Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/28/2021 PUBLIC HEARING
September 28, 2021
Present: Matt Scherr Chairman
Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner
Jill Klosterman Chief Financial Officer
Beth Oliver Deputy County Attorney
Holly Strablizky Assistant County Attorney
Kathy Scriver Deputy Clerk to the Board
This being a scheduled Public Hearing,the following items were presented to the Board of County
Commissioners for their consideration:
Commissioner Updates
Commissioner Chandler-Henry reminded everyone that today was National Voter Registration Day. For
those who.had not registered to vote,today was a good day. Everything could be done online at
govotecolorado.gov, and for those who wanted personal help,they could visit the County Clerk's Office.
Commissioner McQueeney stated that she had nothing to share.
Chairman Scherr shared that the Valley Home Store was offering classes for new home buyers. There was
a class coming up on October 5th. Folks could go to valleyhomestore.org for information.
County Manager Updates
Jill Klosterman stated that she had no updates.
Consent Agenda
1. Resolution 2021-078 of Approval for Amended Final Plat for 89 Elk Track Court,AFP-9151-2021
Michael Sylvester, Planning
2.Agreement for Services between Eagle County and L'Ancla as a Lead Community Health Partner
Health Harmon,Public Health& Environment
3.Agreement for Services between Eagle County and La Cocina as a Lead Community Health Partner
Health Harmon,Public Health&Environment
4. Resolution 2021-079 Approval for Planning File: ZS-9075-2019,Newby Aggregate Recycling Special Use
Permit
Colton Berck, Community Development
1
09/28/2021
Commissioner qu moved to approve the Consent Agenda for September 28,2021,as presented.
Commissioner ch seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Constituent Input
Lucinda Jensen of Edwards expressed concern for her loss of freedom. She did not believe there was a
pandemic to fear and there was no reason to wear a mask. She also encouraged in-person voting.
Kristri Carleton of Gypsum spoke. She recently had a liver transplant and was unable to receive a COVID
vaccine. She could not return to her job at Vail Resorts because they were requiring that seasonal employees be
vaccinated. She was now unemployed. She asked the board to stand up for freedom. She expressed full support
for the parents that were present standing up for their children against the mask mandate.
Krista Keiser spoke. She presented some questions and facts for the board to consider regarding the
COVID vaccine. She asked the commissioners to allow people the right to make their own decisions.
Heather Bergquist of Gypsum spoke. She shared comments by a healthcare worker with Vail Health who
was fired because she refused to be vaccinated. She asked the board of county commissioners to intervene.
Ken Armstrong of Eagle spoke. He spoke about fear mongering, political polarization, and social
engineering in the disguise of protection. He supported the right of privacy with respect to personal health
decisions and personal freedom. He believed that Eagle County was supporting government interference.
Celine Olden wished to cede her time to Jim Tarr.
Pamela Chapman wished to cede her time to Jim Tarr.
Jim Tarr from Basalt spoke. He was the president of Cornerstone Christian School. Before any mandates,
they had decided that it was within their faith and conviction it was important to align themselves with families.
They believed the fundamental block of society established by the Bible was the family. The family was more
important than any other unit. Their value as a Christian school was to honor the wishes of the parents. He believed
that the family rights of the parents were being ignored. He believed there was a crisis of world views. They had
about 100 students and were subjected to a one size fits all approach to this issue of the mask mandate. He believed
their religious exemption had to be considered.
Business Item(s)
1. Memorandum of Understanding Establishing a Regional Transportation Authority Formation Committee
Tanya Allen, ECO Transit
Executive Summary:The attached Memorandum of Understanding(MOU) is the culmination of efforts over the
last year at the Mayors and Managers meetings and the efforts of an Ad Hoc Regional Transit Optimization
Committee aimed at identifying ways to improve the regional transportation system.
The MOU proposes the formation of an RTA Formation Committee, an RTA Technical Committee,and an RTA
Community Stakeholders Committee. Eagle County,the Town of Vail,and the Town of Avon were committed to
funding Phase I of planning costs so that this effort is able to proceed by retaining a community outreach facilitator
by October. Phase II contemplates funding contributions by all municipalities that would participate in this RTA
planning effort in 2022. The goal of this effort is to draft an RTA agreement and potential tax funding question for
consideration by voters by the November 2022 election. The primary mission of an RTA would be to support
enhancements to regional transit services and/or other multimodal transportation initiatives. The contemplated RTA
may also include dedicated funding to support the Eagle Air Alliance and subsidies to secure new direct flights to
Eagle County Regional Airport. As of 9/20,the MOU has been approved by the towns of Avon,Vail, Red Cliff,
Eagle, and Minturn. Gypsum will be considering the MOU on 9/28.
2
09/28/2021
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the Memorandum of Understanding establishing a
Regional Transportation Authority formation committee.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
2. Resolution 2021-080 Open Space Funding Request for Johnson et al. Castle Peak Conservation Easement
Transaction Costs
Katherine King,Open Space
Executive Summary: The Johnson et al. family would like to place a conservation easement on a 649-acre parcel
of mostly undeveloped land near Castle Peak that has been in their family for decades.The easement would allow
for two building envelopes in the location of existing rustic cabins, but would conserve the remainder of the
property in perpetuity. The property's primary conservation values are protection of wildlife habitat, scenic
landscapes, agricultural lands, and sensitive lands and environments. The family intends to donate the
conservation easement to EVLT but would like the County to assist with$97,707 in Open Space funding for the
transaction costs associated with the easement. Open Space Advisory Council(OSAC)reviewed the property's
conservation values and the conservation easement transaction costs at their August meeting and recommended
the county approve the Open Space Fund expenditure.
Ms. King presented the request. The property was approximately 640 acres accessed from Eby Creek
Road. The conservation easement would encompass the entire property. The request was for$97,000 to cover
transaction costs. She reviewed the open space combined criteria scoring and indicated that the property scored
medium/high with the exception of the visual buffers. There would be no public access for recreation or other
purposes as planned in the conservation easement. The Eagle Valley Land Trust would bear the long-term cost
and responsibility of maintaining and monitoring the conservation easement.
Commissioner McQueeney moved to approve the resolution approving and authorizing the use of open
space funds for the Johnson et al. Castle Peak conservation easement transaction costs.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners
and reconvene as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation
1.Agreement for On-Call Services between ECAT and Distinctive Design Build LLC
Koltin Howard-Talbott,Airport
Executive Summary: This on-call services agreement between Distinctive Design Build LLC and ECAT is for an
upcoming terminal roof drain project and misc on-call general contracting work throughout the duration of the
agreement. The upcoming work will increase tenant safety by mitigating and redirecting historically icy areas on
the ramp. DDB will be coordinating with ACME dba Umbrella and Encore for the duration of this project.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the agreement for On-Call Services between ECAT
and Distinctive Design Build LLC.
Commissioner McQueeny seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
3
09/28/2021
Commissioner McQueeney moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and
reconvene as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Work Session(s)
1. Board of Health Discussion
Rhea Silverkorn,Administration
Executive Summary: The Commissioners will convene at the Board of Health(BOH)to discuss how we are
currently operating through the pandemic, new legislation as the BOH and what this means,and the status of the
BOH's medical director.
2. Enhancing Colorado's River Recreation Opportunities/Economy
Rhea Silverkorn,Administration
Executive Summary:The policy allowing communities to protect flows benefiting river recreation has not
changed much in 20 years. During that time,river recreation has significantly evolved and we're working to build
support for modifying this policy, allowing communities greater flexibility for protecting river recreation, which
contributes $18.8B/yr to the state's economy.
In addition to attached pdf,please review this story from Aspen Journalism: Conservation groups want recreation
water right tied to natural river features
Participants: Josh Kuhn(Conservation Colorado), Hattie Johnson(American Whitewater),John Cyran(Western
Resource Advocates), Molly Mugglestone(Business for Water Stewardship), Holly Loff(Eagle River Watershed
Council), and Seth Mason(Lotic Hydrological, LLC)
Planning File - Eagle County Room
1. Edwards River Park Planned Unit Development-PDSP-9050/ZC-9029 and 1041-9030-Combined PUD
Sketch/Preliminary Plan,Zone Change, and 1041 Permit
Kris Valdez,Community Development
Executive Summary: The applicant requests approval of a combined Planned Unit Development
Sketch/Preliminary Plan application for land on the northside of US Highway 6 between the Eagle River Preserve
and South Fork Meadows ("Property").Also included is a Zone Change application to rezone the existing parcel
from Resource and Rural Residential to PUD and a 1041 permit application for the extension of water and sewer
services. The Property was formerly part of a B&B Excavating gravel mining operation.The proposal is a
mixed-use development to include approximately 440 residential units and 11,500 square feet of commercial uses.
The hearing is the 12th hearing on this file. The first hearing was held on December 8,2020.
4
09/28/2021
Dominik Mauriello, with Mauriello Planning Group, LLC,presented the project updates based on the
board's feedback. He spoke about the proposed short term rental and indicated that the short term rental would be
prohibited within the PUD. The only building that would be 85 ft. would be at the far east of the development.
Building 2 and 3 would be limited to 70 ft. The goal was to further reduce the building heights. He provided a
PowerPoint slide that showed the look of the buildings and the various heights to provide a sense of scale.
Kris Valdez, Eagle County Staff Planner, presented a summary. The Edwards River Park was a mixed use
commercial/residential project of 53.27 acres, zoned Residential and Rural Residential,440 dwelling units, 11,500
square feet of commercial and conference space, and common open space and connection to Eagle River Preserve.
She quickly reviewed the standards of approval for PUD Sketch/Preliminary Plan and indicated that the application
was in conformance with the standards with conditions.
Maureen Mulcahy,Natural Resources Policy Manager for Eagle County,reviewed the 1041 Permit
application. Staff updated the 1041 staff report based on the applicant's update to the proposal. The regulations
apply to developments with a density of 10 or more dwelling units requiring a permit for Edwards River Park.
There were a total of 32 approval criteria for this project. They address topics including social, economic,and
environmental impacts. There must be a positive finding on each of the criteria in order to be approved by the
Permit Authority. Staff acknowledged that there was a significant overlap between the standards of approval
related to the land use file and the 1041 criteria. She streamlined the criteria. Staff had not recommended any
conditions of approval unique to the 1041 application but incorporated the recommended conditions of approval
associated with the land use application in order to be consistent on evaluating the criteria and land use standards.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the letter to serve from Jason Cowels.
Holly Strablisky,Assistant Eagle County Attorney, stated that a letter was received from Jason Cowles,
Director of Engineering and Water Resources at the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. The letter dated
August 18th indicated that the Water Authority had 320 unallocated acre-feet of water and that this project would
require approximately 70 acre-feet of water. There were other projects that were in the works. If all the projects
came to fruition,then there would be a 225 unallocated acre-feet of water balance. The Water Authority stated that
it had water to commit to serve the project through its unallocated pool of water rights. Mr. Cowles was not
meaning to say they were out of water.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked if the unallocated augmentation water was part of their goal for
reserves or if there was strategic reserve water.
Ms. Strablinsky believed the Water Authority was looking at their options in order to understand where the
strategic reserve would come from. The District and Water Authority were working to find solutions to provide
water for future projects.
• Commissioner McQueeney asked the applicant to review the sustainability plan.
Mr. Mauriello stated that there was an extensive list in the PUD guide; there was a specific section that
talked about all the sustainability approaches. It covered everything from preserving and improving the wetland
areas,wildlife mitigation,car pooling, building bus facilities, making solar available,electric car connections,
electric bike connections, and trying to make the project as green as possible. Water was a big aspect in terms of
budgeting the water use. In terms of the Community Index,they worked extensively with Adam Palmer on that and
they were very conservative. They were able to qualify for 20 points for exceeding the housing guidelines. Under
conservation easement,they qualified for another 10 points. He believed they were at 163 points, being
conservative, and exceeded the sustainable community index for this project.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked for additional details about traffic and level of service.
Nicole Mosby, Eagle County Staff Engineer, stated that as growth continued, Highway 6 would continue to
degrade even without the PUD. Even with the PUD roundabout Highway 6 would still have the bottleneck between
the project and Edwards core and degrade to a level of service"E." As far as the variation request and the reason
that staff was in support, it was because staff must consider performance, environmental sensitivity, and public
safety as part of the standard for that review.
Chairman Scherr opened public comment.
5
09/28/2021
•
Ross Blankenship, Edwards resident, spoke. He expressed support for the project. He believed the
proposal would provide much needed affordable housing. Without this development the county would fall behind
and force families and employees to become transient. The development would create economic opportunity and
serve as a catalyst for all people.
Bobbi Lipnick, Vail resident, spoke. He spoke as the Co-Chair of the Eagle County Housing taskforce. He
had written multiple letters to the board expressing support for the project. The taskforce believed this project
would be an asset for the community.
John Horankates, Lake Creek resident, spoke. He offered an alternative. He offered to form a coalition to
raise money to buy out the developer at a fair price.They would raise the money, acquire the property, and create
another River Preserve, something to be proud of for the next 100 years. He asked the board to deny or table the
file to allow time for him to create a coalition and raise money.
John Kelly, Edwards resident, spoke. He did not support the project. He believed the roundout should be
funded by CDOT, Eagle County, or the state, not a developer. The comments with regards to water were clear.
This project would take 10%of the reserves. He asked the board to table the application or deny the application.
Dwight Merriman, resident of Edwards, spoke. He thanked the board for pushing back on the project. This
property was not zoned for this type of project. The developer bought the land in the hopes to develop it the way
he wanted it developed. This was irresponsible development. He believed the applicant was providing the
minimum required for approval. The traffic was terrible. Roundabouts were terrible and a hazard to pedestrians
and cyclists. He believed that Highway 6 would need to be widened in the future. He believed the condominiums
in the development would be priced at a million and unaffordable to any of the workers in the trailer park. He
believed there wasn't enough water considering fires and climate change. He asked the board to deny the
application.
Susie Kincade, Eagle resident, spoke. She believed the world was changing and the resources were not
available for developments such as these. She asked the board to slow down and put a moratorium on all mixed use
development that lured more people to this valley and focus on new countywide integrated planning aligned with
future projections of the decline.
Terri Lester of Edwards spoke. She believed the goals should be protecting migrating wildlife,air, and
water. The increase in traffic on an incline would cause more emissions and air pollution. The use of space did not
support the preservation of the water, air, or habitat of the bald eagles that were still present in the preserve.As an
adjacent homeowner, she was offended that they had not been recognized in the developer's plan or public
comments about residents that would be impacted by the development. It was her hope and expectation that the
board would fulfill their responsibility to uphold the community's best interest.
Don Welch, Edwards resident, spoke. He believed that over the course of the hearings the board heard
enough evidence to turn down the proposal. He did not believe the project was a fit or met the vision of the
Edwards Community Plan. He wished to address the environmental impacts of a gravel pit. After being used as a
gravel pit for 30 years,there were significant pollutants in the soil. In 2011,the state indicated that a majority of
the pollutants had been cleared from the property. He walked down and took photos of some contaminated soil and
shared his findings with the board.
Kevin Roach, a 45-year resident of Edwards, spoke. He worked at the gravel pit for eight years. He was
strongly opposed to the project based on four things: the scope and size, traffic,wildlife,and water. He believed
the project was not in line with the Master Plan and asked that the board deny the project.
Melissa Ebone, local homeowner, spoke. The variances, density, and height of the project did not make
sense. She opposed the project and asked the board to deny it as proposed unless there was a way to support more
affordable housing for people like her.
Joanna Kerwin, Edwards resident, spoke. She felt that she was versed and aware of the project. This had
been a five year long process, and she wondered how the project got to this point. She stated that the property was
purchased for&7 million dollars by someone that was not a local and the applicant was trying to wear down the
community. She opposed the project and believed the project should have been a hard"No"from the get go. She
asked that the board not approve the application.
Mark Hamilton,Attorney with the law firm of Holland and Hart in Denver, spoke. He represented the
Friends of Edwards Group formed to promote sustainable development in the Edwards area. He highlighted a few
6
09/28/2021
points related to the standards of the up zone and variances. He believed the board had significant discretion to
deny or further condition the project. There were a number of comments and concerns that had not been addressed.
The project after being reduced was still not compatible. This was 440 units with nearly 3,000 additional vehicle
trips. The project did not conform to the Edwards Community Plan and did not demonstrate a small town feel.
Kara Heide, Edwards residents spoke. She elaborated on the Edwards Area Master Plan and believed the
small town feel was being redefined to by everybody who wanted to meet their objective. Speaking as the former
Executive Director of the Eagle Valley Land Trust, she finalized the conservation easement on the Eagle River
Preserve and during that time the goal was to protect the wildlife. She believed that the wildlife would be impacted
by the proposed development. She volunteered to help John Horankates and protect the wetlands and riverfront.
Spencer Denison spoke. He was opposed to the project. He wanted to focus his comments on affordable
housing. The affordable housing guidelines state that the design must address livability, maintenance,health, safety
concerns, and climate lifestyles. There was nothing in the PUD guide that addressed livability and the project fell
short on those requirements. He believed the buildings would be close to the roadway and a 25 ft. setback near the
highway did not make sense. He believed the real problem with the plan was there was not enough space for all
the proposed uses.
Chris Neuswanger spoke. The project had gone from awful to really, really bad. He hoped this would be
the last hearing on the application. There were no soccer fields or playgrounds in the proposal. He believed that
the water was limited and this development would have an enormous impact on the river. The proposal was poorly
written and a hack job. He asked the board to say no.
Karie Wallace spoke. She has been a full time resident of Edwards for 25 years. She lived in South Fork
Meadows. She stated that although the applicant had made changes to the proposal it still didn't meet the standards.
The density was more than 20%more than Riverwalk. The building heights and dimension limitations were not a
fit the adequate facilities and traffic would create health and safety impacts. The benefits did not offset the impacts.
Mark Stein spoke. He wished to reinforce the comments made in opposition. He believed the project was
out of character and out of place with the surrounding area and did not conform with the Edwards Community Plan.
Brad Greenway spoke. He believed the water issue would not go away. The future of the water supply had
become cloudy with the current drought and climate change. It was prudent to proceed until the water allocations
for this development were supported without tapping into the water reserves.
Anni Davis spoke. She owned a home in South Fork Meadows. The last public hearing provided detail on
the impact of traffic however their access on hwy 6 that was directly to the west of the development. She requested
that another study be done to see how it would impact their driveway. She did not believe the plan addressed deed
restricted housing and employee housing. She believed that the short-term rentals would create problems with
neighbors.
Susie Smith spoke. She opposed the development. She believed affordable housing versus workforce
housing was lacking in the proposal. The childcare was an afterthought. She supported preserving the property in
its natural state. The traffic should be considered in the event there was an emergency. It was clear that the
community was opposed to the development and asked the board to deny the application.
Chairman Scherr closed public comment.
Mr. Mauriello responded to some of the comments made during public comment. He took issue when
some of the facts were not accurate and some of the statements were untrue. He clarified that the applicant went
beyond the Planning Commissions recommendations. A lot of the comments and quotes made by the public were
taken out of context. The applicant was not an outsider but lived in the area and spent a considerable amount of
time,before purchasing the property participating, in the Edwards Area Community Plan process and meeting with
staff.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the environmental impacts assessment .
Ms.Valdez stated that she would have to reach out to the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment to find out if they had any evidence that the property was contaminated.
Mr. Mauriello stated that they had a letter that basically stated that they were satisfied with how the
property was cleaned up.
Chairman Scherr stated that he had a lot to consider and believed it would be beneficial to table the file.
7
09/28/2021
Beth Oliver, Deputy Eagle County Attorney, believed it would be appropriate to allow time for the board to
consider and go through the information. She stated that it would be necessary to talk to the applicant to see if they
were willing to agree to a tabling.
Ms. Valdez stated that there could be a special hearing date of October 7 starting at 3:00 p.m.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about setbacks from Highway 6 and if there was a variance being
requested.
Ms. Valdez stated that the setback from Highway 6 was considered a rear setback from where the property
takes an entrance from and therefore, not a variance request. The distance for the resource zone district was 12.5 ft.
or half the height of the tallest building.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry agreed that the board had received a lot of public feedback and would like
to make sure she had time to review all the letters.
Mr. Mauriello indicated that the tabling was acceptable
Commissioner McQueeney moved to table file no. PDSP-9050 and ZC-9029 to October 7 at 3:30 to obtain
additional information necessary for a complete review of the criteria of approval.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved that the Eagle County Permit Authority table file no. 1041-9030,to
October 7 at 3:30 to obtain additional information necessary for a complete review of the criteria of approval.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Prof EAGie
h�' �0
r G
There being no further business : ,the meeting was adjourned until October 5,2021.
sDRADD '��
Atte
C1 rk to the Board airman
8
09/28/2021