Section 2: Planning Activity Nodes . 23 Pitkin County Airport Activity Node . 23 Airport Business Center Activity Node . 27. Buttermilk/Inn at Aspen Activity Node . 32. Pomegranate/Aspen Country Inn Activity Node . .37 Section 3: Outlying Developable Areas . 41 Soldner . .42 Sardy . 43 Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District . 44 CHAPTER 2: FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND LAND USE DESIGNATIONS 47 CHAPTER 3: SCENIC GUIDELINES AND VIEWS 53 Section 1: West of Maroon Creek Scenic Guidelines . 54 Section 2: Views and Viewplanes . 68 CHAPTER 4: WOMP AUTHORITY BACKGROUND INFORMATION 101 WEST OF MAROON CREEK PLAN | Pitkin County, Colorado Table of Contents p i FIGURES 1 . WOMP Area Boundary Map 2 . Activity Nodes Map INTRODUCTION 3 . Existing Zoning Map (City and County) 1 4 . WestPlan of Intent Maroon . .Creek . .and . Highway. .82 . Corridor . 2 Policy Direction From the AACP . 4 5 . MapExisting of Visual Land BufferUses and Lands Current Between Zoning Developed . Areas. 6 6 . MapHow of the Established WOMP is OrganizedSubdivisions . 8 CHAPTER 7 . Map of Aspen Urban Growth Boundary Expansion to Include County Pitkin County Airport and Aspen Snow Dump 9 8 . Highway 82 Access Control Plan LAND9 . Trails USE Map AND TRANSPORTATION POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STEPS BY AREA 9 10 . Transit Map Land Use and Transportation Policies 11and .
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment for the Establishment of Low Altitude Training for Cannon AFB, New Mexico
    Environmental Assessment for the Establishment of Low Altitude Training for Cannon AFB, New Mexico Public comments on this Draft EA are requested pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC 4321, et seq. All written comments received during the comment period would be made available to the public and considered during Final EA preparation. The provision of private address information with your comment is voluntary and would not be released for any other purpose unless required by law. However, this information is used to compile the project mailing list and failure to provide it would result in your name not being included on the mailing list. August 2011 DRAFT FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) INTRODUCTION -The Air Force is interested in obtaining public and agency comments on this revised proposal to designate a low altitude training area for training Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) aircrews. This Draft FONSI is provided as part of the attached Environmental Assessment for public and agency review. NAME OF PROPOSED ACTION - Establishment of Low Altitude Training for Cannon AFB, New Mexico. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE - The United States Air Force (Air Force) proposes to designate a low altitude training area in northern New Mexico and southern Colorado where 27 Special Operations Wing (27 SOW) aircrews operating from Cannon AFB would train for worldwide operations under their global response commitment. Cannon AFB based MC-130J and CV-22 aircraft rely on darkness, terrain, and low altitude to provide masking during missions. 27 SOW aircrews are required to maintain flight proficiency in varying terrain including mountainous terrain, varying threat levels, different climatic conditions, and low altitude after dark missions to support Special Operations Forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft of Comments for WWRNF DEIS TMP…
    Our mission is to create and sustain the best possible mountain bike trail system and experience in the Roaring Fork Valley. January 30, 2014 TO: Upper Roaring Fork Trails Plan, Planning Team RE: Comments for URFTP, Mountain Bike User Group Meeting In this document, we intend to address the overall goals for this Trails Plan from a mountain bike trail user’s perspective. These comments are based upon our detailed knowledge of the area and our experiences riding great trails both within and beyond the Roaring Fork area. Using the IMBA Ride Center evaluation system as a guide helps us to understand the types of trails and amenities we should hope to include in this planning process. Achieving a Gold medal rated IMBA Ride Center would mean we’ve achieved many of our trail quality and quantity goals while at the same time providing a valuable community trail network that both locals and visitors will enjoy for years to come. While our focus is mountain bike trails, we are fortunate in that our trail system is not over crowded, and there is almost always plenty of room to share the trail with other user types. While we expect most of the trails in the network will continue to be open and used by hikers, dog walkers, runners, and the occasional equestrian, we are interested in studying separated uses if and when bike specific trails are designed with features that are downhill oriented. The following pages include big picture goals and specific location based ideas that should be studied in the context of existing conditions maps.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form
    NFS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 (Revised March 1992) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic -c 'mplete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (National Register Bulletin 16B). Complete each item by entering the r additional space, use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer to complete all items x New Submission Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Railroads in Colorado 1858 - 1948 B. Associated Historic Contexts The Historical and Technological Evolution of Colorado's Railroads 1858 - 1948 x See continuation sheet C. Form Prepared By name/title Clayton B. Fraser, Principal, and Jennifer H. Strand, Research Historian organization Fraserdesign date 31 August 1997 street & number P.O. Box 6025 telephone 970-669-7969 city or town Loveland state Colorado zip code 80537 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and the Secreiafv~«tthe Interior's Standards for Archeology and Historic Preservation. ( r-j See continuation sheet for additional comments.) ^a^^ Signati/re of certifying official Dale Sta\|:e Jflistoric Preservation office, Colorado Historical Society State or Federal agency and bureau I, hereby, certify that this multiple properly documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory — Nomination Form 1. Name Received JAN 22
    NPS Form 10-900 Expires 10-31-87 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service For NPS UK only National Register of Historic Places received JAN 22 !98T Inventory — Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries — complete applicable sections ______________.• 1. Name historic Thomas Hynes House (Historic Resources of Aspen - MRA) and or common Thomas Hynes House ____ ___^__ 2. Location street & number 303 East Main Street _____________________ not for publication city, town Aspen vicinity of n/a state Colorado code 08 county Pitkin code 097 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use nZ^district n/a public x occupied H/^agriculture Jl/^museum x building(s) x private n/a unoccupied x commercial JD/apark ."/^structure n/a both n/a work in progress n/aeducational j^/aprivate residence n/asjte Public Acquisition Accessible J3/aentertainment Irreligious n/aobject n/a in process x yes: restricted .n/agovernment Ja/ascientific n/a being considered Ik-.?- yes: unrestricted n/aindustrial -Q/atransportation x multiple resource n/a no H/amilitary 4. Owner of Property name Niklaus G. and Gertrude E. Kuhn street & number P. 0. Box 8016 city, town Aspen vicinity of n/a state CO 8l6l2 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Pitkin County Court House street & number 506 E. Main Street city, town Aspen state Colorado 6. Representation in Existing Surveys n tltleState Inventory of Historic Siteftas this property been determined eligible? yes JL_no ri/a v n/a n/a date Ongoing — — federal _jk- state __ county __ local depository for survey records Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation city, town Denver state CO 7.
    [Show full text]