Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/20/2001
PUBLIC HEARING
NOVEMBER 20,2001
Present:
Michael Gallagher
Am Menconi
Tom Moorhead
Jack Ingstad
Sara J. Fisher
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher
Commissioner
County Attorney
County Administrator
Clerk to the Board
Absent:
Tom Stone
Chairman
This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of
County Commissioners for their consideration:
Consent Agenda
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher stated the next matter before the Board was the Consent Agenda as
follows:
A) Approval of bill paying for the weeks of November 19 and 26,2001, subject to review
by County Administrator
B) Approval of payroll for November 29,2001, subject to review by County
Administrator
C) Approval ofthe minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting of November
6,2001
D) Intergovernmental Agreement between the County of Eagle and the Town of Gypsum
E) Intergovernmental Agreement between the County of Eagle and the Town of Red Cliff
F) Resolution 2001-137, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373167 (amended) in the amount of$99,936.84, for the account of Kensington Partners, a Colorado
General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
G) Resolution 2001-138, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373141 (amended) in the amount of$95,456.18, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a Colorado
General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
H) Resolution 2001-139, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373035 (amended) in the amount of$199,147.00, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a
Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,
2001
I) Resolution 2001-140, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373963 (amended) in the amount of$123,564.93, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a
Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,
1
11-20-2001
2001
J) Resolution 2001-141, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS372706 (amended) in the amount of$147,844.64, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a
Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,
2001
K) Resolution 2001-142, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373020 (amended) in the amount of $31,388.60, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a Colorado
General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
L) Resolution 2001-143, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373088 (amended) in the amount of$19,646.00, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a Colorado
General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
M) Resolution 2001-144, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS373040 (amended) in the amount of $45,850.00, for the account of Cordillera Mountain Tract,
Filing 34, Water Tank, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
N) Resolution 2001-145, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS372714 (amended) in the amount of $527,604.43, for the account of Kensington Partners, drawn on
Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
0) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead, County
Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney
in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. NZS418237
(amended) in the amount of $149,900.43, for the account of Squaw Creek Realty Corp., drawn on Wells
Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
P) Resolution 2001-146, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS372998 (amended) in the amount of$118,809.65, for the account of Squaw Creek Realty Corp.,
drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
Q) Resolution 2001-147, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS382770 (amended) in the amount of$31,810.00, for the account of Kensington Partners and Squaw
Creek Realty Corporation, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
R) Resolution 2001-148, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead,
County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as
Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No.
NVS337711 (amended) in the amount of$35,221.12, for the account of Kensington Partners, drawn on
Wells Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
S) Resolution, conferring Power of Attorney upon R. Thomas Moorhead, County
2
11-20-2001
Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney, and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney
in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. NVS372709
(amended) in the amount of $152,426.00, for the account of Cordillera Irrigation Line, drawn on Wells
Fargo Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 1,2001
T) Resolution 2001-149, conferring Power of Attorney upon the Attorney's Office to
draw on Letter of Credit No. 424, in the amount of$5,000.00 for the account of Wadel Development,
LLC, for Road Cut Permit No. 2649, drawn on Weststar Bank, Letter of Credit will expire December 2,
2001
U) Revised Eagle County airport Expansion Underground Electric
V) Eagle County air Terminal Addition, Change Order #4 to B & B Excavating for
addition of Schedule II, work and Schedule IV work
W) Contract for A TM Services at the Eagle County Regional Airport.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the
Consent Agenda.
Tom Moorhead, County Attorney, stated they would like to withdraw items 0 and S.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked the purpose of all the resolutions above.
Mr. Moorhead explained that Letters of Credit were obtained to provide monetary security for
improvements to assure they are done to County standards. He stated for those not pulled, the
Attorney's Office has not received an extension. They need to be able to draw on those if new Letters of
Credit are not received. They anticipate that all the Letters of Credit will be extended by December 1 st,
but because there is no meeting prior to that date they must be on this agenda.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented excluding items 0
and S.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Plat & Resolution Signing
Matt Gennett, Planner, presented the following plats and resolutions for the Board's
consideration:
5MB-00282. Hi~hland Meadows. Filing No.2. ARe-Subdivision of Lot 12. He stated
this was a Type B Minor Subdivision, the intent of which is to subdivide Lot 12 into two ~ duplex lots,
Lots 12A and 12B. Staff findings are as follows:
Pursuant to Section 5-290 (G) (1) of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations:
5-290 (G) (1) Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision
(G) Standards. The Board of County Commissioners and the Community Development Director
shall consider the following in the review of a Type A Subdivision, a Type B Subdivision, and an
Amended Final Plat.
Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision.
a) Access, potable water, and sewage disposal on the land to be subdivided are adequate;
b. The plat does conform to Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations,
policies, standards, and guidelines; and
c. No Improvement Agreement is applicable.
5MB-00284. Miller's Creek On the Eagle River. Filing No.2. A Re-Subdivision of
Lot 1. He stated this was a Type B Minor Subdivision, the intent of which is to subdivide Lot 1 into
two ~ duplex lots, Lots lA and IB. Staff findings are as follows:
Pursuant to Section 5-290 (G) (1) ofthe Eagle County Land Use Regulations:
5-290 (G) (1) Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision
3
11-20-2001
(G) Standards. The Board of County Commissioners and the Community Development Director
shall consider the following in the review of a Type A Subdivision, a Type B Subdivision, and an
Amended Final Plat.
Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision.
a) Access, potable water, and sewage disposal on the land to be subdivided are adequate;
b. The plat does conform to Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations,
policies, standards, and guidelines; and
c. No Improvement Agreement is applicable.
5MB-00285. Miller's Creek On the Eagle River. A Re-Subdivision of Lot 2. He
stated this was a Type B Minor Subdivision, the intent of which is to subdivide Lot 1 into two )Iz duplex
lots, Lots 2A and 2B. Staff findings are as follows:
Pursuant to Section 5-290 (G) (1) of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations:
5-290 (G) (1) Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision
(G) Standards. The Board of County Commissioners and the Community Development Director
shall consider the following in the review of a Type A Subdivision, a Type B Subdivision, and an
Amended Final Plat.
Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision.
a) Access, potable water, and sewage disposal on the land to be subdivided are adequate;
b. The plat does conform to Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations,
policies, standards, and guidelines; and
c. No Improvement Agreement is applicable.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the final plats for file numbers 5MB-00282, Highland
Meadows, Filing No.2, ARe-Subdivision of Lot 12, 5MB-00284, Miller's Creek On the Eagle River,
Filing No.2, ARe-Subdivision of Lot 1, and 5MB00285, Miller's Creek on the Eagle River, a
resubdivision of Lot 2, incorporating staff findings.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Resolution 2001-150. To Approve A Special Use Permit for Sprint. PCS (Eagle
County File No. ZS-00086). The Board considered the Applicant's request on October nrd , 2001.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2001-???, to approve a Special Use Permit
for Sprint, PCS, file number ZS-00086.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Ofthe two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Settlement Stipulations
Tom Moorhead stated the next matter is a settlement stipulation for General Communications
located at 756 West Forest Road in Vail. There is a total Board of Equalization value of$I,482,000.00
with a stipulated value of$I,181,150.00. He stated after an exterior site inspection it was concluded the
improvement were in a tear down or salvage condition and a salvage value was then applied to those
improvements.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked for an explanation.
Max Schflaley stated a number of the houses were built in the 1960's and are now of tear down
quality. Though the improvements may be in okay condition for their age, for the standards of Vail it is
now considered tear down value.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked what that makes his house that was built in the 1930's. He
asked if this were not in tear down or salvage condition, this property would be worth $1.4 million, but
is now being considered at $1.1 million.
4
11-20-2001
Mr. Schflaley stated the appraisal is based on the value of the land.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the settlement stipulation for R010766, General
Communications.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Annexation Agreement, National Guard Facility and Annexation Agreement, Cooley Mesa Road
Tom Moorhead stated this is an agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Gypsum,
annexing the National Guard Facility into the Town of Gypsum and Annexation Agreement between
Eagle County and the Town of Gypsum, annexing the 2nd Cooley Mesa Road to the Town of Gypsum.
He asked these items, 7 & 8, be continued to December 4th as they are still waiting for input from the
Town of Gypsum.
Chairman Pro-tern asked if there were any problems.
Mr. Moorhead stated there are not.
Commissioner Menconi moved to table the Annexation Agreement between Eagle County and
the Town of Gypsum, annexing the National Guard Facility into the Town of Gypsum and Annexation
Agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Gypsum, annexing the 2nd Cooley Mesa Road to the
Town of Gypsum, to December 4,2001.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene
as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Liquor License Consent Agenda
Earlene Roach, Liquor Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda as follows:
A) Vail Food Services, Inc.
Game Creek Club
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license. This establishment is
located on Vail Mountain and is a private restaurant. There have been no
complaints or disturbances during the past year.
B) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc.
Beano's Cabin
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license with optional premises.
This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain and is a private
restaurant. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past
year.
C) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc.
Spruce Saddle Restaurant
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license with optional premises.
This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been
no complaints or disturbances during the past year.
D) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc.
Trapper's Cabin
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license with optional premises.
5
11-20-2001
This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been
no complaints or disturbances during the past year.
E) Vail Food Services, Inc.
Two Elk Restaurant
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license with optional premises.
This establishment is located on Vail Mountain. There have been no
complaints or disturbances during the past year.
F) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc.
Zach's Cabin
This is a managers registration for Valerie Ropes. Ms. Ropes is reported
to be of good moral character. She has worked in liquor establishments
throughout Eagle County and for Vail Resorts in other restaurants.
G) Gashouse, Inc.
Gashouse Restaurant
This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license. This establishment is
located along Highway 6 in Edwards. There have been no complaints or
disturbances during the past year.
H) Resolution 2001-151
Amending Resolution 2001-093, adding Bar Code (Serving Alcohol
Responsibly) to the requirements for issuance of a liquor license or special
events permit. This is in addition to the TIPS training that is a current
requirement.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked about Two Elk Restaurant and ifit is for Vail Food Services
or Beaver Creek Food Services and which mountain it was located on.
Eric Stein, Vail Resorts, stated Two Elk is located on Vail Mountain and it is owned by Vail
Food Services Inc.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked if they can verify that, correct the error and then approve the
consent agenda accordingly.
Mrs. Roach stated it is Vail Food Services Inc. and is located on Vail Mountain.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda for November
20,2001 as presented with a change on item E from Beaver Creek Food Services Inc. to Vail Food
Services Inc. and the location from Beaver Creek Mountain to Vail Mountain.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Allie's Cabin
Earlene Roach presented a modification of premises for Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc., d/b/a
Allie's Cabin. She stated the applicant proposes to add the lawn area marked on the map as A and B, to
their premises.
Eric Stein stated these premises will primarily be used for special events and for the end of the
season parties hosted by Vail Resorts.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked if these optional premises will be serviced by Beaver Creek
Mountain Club.
Mr. Stein stated this optional will be serviced by Allie's Cabin.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked about the distance between the restaurant and the proposed
optional premises.
Mr. Stein stated the distance is approximately forty feet with a walkway in between.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher stated the big deal with the premises are the boundaries and asked if
6
11-20-2001
it would serve to open up and connect the area so to avoid potential problems with the area.
Mr. Stein stated those attending such an event mayor may not be members ofthe Beaver Creek
Club. He stated during the ski season there needs to be an access between the areas. However, when
this premise is in use it will be fenced.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the modification of premises for Beaver Creek Food
Services, Inc., d/b/a Allie's Cabin.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and
reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
PDA-00034, Cordillera, Ninth Amendment to PUD
Joseph Forinash, Planner, presented file number PDA-00034, Cordillera, Ninth Amendment to
PUD. He stated the only point of discussion by the Planning Commission was clarification that the
purpose of the PUD Amendment is to cover a change not adequately addressed in the Eighth PUD
Amendment.
This application is to amend the PUD to revise a portion of the boundary between Planning
Parcel T (residential) and Planning Parcel W (golf course) to permit the creation of an additional
residential lot (Lot 26) in Planning Parcel T. The Eighth Amendment approved an additional dwelling
unit in Planning Parcel T (residential), but the location of the proposed lot is actually in Planning Parcel
W (golf course). This amendment would expand Planning Parcel T sufficiently to allow the creation of
the additional lot.
The chronology of this application is as follows and as shown on staff report:
January 2000 - Final Plat for Cordillera Subdivision Filing 36 approved which created
residential lots in Planning Parcel T in the vicinity of the proposed Lot 26.
June 2000 - Final Plat for Cordillera Subdivision Filing 41 approved which created Parcel W-3
(a part of Planning Parcel W) for use as a golf course.
May 2001- The Eighth Amendment to the Cordillera PUD Guide (PDA-00032) was approved
which, among other things, shifted one residential dwelling unit from Planning Parcel M of the Western
Parcel to Planning Parcel T of the Mountain Tract.
May 2001- A PUD Final Plat application (PDF-00069) was submitted to Eagle County which
would create a new residential lot (Lot 26) in the location contemplated in the Eighth Amendment to the
PUD. During the review of the application, it was noted that the location of the proposed lot is actually
in Parcel W-3, a part of Planning Parcel W (golf course). File No. PDF-00069 is being held pending
Board action on File No. PDA-00034.
Access: The Summit Trail
Referral responses are as follows and as shown on staff report:
Eagle County Engineering - No comments.
Additional Referral Agencies: Eagle County Attorney, Eagle River Fire District, Squaw Creek
Metro District.
Notices were sent to all (810 unduplicated) property owners within the Cordillera PUD plus
adjacent property owners. Several telephone inquiries were received seeking clarification of the
proposed amendment. One written response was received expressing opposition the to proposed
amendment, and is attached to this staff report.
7
11-20-2001
Staff findings are as shown on staff report and as follows:
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the
review of a PUD Preliminary Plan:
STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land
that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to
control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land
that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD.
Information provided by the Applicant indicates that the property which is the direct subject of
this application, that is, Parcel W-3, is owned by the Applicant. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)]
The title to all land that is the direct subject of this application IS owned or controlled by one (1)
person.
STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] - The uses that may be developed in the PUD
shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as
a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule", or
Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule", for the zone district designation
in effect for the property at the time of the applicationfor PUD. Variations of these use designations
may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized.
No changes in use have been proposed as a part ofthis Amendment. Only the boundary between
two areas with different permitted uses is being shifted. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)]
The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE those uses that are designated as uses that are
allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in the Planned Unit Development Guide in
effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment.
STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional
limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of
Dimensional Limitations ", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the
application for P UD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to
Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between
buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snow
melt between buildings.
The sole purpose of this PUD Amendment is to shift a portion of the common boundary between
Planning Parcels T and W. No changes in dimensional limitations is involved.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)]
The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE those specified in the Planned Unit
Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment.
STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Offstreet parking
and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street
Parking and Loading Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant
demonstrates that:
(a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the P UD that
do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents,
guests and employees of the project will be met; or
(b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less
than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may
commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus
passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard.
8
11-20-2001
The proposed PUD Amendment involves no changes in off-street parking and loading standards.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)]
It HAS previously been found at the time that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved
that adequate, safe and convenient parking and loading was being provided. The proposed PUD
Amendment WILL NOT adversely effect the adequacy of the existing off-street parking and loading.
STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD
shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaving and Illumination Standards.
Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed
landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the P UD and between the
PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive street
scapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area.
The proposed PUD Amendment involves no changes in landscaping and illumination standards.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)]
It HAS previously been found at the time that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved
that landscaping complies with applicable requirements of the Land Use Regulations, except where
variances have been granted. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT impact existing landscaping
nor require additional landscaping.
STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD
shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D.,
Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Develovment (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan
for the P UD that is determined to be suitable for the P UD and provides the minimum sign area
necessary to direct users to and within the PUD.
The proposed PUD Amendment involves no changes in sign standards. Staff makes a favorable
finding.
[+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)]
It HAS previously been found at the time that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved
that signs comply with applicable requirements of the Land Use Regulations, except where variances
have been granted. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT impact existing sign standards.
STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate
that the development proposed in the Preliminary Planfor PUD will be provided adequate facilities for
potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads
and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police andfire protection, and emergency
medical services.
The additional unit in Planning Parcel T should create no adverse incremental impact on the
adequacy of the facilities in the subdivision. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)]
It HAS previously been found that adequate facilities were to be provided based on the Land Use
Regulations in effect at the time of approval ofthe Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD
Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the provision of adequate facilities with respect to potable
water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads, or
location in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services.
STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards
applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards.
Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development
achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms
of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum
9
11-20-2001
design principles are followed:
(a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access
to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be
by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No
roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of
the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for
that functional classification of roadway.
(b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and
convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages
off-site.
(c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to
all lots or units. An access easement shall be grantedfor emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as
applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services
and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities.
(d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for
smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts
a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots,
units or buildings shall not be permitted. Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected
with roads outside of the P UD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to
maintain the County's road network.
(e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal
street network andfrom off-street parking areas.
At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that adequate
improvements were to be made. The proposed PUD Amendment will neither adversely effect the
adequacy of these improvements nor warrant additional improvements. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)]
It HAS previously been found that adequate improvements were to be provided based on the
Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The
proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect improvements regarding:
(a) Safe, Efficient Access.
(b) Internal Pathways.
(c) Emergency Vehicles
(d) Principal Access Points.
(e) Snow Storage.
STANDARD: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The
development proposedfor the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the development was
compatible with other development in the area. The addition of the proposed lot will not significantly
alter compatibility with the surrounding land uses. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)]
The development proposed for the PUD IS compatible with the character of surrounding land
uses. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect this compatibility.
STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be
consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM).
The following analysis with respect to the Master Plan and the FLUM applies only to the changes
proposed in the PUD Amendment.
10
11-20-2001
EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN
EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN
EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN
VISION STATEMENT: Housing for local residents is a major priority of Eagle County. There
should be a wide variety of housing to fulfill the needs of all its residents, including families, senior
citizens, and those who work here. Elements of Eagle County's vision for housing are:
Housing is a community-wide issue
Housing should be located in close proximity to existing community centers, as defined in the
Eagle County Master Plan
Development of local residents housing should be encouraged on existing. . . transit routes
Housing is primarily a private sector activity but without the active participation of government,
there will be only limited success
11
11-20-2001
It is important to preserve existing local residents housing
Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate housing opportunities within the
county
Development applications that will result in an increased need for local residents housing should
be evaluated as to whether they adequately provide for this additional need, the same way as they are
evaluated for other infrastructure needs
POLICIES:
ITEM
I. Eagle County will collaborate with the private sector & nonprofit organizations to
develop housing for local residents
2. Housing for local residents is an issue which Eagle County needs to address in
collaboration with the municipalities. . .
3.
Steps should be taken to facilitate increased home ownership by local residents
and workers in Eagle County
x
4.
Additional rental opportunities for permanent local residents should be brought on
line. Some... should be for households with an income equivalent to or less than
one average wage job
x
5.
Seasonal housing is part of the problem & needs to be further addressed. It is
primarily the responsibility of. . . employers. . .
x
6.
New residential subdivisions will provide a percentage of their units for
local residents
x
7.
Commercial, industrial, institutional, and public developments generating
increased employment will provide local residents housing. The first
preference will be for units on-site where feasible, or if not feasible, in the
nearest existing community center. . .
x
8. The County will seek to make land available for local residents housing in
proximity to community centers
9.
Mixed use developments in appropriate locations are encouraged
x
10.
Factory-built housing is an important part of Eagle County's housing stock
x
II.
There is a need to segment a portion of the housing market to protect local
residents from having to compete with second home buyers. Where public
assistance or subsidies are provided for housing, there should generally be limits
on price appreciation, as well as residency requirements
x
12. Eagle County recognizes that housing for local residents is an ongoing issue
It has previously been found that the PUD is in conformance with the Master Plan. The proposed
PUD Amendment is not sufficiently different in character or magnitude to alter conformance with the
Master Plan. Staff also finds that the proposed PUD Amendment is in conformance with the Future
Land Use Map, and makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section5-240.F.3.e (10)]
The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use
Map (FLUM). The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the consistency with the
Master Plan.
STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Planfor PUD shall
include a phasing plan for the development. if development of the P UD is proposed to occur in phases,
then guarantees shall be provided for public improvements and amenities that are necessary and
12
11-20-2001
desirable for residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public
improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as
early in the project as is reasonable.
Phasing is not required for this PUD Amendment. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)
A phasing plan IS NOT required for this PUD Amendment.
STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The PUD
shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards.
(a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of25% of the total PUD area shall be
devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD
shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every
one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents of the PUD. In order to calculate the number of
residents of the PUD, the number of proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two and sixty-three
hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy each dwelling unit in Eagle
County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan.
i. Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-of-ways,
and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space.
if. Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas,
riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year flood plains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that
are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable
by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently
accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD.
b. Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown
on the Preliminary Planfor PUD and shall be constructed andfully improved according to the
development schedule establishedfor each development phase of the PUD.
c. Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to
conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Planfor PUD. To ensure that all the
common open space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or
covenants shall be placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any
common open space.
(d) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association
or nonprofit corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and
cultural facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance,
administration and operation of such land and any other land within the P UD not publicly owned, and
secure adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be
established prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or
nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD.
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that adequate open space
was being provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not significantly adversely impact existing
common recreation and open space. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)]
It has previously been found that the development DOES comply with the common recreation
and open space standards applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The
proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT significantly adversely affect common recreation and open
space within the PUD with respect to:
(a) Minimum area;
(b) Improvements required;
(c) Continuing use and maintenance; or
13
11-20-2001
(d) Organization.
STANDARD: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] - The PUD shall
consider the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents, as well as the
recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection
Standards.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not adversely impact natural resources. Staff makes a
favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)]
The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect natural resources.
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the
review of a Sketch Plan for Subdivision:
STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] - The proposed
subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan.
See discussion above, "Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)]
[+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)]
The PUD Amendment IS consistent with the Master Plan, and it IS consistent with the Future
Land Use Map (FLUM).
STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] - The
proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of
these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone
Districts. and Article 4, Site Develovment Standards.
Article 3, Zone Districts
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, findings were made to warrant the zone
district change to PUD based on the applicable Land Use Regulations. The proposed PUD Amendment
is also consistent with the provisions of Article 3, Zone Districts, of the current Land Use Regulations.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
Article 4, Site Development Standards
When the Preliminary Plan was approved, it was found that the applicable site development
standards had been satisfied. The proposed PUD Amendment does not create any non-compliance.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)]
It HAS previously been found that the development complied with the regulations, policies and
guidelines of the Land Use Regulations applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the
PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT create any non-compliance with any provisions of
the current Land Use Regulations.
STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] - The proposed
subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in
the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or
result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development.
(a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's
service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed
road extensions shall be consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan.
(b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate
population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines.
(c) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the
entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service
into an otherwise un-served area.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not alter the spatial pattern in any way that causes
14
11-20-2001
inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public
facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)]
The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT adversely affect the spatial patterns in the area.
STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] - The property proposed
to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources
and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and
existing and probable future public improvements to the area.
The proposed PUD Amendment does not alter the suitability of the property. Staff makes a
favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)]
The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT alter the suitability of the property for
development.
STANDARD: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] - The proposed
subdivision shall be compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not
adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not adversely affect the compatibility of the subdivision.
Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)]
It HAS previously been found that the development was compatible with other development in
the area. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely effect the compatibility of the
resulting development with surrounding uses.
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation: Applicant
shall submit the following: "Proposed PUD guide setting forth the proposed land use restrictions."
A draft amended Planned Unit Development Guide is provided. The only proposed change is to
update the date of the PUD Guide document. Staff makes a favorable finding.
[+] FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)]
Applicant HAS submitted a PUD Guide that demonstrates that the requirements of this Section are fully
met.
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F. 3.m Amendment to
Preliminary Plan for PUD:
STANDARD: Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.] -No
substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon
afinding by the County. . . that (1) the modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient
development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development, (2) does not affect in a
substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the
planned unit development or the public interest, and (3) is not granted solely to confer a special benefit
upon any person.
The proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with these standards. Staff makes a favorable
finding.
[+] FINDING: The proposed PUD Amendment (1) IS consistent with the efficient development
and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development, (2) DOES NOT affect in a substantially
adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the planned unit
development or the public interest, and (3) IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any
person.
Kathy Eastley, representing the applicant, stated this is actually a housekeeping issue as the plat
did not get changed appropriately and they are now trying to correct the error.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher stated for the record that this is not an addition to the number of
15
11-20-2001
lots.
Ms. Eastley responded it is not.
Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. PDA-00034, , Cordillera, Ninth
Amendment to PUD, incorporating the staff findings.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
PDF -00069, Cordillera, Filing 36
Joseph Forinash presented file number PDF-00069, Cordillera, Filing 36. He stated the applicant
is requesting this matter be tabled to December 4, 2001 to allow staff to prepare the plat.
Commissioner Menconi moved to table file number PDF-00069, Cordillera, Filing 36, to
December 4,2001 at the applicants request.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
ZS-00082, Pettet/McFee Special Use Permit
Cliff Simonton, Planner, presented file number ZS-00082, Pettet/McFee Special Use Permit. At
its hearing on November 8, the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission responded
positively to the applicant's proposal, and considered the following in its decision to recommend
approval, with conditions, of file ZS-00082:
The possibility of combing the septic systems on the site.
The impact of a detached ADU on the perceived density of the area.
The addition of a second driveway to a single lot.
The possible setting of precedent for more ADU's in the Missouri Heights area.
The need to control impacts to the neighborhood through restrictions on size and height.
The relationship of Homeowner's Covenants to Eagle County Land Use Regulations.
Consequent to their deliberations, the Planning Commission approved file ZS-00082 contingent
on the following conditions:
a. That the Applicant work with Eagle County Environmental Health to evaluate the possibility
of combining the septic systems on the site.
The Applicant is in agreement with this condition.
b. That the proposed Accessory Dwelling unit be limited to no more than two bedrooms.
The Applicant is in agreement with this condition.
c. That the Applicant be required to pay applicable Road Impact Fees.
Pursuant to Section 4-71 O.E.l, Road Impact Fees are already required, and will be collected at
the time of issuance of a building permit.
d. That the structure housing the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit be limited in height to 24
feet measured from ridge to existing grade.
The Applicant believes that this condition may be overly restrictive, especially in light of the fact
that no adjacent property owners responded with any concerns. Rural Residential Zone District
Standards limit the height of a structure to a maximum of 35 feet.
The applicant requests approval for an accessory dwelling unit on Lot 35, Red Table Acres
Subdivision, in the Missouri Heights area above El Jebel. Normally, a Limited Review process would
be necessary for this proposed land use, but the 1.01 acre lot is non-conforming in size for the underlying
Rural Residential zone district, and as such a Special Use Permit is required.
The two bedroom accessory dwelling will be constructed as part of a detached garage, and will
require its own individual sewage disposal system (ISDS). A maximum size of 850 square feet is
16
11-20-2001
allowed. Potable water will be provided through connection to the existing community water system
that is owned and operated by the Red Table Acres Homeowners Association. Access will be via a short
driveway to Deer Trail Avenue.
The chronology of the file is as follows and as shown on staff report:
The final plat for Red Table Acres Subdivision was approved in April of 1973, and amended in
October of 1977. Since that time, and with the exception of building permits associated with single
family homes and related improvements, no land use activity of significance has occurred on this site.
Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows:
Eagle County Engineering October 17, 2001
No Comment at this time
Eagle County Environmental Health October 10, 2001
Evidence required that sufficient geological testing has been done to indicate that the soils on the
site are suitable to accommodate a primary and alternative site for a septic system leach field
The cost associated with septic system maintenance should be the responsibility of the owner, not
the tenant
A letter from the homeowners association agreeing to provide an additional tap for domestic
water is required.
Second Memo. October 22. 2001. based on site visit/investigation
No evidence of ground water or bedrock found in the soil profile.
Two 1000 square foot leach field sites should be identified.
Care should be taken to avoid the need to pump effluent uphill to the sites
An additional 1500 square foot site will need to be identified as an alternative site for the main
dwelling, should that system fail.
Additional soil work will be required prior to the issuance of an ISDS permit on this site.
Red Table Acres HOA October 28, 2001
Domestic water will be provided per Association Covenants through the existing subdivision
water system.
Additional Referrals were sent to the following, with no response received:
Eagle County Assessor, Basalt Rural Fire District.
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-250.B Standards for the review
of a Special Use Permit:
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.l Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use
shall be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and
policies of the Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan, including standards for building and
structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use.
The master plan matrix that follows analyzes the proposal as submitted.
EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN
x
x
x
x
x
x
17
11-20-2001
Environmental Quality - Possible impacts to water quality will be mitigated by promptly re-
seeding disturbed areas and through the proper placement and installation of a new individual septic
system. Screening by existing vegetation will reduce visual impacts to adjacent lots.
Affordable Housing - The master plan encourages the private development of accessory
dwelling units.
MID VALLEY COMMUNITY PLAN
Housing - An additional accessory dwelling unit may contribute positively to the current
shortage of affordable housing units in the Roaring Fork Valley.
Missouri Heights - The Master plan identifies traffic and the carrying capacity of Missouri
Heights Road as a concern. Pursuant to the Zone District Standards listed and discussed below (see 3-
310.A.6), an accessory dwelling unit "shall not count toward any applicable density limitations for the
property". As such, restrictions on additional accessory dwelling units in the Missouri Heights area
relative to the carrying capacity of the road should not apply. Other ADU' s have been approved in this
subdivision.
[+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use Permit IS appropriate
for its proposed location and IS consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies ofthe Master
Plan and Master Plan FLUM, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities,
and intensities of use.
ST ANDARD: Section 5-250.B.2 Compatibility. The proposed Special Use shall be
appropriate for its proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.
The accessory dwelling unit is proposed for an existing rural residential neighborhood that
contains lots that are approximately one acre in size. The proposed building site is relatively flat, easy to
access, and should drain well to the south. Other accessory dwelling units have 'been approved and
constructed on adjacent lots. The area supports a mature landscape which helps screen individual home
sites from adjacent areas.
[+] FINDING: Compatibility. The proposed Special Use IS appropriate for its proposed
location and IS compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.3 Zone District Standards. The proposed Special Use shall
comply with the standards of the zone district in which it is located and any standards applicable to the
particular use, as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Avvlicable to Particular Residential,
Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3-330, Review Standards Avplicable to Particular
Commercial and Industrial Uses.
The proposed Special Use will be located in an area zoned Rural Residential. Section 3-310 of
Eagle County's Land Use Regulations lists the following review criteria:
Section 3-310.A -Accessory Dwelling Units
[+] 1. Number. No more than one (1) accessory dwelling unit (ADU) shall be permitted in
18
11-20-2001
conjunction with and in addition to the principal use of the parcel.
No accessory unit currently exists on this lot, and only one accessory unit is being
requested.
[+] 2. Size and Use. The size of accessory dwelling units shall be determined by the zone district
and parcel size. A Rural Residential zone designation allows a maximum size of 850 square feet.
The applicant has represented that the proposed ADU will not exceed 850 square feet in
sIze.
[+] 3. Location. An accessory dwelling unit may be located within or attached to the structure
containing the principal use of the parcel, or may be detachedfrom that structure ifit is
located within or above a garage.
The proposed ADU will be constructed above a detached garage.
[+] 4. Parking ...Any accessory dwelling unit containing two (2) or more bedrooms shall have
two (2) off-street parking spaces.
Two off-street parking spaces are proposed.
[+] 5. Ownership The accessory dwelling unit shall not be condominiumized or sold separately
from the principal use of the parcel.
The applicant has represented that this standard will be met.
[+] 6. Dimensional Limitations. Accessory dwelling units shall only be permitted on parcels
that conform to the minimum lot size standard of the underlying zone district. The Unit
shall be developed so as to conform to all setback, height, lot coverage floor area and
other dimensional limitations of the underlying zone district, but shall not count toward
any applicable density limitations for the property.
Dimensional limitations related to building height, setbacks and coverage, as proposed, will be
met. Regarding the standard that restricts ADU's to lots that conform in size to the underlying zone
district, this standard is clearly superceded by Section 6-120.A.2. Nonconforming Lots of Record, Other
Uses, which allows the owner of a non-conforming lot to apply for a special use permit for any use
(outside a single family home) that is allowed, allowed by limited review, or allowed by special review
in the applicable underlying zone district. Red Table Acres Subdivision is zoned Rural Residential, and
ADU's would normally be allowed by Limited Review for a lot that conformed to the minimum lot size
of 2 acres.
[+] 7. Adequate facilities. It shall be demonstrated that the accessory dwelling unit will be
provided adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste
disposal electrical supply, fire protection, and roads.
It has been demonstrated that the proposed ADU will be provided with adequate
facilities, including potable water and sewage disposal (see Memo of 10/22/01 from Laura Fawcett,
Eagle County Environmental Health, and letter of 10/28/01 from the Red
Table Acres Homeowners Association).
[+] FINDING: Zone District Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES fully comply with
the standards of the zone district in which it is located and the standards applicable to the particular use,
as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Armlicable to Particular Residential, Agricultural and
Resource Uses
ST ANDARD: Section 5-250.B.4 Design Minimizes Adverse Impact The design of the
proposed Special Use shall minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on
adjacent lands; furthermore, the proposed Special Use shall avoid significant adverse impact on
surrounding lands regarding trash, traffic, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, noise, glare,
and vibration, and shall not create a nuisance.
Improvements related to the construction of this accessory dwelling unit will not create the
impacts contemplated by this standard. Site disturbance should be minimal, and the new structure will
19
11-20-2001
be screened by existing vegetation. No negative comments where received from adjacent property
owners.
[+] FINDING: Design Minimizes Adverse Impact. The design of the proposed Special Use
DOES adequately minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on adjacent
lands; furthermore, the proposed Special Use WILL avoid significant adverse impact on surrounding
lands regarding trash, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, glare, vibration, noise and traffic, and
WILL NOT create a nuisance.
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.5 Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. The proposed
Special Use shall minimize environmental impacts and shall not cause significant deterioration of water
and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resources.
Improvements related to the construction of this accessory dwelling unit will not create the
impacts contemplated by this standard. The use proposed is in an established residential subdivision.
Careful siting and proper construction of an individual sewage disposal system will be implemented
through Eagle County's ISDS permit system.
[+] FINDING: Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. The proposed Special Use WILL
minimize environmental impacts, and WILL NOT cause significant deterioration of water and air
resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources and other natural resources.
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.6 Impact on Public Facilities. The proposed Special Use
shall be adequately served by public facilities and services, including roads, pedestrian paths, potable
water and wastewater facilities, parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical
services.
The Red Table Acres Subdivision has been in existence for over 25 years, and is adequately
served by public facilities and services.
[+] FINDING: Impact on Public Facilities. The proposed Special Use IS adequately served by
public facilities and services such as roads, pedestrian paths, potable water and waste water facilities,
parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services.
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.7 Site Development Standards. The proposed Special Use shall
comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Develovment Standards.
Article 4, Site Development Standards
[+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1)
Per zone district standards, two off-street parking spaces are proposed.
[n/a] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2)
As this is a previously subdivided lot, standards in this division do not apply.
[n/a] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3).
[+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4)
[n/a] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410)-
[n/a] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420)-
[n/a] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430)-
[+] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) Any wood burning devices will be required
to conform to the standards of this section.
[n/a] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) This site is not identified as an area of
possible Ridgeline impact on related maps.
[n/a] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) An Environmental Impact Report was
not required
[n/a] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5)
Standards in this division do not apply.
[+] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6)
[+] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) The proposed driveway will conform to related
20
11-20-2001
standards in this section.
[n/a] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630)
[n/a] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640)
[n/a] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650)
[n/a] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660)
[n/a] Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670)
[+] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) See letter from Red Table Acres
Subdivision HOA, 10/28/01
[+] Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) Reference the response from Eagle
County Environmental Health, 10/22/01. The additional soils work required will be implemented
pursuant to the issuance of an ISDS permit, which will be required prior to approval of a building permit
for the proposed ADU.
[+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7). A Road Impact Fee is
applicable to the addition of an accessory dwelling unit, and will be due at the time a building permit is
issued.
[+] FINDING: Site Development Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES comply with all
the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards.
STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.8 Other Provisions. The proposed Special Use shall comply
with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for
use, layout, and general development characteristics.
No other applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations were found relevant to this proposal
for Special Use.
[+] FINDING: The proposed Special Use DOES comply with all standards imposed on it by all
other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development
characteristics.
Mr. Simonton reviewed the conditions as follows:
1. That the Applicant work with Eagle County Environmental Health to evaluate the possibility
of combining the septic systems on the site.
2. That the proposed Accessory Dwelling unit be limited to no more than two bedrooms.
3. That the Applicant be required to pay applicable Road Impact Fees for the Accessory
Dwelling Unit as required by Section 4-71O.E.1.a ofthe Eagle County Land Use Regulations.
Additionally, the Board of County Commissioners may wish to include the following condition,
which was recommended by the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission:
4. That the structure housing the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit be limited in height to 24
feet measured from ridge to existing grade.
Brian Pettet, applicant, was present for the hearing. He stated the only real concern he has is
with the road impact fee. He suggested that the cost would be approximately $1,600.00 which would be
the same for a new unit to be built. He stated the subdivision was approved in 1973. He read from the
exemption statement. He stated this additional unit should have little impact on the road.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked the attorney for a recommendation.
Mr. Moorhead stated he would have to review the request.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher stated they will not assess the impact fee if it is not required. He
then spoke to the height of the building.
Mr. Pettet stated they will not be coming close to the 35 feet height.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked if there are other properties in this subdivision that have
accessory dwelling units and if they went through this process.
Mr. Simonton stated there are but they did not go through this process and it seems as though
they may have been built without going through the proper processes. He stated those are currently
21
11-20-2001
being investigated.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher asked ifthis is the subdivision that attempted to create a special
district to deal with the water concerns.
Mr. Simonton stated it is.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher stated he believes the distribution was inadequate. He asked for
public comment. There was none.
Commissioner Menconi stated on a draft report from staff and this report the file numbers
conflict.
Mr. Simonton stated it is 082 and there must have been a typographical error.
Commissioner Menconi stated it is on page 9 of 9 with the motion and conditions.
Ray Merry, Director of Environmental Health, referred to condition #1 and believes it is not
necessary and probably more problematic than helpful. He stated he would rather see two separate
septic systems on the site. He referred to condition #2 and recommends that a maximum of two
bedrooms and 850 square feet be included.
Mr. Pettet stated he is in agreement.
Mr. Simonton stated condition #3 may be superfluous as it will be taken care of in the permitting
process.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher suggested he is inclined to take out #4 as there are covenants that
bind the building.
Commissioner Menconi asked about number 24 on staff report.
Mr. Simonton suggested that condition did not come from anywhere in the Regulations. He
stated it was a unanimous vote of approval with the conditions from the Roaring Fork Valley Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Menconi asked Mr. Pettet about the covenants.
Mr. Pettet stated it refers to the view corridor of the neighbors and he may not impact those.
Commissioner Menconi asked why Chairman Pro-tem Gallagher would not want to include the
conditions of the Planning Commission.
Chairman Pro-tem Gallagher asked to review the photographs. He stated it is his understanding
the site is in a lower elevation than the surrounding parcels. He asked how much lower the site is.
Mr. Simonton stated the ridge of a 25 foot building would be getting close to the foundation level
ofthe adjacent property owners.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher suggested the difference in the height of a 28 foot building would
cause minimal disruption.
Commissioner Menconi moved the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners approve File
No. ZS-00082, Pettet / McFee Special Use Permit, incorporating Staff findings, with the following
conditions:
1. That the proposed Accessory Dwelling unit be limited to no more than two bedrooms and 850
square feet.
Chairman Pro-tern Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote
was declared unanimous.
Mr. Pettet stated accessory dwelling units and duplexing homes are very difficult regulations to
enforce. He stated staff has been very supportive of this process and he encouraged staff to continue to
respond to complaints from homeowners.
Attest:
Clerk to the Boa d
~,~
Chairman
11-20-2001