No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/21/2023 PUBLIC HEARING March 21, 2023 Present: Kathy Chandler-Henry Chairman Matt Scherr Commissioner Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner Jill Klosterman Chief Financial Officer Matt Peterson 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: Constituent Input Chairman Chandler-Henry opened constituent input, seeing no one in the room, she closed constituent input. Commissioner Updates Commissioner McQueeney had no updates. Commissioner Scherr spoke about Project Funway,the event was put on by the Education Foundation of Eagle County-E.f(ec). The proceeds went to fund the organization which supported teachers and students in Eagle County public schools. Chairman Chandler-Henry stated that tomorrow was World Water Day and the theme of this year was accelerating change. World Water Day was an annual United Nations observance day held on the 22nd of March that highlighted the importance of sustainable management of freshwater resources. County Manager Updates Jill Klosterman spoke about the airport's winter flight schedule,noting that it was ending April 3rd and reminded folks to look before they book when flying out of Eagle. Consent Agenda 1. Intergovernmental Agreement Between the Town of Vail and Eagle County Concerning Wildland Fire Mitigation Program Eric Lovgren, Fire Mitigation 2. Preconstruction and Construction Services Agreement Between Eagle County and RA Nelson for for the Health and Human Services Building Second Floor Remodel Kristin Degenhardt,Project Management 1 03/21/2023 3. Approval of the Minutes for the Board of County Commissioner Meetings for January 10,January 24, January 31. and February 7,2023 Kathy Scriver, Clerk&Recorder's Office Commissioner Scherr moved to approve the Consent Agenda for March 21, 2023 as presented. Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner McQueeney moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation. Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation 1. Eagle County Airport Terminal (ECAT)Amendment to Agreement with Tailwind EGE, LLC Jodi Doney,Airport Executive Summary: Amendment to the original agreement to add an additional cafe/gift shop at Gate 7,and added storage space in their lease. Jodi Doney, Terminal Operations Manager stated that the restaurant had added space on the first floor of the terminal called Colorado Made. It was a spot where travelers could get a coffee, a beer, or any locally made goods. Jill Klosterman moved to approve the Eagle County Airport Terminal(ECAT)Amendment to Agreement with Tailwind EGE, LLC. Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Commissioner Scherr moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and reconvene as the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority. Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. For the record Chairman Chandler-Henry recused herself from the discussion and vote as she sat on the board of directors for Habitat for Humanity so would not be involved in making any funding decisions for the organization. Eagle County Housing and Development Authority 1. Grant Agreement between Eagle County Housing and Development Authority and Habitat for Humanity Vail Valley Tori Franks,Resiliency/Housing Executive Summary: This grant agreement outlines the terms of the$3,280,000 grant ECHDA will convey to Habitat for Humanity(HFH)Vail Valley to fill the funding gap in HFH's 3rd Street project. The 3rd Street project,located in Eagle,will be a 16 unit net-zero ready,price capped affordable housing project developed by HFH. Ms. Franks stated that the agreement would fund a gap for HFH's 3rd street development,which was 16 units in Eagle. It was an all electric development. All the units would be price capped/deed restricted. Twelve 2 03/21/2023 units would be school district units and priced a touch higher. The remaining four would stay in a normal pricing structure and much lower. The contract outlined the Housing Authority engagement in the partnership. John Welaj,Executive Director for HFH, stated that they were working with a company called Fading West out of Buena Vista. The manufactured homes were finished to a fine level of detail. Ms. Franks stated that the units came all electric and they would be net-zero ready. Elyse Howard, Director of Development with HFH, stated that they worked hard with Fading West on the mechanical system and they were very open to getting a system that would best for the homeowners. Ms. Franks reminded the public that the Housing Authority's ability to partner in this way was due to the funds that came from the sale of Lake Creek Village Apartments in Edwards last year. Commissioner McQueeney moved to approve the grant agreement between Eagle County Housing and Development Authority and Habitat for Humanity Vail Valley. Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Commissioner McQueeny moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority and reconvene as the Eagle County Board of Health. Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Board of Health 1. Board of Health Meeting Executive Summary: This is a regularly scheduled Board of Health meeting. Agenda items include: 1)public comment,2) items of interest by the board members, 3) community health assessment process&public health improvement plan,4)updates from the Public&Environmental Health Teams. The full agenda and executive summaries can be found in the attached Board of Health Packet for March 21, 2023. Planning File - Mt Sopris Room, El Jebel 1. The Fields: Combined Sketch and Preliminary Subdivision Plan, SSP-9165-2021,Zone Change, ZC-9136-2021,Variation from Improvement Standards, VIS-9169,Areas and Activities of State Interest 1041 Permit, 1041-9137 Vince Hooper,Community Development Executive Summary: This is a continuation of the hearing started on August 17,2022,which was subsequently tabled on August 29,2022, again on October 11,2022,December 20,2022,January 31,2023 and February 21, 2023 for consideration of Applications for a residential development with a mix of housing types providing up to 135 residential units. The Applicant requests approval of an Amendment to the Official Zone District Map("Zone Change")from Rural Residential(RR)to Residential Multi-family(RMF). The Applicant requests approval of a combined Sketch/Preliminary Plat Application, a Zone Change Application, a Variation from Improvement Standards,and a 1041 Permit(collectively the "Application') for a 19.39 acre parcel located north of and adjacent to Valley Road,west of El Jebel Road,and south of Highway 82. Chairman Chandler-Henry stated that the board would be considering The Fields application. For deliberations the board would consider the standards required for each file along with the consideration of the public input that has already been received. Public input was closed at the last meeting, and no additional comment would be heard. She assured folks that the board read everything that was sent in as well as hearing in-person testimony. 3 03/21/2023 Matt Peterson,Assistant Eagle County Attorney, added that written public comments had been received by the county from the time that the application was posted on the website following the referral period in early 2022. Through the close of public comment at the last hearing on February 21, 2023,the board did open in-person and virtual public comments and allowed anyone present to be heard. While the board indicated at the end of that hearing that public comment could be considered at this hearing, it came with a caveat that it would depend on information previously presented. Upon review of the record,both written and public comments were taken after multiple referral periods, and as a result,the public had ample opportunity to comment on all aspects of all four applications including the 1041 permit applicant and believed that the board should leave public comment closed unless it determines any new information was presented. All public comments received prior to the close of public comment would be part of the official record for this file. Vince Hooper,Eagle County Staff Planner,proceeded with a summary of the hearing timelines. At the last hearing, county staff presented additional new supplemental information provided by the applicant on the viability of the pedestrian connection. Staff provided an additional addendum#2 that addressed the applicant's new information. Staff also summarized the findings and recommendations for the Zone Change ZC 9136-2021, the Variation to the Improvement Standards VIS 9169-2021, and the Sketch/Preliminary Plan SSP 9165-2021. The meeting was continued to tonight's hearing. There were some questions raised about the open space plan being presented with the application and he wanted the board to understand that the requirement for the proposed subdivision for Residential Multi-family(RMF)zoning did not require the applicant to meet the minimum requirement of 25%open space. The standard that did apply to a RMF was pretty brief and fairly generic. The applicant had provided over 30% open space in the form of open space easements. The open space easements did not comply with the definition of usable open space which was not required. The applicants provided a maintenance plan and indicated that a Master Homeowners Association would be established and responsible for the maintenance of the common areas,open space, streets, sidewalks, and trails within the subdivision. He provided a summary of the Zone Change, VIS, and Sketch/Preliminary Plan for Subdivision findings and indicated that the proposal was in conformance with the standards with conditions. The first condition simply stated that all the applicable applications would be approved along with the Zone Change. The second condition was a condition that had been discussed in the past and had various language changes. It required the applicant to construct a public pedestrian connection prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy and required that the applicant or HOA for the subdivision be responsible for the maintenance,repair, and replacement of the connection. The third condition required the applicant to provide a restrictive plat note stating that all the tracks and easements identified as open space shall never be developed and remain as private open space. The 1041 permit was required because of the major utility infrastructure extensions to the site because the site had more than 10 dwelling units. He stated that there were a lot of standards and did not take the time to go through each one but indicated that the application met the standards with conditions. The first condition was a restrictive plat note being placed on the final plat that stated that all of the tracts that were identified as open space shall be preserved as open space in perpetuity with the filing of the plat and the second condition was for the trail connection. With the 1041 plan,the applicants had the ability to obtain a waiver for the requirement of a special use permit for the same major utility infrastructure extension. Staff recommended that a waiver be issued and the two standards for the issuance of the waver had been met. He stated that each one of the recommendations had been listed in the presentation. Jon Fredericks,planner for the project, spoke about the usable open space within the project and the fact that a standard subdivision did not need to conform to the open space standards of a PUD. The correction was that there was usable open space within this project. There was a pond, a dog park, a children's park,and walking trails through the open space. Those were things he believed should be considered usable open space. He reviewed some of the key milestones affecting the review of the project dating back from 2013 to the present. He did a recap of the public benefits which included Valley Road traffic calming and pedestrian connections, including two raised pedestrian crosswalks with flashing beacons. The applicant proposed JW Drive intersection improvements. With regards to the El Jebel intersection,the applicant had committed to more than eight times the level of their impact. Their traffic volume at the Valley Road intersection was 3%of the intersection,and they had committed to providing 24%of the intersection cost. Lastly, they would be providing 40%of the units in the • 03/21/2023 project as deed restricted affordable housing,made up of 25%price capped units and 15%resident occupied units. Evan Schreiber, applicant,provided some closing thoughts. He reviewed some key facts in terms of how the project conformed to the Future Land Use Map,the Mid Valley Master Plan,the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan, and met the standards of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations(ECLUR). He believed the project was consistent with the county's own strategic goals and plans and was aligned with the Governor's housing policy. The project was in line with all the current data. Commissioner McQueeney asked about the variance request for street parking and wondered about the hardship to the applicant. Mr. Hooper stated that the hardship was based on the national standard that allowed streets of this type to be able to have on street parking,which ours did not. Rickie Davies,Eagle County Staff Engineer, stated that the hardship was the land use regulations themself. Mr. Fredericks added that the basis for requesting the on-street parking was only for guest parking as was not to be used to meet their parking requirement. Commissioner Scherr stated that the board was required to consider all the standards. He understood that this was an emotional issue for those living in the community. The board appreciated all the public comment but was disappointed with some of the comments made towards staff. He did believe the density conformed with the Comprehensive Plan. He agreed with the change in circumstances with regards to the Community Plan. In regards to the variance for parking,he was satisfied with the explanation. He found that the project was in conformance with the ECLURs. He did not believe the project met the standard for adequate infrastructure with regards to level of service on the road. Some of the public benefits were straightforward and beneficial but the proposed trail was not certain enough to be a public benefit. He did not believe the benefits in total outweighed the impacts of the development and,therefore, did not meet the standard. He was not able to approve. Commissioner McQueeney believed that in terms of the adequate infrastructure, it was a shame the applicant did not request a variance request for traffic. She believed the public benefits did not outweigh the disadvantages of the increased density. The FLUM identified the parcel as somewhere that density could be considered but that density required a zone change which required a public benefit, and she was just not finding any. She believed this was not a simple land use file. There was a lot of controversy in weighing the standards. She did believe the project was in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the surrounding areas,but the places she got stuck were on the public benefit side. The housing was a benefit but was not an affordable housing project. A sidewalk did not outweigh the disadvantages created by the zone change. Chairman Chandler-Henry believed the zone change conformed with the Comprehensive Plan and was compatible with the surrounding areas. The money for the intersection and traffic calming were public benefits. The trail was conceptual in nature so she did not believe it was a public benefit. The additional housing would likely not be affordable for the local workforce. Therefore weighing the adverse impacts of the project against the benefits did not balance out. With regards to infrastructure,the level of service was failing, and if the peak hour counts were considered, it would not meet adequate infrastructure. The 1041 permit also relied on public benefit, and she would have the same argument that this did not meet the public benefit for the 1041. Mr. Schreiber stated that a lot of this feedback was substantially new. He requested a tabling so that they might take the feedback into consideration. Commissioner McQueeney stated that this was not feedback. Chairman Chandler-Henry thanked the applicants for the request but she did not believe that there was any new information that would merit a tabling. Mr. Peterson clarified that the board may consider a request for a tabling at any time if there were good cause. However,this would depend on the facts of each situation. The board could consider the number of hearings,the potential for new information or lack thereof, and any other applicable circumstances. Mr. Schreiber believed their good cause would be that two hearings ago they provided the amended affordable housing plan and received no feedback relative to the adjustment. They were surprised and would like to make modifications relative to the concerns of the lack of public benefit. 5 03/21/2023 Commissioner McQueeney stated that the board was not providing feedback. This was the board's deliberation. Jody Edwards, attorney for the applicant, stated that the applicant wished to have an opportunity to table the application and go back to address the infrastructure and traffic. Mr. Peterson added that in considering all of the circumstances here,the board may consider the number of hearings as well as the public benefits that had previously been revised in response to comments made by the board as well as comments made by the public. Lastly,the board may consider the variance and potential for the process had been discussed previously at length on the record as well. Commissioner Scherr stated that at this point,he didn't believe it warranted a tabling. Commissioner McQueeney stated that she didn't believe it warranted a tabling as there was no new information that they had not already considered at a previous hearing. Chairman Chandler-Henry agreed. She clarified that the board had discussed on the record the variance, and different methods of analyzing traffic counts. They made deliberations based on what they thought was most appropriate and fit the standard in Article 4. The applicant had a chance to revise and review the file numerous times over the many months. Commissioner McQueeney stated that the board did not negotiate and apologized if the applicant thought there was another opportunity. Jodi Edwards, attorney for the applicant, stated that the applicant wished to withdraw their applications. Chairman Chandler-Henry stated that a withdrawal was within the applicant's purview and did not require the board to vote on or accept the withdrawal. If it were to come back, it would be a new application and would start with the Planning Commission. o�tOLE co, There being no further busines : . d,the meeting was adjourned until March 28, 2023. n foLORoPo Attest: Cler to the Board Chairman 6 03/21/2023