No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/14/95 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 14, 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 PD-100-95-AF1, Beaver Creek Subdivision, Amended Final Plat. Staff is recorrmending a tabling while they await further information. Jim Fritze, County Attorney, stated there was a concern with access but they have come to agreement and will change the current plat note to reflect the discussion today. He believes all is worked out and it is a matter of creating the documents. Tom Ragonetti, attorney for Vail Associates, stated the issue was continuous access to residents in surrounding condominiums and their continued access to their property. Vail Associates requests the Board give their approval pending the successful rewrite of the document. Jim Fritze concurred with the suggestion. Commissioner Gates moved to approve file number PD-100-95-AF1, Beaver Creek Subdivision. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. In discussion, Kevin Lindahl, representing Tom and patricia Brist, owners of a unit at the Inn at Beaver Creek, asked their objection be voiced because of the impact it will have on their views and their property. Mr. Lindahl stated one of the findings the Board must observe is the change to the existing facilities is not effected. Mr. Lindahl believes this modification changes the original plan. Ms. Eastley stated the proposal changes the configuration of the lot and increases the lot size by 92.5~. The adjacent property owners have written numerous letters of co~laint. Commissioner Philllps asked about the location. Ms. Eastley explained the location. Kevin Lindahl showed the Board the location on the map. Mr. Ragonnetti asked Gerry Arnold to show the changes. Gerry Arnold, Vail Associates, suggested the views of Village Hall will be impacted, however, the views of the mountain will be preserved. Ms. Arnold does not believe the majority of the views will be effected. Mr. Ragonnetti suggested the change will not substantially change the views. The building has always been planned for that location. Chairman Johnson asked about the number of complaints. Ms. Eastley stated numerous phone calls have been received and several of those vehemently opposed to this. Mr. Lindahl indicated another concern with the change of the lot line as it is not assured the building will be as shown on the map. Mr. Lindahl stated, with all due respect to Mr. Ragonnetti, his client does believe it will effect the views. Mr. Fritze clarified his discussion with Mr. Ragonetti earlier today and related this was not the issue discussed. Mr. Ragonnetti asked to show a map they brought showing in fact the applicant's view is not disturbed. The fact there has not been a building there is incidental. Ms. Arnold showed the location of Mr. Lindahl's client's unit. Ms. Arnold stated they will indeed build the building in the location as is. They intend to build it that way and will gratefully sign something to that effect. 1 Corrmissioner Gates asked Mr. Lindahl if he was satisfied. Mr. Lindahl stated partially so, but there will still be impact to the view. Corrmissioner Phillips asked if lot 14 was vacant? Ms. Eastley responded it is zoned resource corrmercial and the plat note indicates open space. Mr. Ragonnetti again stated it will effect the views but that has always been the plan. The change, Mr. Ragonnetti stated has little to do with the views. Ms. Eastley stated the increase of the lot size is indeed a concern to the opponents. Mr. Lindahl asked if the change to lot 12 will cause and encroachment on the open space. Ms. Eastley responded they are deducting space from the open space easement to increase the lot size. Mr. Ragonnetti stated the easements have been traded for other locations and the Beaver Creek Planning and Zoning is in full support. Mr. Fritze stated in voting, 22.19.108 establishes the criteria for approval. Corrmissioner Gates believes his motion does indicate they are in compliance. corrmissioner Phillips stated the second concurs. The vote was declared unanimous. Mr. Lindahl asked the two maps he produced remain part of the record. Mr. Fritze asked for the same from Vail Associates. ZS-362-95, Eagle Wings Property Paul Clarkson presented file number ZS-362-95, Eagle Wings Property, Cooley Mesa. He stated this was a request for a contractors storage and auto salvage yard. This was heard in May by the Planning corrmission and tabled and heard again on November 1, 1995. The applicant currently has a permitted salvage yard. Mr. Clarkson stated staff has no objections to the tabling. Chalrman Johnson stated the Board will take a fifteen minute break until all parties are together. Greg Stutz, attorney for the Ewings asked for a 60 day tabling. The issue is a matter of legal access about some property owned by Holy Cross. The other issues can be resolved before they come back. Mr. Stutz stated this is a prime area. Karen Karthy, adjacent land owner, stated dust control is one of their primary issues. There have been many problems with the road. There are health issues for themselves and the livestock. The amount of dust is tremendous. Another issue is where they cleared a two acre site and there are now thistles. The berm protects them but not the neighbors. She indicated there are water issues, trespassing issues, fence destruction, and a plugged water line which was resolved. The dust issue is a real concern come spring time and she'd like it resolved. Chairman Johnson stated the dust control must be taken care of and the State Statute dealing with weed control must be adhered to. Mr. Fritze was advised by staff a violation notice was given to the land owner and the conduction of use is not permitted. Corrmissioner Phillips moved to table file number ZS-362-95, Eagle Wings Property, Cooley Mesa for sixty days to January, 1996. Commissioner Gates seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ZS-376-95, Vail Daily Business Center Paul Clarkson, Planner, presented file number ZS-376-95, vail Daily Business Center. He stated this was a request to consider dwelling units ln a Corrmercial General Zone District. The applicant is Bob Brown. This is across the street from Paddy's and Micheles. The building will contain commercial space on the lower level, office space for the vail Daily on the second floor and seven dwelling units on the top floor. The only issue staff has is the concern for local employee housing. The possibility for the units to be subdivided. Staff is recorrmending conditions be placed as provided by the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 Chairman Johnson asked if the decision today was only for the housing. Mr. Clarkson responded yes. Chairman Johnson stated he understands the intent of the condition but the wording is confusing. Bob Brown stated there must be at least one Eagle County Employee in each unit. Mr. Brown stated he would not like to look at a deed restriction unless necessary. The land use regs do require a special use permit for this proposal and that is reflected in the lansuage of the special use. Chairman Johnson stated the restrictlon itself is a deed restriction. He believes they would not approve just any residential units there. This lS attempting to assist our housing. Perhaps the one fact that at least one individual on the lease being an Eagle County Employee. Mr. Brown asked about part/time service employees and how this is administered and what are the requirements he has to live up to. Chairman Johnson stated the enforcement issue should not be difficult. If a complaint is made to the County they are doing short term rentals or selling units, then there will be a concern. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve file number ZS-376-95, Vail Daily Business Center with the change as read and incorporating staffs findings and other conditions. Commissioner Gates seconded the motion. In discussion, Jim Fritze stated that occupant is the appropriate language. Chairman Johnson called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PD-337-95-S2, Knudson Ranch sid Fox, Planning Manager, presented file number PD-337-95-S2, Knudson Ranch. He stated this was a request for Sketch Plan for twenty-six (26) dwelling units on 10.54 acres. The site is located immediately east of Arrowhead and south of highway six. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the current plan. The 1983 sketch plan was approved for 15 dwelling units but that sketch plan has expired. Rick Plyman, Peter Jamar and Associates introduced Summit Habitats. He indicated they originally submitted a plan for thirty three units. That was denied and they started over. They resubmitted an application for 29 units and while worklng with staff, they came to the 26 number and supports staffs recorrmendation. They are happy with the current plan and the changes, he believes are very good. Mr. Plyman stated there are two pieces of property. One is, the original homestead for the Dodo Ranch which is about ten acres. There is a smaller piece, 100 x 100 that sits above the driveway, which was the telephone switch station sold to them by the telephone company. The DeMuths own that property and have a house on it. The old ranch house is still in residential use and has been leased. The utilities currently go past the site but only with telephone and electricity. The water is from a spring. Both buildings are on septic systems. Mr. Plyman further discussed the history and the current use. They have taken a real team approach to this property and the proposed development. They intend to use the Arrowhead Design Review Board for the requirements and approval of the property. They have set some strong design plans and intend to make the existing "beat up" area into the landscaped lower five acres. Planning area B will be set up with the same wildlife and use restrictions as Bachelor Gulch. The only uses will be for a trail through the property tying it to Arrowhead. They have consolidated the driveways and it will be improved. The units up on the bench will help disguise the abrupt transition. They will revegitate and landscape the cut and the scare. 83~ of the site is open space. Reducing from 33 to 26 was a 20~ reduction in density. They were able to keep the same price point for the units. There are no environmental issues and all contacted are positive with the five acres of open space. They are very positive about the site and the location of the project and have all the surrounding property owners support. 3 Chairman Johnson asked about the guest parking spots and the fact there were 15 offered in the first proposal. Mr. Plyman stated there are now ten. Each unit will have a two car garage and additional parking behind the garage. Chairman Johnson asked about the Arrowhead DRB reviewing the changes and asked if they will have to go before them in the future. Mr. Plyman responded yes they would. Cornrrassioner Phillips asked about the wildlife mitigation plan. Mr. Fox stated the sketch plan just requires details will be later defined. Mr. Plyman stated the two issues Bill Andree had was grazing and domestic livestock and a restricting or fencing cornrratment for dogs. Cornrrassioner Gates asked about the open space on this project and how it will be seen for tax pUrPQses. Mr. Pl~ stated it would be deeded as a corrmon element. Mr. Frltze stated that would be the way to take care of it if that is what the Board wants to see. Chairman Johnson stated his only suggestion for desisr: improvement is to put in foot paths along the north western portion to provlde for future access to public transportation. Mr. Pl~ stated there is a spring that they would like to use as well for irrigatlon in the future. Sid Fox stated they are recommending approval with five conditions. Mr. Fox stated they are not proposing an economically equal project to Arrowhead and this should simply set design standards. corrmissioner Gates moved to approve file number PD-337-95-S2, Knudson Ranch incorPQrating staffs conditions and findings. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. G-81-95, Road vacation Jim Fritze stated staff and the attorney's office are going to be requesting a tabling for this matter. Staff does not believe the loose ends are tied up or the kinks worked out. George Roussos, County Engineer, presented file number G-81-95, Road Vacation. He stated this was a request to consider a petition for vacation of certain roadways , Knapp Road No. 1 (known as Casteel Lane, and Knapp Road No. 2 (known as West Lake Creek Drive). The Petitioners have requested the roadway be vacated on the basis the roadway is located entirely on the Petitioners' property in Eagle County. Mr. Roussos stated they have received some objections to the vacation by adjoining property owners though one neishbor is in support. He discussed concerns brought up at the Planning COITmlssion meeting. Mr. Mitchell, the neighbor to the south wrote a letter which Mr. Roussos introduced into the record and to the Board. Mr. Mitchel's letter shows his concern with the required access that may be imposed. He does not want to have to accept their movement of the road. When the letter was reviewed by the Eagle County Land Use corrmittee, they recommended a conditional approval for a recreational easement. Staff has two concerns and one is with the sign at the entrance to the property. The attorney's office has received a copy of the proposed easement and neither they or the engineering office have had the chance to review the proposal. Kevin Lindahl, representing Bud and Betsy Knapp, introduced them and Jim Hyatt, Vice President of Yeehaa, an international landscapins firm. He stated the Knapp property is located on west Lake Creek sittlng up at the end of the valley and he showed it on the map. Mr. Hyatt reviewed the history of the tract of land. It was accessible for farmins and ranching. Mr. Pilgrim in 1900 wrote in his journal about the inaccessibllity of the property. There were three roadways built in the 1970's. In 1993, the Knapps bought the property owning 260 acres. The Knapp's are trying hard to restore this area to is original state. They are environmentally sensitive to the land and the planning of such. They intend to leave the majority of the land for open space. They are building four guest cabins and a caretakers home. The property is bordered to the south by the Mitchel property of 160 acres. The Vail Plus Fifteen Partnership owns 4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 125 acres. On the north side is the Mall property and east of that the Tally property of 58 acres. On the east side it is owned by Eagle Meadows. Above that is White River National Forest. Mr. Hyatt showed the property on slides. He showed the intersection of Castillo Lane and where they would like to vacate and cover some of the cut and damage of the road. The roads are not maintained by the County. They have a permit to regrade HolyCross Drive which is in the spirit of the other improvements they are trying to make. He then showed the approach to West Lake Creek Drive. Both roads are surrounded by Knapp property. He believes it only makes sense to vacate the roads. Another point is these roads do not provide access to anyone else. They were created for high density development but they do not intend to build. He commends the Knapp's for the efforts they are making and have made to refurbish the land. The Knapp's are allowing use of their property for foot and ski traffic and will continue to do so. There is no need for vehicle access to those roads and it would be a detriment. Mr. Hyatt introduced the Knapps and Mrs. Knapp came forward. Mrs. Knapp indicated she and her husband have lived here for sixteen years and they have a great sensitivity for the land. There intention is to enhance it for generations to come. Mr. Knapp stated their desire is to protect the lands and to manage the vehicle traffic on those roads to prevent road accidents. Mr. Knapp added in the two locations at the cul-de-sacs, they do plan to build two studios. They have welcomed people to their property and have only eliminated overnight campers because of fires. Mr. Lindahl submitted letters from neighbors and landowners in support of the Knapp's proposal and thanking them for the efforts they have made to keeping the area accessible to foot traffic. Mr. Lindahl stated his apologies that Mr. Roussos had not seen the easement. Mr. Lindahl stated it was given to the Attorney's Office two weeks ago and he was not aware Mr. Roussos had not seen it. Mr. Lindahl further discussed the easements. James Gilbert, area resident, indicated they are one of few owners who live in the area year round. He stated it is a very rural area and one of the problems they have is with vehicle traffic. The recreational users are a pain and they don't show respect for the property. To keep the area for recreation they have to control the road. Mr. Gilbert stated he lets people cross his property as the Knapp's do. Letting the public drive on roads that are not publicly maintained puts the burden on them. Asain, they are happy to let people use the roads but thinks they should elimlnate the vehicles. Peter Halstad, area resident, stated he and his wife abut the area. He stated they have put covenants on their 105 acres restricting additional houses from being built. Mr. Halstad stated they pick up for everyone else up there. They bought a road grater to maintain the roads. They love to use the area for walks. There is abuse of the area by people able to access by vehicle. They party up there at the end of cul-de-sacs leaving trash and damaging the roads. Sandy Hinman, resident of the valley for nearly thirty years, showed his place on the map and where he uses the Knapp's I?roperty for skiing and biking. He applauded the Knapp's on their keeplng the property open to the public for recreational use. They were thrilled when the Knapps bought the whole thing. They are in full sUPI?ort of anything the Knapp's plan to do. Guy Parker, County resident Slnce 1962, works as the caretaker for the Knapps for the past four years. In his time there he sees the primary use of the roads for recreation. There is a great deal of support for the Knapp's in this endeavor. He has not come across anyone who has been upset with them for any of what they have or are doing up there. Rick Johnson, area resident, referred to the discussion provided today. Mr. Johnson referred to the Tally'S property and the Knapp's property on his New York Mountain Project map. He stated they participated in the two hearings earlier. Mr. Johnson stated he wrote a legal policy arsument on behalf of the Tally's. The Tallys wrote a letter to the Corrmissloners as well. They appeared at the continued hearing on September the 20th. He believes the requested road vacation will effect the Tally's property because the end of the public road will now be on the Tallys property. This will create an impact on the Tallys. The subject roads were dedicated as 5 public roads and the reliance was there when the Tallys purchased the property. The Tally's and their guests have used the roadways for recreatlon. They are concerned about handicapped accessibillty as well as access to bikers. The County does not maintain the roads. The cul-de-sacs elimination will cause concern for emergency service. Mr. Johnson believes this should not be done in a I?iecemeal fashion. He referred to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, sectlon 2.22 (3) and stated the applicants for any road or easement vacation shall present a petition requesting such vacation to the Department of Community Development, signed by the owners of all abutting property whose means of legal ingress and egress thereto would be affected by such vacation. The attorney's office interpreted this to state it must be the sole ingress and egress. Mr. Johnson referred to case law and the results of a pitkin County case. Mr. Johnson stressed ingress and egress does not define access to any specific area. Mr. Johnson discussed easements and the fact the County will loose title to the road once it is vacated. He suggests the Knapp's are not necessarily as wonderful as they and their friends may think. He showed two photographs for review. Mr. Johnson stated they are introducing a more responsible land use and planning for the area. There is nothing in this vacation for the public. The public looses access and the use of their public property. He referred . to Resolution 90-93 and the petition used to vacate property earlier. Mr. Johnson stated he advised Jim Fritze of their concerns in September and has not received a response. The Mitchel's property, which will also be affected, are in opposition. They have written two letters and question who will enforce the public rights. They believe the gate located on Holy Cross drive is illesal. They don't understand the purpose of the easement. The Mitchel's belleve the road vacations, if approved, will enable the Knapp's to request further vacation. Mr. Johnson stated neither the Knapp's or their attorneys have contacted the Mitchel's to work out a mutually satisfactory arrangement. They believe this is a piecemeal effort to discourage public use in the area. He sees no reason for the County to vacate these roads. Chairman Johnson asked about the legal ingress and egress effects and how it effects the Tallys. Mr. Johnson responded it does not need to have an ultimate destination. It means to take you off your property or to your proI?erty. He again referred to pitkin County and the lack of the limitatlon as stated in that County. Corrmissioner Gates asked about the County's interpretation. Bob Loeffler stated Mr. Johnson's interpretation of the re~lation is wrong and unsupported. They do not agree the petition is invalld. Mr. Loeffler stated the easement has not been thoroughly reviewed by either the Engineer or the Attorney's Office. The adoption of this vacation will have to be delayed as the language is unacceptable as is. Chairman Johnson suggested the Board could approve the easement with the condition the language be worked out before a Resolution is signed. Mr. Loeffler stated if the Board is inclined to accept the easement they instruct County Engineer to write an easement that is appropriate. Mr. Loeffler asked the KnaPI?'s if the easement they have volunteered is the same dimensions of the existlng road bed. Craig Kerr, co-counsel with Kevin Lindahl, stated they intend to request a 20 foot easement but will do whatever the County suggests. commissioner Phillips questioned the blocking off the Mitchel's property and asked them to again point out the roads. Commissioner Gates moved to table file number G-81-95, Road Vacation for further clarification of the easement. Corrmissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PD-138-95-S1, Adams Rib Golf Course Keith Montag, Director of Community Development, presented file number PD-138-95-S1, Adams Rib Golf Course. He stated this hearing was a continuation of the hearing for public input and is one of a series. The focus tonight is regarding the water and the status of federal permits. Mr. 6 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 Montag pointed out Staff corrments in the Board's packet which contained any newly received correspondence. He also included a letter from White Water Engineers and related the memo describes the status as they see the water situation. The water service will be the initial focus. The water service is proposed to be acquired form the Town of Eagle or through the creation of a separate water district. Wastewater treatment will be provided by a proposed advanced wastewater treatment plant located on the Salt Creek parcel. A specific employee housing plan was not inco~orated within the submittal. However, the application states the resldent population livins at the Golf Course is a significant portion of the resident employee populatlon that will be demanded by the development of the resort. Mr. Montag stated the State is requiring the augmentation plan must be approved before they are going to review detailed water information before the plan is submitted. The memo from White Water Engineers sumnarized the issues. The minimum stream flow versus the historic stream flow. The applicant indicates it is feasible for Adam's Rib to develop an independent water plan. The location has not be confirmed. One of the things that will be required is a strong moni toring prosram. That has been an ongoing concern of staff. They say vested water rlghts will not be an issue. Corrmenting further on water, Mr. Montag stated there has been a water quality plan. The goals need to be satisfied both during or after the project. Mr. Montag stated this is one of the better plans the county has reviewed but there are a number of techniques that must be implemented. The Town of Eagle is currently preparing a water plan to include the valley. The town would like to see this master plan completed prior to the county moving forward on this project. The augmentation plan will only accommodate 21~ of the currently proposed residential units. He believes the applicant has not done a thorough job. He believes they have double counted the water rights. He takes issue with the water right report and inconsistencies. Under water quality, Mr. Roby questions the type of sampling of the water quality. He says he casts doubt on Adam's Rib Mr. Montag discussed a letter from Mary Hammond, s specialist who monitors water law relating to discrepancies in the au~entation plan. She raised concern about the availability of civil water rlghts. She discussed the double counting. She questions return flows and minimum streamflow. Willie Powell, Town Manager of Eagle, introduced the Town's water attorney. Mr. Powell stated it is the Board of Trustees desire the Water Plan be approved prior to any decision being made on this project. They believe it inappropriate to approve a water plan that will duplicate the efforts and go asainst all the master plan rules and regulations. Sherry CaIOla, the Town's Water Attorney, stated the town has it's water plan located at a site adjacent to Adam's Rib. She explained the restrictions the town has on flow requirements. The town has a 1983 agreement with Adam's Rib for the golf course and some area in town. Now, that agreement is outdated and will not work for anyone. They have worked with Adam's Rib to develop a conceptual plan for the Town to I?rovide water to the Golf Course. They have not been able to integrate that wlth Adamn's Rib's other needs. The town feels this must be looked at as a whole and not piecemeal. The town is concerned with competing needs. She understands Adam's Rib will submit an augmentation plan and the Town will oppose it. Their main concern is a competing water system which is crucial to this base. Corrmissioner Gates asked Mr. Powell if the Eagle Master Plan does not mention Adam's Rib. Mr. Powell stated it is true, the consensus of the public and the advisory committee is seeing the future of the area to be without Adman's Rib at this point in time. That is why they are concerned with sisning a water agreement with them. They are not confident this plan is conslstent with water the community wants or any decision they may make. Fred Kummer, president of Adam's Area and Adam's Rib, stated his three main concerns are water, right-of-way, and why he can't get what he wants. 7 He stated he met with Mr. Powell today and he does not believe it is legal for the Town to impose the tap charges. If they could meet with the town they would make concessions to the town. Secondly, regarding water, they are unable to be held hostage to the things still to come. They have asked for a modification of the golf course plan going from 540 to 1687, and they have asked for some additional units. The second issue is that of right of way. They are working with Eagle Ranch and they should be able to come to terms with them as well as with the second party and perhaps the third. He thinks they should be able to come to agreement with all parties. The third issue, is an understanding that possibly 1055 is more than they think aI?propriate, they should create a dialogue, work sessions, where there are dlscussions with the county to find those things that are most appropriate to all parties and particularly to the county. Richard Ca~lse gave hlS resume for the record stating he has seen repeatedly how dlspute resolution can work. Mr. Carylse stated Mr. Kummer has agreed to talk about a reduction in units. They believe it is going to be easier to address the master plan issues by gettlng going on a meaningful dialogue. Mr. Carylse talked about the master plan process. A I?lan is an advisory document, a guide to development, a guide to decisions. H1S message is, the Board and only the Board can interpret the master plan and only they can apply it to specific parcels. He has advised his client the reality is they Omust have a dialogue with the Board of their interpretations as to what is the master plan. There are approaches they can take to resolve the issues with the Board. They would like an informal discussion to hear their concerns. Jim Fritze, County Attorney, questioned the dispute with the Board's statement. The Board has not come to any position on this file where there is a dispute with the Board and the appllcant. Mr. Carylse stated there is a perceived fact there is a current dispute in this valley about the density. Terrill Knight, Knight Planning, pointed out they are moving forward with the augmentation plan and they are clearly ahead of where they should be. He stated they clearly understand water law and their plan takes those into account. Concerning monitoring of water, it is a function of the state. They must ensure compliance. They have included implementing methods to assure water compliance. Mr. Knight stated their work with the Town has been very successful and they are close to coming to terms with technical concerns. They are following the system and reiterated they are well ahead in the water planning and working with the town. Charlie Wick, project manager, discussed the augmentation plan and the area it covers. It is about a 18 - 24 month process to complete the plan. The plan is being written with the intention of joining the Town of Eagle whenever possible. They have collected water quality data and have a 40 year history of the stream. Mr. Wick stated the water quality issues will be addressed by Jonathan Jones of Write Water Ensineers. Boots Ferguson from Holland and Hart is a primary water attorney ln the state. John Jones, asked the Board to refer to Tab 2 of the handout and open to item #1. This corrmitment is described in the 1989/90 and 1994 ARRA Water Quality Mitigation Plans. The 1989/90 Plan was given Draft 401 Certification by the CWQCD in 1989. The 1994 Plan is now being reviewed by the CWQCD. It is more comprehensive and makes stronger corrmitments than the 1989/90 Plan. There have been over 20 independent contributors and reviewers of the 1994 Plan. He continued to review the handout. Boots Ferguson, Water Attorney from Holland and Hart. For the last twenty years Adam's Rib has been focusing on water resource they have to provide for a develoI?ment such as this. He stated Adam's Rib has the rights, has the agreements wlth the town and can provide for this development within the prescribed guidelines. Mr. Ferguson discussed the timing. He stated they have an existing agreement with the town to service 200 units. This was executed in 1983. They have a legal source of supply which is in place and the tap fees have been paid. Adam's Rib, he stated, has never suggested the reduction of the minimum stream flows. The remaining water needs for the development are in negotiation still. They have basically reached an agreement with respect to the legal issues and the engineering issues. Negotiations with the town have provided them a conservative check. The initial negotiations where done with 8 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 the town thinking they would be the applicant and therefore they worked closely with the Engineers. The preservation of the streamflow in Brush Creek has been their primary concern. If agreement is reached with the Town the plan will be conveyed to the Town. Based upon the proposed agreement with the Town, they have developed a plan that uses the senior water rights to maintain the successful development of the Town. The question now is how do they enhance the streamflow as it moves through the proj ect . At the down stream point of the proj ect, make sure the historic regiment of the stream remains the same. Commissioner Gates asked if in dry years there is access to any water through some of the reservoirs. Mr. Ferguson stated they are looking at Wooford Water as well as Green Mountain and Rudi. Mr. Fritze asked about the charts supplied and questioned why August was selected. Mr. Ferguson stated August was selected because in a dry year the flows are low enough that in August, the senior irrigators can still take needed water. They wanted to analyze if their water rights would be sufficient. He stated they also looked at February'S fisures. Mr. Ferguson related their responsibility is to maintain the historlc strearnflows and the low flows are a result of the senior water rights. Eagle Ranch takes out below them and they are the senior holder. Mr. Ferguson explained the historic regiment of the water rights. Ms. Caloia stated Adam's Rib will have to replace all the water they divert at or above where it is diverted. She stated it takes a tremendous amount of monitoring. The Town would have to make sure the monitoring of their system occurs and will be at the cost to the Town. She takes issue to Mr. Fergusons' implication they and the town are working hand in hand. Mr. Ferguson stated if they do their own system they will not compromise. Mr. Kummer stated they recognize the concerns of the Town and they have shared an understanding of where the water should come from. Mr. Kummer stated nothing in the world will stop them from reaching an agreement with the Town. He sees this as having been a delay tactic. John Bort, project manager for the Forest Service, dealing with Adam's Rib, stated his comments will take about 10 - 15 minutes. Specifically they want to cover the status of the federal I?ermits. Adam's Rib only has one permit with the Forest Service that was lssued in 1982 and it is still in effect. There is an application with Corps of Engineers. They have been analyzing the components for the last twenty years. There has been a lot of reference to the 1982 Forest Service Environmental Analysis process when they completed the first round. At that time a decision was rendered that said Adam's Mountain was suitable for skiins. They were given encouragement to further the process. A number of addl tional conditions were imposed at that time. In 1987 they kicked of the application with the Corps. In 1989 there was another proposal. In 1993, there were some due dates imposed. Mr. Bort continued to talk about the permitting process. In the special use permit there is a clause of December 31, 1995 deadline for occupancy. Adam's Rib has asked the permit deadline be extended based on due diligence. They are reviewing that now. In 1989 the permit was extended and they are reviewing it further. Mr. Bort moved forward to discuss the status of the environmental impact being studied by them now. Under this round of environmental analysis they may be looking at requiring a new application. He stated they have identified many key issues to be analyzed and they are not just the environmental issues. They are looking at transportation and social issues as well. They have developed a number of alternatives. He referred to his map and the handout the corrmissioners have. The map shows a project area as it relates to the Brush Creek Valley and the ski mountain. He showed the land exchanse to take place. Rib modification is another concern. The power transmlssion line has three alignments they are considering. The Corps is 9 checking the wet lands. Mr. Bort discussed the no action scenario on private lands. Most of Adman's Rib is 35 acre zoning. They analyzed the environmental effects as it relates to private lands at the lowest level of possible develoI?ment. Mr. Bort referred to the schedule for completion and they lntend to provide a quality document that will give long term analytical data to do so. corrmissioner Gates indicated they seem to be reviewlng the same information again and again. Mr. Bort said they must bring all this information up to today's knowledge of the effects. Charlie Wick explained some of the various studies they have had to do because of national concerns and are thus analyzed in relatlonship to the development. These analysis ensure the environmentally sensitive issues be addressed. Mr. Kummer's back and he still feels this is a good proj ect . The approval they received in 1982 anticipated change. They started with almost 90 acres of effected wetlands. They have worked with the Corps and the Forest Service. Conceptually, he believes the project is the same as it was, but its gone through an evolution. The same way they have reached resolution is hopefully the way they can reach it here. Norman Nunn, area resident, discussed the gopher versus cattle concept. Mr. Nunn read his letter into the record and discussed the subsidizing of cattle ranches. He discussed the 35 acre concerns. Mr. Nunn mentioned the wildlife concerns and the fishing that will be better managed. Rick Juedemann, area resident, stated he is living in a trailer that has been paid for three or four times over. He discussed the buildout in vail and where they as construction people will have to So. The old family farms will be subdivided into 35 acres parcels. He questlons the urban sprawl. As far as the development, the Board can control this. Roy Mosher, a resident of the Valley for many years, stated he grew up here and he'd like to see the valley stay green. He read from a letter and discussed the concern with the 35 acre parcels. He mentioned the noxious weeds that will ensue. Dick Turgeon, area resident, stated he has a big credibility gap with the planning corrmission and the staff. He reflected on the master plan of the 1970's asked what has happened to it. Mr. Turgeon believes the staff is tryin~ to blackmail Kummer to tie into the Eagle Water and Sanitation Distrlct. He believes this is wrong. Mr. Turgeon reminded the Board he was involved in the hiring of Jim Fritze and Keith Montag. He questioned Mr. Montag's abilities. Mike Bradley, resident of the Brush Creek Valley, suggested many things have been said tonight about water and land. He can't really be concerned with Mr. Kummer's land rights when his are not taken into consideration. He is dependent upon the Board to ensure his rights. They will be paying the price of development as they loose the water on the their property. He would like to see the rights of the small land owner taken into consideration. Henry Vest, a valley resident for twelve years, on the town of Avon planning corrmission for four and a half years stated he thinks from reading the news clips over the last couple of years, his general opinion is in favor of the Adman's Rib recreational area. In staff notes he sees no reason why the Board would not vote for the proposal. Mary Hanmend, Attorney specializing in water law, referred to a letter she wrote to the Board. She believes it appropriate that some of her concerns have been addressed. She still has concerns there is not an appropriate water supply worked out for this project. Mr. Ferguson indicated the water contract is a done deal but the Town disagrees. After eighteen months of negotiations and still no contract it is worrisome. She believes there to be some serious institutional problems. She referred to Mr. Ferguson's argument regarding the 12 DFS and the suggestion to reduce it. The engineering issues may be a concern and does make them all the more important. She is concerned the water supply that Adam's Rib claims is very high. She explained the reductions of water supply. The Town has indicated no permit should be issued for Adam's Rib until they provide an augmentation plan. Jim Edwards, a Vail resident, questioned if we can handle this kind of development. The load on the infrastructure needs to be assessed. Leonard Sinclair, area resident, confessed he has never caught a fish 10 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 out of east Brush Creek because there are no fish there. He discussed the water up that area and the high quality of water that is present. His corrment regarding the federal permits is that they take too damn long. He started telling war stories from 1955. His parents came here and without invitations. This is an area that provides and opportunity that people desire. Tom Brooks, lives in Gypsum Colorado, stated he knows one thing for sure and that is we are missing an opportunity here. Spending money on decisions that are never made. We study studies. Everybody is afraid to make decisions. He hopes that isn't the case here. He loves nature. He suggested he is going to start charging by the square inch for hair cuts and study each section. Nancy Hill, resident of Eagle, read from a letter she sent to the newspaper not too long ago. She discussed the second homes and the empty city label that Vail now has. She referred to an article in the Denver paper. Ms. Hill referred to the Commissioner's stated goal of finding more housing in Eagle County and this goes against those plans. Sally Metcalf read a letter from Rosie Sherwood. She emphasized her concerns with the quality and quantity of water. Mrs. Sherwood discussed the wheather of 1977 and the drought and Adam's Rib ethics in handling their water that year. She questions how the integrity of the water will be preserved. Sally then discussed a meeting she had with people in a similar developing area and hopes that Board will prevent then from facing the same problems. Darren Tuhulki, a painting contractor from Minturn moved here for opportunity. He supports Adams Rib, he's seen their plan, he's been up Brush Creek, he thinks the valley is beautiful. The development is going to happen regardless. He is concerned about his friends not having a self sustaining future in the area as construction dries up. He addressed the riparian zones along Brush Creek if the 35 acre parcels are allowed. As far as the ski area, he doesn't think it's a bad idea. Luck Danielson, attorney for the concerned citizens, believes this project is not going anywhere. He has been watching this for twenty years. He wishes Mr. Kummer would have stuck around because he thinks what they do need is dialogue. Mr. Danielson reflected the history of the augmentation plan which was due in 1989. They needed a wet land permit and missed the deadline. He believes the problem is the development simply does not work. The federal government did make a decision in 1989 as their permit was denied. In 1982 there was water supply that was going to come form Vassar meadow, then they talked surface diversion. Mr. Danielson's point is this project is too big, too much. Why are we here toni~ht? Because the developer is asking for more. Mr. Danielson really belleves this will all come to an end. The infrastructure costs are not realistic. He hopes the Board's sense of fairness includes the people in the dialogue. Max Quinon, a neighbor of Adam's Rib, stated he has concerns with the water quantity comments that have been made tonight. He has seen the water level get low. In August of 1994, the stream went dry. This upsets him. He doesn't understand why they say there is plenty of water. Behind his house, in a dry year, there should be 8 1/2 cubic feet per second when there is none flowing. He referred to the paper water where the decree may have nothing to do with what is being used. Keith Montag stated the only other item is the agenda for the next hearing. They do have time for December 12, 1995 to hear concluding comments form the applicant and the staff. There will be an opportunity for questions form the Board and Board deliberation. Mr. Knight stated the bulk of their presentation will the financial issues of the resort. Chairman Johnson asked the rest of the Board how they would feel about taking public comment on December 12, 1995. Mr. Montag stated there would be a project economic presentation. commissioner Phillips stated she doesn't mind the public comment but 11 would like it be restricted to new information. Commissioner Gates stated people should be able to speak if they so desire. Mr. Knight stated they will have their water people here. 'There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until November 20, 1995. ~., 4'c.x!!(j;-..;; 12