HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.04 Staff Report & Exhibits - Part E, On the state level, the Colorado Iægislature has approvedftinding for contracts that extend the season for single-en-gine tankers and helicopters. Those resources are in addi-tion to air support available to federal ageneies Morgansaid having exira resources for longer periods would allowthe state to stage aggressive initial attacks to knock dovrnûres before they become destructive.Lâstthere werewildlandCHELSËA SELF/GLENWOOD SPRINGS POST INDEPÊNDENTFire crews battle the Grizzy Creek Fire as it shoots downthe ¡idge into No Name Canyon oh Aug. l'1.WITDFIREFrom pageAlacres. Theyboth burned in natisnal fôrest in the centralmountains. The Pine Gulch Fire north of GrandJunctionwas temporariþ the largest in the state's history at 139,OO7acres, mostly on Bureau of,Land Management holdings.Columns of smoke drifting up from the Grizzly Creek Firein Glenwood Canyon in August rattled the nerves of Roar-ing Fork Vailey residents.whichthreatened Bâsalt, Elin July2O18, is still fresh onForkportionthe county is located in thewildland-urbaninterface - the terrain susceptible to wildfires. Many of thehomes in Pitkin County also are in that susceptible terrain.\¡/eledown quicklywith local, state and federal crewsworking collaboratively.Morgan and other st¿te officials stressed at Thursday'snews conference th¿t ûre mitigation would be required toease the threat ofwildfires in Colorado over the years. Thatincludes thinning trees through timber sales and mechan-ical treatments and, when conditions are favorable, usingprescribed burns where firefightert purposely light fires toachieve beneficial results.Individual homeol¡¡ners also are being asked to help.MacDonald, the Pitkin County emergency manager, said,"everyone needs to do their part.? That includes crealingdefensible space around their homes, using fire resistantmaterials, signing up for emergency alerts and having anevacuation plan.'1T'e will continue to see wildfire, so we need to becomefire adaptive, in sther words, learn to live with wildfirei'MacDonald said.Thompson said Roaring Foik Vatley reside¡rts can calltheir fite department to aruange a free assessment of whatthey should do to make their properties less susceptible towitilfire and 'harden" their homes against wildûre risk. fhehomeowners will be responsible for following uþ on thework.Thompson said homeowner interest in the assessmentsand followingthrough onthe work is a mixedbag."We see upticks, then it slows downj'he said. "I wouldntsay (the response) is overwhelmingJ'Since now is open-burning season ofditches and drygrasses on agricultural lands, Thompson said propertyo\¡ñrers should go online at the fire department's website toget a permit. They also should use precautions, like avoid-ing intentional burns during high winds.State a¡rdlocal offi.cials aretaking additional steps toprepare for the 2021 wildfire seâson. Thompson saidRoáring Fork Fire Rescue.is getting its wildland firefight-ing equipment prepared earlier than usual and is alreadyrefre shing training for fi refighters.The Pitkin County Fublic Safety Council is focusing onevacuation plans for various scenarios, including situationswhere a wildfire forces Aspen residents to depart over [n-dependence Pass.The council met via teleconference with the sheriffofGrand County, which was in the thict of the East Tlouble-sorne Fire lastyear. The area faced many of the same chal-lenges confronting the Roaring Fork VaJIey - how i.o getpeople to safety in a narrow valleywith a limited numberofroads.s condon @ asp entim.e s. com
Paç 10. Aspen Daily News . triday, April 9, 2021ST TEGov. Polis \{arns wíldfire season is a'year-round phenomena'By Patt-y llieberyAssociated Pres:./Report for Amria 'DEì.I\iER - Colorado fire of-ficials along with Gor'. Iared Polisannounced the 2021 wildûre seasonmitigation plan Thursday to fightfires earlier with more funds and re-sources on the ground; following thean unprecedented 2020 wildfrre sea-son with iluee of the largest ûres instab historv.' "In ã}Zi,wehave already orperi-enced fi¡es. One of the things that is achange ofparadigm is Colorado usedto blk about a füe seaso¡. It's now ayear-round phenomenal' Polis said.The plan comes following Colo-rado's 2020 summei and fall whichincluded three of the largest fires instaÞ history and an unusüal erctend-ed wildfire season well into October.The 2020 fires burned more than 935square mtles (2,422 square kilome-ters), said Mike Morgan, director ofthe Colorado Division of Fiie Pre-vention and Control.The new approacb to.combat-ting and nitigating wildfires acrossthe state v¡ill be an %ggessive ini-tial attacki Morgan said. By allocat-ing resour-ces to local governmentssooner, they hope to lessen a fire'simpact by shortening. the length oftime itsburnin$.'We spend a little bit more moneytoda¡ but we dont have as manylong durafion events as a result ofthatl'he said.After a dev¿stating 2A20 season,Coloradois un&rgoiñg a *metamor-phosis of the change of the cultureof how we respond to wildlife firel'said Stan Hilkey, executive direc-tor of the Colorado Department ofPublic Safetf.With exces-< frmdq heightenedaviation support, tactical' preposi-tioning and mutual aid across local,state and federal partners, Hilkeypraised the state's mitigation efforts.. 'I've never seen a more stateof readiness than we hale to-dayi Hilkey said. .Several biils passed in the Colo-lado Legislature set aside millions ofdollars for wild"fire mitigation includ-ing funds for more aviaiion tools andthe extension of several contracts forair tankers and helicopters used toûght fires from above..Throughout the Souttrwest,predicted to expand from south-west Colonado in May to much ofsoutå.ern Colorado in June.'A shiftnorthward of the above normal sig-nificant û:re potential is projectédacross werst-central and northwestColorado into southwest Wyomingduring ful¡d'"The true nature ofthis fire sea-son wonl besee the Apriltioni Polis said.appar€rit until weand lvfay precþitâ-andNationalPredictivenormal risk isrn thisrhursd ay,ect-22,202o fire phoro, fiarnes risefrom ,"n"fliiltffSl1*li;i1"fire burnt near Granby, Colo. Colorado fire ofûçials and Got Jared Polis announcedthe 202f wildfire seasãn mitigation planThursday.' The state demographer estimates- that Colorildo's current population of5.7 million people will iàcrease to 8.5million in the next 19 years, Polis said-Officials encourased the oublic totake their role seriouilyin präventingwildfires ar¡ the season rar¡ips up."On alerage across the coüntry,human-car:sed wildfires make up87a/o of wildfire occurrences everyyear. Most of these fires can be pre-ventedl Hilkey said.
Proposed c9mp wouldbe at danger's doorRecent letters concernirig the proposedAscendigo development are a warni¡rgas to what's eoming to this valley. Ufbansprawl is nowpushing d.evelopers irltosurrcunding rural areas bringing noise,congestion,.increased. traffic, lights illuminatingthe skies at night, destroyingourvalley's heritage forever.Withthisreality,what coneernsmostup here inMissouri HeigbtsW'Cguststsjust the nature of thislivewith theknowledge,aftÞ¡being evacu-ated from o¡rr homes during the LakeChristine Fire and being put on evÍÌcua-tion alert a,gain during the Grizzþ CreekFire last surrimer, that any sparþ droppedcigarette, catalpic converter touching drygrass or lightning strike could turn Mis-souri l-{eþhts into a raging inferno.Remember those nighttime picturesof the Lake Christine fire? That could bea future glirnpse of Blue Lake, Basalt orAspen. Underthese windy conditions wehave up here; ûrefighærs have told us theonly *ay to stop a'fire would baircraft - hours after it started. In com-ûñGıñ; thiGnorth of Bòutder last fallburned at a rate covering three footbaXlfields a minute. Nobody could outrunrhâr.So why put a "recreational ca"rnp' (theirwords) with hundreds of people living,visiting and milling around campgroundsholding large outdoor fundraising eventsanil..adiling 45g"plus cars a day to ûur ru-ral dirt roads in the niddle of a fire zone?Iook at recent headlines. "Big fire .threat ahead this summer.l We under-stand the challenges of autis¡n. IVe ap-plaud Ascendigo's mission- But forciugsuch a large, ever-oipanding commercialde-velopment into the middleof a high-ûre haza¡d zone makes.no seuse for sur-rounding neþhborhoods, towns and espe-ciaþ all the young lives tlrat might be lostif a ûre broke out. Entering the 2lst yearofWestern drought, Missouri Heþhts isthe last place toput Ascendq*r*TheAspen Tirnes øceepts lctters tothe edítor that s.lry pOQ words qr less.Lettere Wet inchtdn thc øuthw's nømc,hornatøttnt, øfiJiøtíon (if øng) ønd.gthonenumkir (for verífuqtion purposes onlg).The d,ecisi.on to pr.ínt øny subrnissionis eønpleæly at the d,ìscretion of theAspen Ti,mes edito,t'. To send, ø lettæ, ga.toasptentí.nzes.corn/eon tributø or letters @øspentimcs,cott.caû
Study:'I)rought-breaking rains rare, erratic in IIS Westñlatthew BrcwnThe fusocÍated PræsBILLINGS, Mont. * Rainstôrrns grewmore erratic and Èq.ltÉlr much longer-across most ofthe U.S. West oveiihe pasthålf-centuty as climate change wanned theplanet, according to a sweeping goveim-ment study r.eleased Tlresday that con-cludes the situation is woxening.The most dra¡riatic ctranges wer€ re-corded in the desert Southwes! wtrere theaverage dry period between rainstormsgrew from about 30 days in the fgT0s to,û5 days between storurs úow, said JoelBiederman, a research hyilrologistwith theU.S. Deparbment of Agriculture SouthvrestWatershed Resea¡ch Center in Tucson,Arizona.The consequences ofthe intense dty puri-ods ttrat pummeled areas ofthe West in re-centyea.rs v¡ere severe * more intense anddangerous wildfi res. parcEã!ñffi ds-not enough vegetation to support livestockalrd wildlife. And the problem appears to.be accelerating, with rainstorms becomingincreasingly unpredictable, and more areasshowing longer inte¡:r¡als between storms .since the turn of the century compared toprior decades, the study concludes.The study comes witlr almost two.thirdsof the contignous U.S. beset by abnormal-ly ùy conditions. Warm terrperaturesforecast for the ne)ft several months couldGlenwood Springs Postmake it the worst spring drought in almosta decadg affecting roughly /4 milli,on peo-ple across the U.S., the National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration said.Water use cutbacks, da^rnaged wheatcroDs. more fires and lower reservoirs inCalifornia and the Southwest are possible,weather service and agriculture ofrcialshave warned. Climate scientists are callingwhat's happening in the West a continu-ation of a "megadrought" that started inloee.Êil|.:.É h (.O 4j¡qo .While previous research documenteda decline in total rainfall for much of theWest, the workby Biederman and eol-Ieagues put more focus on whenthat rainoccurs. That has significant implicationslwednesdav,ApritZ2O2t lA31for how much water is available for agricul-ture and platrts such as grasses that haveshallow roots and need a steadier supply ofmoisture than large trees.'oOnce the growing season starts, the totalamountof rainfall is important. But if itcomes in just a fewla¡ge storus, with realtylong dry periods in betrveen; that ca^n havereally detrimental c.onsequence{ studyco-author Biederman said in an interviewTüe total arnount of rain ia ayear doesn'tmatter to plants - especially if rains comemostly in heavy bursts with large nill-off -.but consistent moisture is uihat keeps tlrenf-alive, said UCI,A meteomlogist DanielSwain, viho writes aweatherbþ aboutthe'lVest and wa¡ nÕt pari of th€ study.A62021TheTimesEagle org encouraging planning for fire seasonVail Daily staff reportWildûre season is around the corrter,and the Eagle Valley lMitdland programis looking to heþ prepare the corrmu-nity by kicking offa "protect Our WUI"challenge during the month ofApril. TheEagle Valley Wildland prograrrE Çonsistingof Greater Eagle Fire Protection Districtand Eagle River Fire Protect Dishict wiltunveil a challenge each week'in .tpril to en-coyraSg thg comnnunity to take small stepsto harden tlre defensible space around their .homes.Follow the Eagle Valley Witdla¡rd pro-gram on Facebook and Instagram for the.--^- Ichallenges each week. By sharing beforeand after pictures of the work done foreach ôf lhe weeHy chaXlenges; participantswill quali$,to receive agoodie bagfilledwith prizes.The contest will end May 1, in coordina-tion with Nationa,l Wildfire CommunitvPrepa,redness Day, a national campaignthat encourages people and organizationseverywhere to come together on a sin-gle day to take action to raise awarenessand reduce wildfire risk. It is held in theUnited States a¡rd Canada on the firstSaturday in May. Given that in-person8|therin6s a¡e limited or on-hold in manyplaces, this year's Prep Day is focused onwhat residents can do on and a¡ourid theirhomes to hetp protect against the threat ofwildûres.Weekly challenge videos will be postedto social media a,nd additional informationdissemina;ted via.NextDoor. Tb particþate,communiþz members must share ¡rhotoson tåe Eagle Valley Wiltlland Facebook(EagleValleyWildland) or Instagram(eagle_valley_wildland) pages with thehasbtag #FrotectOurW[I[. For example, aresident ca¡r sha¡e a before and after pic-ture of cleaned. out gutters, limbed up t"eesor cleared vegetation.over 32,OOO acres anddirectlythreatened several communitieswithinin state.ÞEagle County. In response to this growingthreat from uncontrolled wildfire, in 2O2-Othe Greater Eagle and Eagle River Fire pro-tection Districts cooperativeþ launehed theEagle Valley Wildland program. The intentof this joint wildland prograr.n is to rèducethe overall wildfire risk of the communi-ties it serves through effective mitigation,appropriately scaled wildfi re supprãssionand colla,borative community outreaih andeducation.ofColorado's
Camp ineompatiblei\{y letter voices an opinion of a long-time Misoouri Heights resident.who hâs. examined the Ascendigo Camp proposaland,find it to be dangeieusly t"å;'- -_patible with our locale. I have lived e¡nthis arid plateau since lgfiO and:feelvery strongly that this large eommerela!__ operation is unsuitable, the most import- eperant reasons being water usage and firedanger.' 'W-ater: ,¡1¡- both a resideul aur.l firr.merTETTERS TO THE EDITORMissouri Heights won't bycyclist-friendly with campFor the avid cyclists going up CatherineStore Road, througþ.Fender.I¿ne and ElJebel Road (Cattte CTeekttoadfrom Wen-dy's), you are about to be challenged!Your safety on this route is in peril.If the propoeed Ascendigo developmentis permitted, this popularl^^- *:-L+ ^^^- L^-;-^ .-Àwl, ur¡ór¡u Èwu uçw¡uç @thoroughfare fsr constfl rctionvehicles, d.elivery tnrbks, ser-III|ITlïI¿¡ltüt%¡ Board member of Kings Row, I am very, familiar with ihe cllanging natlre of ourlimited water supply. fficial acknowl-edgement of this water situation wasproved by our opposition to the HuntRanchproposal in 2OO8 whete the devel-opment was prevented by a W'ater Courtdecree severely limiting water use in thedevelopmeirt that kept it from movingforward, The situation is more desperãtenow due to òontinuing home consåucdonand c-hanging environmental conditions.The Ascendïgo proposal showø the orga-nization's lack of,understanding of bolhdomestic and agricultural water laws andrealities.\tr/ildfire: Since residing here, myhome has been thr.eateneã four times- by witdfire and I have been èvacuatedtwice. Therefore, I would not considerwildfire to be a casual threat to residents'welì-being bui ve¡y real and growing' annually. Missouri Heights h?s experi-euced seasunally increasing, uncontrol-: lable drought and winds that raise boththe possibility and potential sprea,cl ofwildfire across our neighborhoods. Wecannot tolerate the. increased water irseand subsequent danger posed by a largecommercial operation.This opinion is not about autism, it isabout water and fire. The limited amountof water we have on Missouri Heights. must be saved for cument residents todrink and suppress wildfires, not to be' uscd Þy a lerge cohlutercial facility. Thatpossibility is &n cx,treme danger to peoplethat alreadYlive here' sur"n c"ruoCarbondalertlrvvice carders, andup to450 addedvehicles aday, marry qnfimiliar with these roads. Theextra traffic from this (or future commercialdevelopments) will be horrific.This presents a real dangerto you andthose ofus r¡iho live in Missouri Heights.-. There is no "sha¡e the road'credo withearth-moveæ and dump trucks. There isno shoulder on these roads, so a gentle passaround a cycli* is already difficult today. Ienvision a long line <if cars, impatiently tqy-lngto see around atnickand then en@un-tering a cyclisù This is not safr !Please join us as we oppose the applicationto allow the Ascendigo ranch developmenUYour voice is as valuable as those of residentshere. You stand ø lose a beautiftl a¡rd well-loved cycliugloop. More infurmation onhowto oppose locating Ascendigo in MissouriHeights is available atthe Kee¡r Missouri$lSnt nurrt website. www.KeepMOHrural.Su€CrayerU/* MissouriHeights*ffi,F8Dry as a boneA bird that flew into power lines is believedto be the cause behind a wildland fireWednes-day near 2222 Mclain Flats Road. A tofal of 16personnel, five fire apþaratus and one ambulance.responded after receiving a report at 1:53 p.m.The half-acre fire was contained within about20 minutes and the fire designated out within anhour, according to a press release from the AspenFire Protection District. '"Crews from Holy Cross Electric were on sceneim4ediately after emergency crews and madeessential repairs to power equippÂent quicklyj'it was notdd.;Fires occurrinE this eârl)1 in the season in thehigh country are an ominous rembewildfireseason, Please sign up for Pitkin Aferts EmergencyAlerts I Aspen Fire Protection District and be famil-iar with Ready. Set. Go. Home (wildiandfirersg.org)ithe releasgcontlnued. For more information, callAspen Fire at 970-925-5532.
Ascendido location inappropriateEditor:It was refreshing to read )anet Mohrmans April l0letter co¡-cerning Ascendigo's proposalin Missouri Heights and her changein view as to the appropriate¡¡ess of that locati'on. With more ac-curate information as to the articulated concêrns associated with.this locationn many initial supporters of the project are now ac-tiveþ opposing it. I suggest the Ascendigo board of directors andfoundertake an independent reviewof the application. Theymaynotbe aware of manyimportant factors whiih their managementteam may not be disclosing to them. It is not unusual for man-+Karen MoruleskiCarbondale
AscendigoplnEditor:firng ærfAscendþ site a possible disasterEdito¡:I am a residmt of Denve¡ and h¿w no \¡oiæ i¡the -Ascendigo debate. Howc$er, I lived on Fotr RuDríve.in Carbondale for years._ Fox Run is adjacent to Ascendigo literaily t,OO0feet from ou foimer rcidence. Fóryeæ I'muldwalk ou¡ dogs over to and thougb'th. Ar..rai-go property. It is beautiful ifl thtwinter aDd thespring. However, tÏere is a real û¡e risk i¡ srmmei.To make matters wone, the water suoolv !s lim-ited and âìmost certâinly declininc. Eve?i;+eeÌ NrHOA would confro¡rt tÉe ü"rit"d"rpp¡í d*at;..Supptries were juggled to. m¿kc surei;€'b¡d su6-cimt wsts. We wete lu&f.to.ha¡e sooe êitch wa-ter righæ which, ia a good par, w,njld s€e us tothrough the end offune, but in a bad yearwo¡ld begooe þearlyMay.. .I haç qo idea whet¡er Asændigo has suchrights. If nor, I doub,t ¡he proiect ca¡ úork If thevdo, I v¡orry *ra¡ they will 6uilã a p¡oiect which wiúbe a terrible fi¡e risk in a dry veù. Iîthe¡e is a füeon tle site I fear for the children- A gæat idea -but'the wrong place.philip Vedqer...1,*-3 firll-rimq .¡o-eo**. in lúissourinery¡$. upon leãrûi¡g of the p¡ooosed Asæn_'.crgo Kancà_drcâtional fadlrty, i ryås hþhly con_cemed- My lengthy list of co¡ãérns were DromDrtvaddr-ess€d by Dan Richardson aaa fetei naf UimeeÞng me pe¡sor2lh at the sitewelfo¡g ihe p¡opd,ty; hi¡iä-v qou"ti*" -_swered aûd leaming raore of t[eir'.rvhv. aDd vi-sto¡ wäs^not only infonriad.ve, b{rtrefresÉins. Thwnave seülessty been sv:aihble to mysdf arð aIÌ o?my ne€hÞots-to ta€ phone caIs, eineils aod erenmeet Personelly. ïhis neefirry p¡omoted mv m;iffs.,"H,ff ;##:rmf"lr*läú, ;,, u!trrdÌen with autim desenæ to häir a olace¿Fffijffiqåffiffiïäme ¡and. r¡g_coriceptilal plan displavs-low_den_ -:':l'iñ.ii#H"Y"H#"ffiisxÍg¡ou? cotning intq:.our community tı destrov mì. 5tft "äïäií*off#ä#i*.f :#ffi *mer commitmect not onlyforettism $¡p,pixC b,r¡i Jto our com¡ûnity as a ilbole. I resnect'h,. äi_ Fi*r,9j.-y ¡tfignbors; howwer, I få it w<¡uld ber.¡_mcr.eúb¡y seltsh to :rot welcome Asce¡¡dho p.anch ¡swru o_pen arns and sæ thei¡ vision becoire. *, *$_?:F":Fg tn our youth ad ""-;;ry;. ãa I4m tor ell_llidÞlh fer¡esor-Coo*Âotî1rl a.i ctrbondÊffi#ffiry u*flåËåES$s åå å$$åår a$gí g lËåFåãËe{ËË $rE FF.gFl FEÊ,ã g q Ë FgF: E 8.r;ìs Ë'r c.sr s F: s ã E I Ë n *ç ë.Ë'F ci'5 9 ãå' l$ãË ÍF$' E -'aqåÉåi åååË ååËåsq$ååååååååflåå ååråårry ffffågffeeÉ,åffsååF¡fIil|IãrâËlltftIttIããEgËd ÈÈgg.eF F8u ûlÞÊËädi äåH,5{ É.äåH å= 3e Ðå 3?'t 9I +R I Érs F.È'. ãÃ
CPwlooks intofire *iligatiqtaround BasaltshootingrangeO þerati,onß duri,ng fi,rerestr'ícti,ons sti'll røise'issuesScottCoñdonTte Aspenïirtsnoyed heavy e,qlripmentontotné sasalt s'tate \trildliferaitigation- A bulldozerArea earlierin tåe daYforfrear¡il heary excavats wíllwidenanddear an old rsadtlr¿t'ras used yeam ago toinstâttwill ûll"¿ dual.roleofproviding aSHOOTIHG RAilGEFrbmpageAlTVe're expecting a,usthÊ¡ hot,flry summeri Yamâshita said.'We're rampingup tomake surepersonnel a¡e on site."that poin-t sptrrd a questionfrom Bàsalt Mayor Bill Kaneon rrhetkr CPW.would dosethe publie úòoting range iffuereıtrictions are put in placethissiume,ìr.Yamashita said CPW u/i[ stirk :toib piorpolícies: If csr¡ntiesand federal prblic land 'nane.gersrdeclare stage 3 fire restrictions,it lt'ould indic¿æ conce¡ns wereso grave that national forcst andBuieau of r end Managementholdinæ would be closed. In th¿t .cas.e, the shooting rangewouldbeclosed:Stage 2 ûre rìestrictions wouldnot trigger an automatic closure.Sage 2 coüditions prohibitrictiv-ities suchas chaxcoalgdljs $mok-ing outdoors, use of equipmeutthat pmduces spadrs outdoorsas urdl as f¡es outside of formatcarnpgrcundsCFVV ofrcials would consideroperations atshootingranges on acase'by-ease basis dpring stage 2r.estrictions, Yarnashita said. Oneadyantage ofthe rquge is it con-t ú <taxgetshptingin asqrer-vised seqin8 onland tliathe-qbe€nprepared to containfire, he noted-Ifthe range were clased, fiearnsenthusiasts uror¡ld be able to shootunsupervised on otlrer publiclads;A dock sib high and dry at Late Cktstine,Thå water hqrel in $e fâkewas reduced )ears ago overconcems about a possible leakColorado Parks andlilildlife is pursuing addition-al safety improæments ar tbe Basah $hooting Rangebut doesn't þtan any operarbnal changes this year ifdrougþt and fire danger gmw.CPlil a¡ea wildlife man¡gþr M¿tt Yamashita told'the BasaltTown Council oir Îrcsdaynigþt tlut CPWpower lirles. Ttre madfpebreak ar¡d a¡!c.e.ssThe council ¿lço pressedYa-mashita on the future of l¿keChriÁtine itself; The latce is l,oc¿tedwest of.downtor¡yr¡, off of Home-stead Rioad."fm puningtlris mildþ, butI "tte Christ¡n€hasntlived uptoits potentiiali lta¡re saiil. Insteadof hosting trophyt¡out the hkehas "monster goldûshi Council-man C*ry Tênnenbaum noted. .CPYI made sipifi cant impiove,ments tothelake in tlre mid-2OOOs and acloro¡¡ledged that tåeagpt!úy hâdnt taken fulI adr¡a¡r-tage of theproperty. Horvever,about sk¡æars añer the improve-.ments were rrade, the wæer }evetin the lake had to he ¡educeil toassess the stmctural integrity ofthe damthat crcates itYa¡nashita aBlmowftdgBd tåatCPWhasnt pursued a resolutionas diligently as-it should."It's kind ofbeen punter{" hesaid.lrlew staffis making it a priorityto assess the structn¡al issics soCFW øn decide on månagemel¡tofthe lale a¡rd sutrounding a,rea"hoblets in the a¡ê¿ extendbq¡ond the water level. å. major¡nrtion of the pa,rkÍng lrot is cur-rendy stciring pihs of chewed-up-aqhalt Yaurashita said soùe ofthe mæerial would proUaUyUeused to prevent vegetation fiomgrowing arnund the shootingraüge.Kane said thereis greatþten-tial atthesite. Iüater could beaddod, the lakri stocked, picnictabþs instaüed and walking trailslaid -o,ut T.fre town governmentwould lÍkeþbe willing to helpwith funding;he said-to theupper reacbs of si:æelands for ernergency re-spoodens. Tbe road isupslopefromtbepistol, rifle anilshægun ranges.The wor* this'3rearwiübo ùe second phase of threeyears'wonh ofworþYa+ashit¿saiil.noaring'Fork FireandResewCtief Scot¡Tbmpgonreooüñetd€dðe I¿ke Chiistiueimpmvernents intle aûemnath ofFiieinJuly2OrS.tbreatenedalshootingaange raihen two people üegattyshot incendiary rorfr¡d's;Tborrpsons vísim$ to create afuebæak and an'inigaeed gæ*nbelt aroooa*e *lootiog ræge and ad-þceñprop€rtY.'Obru*nrsþthe gtral is toneverhave anotherfire startthseiYâ,nåshitaÊaid. :e* âtrítíoû to ee frebmat' cPwbåo seeüd fud-tlg fur one*iupqr¡*¡y worker ¿o¿ Uopes 9 tnün ftadstñasecodpo&tinn:to bslpvriù ov€rsi&t æ Ae /¡tfecürty. '
-heïmesA9Drought, dry soils wilt againrihrunoffacoFbreca,sters : Streamfl,outs dorøn nearly?O7, corrupared røttlt snorøpa,ck fcrColoraCo R?,L,er /t ea,drØafuls, otñ,er bc¿stmsFleatherSackettAspen JoumalismWa,ûer forecasting açncies inColorado have releasedtheir Aprilstreamflow predictions, confi rm-íng what many already knew:Drought and dry soils q,ill dim:n-ish ¡i'i'ers this spring."The mein story ofthis watersupply outlook seasonis the effect of,lastyear's drought goinginto vinter,'said KarlWetlaufe¡ a hydrol-ogist and assistantsupewisorwith theNatu¡al Resor¡¡cesIf soils were not so dw, stream-flow predictions would irackcloseþ with snowpack But thisyea¡, rn many areas $treamflowsare predicted to be"down þ r5%tþ 20% compared with the snow-pack, and streamfloÌr for ali riverbasins in the stâte are predictedto be below average.NRCS relies heavily on datafrom SNOTEL (shortfor snorv telemetry)sites for its ì{¡ater .supply forecasts.These automa:edsensors collect snowand weather datafrom rernote, moun-tainous areas a¡ound the ståte. Atthe beginning of the month, thesnow-water equivalent, which isa measure of how much wa;er iscontained in the snowpacþ was9Oo/" of av.erage for the ColoradoRive¡ headwaters, which includesthe Roaring Fork Rirær basin.'W'arm weather the first fewdaysof the month ha{l dropped ürainumber to 78% by lV'ednesday..According to NRCS models,streamflow for the Rc,aring ForkRiver, measured at its confu-ence with the Colorado River inGlenwood Springs wiil be 7A%ofaverage. The CERFC rnod-el predictsjust 68% ofaverage.Throughout the Colorado heàd-watel:s, stream flovv predictionsrange fi'om ST% to TZ"/o of average.According to CBRFC hydrolo-gist Cody Moser, mosi river b¿¡,sinsin Coloracio were in the bottornfive dr{estyears for soil moisturegoing into the winter and sorneplaces, like the Sa¡r Juan Riverbasin in the southwiest cornerofthe state, had iecord low soilmoisture."\4'e had poor soil moistureentering the seasonj'$foser said.'\il-e also have belo.,vnormal snow,so a lot ofthings are workingagainst a good runo$ season.',The Lake Powell inflowfore-cast, at 3.2 million acre.feet, isjust 45%.of normal and a 29ódecrease from the CBRFC ll{a¡chforecast.ANO'THERTRICKYYEAR FOR RUEDI' Tim Miller, a hydrologist at rheBureau of Reclamalion, whichoperates Ruedi Reservoir, saidpredicting inflow into the rese¡-voir from the Fryingpan'Riverand surrounding tributaries is lfte"looking out into the crystal ball;"It's Miller's job to relea¡eenough water from the reser-voir to make room fçr the inÍlorn,Filling it to capacity - roughly1O2,OOO acre-feet - requires pre-cision and can be tr.icþ Last fearHEATH ER SACXETT/ASPEN JOURNALIsMThe dam at Ruedi Reservoir, seen here in earry Aprir. The reservoir iscurrently 57olo full and Bureau of Rreclamation ofäc¡als pr"¿¡it it *¡äbe possible to- fill this year if they keep rereasing just the minirnumdownstream for now.Conservati,on Service Colorado .Snow Sunæy. *\4Ie a¡e anticipafi.ngsignifi ean*y lcwer runoff corn-pared with the snowpackbecauseMiIIer missed the ma"rk þ about5,OOO acre-feet, leaving reservoirlevels a bit low. Itwas becausestreamflow forecasts didnt fullyaccount for the spring's lach ofprecþitation, warmer-thanrnor-mal temperatures and dr*r soils,he said.'IMe were over-forecasting unlilright at tJre very endj' tvtiller said."It wasnt until the end of May andearþ June that we realized wå justwerent going to get that \¡olnrne.Lastyear, beeause ofthose fore-casts, I was releasi.ng quite a bitmore water at this time because Iwas ørpecting a bigger inflou/.'This year, Miller said he planson releasingjust the minimumneeded to meet the instream flowneeds of the lower Fryingpan un-tiì he knows there wiil be enoughrunofto fill the reservoir. Mucúofthe water stored fui Ruedi iseither 1Êsh vraærj ieleased forthebenefü ofendangered ûsh down-stream or contract water¡ whichhas been sold þ the bureau tocover the costs ofbuilding andoperating the reservoir. ManyRUNOFE Al0ovÙl èwe entenedtureThe Coiorado Basin RiverForecast Cenie and NRCS bothreleased streamfiow forecaststhis week for the months ofÂpr_lthrough Jut'y. This is the secondyear in a rowparched soils willrob rivers of their water.
Support for AscendigoEditor:I amrrriting in support of Ascendigo's efforts toopen a day camp on Misso-uri Heights. My daugh-ter came back hor4e to work and pursue ari nursingdegree so she could move to sorne other mountaiñtown and find a good iob and a home she,could rea-sonably afford totruy. For obvious reasons, that is nothere in Aspen, where she was born and srew uD.She foúnd work at Ascendiqo, and ıoth she andI have lear¡ed a lot about autiså. It's not.o"t^go"..They arent diszuòtinq. They suffer from numêiousbreákdowns reðuhin{ from total fruitration. Whoamong us working poor have not felt the same? Ihave learned a lot about autism because of mv daush-ter. They arent hopeless at all. And, Ascend'igo däesown 126 acres after all. They wort't put a bunch ofspec homes gp theqe. Theyháve a higher goal.My daughter deals with vouns.- stro-ns men intheir 20s, añd they require u focrrsËd óhvsiËal outletand some simple ¡ioals to blow offsteam. A day campor even camping could be very beneficial foi them.Now Missouri Heights neighbors, ask yourselves:would you organize against [he Girl Scorits? I thinkyou should educate yóurselves about autism beforeyou decide to be NIMBYs about this.These folks arent poor. They will have a classy op-eration. Whatt your þroblem?Î guess the blindhoïr-acceptance ofothers you prejudge. And, ofcourse, aworry about your property values. Shame on you.Cheryl Niro (lscendigo can andshould do betteri April 6) and TobiasMunk ('Ascendigo a worthy cause, wronglqcationi' April6), I realize I did just whatI aecused you of doing: not understandingWhere does Ascendigo go?Editor:Iknowalittle aboutJanet MohimanAspenI'm scared for you and what you face. Evenif you dont call this valley your only home,you face a battle and I say, good Iuclc' Guess I have to eat a little crow here andapologize. I appreciate that you appreciatethe soldiers on the ground, trylng to helpautistic guys live their best lives. I honest-ly wonder where Ascendigo is supposed togo? Andwhat they can dowith theirland inMissouri Heights? But that is not uP to me.It would be great if you all could talk andI work it out. That Hunt Ranch thing is evil.Guess I'm done. GoodlucktheJanet [llohrmanAspent4l*J^ t ¿rr /"ltow- LLp l¿\hr,Ja¡w¡ o-Pûerrûu-ç erl.¿Lc a- oLrz*Ç \,,o*' oV iur{ì c/v\/)q¡€{e- Yv\r-e ?uìJu{ .Ja.rne*'ç 4c+ (rkr
April 11,2021
Joe Edwards
14 Fender Ln.
Carbondale, CO 81623
Glen Hartman, Planner
Garfield County Planning Dept.
109 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
OU¡47kê.
'îW.)oun,,.,ctoptïld
Re: Ascindego
Dear Mr. Haftman,
I am opposed to the Ascindgo application for a commercial operation of a facility for Downs syndrome
patients including group housing for staff and patients, activity halls, barns, and various associated
buildings and structures, primarily on the basis that it will fundamentally alter the character of the rural
area as a result of the considerable traffic it will generate and the noise, dust and bustle of activity it
will generate that is incompatible with the existing quiet remote large lot rural nature or this area. Also
the fact this proposal is at odds with the existing zoning and master plans for this area of the county. I
would hope that you and the planning department would develop a recommendation of denial to
forward to the BOCC for this ill advised proposal.
This proposal does not comply with existing zoning as it can not meet the definition of an educational
facility as the applicant is not affiliated with any national educational organization. That fact alone
requires the application be denied. The prior applicant for the White Cloud Ridge subdivision, alarge
lot housing subdivision, is in violation of the SIA for that prior county approval of that subdivision. The
prior applicant Tom Levitt was required by the County in paragraph2.D (3) to install a new surface on
Harmony, the access to the project, to county secondary access road standards including a chip and seal
surface and Levitt represented by means of the homeowners association corporation he formed that he
would would maintain such road in good condition. He provided a Road Maintenance Agreement to
the County by which he agreed to maintain Harmony. He violated such representations to the County
by failing to improve the road to a proper county standard. The road was never properly crowned and
intersecting roads and driveways were not properly constructed to divert runoff and snow melt into side
drainage ditches and the compaction was inadequate and the chip and seal surface was too thin and the
surface quickly disintegrated and became potholed and the road was never maintained by the the
Homeowners Association he had created. As the current applicant has or is in the process of acquiring
Mr. Levitts interest in the'White Cloud Ridge subdivision and the HOA Levitt created, the current
applicant has assumed the obligations of Levitt and his HOA with respect to the obligations to the
county as set out in the subdivision improvements agreement and related documents of the White
Cloud Ridge approvals. Therefore the cunent applicant is in violation of the obligations of Levitt and
the V/hite Cloud Ridge HOA with respect to the obligations to properly construct and maintain
Harmony.
The applicant has proposed a poor and insensitive design and location of the main buildings it desires
to construct. It proposes to construct its main facilities just off Harmony and west of the large water
storage tank. This is the highest elevation on the entire parcel and is in full view of approximately 60
residential homes in adjacent subdivisions. If those facilities were placed about 4000 feet SW of the
l?-1þ
I.og
proposed site they would be behind a ridgeline and not visible to or from the surrounding homes. this
would significantly reduce the visual light and sound impacts of the proposal on adjacent homes. Also
the proposed site of a future pond is inappropriate as it destroys the old homesteader cabins site. That
area drains to the south and is full of large excavated basalt boulders and would be difficult to seal the
southerly drainage.
However, this proposal is just inconsistent with all of the existing master planning and zoning and
should be denied.
oe
?rntl a*owfrãii.i?9 ",#-n ;n iJ - ä,åfi]îlJ-.¡EiJ{:, i fr e;.slrJc}rl .;à(? JtlU"-l
ßÊÞ Lo t e,ïÐr\¡Ë¿A lûhJÞ
Dqb*3grfe"b)rfral\,-1\,2úçcÞ&rturnove fiìßt Ñ e¡ar*scÊ"1*TïprþSW FÐCUî Yq rcrtu$ S\P'Jîô ät{33*¡t l*ti'lü-#' n'/t*Å'n*{ltru. #* å" 1",¡".}î;g;,.q
ER
L844 ñ€cF/Pe.Õ
o_;;il;";äþ"
f,frf,ilF[,rr ,î.xl*rum bleridge@gmail. com
970-948-2r5r
4/12/202L
To the Garfield County Commissioners:
I am writing you regarding the wisdom of allowing a commercial non-profit
enterprise to conduct a commercial business on a newly constructed campus on the
rural Missouri Heights, White Cloud property.
My name is Holly Mclain. I sold Moon Run Ranch, OId Snowmass in Pitkin County,
Colorado after 47 years of ranching in the Roaring Fork Valley and outfitting in the
USFS Maroon/Snowmass Wilderness. In 201,41 moved to Missouri Heights to Ruth
Fender's original Homestead property, I chose Missouri Heights because it is a
rural agricultural area, where I can keep my horses, chickens and grow a garden.
Within this area there are at least 6 real working ranches,large properties with
livestock including horses and cattle; and residential properties with long vistas and
larger spaces between homes. Most people grow gardens and have animals like
cattle, sheep, chicken, ducks and geese for their supplemental food source.
I live on the Eagle County side of the Heights and I know that commercial
enterprises are not within the zoning permitted for this area.
I am not against Ascendigo per se, but any large commercial endeavor in a rural
environment is incongruent. Housing 70 campers and then staff to accommodate
those campers would put untold pressure on the road access arteries in our
neighborhood. If the component of horses is removed from the scenario, Ascendigo
becomes a transit operation for camp activities and councilors. Missouri Heights is a
family territory. This residential neighborhood does not require Cysco trucks to
deliver foods to the commercial kitchens that will be built on this campus. Large
Missouri Heights ranches still maintain ownership for agriculture. If Asendigo is
allowed, future sellers and buyers of those existing ranches, which have large
buildings such as riding arenas and hay barns will be asking for similar zoning
changes. This approval will set a precedent, putting pressure on the Garfield and
Eagle bureaucrats to allow new uses similar to Ascendigo.
Worst of all is the proposed misuse of water. Ascendigo's water plan of capturing
the B water to fill a pond for clients to float on for their water therapy is counter to
our Colorado water rights drought situation. The B water rights turn on later in the
summer after first cutting of hay. Before and after the water is received, there will
be an empty, unsightly hole, another large area of undisturbed land for noxious
weeds to proliferate. Missouri heights is stressed for water. Wells are dropping and
I personally believe there should be a moratorium for any new development. Water
is precious and we are all in the throes of climate change. I am writing my letter to
Garfield County Commissioners today to stop this potential water offense.
t7lEXHIBIT
When ranching was king, Missouri Heights was flood irrigated, which soaked the
land and recharged the aquif'er. Hry, potätoes and grazirrg cattle utilized our
precious anrì ìimited water. Now, there is no recharging of our aquifer. I am against
allowing t:Ïre cle¡rìet:inn of our watcr by peopìc who nray have no idea how their
actions are affecting our water table.
Fire is another climate change reality. The Lake Christine fire burned to my fence.
MHMMR lrrigation Company turnetl on waLer so Lhat I and my neighbor, Alex Ifim
could flood our lands. We stopped the fire from rampaging across Missouri Heights.
Most residential home owners are unaware of the importance of managing water. In
the West, durrng the early western frontier days, people fought and clietl tlver waler'.
People are known to go out at night to divert water f'or their own unpermitted use.
This still occurs.
Ascendigo is a good organization. Currently they use Spring Valley Campus for
housing [already built and functioningJ; they go to Rifle Gap for water, floating
therapy [plenty of water available to the public); Sidney Horowitz currently runs
Ascendigo equestrian program at Crystal Springs Ranch. WindWalkers and Smiling
Goat offer equestrian therapy (existing programs available in Carbondale); and any
other needed programs can be accommodated locally without building a large
campus complex on Missouri Heights. The Ascendigo Campus will be lit at night to
illuminate roads and buildings. Light pollution is real. Missouri Heights residents
enjoy our starry night skies, which would be forever altered.
I support the ideology of Ascencligo. I qnestion the wisdom of putting this large
envisioned facility on rural land with the challenges of limited water, wildfire
danger and increased traffic impacts.
From my Missouri Heights neighbor, focelyn Terry -
"l live down an old dirt road, ridclled with potholes.'l'he danger for wildfire in my
neighborhood is extremely high, with dry conditions almost year-round and high
winds on a regular basis. Our mesa overlooks the midsection of the Roaring l'ork
Valley, with Mount Sopris highlighting the natural bcauty to the Southside. Water is
limiLed here, and we are constantly repairing our aging water systems in order to
keep up with the addition of new single-family homes. We work together as
neighbors to identify fire dangers and traffic concerns. You can wait behind a slow
tractor on a county road or take the time to stop and chat with a neighbor in the
midctle of the street, ancl you will know that you are living on Missouri Heights. We
thrive as a small community in a rural environment."
Many residents in our rural Missouri Heights neighborhoods want to keep the area
peaceful, verdant and with no additional traffic, light pollution or heightenecl
activities. Please carefully consider the decision to grant Ascendigo the use rights for
this commercial, albeit non-profit enterprise.
Sincerely,
Holly Mclain - Missouri Heights Resident
tLl
EXHIBIT
It.c!ôd
April 5,202L
Most s incerely,
&Ëc €fvËÕ
;
Dear Board of counrv commissioners'
, "^..fÎfflîr,it$r?yffirI taught in the field of Special Education for many years. I have infinite resp
p"r"it , teachers and aàvocates of our special needs population' My area was the
visualþ impaired, though contactwith a myriad of special needs was common.
A dream of one of our pãrents was to find a facility for the least able of our visually
impaired where they iould permanently live, work, socialize and basically enjoy life.
This type of residence would have been a dream come true, however if the
oppoiCunity arose, I personally would not have chosen an area in an established
nàighborhóod wheré people valued the peace, serenity and rural feel of the
surrounding area'
I applaud those who care so much for the well being of the autistic community.
fnant goodness for the caring support. I do not applaud the idea of basically
commeicializing a plot of land and disrupting the rural atmosphere and tranquility
of an entire neignbàrhood. Surely, there are more appropriate and larger tracts of
land on which to place this unique, well intentioned and large project'
I am aware if the impending problems that others have addressed, traffic, road
erosion, water issuei, noise, and above all the rural character of the community, not
to mention the sffess this is causing for many of the Missouri Heights neighbors.
I hope you will give your decision a great deal of though! and while you're thinking
place yourself in the shoes of the people whom this facility will impact'
I thank you very much for your time and consideration
Marjorie Aleamoni
Missouri Heights resident
EXHIBIT
tnGlenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Brad Fite < brad.fite@cityofaspen.com>
Tuesday, April 20, 2021 12:13 PM
Olivia Cook
Glenn Hartmann; Kimala Fite
lExternall Question regarding Lot 19 of Fox Run Meadows Subdivision vs. Ascendigo
land use.
Good morning, Olivia:
Our property is partially in Eagle County and partially in Garfield, and we pay taxes to both. My wife attended a meeting
yesterday on the Ascenigo project proposal that would put a large commercial development just across the County line
beside our house. The CEO, Dan Richardson told my wife and others yesterday that Garfield County was reviewing this
proposal as an "Educational" Facility based on input from Eagle County. They propose to put up many buildings,
including a 52 foot high gymnasium for the 24 clients and 48+ nursing and support staff. This will be right up where it
will impact everyone's view plane. Can you let me know if indeed Eagle County had input on the "Educational"
classification as Mr. Richardson stated? We are concerned with a huge increase in traffic on our private road, their
parking lot and perimeter lights on 24/7 and the coming and going of ambulances as conveyed to us by both Mr.
Richardson and their planning consultant Bob Schultz. The employment ads for Ascendigo Staffing are for many medical
professionals (various types of nurses etc.), and while they have presented this development to the neighbors as a small
"summer camp", Dan Richardson yesterday stated that this will be a year-round operation with intense activity (therapy)
in the summer. We believe that this is a medical care facility intended to give wealthy families a break from the
challenge of caring for autistic family members, and while we feel that this is a organization with a laudable mission, we
feel that it does not belong in the heart of some of the most valuable homes in Garfield and Eagle County.
lf you could please let us know Eagle Counties involvement in this process and how we might be heard, we would greatly
appreciate it.
Kind regards,
Tþ -r4
*Fl'
CITY OFASPEH
Brad Fite
Facilities Manager
Parks and Recreation
0861 Maroon Creek Road
Aspen, CO 8161 1
(970) 544-4119 (O)
(e70) 30e-5426 (C)
www.citvofaspen.com
{ü
1
Ítgt@E
Pitkin County's Recovery Plan for COVID-19 to make Aspen safer and healthier means we all must follow the five
commitments of containment:
1. I will maintain six feet of distance from anyone not in my household
2. lwillwash my hands often
3. I will cover my face in public
4. lwillstay home when l'm slck
5. I will seek testing immediately and self-report if I experience symptoms
More at https://covidlg.pitkincountv.com/
From: Olivia Cook <olivia.cook@eaglecounty.us>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 4:47 PM
To: Brad Fite <brad.fite@cityofaspen.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Fox Run Question
Hi Brad,
I hope you're enjoying the sunshine!
I spoke with Glenn today about the intergovernmental agreement. So far we are on the same page with that. There is a
plat note on the plat (note 8) stating that Eagle County has jurisdiction over the zoning and land use regulations for the
property, including the portion in Garfield County. Glenn and I agreed that I can be your main contact regarcling
questions on this property for now. Depending on how this all shakes out I will probably be in touch with Glenn again if
the County has questions regarding access from Harmony Road, which is in Garfield County.
Based on my research so far, here are some starting points for next steps on your questions:
Building Envelope
As I understood it, you were saying you'd like to build a barn with an attached caretaker unit. As you mentioned, the
PUD Guide states a caretaker unit must be integrated with the primary residential unit, garage, or barn. You were also
correct that the caretaker unit must be located within the building envelope for the property. lt sounds as though you
and your neighbors have discussed potential alternative locations for the proposed barn located outside of the building
envelope.
The County does have a land use application process to amend a building envelope. Generally, the size of the building
envelope cannot change, but there are instances where the building envelope can be broken up into two smaller pieces
that add up to the same square footage as the existing building envelope. You could submit an application for an
Amended Final Plat that would be reviewed by staff, external review agencies, and ultimately the Board of County
Commissioners. Review would be based on standards for an Amended Final Plat in the Eagle County Land Use
Regulations.
The first step to submitting an application is a meeting with County staff to discuss the proposal. I'm happy to provicle
more information on how to do that. Before we schedule that meeting, I was hoping you could provide more
information on the following.
2
Encroachment
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, April 20, 2021 12:58 PM
Donald Flaks
Glenn Hartmann
RE: lExternal] Ascendigo CamP
Hello Mr. Flaks, Thank you for your comments. They will be added to the packet and reviewed as part of the approval
process
Regards,
.shergl L Eower, AlcP
Community DeveloPment Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970-945-7377 $69sl
From: Donald Flaks <donflaks@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, APril 20,2O2t 12:1-9 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: IExternal] Ascendigo Camp
To the Garfield County Commissioners and all other responsible parties:
Ten years ago, at the end of the Aspen ldeas Festival, my wife and l, out of pure curiosity, went to see a home listed for
sale in Missouri Heights. As lifelong residents of the New York City metropolitan area, and well into our 70's, the last
thing in our minds was to relocate. That said, less than two months later, we moved into our new home in Stirling Ranch
and never looked back. Once we got settled, we quickly learned - our story was far from unique. Most of our new
friends and neighbors experienced similar abrupt changes to their lives'
The reason for this ubiquitous flight to Missouri Heights is immediately evident to anyone walking, biking, or riding
around our neighborhood - broad open spaces, extraordinary views and very quiet roads. We cherish this pristine
environment - the introduction of the Ascendigo camp will instantly and indelibly impact this tranquility.
For my wife and l, personally, it can be argued that the Ascendigo camp will be less an obstruction to our life than the
proposed White Cloud homes, since we directly face the western end of the subject property, where little development
is proposed. That said, we still, vigorously oppose the Ascendigo camp because we are not thinking just of ourselves nor
just for this moment, but for our entire neighborhood and its future. What we find most disturbing is that even their
iecently proposed reduced plan of operations still creates an extraordinary increase in traffic for the immediate
neighborhood. Furthermore, their new "commitments" of a reduced program in scope is not enforceable nor
1
EXHIBIT
tll
reliable. AND it would not take much for them to expand their program to its original level, and even beyond, and truly
flood the landscape w¡th extra cars/vans/busses - and even structures. That would truly be tragic,
We do not deny, for an instant, that this facility provides an essential service to the community, but it is unreasonable to
expect it to fit in within the serenity that invaluably exists in Missouri Heights today. Clearly, it should be located within a
more developed area, of whjch there are many other opportunities.
Another question I have regarding this project is the willingness for the officers of Ascendigo to proceed to spend
upwards of THREE MILLION DOLLARS to purchase this property before obtaining the approval they need for this project
to go forward. I have been in the real estate business all my adult life. I have contracted to purchase and sell similar
tracts of land, but such contracts were always conditioned upon first securing the approvals from the local government
authorities needed for its purpose. And in fact, Ascendigo did just that when they tried to create this same project in
Emma in Eagle County. I would ask Ascendigo, why they did not follow the same contractual procedure as in Emma and
what plan they have should their application be denied?
2
Tomrny Barras
l5 White Cloud Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
April 20, 2021
Dear Commissioners and Decision-Makers,
I live at 15 White Cloud Road, and I am writing to urge you to reject the application Ascendigo
has submitted for their proposed year-round program and summer camp. Overall, this
program, although legally a 501c3 non-profit, operates as a commercial venture much too
large for this quiet rural residential neighborhood. I agree strongly that commercial
development will begin in Missouri Heights if Ascendigo is allowed to develop.
I purchased this home with the expectation the residential subdivision would be developed
over time as moderate growth happens typically, and I would have neighbors. I did not expect
it would become an area with commercial operation with larger structures, heavy traffic, over
100 people there regularly. These things would forever change the character of this area and
pose concerns relating to fíre and evacuation, water, noise, traffic, and more.
I agree that Ascendigo is a worthy cause, and there must be locations on the valley floor that
are more attractive with much easier access to services needed.
Please vote NO to the Ascendigo application
Respectfully submitted,
l7r"L-
EXI.IIBIT
Ìt05o6
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David Aguilar < daguila12020@gmail.com >
Wednesday, April21,2021 2:56 PM
Glenn Hartmann
IExternal] Ascendigo Development
Dear Mr. Hartmann
The recently proposed Ascendigo Development is certainly a worthy cause but threatens the
future and well-being of residents living in Missouri Heights. With the growing threat of
wildfires in Western Colorado, already taxed water resources in Missouri Heights could easily
become over-stressed by this open-ended commercial development. The impact of adding an
additional 450+ cars a day onto Harmony Lane, the only dirt and gravel road via Fender Lane
leading to and from the camp, is another maior warning sign this project is ill-suited for its
current proposed location.
As a Missouri Heights resident and landownþr for the past fifteen years, I recognize we live in
a very peculiar and dangerous micro-climate where sustained winds can gust from early
spring through the end of fall, sometimes reaching 60 miles per hour. Any wildfire occuring
up here would be unstoppable wrecking untold damage to the Ascendigo Camp, surrounding
homeowners, nearby communities and especially any young autistic kids caught in a raging
inferno. Firefighters reported the wildfires north of Boulder last Fall consumed areas the size
of three football fields every minute. With the Wind River easement access and private Sunset
Lane blocked off to Ascendigo usage, the only egress to and from the campsite along Harmony
Lane could be cut off by fire creating a recipe for disaster.
Now entering our twenty-fïrst year of drought here in the western states, our Missouri
Heights water supplies show signs of stress. Some neighbors have had their wells go dry
while others have seen their water supplies contaminated with sand, mud and silt, The mere
idea of excavating lakes for summer recreational activities, permanently housing and
providing water needs for one-hundred or more new residents, hosting fundraising events
for up to 250 people is delusional. With neighbors experiencing water problems now, as long
time resident Kit Strang has said, "When ít comes to water, Ascendigo is digging itself a deep a
hole that it may notbe able to get out of,"
The last and most glaring point of my concernsis the consideration of Ascendigo as an
"educational institution" by Garfield County Land Use Department.
In all their advertising media, web sites, etc. Ascendigo proudly promotes their services
as "an Adventure Camping and Liþ-Enrichment Experience".There is no mention of
EDUCATION being taught. That qualification is missing for a very good legal
reason. Ascendigo is not an established Autism/Spectrum educational organization
recognized or affiliated with other professional state or federal autism organization. They do
not employ credentialed educators conducting approved curriculum-based educational
1
EXHIBIT
133
inoô.ô6
services. Instead, they promote their own home-grown "enrichment experiences"which in
today's world could mean practically anything.
In reality, WHAT Ascendigo lS is exactly what Ascendigo SAYS it is: A non-profit, future-
expanding corporate enterprise offering adventure camping and life enrichment
services while hosting conferences, massive fundraising events all the while housing
and feeding year-round staffers and visitors. 'l'hey are not, in any legal sense, nor do they
advertise in any way, a licensed, accredited, established educational organization providing
approved therapy programs for those on the spectrum.
For all the above reasons, this application of Ascendigo Autism Services to build a
50,000 square foot sprawling future-expansive corporate facility with a fifty- foot tall
recreation center in the middle of Missouri Heights should be denied. This organization
belongs on the valley floor where paved county roads permit safe and rapid access for
emergency responders, the removal from the harm from high-wind wildfire threat and the
access to plentiful water supplies that are rearlily available there. Thank you for considering
this letter. Please keep historic Missouri Heights out of the valley floor commercial
development crush. It maintains today such a wonderful antl colorful heritage. As we all
know, once you lose it, once you pave over it, it's gone forever.
David A. Aguilar
Shirley G. Aguilar
Missouri Heights and Eagle County residents
2
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subiect:
Attachments:
Connie Wood <connieawood@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, April 20, 2021 10:45 AM
Glenn Hartmann
eagleadmin@eaglecounty.us; morgan.beryl@eaglecounty.us; comdev@eaglecounty.us
lExternal] Ascendigo Land Use Proposal in Missouri Heights
Ascendigo Letter.pdf
Glenn
Attached is a scanned version of my letter regarding the above-referenced matter, which, as you can
see, I am also emailing to the Eagle County Commissioners and their Community Development
department. I am mailing originals of the letter to you and the Garfield County Commissioners
today. I am hopeful that you will also share the letter with the Planning staff before your
recommendation is finalized.
It is my understanding from our conversations that all letters you receive will also be included in the
packet for the hearing.
Please let me know that you have rece¡ved my letter and thank you for your consideration
Connie Wood
t3+
EXHIBIT
'4oosı
1
April 19,2021
VIA U.S. MAIL
Tom Jankovsky, Commissioner
John Martin, Commissioner
Mike Samson, Commissioner
Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County
108 8ü'Street, Suite 101
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
VIA U.S. MAILand
VIA EMAIL ehartmann@*arfield-countv.çqm
Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner
Garfield County Community Development
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Ascendþo land Use Proposal ln Missourl Heishts. Your File No. LIPA-01-21-8826
Dear Commissioners Jankovsky, Martin and Samson and Planner Hartmann:
Pursuant to my discussions with Glenn Hertmann, I am submitting this letter to confirm my
onposition to the Ascendlgo Ranch proposed development ln Mlssourl Helghts.
I am a resident of Missouri Heights and have been for over 33 years. Most of us who live in
Missouri Heights live here for the peace and quiet and rural character the area provides and its distance
from congestion and the masses. The rural character of the area and way of life (including water supply)
will be threatened if this proposal is approved and it will set a dangerous precedent for
overdevelopment ¡n the area.
After review of Ascendigo's Application materials, I have major concerns about the development
and its impact on the Missouri Heights area where ¡t is proposed. I believe Ascendigo's Application fails
to meet the Land Use standards in several important respects. My concerns are many and include, but
are not limited to, the magnitude of the development and proposed further expansion, its
incompatibility with the rural land and character of the area, the increase in traffic and noise, increased
taxing of water supplies and roads, and fire danger.
Masnitude of Development and Proposed Further Exoansion
and lncompatibiliw with the Rural Land and Character
First, let me say that I was very disappointed when a representat¡ve of Ascendigo was asked
recently about their "educational training curriculum," which I assume is to support their Application as
an Educational Facility. The final Application materials say "Ascendigo does indeed have a published
educational train¡ng curriculum." The questions asked were: What ís the date of that document and
where can it be found? We were told that the informat¡on was proprietary and not available to the
public. I can't understand why they would not want to share that document, especially if that is the
basis for their submittal. That is key information when looking at their Application.
The magnitude of the proposed development is not "aligned with other communlty services" it
l¡sts ln our viclnlty (Strang Ranch, Windwalkers, Mlssouri Heights Schoolhouse). The impact of the
current activities listed for these 3 entities all combined is not even close to the activities that are
proposed on the Ascendigo property.
Letter to Garfield County Commissioners Jankovsþ, Martin and Samson, and planner Hartmann
April19,2021
Page 2
I have no object¡on to the goals of Ascendigo to help youth and adults across the autism
spectrum and I applaud their efforts. However, the Missouri Heights area where this development is
proposed is not the proper place to âdd the extent of almost year-round uses they propose and
"related" usês for the Ranch, such as overnight accommodat¡on rentals to ,rfamlly and frlends, of
Ascendlgo and lodgln¡ for outc¡de/Gorporato guests, fundrairln¡ actlvltles, ctc.
This development will have a huge impact on the area as far as the number of people proposed
to be coming and goíng from the property and staying on the propefi when you are talking about a
Base Camp, Camper Lodge, Staff Lodge, Activity Barn, Caretaker Dwelling, Caretaker ADU and Guest
Cabin ("primary buildingd' of up to 45,5ft0 sq. ft. according to their Limited lmpact Review and
Subdivision Vacation document), AND additlonal "accessoty structures" for maintenance and storage, a
hay barn, horse and goat barns, an equestrian tack/office, and loaflng sheds on the property and for
other proposed "actlvities." Th6 proposed development ¡s not compatible wlth thelr slnglc-family rural
residential neighbors in size, scale or use.
ln their documents, Ascendigo and their consultants make numerous comparisons to what was
approved and what they propose, but those comparisons are not relevant, especially when the Final plat
for Whitecloud Ridge was recorded on October 20, !@, over 20 vears aro. And lT WAS NEVER
DEVELOPED. Things have changed considerably during that time and, as the Comprehensive plan states,
"Because condltlons change over t¡me, ¡t is ¡mportant for the county to revlsit and update....,, That is
certainly true when comparing 2000 to 2021. There should be no comparing Ascendigo's proposed
development to what was proposed over 20 years ago; it should be looked at by what is there today.
ln their Application materials, Ascendigo also indicates that buildout could take "several years or
more as it is dependent on addltlonal fundraising." With net fundraising income, as reported in their
publicly disclosed tex returns for 2O',7 of 533,134; 2018 of 566,570; and 2019 of $73,431, that could
take a very long time.
lncrease in Traffic and Noise
ln their most recent traffic study, "Trips per day'' of 210 should be compared to what the vehicle
trips are from the propefi today (0), not what w͡s proposed for a subdivision that was never
developed. lt appears that the additional trips will double those that are present today. The increase in
noise associated w¡th these additional vehicle trips will seriously diminish the quality of life for everyone
in the area. And with construction of "several years or more", the traffic and noise will be even greater.
On any given day at my hrime, you cân hear a long way. On some days, it is so quiet that you
can hear the traffic on Highway 82 during peak travel times. lf we can hear that noise, you can imagine
how much will be heard during activities that are even closer that are planned for "up to 150" people,
lncreased Taxing of Water Supplles
Of major importance is the additional stress the development's impact will have on the water
supplies (both drinking water and irrigation water) in the area. We have had experiences over the last
several years where, each yeâr, therê ls less water available for irrigation. Last summer, during our
irr¡gat¡on water call, there wâs only about 2% weeks available for water¡ng for our subdivision. Add to
Letter to Garf¡eld County Commissioners Jankovsky, Mart¡n and Samson, and Planner Hartmann
April 19,2021
Page 3
that the lack of water pressure, low water alerts, and the production from water wells dropping, all
related to drinking water, the magnitude of the Ascendigo proposal will only negatively affect the
available weter supplies. And with the drought conditions throughout Colorado, the strain on the water
supplies will only continue to become greater. Ascendigo's plans for ponds and such a large daily
population will negatively affect those water supplies. The fact that the wâter supply might have been
adequate back in 2000 does not mean that it will be adequate with the huge development they propose.
Homeowners in the area indicated that when the pond was being constructed on the propefi a
few years ago, employees working on the project indicated the reason for the pond construction was
that the production from the water wells was dropping and there was concern that the water supply
would become inadequate if the trend cont¡nued. The pond was being constructed for the water to
seep into the ground and help recharge the groundwater supply and increase the well production.
Filling the ponds from the wells would further decrease the well supply and it could only be
filled with irrigation water during certa¡n weeks ¡n the summer. Ascendigo has plans to fill 3 ponds on
the propefi, including for recreational uses, and there may be plans to line at least one of the ponds,
which would not help the level of the water wells from dropping, but would have the opposite effect.
Our concerns with water supplies are only exacerbated by these plans.
Homeowners have told of the problems with both irrigation and drinking water in the area of
this proposed development. lf there was just one issue that could be of major concern, the water
situation is it. Please do not approve overuse of our llmlted water supply. There must be
accountability and protection of the resources or someday there will be no more.
lncreased Taxins of Roads
On a recent, very slow drive down Harmony Lane from 102 Road, you cen see that the road is in
terrible disrepair, with ruts and holes everywhere. lt is apparent that the chip and seal that Ascendigo is
proposing for that road will have to be redone, maybe several times, to handle the increase in traffic and
especially with construction traffic through a buildout that they describe as "several years or more." lt is
my understanding, and I believe you have received notice that the residents of Sunset (private road)
¡ntend to close their road to Harmony Lane. With Harmony being the only way out for those who live
along it, it points to the increase in danger for those individuals during evacuation in the case of wildfire,
especially if there are "up to 150" people on the Ascendigo property at any one t¡me.
Fire Danger
During the 2018 Lake Christine Fire, for those of us who were evacuated here in Missouri
Heights, it was a very scary chaotic and stressful event, with traffic on Fender Lane coming across 102
Road and down Catherine Store Road after the fire came down the ridge into ElJebel (as the ElJebel
Road was closed), and it was a steady streâm of traffic, including not only passenger vehicles, but also
trucks, trailers hauling animals, etc. We are all very grateful that, thanks to the alert systems and the
quick action of the fire and other emergency personnel, with the exception of 3 homes, we survived that
incident. The experience is something that sticks with you for the rest of your life. The fire danger is
very high for our area and, if you add another "up to 15d' people to an evacuat¡on m¡x, that's significant
and causes great concern.
Letter to Garfield County Commissioners Jankovsky, Martin and Samson, and planner Hartmann
April19,2021
Page 4
On April 9, 2O2L, we experienced a wildfire in neighboring Stirling Ranch during a very windy
afternoon in Missourl Helghts. Thanks to the prompt action of fire personnel, it was qulckly under
control, but brought up memories of the Lake Christine fire and proved that we have a very long fire
season ahead. The fact that during fire season, we have very high winds in Missouri Heights, whicñ can
make a fire even more unpredictable, and with the drought conditions in all of Colorado, these factors
only add to concerns about placement of so many people in one place at one time.
ln Summarv
There was a recent statement in one of our local papers, with regard to development in the
Roaring Fork valley, say¡ng that "the rights of a brand new buslness should not be allowed to supersede
the rights of rcsidents in the area" and this certainly apptles in the case of this proposed development.
There are experts who are weighing in on both sides of this issue, which will be of lmportance,
but I encourage you to also listen to and take into account the personal experiences of homeowners in
this area, as we are the ones who have been living here (and many of us for many years).
The proposed Ascendigo development does not comply with sections 7-103 (coMpATtBtuwl,
7-1f14 (SOURCE OF WATER) and 7-10? (ACCESS AND ROADWAYS) of the Garfteld County tand Use and
Development Code, and it does not comply with the Garfleld County Comprehensive plan 203O whlch,
among other things, is said to strive to preserve the rural land and character of Garfield County.
Therefore, I would encourage the Board of County Commissioners to DENy the Ascendigo
development as proposed.
Thank you for your consideration.
sincerery,
A",^tL
Connie A. Wood
Kingis Row
Carbondale, CO 81623
Because this proposed development will also negatively impact Eagle County rcsidents, roads and othcr
services, I am sendlng a copy of my letter to Eagle County.
V-lA EMAIL easleadmin@easlecountv.us
Matt Scherr, Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner
Jeanne McQueeney, Commissioner
Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County
Vl FMAII mÍ¡rqtn hanrl/ã)a:cla.^¡rñh, ¡r^
-=j: --! rrr-.-!'rr'¡r rrE-rú-r!ùgq.¡¡t.s¡
Morgan Beryl, Community Development
Director,and@
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sarah Kaiman < sarahlwolff@gmail.com >
Wednesday, April21, 2021 1:14 PM
Glenn Hartmann
[External] Ascendigo in Missouri Heights
HiGlenn,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
I live right on the border of Eagle and Garfield counties. The proposed Ascendigo development will also affect both
counties, so I am writing both Garfield and Eagle Co contacts.
First of all, the land is zoned rural-residential. lf we can't count on zoning to keep these kinds of things out of our area, I
have no confidence in government.
Missouri Heights residents will be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire and water concerns. The roads and
infrastructure are not designed to support this development. ln fact, the roads leading to the proposed site are the
worst in Missouri Heights and currently havevery little traffic. I hearthat Ascendigo will not bring any revenue to help
with all of this stuff. That is bewildering.
Many wells are already running out of water. The Ascendigo water use will be huge compared to the amount that would
be consumed with rural residential use.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to
future commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
We all support Ascendigo's work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe
Please do what you can to encourage Garfield County to reject this application.
Thanks,
Sarah Kaiman
1253 Kings Row St.
Carbondale, CO 81623
Sarah Kaiman
720-648-7893
EXHIBIT
h(
L
EXHIBIT
t3L
l,t
-c.o0d
RE: Ascendigo Property Holdings Change in Land Use
Application;file no. LIPA-t1-21-&826 & PLVA-ü1-21-&827
Dear Commissioners Jankovsky, Martin and Samson.
I am writing to you today with serious concerns that the Ascendigo
change in Iand use application will negatively impact our
neighborhood area of Missouri Heights and that the application
fails fundamentally to meet the land use standards for change in
use in several relevant and important respects as detailed below.
1. Fails to meet LUDC 7-103. Compatibility with adjacent
land uses and fails to comply with the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan 2030 Future Land Use Plan which
designates this area as Rural single-family "Residential
Medium". The development is a high intensity
commercial use and includes a dining room area that
seats 75 diners and a deck that seats an additional 25
diners; lodging, including housing and guest cottages
that sleep near a total of 100 guests and staff.
2. Fails to meet LUDC 7-103. More than 50,000 sq ft of
buildings, plus, barns and maintenance buildings are
proposed. The uses, activities and improvements are
nowhere close to being compatible with the single
family rural residential neighbors in either size, scale, or
use.
3. Fails to meet LUDG 7-104 and Comprehensive Plan.
Ascendigo's stated use of water seems to ignore that
over the past three years, neighborhood water supplies
have been adversely impacted by low pressure, mud/
sand infiltration into wells, and zero lack of water
pressure during the Lake Christina fire. lts stated plans
for ponds and a greater daily population can only
negatively affect the available water resources.
Missouri Heights does not have the bountiful water access of the
Roaring Fork River, but instead relies upon aquifer recharge
from rain and nearby snow pack. Water wells tap the
underlying basalt rock reservoir. Many nearby water wells
have gone dry in recent years: (source 312018 Sopris Sun)
https : //www. sop rissu n . co m/2 0 1 8/0 3/2 8/whe n-the-we I l- ru ns-
drv/
4. Fails to meet LUDC 7-103 and the Future Land Use
Plan. Activities are stated as year-round with proposed
high intensity or heavy use for eleven out of twelve
months. The "summer Camp" runs from May 1 through
September 20 and includes 100 campers, counselors,
maintenance and kitchen staff, administrative staff and
other support staff on site daily. Camper "Turn over
day" will see even higher numbers of people present,
and again during its Winter Camp which runs from
January 1 through March 30. Non-camp months will
welcome seminars with guests housed at the lodge and
dining facilities open and use for other programs. These
high concentrations of people and activities is not
compatible with the rural single family residential
neighborhood that has a low daily population dispersed
over large homesites.
5. Fails to meet LUDC-7-103 and Future Land Use
Plan. The resulting enormous increases in traffic is not
compatible with the current Rural Residential Medium
designation and is not compatible with the single-family
residential neig h borhood.
6. Fails to meet LUDC 7-107, "All roads shall be
designed to provide for adequate and safe access". Of
serious concern is that Ascendigo has requested a
waiver from the usual Garfield County road standards.
The road is, quite simply, a wreck. Harmony Road is a
barely improved farm road with little or no road base.
The planned grading of a section of the road by
Ascendigo a few weeks before the site visit represents
a mere band aid and was done only to disguise the
completely degraded surface and road base. Their
proposed "chip and seal" improvement is not adequate
for the extent of planned use.
7. The proposed development site is located in
Garfield County's "Very High" susceptib¡l¡ty index
for wildfire. The two roads which are the evacuation
corridors from the site, CR 102 to; Katherine Store
Road and Fender to Upper Cattle Creek, have blind
spots and right angle turns that impede traffic and do
not permit any sort of an efficient evacuation. The Lake
Christine evacuation was chaotic and witnessed
bumper to bumper vehicles and trailers all in a slow
parade out of this area in July 2018. Add another 100,
plus people concentrated in one area to this mix and
there is only disaster in its wake. Accordingly, it fails to
comply with "Comprehensive Plan 2A30", page 52,
Policy 5 vi.
8. Does not meet the definition of "Educational Use"
under the Land Use Gode. "Buildings and uses for
instruction or research activities associated with an
academic institution (Emphasis added)..." Ascendigo
is not, and has never claimed to be, an academic
institution or associated with one.
9. This development does not comply with
"Comprehensive Plan 2030" that strives to preserve
rural land and character and encourage more intense
development in towns and already developed
commercial areas that have adequate established
infrastructure.
All told, Ascendigo is proposing to change the character of this
portion of Missouri Heights from that of rural residential to
commercial. This is a large year-round commercial venture,
not suitable for the rural residential zoning of this area. The
proposed Ascendigo development is in violation of LUDC
7443.
While Ascendigo is a worthwhile endeavor, its commercial
development is inappropriate in Missouri Heights' rural
residential neighborhood and is non-compliant with our
existing zoning and threatens to overburden the limited
water resource. A more suitable location would be within
the commercial confines of the Highway 82 valley floor
where zoning would not need to be changed and concerns
less impactful.
For these reasons I implore you to Please Vote "No" on the
proposed Ascendigo development.
Sincerely,
Velma Henry
909 Fender Lane
Carbondale, Co 81623
t57
EXHIBIT
lâ03ôgNigel& Maria Willerton
1575 Mariposa Avenue
Boulder CO 80302
USA
19th April 202L
By email to Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner - Garfield County
gha rtm a n n @ga rfie I d-cou nty. com
Dear Mr Hartmann,
As the parents of an adult son on the autistic spectrum, I am writing in support of the Ascendigo
Ranch project proposed in the Missouri Heights area of Garfield County'
Ascendigo has brought significant benefits to the quality of our 23-year old son's life with the
residential and educational support services they provide to him in Carbondale. The program has
enabled him find employment in Glenwood Springs, allowing him to make a positive economic
contribution to his local community and growing his confidence and self-esteem.
We discovered Ascendigo through the summer camp outdoor activity programs. A significant
purpose of the ranch is to extend and grow those opportunities, helping more children and young
adults with disabilities similar to Cameron.
I find it hard to believe that the main objections to such a rural ranch project are environmental
concerns, given the alternative is the development of a significant number of new homes which
would have a far greater negative impact. Ascendigo is an educational facility that will develop
the land into the proposed ranch in a far less dense and environmentally friendly manner. Our
knowledge of the Ascendigo management and mission makes me confident that they will be
extremely conscious of conserving wildlife, maximizing open space and minimizing any negative
environmental impact.
Therefore as parents of a young man who benefits from the Ascendigo programs, and as regular
visitors to the Roaring Fork Valley to hike & cycle, we sincerely request your support of the
Ascendigo limited impact review and the development of the Ascendigo Ranch project.
Sincerely,
N "gLL Wíilt-rtot-
Nigel & Triny Willerton
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Gwen Carew < gwencarew@comcast.net>
Monday, April 19, 2021 4:48 PM
Glenn Hartmann
[External] No To Ascendigo
please do not approve this land use change or this development.
I live in Mo Heights, on Fender Lane. I oppose this commercial development and the traffic it will bring. The increase in
traffic is dangerous. Also, this is not an education facility. lt is a place for people to recreate'
I know this. I have a child with Autism' Thank you' Gwen
t\{tâ.cD0g
EXHI BIT
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Kristina Tober <sktober@comcast.net>
Monday, April 19, 2021 5:22 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Support for the Ascendigo Ranch
Dear Mr. Hartmann
I want to lend our family's support for the new ranch that Ascendigo intends to develop and operate.
Our son Luke has been a participant in Ascendigo's summer camp program for almost a decade. We also hope that soon
our son will become a more permanent fixture in Garfield County as a resident and participant in Ascendigo's Adult
Enrichment program.
While it's easy to focus on the benefits of this ranch to the population it will serve, I think it's more important to
highlight what it brings to Garfield County and the local communities:
The more people are exposed to individuals with autism, the hope is the greater their understanding, empathy
and support for their efforts to engage and contribute to the local community.
We need to include individuals with autism in the equity and inclusion dialogue. A community that embraces
and supports diversity in all populations is a community that is richer, kinder and more patient.
By building this tremendous resource, you will also encourage more investment into your county. We saw this in
Steamboat where the Steamboat Adapt¡ve Recreation Sports (STARS) program built a ranch. The families of the
adults and children that this program serve want to make Steamboat a place they return to, again and again,
and invest in primary and secondary residences.
This will be an asset to the community in the sense that the Roaring Fork Valley will be seen not just as the
playground of the rich and out of touch, but a place where diversity is welcome and embraced, where the
community provides deep and necessary supports, and welcomes all individuals.
This program will bring additional professional jobs to the County. Ascendigo offers jobs for people who are
educated and trained to support the autism population, thereby adding rich vocational opportunities in the
community that aren't just reliant on the tourism sector.
The individuals who are planning this project carry the same love of the Valley and its rich ecological heritage. They will
work hard to preserve what has made this valley such a beautiful place for so many people, and they will allow an
underserved, often isolated population the same opportunities to respectfully engage with this valley as others can.
Thank you for your time
Kristina and Stephen Tober
Denver CO
847-40L-1406
a
a
1
t31
EXHIBIT
'do5o6
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 B:27 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: IExternal] Ascendigo Please Read
I have not responded to any of these folks.
,shergl L Bower, AICP
Community Development Director
LO8 8th Street, Suite 40L
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97O-94s-1377 (L6O5l
From : M ike Sa mson <msamso n @ga rfie ld-co u nty'com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 30,2OZL 8:04 AM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@ga rfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: IExternal] Ascendigo Please Read
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message
From: Jennifer Bruno <ienbh4@gmail.com>
Date: March 29,2021at 11:57:03 PM MDT
To: M ike Samson <msa mson @ ga rfie ld-co u ntv.com >
Subject: IExternal] Ascendigo Please Read
Dear Mike Samson,
I know you have heard from many of my neighbors and the residents of Garfield and bordering Eagle
County about allowing Ascendigo to build a HeadQuarters in Missouri Heights. We are concerned voters
and tax paying citizens. By now you have read countless letters about the violation of land use codes,
the traffic, the dust, the roads, water resources, non-rural nature and fire danger. I agree, the volume is
simply too much, and it is unsafe for all residents and visitors to create something of this magnitude in a
dirt road community with limited resources and access in an emergency. We all felt it when we had to
sitin"ruraltraffic"duringtheemergencyevacuationoftheLakeChristineFires. ltwill hauntmeforthe
rest of my life.
This is an extreme environment and can not sustain the likes of 456 additional cars daily, for-profit sub-
rentals when not in use, vendors, deliveries, campers, drops offs/pickups, emergency vehicles and 100
person dinners on a weekly basis (admitted bv Dan Richardson himself), etc. The water needed for an
equestrian center, playing fields and a pond is absurd up here. The list goes on, but it ends for me in
the chanse of land use codes. This is a "can of worms" that will change everything - not only for
Missouri Heights, but all of rural Garfield County.
1
tm
EXHIBIT
'ooo.od
Although a wonderful cause that my family holds (very) near and dear, it is a commercial land use that is
unfounded, inappropriate and unsafe. I agree that this production is a way to create an
important experience forvery special and deserving people. lt's lìärd for rne to leave the Lugged
heartstrings out of ¡t, but I must, to make sure my community does not head down a rabbit hole that we
can not recover from.
Ascendigo's website states itis "covered by most insutance". Does insurance pay for education now?
We all know this is not educational use. lt is important to think about the tuture when
Ascendigo realizes it is too harsh of an cnvironmcnt to sustain? Who will be allowed to commercialize in
our rural neighborhood then?
To be frank, it feels like a back door deal with the Mayor of Carbondale - A.K.A., The COO of
Ascendigo - and his Garfield County elected officials. I mean, how else can a 3 step approval process go
down to 1 step process? Can someone please explain how this happened with all of the pushback in the
community?
I am looking forwartl to hearing your response, and thank you for your consideration
Concerned Cltlzen,
Jennifer Bruno
(970) 30e-3066
2
GIenn Hartmann
Sent:
To:
Cc:
From:
Thanks Tom, Have a great day!
-Sherul L Eower, AIC?(J
Community DeveloPment Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970-94s-L377 (16Os)
From : Tom Ja n kovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfie ld-cou nty.com>
Sent: Monday, March 29,2O2t5:.42PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwa rded message:
From: noreplv@formstack'com
Date: March 29,2O2L atL2:38:47 PM MDT
To: tia n kovskv@ga rfield-countv.com
Subject: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: peggvmever9@gmail.com
Garfield County
Subject: Ascendigo
Name: Peggy MeYer
Email : peggvmeverg@gmail.com
Phone Number: (630) 877-3756
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 B:33 AM
Tom Jankovsky
Glenn Hartmann
RE: [External] Garfield County website inquirySubject:
Message: I wanted to write you in full support of the ascendigo development. I live directly
across-from the white cloud plots in Garfield county. I believe this is the best use of this
property.
1
EXH¡BIT
tH
Please vote yes to bring this to conclusion
2
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 B:34 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: lExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
,^sherul L Bower, AlcP<J
Community Development Director
LO8 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97j-94s-r377 (L6Osl
From: Tom Ja nkovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfie ld-co u nty.com>
Sent: Monday, March 29,20217:26PM
To: She ryl Bowe r <sbower@ga rfield-co u nty.com >
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: no re plv@fo rmstaek.cqm
Date: March 29,2021. at6:t9:L7 PM MDT
To: tia n kovskv@ga rfield-countv.com
Subject: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: maddv@ rof.net
Subject: Ascendigo /white cloud proposal
Name: Mary Chester
Email: maddv@rof.net
Phone Number: (970) 379-5777
Message:
Dear Commissioners Jankovsky, Martin and Samson:
I am writing to you today with serious concerns that the Ascendigo change in land use
application will negatively impact our neighborhood area of Missouri Heights and that the
application fails fundamentally to meet the land use standards for change in use in several
1
ä t+>
EXHIBIT
Gørfield County
relevant and important respects as detailed below.
Fails to meet LUDC 7-103. Compatibillty with adjacent land uses and fails to comply with the
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 Future Land Use Plan which designates this area as
Rural single-family "Residential Medium". The development is a high intensity commercial use
and includes a dining room area that seats 75 diners and a deck that seats an additional 25
diners; lodging, including housing and guest cottages that sleep near a total of 100 guests and
staff.
Fails to meet LUDC 7-103. More than 50,000 sq ft of buildings, plus, barns and maintenance
butldtngs are proposed. The uses, activities and improvements are nowhere close to being
compatible with the single family rural residential neighbors in either size, scale, or use.
Fails to meet LUDC 7-104 and Comprehensive Plan. Ascendigo's stated use of water seems to
ignore that over the past three years, neighborhood water supplies have been adversely
impacted by low pressure, mud/sand infiltration into wells, and zero lack of water pressure
during the Lake Christina fire. lts stated plans for ponds and a greater daily population can only
negatively affect the available water resources.
Missouri Heights does not have the bountiful water access of the Roaring Fork River, but
instead relies upon aquifer recharge from rain and nearby snow pack. Water wells tap the
underlying basalt rock reservoir. Many nearby water wells have gone dry in recent years:
(source 312018 Sopris Sun) https://www.soprissun.com/2018/03/28/when-the-well-runs-drv/
Fails to meet LUDC 7-103 and the Future Land Use Plan. Activities are stated as year-round
with proposed high intensity or heavy use for eleven out of twelve months. The "summer Camp"
runs from May 1 through September 20 and includes 100 campers, counselors, maintenance
and kitchen staff, administrative staff and other support staff on site daily. Camper "Turn over
day" will see even higher numbers of people present, and again during its Winter Camp which
runs from January 1 through March 30. Non-camp months will welcome seminars with guests
housed at the lodge and dining facilities open and use for other programs. These high
concentrations of people and activities is not compatible with the rural single family residential
neighborhood that has a low daily population dispersed over large homesites.
Fails to meet LUDC-7-103 and Future Land Use Plan. The resulting enormous increases in
traffic is not compatible with the current Rural Residential Medium designation and is not
compatible with the single-family residential neighborhood.
Fails to meet LUDC 7-1O7. "All roads shall be designed to provide for adequate and safe
access". Of serious concern is that Ascendigo has requested a waiver from the usual Garfield
County road standards. The road is, quite simply, a wreck. Harmony Road is a barely improved
farm road with little or no road base. The planned grading of a section of the road by Ascendigo
a few weeks before the site visit represents a mere band aid and was done only to disguise the
completely degraded surface and road base. Their proposed "chip and seal" improvement is not
adequate for the extent of planned use.
The proposeci cieveiopment site is |ocated in Garfield County's "Very High" susceptibility index
for wildfire. The two roads which are the evacuation corridors from the site, CR 102 to,
Katherine Store Road and Fender to Upper Cattle Creek, have blind spots and right angle turns
that impede traffic and do not permit any sort of an efficient evacuation. The Lake Christine
evacuation was chaotic and witnessed bumper to bumper vehicles and trailers all in a slow
parade out of this area in July 2018. Add another 100, plus people concentrated in one area to
this mix and there is only disaster in its wake. Accordingly, it fails to comply with
"Comprehensive Plan 2030", page 52, Policy 5 vi.
Does not meet the definition of "Educational Use" under the Land Use Code. "Buildings and
2
uses for instruction or research activities associated with an academic institution (Emphasis
added)...', Ascendigo is not, and has never claimed to be, an academic institution or associated
with one.
This development does not comply with "Comprehensive Plan 2030" that strives to preserve
rural land and character and encourage more intense development in towns and already
developed commercial areas that have adequate established infrastructure.
please save the property rights of the homeowners. Sincerely, Mary Megan chester
3
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
-sherul L Eower, AlcP(J
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81-601
970-94s-L377 (L6Osl
From : M i ke Sa mso n <msa mso n @ga rfield-cou nty.com >
Sent: Monday, March 29,2O2I7:36 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 B:34 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: lExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
From: noreplv@formstack.com
Date: March 29,2O2I at 5:04:01 PM MDT
To: Mike Samson <msamson(ôga rfield-countv.com>
Subject: IExternall Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: gwenca rew@comcast. net
Garfietd Coanfii
Subject: Please say No to the Ascendigo Proposal
Name: Gwen Carew
Email: owen comcast.net
Phone Number: (970) 379-5731
Message: Dear Mike,
My name is Gwen Carew. I live at 1111 Fender Lane, Carbondale, CO. I am writing today to ask
you to please vote NO on the proposed Ascendigo development. This development does not
1
EXHIBIT
troo06
belong in MO Heights
This development fails to meet LUDC 7-103. Compatibility with adjacent land uses and fails to
comply with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 Future Land Use Plan which
designates this area as Rural single-family "Residential Medium".
The development is commercial and NOT educational
I am very concerned about the increase in traffic. Like I said, I live on Fender Lane and there will
be a significant increase in traffic.
There are many people who enjoy riding their bikes up the MO Heights hill here above El Jebel,
as well as on Fender Lane. I like to go running down Fender Lane, but am very scared about
how dangerous the traffic situation will become. Fender Lane was not made to accommodate
this sort of traffic.
Please, please Vote NO on this proposal.
Thank you very much for your time. Gwen Carew
2
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 B:35 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
sherul L Eower, AICP<)
Community DeveloPment Director
LO8 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97O-94s-L377 (t61s)
From: Tom Ja nkovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfield-cou nty.com >
Sent: Monday, March 29,20215:36 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message
From: norePlv@formstack.com
Date: March 29,2O2Lat3:t2:4L PM MDT
To: tia nkovskv@earfield-countv.com
Subject: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: didilawrence@comcast.net
Subject: development in Missouri Heights
Name: DEIRDRE lawrence
Email: didilawrence@comcast. net
Phone Number: (970) 319-9650
Message: I am writing in regards to the proposed development in Missouri Heights! I have lived
up rrerã for several yð"rc
"ñd
Û'" greatest thing about that is that is RURAL, peaceful, quiet,
beautiful. This propósed developmlnt is an abómination to the community and all that is sacred
up here. lt will desiroy all that is great about living up here. The traffic alone will be horrendous
,nO tn" building site á disgrace. Ño way should this development be approved. Chose wisely,
all our futures depend on your sense of moralitYrand love of this environment'
Garfield CountY
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Sheryl Bower
Tuesday, March 30,2021 8:35 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
.sherul L Bower, AlcP
<-/
Community DeveloPment Director
l-08 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97O-94s-L377 (ê61sl
From : Tom Ja n kovsky <tja n kovsky@ga rfield-cou nty'com>
Sent: Monday, March 29,20215:35 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county'com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: noreplv@formstack.com
Date: March 29,2O2t at 4:06:51 PM MDT
To: tia n kovskv@ga rfield-cou ntv.com
Subject: IExternall Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: ken@ ia nckilaconstruction'com
Subject: Ascendigo Camp for those with Autism
Name: Ken Janckila
Email : ken@ianckilaconstruction.com
Phone Number: (970) 379-4695
Message: Tom,
I am writing in support of Ascendigo Development who plans to build a camp for those with
Autism. We sold them the propeft!, with the thought that it was less of an impact on the area, in
place of the potential of 26 homes. Building the homes would have been a very profitable
business venture for us.
1
Garfield County
The help and support the camp can provide for those with autism cannot be measured with a
monetary value. I grew up in a small town in Minnesota, where one person, decided to build
homes in our small town for those with Autism and Down Syndrome. lt was met with fierce
opposition but fortunately it prevailed and became a very highly recognized organization and
then created a operation called Functional lndustries where they could also work in a safe and
comfortable environment.
It is always tough battle, when those who are in opposition do not get their facts straight. This
leads to confusion and attempts to stop what is great benefit to our community.
Sincerely,
Ken Janckila
2
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Thursday, April B, 2021 3:22 PM
David Aguilar; Glenn Hartmann
RE: lExternal] Mis-classification of Ascendigo
Mr. Aguilar, Thank you for your thoughtful email. So a little about how the code works, in the absence of a specific use
being listed in the Land Development code, Table 3-403: use Table, the community Development Department
determines what listed use the proposed use is most similar to. Community Development ¡s most concerned about the
impacts and character of the proposed use and the impacts and character of the Ascendigo project are most similar to
the character and impacts of an educational facility with overnight stays (regardless if they are associated with an
academic institution or not). And as I mentioned to the other neighbor, regardless if this is classified as a Major or
Limited impact, we will be requiring the same studies be done, the same level of analysis of the impacts will be
completed and our review of consistency with the Code and the Comprehensive Plan will be the same. lt will be up to
the BOCC to determine if, after reviewing the application, the staff report and hearing public input, whether the
proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the code and if it's not they have the option to deny it'
Regards,
.sherul L Bower, A/c?(./
Community DeveloPment Director
108 8th Street, Suite 40L
Glenwood Springs, CO 8L601
970-94s-1377 (r60sl
From: David Aguilar <daguila12020@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 6,2O2L 3:37 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>; Glenn Hartmann <ghartmann@garfield-county.com>
Subject: IExternal] Mis-classification of Ascendigo
Dear Ms Bower
After reading recent correspondence between you and concerned neighbors here in Missouri Heights regarding the
difficult position of GARCO on trying to fit the Ascendigo Organization into an educational classification category, I can
sympathize with your dilemma. A county government's duty is to work with developers guaranteeing that proposed
developments do not alter or impact existing communities or land use laws and yet at the same time improve their
communities and raise tax revenues to support other county needs. Sadly, in this instance, classifying Ascendigo as
an ,,educdtional orgonization" AND a non-profit corporation makes them what many angry taxpayers today might
classify as "takers"...They make money but contribute nothing back to the community which seems so typical of
corporations today.
Let's clarify WHy categorizing Ascendigo as an educational organization is so egregious. Upon closer examination, the
answer becomes obvious.
Asecendigo, on all their advertising media, web sites, etc. proudly promote their services as "an Adventure, Camping,
Life-Enrichment Camp". There is no mention of accredited EDUCATION being offered and that is missing for a very good
legal reason. They are not an established or participating Autism/Spectrum educational organization recognized
1
or aff¡l¡ated w¡th any profess¡onal state or federal aut¡sm group. They are not educators offering educational services.
They offer "enrichment experiences" which in todays' world could be anythlng.
As stated by the Council for Education Accreditation in 2008:
Educational accreditotion is o quality ossuronce process under which services ond operations of private or stote
educotional orgonizations or progroms are evaluated ond verified by a professionol externot body to determine whether
applicable ond recognized standards ore met. tf stondords are met, accredited status is granted by the appropriate
agency recognized by the Notionol Advisory Committee on tnstitut¡onol Quolity ønd tntegrity (NACtQI)-on advisory horly
of the U.S. Secretary of Education.
Apparently, Ascdendigo has failed to complete this critical educational requirement since a "LIFE ENRICHMENT
(purposely undefined) CAMP
does not øppear to 1øll under this educational category.
' Ascendigo does not currently list the employment any degreed professional special needs educators conducting their
programs. They employ numerous "managers", young "volunteers" but no educators.
r And most revealing and concerning, Asccndigo does not demonstrate that they are a member or supported
by ANY recognized professional autism educational organization including the Top 9 National Special Needs
Organizations:
The Asperger Syndrome and High Functioning Autism Society
The National Autism Society
Autism Research lnstitute
Autism/Spectra I Society
Organization for Autism Research
Wrightslaw Special Education Law and Advocacy Society
National Association of Special Education Teachers
The Center on Technology and Disability
National Professional Development center on Autism and spectrum Disorders
US Department of Education
Sadly, WHAT Ascendigo lS is what they SAY they are: A non-profit corporate enterprise offering un-
measurable "adventure, camping and life enrichment services" to families in need. They are not in any legal sense, nor
do they advertise in any way, a licensed, accredited, established educational organization
providing approved educational programs for those on the spectrum.
Classifying them as such is a BIG MISTAKE . Upon further re-consideration, this application should, in all good
conscience, be denied until Ascendigo can demonstrate they meet state or nat¡onal requirements and receive
certification that they are truly an educational organization offering critical approverd services to people on the
spectrum.
Sincerely, David A. Aguilar
2
ROBERTA. BRANDON
405 SKIPPER DRIVE
CARBON DALE, COLORADO 81623
(9771 882-L37 5 / bobbra ndonny@gma i l.com
April9,2021
To the Garfield and Eagle County Boards of County Commissioners:
I am a resident of Missouri Heights who opposes the proposed Ascendigo Camp development based on the
environmental concerns already articulated by many of my neighbors--a drain on an already scarce water supply;
a dramatic increase in traffic on our limited roadways (also, Fender and Catherine Store Rd. are a destination for
many cyclists from miles around, and the estimated 250-450 vehicles on peak days will pose an inherent risk to
our two-wheeled friends); increased fire risks; and significant evacuation challenges that will put campers and
emergency first responders in danger (both in Garfield and Eagle County). Moreover, local real estate agents have
opined that property values in Mo. Heights could decrease by 2O%; once one such a project is permitted, others
while be inclined to develop here, and our uncluttered, quiet way-of-life will be irreparably altered.
Before I am called a NIMBY meanie, note that I fully support the great work that Ascendigo does. Before moving
to Mo. Heights, I lived next door to a family for twenty years that had an autistic child who I watched grow into a
productive and happy young man. I totally support "the cause;" but our rural setting is not the appropriate
location for this business venture.
I am troubled by Ascendigo's ever-changing statistics, e.9., the estimated 450 cars during peak times have been
mysteriously lowered to 250 cars...it's still too many for our limited roads. Many of those vehicles will presumably
crowd in during two hour time periods (e.9., during the weekly "farewell" dinners), posing unavoidable and
unprecedented traffic backups. I also question management's claims that they are "committed" to various
mitigating concessions, implying some promise that, in truth, is not at all binding on Ascendigo. They can and
likely will change their minds when financial realities require them to increase the number of campers, the weeks
operating at full capacity, the dinners for L00+ persons, the number of fundraisers per year and maybe even the
number of physical structures on-site. Absent a binding agreement (perhaps with surrounding HOA's, and with
financial penalties for breaching the empty representations, "anticipations" and expectations currently professed
in Ascendigo's marketing materials), Ascendigo's claims are arguably nothing more than self-serving puffery.
I also question whether my neighbors can sufficiently voice our opposition in a public hearing if it is limited to one
day. Almost 220 neighbors in the immediate vicinity have signed a petition opposing the project; many more are
also expected to sign. A single hearing would fly in the face of the transparency and concern for neighbors that
Ascendigo proudly boasts. Ascendigo: Why don't you urge the Commissioners to revise their plans to
accommodate a more expansive public forum?
It is hard to believe that Ascendigo would spend over 53 Million to acquire land without some kind of advance
assurances that the requisite final approvals would be granted. So are the hearings just for show? Ascendigo's
Chief Operating Officer is also Carbondale's mayor; to the extent the Town will be submitting any position paper
regarding Ascendigo...how can it be impartial? I fully understand that Carbondale has no decisionaljurisdiction
here, but all of us in Mo. Heights patronize Carbondale businesses (and we consider Carbondale "our town"). l'd
like to think the Town would take no position or perhaps oppose the project given its adverse impact on many
hundreds of local residents (and relatively few of the campers will be local). That said, I won't be surprised if the
Town is more politically inclined to support Ascendigo (in light of the mayor's corporate position there, and
Ascendigo being one of the Town's largest employers).
t+7
EXHIBIT
þoôg
Garfield and Eagle County Boards of County Commissioners
April9, 2021
Page 2
My understanding is that the Ascendigo project cannot legally proceed unless it meets the definition of an
"educational facility" under the County's Land Use Code. The company has therefore recently been stressing that
characterlzation in its materials), but theír program descriptions primarlly focus on outdoor activit¡es, sports and
therapy, with off-season seminars for training professional therapists (not seminars for those struggling with
autism). Ascendigo is not and has never been an educational facilitv. The project is to be a therapeutic camp
facility during the summer with other events and business during the rest of the year. One need only look to the
company's own 2019 Form 990 Financial Disclosure to see it's not an educational facility-ORGANIZATION
MISSION: OUTDOOR EXPERIENCES AND CLINICAL THERAPY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN AND ADULTS WITH AUTISM
SPECTRUM DISORDERS.
The Commissioners should only consider educational elements if they are the primary purpose of the project,
which is not the case. Ascendigo's recent pointing to "educational" elements is a mere "smokescreen" to detract
from what Ascendigo has always been and would be in Mo. Heights-an outdoor camp and year-round program
with therapeutic goals. Querie: lf IKEA were to move to Mo. Heights and host a monthly educational seminar
about furniture assembly, would the Commissioners deem IKEA to be an educational facility? lt's an absurd
hypothetical but my point is that the Code cannot possibly have intended that a mere incidental educational
element justifies permitting an otherwise commercial, camping business to move into a rural community.
The IRS uses the National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities (NTEE) system to classify nonprofit organizations, based
on descriptive data in applications for tax-exempt status. An NTEE code designates a charity by its primary
purpose. Ascendigo fíles its Forms 990 with Guidestar, a widely recognized resource for informational profiles of
non-profit groups. Ascendigo lists in its own Guidestar profile the following NTEE code-
N20-- Organizations that operate facilities for cooperative group living experiences in the out-of-doors; and
which provide opportunities to learn campcraft, nature lore and conservation, and participate in a wide range
of indoor and outdoor recreational, athletic and group social activities including cookouts. Nowhere in its
Guidestar profile does Ascendigo list any NTEE code assigned to educational facilities. lt is not what they do.
I respectfully submit that the Garfield County Commissioners are precluded by the facts and law from permitting
Ascendigo's proposed development from being built. I encourage the Commissioners from both Counties to
oppose the proposed project; it is opposed by the overwhelming majority of persons living in Missouri Heights.
Ascendigo should put this worthwhile project in a more suitable location.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Brandon, Esq
405 Skipper Drive
Carbondale, CO 81623
t+g
EXHIBIT
üo5ogGIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Judy Shettel
90 Vaquero Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
Judy Shettel <judyshettel@me.com >
Thursday, April22,2021 7:21 AM
Glenn Hartmann; sheryl Bower; jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecounty.us;
morga n.beryl @eag lecountY.us
lExternall Ascendigo OPPosition
Dear Eagle CountY officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights'
while I recognize that this propefi is in Garfield county and the planning dept. there.will make the decision, Eagle
county will certainly be negatively impaaeJ. Ñot onty w¡lt residents be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire
and water concerns, but the Eagle county munìcipat seruices will be called upon given the proximity to the property' It's
right on the county line. From rıad accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
infrastructure, this pr"fJ brings significant increased activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associaied with ihosé issues. This is not simpiy a Garfield county matter. It will be an Eagle county
pr"úñ and those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this'
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. we seem to be facing more and more drought every year' we
are seeing the effects of climate change, Rñd imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from
that single road access point should we have anot-her fire, The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over
time anã would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location'
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
we all support Ascendigo,s work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe'
please Oó wfrat you cañ to encourage Garfield County to reject this application'
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
greg litten <gclitten@gmail.com>
Thursday, April22,2021 7:34 AM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternal] Ascendigo ProPosal
Dear Glen Hartmann
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
While I recognize that this propefi is in Garfield County and the planning dept. there will make the decision, Eagle
County will ðertainly be negatively impacted. Not only will residents be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire
and wãter concerné, but thã Eagle County municipal seruices will be called upon given the proximity to the propefi' It's
right on the county line. From róad accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
inîrastructure, this project brings significant increased activíty and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associafed with [hose issues. This is not simply a Garfield County matter' It will be an Eagle County
prob-lem and those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought every year' We
are seeing the effects of climate change. Rñd imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from
that singlé road access point should *l haue another fire, The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over
time anã would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
We all support Ascendigo,s work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe.
Please dó what you cañ to encourage Garfield County to reject this application'
Thanks,
Gregory Litten
0151 Prince Dr.
Carbondale Co 81623
t+\
EXHIBIT
.coôg
From, Mark Hogan2lO Harmony Lane, Carbondale CO 81623
To: Garfield County Commissioners'
RE: (Ascendigo APP|ication)
The current Land Use Application from Ascendigo in Missouri Heights. I would ask for a further
study and review on this åpflication to be consiðered of the following as listed, for the future of
Harmony Lane Road, (HLR).
Harmony Lane Road.
. The existence of HLR was formed of adjoining HOA's, therefore deemed as a private road
usage as of 1g97. Neither of the HOA's or individual homeowners to HLR, to date have
ðóllãctvelv formed a fund to maintain this road to its existence today. The existing road has not
had any maintenance other than a few dedicated homeowners taking on the road themselves to
addresó faulty areas and of snow plowing. (No current funding or maintenance of the road exists
to date.)
Current Harmony Road use and maintenance,
. There is no enfbrced Road Association Agreement to date, with HOA's or homeowners that
share the current status as a private road in Garfield county.
Application EntitY:
. ön Ascendigo's application as an educational facility, they are not cla_ssified as an educational
facility, onry al a stäie of meaning for application through.the Garfield County planning and
zoning'. nré tney not a therapeutið care giving facility, similar as a nursing home, a day care
center, a summer camp or camp retreat? Legally are they classified as educational? The
applicánt should be zohed as is stated for thé current use and not re zoned as an educational
tax-exempt facilitY.
. Zoned as educátional exempts them from tax liabilities to the county and puts the burden on
current tax PaYing citizens.
Ascendigo Application Traffic Study,
. ih"i, aiptiiation is stating the prójected average daily traffic is approximalely 446 vehicles per
day.
. Of the 446 vehicles projected to use HLR of that study, Ascendigo is projected of 105 vehicles
in and out of each daY.
. Ascendigo will be tripting the current usage of this road. An intense high use impact on HLR.
. The traffic study is laxeà'in identifying terms of emergency calls of support and from which
jurisdiction that support comes flgt'
. would ask that a bipartisan traffic study of this current application be considered. The current
road is not designed for high use impact.
Ascendigo HLR Modifications,
. Ascenjigo proposes to remove the remainder of the existing chip and sea.l surface between
the primafo entrance and CR-102, regrade the road surface to promotedrainage, and apply a
ñew cfr¡p ánd seal pavement surfaceãs required in Table 7-107 of the County code.
. A waiver for the total road width in Table 7-107 of the county code is proposed to help reduce
speeds, keep with the rural character of the area, and keep maintenance costs manageable for
users.
. Curren¡y the maintenance of the road is the responsibility of a user nglg Association to which
nscãnO¡gó will participate. (Current Road Use Agreement is null and void.)
For the better of the community and adjacent homeowners to Harmony Road and for the new
dévelopment of Asceno¡go. cárf¡eld County should consider to be implemented of the following
2
I5a
EXHIBIT
!Dôð
with Ascendigo Application Review Process.
Suggested modifications and or conditions be imposed with Ascendigo application.
. HLR should be addressed prior too, and first before any excavation of the proposed
development breaks ground.
. Ascendigo should bring up the entire length of HLR to Garfield County standards for a new
chip and seal to include, proper shouldering, proper crown for drainage, proper culverts for
drainage, with the use of dips, not speed bumps for speed control, dips will also help contribute
to proper drainage. Dips similar in design as to Garfield County road 108.
. Electrical and telecommunications to be buried for future use. With electrical in the ground will
eliminate the current fire potential of fallen power lines from high winds, and the fire danger that
persist from.
. All the above could be provided by the new development of Ascendigo and then for Garfield
County to maintain. The county is not taking on absorbing the cost to get the road to the state it
needs to be for high use impact.
Further Discussion
. After HLR has been brought up to standards then Garfield county shall take over all and future
maintenance as needed per county standards for HLR.
. With Garfield County as the sole operator and of maintenance for Harmony Road, the liability
factor of this development then will not be shoulder of the current homeowners or HOA's for the
additional use of emergency vehicles, for lack of maintenance and snow plowed roads.
. The HLR access for this development needs to have a road to standards. Suggest that this be
at the applicant's expense, and not the existing adjacent homeowners, community, or Garfield
County.
Thank you,
Mark Hogan
0210 Harmony Lane
3
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
g@laurelia.net
Wednesday, April21, 2021 4:53 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Keep Missouri Heights RuralSubject:
Dear Mr. Hartmann,
please think about the consequences of allowing Ascendigo to build its infrastructure in Missouri Heights. I encourage
you to oppose this proposition. Missouri Heights is a rural community, many of us are farmers and ranchers who rely on
the already scarce resource of water for our livelihoods. lf Ascendigo goes forward with their plans, the water use of
the¡r infrastructure wíll be an added stra¡n to this priceless resource. The traffic of both cars and people, as well as2417
lighting, will further stress the vulnerable wildlife populations. Allowing a commercial building to be bu¡lt in Missouri
Heights would begin the destruction of our rural farms, ranches, and way of life.
Ascendigo has a noble mission. Their organization blesses and brings light and hope to many people, young and old. we
are not opposed to Ascendigo, only their plan to build commercially in Missouri Heights'
Thank you for your service to the people of Eagle County. Please fight for us.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle DeWind
EXHIBIT
lÇtti
"c0oI
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Carol Gault < cgault@rof.net>
Wednesday, April21, 2021 4:34 PM
Glenn Hartmann
[External] Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
Dear Eagle County officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
While I recognize that this propefi is in Garfield County and the planning dept. there will make the decision, Eagle
County will cãrtainly be negatively impacted, Not only will residents be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire
and wäter concerné, but thè Eagle County municipal seruices will be called upon given the proximity to the propefi. It's
right on the county line. From road accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
infrastructure, this project brings significant increased activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associated with those issues. This is not simply a Garfield County matter. It will be an Eagle County
problem and those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought every year. We
are seeing the effects of climate change. And imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from
that singlé road access point should we have another fire. The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over
time and would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
We all support Ascendigo's work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe.
Please do what you can to encourage Garfield County to reject this application.
Sincerely, CarolGault
1028 Kings Row Ave, Carbondale, CO 81623
6>!oô6
EXHIB IT
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Hi
krahe@sopris.net
Wednesday, APril 21, 2021 4:02 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Do not support the Ascendigo project for Missouri Heights
I lived in Missouri Heights for over 16 years and do not support theAscendigo project for Missouri
Heights which ¡s a resldential area witñ limited water and high fire danger. My house went through
theÞanarama fire in 2002. So I know the fire danger well.
Ascendigo does good work but Missouri Heights is not a good place for it.
Cathleen Krahe
723 Vine St.
Aspen, CO 8161 1
1
t5+
EXHIBIT
oıoaGlenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Gary L. Auerbach <gauerbach@muchlaw.com>
Thursday, April 22, 2021 B:29 AM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Ascendigo IIWOV-MS1.FlD5379]
we own property in Missouri heights and have been following the proposed development of the property on which
Ascendigo ¡s attempting to build a facility. Though we support its mission, we are opposed to the development of this
property for the intendãd purpose. I think others have expressed their respective concerns including traffic, water
and access during emergencies. ln reviewing the proposal i note that the developer is comparing the impact from its
operat¡ons with a residential development that has not been built and may never be built. I dont think this is a valid
comparison and should not dictate the decision making process. I hope you will take these comments into consideration
and share them with the other decision makers' Thanks'
Gary L. Auerbach and Marilyn Susman
54 Palo Verde
Missouri Heights
Muchf
Gary L. Auerbach
frlluón Sne¡¡st, P.C. | 191 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1S00 I Chicago, lL 60606
P:312.521.2688
qauerbach@muchlaw.com I muchlaw'com
Member of Ally Law
50 Honoring Tradition,
Cu ltivoting lnnovation.
YEARS
The information contained in this email communication is intended only forthe personal and confidential use of the designated recipient named
message may be an
"ttorn"y-ãiLnt
Communication, an¿ as suðn ¡s priíileged and confidential. lf the reader of this message is not the intended
hereby notified that you have received this communication in error, äno thãt any rev¡ew, disseminat¡on, distribut¡on, or copying of the message
iivouîàu" received this trrn"risr¡on in error, please notiry us immediately by telephone and/or reply email.
above. This
recipient, you are
is strictly prohibited
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
paris@arise.love
Thursday, April22,2021 12:53 PM
Glenn Hartmann; Sheryl Bower
[External] Ascendigo Proposal
Dear Garfield County officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposition.
While I value Ascendigo and believe in their mission, I do not think it appropriate for them to be located in a residential area. I
understand the property is in Garfield County and the planning department there will make the decision, but those of us who are
residents of Eagle County will be strongly affected as well. A few concerns include the unreasonable water usage required for this
operation, increased traffic and travel through neighborhood regions, and the ever-present potential for wildfire, like many of us
experienced with Lake Christine. My main concern, however, is preserving the beautiful, quiet character of our neighborhood and
residential communities and families. This does not only affect those residents of Garfield County; those of us who live in Missouri
Heights in the Eagle County district do not want this.
On behalf of the Missouri Heights residents, families, ranchers and farmers, I ask you to hear our concern regarding this operation. I
truly hope we can work together to figure out another option that will keep our communities quiet and safe and allow Ascendigo to
fulfill their vision in a more appropriate location.
Thank you for your time
Paris DeWind
1848 Upper Cattle Creek Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
lo:
Cc:
Subject:
Katherine Reppa <kreppa0499@sopris.net>
Thursday, April22,2021 12:32 PM
Glenn Hartmann;Tom Jankovsky; sheryl Bower;John Martin; Mike samson
jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecounty.us; Karen Moculeski
lExternall right project, wrong location
while Ascendigo Ranch,s proposal for a year-round camp is laudable, there couldn't be a more poorly-chosen location'
There are many compelling reasons to deny this proposal (water resources, traffic, limited roads, noise, pollution'
zoning) and I will focus on a crucial one: wildfire threat'
During my time in Missouri Heights, I have been evacuated twice (almost three times) due to encroaching wildfires' As
the panorama fire approached ãur neighborhood, the sheriff came to our house and yelled through his bullhorn, "You
need to leave NOW. l'm not talking about L5 minutes, but NOW'" lt was terrifying'
,,Those with autism are likely to hide in fire situations: in closets, under beds, behind furniture'" adapted from
https://naml2.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% 3A%2F%2turldefense.proofpoint'co m%o2Fv2o/o2turl%3Fu%
3 Dhttp-3A_a utismspea k s.org%26d%3 DDwl FaQ% 26c%3DeuGZstcaTDl lvim E NSbTjXrwqOf-
vSA_CdpgnvfiiM M%26r%3D5SbK_O5HHetqjeyQmyycg4sdtj2YRehkcgiQs6afFik%26m%3DSVa4q6HERRGJseWoKg4fmXl
wBLdoQgpnTllMHJEri-M%26s%3DqHNYXbiRWbLMDwgYBosVuP-9nsB1GelzK9u7lkEh-
7 8%26e%3D&a m p;data= o4%7 coL%7cgha rtma nn %Ae/garfield-
county.com %7cfaa33re7cfL84b2l42c308d905bcf7d6%7co8e36ed6b51748b0bf1cac960e8059e0%7co%7co%7c637547
132330375357%Tcunknown%TCTWFpbGZsb3dSeyJWljoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQljoiV2luMzliLCJBTil6lklhawwiLcJXVcl6M
no%3D%7C3000&sdata=DTpwyLRpg6UVdewctqJbgpDlkrHlynorbhpL3lBL%ZBTg%3D&reserved=0
,,lndividuals with autism have a particular problem with fire drills: the noise, lights and crowded halls." adapted from
https://naml2.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https% 3A%2t%Zturldefense.proofpoint.co m%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%
3Dhttp-3A_autismclassroomresources.com%26d%3DDwlFa Q%26c%3DeuGZstcaTDllvimENSbTjXrwqof-
v5A_CdpgnvfiiM M%26r%3D55bK_O5HHetqjeyQmyycg45dtj2YRehkcgiQs6afFik%26m%3DSVa4q6HERRGJseWoKg4fmXl
wBldoQgpnTilMHJEri_ M%26s%3)g39yy50w8DuM7pwJz68V10Czc7Ys3k4SMwJ29Ylffxg%26e%3D&data--o4%7co
L%7 Cgha rrma n n %40ga rf i e ld -
county.com o/o7cfaa33re7crL84b2r42c308d905bcf7d6%7co8e36ed6b51748b0bf1"cac960e8059e0o/o7co%7co%7c637547
j.323303753 57%TC¡nknown%TCTWFpbGZsb3dSeyJWljoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQljoiV2luMzliLCJBTil6lklhaWwiLcJXVcl6M
no%3D%7C3000&sdata=lVDN6DxGDaTJv%2FUkihMsclS3TrHrr65sQgggzunCcmM%3D&reserved=0
safely rescuing many children within minutes of an approaching fire (with very few access roads) could be futile and
tragic.
,,The consequences of ¡ntense dry periods are severe, including more intense and dangerous wildfires'" from Post
lndependent
,,Governor Polis warns that wildfire season is a year-round phenomenon." Post lndependent
WRONG LOCATION
Katherine RePPa
Missouri Heights
1
Kenneth and Andrea Crouse
390 Sunlise Lane
Carbondale, CO 81623
Ãptil22,202I
\IIA E-MAIL morgan.beryl@townofeagle.org
m organ. betyl@eaglecourity. us
Morgan Beryl
Comrnunity D eve lopment D ilector at Eagle County
200 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Re: Ascendigo Application to Garfield County
Deal Morgan Beryl:
My husband and I live in Eagle County within a rnile of the proposed Ascendigo project
that is before Garfield County. 'We have been residents in Missouri Heights for 5 years and
enjoy the quiet, rulal neighbolhood. This letter is to request that you oppose the Ascendigo's
proposal.
Although the Ascendigo's project is in Garfield County, it will impact Eagle County
residents with it's proposed increase in traffic, noise, light pollution, fire and water concerns
along with potential of reducing property values since it is on the County line.
In regards to increased traffic, the original proposal submitted by Ascendigo mentioned
450 cars then was reduced to 250 car.s along with emergency vehicles. Even though Google
Maps gives directions to the proposed site via Fendery'County Road I02to Harmony Lane - how
many people will drive over Paseo to Sunset (a private road) to Harmony? And, how many of
those people will be new to the area and not respect the danger of wildlife on the roads fi'om
Highway 82 to the site?
Colorado has increased drought over the years affecting potential wildfires. How will a
single road access to Ascendigo's site be condusive to evacuating the large number of people
proposed? Ascendigo has stated they will have up to 150 people at one time.
In reading a letter to the editor in the Aspen Times flom the Board of Ascendigo earlier
this week,I noted that few of the Board Members actually live in Missouri Heights. I wonder if
any of them were evacuated during the Lake Clu'istine fire in 2018? If they were evacuated,
memories of congestion on Fender/County Road 102 will be lecalled along with the stress fi'om
not knowing when we could return and then dealing with the impact of smoke. If a fire were to
happen in the area of the Ascendigo site in the future, I believe Eagle County resources would be
utilized. Another reason for Eagle County to carefully consider Ascendigo's proposal and object
to it,
VIA tr.MAIL
Morgan Beryl
Ãptil22,202l
Pagc2
f)ue to the proximity of the Ascenrligo site to Eagle Cormty, other: Eagle County
tesources rvil1 be needed for road accidents, health emergencies and road maintenance. It is our
understanding that Eagle County will not receive revenue fi'om Ascendigo's project. Is it
appropriate for this project to set a precedent for othel non-residential uses'for Missouri Heights
that are not compatible with the rural environment? Wlry should Eagle County residents be
negatively impacted by an inappropriate use in a residential rural area?
I haven't reviewed Ascendigo's rcports regarding water but I wonder how it will affect
our aquifer. And, if those repofis adequately address how theil water requilements will affect
the sutrounding neighbors.
Ascendigo argues that the proposed site was approved (20 years ago) for 13 home sites
and their project will have less impact. The subdivision has not had one horne developed on it to
date. We believe the development will have a much larger impact without any tax benefit to
Garfield County to generate funds to support an inappropriate use in a rural, residential
neighbolhood.
I was not able to locate aqywhere il Ascendigo's application a restt'iction to furthel
expansion or accountability.
I urge you to notify Garfield County that Ascendigo's planned project is not acceptable to
Eagle County residents, I understand that Eagle County previously denied this sort of project by
the residents speaking up and being heard. Ascendigo's mission is admirable but the location at
White Cloud is inappropriate,
Thank you for your time and consideration.
S
and Kenneth Crouse
cc (via email): Glenn Hartrnann, Garfield County Senior Plarner
Sheryl Bower, Garfield County Conrmunity Development Director
Tom Jankovsky, Garfield County District 1 Commissioner
John Martin, Galfield County District 2 Commissioner
Ìviike Samson, Gatirei<i County Disirict 3 Commissioner
Jeanne McQueeney, Eagle County District 3 Commissioner
Matt Scheer, Eagle County Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Heruy, Eagle County Commissioner
Basalt Water Conservancy District
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
sally Sakin <sally@sakinfamily'com >
Thursday, APril 22, 2021 1 0:50 AM
Glenn Hartmann
Duncan Barber; amartin@ascendigo.org
lExternall Ascendigo
Dear Commissioner Hartma n
I write this letter on behalf of my husband and myself in support of the new camp being built
in Missouri Height by Ascendigo for individuals with aut¡sm. We believe this is a wonderful
addition to our commun¡ty. Not only will this rural area have the opportunity to have fewer
homes built at a t¡me when residential and commercial real estate development is exploding
in this valley but a non-profit will be raising money to provide services that will be in operation
only part t¡me. we believe this camp will be a fine compan¡on to the commun¡ty providing jobs
and opportunities that our sorely needed to an underserved special needs
population. Embracing differences is what the nation is calling out for and we feel proud to
have a camp that will help individuals grow, thrive, and feel welcomed'
Here are just a few facts about Autism:
. ln 2o2o,the CDC reported that approximately 1 in 54 children in the U.S. is diagnosed with an
autism spectrum disorder (ASD), according to 2o16 data'
o 1 in 34 boys identified with autism
o 1 in 144 girls identified with autism
. Boys are four tiñes more likely to be diagnosed with autism than girls.
. Most children were still being áiagnosedãrt"r age 4, though autism can be reliably diagnosed
as early as age 2.. 31% of children with ASD have an intellectual disability (intelligence quotient [lQ] <70)'
250/o arein the borderline range (lQ 71-85), and 440/ohave lQ scores in the average to above
average range (i.e., lQ >85).
. Autism affects all ethnic and socioeconomic groups'
. Minority groups tend to be diagnosed later and. less often.
. Early ¡nterveåtion affords the ıest opportunity to support healthy development and deliver
benefits across the lifesPan.
. Research indicates that genetics are involved in the vast majority of cases. '
. parents who have a child with ASD have a 2lo 18 percent chance of having a second child
who is also affected. .
. Many children affected by autism also benefit from other interventions
A camp experience provides respite for those with Autism, for their families, and caregivers' lt
allows for early intervention, socialization. This is experience also takes them out of
opportunities for bullying and reduces isolation. our valley provides beauty, opportunity to
1
exper¡ence nature, r¡vers, hcirses, open skies. What individual would not thrive under any
circumstance with this kind of exposure.
We believe our entire Valley will all be better off by allowing for such an organization to open
its doors to many who will benefit from this camp. Please do vote to atlow for Ascendigo to
continue in the process.
Thank you.
Best,
Sally B. Sakin (she/her)
Duncan Barber
499 Wooden Deer
2
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
lo:
Cc:
Sheryl Bower
Thursday, April22,2021 10:24 AM
Lorraine Ferro
Glenn Hartmann
RE: [External] AscendigoSubiect:
Hl Lorraine, Thank you for your comments. l'll make sure they get into the packet of information that
we distribute to the Garfield County BOCC prior to them making their decision.
Regards,
.sherul L Bower, AlcP(J
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 40L
Glenwood Springs, CO 8160L
970-94s-1377 (L6Osl
From: Lorra i ne Ferro <l bfe rro3200@ gma il.com>
Sent: Monday, April t9,2O2t 8:45 AM
To: gharmann@garfield-county.com; Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>;
jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecounty.us; morgan.beryl@eaglecounty.us
Cc: keepmohrural @gmail.com
Subject: IExternal] Ascendigo
Good morning everyone,
As a year round resident of Fox Run in Missouri Heights I would like to voice my concerns regarding the potential
Ascendigo project just a few blocks away. While this may be a facility that will promote a good cause our quiet
residential community ís very much the wrong location. The impacts that we will see from a large project like this one is
not something that should be in a residential area. The negative effects that it would bring to our residential community
in traffic, water usage, noise, light pollution, concentrated population and greater chances of wildfire incidents far
outweigh the positives of the proposed project. Mlssouri Heights is a residentialcommunity and not a place for
commercial business. I know you are all reviewing this project very closely and I hope you will take our community's
concerns seriously.
Respectfully,
Tom and Lorraine Ferro
EXHIBIT
t61
tâooog
1
Ibc
EXHI
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subiect:
Sheryl Bower
Thursday, April22,2021 1O:02 AM
janine gunning
Glenn Hartmann
RE: reject Ascendigo
Hello Janine, Thank you for your comment. I will make sure that it gets in the packet of information we send to the
Garfield County BOCC prior to them making a decision'
Regards,
shergl L Eower, AlcP
Community DeveloPment Director
108 8th Street , Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601'
97O-94s-1377 (L6Os)
From: janine gunning <janine@scenerental.com>
Sent: Thursday, APril 22,20219:47 AM
To: Sheryl Bowe r <sbowe r@ga rfie ld-cou nty.com>
Subject: IExternal] reject Ascendigo
Dear Representative,
Please oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights'
While I recognize this property is in Garfield County, Eagle County will considerably be negatively impacted.
our traffic, fire and water concerns are not addressed by iepresentatives a1d keep getting pushed further down
the road. From road accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road infrastructure,
this project brings significant increased activity and vehicles.
This is NOT a Garfield County matter. It is an Eagle County problem. 'We are the step-child of Eagle County
and officials consistently turn a blind eye in our area'
The potential drain on our water is of immense concern. Residents encounter water restrictions each summer yet
this ıonglomerate who will always turn a profit is proposing to build lakes and water resources for a
commercial endeavor.
our rural area is under attack, and it is your responsibility to use your position and ability to protect residential
zoningand restrictions. This area was zonedresidential and should forever stay residential. WHY else do we
make'iaws and regulations? This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
I have a child with a disability, and have donated to Ascendigo in the past, yet this proposal to build a
commercial project in this spLcific location is not appropriate. We do not support them anymore and the
community wili never let this rest, or support Ascendigo in the future'
1
Please do what you can to encourage Garfield County to reject this application.
Slncerely,
Janine Gunning
El Jebel, CO
2
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Thursday, April22,2021 9:46 AM
Glenn Haftmann
FW: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
.sherul L Bower, AlcP(J
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 8L601
970-945-L377 (t6O5')
From : Tom Ja nkovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfield-cou nty.com >
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2O2L7:25 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message
From: noreplv@formstack.com
Date: April 2L, 2O2L at t:t3:29 PM M DT
To: tiankovskv@ga rfield-countv.com
Subject: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: sa rahlwolff@gmail.com
Subject: Ascendigo
Name: Sarah Kaiman
Email : sarahlwolff@smail.com
Phone Number: (720) 648-7893
Message: Hi Mr. Jankovsky,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
I live right on the border of Eagle and Garfield counties. The proposed Ascendigo development
will also affect both counties, so I am writing both Garfield and Eagle Co contacts.
1
å tbt
EXHIB
Garfield County
First of all, the land is zoned rural-residential. lf we can't count on zoning to keep these kinds of
things out of our area, I have no confidence in government.
Missouri Heights residents will be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire and water
concerns. The roads and infrastructure are not designed to support this development. ln fact,
the roads leading to the proposed site are the worst in Missouri Heights and currently have very
little traffic. I hear that Ascendigo will not bring any revenue to help with all of this stuff. That is
bewildering.
Many wells are already running out of water. The Ascendigo water use will be huge compared
to the amount that would be consumed with rural residential use.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this
would open the door to future commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle
County and rejected for similar reasons.
We all support Ascendigo's work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not
appropriate nor is it safe. Please do what you can to encourage Garfield County to reject this
application
Thanks,
Sarah Kaiman
1253 Kings Row St.
Carbondale, CO 81623
2
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Sheryl Bower
Thursday, April22,2021 9:46 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: [External] Garfield County website inquirySubiect:
sherul L Eower, AIC?
<J
Community DeveloPment Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97O-94s-L377 (t61sl
From : Tom Ja n kovsky <tja n kovsky@ga rfield-co u nty.com>
Sent: Wednesday, APril 21, 2O2L 7 :22 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message
From: no reolv@fo stack.com
Date: April 2L,2OZt at 2:32:L3 PM M DT
To: tiankovskv@ga rfield-countv.com
Subject: IExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: hbfinn5@email.com
Subject: autistic camp in missouri heights
Name: Harvey Finn
Email: hbfin ail.com
Phone Number. (970) 963-1424
Message: To: Commissoner Tom Jankovsky,
Please consider leaving Missouri Heights a rural area'
As a cyclist it is one of the last road networks that a cyclist can feel safe when riding
I have navigated these roads for forty years and one time with Ride the Rockies for a short
distance. Tñe comments other riders were saying made me feel good about what we have and
1
ILL
EXHIBIT
Garfield Couniy
cherish. Please help us keep what we have
Thank You
2
lb,
EXHIBIT
April 18,2421
Mr. John Martin
Garfield County District 2 Commissioner
108 8th St. Suite 10'1
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Ascendigo Property Holdings Change in Land Use Application;
File no. LIPA-01 -21-8826 & PLVA-O1-21-8827
Dear Mr. Martin,
The proposal recently received by the Garfield County Planning Commission from
the corporation Ascendigo Property Holdings is seriously troubling to many of us
who live in Missouri Heights.
First, we believe the application fails to meet the land use standards for change in
use and ignores the vision set out in the 2030 Garfield County Master Plan to
protect wildlife and preserve the county's rural heritage. And secondly, we are very
concerned that if it were approved, the Ascendigo change in land use application
will set a precedent for further commercial expansion and have an extremely
negative impact on the entire neighborhood area of Missouri Heights.
Ascendigo is proposing to change the character of this portion of Missouri Heights
from thai of rural residentialto commercial in violation of LUDC 7-103. This is a
large year-round commercial venture, being presented under the guise of an
educational facility to suit the purposes of the land change. The plans beyond the
summer camps include fundraising events, renting out the facility to other causes,
hosting 1gg-people dinner receptions - none of these are "educationalwith a
curriculum" aS Set out in the Garfield County Land use code "as activities
associated with an academic institution." Further, the large buildings, including
lodging, activity center, administrative center and commercial kitchen to serve the
Oairy cıncentration of 100 people is not compatible with the existing rural, large lot
single family homesites and scattered population.
From the significant increase in traffic - Ascendigo's application states how many
are current in the area and estimates 450 vehicle trips per day to the facility,
indicating the vpd on the same roads would be nearly doubling - to the water issues
the areais facing already, and so many other details in between, it is not a suitable
change for the rural residentialzoning of this area. Dropping a commercial
development into the midst of rural Missouri Heights, changing the zoning and land
use is neither admirable nor amenable for the surrounding area'
We would like to be clear that the people Ascendigo is endeavoring to assist are in
no way a part of our disagreement with the application. The mission of Ascendigo is
laudable and worthwhile. We pray the needs of those in the autistic community will
be met in a far more responsible location - one with access that doesn't entailtravel
on slow mountain roads with tight turns, and a location that is not struggling with
drought and all its consequences, not the least of which is the threat of wildfire and
challenging evacuations.
We simply do not support the County rezoning land use for this particular
commercial activity, nor any other commercial activity in this rurallresidential area.
When we purchased our home here in Garfield County six years ago, we relied on
the existing Garfield County Zoning indicating the area is Rural/ Residential, and not
for Commercial use.
Unfortunately, our own neighborhood has struggled for years with another "Ranch"
nearby that has repeatedly broken the use rules in Garfield County with attempted
commercial endeavors and enforcement has been a recurring challenge. We're
concerned about the level of latitude requested in Ascendigo's plans as well, and
we feel approving Ascendigo's development would set a terrible and adverse
precedent for the entire Missouri Heights area for the future, and will create issues
challenging commercial land use development in this rural area for years to come.
For all of these reasons and more, we respectfully request you to consider ALL the
far-reaching ramifications of the land use change request by Ascendigo and deny
the land use application. The impact of this decision will be felt from one end of
Missouri Heights to another.
Sincerely,
WiX,t.û^,,^,4' /'¿ ü0U- -:
Jan and Kirk Williams
4 Red Wing Lane
Carbondale, CO 81623
?tfi^l¿39-UN\ Þ1 ?o ? blq ^ ul to tlO
tb+
EXHIBIT
tñ
-e.otg
Andrew Stone.396 Sunset Lane' Carbondale, CO 81623
Glenn Hartmann
Garfield County Çommunity Development
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RECEIVED
. 'l .i,i\,'":i.': :
GARFIELD COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mr.liartmann,
I am writing to add my voice to those who stand in strong opposition to the ill-conceived, ill-
considered Ascendigo Project on Missouri Heights.
Let me start by noting that I have been a Roaring Fork Valley full-time resident, homeowner and
business owner for 50 years - for the last 30 of which I have been a homeowner and resident of
Missouri Heights. This is my home and I am deeply committed to it.
Ascendigo's stated mission is certainly admirable. However, its Missouri Heights project seems
to have been developed with total disregard for its heavy impact on the immediate neighborhood
- and on the extended Missouri Heights area. This would be the first such commercial operation
in the area and can only lead to future even more destructive incursions'
The Ascendigo project is a high-intensity use totally out of character with the neighborhood on
which it is being imposed. There is not a comparable operation anywhere within miles of this
proposed development. As I am sure you know - and must never lose sight of - the existing
neighborhoods in both Eagle and (especially) Garfreld County are almost exclusively low-
impact, large-lot semi-rural residential areas or horse ranches. There is nothing even remotely
similar to the Ascendigo Project.
I am sure that others have detailed many serious objections to the Ascendigo plan, so I will try
not to go into detail on points that I am certain have been made already. I will have to note,
however, that Ascendigo is seeking to build in an area with limited and ever-diminishing water
resources. Some wells in the area are already running dry and others are frequently clogged with
silt and sand. It is difficult to believe Ascendigo will find the water it needs for its basic
operations - and yet they are planning a large pond and an equine center, both of which are
heavy water uses. This Seems foolish, careless and destructive.
That said, I would like to go into a little more detail on Ascendigo's Traffic Study.
I will not try to grapple with the study's complex charts and tables in any real detail. Howevet,
Table 4 on page 12 of the study, shows that the project predicts, quite casually, that trafftc on
Sunset Lane will increase by roughly 50 percent. Sunset Lane is a privately owned, privately
maintained, and relatively vulnerable dirt road without shoulders or adequate drainage. The
yearly expense of maintaining that road is not inconsiderable even at current traffic levels.
Ascendigo seems witling to impose significant damage to that road without any apparent concern
for the neighbors who own and must pay for the road.
Similarly, Table 4 shows that traffic on Harmony Lane will more than triple. Currently,
Harmony Lane is in dire condition - rough and potholed. It receives virtually no maintenance
from either Eagle or Garfield counties. Tripling traffic there can only be a disaster.
And in the study's 'oconclusions" they state that the roads can handle the additional traffic with
oono delays" - ¿s if traffic jams on rural dirt roads are really the critical issue. The increase in
traffic in and of itself is a major impact, generating noise and dust and increasing danger for the
many pedestrians and bicyclists who use these roads (which, of course, have no sidewalks or
shoulders).
I will also note that, somewhat hidden deep in the report, the Ascendigo plan calls for atypical
Sunday to have 24 families and25 staff members all leaving more or less at the same time at
around 6 p.m. The current existing afternoon "outbound" peak-hour traffic is listed as 19
vehicles per hour. The Sunday plan would more than double this "peak."
Additionally,I will note that the traffic study makes no reference to the impact on County Road
100, the Catherine Store Road, even though the project calls for that road to be one of the main
routes to and from the Ascendigo development. As I am sure you know, CR 100 is a steep,
narrow, extremely winding road which is totally inappropriate for any additional traffic.
I could go on at length, but I will spare you that. My basic point here is simple: The planners of
this project are showing a total lack of concern for the impact they will have on the existing
neighborhood.
This project is simply wrong for the area. I call on you to consider your obligations to the health,
safety and the greater good of the existing community and to reject this proposal.
Sincerely,
Andrew Stone
396 SunriseLane
Carbondale
RECEIVED
'¡
'.i'l; l. ' .,1 .
GARFIELD CÜr-'¡u '
GOIIITUNITY DEVELOPMENI
April2t,2O2L
Board of County Commissioners
Garfield County
108 8th Street, Suite 1-0L
Glenwood Springs, CO 8160L
Reference: Ascendigo Project
Gentlemen:
ln reference to the above proposed project, please note the following:
1) I live on Sunset Lane, a private dirt road, less than L/LOth of a mile from the
proposed project. Their application to you says that they will increase the
traffic to the area by 446 vehicles per day, with many of them passing on
Sunset Lane, our private road. That is unacceptable, and the owners on
Sunset Lane will find a way that that does not happen.
2) Their applicat¡on says that they are similar to the Strang ranch, Windwalkers,
and the Missouri Heights Schoolhouse. There is NO comparison to those
entities and their project, and their statement is a FALSEHOOD'
3) To my knowledge, every subdivision in Missouri Heights between ElJebel
and Hwy L33 is zoned Rural, both in Eagle County and Garfield County,
and there is NO commercial or operations that even comes close to what
Ascendigo is proposing. Also, being Rural, there are no duplexes, no
Condominiums, or business (retail) operations in Missouri Heights.
Every subdivision has only single family homes.
4') Water in Missouri Heights is a BIG ISSUE, and I doubt that they have
adequate water supplies for what they are proposing. The have three
taps for single family homes from the Antonidies Well, which is pretty
much tapped out by the existing single family homes adjacent to
their project. HAS A FULL AND COMPLETE WATER STUDY BEEN DONE
TO SUPPORT THEIR PROPOSAL?
ln short, I am against their project, wrong place for this development. However,
lf you do approve their project, you should require them to Pave Harmony Road,
have their main access to the development from Wind River Road, and have them
relinquish their 3 taps back to the Antonities Well Association.
ly fS,
r
EXHrBrt
It'6t;o5ôa
Ve
ny Schee owner of Sunset Lane
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Melinda Fouts <melinda@successstartsw¡thyou'net>
Friday, April 23, 2021 B:58 AM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternal] Keep Missouri Heights Rural
Dear Mr. Hartmann,
I have lived in Missouri Heights for t7 years and am writing to express my concerns about the Ascendigo project' First of
all, it will have a negative ímpact on the neighborhood in various ways with the additional traffic of the estimated 450
more cars a day. The application does not meet the land use standards for the change proposed in several areas, the
first being is it violates'the preservat¡on of the rural nature and character of this area by being incompatible in the
proposed size and use and a negative impact on what are already scarce water resources. This area is very susceptible
to wild fires and there is limited access to evacuate from the area as experienced July 4, 2018. lf the fire had been
moving faster than ¡t was, many lives would have been lost. we cannot afford an increase in this size for this very reason
along with the water ¡ssue.
This proposal is thoughtless in many ways, is narrow sighted, and should not be allowed
Thank you for your time and considerat¡on'
Sincerely,
Jt'lelZnfu
Jr.le/ínúfouts, ?ñ.D.
970-274-3r3o-fxecuttve coøcñíng'vít6 an íroniftst ín ø uefuetgbva
ñtfps: 'n cota ir -c
rnelínú@successstartstvítEyoun¿t
5UCCEssiliifiYou
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Sheryl Bower
Monday, April 26, 2021 4:22 PM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: lExternal] Garfield County website inquirySubiect:
Glenn, Here is someone that signed the petition and changes their mind. I think folks may be confused about us
changing the zoning.
.sherul L Bower, AlcP(J
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970-94s-t377 (t69s)
From : M i ke Sa mson <msa mson @ga rfield-cou nty.com>
Sent: Monday, April26,20214:L8 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: IExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message
From: noreplv(ôformstack.com
Date: April 26,2O2Lat2:2O:42 PM MDT
To: M ike Sa mson <msa mson @ ga rfield-co u ntv.com >
Subject: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: Lmainegb(ôemail.com
Subject: Ascendigo DeveloPment
Name: Laura Maine
Email: Lmaineob@omail.com
Phone Number: (970) 379-9130
Message: Hello, I live on County Rd 162 in Garfield County - Missouri Heights. I signed the
petition from Keep Missouri Height Rural. I have since learned that you are not actually
1
It1!o.od
G*rfteld Coanty
considering changing the zoning of the property. That was my entire concern and the reason I
signed the petition.
That said, I have always supported the mission of Ascendigo and if you are not changing the
zoning and this will not set a preoedent for future development, than I support this project.
Thank you
Laura Maine
2
EXHIBIT
å tL{April23,2O2L
To all: Garfield County Commissioners, our elected Eagle County representatives, Garfield Co Planners and Community
Development personnel
Regarding the Ascendigo Ranch development application,
While their mission is admirable, their choice of location is extremely problematic. Missouri Heights is a
sparsely populated residential area - but you all know that. There are limitations to water, there are narrow
single lane roads, there are high, sustained winds, there is a quiet, rural atmosphere that we sustain and
moved/built here for.
Ascendigo's proposal lays out how the program will permanently alter our community in so many ways. The
following will address each topic specifically.
a
a
a
a
Change of Zoning and current land use approvals - First & foremost this should be the basis for denial:
. The parcel is currently known as White Cloud Ridge. A previously approved residential parcel with
13 lots for single family homes. The Ascendigo group bought this parcel knowing this approval is
in place. Their desire to go to Garfield County to request a change of use should not constitute an
argument for acceptance by GarCo. There is a process involved in Change of Use and the Missouri
Heights Master Plan does not include commercial operations as an acceptable use.
Water:
¡ Western Colorado is in the 20th year of a major drought cycle. When was the last time we had a
day-long rain or even our summer monsoon cycle? Our aquifers are being depleted. Wells are
stressed, water restrictions are imminent. For Ascendigo to propose the size and scale of their
buildings, their operations - a commercial kitchen, guest facilities and rentals, ponds, etc, is just so
absolutely insensitive to the realities of our landscape and sustainability. Kitchens use water,
guest facilities need toilets and showers, ponds need filling because they evaporate - especially
with our winds. 100 or 150 overnight guests could use as much water in L day as we use
individually for our homes in L summer. (Here in Sopris Mesa just north of this development we
are allocated 60,000 gallons from May 1to Oct 1.) Ascendigo's water use will be dramatic.
Fire:
o We have lived with "Go boxes" of valuables, fire safes, lists of what to grab, in our hall closet for
over 5 years in the event of a fire. We have lived the past 2 years either on pre-evacuation status
or keeping our eyes on already close-by fires. lt's very stressful. July 4, 2018,17 pm, we activated
our evacuation plan with the Lake Christine Fire blowing up. Our only route out of the Heights
was west on CR 102 (Fender Lane) to Catherine Store Rd. 100 because the fire was about to
consume ElJebel. The amount of traffic on that route was like 170 going into Denver on a ski
weekend. Packed, slow, people lost and terrified, towing stock trailers, congested, disorganized,
no emergency personnel guiding people unsure of where to go. Now put into the mix the 100 -
150 people staying at Ascendigo needing to get out.
lnfrastructure:
o Ascendigo is claiming non-profit status. This means they will not pay into current infrastructure to
maintain roads, fire protection districts, police and rescue, schools, etc. Their claim of 450 vehicle
trips per day will significantly stress our already-worn roads, not to mention seriously diminish the
quality of life for those of us who bought into this community. The steep, winding roads are the
only available access to this community. This doesn't even consider the impacts of the
construction traffic necessary to build-out the camp. See excerpt from Sec 4-203 below regarding
buildout timing.
a Development impacts:
¡ The footprint of Ascendigo's proposed buildings, ponds, equestrian fields, is enormous.
As proposed (their lansuase):
-Bose Camp - the comp headquarters for registrøtion, reception, meols, ond
education ønd trdining for educøtors ønd others (up to 6,800 square leet)
-Comp-er Lodge- sleeping quarters dnd showers lor up to 24 campers dnd two on-
duty stofr (up to 8,5(n) squøre feet)
-Staff Lodge- sleeping quørters for up to 48 staff members (up to -
8,500 square feet)
-Activity Børn- a training and therdpy center (74,000 squøre feet)
-Caretøker Dwelling- ø home for on on-site støfrfømily (up to 3,500 squøre feet)
and Caretøker ADU- secondary on-site staff family unit (up to 2,500 square feet)
-Guest Cabin- rentol cabin for Ascendigo porticiponts (up to 7,700 square feet)
-There would also be accessory structures for mdintenance equípment and
storage, o hoy børn, horse ond goat børns, on equestrian tack/office, and loafing
sheds.
This is 37,OOO sq ft of structures, not counting the last bit of accessory structures,
tbd. How much domestic water with showers, toilets, irrigation would these
facilities consume? We suspect more than the 13 single family homes that the
parcel is already zoned and approved for.
a Traffic
o Their language from their proposal:
The Ascendigo Ranch is expected to odd six morning peok hour trips from CR 702 onto
Hormony Ln, and eight trips in the øfternoon peak hourfrom Hormony Ln. to CR 702.
This is simply not true. How does this mesh with their proposed density and Ascendigo
providing/ull-time jobs, commercial kitchens that require food & beverage deliveries,
maintenance crews, emergency services, not to mention lhe entire buildout taking
severøl yeørs or more? Their words - see below.
From Sec 4-203 Submittal requirement of the Ascendigo submittal:
J. ...the initial buildings are expected to include equestrian facilities, then the Base
Camp and then the Camper Lodge. Additional phases will be implemented as funds allow. The
entire buildout is expected to take severol yeørs or more.
The traffic impacts will be endless, horrendous, and dangerous for all the reasons and situations
stated above.
Refer to Section 7-3OL of their proposal which outlines "Compatible Use". Some highlights - their
language:
o ...the Basecomp buitding also includes o 72-sedt dining høll, commercidl kitchen,
bøthrooms, storage, mechanicat/utility space, ønd o 2$-seot outdoor dining porch. The
Basecamp will serve os the primøry location for educotion ønd troining when offered
during non-summer periods. The Bosecomp mdy olso be used during speciol events.
o The Camper Lodge includes 24 single-occupøncy rooms ond 72 bothrooms, such that 2
campers will shdre o bøthroom. At futt cøpacíty, there witl be 24 campers sleeping in the
Iodge
o The Stdff Lodge includes 24 doubte-occuponcy rooms with bathroom capocity for up to 48
people. At full capdcity, there would be 48 people sleeping in the lodge during the summer
o peøk summer døv - These ore cømper drop-oÍf (sunday) dnd pick-up days (Friday) which
occur once eøch per week. These ddys dre less octive in terms ol recreøtional activity but
will have more vehicular troffic and total people on- site'
How is this compatible to the rural character of Missouri Heights? How much water will
these act¡v¡t¡es and facilities use and what are the traffic impacts from construction, guest
visits & delivery/maintenance schedules. Their traffic tables are just best guesses. our belief
is that every statistic in their development proposal is understated. That's what developers
do. This will become a small city causing irreparable damage to the current residents of this
peaceful enclave who moved and built here for a piece of the Colorado Lifestyle' When we
built and moved up here in 2}O}there was a 200+ herd of elk that would cross the Fender
Ranch every winter. They're gone. Development has already changed the fragile grasslands
of Missouri Heights, and if approved, Ascendigo will do even more damage. Much more-so
than if thirteen homes were built in the area. As mentioned earlier, the light pollution, noise,
and added activity in the area promises to permanently change the landscape and behavior
of wildlife forever. This can't happen.
Our opposition to Ascendigo has nothing to do with Autism or NlMBYism' lt has everything
to do with Missouri Heights being the wrong place for a project like this. There isn't enough
water, our roads are already crumbling, our wildlife is already leaving' Quite simply, this area
cannot sustain a project of this size. lf this proposal were to go through, it would create a
slippery slope where Missouri Heights could be transformed into a commercial area. lt can't
work and it won't work. Hunt Ranch was denied for the same reasons. The water will run
out. The fires will return. And that could mean disaster for not only Ascendigo, but for every
single resident that calls Missouri Heights home.
Thís project must be denied
Passionately,
Glenn MontgomerY
1021Green Meadow Dr.
Sopris Mesa Subdivision
lbti
-floog 1
EXHI BIT
Steve Gook
263 Caballo St
Carbondale, CO 81623
(970) 366-0307
loverocks.steve@gmail.com
April 19,2021
Glenn Hartmann
Garfield County Senior Planner
1O8 8th St., Suite 101
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
ghartrnan nrôgarfie ld-co unty.co m
Re:Ascendigo Ranch Application
Lr pA-01-21-882 6 / PLVA-o1- 21-8827
Mr. Hartmann,
I have been a resident of Missouri Heights for 15 years and a small business owner in the
Valley over 3O years. I too have a local non-profit, The Love Rocks Foundation where we
gift musical instruments and lessons to youth and those w¡th special needs. lt ls
rewarding to serve our great community through education and musie therapy. I feel
Ascendigo Ranch will also add value to our llrnited communþ re-source$ for special
needs. I am writing to you in support of the ranch.
My neighborhood has a unique opportunity to show comp€Bsitn and to eupport our
community. The ranch will provide much needed servlces for thoge wtth ggeetal ness
and will be in a safe place, enhôncing their personaf growth, le' rfllng and sqelâl $klltp"
After reading the public information about the rançh, 'lt'sdear'U.lêy
Our resources arent in jeopardy and the architectgre ândi
with our land. Not to mention, I would rather see a ggod
versus more single family McMansions.
I've been here a long time and I know my
neighbors, but it's my hope speaking up wll¡
standard Valley opposition and greed.Why
important and deseruing? Change is the only
It's our
Sincere
back and contributel
Evelyn and Steve Quick
744 Holland Hills Road
Basalt
co8L62L
26 April2Q2!
By emailto Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner - Garfield County
gha rtman n @ga rfield-countY.com
Dear Mr Hartmann,
We have become aware of the controversy over the proposed Ascendigo development and wish
to register our support for this project as proposed in the Missouri Heights area of Garfield
County.
Through our connections in Colorado, we have become increasingly aware of the benefits that
Ascendigo has brought to the quality of life for people living with autism and related conditions.
We also have first-hand knowledge of the Houston Center for Pursuit which was located in the
heart of Houston on the edge of River oaks until it moved to larger premises a few miles away.
The environmental related arguments against this project seem rather lame when compared to
the size of the residential footprints that many have established in that area. ln a society where
it is becoming increasingly divisive, which we find very sad, why would people living with a
disability such as autism, be denied the opportunity to thrive in a rural setting? We are confident
that the management team at Ascendigo are socially and environmentally conscious, thus
addressing other concerns such as water supply.
ln closing, as residents of the Roaring Fork Valley, we sincerely request your support of the
Ascendigo limited impact review and the development of the Ascendigo Ranch project.
Sincerely,
EXHIBIT
t1D¡;úoog
S'tut?' a¿^"d' Evelgw Qú¿'k/
EXHIB¡T
t1 I
tâ
-co6g
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Friday, April 23, 2021 10:13 AM
Victoria Stulgis; Glenn Hartmann
RE: lExternal] Voiced Opposition to Ascendigo - Victoria Stulgis
Hi Victoria, Thank you for your comments. We will make sure they are included in the packet that we provide to the
BOCC prior to them making a decision.
Regards,
.sherul L Eower, A/c?<)
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 40L
Glenwood Springs, CO 81.60L
97O-94s-L377 (L6O5l
From: Victoria Stulgis <victoria.stulgis@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 23,2O2! 8:55 AM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>; Glenn Hartmann <ghartmann@garfield-county.com>
Subject: IExternal] Voiced Opposition to Ascendigo - Victoria Stulgis
Dear Senior Planner Hartmann and Director Bower,
l've lived in Missouri Heights a little over three years. I moved out to Colorado from the East Coast, and ¡
chose to live here because I love this rural community, its incredible mountain views, the feeling like you could
be in the middle of nowhere, acreage for my dogs to run and for my yaks and donkeys to graze. I love the
area so much, I convinced my parents to buy the lot next door, on the Garfield County side of Harmony Ln (l'm
on the Eagle County side but pay taxes to both counties).
Missouri Heights is special in that it sits above the valley floor. As far as the eye can see, there are incredibie
mountains, but also rural residential and agricultural ranches. Homes of all shapes and sizes, on lots between
2 - 36 acres. These are all single family homes. People who have chosen this bucolic rural landscape as their
home.
ln my career, I work with institutional property owners (commercial real estate companies) - to install onsite
solai across their portfolios, so I am familiar with commercial development. What Ascendigo is proposing,
while they are a commendable organization with a worthy cause, is commercial development in both the scope
and proposed impact of their operations. They are a tax-exempt non-profit because they engage in activities
for both public and private interest without the pursuit of profit, but having worked for two non-profits, Richard
Branson;s climate change non-profit, the Carbon War Room, as well as the Rocky Mountain lnstitute, I am well
aware that well-run nonprofits conduct their activities much the same as a commercial business would.
I attended the first zoom meeting with Ascendigo's consultant. The buildings proposed are beautiful, and the
B-week summer camp sounded like a welcome alternative to the development of the property into 15 homes
(not the 21 thalAscendigo continues to claim). As the plans have developed, however, I took the time to read
the application, and what I learned was a very different story, and I now strongly oppose this intrusion in our
quiet neighborhood. I ask you - does this sound rural residential, or commercial?
1
. 12 weeks of intense camp and additionalweeks at smaller capacity. 94 parking spots. Multiple buildings that house 24 - 48 residents. A 6,800 sqft building where up to 100 people will eat, and a 14,000 sqft activity barn. Perhaps I was most surprised to learn that in non-summer months, they still plan to have daily
commuters for a variety of therapy and group training programs and workshops, and many clients
coming and going each way. Significant increase in traffic with trucks, vans, buses and cars
No one is against Ascendigo and what they do. Their mission is admirable, their program well reputed and very
worthwhile. But their scope is too large an operation for our neighborhood given its rural residential character,
limited to one dirt road in and out, challenged access to emergency services, notorious winds up here that not
only make fire riskier, but are also not conducive for the outdoor activities they are planning. A program like
Ascendigo's should be on the valley floor, where they have better access to all services, emergency, water,
telephone and broadband, and won't bring unprecedented traffic and noise into a quiet neighborhood.
Best,
Victoria Stulgis
220 Harmony Lane (partially in Garfield County)
& TBD Harmony Ln - Parcel 239I282OOL98 (Garfield County)
Carbondale, CO 81623
'Ssâ*¡¡-,.".
v tLLOf ¡d )l.utB,t5
US: +1 617 9439626
2
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
lo:
Subject:
Jim Tomlinson <jim@jimtomlinson.net>
Thursday, April22,2021 10:20 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Ascendigo
Dear Mr. Hartmann
I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
Missouri Heights functions as a community because the agricultural and residential interests are kept in equilibrium' This
proposed deirelopment would disturb thaf equilibrium and would significantly íncrease traffic, fire risk, light and noise
pollution.
The Ascendigo proposal would envision group activities on site of about 100 people and would have a far greater
potential to ðause disruption to the peaceful enjoyment of the neighbouring properties'
In the event of an almost certain evacuation order, given the increasingly dry climate, it would also result in a chaotic and
dangerous situation, whatever the preparations. Since dccess is via single lane dift road, there would be a situation where
fire trucks are trying to access the site as a simultaneous evacuation of a large number of special needs adults and
animals is taking pËce. I live in a neighbouring propefi where fire could easily spread and whilst I take all steps I can to
mitigate risÇ the Ascendigo project would materially increase that risk.
I urge you to oppose this ProPosal'
Your sincerely
Jim Tomlinson
457 SCHOONER LANE
Carbondale
co 81623
fl7-
EXHIBIT
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hepburn,Susan < Susan.Hepburn@colostate.edu >
Friday, April 23, 2021 10:22 AM
Glenn Hartmann
Sallie Bernard
IExternal] Support for Ascendigo Ranch
Hello County Commissioners,
I am writing today to express my very strong support for the Ascendigo Ranch project, currently under review by
Garfield County. Ascendigo is an outstanding program that has been serving youth and adults with complex
developmental disabilities for several years. We have a huge gap in services like this in our state - even in the Rocky
Mountain region in general- and we need to support community-based non-profits like Ascendigo,, who work so hard
on behalf of some of our most vulnerable citizens.
As a psychologist specializing in interventions for people with Autism Spectrum Disorder, I have had the opportunity to
interact with program leaders and staff in many different contexts over the years, and I have been consistently
impressed by their commitment to high quality services to support families facing significant challenges. They are a
well-runandhighlyregardednon-profitagency,whowill (l believe)serveasanexcellentstewardoftheproperty' l'm
hopeful that their request will be approved, as I believe this project has the potential to positively impact many people
in Garfield County and within the region.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my support for this organization's request to build this critically important
program.
Sincerely,
Susan Hepburn, Ph.D
Professor, Dept. of Human Development & Family Studies
Licensed Clinical Psychologist (#2875)
Colorado State University
Box 1"570
Behavioral Sciences Building - Room 315
susan.hepburn colostate.edu
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sheryl Bower
Friday, April 23, 2021 10:47 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
,sherul L Bower, AlcP('/
Community DeveloPment Director
LO8 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
97O-94s-L377 (ê605l
From : Tom Ja n kovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfield-cou nty'com >
Sent: Friday, APril 23, 2021, LO:27 AM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: FW: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
From: noreplv@formstack'com <noreplv@formstack.com>
Sent: Friday, April 23,2O2L 9:59 AM
To: Tom Ja n kovsky <tia n kovskv@ ga rfie ld-cou ntv.com >
Subject: IExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
Subject: Ascendigo Land Use Application
Name: Susan Ellison
Email: su svellison ail.com
Phone Number: (970) 963-0463
Message: We are writing to express our concerns with Ascendigo Land Holding's application request for a
reviewio modify zoningäf its lànd from 'Residential Medium'to one that would allow the organization to create
a 'campus' on Missouri-H"igntt. As residents of Missouri Heights we feel that this change would_result in the
creation of a campus that ij incompatible with surrounding homes and currently approved uses for that parcel.
The following are our concerns:
1. This is a commercial development in a residential area. The application cites examples to demonstrate non-
residential uses and 'Heart' on Missouri Heights. While the proponent has selected Colorado Mountain College
and CARE as similar examples on Missouri Heights, this development is certainly not equivalent in either
1
Gar$eld County
scope or mission and both facilities are located far from this part of Missouri Heights. Strang Ranch, hosting
the anntral Sheep Dog Trials (2 days, total), is not the equal of a year round camip/conferenie facility. The
Missouri Heights Schoolhouse/Community Center hosts small events throughout the year that do not include
onsite housing, camping, administration offices, or the need for water stora{e and septic facilities, Windwalker
is a day use facilrty. None of these provide valid arguments for why this proþerty is suitable for a permanent
residentialfacility and its attendant needs.
2. We are concerned about the traffic that will be generated by this project, both during and after construction.
Our property is on the long hill leading to the top of the heights, near the old landfill s¡té. th¡s corner is often the
location for accidents during the winter as cars speed down the hill exceeding posted speed limits and the laws
of physics as they attempt to navigate the sharp turn at the bottom (and fail). Construction vehicles will
generate dust and noise in excess of the dust and noise we currently experience each day. Over the years,
this part of Missouri Heights has increased in popularity with road bikers. Witn the advent of e-bikes, this will
only increase. An increase in construction traffic as well as the increase in overall traffic of Ascendigo staff and
clients will only exacerbate this problem.
3. Water' As our climate changes and Missouri Heights' population increases, water is becoming a scarce and
valuable commodity. Surrounding neighbors report issues with wells and water pressure. We are concerned
that this non-conforming use will place additional demands on a finite resource.
4' Ftre. The climate is changing. Missouri Heights is now at increased risk from wildfire. Access and egress
from Ascendigo's proposed campus is limited to two routes. As we saw during the Lake Christine Fire, one
route was closed, and Missouri Heights' residents evacuated using 100 Road, There was bumper-to-bumper
traffic for hours as residents left their homes, rounded up their liveétock, and headed down the hill with trailers
behind their vehicles. This proposal would add to the chaos in the event of another evacuation. Fire control
resources are limited. There is a Fire Station on 100 Road, one at the bottom of the El Jebel hill, and one in
Carbondale. None are in close proximity to this location.
5' The Comprehensive Plan includes the following statement: Policy 5: Direct commercial and industrial
development to locations which possess the appropriate physical féatures and community facilities and
services. This application is counter to that policy.
6. The proponent's application consistently compares their proposal to what is currently permitted if the parcels
were developed. This is a specious argument, since those parcels are not currently próposing anything. While
comparisons with potential future development as per zoning are useful, there is currenity no proposeO
development. Comparisons at this point are not valid.
7. The scale of this commercial development far exceeds the footprint of residential use. Six commercially
sized septic/leach field areas are not comparable to septic/leach fields for homes. The cumulative footpriñt of
large facilities for dining, housing, administration, and maintenance is over 50,000 square feet. lf this is
approved and constructed I fear that there will be more applications flowing your way to change zoning
throughout the county. The Comprehensive Plan is a thoughtfully written dóðument inat guiOel develoipment
through 2030. I would urge you to stick with those recommendations and not change thJrules on a case-by-
case basis.
Ascendigo is a wonderful organization. lt provides critical services to a sector of our population that is grealy
underserved. We applaud their mission. Unfortunately, the site they have chosen fortheir campus is
incompatible with current uses. lt is a sad reflection on current use and demographic trends thåt Ascendigo is
unable to find a suitable property on the valley floor that would be closer to thé resources they require.
2
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Judy Shettel
90 Vaquero Rd
Carbondale, CO 81623
Judy Shettel <judyshettel@me.com>
Friday, April23, 2021 11:02 AM
Glenn Hartmann; Sheryl Bower
IExternal] Ascendigo Objection
Dear Garfield CountY officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights. we personally have had failures of
our water supply. we viere evacuated during the Lalie Christine fire, At that time, we were diverted to Catherine Store
Road rather than the closer Catfle Creek Roaã. they estimate an additional 450 traffic trips per day on our rural roads.
While I recognize that this propefi is in Garfield County and the planning dept, there will make the decision, Eagle
county will årtainly be negatively impacted. Not only will residents be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire
and water concerns, but thl Eagle county municipal seruices will be called upon given the proximity to the propefi. It's
right on the county line. From óad accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
infrastructure, this project brings significant increased activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associatêd wltn ihose issues. This is not simply a Garfield County matter, It will be an Eagle County
proúl"r and those of us who lpe in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought every year' We
are seeing the effects of climate change, Rñd imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from
that single road access point should *ã have anot-her fire. The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over
time anã would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons'
We all support Ascendigo,s work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe.
1
t1 b
EXHIBIT
Glenn Hartmann
Senior Planner
Garfield County
April23,2021
Ref: Ascendigo Ranch: optimal use to keep Missouri Heights Rural
We are writing to express our support for Ascendigo Autism Services that has been a stalwart
part of our miä-valley co*munity for decades - providing much-needed nurture for those on the
äutism spectrum aná providing support for families that cannot address all of the behavioral and
mental health needs of their dèpendent children. Ascendigo also employs dozens of skilled
caregivers, and thereby contributes meaningfully to our community and economy.
Now, Ascendigo has identified an optimal property - 126 acres in Missouri Heights that it
propô.". for ãranch that will expand care and service to children on the autism spectrum' Sadly'
facts are being misrepresented' So here are the facts:
. Ascenáigo is a non-governmental organization that provides nationally-recognized health
and eduòation services to people with differential learning'
. The property is already zoned for "educational purposes," and to this end the ranch will
consiruct sli nuitOings, including a barn, and a stable and riding ring that are the
quintessence of our valley's rural landscape.
. Ascendigo will also construct buildings where they will teach, nurture and support
campers, house counselors, and provide administration. This is a far cry from the 20+
high-end homes that will othen¡uise be built under the existing and future planned
development. The intense pressure on resources, notably water, wildlife habitat, and
transport will be far greater under a housing development.
Many homeowners in Gar-field County, where the Ranch will be located, have embraced the
projéct, because it will preserve open space, viewsheds, and the rural way of life that attracted
them to the Heights and us to the valley'
Advent of the Ascendigo Ranch on Missouri Heights represents an optimal use that will far better
protect the social, environmental and economic values that we all want to safeguard in the
iloaring Fork Valley, and will protect against suburbanization, urban sprawl and expansive
residential home-building that its critics are implicitly calling for.
We implore you and the Garfield County Commissioners to weigh the facts, and to act to advance
health and social well-being in our valley and to protect against wanton development and sprawl
by welcoming the Ascendigo Ranch to Missouri Heights'
Respectfully,
Wiltiam Infante - Local business owner and member of the Basalt Town Council*
Betina Infante- Local business owner and member of the Board of Directors of Basalt Chamber
of Commercen
* The opinions expressed within the LTE are solely the author's and do not reflect the opinions of
the organizations mentioned.
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
noreply@formstack.com
Friday, April 23, 20212:45 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall Garfield County website inquiry - Senior Planner
Subject: Ascendigo
Name: Andrea Crouse
Email : andyyogastretch@gmail. com
Phone Number: (970) 618-7166
Message: Garfield County - I am a neighbor within one mile of the proposed Ascendigo project. I have written
to Eagle County to requeôt their support in conveying to you that this project does not belong in a rural
residential for numerous reasons. I will send a typed letter next week. I want to make sure that my voice is
counted that Ascendigo is a noble endeavor but belongs where there is access for emergencies both health
and fire for all participãnts and the staff. The magnitude of the project not creating tax revenue for Garfield
county due to it being a non-profit also seems out of line for the services it will require with up to 150 vehicle
trips per day. And, nówhere in the application is there anything about further expansion in the future or their
educational protocol. Thanks for your time and consideration in denying this application.
EXHIBIT
n1
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subiect:
Sheryl Bower
Friday, April 23, 20219:44 AM
Kimala Fite
Glenn Hartmann
RE: [External] Opposition to Ascendigo
Hi Kimala, Thank you for your comments. I will make sure that they are included in the packet of info the BOCC receives
prior to making a decision.
Regards,
.sherul L Bower, Alc?<J
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 8160L
97O-94s-L377 (L6Osl
From: Kimala Fite <mamafite@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 22,20217:04 PM
To: Glenn Hartmann <ghartmann@garfield-county.com>; Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: IExternal] Opposition to Ascendigo
please see my letter attached requesting consideration to reject Ascendigo's request to change a residential area to a
commercial profit center for this corporation. The majority of our private road owners are against commercial use of
our little dirt road. Our neighboring private roads will be closed adding safety hazards to homeowners.
We beg you to help save our community.
Kimala Fite
1
ln response to the Aspen Times letter from the Ascendigo Board of Directors I would like to
assert that they are presenting a false narrative. To say "meetings with neighbors are
productive and positive" is contrary to the opinion of the more than 380 neighbors that have
signed a petition in opposition to this development and the vast majority of property owners
who came to Monday's tour. We came with hope of getting real answers, but yet again the
details changed right before us and is another sign of dishonesty by Ascendigo. Monday's tour
consisted of approximately 20-30 people, at least 4 of which are paid Ascendigo staff' All of the
property owners in attendance were concerned residents and the vast majority were openly in
opposition to this highly commercial like venture that is trying to intrude on our peaceful
residential neighborhood.
My home is directly across the street from where they plan to have their entrance. My family's
first private meeting was in July 2020 conducted by Bob Schultz (planning consultant for
Ascendigo) with 3 other neighbors adjacent to the property under review. We were told that it
was an "8-week summer camp" a quiet and small operation. There would be a camper lodge,
dorm for interns, a pond for agricultural use and a maintenance barn. This is not what we
heard from Dan Richardson and his PR team at Monday's tour. Not only will there be 24
campers and 48 staff (2:1- ratio due to higher needs to support these campers) the building
plans have changed and there is also housekeeping, laundry, medical, caretakers and a guest
lodge. Catering staff would come daily and not reside on premise. And 94 parking spaces!
presumably to accommodate family dinners on Fridays and Sundays and other non-summer
programs. A smaller capacity camp in May and September is planned and other non-residential
programs in fall and winter. We were suspicious from the beginning in part because the
drawings included a sledding hill- not a summer activity. I can list dozens of items that have
changed or have been misrepresented by their team from water usage, size, buildings, building
height, days of operation, maximum number of people onsite, type of operation, road
maintenance, increased traffic, and the frequency of ambulance visits'
Ascendigo is a full time behavioral/therapeutic facility. Bob Schultz stated that the need for
emergency/ambulance service is very high as some clients need more medical attention than
the medical staff can provide. Dan Richardson has contradicted this. Who are we to believe?
And this location poses different challenges than what they are used to. The notorious wind up
on the ridge is one, This program would likely strain our local emergency responders in this
remote area not to mention disturbing long term citizens day and night. Especially those of us
who live very close by. Their vehicle trips described in the operations plan includes multiple
trucks, vans, busses and cars, going back and forth every day in the summer and quite often in
the non-summer periods. And that includes families coming from out of state who may not be
familiar with our windy roads, and wildlife dangers. Dan Richardson clearly stated Monday that
this would be a year-round operation. Ascendigo has applied to Garfield County claiming to be
an "Educational Facility" when they are a behavioral/therapy provider and camp to special
needs clients. My husband and I have been ardent supporters of, and have helped many
people with autistic family members. We appreciate the mission, but are disheartened by the
clearly dishonest approach to placing a large corporate facility in the middle of the tranquil
residential area that lies on the boundary of Eagle and Garfield Counties. The message is clear -
Ascendigo will say whatever is necessary to build their facilities in this neighborhood with clear
disregard for any harm it may cause others.
Please say NO to allowing Ascendigo from placing a large commercial property in the middle of
a residential community.
It is bad for Garfield County
It is bad for Eagle County
It is very bad for Missouri Heights.
Thank you,
Kimala Fite
260 Harmony Lane
Carbondale, Co 8L623
970-319-2902
From:
Sent:
To:
Glenn Hartmann
Annie Cooke < misocooke@gmail.com >
Thursday, April22,2021 B:09 PM
Subiect:
Glenn Hartmann; Sheryl Bower; jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecounty.us;
morgan.beryl@eaglecounty.us; KeepMOHRural@gmail.com
lExternall Ascendigo Camp Application
To Garfield County Commissioners,
I live in Aspen Mesa Estates (30 years) in Eagle County but I am writing about the Ascendigo Camp application. I am
adamently opposed for the following reasons.
1. Missouri Heights is a RURAL residential area, which is why we choose to live here. Several years ago there was an
application for a special events facility which was denied by Eagle County because they agreed that it was not
compatible with our rural zoning. Ascendigo does a great job for autistic kids but this location is just wrong, wrong
wrong for the following reasons.
2. lt appears to be a conflict of interest for Dan Richardson, mayor of Carbondale, to be requesting your approval of this
camp.
3. Although I understand that the official directions to the camp will be Fender Rd. to Harmony Lane, Google Maps will
route traffic through our subdivision via Paseo and Sunset because it is much shorter. Eventually everyone everyone at
Ascendigo will use this shortcut.
4. Extreme Fire Danger-the closest fire department is in El Jebel not in Garfield County. The Garfield County Fire
Department is too far away to respond if there is a fire, and there will be a fire. That places an unreasonable burden on
the tax payers of Eagle County. We were evacuated three years ago by the Lake Christine fire and last year we were on
pre-evacuat¡on status during the Grizzly Creek fire. Ascendigo in in a pinion and juniper forest. Fire is inevitable.
5. The Ascendigo application states there will be conferences and special events. This is the reason Eagle County
rejected the Dragonfly Ranch application. We are a rural zoned, residential community, specialevents and conferences
are not compatible with our zoning.
6. Ascendigo will be larger than any other Missouri Heights project with more people, cars, vans and trucks.
Construction traffic, camper's busses, staff, conference attendees, ambulances, etc. will bring traffic, noise and dust to
our residential community and will add to already congested traffic on Hwy. 82, El Jebel Road and other Missouri
Heights roads.
7. L¡ght pollution-many of us live here for the dark skies. Ascendigo will ruin this for us. They claim they will have bright
lights all night. This is unacceptable.
g. Water- our water tables are dropping. Many of our neighbors with private wells are having to dig them deeper.
Ascendigo not only will bring thirsty hords of campers but THEY WANT TO BUILD A LAKE! This is unsustainable and
unacceptable.
g. Ascendigo will pay no taxes to support Eagle county roads, infrastructure and emergency services. As an Eagle
County taxpayer, I feel this is unfair and unacceptable.
please consider our position and find a more appropriate location for the good work Ascendigo does.
1
Thank you,
Annie Cooke
Steve Pfeiffer
2
LID
EXHIBIT
tâ
.coog
Tanja and David Duffey
0220 Sam Grange Ct.
Carbondale, CO 81623
970-704-99 66 t 97 0-922-9444
yukonastro@sopris. net
April22,2021
Dear Glenn Hartmann,
We are writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
While we recognize that this property is in Garfield County and the planning dept. will make the decision,
Eagle County will certainly be negatively impacted. Not only will residents be affected by traffic, noise,
light pollution and fire and water concerns, but the Eagle County municipal services will be called upon
given the proximity to the property. lt's right on the county line. From road accidents to fire and heaith
emergencies, and even maintenance of our road infrastructure, this project brings significant increased
activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to mitigate costs associated with those
issues. This is not simply a Garfield County matter. lt will be an Eagle County problem and those of us
who live in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought
every year. We are seeing the effects of climate change. And imagine the evacuation of 100 people;
including children and animals from that single road access point should we have another fire. The
alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over time and would bring fewer impacts and is
much more compatible with the location. Let's keep the visualcontinuity of homes and the existing
zoning in place.
We are very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open
the door to future commercial endeavors. We met with Jeff Richardson and his co-workers on 4119121, on
location for a tour. Here are our concerns of that day:
1. He claimed that the staff would be encouraged to stay on campus, however, we all know,
especially in the wake of Covid-19 no one wants to be isolated anymore. These college students
(staff) will be going up and down our Eagle County road. They may or may not be typical college
students but we all know what most do especially on the weekends.
2. Harmony road currently is nothing but pot holes, would this facility pay for its improvement and
maintenance? Signage, drainage, asphalt, etc. There is no fast escape on Harmony Rd as it is
now, unless you are willing to damage your vehicle.
3. Delivery trucks such as "Cisco Food Company" or "Shamrock Foods" or others are generally
bobtail box trucks which are slow going up and down hills. This will undoubtedly cause traffic
back-ups both up and down the hill from El Jebel, this will be most frustrating to local residents to
get caught behind one of these trucks. This too can be a potential cause for accidents if people
are impatient and pass these trucks around the curves. Then there is winter driving conditions to
consider and the deer that hang out along Upper Cattle Creek Rd.
4.Emergency evacuations: Jeffs response was that their "campers" don't drive so they all get into
vans ór ¡uies to leave which is more efficient and fewer vehicles on the road. However,
dãpenOing upon the type of autism and everybod,y reacls _differently l'm pretty sure autistic people
like routines and an emergency will not be part of their daily routine. An evacuation can infact be
slowed down because soñre ¡nd¡v¡duals may become aggressive, disruptive, have a breakdown
etc. and will be more difficult to get them to join the rest of the campers. Some could act out and
scream and cause others normally calm to get upset and raise anxiety.
5. \A/hat if Ascendigo's contracts with their clients fall through? They will be scrambling to find any
type of businesjor event to come in to help make their mortgage paymenl I really feel this could
ánO woulO open the door to more commercial businesses in Missouri Heights. Lets keep
Missouri Heþhts Rural and keep the traffic on the valley floor.
We all support Ascendigo's work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not
appropràie nor is it saie. Please do what you can to encourage Garfield County to reject this
application.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely
Tanja and David DuffeY
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Stacey Kent <staceykent@me.com>
Thursday, April 22, 2021 10:22 PM
Glenn Hartmann
lExternall ASCENDIGO
Dear Mr Hartmann
I waited to send this letter unt¡l I could gather as much info as possible and also see the site for
myself, as Ascendigo offered us a tour of the campus. I was scept¡cal but wanted to keep an open
mind. After much review, many conversations and reading all the material available, I realize that
my op¡n¡on st¡ll stands and has in fact, intensified. As good an idea as ¡t is to set up a camp of this sort,
to build the Ascendigo camp in Missouri Heíghts is quite simply a terrible proposal and I am
in complete opposition of it being built on Missouri Heights.
We have lived in the neighbourhood for 17 years, on Missouri Heights for 11 of them. We have
watched the summers get hotter and hotter, we have experienced a few fires, we were evacuated for
one of them. We have had visits to our home from the fire department to discuss fire mitigation. ln
other words, we have an understanding of the neighbourhood and how it works and what has
changed recently on account of climate change.
The idea of putting a camp on that site with a road that is not at all easy to access, when fire is a real
issue up here seems crazv.The traffic that Ascendigo will bring will be significant and were we to need
to evacuate, I cannot imagine gett¡ng all these children and all residents out , not to mention
fire trucks in. When we took the tour of Ascdingo last week, one local brought up the fire risks. The
person in charge of the tour said, yes, they had thought of that and could get the kids out in an hour,
and even said something about usually being given one hour to evacuate. That is an absurd,
inaccurate assumption. The night we were evacuated during the Basalt fire, we were awaiting
instructions and told that we could stand down and go to bed, and then sometime around midnight,
we got an alarm to tell us we had 15 minutes to get out!
Speaking of the tour, it seemed they wanted to give us a tour based on what they thought were the
locals' concerns about design. I don't think anybody is terribly concerned with the design. lt may look
great, but not matter how great it looks and no matter how wonderful an idea it is to provide these
children with this facility, there ís absolutely no way it belongs up here! lt seemed the tour guides
actually knew this and ducked out of any serious questions. We also found a lot of inconsistencies in
their arguments, basing their traffic findings on current traffic up here over 3 days but saying it was
two days.
The concerns of Missouri Heights residents is about traffic, fire risk, water shortages, and generally
turning a quiet rural community into something commercial.
One more point about fire risk. ln a recent conversation with the local fire department, I happened to
say something along the lines of if there's a fire this year' and one of the firemen interrupted me and
said,'lt's not 'if', it's a matter of 'when'. ln other words, our firefighters were letting us know what to
1
t{t
EXHIB¡T
ú
-coDg
expect. lf one of those fires happens to be up here with Ascendigo in place, it puts everybody far
more at risk. We urge you to review the roads and current traffic. Even when homes are built on that
land, it will be 15 homes at most and of course, over time, and of course, some of them will end up
being second homes and even if they weren't, 15 homes would still bring in far fewer residents
than Ascendigo will bring.
I love the idea of this kind of camp. When I was a teenager, I worked for a summer on the east coast
at a camp for children with special needs. lt was one of the most fulfilling experiences of my life.
However, the camp's location on Missouri Heights is so wrong on so many levels and will bring too
many risks.
I am thoroughly against this camp in this place and urge you to hear our wishes to move it elsewhere,
I am in constant contact with neighbours up here and I am hearing the same cries coming from every
home.
Sincerely,
Stacey Kent
457 Schooner Lane, Carbonale.
2
Sent:
Glenn Hartmann
From:Morgan Beryl < morgan.beryl@eaglecounty.us>
Friday, April 23, 2021 B:55 AM
g manchester@ lastridgedev.com
Subject:
G lenn Ha rtma nn; Sheryl Bower; jeanne.mcqueeney@eag lecounty.us;
keepmohru ral @ gmai l.com
Re: [External] Ascendigo - ln Missouri Heights - NO
Thankyou, Gary.We will include this as part of our referral comments.
Best,
Støy Infonned1 Sígnupfor the Cotn¡nunìty Deueloprnent Monthlg E-Newsletter here.
Morgan Beryl
Eagle County Government
Community DeveloPment Director
(o) gzo.gz8.8ZSo
(c) gZo-+Zt-gSBg
To:
Cc:
On Thu, Apr 22,2O2L at 5:09 PM Gary Manchester <gmanchester@lastridgedev.com> wrote
Dear Eagle County and Garfield County officialS,
I am writing to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights
Garfield County and the planning dept. there will make the decision, but Eagle County will certainly be negatively
impacted. Traftic, noise,'light poìlution and fire and water concerns all need to be considered. It's right on the county
line so both counties arä jffect"d by this project. There is no revenue coming with it to mitigate costs associated with
those issues and many other issues. rn¡s is ñot simply a Garfield County matter. It will be an Eagle County problem and
those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this'
1
l(L
EXHIBIT
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to
future commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
What are the benefits of this p@ect for Garfield County and Eagle County - at this locátion? I see none for us that live
and own property here.
It concerns me that we owners in Missouri Heights would be stuck paying for additional infrastructure in future years
caused by this project. The traffic alone on our rural roads is a major coñcern.
Most of us who live in Missouri Heights and have bought property here did not buy with the idea that a major commercialproject such as this would ever come to this rural area. We need to keep this areâ rural such as we have now. We need
thoughtful rural development to Missouri Heights, not commercial developments that would considerably change our
environment.
Girry Manchester
Owner - Lot 26 Stirling Ranch
Resident at 507 Kings Row St.
Carbondale, CO 81623
, This email has come to you after being scanned by the
Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please email support@thepcwhisperer.net
2
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Sheryl Bower
Friday, April 23, 20219:44 AM
Glenn Hartmann
FW: lExternal] Garfield County website inquirySubject:
.sherul L Bower, AlcP
<-/
Community Development Director
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 8L60L
970-94s-1377 (L6Os)
From : Tom Ja nkovsky <tja nkovsky@ga rfie ld-county.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 22,2OZt 5:27 PM
To: Sheryl Bower <sbower@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Fwd: [External] Garfield County website inquiry
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: noreplv@formstack.com
Date: April 22,2O2L at LA:4L:O2 AM MDT
To: tia n kovskv@ga rfield-cou ntv.com
Subject: IExternal] Garfield County website inquiry
Reply-To: eva hgn@vahoo.com
Subject: Ascendigo Proposal
Name: Eva Hogan
Email: evahqn(Avahoo. com
Phone Number: (970) 379-7683
Message: Ascendigo Proposal Missouri Heights
As a Harmony Lane homeowner I am asking to consider the following concerns in regards to
the Ascendigo proposal.
1. Road access for oversized vehicles. This is a narrow road and in case of an emergency two
1
Lî3
IT
.6
l9oog
Garfield County
overs¡zed veh¡cles like Firetrucks, Ambulances, transport vans can not pass each other. Since
this is a high risk wildfire and high wind area large vehicles are unable to get in and out in a
quick manner. The therapeutic camp for children is trapped and it is irresponsible to put children
and staff in such a dangerous area and situation. ln addition the campers suffer from
developmental disabilities which is even more concerning.
2. Garfield county does not maintain the road and in the winter month no plowing is provided
and at times the road is more than challenging to get in and out.
3. Ascendigo camp is not and educational program, it is only therapeutic and the language of
the proposal needs to reflect this. Anyone that is familiar with the Autism spectrum or any other
developmental disabilities knows that a weeklong camp has no educational benefits. Therefor
this is a summer camp for these youth and children to enjoy a little time off.
4. The proposed location is inhabited by mountain lion packs. We see mauled deer on the
property on weekly basis. The department of wildlife is aware and should be consulted. I cant
envision having children sitting around a campfire in such and environment.
Thank you for your consideration
Eva Hogan
0210 Harmony Lane
Carbondale, Co 81623
Ph 970 379 7683
2
v(+
EXHIBIT
tâ
-co0o
SUSY ELLISON & MARTY SCHLEIN
4474 COANTY ROAD lOO
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
Apr1l22,202I
Comments on Ascendigo Limited Impact Review
To Commissioners Martin, Jankovsþ, and Samson:
We are writing to express our concerns with Ascendigo Land Holding's application
request for a review to modiff zoning of its land from'Residential Medium'to one that
would allow the organization to create a'campus' on Missouri Heights. As residents of
Missouri Heights we feel that this change would result in the creation of a campus that is
incompatible with surrounding homes and currently approved uses for that parcel.
The following are our concems:
l. This is a commercial development in a residential area. The application cites a
few examples to demonstrate non-residential uses and'Heart' on Missouri
Heights. While the proponent has selected Colorado Mountain College and CARE
as similar examples of 'Heart'on Missouri Heights, this development is certainly
not equivalent in either scope or mission and both facilities are located far from
this part of Missouri Heights. Strang Ranch, hosting the annual Sheep Dog Trials
(2 days, total), is certainly not the equal of a year round camp/conference facility.
The Missouri Heights Schoolhouse/Community Center hosts small events
throughout the year that do not include onsite housing, camping, administration
offices, or the need for water storage and septic facilities. Windwalker is a day use
facility. None of these provide valid arguments for why this property is suitable
for a permanent residential facility and its attendant needs (housing, conference
facilities, atena, water and septic, parking, etc.).
2. We are concerned about the traffic that will be generated by this project, both
during and after construction. Our property is on the long hill leading to the top
of the heights, near the old landfill site. This corner is often the location for
accidents during the winter as cars speed down the hill exceeding posted speed
limits and the laws of physics as they attempt to navigate the sharp turn at the
bottom (and fail). Construction vehicles will generate dust and noise in excess of
the dust and noise we currentþ experience each day. Over the years, this part of
Missouri Heights has increased in popularity with road bikers. With the advent of
e-bikes, this will only increase. An increase in construction traffic as well as the
increase in overall traffïc of Ascendigo staff and clients will only exacerbate this
problem.
3. Water. As our climate changes and Missouri Heights'population increases, water
is becoming a scarce and valuable commodity. Surrounding neighbors report
issues with wells and water pressure. We are concerned that this non-conforming
use will place additional demands on a finite resource'
4. Fire. The climate is changing. Missouti Helghts ls now at irrcreased risk ftom
wildfire. Access and egress from Ascendigo's proposed campus is limited to two
routes. As we saw during the Lake Christine Fire, one route was closed, and
Missouri Heights' residents evacuated using 100 Road. There was bumper-to-
bumper tratTic tbr hours as residents left their homes, rounded up their livestock,
and headed down the hill with trailers behind their vehicles. This proposal would
add to the chaos in the event of another evacuation. Fire control resources are
limited. There is a Fire Station on 100 Road, one at the bottom of the El Jebel
hill, and one in Carbondale. None are in close proximity to this location.
5. The Comprehensive Plan includes the following statement: Policy 5: Direcr
commercial and industrial development to locations which possess the appropriate physical
features and community facilities and services. This application is counter to that policy.
6. The proponent's application consistently compares their proposal to what is
currently permitted if the parcels were developed. This is a specious argurnent,
since those parcels are not currently proposing anything. While comparisons with
potential future development as per zoning are useful, there is currcntly no
proposed development. Comparisons at this point are not valid.
7, The scale of this commercial development far exceeds the fooþrint of residential
use. Six commercially sized septic/leach field areas are not comparable to
septic/leach fields for homes. The cumulative fooþrint of large facilities for
dining, housing, administration, and maintenance is over 50,000 square feet. If
this is approved and constructed I fear that there will be more applications
flowing your way to change zoningthroughout the county. The Comprehensive
Plan is a thoughtfully written document that guides development through 2030. I
would urge you to stick with those recommendations and not change the rules on
a case-by-case basis.
Ascendigo is a wonderful organization. It providcs critical services to a sector of our
population that is greatly underserved. We applaud their mission. Unfortunately, the site
they have chosen for their campus is incompatible with current uses. It is a sad reflection
on current use and demographic trends that Ascendigo is unable to find a suitable
property on the valley floor that would be closer to the resources they require.
Please deny this application.
Sincerely,
Susy Ellison and Marty Schlein
From:
Sent:
To:
Glenn Hartmann
Tony Popish <twpopish@gmail.com >
Friday, April 23, 2021 6:03 PM
Subject:
jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecou nty.us; morgan'beryl@eaglecou nty.us;
keepmoh rurail @ gmail.com; G lenn Ha rtmann; Sheryl Bower
[External] Against the Ascendigo proposal
Dear Eagle and Garfield County officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
While I recognize that this propefi is in Garfield County and the planning dept. there will make the decision, Eagle
County will cirtainly be negatively impacted. Not only will residents be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and fire
and wãter concerné, but thl Eagle County municipal seruíces will be called upon given the proximity to the property. It's
right on the county line. From óad accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
inîrastructure, this project brings significant increased activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associatêd with fhose issues. This is not simply a Garfield County matter, It will be an Eagle County
problem and those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is also of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought every year. We
are seeing the effects of climate change. lñd imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from
that singlã road access point should wã have another fire. The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over
time anã would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commeróial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
We all support Ascendigo,s work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe.
Please Oó wfrat you cañ to encourage Garfield County to reject this application'
As a final note.
I have been through 3 wildfire evacuations in 30+ years of living on Missouri Heights, and feel lucky to have escaped each
time. With more and more people up here, I'm not sure if our luck will continue to hold out.
Thank you for your attention,
Tony Popish
144 Elk Range Drive
Mo. Hts.
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Glenn Hartmann
Sylvia Wendrow <sdwjds@yahoo.com>
Friday, April 23, 2021 6:12 PM
Subiect:
Sheryl Bower; Glenn Hartmann; jeanne.mcqueeney@eaglecounty.us;
morgan.beryl@eag lecou nty.us
lExternall Ascendigo Development in Missouri Heights
Dear Garfìeld and Eagle County officials,
I am writing to encourage you to oppose the Ascendigo proposal in Missouri Heights.
Although this propefi is in Garfield County and the planning depaftment there will make the decision, Eagle County will
certainly be negatively ímpacted. Not only will residents of both counties be affected by traffic, noise, light pollution and
fire and water concerns, but the Eagle County municipal seruices will be called upon gíven the proximity to the propefi.
It's right on the county line. From road accidents to fire and health emergencies, and even maintenance of our road
infrastructure, this project brings significant increased activity and vehicles - and there is no revenue coming with it to
mitigate costs associated with those issues, This is not simply a Garfield County matter but also an Eagle County problem
and those of us who live in Missouri Heights do not want this.
The potential drain on our water is of great concern. We seem to be facing more and more drought every year. We are
seeing the effects of climate change, And imagine the evacuation of 100 people, including children and animals from that
single road access point should we have another fire. The alternative subdivision of homes would be developed over time
and would bring fewer impacts and is much more compatible with the location.
I am very concerned about the change in character to our rural, quiet area and believe this would open the door to future
commercial endeavors. This was tried once before in Eagle County and rejected for similar reasons.
I support Ascendigo's work and their mission, but building it in this specific location is not appropriate nor is it safe.
I encourage Garfield County to reject this application.
Sylvia Wendrow
85 Prince Dr.
Carbondale CO 8L623
EXHIBIT
tlb
1
GIenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Natasha Soby <natashasoby@gmail.com>
Friday, April23, 2021 9:05 PM
Glenn Hartmann
[External] Ascendigo's commercial development in a Residential Neighborhood
Glenn,
Many of us either grew up in the area and are witnessing massive change/growth, or moved here to become part of a
community that is very different than where we came from. The people drew us in. Authentic, compassionate, and
neighbors so good that we can live halfway across the country from family. This community has created new families
for many of us. Many articles have been written about the dangers of Ascendigo moving into our quiet neighborhood
in Missouri Heights, addressing zoning, land use issues, failures to meet statutes and community goals, so I want to
discuss the human component. This change in zoning will completely change the nature of why most of us have made
our forever home in Missouri Heights. Sound travels significantly up here, and we all hear a dog bark at 1000 yards, a
simple conversation, etc. We've sought to escape the city lights, traffic, sounds, etc. lt's rural, and we appreciate the
quiet. This change to our beloved community will impact traffic, water, impact property values, disrupt the wildlife,
bikers, etc. All of us are impacted. So my question to Ascendigo is this, to date -400 people, many of whom live in
Missouri Heights, have signed a petition stating this is not the right location for your project. Why not find a location
where there will be no opposition, only happiness for your business? Missouri Heights is not the first location
attempted for Ascendigo's campus. [ike their Missouri Heights neighbors, the residents of the other locations also
pointed out stark inappropriateness of a commercial campus in a residential neighborhood and successfully made
their case that these residential areas were not a good f¡t. lt's clear that the appropriate location for Ascendigo's
campus is an area closer to the emergency services and other amenities that they've stated will be heavily used, an
area designated for commercial or mixed use such as those on the valley floor. lf we lose the magic that makes our
beautiful community so special, than it won't just be the people in Missouri Heights that are driven out. Th¡s town will
be one step closer to the rest of America struggling with how to love their neighbors like themselves. Please do the
right thing. As it's said, the wrong thing is still wrong even if everybody else is doing it. The right thing is still the right
thing, even if nobody else is doing it. The VAST MAJORITY of your neighbors are telling you that we oppose this.
Missouri Heights has come together to say no (www.keepmohrural.com). Despite the important work that you do,
this is the wrong place for this project. Please listen to the protests and please reconsider.
Natasha Soby
181 Harmony Lane
Carbondale, CO 8L623
tr7
EXHIBIT
tr0ôôg
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Jerry Hjelle <jhjelle@ hjelleadvisors.com >
Sunday, April 25, 2021 9:52 AM
Glenn Hartmann
Jerry Hjelle
Subject:lExternall STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED ASCENDIGO RANCH lN MISSOURI
HEIGHTS
April24,2O2l
To: Garfield County Commissioners
I write in strong support of the proposed Ascendigo Ranch site plan. As you know, Ascendigo works to
empower and inspire people with autism. Mojestic goals, from an organization that has been headquartered
in Carbondale for the last 17 years. By all accounts, Ascendigo is both very well managed and an upstanding
not-for-profit "citizen" in Carbondale. They employ -60 people, making it one of the town's top employers.
More importantly, they have touched the lives of hundreds of autistic people.
Recently I had the opportunity to meet with Ascendigo's Peter Bell and Dan Richardson, on the proposed
Ranch site, to learn more about the development plan, and to, frankly, express some general concerns that I
have regarding Missouri Heights water availability, traffic, noise and fire risks. For context, I have spoken out
previously against a specific nearby commercial project in Missouri Heights. Peter and Dan systematically
walked me through Ascendigo's plan and impact assessments on each of my concerns. This was truly eye-
opening. After several questions and answers, I concluded that the assessment was thoughtful, intellectually
honest and very valuable. On the topic of water, their analysis seems to be supported by Alan Caniglia, a local
HOA leader with significant knowledge of the Missouri Heights water situation.
Change is a difficult subject. But many of us who built or bought houses in Missouri Heights, one-by-one,
altered the landscape. The proposed Ascendigo Ranch plan has four main advantages compared against the
most logical olternøtive case--the gradual, one-by-one development of the -20 properties that comprise
the proposed site. First, the octuol building plans for the facility show a much less intrusive development
footprint compared with the alternative o1'20 individual houses, roads and related development. Second,
the operotional plan for the Ranch shows that the traffic, fire risk and water-use impacts are favorable, in
some areas, significontly more favorable, than the alternotive. This assessment was done using worst-
cose impacts during the peak summer occupation. Third, the proposal involves Ascendigo, a local organization
with very strong leadership and a proven track recordin our community. Fourth, the proposal involves
helping our autistic neighbors meet their goals -- goals as Majestic as Mt Sopris itself.
But personally, I have a confession to make. Over the last L0 years I have walked my dogs at the White Cloud
development site (i.e., the proposed Ascendigo Ranch site) on literally hundreds of days. On those trails, I have
met many neighbors (and their dogs!) and discussed possible site development options. After getting more
information regardingthe plan and Ascendigo's leadership and purpose, lam nowof the belief thatthe
proposed Ranch site is the better outcome for the community and this beautiful stretch of land.
1
Keep Missouri Heights Mojestic.
Respectfirlly,
Jerry Hjelle
Missouri Heights
2