No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/31/95 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 31, 1995 Present: James Johnson, Jr. George "Bud" Gates Johnnette Phillips Sara J. Fisher Chairman Corrmissioner Corrmissioner Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Plat & Resolution Signing Kathy Eastley, Planning Technician, presented the following plats and resolution to be signed by the Board: 01) SM-994-95, Whiskey Hill, Lot 25. She stated this was a Minor Type "B" Subdivision, a resubdivision of Lot 25, Whiskey Hill, to create lots 25E and 25W. This plat does contain the duplex split caveat stating only one two-family structure may be constructed on the combined area of the lots. corrmissioner Phillips moved to approve final plat, file number SM-994- 95, Whiskey Hill, Lot 25. Corrmissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 02) SM-999-95, Berry Creek Ranch, Filing 3, Lot 37, Block 2. stated this was a Minor Type "B" Subdivision, a resubdivision of Lot 37 create Lots 37E and 37W in the Berry Creek Ranch Subdivision, Filing 3. plat does contain the duplex split caveat stated only one two-family structure may be constructed on the combined area of the lots. Commissioner Gates moved to approve final plat, file number SM-999-95, Berry Creek Ranch. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 03) SM-I002-95, McCoy Peak Lodge Condominium Map. She stated this was a Minor Type "B" Subdivision, a condominium map for Lot 23, Block 2, Tract A of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Fourth Filing of the Beaver Creek Subdivision creating four corrmercial units and 37 residential units. The current zoning is PUD commercial. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve final plat file number SM-I002- 95, McCoy Peak Lodge Condominium Map. corrmissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 05) Resolution 95-130, amending the Eagle County Land Use Regulation 1982, as amended. She explained the amendment to the Board. This file was presented to the Board of County Commissioners on October 17, 1995. Commissioner Gates moved to approve Resolution 95-130, amending the Eagle County Land Use Regulation 1982. Corrmissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 06) Resolution 95-131, file number ZS-373-95, Special Use Permit for land, Lance and Gretchen Weber. This is a resolution for approval of a Special Use Permit in the Resource Zone District. The Weber's are seeking a Home Occupation for Gunsmithing/Ammunition Reloading. This file was presented to the Board of County Commissioners on October 17, 1995. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve Resolution 95-131, file number ZS-373-95. Commissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. She to This 1 ZS-369-95, 10th MOuntain Hut Association Ellie Caryl, Planning Technician, presented file number ZS-369-95, 10th Mountain Hut Association. Ms. Caryl reviewed the mitigation plans regarding parking, road access, fire protectlon. Staff does recorrmend approval of the Hut as does the Eagle and Colorado Valley Planning Corrmission. Four conditions are required by staff as follows: 1) Adhere to the Wildlife Mitigation Plan as finally incorporated into the USFS Special Use Permit Operating Plan for the Middle Creek Hut. 2) Prior to receipt of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (anticipated in Fall of 1996), written notification from the Town of Vail must be submitted to the County that states the parking areas have been constructed and signed to the satisfaction of the Town of Vail. 3) With building permit application, submit construction plans for new access road for review by the County Engineerins Department. 4) Following construction, areas surround~ng the site shall be revegetated and cleared of any construction debris. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve file number ZS-369-95, 10th Mountain Hut Association. Corrmissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanlmous. PD-313-95-Al, El Jebel Texaco PUD Amendment Ellie Caryl presented file number PD-313-95-Al, El Jebel Texaco PUD Amendment. The applicant proposes to amend the Planned Unit Development Guide for the El Jebel Texaco planned Unit Development to resolve a conflict regarding allowed sign sizes. The current PUD guide states "signs must adhere to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Section 2.11. of the Land Use Regulations, Specifically 2.11.06.2, Commercial and Industrial Zone District sign regulations, but signs shall not exceed 184 square feet for the total project." The signs that were installed at the Planned Unit Development are within the limitation of 184 square feet total, but do not meet the sign code regulations and were installed without approved sign permi ts . The applicant is requesting the PUD guide be amended to allow for the size of the signs that were installed. Ms. Caryl stated as part of the PUD the applicant is asked to submit a sign plan. The applicant's representative, Steve Isom, provided a revised site plan showing the location but, the size and the design were not included. A letter was submitted stating what they thought would be included but it was not specific. The Express Lube was completed prior to the others and without permits. Staff made an effort to work with the applicant, understanding there were some loose ends, and they suggested that they all be permitted at once. With Wendy's and Texaco nearing completion, a signed I?ermit was submitted for the Wendy'S sign. It was not however approved, but lt was installed. Ms. Caryl stated there is a five step process in Eagle County required before installation of signs. This process was not followed. There may have been some miscommunication between the owner and their consultant. Eagle County attempted to work with the applicant but the applicant determined that a PUD amendment was the only way. Ms. Caryl stated it is the Texaco and the Monument signs that exceed the Slgn requirements. The Roaring Fork Planning Corrmission denied the request to allow the signs to remain. As a co~romise Staff is recommending the following: 1) Reduce the Slze of signs on the Texaco canopy to 27 square feet 2) Reduce the size and height of the multi-business monument sign to a maximum size of 64 sguare feet and comply with the requirements of Section 2.11.04.G Sign Helght and Setback Calculation subject to review and approval by the SiSTI Code Administrator. 3) Obtaln approved sign permits for all allowed and applicable signs in the PUD. 4) Obtain state electrical permit as required for all illuminated total. signs. Corrmissioner Gates mentioned the sign restrictions placed on the facility across the street. Ms. Caryl stated the Fitzsimmon's Amaco is across the street and visited the site this morning. She stated they have about 150 square she feet of 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 signs. They have taken out many of the signs they did have about four years ago. Bob Loeffler, Ass't. County Attorney, stated the PUD does not allow more than 184 square feet of total signage, both permanent or exempt. If it is a sign, it must be counted towards the total. Ms Caryl stated there is 178 square feet on site. Express Lube has a 5 square foot sign. Plus the three stars referred to as the salad bar sign. Steve Isom, Isom and Associates, stated they had submitted in all of their preliminary plans all of the signs and thelr locations. In September of 1994, they submitted all of the sign plans. He assumed when he submitted the preliminary plan the signage was approved. He was instructed, by Jim Fritze, to apply for an amendment to the PUD to incorporate the signs. What he would like to do is simplify this down to three issues: 1. The monument sign has always been at ten feet back from the property line. They moved it fourteen feet back as requested by staff. Mr. Loeffler questioned Mr. Isom's request. Mr. Isom stated they moved the sign more than the three feet requested. Ms. Caryl stated they are talking about two different things. She stated, as part of the review of the site plan, and for traffic safety she requested the movement. She referred to the sign set back and that permits are required. The siSTI setback is related to the height. What is referred to in the resolution lS regarding the clear vision area. corrmissioner Phillips asked if the sign must come down. Chairman Johnson stated no. Mr. Isom stated it must be moved. By doinS so, they are under the angle. Mr. Isom again related they understood lt to have been approved at the preliminary plan. Ms. Caryl stated perhaps she was remiss in assuming they would get sign permits and the specifics would be determined at that time. Mr. Isom stated number 2, in their original applications they had the sign at ten feet. He provided the Board with a drawing. He stated they used these in the presentation drawings when submitted to the Board. Ms. Caryl stated they do not have copies of these in the files. Mr. Isom referred to a September 15, 1994 letter where they discussed the signage. They submitted an application for a sign permit on 6/16/95 for a sign exactly as approved by the Board. They had not started the manufacturing of the sign. Mr. Isom stated he came to the office and Kristin told him the sign was approved. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Clarkson if they provide verbal or written approval of signs. Mr. Clarkson responded written. Discussion continued on item number two. Item number three, Mr. Isom stated, the Texaco signs, including the star, has always been part of the submittal and it was included in the September 15, 1994 letter to Ellie. He assumed all was well. Kevin had not in fact applied for the permit and it was applied for after the fact. Kevin Tucker, applicant, stated the mistake was made when Steve applied for the monument sign as he thought all the signs were being applied for. It was his mistake. Mr. Tucker talked about the additional trees and plants they have put on the property. He again stated they had made a mistake but they are still under the 184 square feet and questions what he is applying for. Mr. Loeffler stated the PUD guide expressly requires the application for signs and that 184 square feet was the maximum allowed. They may be under that but they are not in compliance. Commissloner Gates moved to approve file number PD-313-95, El Jebel Texaco PUD Amendment, requiring the signs conform to the signage as stated ln paragraph six. Chairman Johnson suggested it also include conformance with the sign code under section 11 unless otherwise specified in this document. Corrmissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 3 ZS-372-95, Colorado MOuntain Express Paul Clarkson, Planner, presented file number ZS-372-95, Colorado Mountain Express represented by Bill KaczYnski. He stated the applicant is applying for a temporary Special Use Permit, until April 14, 1996, to allow for the I?arking and storage of approximately 100 of their passenger vans. The appllcant's submitted proposal included an office trailer for dispatch purposes and a "vehicle barn" for the cleaning of vehicles and the storage of cleaning supplies. The trailer's use has been reduced to the storage of vehicle keys and fleet management and the "vehicle barn" has been eliminated from the proposal in its entirety. Those uses originally proposed for the site will be performed at the company's Metcalf Road site. Human occupation of the site will not be full-time. Discussion continued on the subdivision and/or lease of 35 acres which would not then restrict the use of the property. Chairman Johnson asked if it was possible to lease the 35 acres. Mr. KaczYnski responded he can ask the landlord but he is not sure of the response. Chairman Johnson asked if this can be tabled until the sixth as they can not take an action that would create an illegal subdivision. commissioner Phillips moved to table file number ZS-372-95, Colorado Mountain Express to November 6, 1995. Corrmissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PD-291-95-A, Riverwalk at Edwards Paul Clarkson presented file number PD-291-95-A, Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Amendment stating the aPI?licant is proposing to amend the Ri verwalk PUD Guide that modifies the 1) Slgn code and 2) provides for the addition of final design flexibility. The sign code will provide for stricter control, flexibility on certain buildings, a lower total project signage, a reduction of individual business signage and reduced signase fronting the Eagle River, Green space, and the Riverwalk Park. The flexibllity statement will allow for minor design variations in the final road and pedestrian walkway alignments, the final configuration of lot and tract sizes and shapes, final building envelopes, final access and parking locations and landscaping plans. The Flexibility statement includes an overall Development Plan maI?o Chairman Johnson asked what they were being requested to do lS approve a reduction in the signage. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve file number PD-291-95-A, Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Amendment including the findings. Corrmissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. LUR-015-95, Eagle-Vail Commercial POD PD-68-95-A, Eagle-Vail POD ZS-371-95, Emerald Acres Office Complex Paul Clarkson stated these item have been withdrawn by the applicant. PD-296-95-AF3, Cordillera Valley Club Lots 19 & 20 Patti Haefeli, Planning Technician, presented file number PD-295-95-AF3 Cord~lle~a Valley Club, ,Lot:-s 19 & 20, Filing 1. She stated this was an ' appllcatlon to amend bUlldlng envelopes and vacate a pedestrian easement for Lots 19 & 20. Staff is recommending approval and received a positive response from the Attorney's office. 4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 Commissioner Gates moved to approve file number PD-296-95-AF2, Cordillera Valley Club, Lots 19 & 20, Filing 1. corrmissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business to come before this Board the adjourned until November 6, 1995. ~ --- Attest : ~ LA CTer to ta~ d~~ /},~,;j;-/ 5