No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/19/04 PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 19,2004 Present: Tom Stone Am Menconi Michael Gallagher Jack Ingstad Diane Mauriello Earlene Roach Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator County Attorney Deputy Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Executive Session Chairman Stone stated the first matter before the Board was an Executive Session. Commissioner Menconi moved that the Board go into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice concerning the bid and hearing process for a 2004 Loader, concerning the request by the County's water attorney to represent the City of Aurora on a limited basis and for the purpose of receiving legal advice and directing negotiators concerning the Miller Ranch Development Agreement and for the purpose of receiving legal advice concerning requested changes to the Miller Ranch Housing Guidelines all of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to c.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b) and (e). Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Prior to the discussion of Miller Ranch matters, Commissioner Stone excused himself from the neeting. At the close of the discussion Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn from Executive Session and reconvene into the regular meeting. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. With two Commissioners present the vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Chairman Stone welcomed the students from the various High Schools who are participating in government week. Chairman Stone stated the next item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of April 19, 2004, subject to review by the County Administrator B. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle Board of County Commissioners Meeting for April 6,2004 C. Resolution 2004-046, Authorizing the Chairman ofthe Board of County Commissioners to Execute Proxies Authorizing Rich Cunningham, Director of Facilities Management, to Vote and Act on Matters Associated with the Avon Center Commercial Owners Association D. Resolution 2004-047, in Re: the Matter ofthe Appointment of Five Candidates to the Board of Directors of the Mid Valley Metropolitan District E. Advertising Contract, Speakout Vail, Inc. F. Authorize the Chairman to sign a Letter of Intent to the F.A.A. from the Board of County ~ommissioners, showing support and financial commitment, for the Eagle County Regional Airport Radar Chairman Stone asked the Attorney's Office ifthere were any changes to the Consent Agenda. 1 4/19/2004 Diane Mauriello, County Attorney, stated there were no additions or revisions to the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Menconi asked about item C, appointing Rich Cunningham to the Board of Directors for the Avon Center Commercial Owners Association. He wondered whether it would be brought to the County Administrator before voting takes place on each item. Jack Ingstad, County Administrator, stated that they would and if important enough items will bring it before the Commissioners. Commissioner Menconi stated he would like to pull item E, the Advertising Contract with Speakout. Commissioner Gallagher stated anyone of the Board has the ability to take items off of the Consent Agenda. Chairman Stone asked item E be pulled and discussed after consideration on the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented, excluding items C & E. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Item E, Advertising Contract, Speakout Commissioner Menconi stated he prepared a comparison based on studies he reviewed concerning purchasing local media but would like time to get them printed and distributed. Commissioner Gallagher asked about the amount of information. Commissioner Menconi stated it was two pages. Commissioner Gallagher stated he would like to put item E from the Consent Agenda under item 11 on the agenda. Michael Caccioppo, president of Speakout, stated he has people present to speak on this matter and they do have time frames. He asked Commissioner Menconi ifhe plans to vote on this contract. Commissioner Menconi answered yes. Mr. Caccioppo stated it is his belief that Commissioner Menconi is in violation of Section 24-18- 108.5, Rules of Conduct ofthe Colorado Revised Statutes, with his votes on matters pertaining to Vail Resorts. He stated Speakout has provided a volume of information on Commissioner Menconi voting on matters of conflict. He stated Speakout reported on a variety of items concerning Commissioner Menconi stealing stacks of Speakout papers (reported by Erica Ennis), being booted from the Homeowners Board, and the SOS Society being accused of not giving away vacations that were apparently won by children. He spoke to the Women's Resource Center. He felt all of these were indications of Commissioner Menconi's dismal public record. Commissioner Gallagher asked Mr. Caccioppo to only speak to Commissioner Menconi's intention to vote on the contract with Speakout. Mr. Caccioppo stated he is asking Commissioner Menconi to follow the letter of the law and not vote on matters where there is a conflict of interest. He believes Commissioner Menconi is out to make sure Speakout does not succeed due to his running for re-election. Commissioner Menconi stated he would agree to take this matter up under item lIon the agenda. Chairman Stone stated he would like to allow those present to speak to do so now. The Board concurred. Chairman Stone asked for public comment. Mike Mathias, area resident, stated he reads a lot and does read Speakout. He stated he gets the idea that people in the County do fear reading papers at times. He stated they should encourage public out put. He stated they have one paper now with associated cousins so to speak. He encouraged everyone to use Speakout along with any other papers. Jerry Dooher, area resident, stated they do need more than one point of view and Speakout is another point of view. 2 4/19/2004 Joy Overbeck, area resident, stated they do need another voice in the community. She stated Mr. Caccioppo does perform a very libertarian function. She spoke to the Sunshine Law and the problems with he School District he brought forward. Those would not have been known if not for Speakout. She spoke to the current action that has gone to the Supreme Court. Arthur Kittay, area resident, stated it is discriminatory to not advertise in all the newspapers of the County. He stated to advertise in one and not the other is a discrimatory policy. He stated there are only two newspaper companIes. Samual Mack, area resident, stated he is very impressed with Mr. Caccioppo. He stated he advertises with Speakout. He stated he got zero response from advertising in the Vail Daily due to the number of articles in the paper and ads tend to get lost. He stated he received a response the next day from his ad in Speakout. He stated if the County wants to get the word out they should advertise with Speakout. Chairman Stone closed public comment. He stated the Board will take this matter up later in the day. Plat and Resolution Signing Chairman Stone stated there are no plats or resolutions for the Board's consideration today. Change Order #4, Miller Ranch Road/Highway 6 Intersection Improvements Justin Hildreth, Engineering Department, presented Change Order #4 to the Contract for the Miller Ranch Road / Highway 6 Intersection Improvements. Mr. Ingstad stated he pulled this matter from the Consent Agenda as he wants the Board to be fully informed on anything concerning Miller Ranch. Chairman Stone asked about the County's relationship with B & B Excavating, Inc. with slower work nd execution of agreements. Mr. Hildrith stated things are better and they have not had the same issues they had in the past. The change orders have been due to site conditions. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve Change Order #4 to the Contract for the Miller Ranch Road / Highway 6 Intersection Improvements. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Bid Award, Wagner Equipment Company Brad Higgins, Road & Bridge Director, presented the bid award for a 2004 Caterpillar Loader. He stated this matter was tabled on April 6, 2004 and April 13, 2004 to allow time to review all bids, including the warranties and buy back quotes, and for the purpose of reviewing the bid process. He stated his initial recommendation was to go with a Caterpillar Loader but is now recommending the Board award the bid to Ferris Machinery who were the low bidders. Diane Mauriello stated the Board needs to stick within the parameters of the bid document. The decision should be made on the initial bid packet. There was not significant information included in the bid documents on warranties and buy back prices. Commissioner Gallagher stated he has listened to the tapes of the first meeting and is well informed. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the bid award for a 2004 Loader to Ferris Machinery for a Kawasaki Loader for a total of $139,250.00, which is the low bid. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. In discussion, Jack Ingstad stated there should be discussion for the public. Chairman Stone called for public comment. 3 4/1912004 Commissioner Menconi thanked everyone for their participation. He asked for warranties, buy back costs and staff s recommendation be included in bid packages from this point forward. Chairman Stone stated they have made a sincere effort to make this an open process and are adhering to the letter of the law. Chairman Stone closed public comment. He called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2004-048, Local Resident Housing Guidelines Keith Montag, Assistant County Administrator, presented Resolution 2004-048, adopting the Local Resident Housing Guidelines. He stated they are changing the regulatory document into a suggested set of criteria as a frame work for suggested proposals. He stated these guidelines were generated from the many discussions last fall on the housing guidelines. Chairman Stone asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Gallagher stated this was an appropriate next step in the affordable housing process. By putting this out to the developer as they begin negotiations it will be very helpful. Chairman Stone thanked Rebecca Leonard and K.T. Gazunis for all their work on these guidelines. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2004-048, adopting the Local Resident Housing Guidelines. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Interest Report for Quarter 1 - 2004 Karen Sheaffer, Eagle County Treasurer, presented the Interest Report for Quarter 1, 2004. She pointed out this was the lowest interest report they have had thus far. She stated they are currently invested in short term securities in order to take advantage ofthe anticipated higher rates. Chairman Stone asked about the budget. Ms. Sheaffer stated the budget is doing well as they anticipated these drops in interest. The second and third quarter budget anticipates are higher earnings. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the interest report from the Treasurer. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Earlene Roach, License Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda for April 19, 2004 as follows: A) Pocantico Pizza Blue Moose Cafe This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the Plaza at Beaver Creek. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. B) Ore House Edwards LLC Ore House Mustang Grill This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the old Asia located, across the parking lot from Fiesta's, in Edwards. There have 4 4/19/2004 been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. C) Ore House Edwards LLC Ore House Mustang Grill This is a change in corporate structure, adding Chris Lloyd as a 16% owner. Mr. Lloyd is currently the registered manager for the Ore House and is reported to be of good moral character. C) Atlas Pizza LLC Atlas Pizza This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located along Highway 82 in E1 Jebel. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. D) Diamond Five Ltd. Coyote Cafe This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the Plaza in Beaver Creek, at the base of the mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. E) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. Silver Sage Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license with optional premises. This establishment is located along Red Sky Road in Wolcott. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. F) Boaters Bar, Inc. The Boaters Bar This is a renewal of an optional premise license. This establishment is located along Trough Road, on the Rancho Del Rio Property. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. G) Gwendolyn J. Braatz Fireside Lodge This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located along Highway 131 in Bond. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. Commissioner Gallagher asked as to enforcement with regards to inspections, how the Edwards licenses compare to those in Beaver Creek or Arrowhead. Ms. Roach stated they are the same. Commissioner Gallagher asked about sting operations. Ms. Roach stated currently the Sheriff s Office does sting operations on off premise establishments but will start sting operations for on premise establishments in the near future. Those will be performed in all areas of unincorporated Eagle County. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda as presented. Chairman Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi was not present at this time. Daniel's Bistro Earlene Roach presented an application for transfer of ownership for Daniel's Bistro, Inc., d/b/a Daniel's Bistro. This establishment was Troon, Inc., d/b/a Bristol at Arrowhead. The Joly's also own Mirabelle at Beaver Creek. All applicants are reported to be of good moral character. This application is in order. Natalie Joly, owner, was present for the hearing. 5 4/19/2004 Chairman Stone asked if they are licensing the entire golf course. Ms. Joly stated they are. Chairman Stone asked about servicing the course with beverage carts. Ms. Jo1y stated the only time they use beverage carts is during major golftournaments. Ms. Roach stated the applicant will have the ability to use beverage carts but does not have to. Commissioner Gallagher asked if the patrons can go back to the clubhouse and take the drink out on the golf course. Ms. Roach answered yes. Commissioner Gallagher stated the alcohol management plan looks to be in conformance and he has no questions. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve a transfer of ownership from Troon, Inc., d/b/a Bristol at Arrowhead to Daniel's Bistro, Inc., d/b/a Daniel's Bistro. Chairman Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unammous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unammous. Item E, Consent Agenda Chairman Stone stated the Board will continue with Item E on the Consent Agenda, a proposed contract with Speakout. He asked if there was any further public comment. Jim Olsen, area resident, stated he often disagrees with Speakout, which is why he supports that paper. He believes ads should be placed in Speakout. Commissioner Menconi presented his handout concerning purchasing advertisement. He read from the document as follows: "This strategy paper will assist Eagle County staff in making wise media purchase decisions. While needs and situations change, this information and the strategies herein will be useful in making sure county dollars are maximized. All media purchases involve the evaluation of demographics, reach and frequency. Demographics are generally of greater concern to consumer product advertisers. While most local county advertising focuses on sheer numbers (reach), there may be occasions that an ad buy might be more finely targeted (ex. Hispanic population and Seniors). Reach is the number of people an advertising medium is exposed to. Additionally, the advertising world talks about impressions. A single newspaper, delivered to a home, may make two or more impressions as it is shared by family members. Larger, more substantial media outlets spend a significant amount of money on audience research to help quantify and, in other words, justify, their ad rates. Frequency is an important component of any ad buy. Decades of research shows that people don't start remembering ads until they've been viewed at least 7 times. That's not to say that a one-time ad cannot be effective (Apple's 1984 Super Bowl spot is a classic example), but more often than not one-time advertising is not considered that cost effective. Planning a media buy, you need to answer the following questions; who do you want to reach, how much lead time will you have and how much do you have to spend. Most local Eagle County media buys will probably focus more on reach than on demographics. Outside of specialized legal advertising for bids, hearings, etc, getting information to as many residents as possible will probably be the key determinant. Another factor to determine is placement. In print media 6 4/1912004 there is often a premium price attached to specific placement (such as the inside front cover). The same is true with electronic media. Drive time (during the commuting hours) is usually priced higher for radio station air buys. Advertisers and media buyers talk about CPM. That is cost per thousand impressions. For example a $200 add in a publication with a circulations of 4,000 is $50.00 per thousand. For a publication with a 15,000 circulations the same expenditure would be $13.00 per thousand. Cost per thousand is a valuable comparative tool. But what if you can't make a comparison? That sometimes happens, especially in smaller markets where publications or electronic media outlets cannot provide you with concrete audience numbers. Specifically for print media there are three questions you should have answered, how many units are printed, what is the number of distribution points and what is the average number of unsold/unclaimed papers. For a public information campaign that will require a sustained, repeatable message you might consider smaller ads with higher frequency. For radio spots that equates into 15 or 30 second spots. Radio media isn't very effective for one-time-only spots but a full page print ad can be. Negotiating rates, like any business, media outlets are often willing to provide price breaks based on volume and payment terms. The following are good guidelines to follow: Do not enter into a long term (semi annual/annual) media buy contract until you have you ad plan and strategy in place and just prior to the commencement of the ad running. Buying of space without knowing how you will use it is a money wasting strategy, even if the savings appear to be substantial. If a substantial discount is offered for pre-payment, negotiate only on a pay as you play basis. Be highly suspect of any publication that offers a great rate based on full pre-payment ofthe contract. That's usually a warning sign of cash flow problems. The last place you'd want the county to be is an unsecured creditor in a bankruptcy filing. Ask about short rate penalties. Let's say you enter into a long term contract (ex. 1 ad per week for 52 Neeks) to get a favorable price break. Then, six months into the contract the need to continuing to advertise goes away. Usually the media company will charge you the difference between an annual rate and a spot rate. Make sure you know what that difference is. It is much better to negotiate a short rate clause prior to signing a contract than to try and break a contract later. Countywide coverage will necessitate a split media buy to cover the Basalt - EI Jebel area. The cost per reach ratio for covering this area will be higher due to the fact that the county will essentially have to buy more coverage in a Roaring Fork or Garfield County publication to reach this smaller population segment. To insure both fairness and integrity, any county purchase of local media should be based solely on cost effectiveness of the media buy in terms of ad cost, reach and cost per thousand. Any contract entered into with a publication that cannot meet the previously discussed economic criteria could put the county at risk in several ways; 1) negative public relations for the county and elected officials, 2) exposure to litigation based on misuse of county funds to support a particular political agenda, and 3) alienation of other media outlets who might refuse to accept future county business." Commissioner Menconi asked if the County has a negotiated contract with any other media company. Mr. Ingstad stated the County has a contract for certain rates on advertising with the Vail Daily. He stated that contract indicates the County will place so many ads at a certain rate. He stated he believes that one is for display advertising and there is one for legal advertising. Commissioner Menconi stated he believes Mr. Caccioppo was trying to personalize this issue. He stated he is merely looking at this decision as a business decision. He stated they must make good business judgments and compare it to all those available. He suggested the Roaring Fork Valley Journal and the Eagle Valley Enterprise should be considerations for placing advertising. Diane Mauriello stated Sections 23-18-105 and 24-18-108.5 were quoted by Mr. Caccioppo. She ;tated she takes a different standing on those. The section indicates that "a public officer, a local official or an employee should not perform an official act substantially or directly affecting business or other 7 4/1912004 undertaking to its economic detriment". The piece that was omitted was "when he has a substantial interest in a competing firm or undertaking". She stated it is the financial interest that raises a question. Mr. Caccioppo stated they do disagree based on the word "or". It is the undertaking of which he refers. Even if the County Attorney and he disagree, it comes down to the appearance of conflict. He stated he finds it to be amusing the County would need a policy for that. Mr. Caccioppo stated in regards to the First Amendment, he believes the County should not try to eliminate free speech or discriminate. Are Speakout readers allowed to get County messages? Should conservative readers be discriminated against. It was important to take note of what Joy Overbeck said about articles in Speakout not being covered by the Vail Daily. Mr. Buckley was in the audience and informed all present he was in favor of advertising in Speakout. Mr. Caccioppo explained that prices for a quarter page ad in the Vail Daily were $236.00, in Speakout costs are $225.00. Speakout is lower in price. Mr. Caccioppo stated the Vail Daily advertises 450 locations and Speakout advertises 852 locations. He finds it amazing there is a contract with the Vail Daily. He stated another contractor would not have to go through what he has to go through. What he is doing is challenging the moderates and the liberals of this County. He stated they have differences and they still get along fine. He stated he pays on this paper as he goes. There is no risk in advertising. It will be on a pay as you go basis. He stated he has been here for 30 years and does not steal other people's money. If you go on the pay as you go basis there is no financial risk to the County. He requested everyone be treated fairly. Chairman Stone referred to page two of Commissioner Menconi's handout. He spoke about Mr. Menconi's opinion that basing the decision on cost effectiveness could put the county at risk. Commissioner Stone concurs with the balance of Mr. Menconi's suggestions, but has the feeling that this particular opinion represents a thinly veiled threat. In his opinion the most objectionable comment that Mr. Menconi makes is number 3. This comment warns of alienation of other media outlets who might retaliate by not accepting the county's business. He believes that if another media outlet doesn't want to accept County money that is their right under the principle of free enterprise. He stated that on a personal note, he believes it is pretty obvious that the former editor ofthe Vail Trail, David O. Williams is not a friend of his. He went on to say that Mr. Williams had looked for opportunities to write negative articles about him and this has continued by Mr. Williams trying to go to other media conglomerates and trying to malign Commissioner Stone's service to Eagle County. Even though this is the case, Commissioner Stone specifically suggested the county continue to advertise in the Vail Trail. In Commissioner Stone's opinion, the job of the County Commissioners is to get the word out to all the public. His support for this contract, which he indicated he would be voting in favor of, was not based on trying to keep Mr. Caccioppo in business. Commissioner Stone stated that he had also done some research and based on this research, believes that Speakout is within a reasonable cost range. He believes that Speakout reaches a segment of the population that does not read other papers. His goal is to try to reach everyone, and it is the voters who will make the final decision. Commissioner Stone clarified that he does not always get his way with the local papers, but that didn't mean that they didn't have readers. He also said that Steve Pope mentioned to him when Colorado Mountain News Media purchased the Vail Trail that their intention was to offer an editorial slant that was left of center. Commissioner Stone believes that this slant would allow the paper to reach a certain audience. He expressed support for this contract because he believes that it too will reach a different audience. Mr. Caccioppo stated he has written negative things about Commissioner Stone and they have gone toe to toe. He stated he has also disagreed with Commissioner Gallagher. It should be not be public policy that independent papers should have to kiss up to the government to receive their business. Mr. Ingstad stated one of the concerns they have is entering into a contract where they would have to place ads weekly or monthly. There are times when they commit themselves to such contracts, some weeks it is difficult to fill that space. It would be helpful to have an understanding that if they do not have an ad they would not have to place that ad. 8 4/1912004 Mr. Caccioppo stated there are other ads that are in some papers that he has not seen in Speakout. He stated running different kinds of ads can be beneficial. He would be willing to say the County could increase the size of an ad the next week, or to run a different kind of ad. It is the fixed dollar amount commitment that he is looking for Ms. Mauriello stated if the Board wishes to have the flexability Mr. Ingstad is recommending, it should be included in any motion. Commissioner Menconi stated his concern is the cost ratio and how to spend County dollars in advertising. Shop owners have related they ask Speakout not be placed in their shops. He stated he will not be voting for this matter as he believes this is not a good use of taxpayer dollars. Mr. Caccioppo stated this was an advertised matter. One of the advantages of Speak out is that it fits better on counters. Commissioner Gallagher moved to authorize the County Administrator to negotiate a contract with Speakout to run from June 4,2004 through December 26,2004, for an amount not to exceed $5,625.00. The Chairman shall be authorized to sign said contract when finished. Chairman Stone seconded the motion. Commissioners Gallagher and Stone voting aye and Commissioner Menconi voting nay. Senator Campbell Chairman Stone introduced George Rosman, representing Senator Campbell who has decided not to run for reelection this year. Chairman Stone related Senator Campbell served in the state and federal legislation for 22 years. He was beneficial in the County obtaining $2,000,000.00 for the Airport. Ms. Rosman stated she brought a biogragpy from Senator Campbell. She stated she also brought along a pocket constitution. She gave her background with Senator Campbell. She stated they meet with the BLM, Forest Service and other federal governments. She stated they go to different counties and meet with them to discuss any concerns they may have. Commissioner Gallagher suggested everyone pick up a copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. State of the County Presentation Chairman Stone stated the next matter before the Board was the State of the County presentation. John Denardo, Director of Innovation and Technology, showed the new County video for the students present for Government Week. Website Preview John Denardo presented a preview of the proposed County website. LUR-0047 Church in Commercial General Zone District Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Planner, presented file number LUR-0047, Church in Commercial General Zone District. She stated This application will amend the Land Use Regulations to revise the manner in which land will be valued for cash payments in lieu of school land dedication. For larger subdivisions (10 or more lots), the Director of Community Development will provide, at the lPplicant's expense, an independent appraisal completed by a professional appraiser to determine the per acre value of the useable portion of the land to be developed. 9 4/19/2004 For smaller subdivisions (fewer than 10 lots), in order to eliminate the burden ofthe cost of an independent appraisal on a small subdivision, the Director of Community Development will provide a report, prepared by the Eagle County Assessor based on information available in the Assessor's Office, indicating the per acre value of the useable portion of the land to be developed. This amendment is being proposed in an effort to ensure that payments of cash in lieu reflect current market value on a per acre basis. She stated both the Eagle County Planning Commission and the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval. Their discussions are as follows and as shown on staff report: Distinction between land with approved subdivision appraised with vs. without infrastructure improvements. Staff Response: The difference is the cost of installing the infrastructure improvements. A survey of other jurisdictions indicates that other counties require appraisals on this basis, that is, valued based on an approved subdivision without infrastructure improvements, and the concept is not problematic for the appraisers. Reason for eliminating the requirements that appraisers be MAl certified. Staff ResTJonse: Discussions with appraisers have indicated that it is sufficient to use Certified General Appraisers with subdivision experience. Requiring MAl certification may unnecessarily add to the cost of the appraisals. If a developer obtains a second appraisal, would s/he be reimbursed for the cost of the first? Staff Response: No. Whether payments of cash in lieu would increase as a result of this amendment. Staff Response: Probably. The value of land further away from community centers, where residential development typically occur, tends to lower the average land values currently used. The appraisals or Assessor's reports will result in land in new residential subdivisions being valued more accurately. How current appraisals would be required to be. Staff ResTJonse: Administrative guidelines would be developed for these appraisals which, among other things, would indicate how current appraisals must be, for example, no more than six months old prior to consideration of the final plat. The chronology of the application is as shown on staffreport and as follows: 1972 - Eagle County Subdivision Regulations amended to require dedication of land for school sites or payments of cash in lieu. 1993 - Land values for cash in lieu of school land dedication updated by Board of County Commissioners Resolution 93-139. 1996 - Land values for cash in lieu of school land dedication updated by Board of County Commissioners Resolution 96-16. 2003 - Land values for cash in lieu of schoo11and dedication updated by Board of County Commissioners Resolution 2003-0074. Referral responses are as follows and as shown on staff report: Eagle County Attorney Satisfied with proposed amendment. West Grand School District (telephone response) The District is comfortable with whatever decision Eagle County makes in this regard. Town of Basalt (telephone response) No questions; the proposed amendment "makes sense". Town of Gypsum (telephone response) Asked clarification of the appraised market value of unimproved land based on approved preliminary plan or proposedfinal plat. 10 4/19/2004 Additional Referral Agencies: Eagle County Assessor, Eagle County School District, Roaring Fork School District, Colorado Department of Local Affairs (Division of Planning), Colorado Land Use Commission, Town of Avon, Town of Eagle, Town of Minturn, Town of Red Cliff, Town of Vail. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-230.D., Standards for the review of Amendments to the Text of the Land Use Regulations: STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-230.D.1.] B Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM (Future Land Use Map) of the Master Plan. EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Affordable Housin Community Services Conformance x1 x2 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable x x x x X 1 - This amendment will facilitate improvements to and expansion of school systems. x2 - This amendment will tend to encourage development of schools in the vicinity of residential ieve10pment, consistent with the Future Land Use Map. EAGLE AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Community Size Open Space Environment & & Character & Recreation Sensitive Areas Conformance Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable x x x x x x x Conformance Non- Mixed Not Conformance Conformance Applicable Land Use x Housing x Transportation x Open Space x EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN 11 4/1912004 Potable Water and Wastewater x Services and Facilities X1 Environmental Quality x Economic Development X Recreation and Tourism X Historic Preservation x Implementation X Future Land Use Map x _1 . . x - ThIS amendment WIll support the Eagle County School Board m provIdmg a strong educatIOnal system. Housing Transpor Community Environment EI Jebel! Lower Ruedi Missouri -tation Facilities Basalt Frvina Pan Reservoir lrleigl1ts Conformance X1 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X X Applicable MID-VALLEY COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN X 1 - This amendment will encourage the development of schools in or adjacent to existing community centers and have developers provide school sites and/or cash-in-lieu. Inside Outside Wildlife Open Space Water Hazards Air, Transpor History and Activity Activity Recreation and Odor, -tation ArcheblQgy Center Center Sanitation Noise Conformance Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X X X X Applicable WOLCOTT AREA MASTER PLAN [+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-230.D.1.] - The proposed amendment IS consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM (Future Land Use Map) of the Master Plan. STANDARD: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2.] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, 12 4/19/2004 and is the appropriate zone district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district. By requiring adequate payments of cash-in-lieu of land dedication for schools, this amendment will help to provide resources to the school districts to acquire land in appropriate locations, most often in or near residential areas. [+] FINDING: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2.] - The proposed amendment IS compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and IS an appropriate zone district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district. STANDARD: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3.] Whether and the extent to which there are changed conditions that require an amendment to modifY the use or density/intensity. [+] FINDING: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3.] - There ARE changed conditions that require an amendment to modify the use or density/intensity. STANDARD: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.DA.] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands. This amendment will not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment. [+] FINDING: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.DA.] - The proposed amendment WILL NOT result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands. STANDARD: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5.] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment addresses a demonstrated community need. The ability of the school districts to acquire sites for new school facilities is essential as the population increases. This amendment will provide resources to the school districts for such acquisitions. [+] FINDING: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5.] - It HAS BEEN demonstrated that the proposed amendment addresses a community need. STANDARD: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6.] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern, and not constitute spot zoning, and whether the resulting development can logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services. By providing resources to the school districts to acquire land for school sites near residential developments, the proposed amendment will encourage development in a logical and orderly fashion and not have an adverse effect on development or development patterns. [+] FINDING: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6.] - The proposed amendment WILL result in a logical and orderly development pattern, WILL NOT constitute spot zoning, WILL logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services. STANDARD: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7.] Whether and the extent to which the area to which the proposed amendment would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area. The population of Eagle County continues to grow. By providing resources to the school districts to acquire sites for new school facilities, the districts will be better able to serve the public interest by expanding the school systems to keep up with population changes. [+] FINDING: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7.] - The area to which the proposed amendment would apply HAS changed or IS changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use in the Commercial General (CG), Commercial Limited (CL) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts. Lance Badger, representing Kensington Partners, stated the request is to amend the text to allow :omething that is currently prohibited, which is a church. He stated he has been fortunate to deal with two different church organizations within the past year. Chairman Stone asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. 13 4/1912004 Chairman Stone asked if this was changing the Land Use Regulations for everyone or just for this file. Keith Montag stated it will amend the Land Use Regulations for all applications. He stated it was an over-site that this was not included in the past. Chairman Stone asked what zone districts are churches not allowed in. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated there are two which are Back Country and Industrial zones. Chairman Gallagher stated he believes that churches are an essential block for the community. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve file number LUR-0045, Church in Commercial General Zone District, to amend Section 4-700.C., School Land Dedication Standards, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations to revise the manner in which land will be valued for cash payments in lieu of school land dedication. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ZS-00114 Believers Way Church Special Use Permit Jena Skinner-Markowitz presented file number ZS-00114, Believers Way Church Special Use Permit. She stated the applicant is requesting this matter be tabled to June 15,2004 as the Planning Commission continued this file. Commissioner Gallagher moved to table file number ZS-00114, Believers Way Church Special Use Permit, at the applicants request. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDA-00051 Ranch House PUD Amendment Jena Skinner-Markowitz presented file number PDA-00051, Ranch House PUD Amendment. She stated the Ranch House PUD was approved in 1999. The PUD consists of one lot containing a variety of residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural uses. The intent of this PUD Amendment is to subdivide Lot 1 into three residential lots as part of Phase III ofthe existing Ranch House PUD (PUD Phases I, II and III are as listed on Exhibit A of the approved PUD Guide). The PUD was written anticipating the elimination of commercial, industrial and agricultural uses as the residential component of the development increased. Specifically, agricultural uses must be eliminated prior to construction of the sixth dwelling unit, and pursuant to the existing Ranch House PUD Section VIII Subdivision the commercial, industrial and agricultural uses must be eliminated in order to convey any lot or residence into separate ownerships. This PUD Amendment will essentially re-write the PUD guide reflecting the proposed use eliminations. In discussions with applicant regarding the elimination of commercial uses, it is in their opinion that the owner may continue with his home occupation, which necessitates storing his excavation/snow removal equipment, as a use by right Currently, utilizing a maintenance/storage garage is considered a commercial use; however, in maintaining the maintenance/storage garage as a component of the owner's home occupation, the use of the garage currently fits within the definition of a home occupation per the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. Historically, the owner had employees and outside storage of materials and equipment- Contractor Storage. Currently, there are no employees and all outside storage of materials and equipment have been eliminated. As part of the original approval, the Ranch House PUD is allowed up to a maximum of six (6) dwelling units. Lot 1 currently contains a single family home and accessory structures. Lot 2 has an existing triplex and maintenance/storage garage, used primarily as a component ofthe owner's home occupation; Lot 3 allows either a duplex or single family structure. Lot 1 and Lot 3 may also be allowed a home occupation (see Section 1: Uses By Right of the attached PUD Guide) and a home business (see Section 2: Home 14 4/19/2004 Business). Existing uses including the storage of hazardous materials, livestock and agricultural buildings/materials shall be eliminated from both the development and the PUD Guide with this amendment. The applicant has also made application for a Minor Type B subdivision, the mechanism for subdividing and creating the three lots. The chronology of the application is as follows and as shown on staff report: 1999 - Lot 1 underwent the PUD process and was platted as the Ranch House PUD. The Planning Commission overall, had no issue with the proposed application; however, they added seven (7) conditions requiring several modifications to the PUD guide. They felt that the modifications were necessary to clarify some of the standards in the guide and/or make the requirements more stringent. The majority of the additional conditions necessitated changes to the PUD guide prior to the Board of County Commissioner hearing. Therefore, Staffhas incorporated only those conditions which did not affect the PUD guide. A copy of the revised PUD Guide is attached. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of this proposal, incorporating Staff findings and with the following conditions: The PUD guide will have language requiring landscaping to be installed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy by Eagle County. If landscaping cannot be installed due to winter conditions the owner will post a performance bond at a rate of 1.5 times the value of the landscaping. The PUD guide will incorporate lighting standards consistent with the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. The PUD guide will require the gate to be removed. Section 2 of the PUD guide will be changed to read that Home Businesses will be allowed only upon issuance of a Special Use Permit by Eagle County. PUD guide will include language defining the responsibilities of the Home Owners Association prior to this file being heard by the Board of County Commissioners. The abandoned wellhead on Lot 1 must be rendered safe. The PUD guide shall include language defining that weed control should be maintained throughout the PUD. Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: Eagle County Sheriff, memo dated March 5, 2004: Advantages: More areas for families to reside Making areas look more presentable by eliminating hazardous materials, etc. Good natural surveillance Close access to Hwy 6 Trees along hwy to quiet noise One way in to residential, one way out Disadvantages: In a hidden location; trees along hwy conceal houses Recommendations: Construct better and stronger gate leading into residential area with either a combination lock or a key lock Big stationary lights by gate; motion lights around houses and alarm systems. Some kind of communication device by gate for visitors or deliveries. Possibly trim trees along hwy 6. Environmental Health, email dated March 5, 2004: The Environmental Health Department has the following recommendations in response to the Ranch House PUD Amendment referral: Any onsite storage of fuel or similar materials must be reported to both the Local Emergency Planning Committee via the Emergency Management Coordinator and to the local fire district. Wood burning devices should be prohibited. Division of Water Resources, memo dated March 23,2004: 15 4/19/2004 We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide a 1.697-acre parcel into 3 residential lots. Lots 1 and 3 are to contain one single-family residence each; lot 2 will contain one single-family residence and a three unit multi-family residence. The applicant proposes to obtain water from the Edwards Metropolitan District (the District) for the three unit multi-family residence located on lot 2 and the single-family residence located on lot 3. An existing well is to continue to serve the single-family residences located on lots 1 and 2, with the option to connect to the District in the future. Wastewater disposal is to be through the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. A letter from Edwards Metropolitan District, dated March 19, 1999, conditionally agreeing to supply four single-family units in the development was provided. Pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), a municipality or quasi-municipality is required to file a report with the county and the State Engineer documenting the amount of water which can be supplied to the proposed development without causing injury to existing water rights. A report of this nature was not included. Neither a well permit nor water court decree was provided for the existing well. As stated in CRS 30- 28-133(3)( d), the subdivider is required to submit "Adequate evidence that a water supply that is sufficient in terms of quality, quantity, and dependability will be available to ensure an adequate supply of water for the type of subdivision proposed." Adequate evidence is usually provided in the form of a water resource report, prepared by a professional engineer or water consultant, which addresses the quality, quantity, and dependability issues. A report of this nature was not provided. For your information, the use ofthe existing well is limited to those uses ofthe well that occurred prior to May 8, 1972, within those uses allowed under CRS 37-92-602(5). Review of USGS Edwards Quadrangle indicates that one residence may have existed on the property as of 1962. Therefore, use ofthe well for an additional residence appears to be an expanded use, which is not permissible under the referenced statute. Based on the above, the State Engineer finds, pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1 )(h) (I), that the proposed use of the existing well as a water supply will cause material injury to decreed water rights and is inadequate. Since insufficient information was provided regarding the Edwards Metropolitan District, we cannot comment on the potential for injury to decreed water rights or the adequacy of this proposed water supply under the provisions of CRS 30-28-136(1 )(h)(I). Referrals were sent to the following agencies, with no response received: Eagle County Engineering, Attorney, Assessors, Animal Control, Housing Colorado State Division of Wildlife Natural Resource Conservation District Fire District, Metro District, Eagle River Water and Sand, Holy Cross and telephone provider The Reserve and Miller's Creek HOA Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary plan for PUD: 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. [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part of this PUD IS owned or controlled by one (1) person and/or entity. 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 16 4/19/2004 property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized 'Jursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. There are no new uses being proposed as part of this PUD amendment outside of what was originally contemplated as part of the initial Preliminary Plan approval. Rather, some existing uses are to be phased out in preparation for additional residential development. [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE 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" for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. 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 PUD. 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 snowmelt between buildings. No variations are necessary outside of what was originally contemplated as part of the initial Preliminary Plan approval. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE 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 PUD. STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and ~oading 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 PUD 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 Loadinf! 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. Parking has been identified on the Overall Development Plan as submitted with this application; parking is sufficient for the six residences. [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] It HAS been demonstrated that off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD complies with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards, without a necessity for a reduction in the standards. STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscapinf! 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 PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. The PUD guide proposes adequate landscaping guidelines. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] It HAS previously been demonstrated that landscaping provided in the PUD can comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. 17 4/1912004 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 Development (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. No new signage is proposed. The Ranch House PUD is silent to sign standards, therefore, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations will apply. [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE as specified in Article 4, Division 3, fugn Regulations. STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for 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 and fire protection, and emergency medical services. Existing facilities (electricity, telephone, gas, cable, etc) currently service the Ranch House PUD. Agreements are in place for all utilities including water and wastewater service. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] The Applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for roads; the applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD was provided adequate facilities for potable water, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply and fire protection. In addition, the Applicant HAS demonstrated that the PUD is conveniently located 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 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-ol-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 granted for 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 PUD, 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 removedfrom the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. 18 4/1912004 Access, snow storage, an emergency turn around area and emergency access to the river have all been adequately addressed as part of this proposal. [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] It HAS been clearly demonstrated that the improvements standards applicable to the development will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards 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 proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. This proposal, to add dwelling units to an existing development is not anticipated to negatively affect compatibility with adjacent land uses, rather compatibility should increase as several uses such as hazardous material storage and agricultural useslbuildings will be eliminated with this amendment. [+] 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. 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 consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is on a broad conceptual level, i.e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANALYSES BELOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Environmental Open Space/ Development Affordable Transportation Qualit Recreation Housin Community Services Conformance x x x x x x Community Center1 Mixed Not Applicable The Future Land Use Map shows this property Community Center. The Community Center designations are overlain on areas typically found along major transportation routes which are served by public water and sewer, and have not been designated as sensitive lands. All necessary infrastructures are in place. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN i Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Coooeration Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance X X X X X X X Non 19 4/1912004 Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable No new development above and beyond what was already contemplated as part ofthe original application is proposed. As such, the proposal is not inconsistent with any of the applicable master plans. EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Water Quantity Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Conformance X X X X X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable 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. It is important to preserve existing local residents housing. Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate housing opportunities within the county for other infrastructure needs. 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. The Eagle County Comprehensive Housing Plan is not applicable to this use as it is not deviating from the original, 1999 approval. No additional residential units are proposed over those that have already been approved. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use Permit CAN be shown to be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Master Plan and Master Plan FLUM, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. 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 PUD is proposed to occur in phases, then guarantees shall be provided for public improvements and amenities that are necessary and 20 4/19/2004 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. Additional phasing is not applicable and/or necessary with this proposal, as this is the final phase of this PUD. [+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) An additional phasing plan IS NOT necessary for this development. 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 of 25% 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. (b) 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. (c) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, 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. (d) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed andfully improved according to the development schedule established for each development phase of the PUD. (e) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for 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. (f) 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 PUD 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. Common areas with access to the river currently exist as part of this PUD and will not be altered as part of this PUD Amendment. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] The PUD HAS demonstrated that the proposed development will comply with the common recreation and open space standards with respect to: 21 04-19-04 (a) Minimum area; (b) Improvements required; (c) Continuing use and maintenance; or (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. This parcel is located along the valley floor; the ridgeline will not be affected, nor will wildlife movements be affected in this area of Edwards, as this development is not found within an identified migration corridor or unique habitat. FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [ Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] The PUD DOES demonstrate that the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents available at the time the application was submitted, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of both a Sketch Plan, and Preliminary Plan for Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] B The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan. The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is on a broad conceptual level, i.e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANALYSES BELOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. See previous discussion. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] The PUD 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)] B 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 Development Standards. Article 4, Site Development Standards [ +] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) [+] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) [+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4) [ +] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) B [ + ] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) B [ + ] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) B [+/-] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) Wood Burning Controls are proposed as part of this PUD Amendment. A new Section IX will be added to the PUD Guide which will be even more 22 04-19-04 restrictive than the Land Use Regulations; the duplex will only be allowed one (1) wood burning device per the structure for a total of two (2) wood burning devices per the six (6) dwelling units- Lot 2 is not allowed a device. The Environmental Health Department, however, recommends there be no devices per the development. [ +] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) [ + ] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) [ + ] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) [+] Storage of Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Materials (Section 4-550) The Applicant proposes to add a new Section X which adequately addresses this standard. [ +] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6) [ +] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) [+] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) [ +] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) [+] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) [+ ] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) [+ ] Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) [+/-] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) AS CONDITIONED Due to the determination of the Division of Water Resources concerning the well on the property legally only allowed to service one dwelling, Staff is requiring that all new structures utilize public sewer and water, available for this development. [ + ] Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) [+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) No Impact fees are associated with this proposal, as it was contemplated as part of previous approvals. [+/-] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] The Applicant HAS fully demonstrated that the proposed subdivision complies 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 Development Standards. STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] B 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. (1) 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 Eat!le County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (2) 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. (3) 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. This development has already been assessed for efficiency as part of the original approval for the Ranch House PUD. 23 04-19-04 [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] The proposed subdivision IS 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. STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] B 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. This lot is not encumbered by geological hazards, floodplain or steep slopes and is suitable for development. [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] The property to be subdivided IS 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. STANDARD: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] B 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. See previous discussion on page 5. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and SHALL NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD. No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of section 24-67-104(1)( e) Colorado Revised Statutes that; (1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation ofthe entire Planned Unit Development; (am 3/12/02) (2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment does not effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment ofland abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or the public interest; (3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. The application has been submitted by the owner of an existing PUD which currently allows for and anticipates this development. Pursuant to Section 5-280.B.4, Preliminary Plan for Subdivision, Staff finds this application in conformance with all required application contents, including, an adequate, Overall Development Plan. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz, reviewed the additional two conditions. Sid Fox, Planner, representing the applicant, stated the owner of the property is Scott Ziegler, who was also present. He stated they have gone through several changes in the PUD Guide in the past several years. He spoke about home businesses and the Planning Commission wanting those home uses to be approved through a special use process. There are several landscaping changes in the PUD Guide. There is also a collateral provision included that landscaping be installed at time of building permit. They included a provision for control of noxious weeds. He spoke about on-site lighting, wildlife and 24 04-19-04 property owner maintenance. He stated he believes the PUD Guide is in good shape. He stated he would like to discuss the gate on the property. He stated the property has been here since 1960 and the current owner has been the owner since 1980. He stated the Planning Commission is asking that the gate be removed. He stated the owner does have items on his property that he would like to protect. He stated he submitted a letter as to why they felt the gate was important. He stated they are not trying to create a gated community. They concur with staff findings and conditions with the exception of the gate being removed. Chairman Stone called for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated the Planning Commission is not fond of having gates on properties. They decided to recommend that it be removed. Chairman Stone asked if there was fire access. Mr. Skinner-Markowitz stated that was part of the discussion. Commissioner Gallagher stated he had no problem with changing the removal of the gate to the inclusion of a "Knox Box" so the fire department could have a key. Chairman Stone stated he agreed with Commissioner Gallagher. Commissioner Gallagher moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve File No. PDA-00051, Ranch House PUD Amendment, incorporating all Staff findings and with the following conditions: 1. Except as otherwise modified by this permit, all material representations made by the applicant in this application and in the public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 2. All new structures must utilize public water as provided from the Edwards Metropolitan District. 3. If the entrance gate is ever to be locked a "Knox-Box" will be available to emergency responders. 4. The wellhead on Lot 1 must be rendered safe by securing the well's opening. If the well is not permitted to be used or is abandoned, the wellhead should be permanently capped. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. In discussion, Chairman Stone asked about the sewer. Scott Ziegler, applicant, stated it is on a sewer main and nothing goes into the ground. Chairman Stone called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 5MB-00330 Ranch House pun Jena Skinner-Markowitz presented file number 5MB-00330, Ranch House PUD. She stated the intent of this Minor Type B is to re-subdivide Lot 1 of the Ranch House PUD, to create three (3) lots with building envelopes. Pursuant to Section 5-290.G.2 of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the Community Development Director has considered the following in the review of the Type B Minor Subdivision: a. Access, Water and Sewage. The access, potable water, and sewage on the land to be subdivided are adequate; 25 04-19-04 b. Conformance with Final Plat Requirements. This Minor B Subdivision is in conformance with the Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines; and c. Improvements Agreements. A Subdivision Improvements Agreement is not applicable. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve file number 5MB-00330, Ranch House PUD, incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat upon approval from the Eagle County Attorney. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2004-049, Designating April 19-23, 2004 Earth Awareness Week Ray Merry, Director of Environmental Health, presented Resolution 2004-049, designating April 19-23,2004 as Earth Awareness Week. Commissioner Menconi read the resolution for the record as follows: "Whereas, there has been an increased awareness of actions having direct and indirect impacts on our local environment; and Whereas, the citizens of Eagle County and the surrounding areas are concerned that steps be taken to preserve the quality of the environment for present and future generations; and Whereas, April 22, 2004 marks the thirty fourth anniversary of the first Earth Day, a day established to increase people's awareness of their environment and the effect their actions have on the environment; and Whereas, there is an international, national and local effort to involve as many entities as possible in this anniversary celebration of Earth Day through special events, media coverage and local efforts; and Whereas, the purpose of Earth Awareness Week is to bring into focus within Eagle County the understanding that the preservation and improvement of our environment is the responsibility of each individual; and Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County recognizes the importance of addressing environmental issues. Now, therefore be it resolved by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado: That, the week of April 19 -23, 2004 be designated Earth Awareness Week. That, the Board hereby finds, determines and declares that his Resolution is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado Moved, Read and Adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held the 19th day of April, 2004. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2004-049, designating April 19-23, 2004 as Earth Awareness Week. Chairman Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher had left for the day. 2004 Annual Earth Day Poster Contest Awards 26 04-19-04 Ray Merry presented the 2004 annual Earth Day Poster contest awards. He stated this was an idea he had several years ago that caught on and gets larger every year. He introduced his staff. He stated this years contest focused on the West Nile Virus. He stated the sponsors for this celebration are as follows: Paddy's Stop N Save Pazzo's Pizzeria Gallegos Masomy 4 Eagle Ranch John, Kunkle and Associates The Gashouse Restaurant Cascade Movie Group Alpine Bank Avon Cordillera Geno's Italian Sandwiches Town of Basalt Movieland Theater Eagle County Code Enforcement City Market Stores $25 gift certificate (5) $10 gift certificates 5 pizza gift certificates $100 cash $100 cash $20 cash $20 gift certificate 30 movie tickets $50 Savings Bond $100 cash Gift certificate for lunch for 2 kid's pool pass 4 movie tickets Domino's Pizza discount card (2) $25 gift cards Mr. Merry stated all students who submitted a poster receive certificates of participation. All prize winners receive an Earth Day T -shirt and a movie ticket. One hundred and seventy six students from nine schools participated in this year's contest with the theme being, "West Nile Virus Awareness." The Commissioners awarded the following prizes for the following students: Basalt Elementary School 3rd Prize: 2nd Prize: 1 sl Prize: Claire Johnson - Domino's Pizza discount card Kaitlin Maestas - $10 WalMart gift card Hannah Condon - $25 City Market gift card Brush Creek Elementary School Honorable Mention: Brooke Asmussen 3rd Prize: Elizabeth Schwaiger 2nd Prize: Hayley Beard - $10 Stop N Save gift certificate 1 sl Prize: Kiah Frieker - $25 City Market gift card Eagle County Charter Academy 27 04-19-04 3rd Prize: 2nd Prize: 1 st Prize: Jack Geddes Jennifer Harrison - $10 Stop N Save gift certificate Madison Cerny - pizza gift certificate from pazzo' s in Avon Eagle Valley Christian Academy Honorable Mention: Bryan Aubel 3rd Prize: Zach Sforzo 2nd Prize: Ashlyn Gruber - $10 Stop N Save gift certificate 1 st Prize: Amy Applegate - pizza gift certificate from Pazzo' s in Avon Eagle Valley Elementary School Honorable Mention: Zach Hing 3rd Prize: Keaton Franklin 2nd Prize: Hailey Vest - $10 WalMart gift card 1 st Prize: Shawnee Cobb - $25 WalMart gift card Edwards Elementary School Honorable Mention: Tania Gastelum 3rd Prize: Karen Parra 2nd Prize: Tyler Peterson - $10 Stop N Save gift certificate 1 st Prize: Montana Nash - pizza gift certificate from Pazzo's in Avon 3rd Prize: 2nd Prize: 1 st Prize: 3rd Prize: 2nd Prize: 1 st Prize: Gypsum Elementary School Kasandra Portice Katie Lundberg - $10 Stop N Save gift certificate Jesus Aguilar - $25 WalMart gift card Meadow Mountain Elementary School Maddie Frye Chelsea Dempsey - $10 WalMart gift card Trevor Edwards - pizza gift certificate from Pazzo's in Avon St. Clare's Elementary School Honorable Mention: Ryan Pigg 3rd Prize: Isabelle Courtois 2nd Prize: Alexandra McCormick - lunch for 2 at Geno's Italian Sandwiches in Avon 1 st Prize: Aubrey Jaramillo - pizza gift certificate from Pazzo' s in Avon 28 04-19-04 Overall Winners 3rd Prize: 1 st Prize: Valerie Thompson, Gypsum Elementary School - $20 Gift Certificate to the Gashouse Kelsey Richards, Basalt Elementary School - Kid's pool pass from the Town of Basalt Brandon Guillon, Meadow Mountain Elementary School - $25 Gift Certificate to Paddy's 2nd Prize: Grand Prize: Misha Harrison, Eagle County Charter Academy - $50 Savings Bond from Alpine Bank, Avon This poster will be framed and remain on display in the Eagle County Building The Board thanked all those for attending and for participating in the Earth Day Poster Contest. He informed all those present there was a reception in the lobby immediately following this meeting. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until April 27, 2004. Ch~ Attes Clerk to the Boa 29 04-19-04