HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/01/2024 PUBLIC HEARING
August 1, 2024
Present: Matt Scherr Chairman
Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner
Beth Oliver 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:
West End Planned Unit Development-File Nos.: SMA-009294-2022,ZC-009296-2022,ZC-009298-2022,
ZC-009403-2023, SMB-009295-2022,AFP-009327-2023,AFP-009412-2023,VIS-009445-2024,
ZC-009405-2023,PDSP-009297-2022, and 1041-009300-2022
Karl Barton, Community Development
Executive Summary: The purpose of the public hearing is to consider various related applications for a planned
unit development,to include the construction of 275 multifamily units and associated structured parking and site
amenities, as well as two amended final plats, a variation from improvement standards, and a 1041 permit for
extension of water and sewer services. The application is subject to change from time to time.
Location: 34083 Highway 6,Edwards area, (Parcel ID: 2105-054-00-024)Owners/Applicants: Edwards West End
EW Investor,LLC Representative: Kevin Murphy Staff Planner: Karl Barton,AICP,Contract Planner
Karl Barton, contract planner for Eagle County, stated that today was a continuation hearing for the West
End PUD. The hearing would reflect on BoCC topics regarding the housing plan,traffic, Loop Road,parking plan,
water supply,road association,dog park,workforce housing,transit, net-zero strategy, open space, and design. He
provided an overview of the site and reviewed the general planning objectives for the Edwards Area Community
Plan. The site was within the Edwards Center Character Area and Edwards Commercial Core. The site was
designated Mixed Use Commercial Residential in the Future Land Use Map. The Urban Design Guidelines were in
effect within the Edwards Commercial Core.As such,the proposal was evaluated using those guidelines.
Peter Suneson,Open Space Education and Stewardship Coordinator, spoke about the Eagle River Preserve
(ERP)and the partnership with the applicant. Staff estimated the cost of time and materials to manage the property
between the Eagle River Preserve and the applicant's property to be about$10,000 annually. In regards to the dog
park expansion,there was currently an off-leash dog park at the ERP that was close to the river,and any manager
change would go through the established processes and protocols,which was not part of this file. Staff supported
managed access. The trail connection would be better managed by partnering with the applicant and establishing a
controlled access point.
Tori Franks, Resiliency Director,reviewed the housing needs,pricing, and how she analyzed the applicant's
housing plan. A comprehensive update to the needs assessment was underway,but unfortunately,the data from the
study was not yet available. The data from the 2018 study indicated a need for nearly 6,000 units. On the rental
side currently,rental properties were full, and there were wait lists. On a county level,the Area Median Income
(AMI) for a household of four,was $130,100.AMI was the basis for what they used in the Housing Guidelines on
the rental side and the for-sale side. 2024 rental rates for a 2 bedroom unit was $2,927. She reviewed the West
End Housing and indicated that the developer proposed 275 units. Of those units,25%need to be deed-restricted.
This was the number that the developer needed to deliver in units or deliver in value of units. Housing placed a
1
08/01/2024
higher value on price-capped units and a lower value on resident-occupied(RO)units. The initial proposal they got
from the developer was that they would meet the guidelines by providing 50%RO deed restrictions, 137.5 units,
meeting the housing guidelines by 68.75. The applicant's revised proposal includes 41.5 RO units in excess of the
housing guidelines. The value of those additional units was 20.75. The developer had enhanced their housing plan
and was proposing 28 price-capped units,and the value of the units in excess of the recommended mitigation was
76.75. 111.6%more housing plan value in the minimum recommended mitigation.
Mr. Barton stated that the applicant's proposal for the housing plan had changed, increasing the
price-capped units from 5% - 10%of the total units(28 units). This proposal continues to satisfy the criteria
regarding public benefit as part of the zone change to PUD criteria. He reviewed the 1041 Permit application and
criteria applicable to major extensions of existing domestic water and wastewater treatment systems. Staff found
that the application was consistent with the criteria. He stated that there was sufficient capacity to serve the
development.
Jim Telling,Managing Partner with East West Partners,provided an overview of the project. As Ms.
Franks stated,the community was short between 4,000-6,000 units. They were proposing 275 units with their
project. It was a start but not a solution to the housing need. They want to provide a quality place for people to live
and enjoy life. This was an ideal location in Edwards with its walkability to shops,restaurants, access to transit,
and access to open space. He hoped tonight's presentation would answer the board's questions from the June 27th
meeting.
Scot Hunn,with Hunn Planning and Policy,presented on behalf of the applicant. He highlighted the vision
of the Edwards Area Community Plan and how the plan met the community character goals within the plan. He
understood there were concerns with regard to the small-town feel and pedestrian scale. They believed the West
End PUD embraced the vision set forth by the participants in the 2017 Edwards Area Community Plan(EACP)and
addressed a preponderance of EACP goals,policies, and strategies. The applicant had proactively met with local
districts and HOAs for over two years during project planning and review. The applicant had revised plans in
response to local input and county staff. The PUD provides safe pedestrian and multi-modal connections and
delivers high-quality, diverse housing opportunities in the core of Edwards. The general planning objectives
included density emphasized within the Edwards Commercial Core, creating workforce housing, a development
that provided walking routes,biking routes, and access to public transportation. The development provided safe
access to existing public parks and playgrounds. The architecture, finishes, and landscaping of the new buildings
would be compatible with the nature of existing development. Economic factors were at the heart of any land use
proposal. The West End PUD adds to the diversity of housing availability by providing workforce housing within
walking distance of commercial service and transit adjacent to Hwy 6. The proposal responds to the mix and
eclectic nature of the Edwards Area and the Edwards Center Character Area while incorporating a preponderance of
community character strategies. Consistent with other county master plans, county land use regulations, and county
building codes,this plan strongly promotes efficient land use patterns, site designs,and buildings,as well as
production and use of alternative forms of energy.
Bobby Long,Principal and Design Director with Kephart Architects, spoke. His firm specialized in these
types of developments. He spoke about the visuals, size, and scale of the building. He provided some visuals of
the proposed building from the dog park. The building form was integrated into the grade,providing a
smaller-scaled facade to the south along Hwy 6,and more in-scale massing with the Edwards Village Center to the
south. The height of the building was incorporated into the existing hillside, in keeping with similar massing for
both Edwards Plaza and Riverwalk. The building form, color, and materials tied directly to the surrounding
buildings,tying the mix of modern and traditional. The proposed lighting would be dark sky compliant,and
lighting would be contained within the property.
Kevin Murphy with East West Partners spoke about Loop Road,the traffic impacts study,and parking
availability. He presented visual slides that showed the existing condition of US Highway 6 and the proposed
configuration. A new WB US Hwy 6 deceleration right-turn in the Loop Road was proposed, and the current
Gashouse access would be abandoned and relocated. A new bus stop and bus shelter would also be relocated near
the West End entrance and Loop Road. The road association was a three-party association between West End,
Gashouse, and Edwards Plaza ownership to facilitate the maintenance and repair of the privately owned Loop Road.
The West End would be responsible for all costs and maintenance until one of the other owners decided to
2
08/01/2024
redevelop their site. The traffic study followed a CDOT traffic study scope of work to support access permit
applications. The Loop Road concept had been in the planning phase for many years. The concept was proposed to
take advantage of the adjacent roundabout providing a convenient U-Turn opportunity. The road also greatly
improves access for the three properties that have access to it. Daily traffic on the west end of the Loop Road was
expected to be about 1,515 vehicles per day(VPD), and on the east end, it was expected to be about 1,975 VPD,
with full development.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked about the date of the traffic study.
Mr. Murphy stated that the traffic study was updated in January of 2023.
Chris McGranahan with LSC Transportation Consultants stated that the traffic counts were originally done
in 2020 through coordination with CDOT. The counts were done in March, which was not the peak season so
CDOT required them to adjust the traffic counts. In the early part of 2023,they went through the access permitting
process.
Chairman Scherr asked about the estimates that this project would generate and wondered if those numbers
depend on the count or did the numbers imply an impact to the existing count.
Mr. McGranahan stated that the short term analysis was based on a couple years of growth plus the project.
The long term traffic volumes were dictated by CDOT.
Mr. Long discussed the proposed parking ratios. The application proposed 425 total spaces,and every
resident unit had a dedicated parking spot. The remaining 15 unused spaces were allocated to visitor parking.
Mr. Murphy reviewed the Colorado Parks and Wildlife(CPW)response letter stating that the parcel did not
serve critical wildlife habitat. CPW did have suggestions with the impact of the project on the adjacent Eagle River
Preserve and the wildlife that used the Preserve. He reassured the board that all fencing along the property
boundary would be wildlife friendly and conform to CPW standards.
Mr. Long spoke about sustainability initiatives. Their goal was to focus on different strategies to create the
building in a sense that focused on community driven goals. As they looked at Net Zero,they would be putting
solar panels on the roof. They expect their offset from solar to be 670,064 kWh. In-building trash services were
designed with(3) separate chutes,providing flexibility for current trash and recycling options,and a compost
service,when available. The Climate Action Plan was a driver for them.
Mr. Teller stated that the Eagle River Water Sanitation District issued a conditional capacity to Serve Letter
on Nov. 15, 2023. The estimated 34.25 acre-foot augmentation requirement for the PUD falls within the
Authority's allocation of water to the property. They would realize the water use at the time of building permit.
Mr. Murphy reviewed the housing plan and stated that the proposal exceeded the guidelines by 111.64%
The West End Housing Plan yielded 146 total mitigation credits,exceeding the required 68.75 units required. In
addition,West End ownership will qualify the residents utilizing the 80-100%rent capped units to ensure the units
are available to those who need them the most.
Mr. Teller spoke about the community leaders who voiced strong support for the project.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the mix of units they plan to be price-capped and deed-restricted.
Mr. Teller stated that there would be a mix of all bedroom types.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked if the rental rates include other fees, such as HOA fees,parking fees
and utilities.
Mr. Teller stated that all of the fees would be included in the total amount,there were additional costs for
people wanting additional parking spaces. There was no HOA so property management would allocate the utilities
based on a reasonable formula. There were no metro district fees. All the common amenities would be supplied as
part of the base rent.
Commissioner McQueeney stated that with the 28 price-capped and 137 resident-occupied units, 110 were
left with no deed restrictions.
Mr. Teller stated that there were 28 price capped units, 65%were resident occupied, 179 units. There were
207 total deed restricted units made up of 28 rent capped and 179 RO units.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry confirmed that there were 68 free market units.
Commissioner McQueeney asked the rents for those 68 free market units.
3
08/01/2024
Mr. Teller stated that they hadn't determined rents at this point in time. They would react to what the
market is for both RO units and non-deed restricted units. At this time they had not finalized their construction
costs.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked if any of the units were allowed to be short-term rentals.
Mr. Teller stated that there would be no short-term rentals.
Chairman Scherr asked about the deed restricted units and the rates.
Mr. Teller stated that they would qualify folks for the price-capped units and would need to be within the
80-100%AMI.
Chairman Scherr asked about master leasing.
Mr. Teller stated that any of the units could be master leased.
Chairman Scherr wondered if the employers could charge any rate.
Mr. Teller stated that employers would not be able to charge more,but if they wanted to charge their
employee less,that would be their decision.
Mr. Murphy stated that language prohibiting an increase by employers could be outlined in the master lease
with the employer.
Chairman Scherr wondered if employers would be competing with individuals in the market place looking
for units.
Mr. Teller stated that they would not be opposed to leasing the 28 price capped units to individuals and only
allow business to master lease the remaining units.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the variance for parking. She saw an issue with additional people
in order to make rent and more people than bedrooms.
Mr. Barton stated that the variance related to parking was discussed by the Planning Commission. They had
expressed concern about the reduction in parking and that there may not be sufficient parking. Moving forward,
they did not request any specific action on the applicant to address this. The commissioners who expressed concern
did, at the conclusion of the hearing,vote for approval. He believed the reduction could be more in the
transit-oriented area.
Commissioner McQueeney asked the applicant if there would be more of a reduction.
Mr. Teller believed this project fits in well with a lot of projects like it around the state. If they were to
increase the parking, it would be going up another level which had its own set of issues.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked about the parking garage and how are the units buffered from the
parking garage.
Mr. Teller stated that there were separate structures for the units that attach to the parking garage. The
design prevents the transmission of noise.
Chairman Scherr asked if there were plans for EV chargers.
Mr. Teller stated that they would be putting in a number of EV chargers as part of the project and add more
in the future if the requirement is there.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked about traffic flow.
Mr. Murphy showed a slide that detailed the site access and Loop Road. Access would be facilitated going
right in at the Loop Road in between the Gashouse and Edwards Plaza and then right out from there also to the
roundabout. There was no left-hand turn. Additionally, on the south side of the plan where Loop Road connects
with Highway 6,one could go right in and right out.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry wondered if someone had to go east.
Mr. Murphy stated that they would have to exit right on the eastern Loop Road and take a right and go
around the roundabout and continue on Hwy 6.
Chairman Scherr asked if the applicant had a referral letter from Core Transit.
Mr. Teller stated that they received a referral letter from Core Transit.
Mr. Barton stated that they received a letter as part of the referral process. He did not recall the content of
their response.
Mr. Teller stated that Mr. Murphy had spoken with them and they said they were fine with the location of
the bus stop and liked the acceleration and deceleration lanes into the bus stop.
4
08/01/2024
Chairman Scherr requested a letter for the record. He also asked about any referral responses from the Fire
District.
Mr. Murphy stated that they had received a response.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked about the heating system for the building.
Mr. Teller stated that it was an electric building so there was an electric based heating system, each unit
would have a heating and cooling system. There would be a central system provided for the common areas,
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked the applicant to talk about what they see as community benefit.
Mr. Teller stated that the housing plan was part of it,the approved bus stop and shelter,the public path that
accesses the Eagle River Preserve around the project, the net zero aspect of the project, and open space partnership
-$10,000 for 10 years.
Commissioner McQueeney asked why this partnership was for 10 years.
Mr. Teller stated that it was what Open Space proposed.
Marcia Gilles, Open Space and Natural Resource Director stated that in their discussion they could not do
an impact study, so staff was asked what the annual cost to maintain the access point.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the 10 years.
Ms. Gilles stated that was what was offered.
Mr. Teller stated that they would be open to more.
Commissioner McQueeney asked about the unit per acre in the developments.
Mr. Barton stated that he would look into it.
Chairman Scherr asked about condition 4, the bald eagle's nest. Colorado Parks and Wildlife(CPW)
suggested that if the nest was active, they coordinate with CPW to determine and implement reasonable mitigation
measures. He worried about the county getting in the middle of litigating what was reasonable.
Mr. Murphy stated that they'd followed all CPWs recommendations and wouldn't do anything differently
in this situation either.
Beth Oliver, County Attorney,believed the word"reasonable"was subject to interpretation. This was
something they could discuss with the applicant and maybe change the timing. It would be helpful to have more
specific information about the location.
Mr. Teller stated that they would work with staff and reach out to CPW.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to continue File Nos. PDSP-009297-2022,ZC-009296-2022,
ZC-009298-2022,ZC-009403-2023, SMA-009294-2022, SMB-009295-2022,AFP-009327-2023,
AFP-009412-2023,VIS-009445-2024,ZC-009405-2023, and 1041-009300-2022 to August 5, 2024 to gather
additional information necessary for a decision and to hear public comment.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
( L7
oGcoGy
f�
There being no further business k � .• ,the meeting was adjourned until August 5,2024.
Attest- /.7
lerk to the Board Chairman
5
08/01/2024
