Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/08/05
PUBLIC HEARING
February 8, 2005
-'resent:
Arn Menconi
Tom Stone
Peter Runyon
Jack In.gstad
Diane Mauriello
Teak Simonton
Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
County Administrator
County Attorney
Clerk to the Board
This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of COUlity
Commissioners fortheir consideration:
Executive Session
The Board ofCourity Conunissioners held two Executive Sessions today. All three commission.erswere
present at each session.
CommissionetRunyon moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session for the
purpose of receivinglegal advice on potential negotiations of a proposed land exchange with the Cordillera
Metropolitan'District; legal advice on options for security and collateral for Subdivision and Off-Site Improvements
Agreement; water matters concerning proposed involvement with water development in Wolcott; and the Crown
Motmtainproposed lease expansion for the tree farm property, as well as concerning legal advice concerning a
persohIlelmatter and anifualcontrol, all of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-
402(4)(b) and(e).Conunissioner Stone seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. At the close ofthe
discussion, Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn from Executive Session and Col11tnissioner Runyon seconded
.. e motion, which passed unanimously.
After the morning session Col11tnissioner Runyon moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into
Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on potential negotiations of a proposed land exchange
with the Cordillera Metropolitan District; legal advice on involvement with water matters and developmen.t of
Wolcott; ~d fOrihe, pUrpose of recehring legal advice concerning a potential conflict of interest with Balcomb &
Green related to representation of Ginn; and, finally, for the purpose of receiving legal advice concerning proposed
pondlise agreement, all Of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursual)t to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b).
Col11tnissioner Stone seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. At thtt close of the discussion,
Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn from Executive Session and Conunissioner Runyon seconded the motion,
which passed unanimously.
Consent Agenda
Chairman Menconi stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows:
A. Approval of BillPaying for the Week of February 7,2005 (Subject to review by the County Administrator)
Mike Roeper, Finance Department
B. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle Board of County Commissioners Meetings for January 18 and
January 20, 2005
Teak Simonton, County Clerk and Recorder
C. Resolution 2005-012 Concerning Appointments to the Eagle County Cooperative Extension Advisory
Board
County Attorney's Office Representative
D. Resolution 2005-013 Concerning Appointment to the Emergency Telephone Service Authority Board
1
2/8/2005
County Attorney's Office Representative
E. Agreement between Schindler Elevator Corporation and Eagle County
Clark Shivley, Facilities Management
F. Alpine Area Agency on Aging Grant Contract Renewal for Senior Services
John Lowery, Senior Services and Carla Budd; Human Resources
G. Agreement between Eagle County and Benje Bendele for the 2005 Fair & Rodeo Sound
Brad Higgins, Fair & Rodeo
H. Agreement between Eagle County and Bums Rodeo Company for the 2005 Fair & Rodeo
Brad, Higgins, Fair & Rodeo
1. First Amendment to the Agreement Regarding Provision of Architectural Services to Eagle County Re:
Freedom Park Memorial
Helen Migchelbrihk, Facilities Management
Chairman Menconi asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda.
Diane Mauriello, County Attorney stated there were no comments or revisions.
col11:h1issionerRunyon moved to approve the Consent Agenda for February 8, 2005, Items A-I.
Col11tnissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared urtanimous.
Resolutioll200S-014Adopting a First Supplementary Budget and Appropriation of Anticipated Revenues fot
Fiscal Year 2005 and Allthorizing the Transfer of Budgeted and Appropriated Monies between Various Spending
Agencies.
Mike Roeper, Finance Director
Mr. Roeper stated the majority Of the requests involved carryovers from 2004.
Mr. In.gstadasked the Board to look over the supplemental budget and identified the carry forward
expenses. He asked Ms. Forifiash to come forward and speak about the il11tnunization outreach supplies request fot
$4;000. HeidehtifiedpreviouslyapproYed expenses.
Ms. Migche1brink explained that she had been asked by two commissioners to find out aboutadding two
exercise bikes and a TV NCR/DVD player to the exercise roOm.
Mr.Ingstad explained the reason for the requested $80,000 for Sheriffs Office for IT support.
Cortirrlissi6Iier Stone informed Mr. Ingstad that the carry forwards did not need to be discussed in deta.il in
his, opinion; He asked for explanation of the new requests.
Cha.irman Menconi added that any grant items did not need to be explained.
Mr; In.gstad spoke about the $50,000 carry forward for summer marketing of the SUl11tner flight program.
Social Service Fund replacement of computer monitors is a required expenditure to get on-line with the state
system. The Airport I'und includes a request for two snow blowers from Kansas City for around $300,000, and
Ovid Seifers will explain this request to the Board. The Assessor's Office has money to purchase monitors for her
mapping'department.
Ms. Forinash spoke to the Board. The additional supplies are needed and were not included based on the
cap of percentage increase allowed in the original budget. These supplies include t-shirts and printed educational
materials related to immunizations. The Social Caseworker position is being requested because a position request
number had not been included in the 2005 budget. She asked that this position be restored, as its exclusion was an
oversight. The summer activities fair was cut in the original budget cycle, and based on the current strong
economic position ofthe County, she would like to reinstate this fair. They have had 700 youth and families show
up in the past. They would like to continue this in the Roaring Fork Valley and add such a fair in the Eagle River
Valley. Participating organizations include scholarship opportunities. Expenses cover advertising, clean up and
waste management.
Commissioner Runyon asked if the $8,000 would include $4,000 for each Valley. He asked if Garfield and
Pitkin Counties would be contributing.
2
2/8/2005
Col11tnfssionerStone moved to approve Resolution 2005-014, Adopting a First Supplementary Budget and
ApPropriation of ArtticipatedRevenues for Fiscal Year 2005 and Authorizing the Transfer of Budgeted and
Appropriated Monieshetvveen Various Spending Agencies, making note that included in that approval are the
monitors for mappingfotthe Assessor's office, the $8,000 for the summer activities fair, and the $300,000 for the
snow blowers for the airport.
Conunissionet Runyon seconded the motion. The vote Was declared unanimous.
Planning andiLand Use Resolution Consent Agenda
Cliff SiIhoIlton, Col11tnunity Development
\. Resolufion200S':'015 to Approve a Pei:h1it Amendment for Site Selection and Construction of a Major New
Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment System and to Construct Major Extensions of Existing Domestic
Water and Sewage Treatment Systems and for the Efficient Utilization ofa Municipal Water Project in
Order to Serve the Frost Creek and Salt Creek PUD (Eagle County File No. 1041-57). The Board
considered the Applicant's request On December 14,2004.
B. ReSolutiofi2QOS"016 Approving an Amendment to the Adam's Rib Frost Creek and Salt Creek Planned
Unit DevelopmeIlt(Eagle County File No. PDA-00056) The Board OfCOUhty Comtnissioners approved
this propdsalon December 14,2004.
C. Resoluti()n200S-017 m the Matter of Amending the Eagle County Land Use Regulations to mcorporate
Language Pertaining to Floodplain Management, Drainage and Grading (Eagle County File No. LUR-
00051). The Board of County Commissioners approved this proposal on January 4th, 2005.
COmmissioner,Runyon moved to approve the Planning and Land Use Resolution Consent Agenda for
February 8, 2005, Items A..C.
Col11tnissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Minor Subdivision'Plat Signing
Cliff Simonton, Community Development
There were no minor subdivision plats for the Board's consideration this week
Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene a~ the Eagle
''Junty Liquor Licensing Authority.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Eagle County Liquor License Authority
3
2/8/2005
Don DuBois, Clerk and Recorder's Office
Consent Agenda
Renewals
A, Blue Creek Grill
EIJebel, CO
This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant Liquor license in El Jebel. There have been no complaints or
disturbances during the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid.
B. Broken Arrow Cafe
Edwards; CO
This isa renewal ofa Hotel and Restaurant Liquor license in EdWards. There have been no complaints Or
distutbaIlces duriIlg the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid.
C. Lodge and Spa at Cordfllera
.Edwards, CO
This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant Liquor License, with Optional Premises, in Edwards. There
. have been no complaints or disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid.
OilterConsell.t
D. Beaver CteekGenetal Store
Beaver'Creek, CO
Resolution t005...()18 and findings regarding Alpine Investors, LLc dba Beaver Creek General Store.
These are the official findings of the Board, as mandated by the Colorado Liquor Code.
Col11tnissioner Runyon moved the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for February 8,2005,
consisting ofItems A-D.
Col11tnissioner Stone seconded the motioIl. The vote was declared unanimous.
Other Liquor
A. Colorado Hotel Operator, Inc./Fandango Cordfllera LLC
dbaLodge & Spa at Cordfllera
APPLICANT:
DBA:
REPRESENTATIVE:
LOCATION:
Colorado Hotel Operator, Inc/Fandango Cordillera LLC
Lodge and Spa at Cordillera
Chris Hanen, General Manager
2205 Cordillera Way Edwards, CO
DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks to register Chris Hanen as its Manager for the Lodge and Spa at
Cordillera, replacing BobNelson who left in October. Matt Bailey, one of the managing partners had been acting
as interim Manager until a permanent replacement could be found. Mr. Hanen has been with the applicant since
November, and they now seek to make him their registered manager of record.
STAFF FINDINGS
);> This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, and all fees have been paid.
4
2/8/2005
}> The applicant is reported to be of good moral character, based upon Sheriffs reports. The applicaIlt did
have an alcohol-related incident in 1999, but the charges were dismissed after he completed several alcohol
awareness cOUrses.
~ Mr. Hanen has been server trained.
CONCERNS / ISSUES:
None
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
Mr. Hanen stated that the Lodge is following the guidelines of the State and appreciates the Board's
approval.
Commissioner Stone moved the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the manager's registration for
ChrlsHanen of Colorado Hotel operator, lhc/Fandango Cordillera LLC dba The Lodge and Spa at Cordillera.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimoUs.
B. Ducks Unlimited
REPRESENTATIVE:
LOCATION:
CONCERNS 1 ISSUES:
Wendy Sacks, Event chairperson
Eagle County Fairgrounds Eagle, CO
None
DESCRIPTION: This is a special events permit application for Ducks Unlimited's annual fundraiser event
to be held at the Eagle County Fairgrounds in the Exhibition Hall. The event will be held on February 26, 2005 and
will be from 5:00 pm to 12:00 am. Staffhas had no problems in the past with events held by the applicant.
STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS:
1. This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, all necessary documeIlts have been
received, and all fees have been paid.
2. The Sheriffs Department, Building Official, and Department of Environmental Health have stated no
problems with this application.
3. PUblic notice has been given by the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises OIl January 28,
2005, 11 days prior to the hearing.
4. There have been no protests filed with the Clerk and Recorder's Office.
STAFF 'RECOMMENDATION:
All findings are positive and staff recommends approval.
Conunissioner Runyon moved that the Board approve the Special Events Pennit application for Ducks
Unlimited for February 26,2005, from 5:00 pm to 12:00 am.
ConunissionerStone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
C. Western Eagle Valley Rotary Club
REPRESENTATIVE:
LOCATION:
CONCERNS / ISSUES:
Linda Lomax, Event chairperson
Eagle-Vail Pavilion Eagle-Vail, CO
None
DESCRIPTION: This is a special events permit application for the Western Eagle Valley Rotary Club's
benefit for the survivors of the tsunami in Asia. The event will be held at the Eagle-Vail Pavilion on February 23,
W05 and will be from 10:00 am to 11 :00 pm. This is the first Special Event Permit requested by the applicant in
unincorporated Eagle County. Staff would like to note that many of the event's operations will be overseen by
Dwight Henninger, Vail's Police Chief and Rotary member.
5
2/8/2005
STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS:
1. This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, all necessary documents have beeIl
received, and all fees have been paid.
2. The Sheriffs Department, Building Official, and Department of Environmental Health have stated no
problems with this application.
3. Proper public notice has been given.
4. There have been no protests filed with the Clerk and Recorder's Office.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
All findings are positive and staff recommends approval.
Lindatomax, representing the applicant, was present for the hearing.
Commissioner Stone asked about staffing.
Ms. Lomax explained that it would be staffed by Rotarians who have been TIPS-trained. There are several
past police and marine officers in the group, as well.
Conunissioner Stone moved that the Board approve the Special Events Permit applicatioIl for theWestem
Eagle Valley Rotary Club for February 23,2005, from 10:00 am to 11 :00 pm.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Mr. DuBois spoke to the Board about the compliance check conducted by the Sheriffs Department On
De'Cember 16, 2004. All establishments in unincorporated Eagle County passed this check, and this was the first
time in Eagle COUhty that had happened.
Commissioner Runyon moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and recdnveIlea:s
the Board of County conunissioners.
Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Other
Ms. Mauriello spoke about the continuation of the Executive Session.
Chairman Menconi asked to go back into Executive Session to cover the remaining items.
Planning Files
1. PR-00027 Miller Ranch LandscapiUl!: Plan
Joe Forinash, cotntnunity Development
NOTE: Tabled from 9/21/04, 10/12, 11/16/04 and 12/15/04 - To be Tabled indefinitely.
ACTION: Proposed revisions to the Landscaping and Fencing Plan for Miller Ranch
LOCATION: Miller Ranch, Tract D, Berry Creek Miller Ranch Pun in Edwards
Col11tnissioner Stone moved to table PR-00027, Miller Ranch Landscaping Plan, at the applicant's request,
indefinitely.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
2. PDA-00055 - Crown Mountain Park PUD Amendment Sopris Tree Farm
Joseph Forinash, Community Development
ACTION: To amend Pun Preliminary Plan to revise site plan for recreation improvements.
LOCATION: Mt. Sopris Tree Farm, south of Valley Road, west of Sopris Village Subdivision
TITLE:
Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD Amendment
6
2/8/2005
FILE N"O./PROCESS:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PDA-00055 / PUD Amendment
Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District
CroWn Mountain Park and Recreatioh District
JTAFF,RECOMMENDATION:
Approval with conditions
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Approval with conditions (5-1)
PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION:
. Roundabout
. Size, adequacy and landscape treatment and drop-off location.
. Discourage use of irrigation boom - visibility and native plants and flowers more appropriate.
. Should be generous with space provided for drop-offs near roundabout.
. Pond
. Whether it will be full year-round.
. Whether it will be fenced for safety in the winter.
. Certainty that the pond will be lined.
. Whether water .flow is sufficient for the proposed ponds.
. Lots of negatives associatedwithpond. '
. Location and intent()f wading area.
. Lirtedpond with a wading area could be very slippery and dangerous.
. Important to keep dogs out ofthe pond.
. Sports fields
ill Ihtentiohregarding spectator areas, including seats and scoreboards.
. Anticipated level of use for competitive sports.
. Outfield fencing of ball fields.
Anticipated completion date for Phase 1 and for all improvements.
. SoUrce of additional fundiIlg for improvements beyond what initial bond issue will cover.
. Location of secondary access fOr emergency vehicles.
. Ihtemal circulation
. Which pedestrian trails are iIlcluded in Phase I? Can more be incorporated, especially south of the baIl
fields?
. Nature ofloopedpaths north of internal road may be more formal than necessary.
. Location and surface of internal access routes for emergency vehicles.
. Consider pedestrian safety measures, including textured walkways and traffic calming measures.
. Landscaping
. Reconciliation of size of evergreens (4 feet) with cost ($800).
. Austrian pine and Scotch pine may be subject to extensive loss to deer.
. Greater use, of native trees, such as pinion pine, may be more appropriate.
. Plant choice may warrant additional consideration.
. What height ranges of trees will be,
. Clarification of landscaping in the vicinity of the ditch.
. Whether park will be separated by fence or landscaping from pocket park in Sopris Village to the east.
. Pedestrian access from the Willits area to the east.
. How has use of fruit trees and the related potential problems been resolved?
. Which playgrounds to be included in Phase I?
. Skateboard park
. Reasons for relocation.
. Sculpture of skateboard park, e.g., above/below ground.
. Tress should be used to buffer from adjacent uses.
. Good to have skateboard park closer to the building - greater visibility.
. Proposed park furnishings - appearance, materials, amphitheater seating.
. Pedestrian crossings need to be safe for park users.
7
2/8/2005
. Lighting
. Lighting should be cast downward and not go overboard.
. Whether motion detector street lighting is available.
. Rules for park should include a dog park..
. Water
. Situation needs to be cleared up and reconciled.
. Intention for water in 30 years if purchased water from Mid Valley Metro is not renewed.
. Uncertainty is not a good situation.
. Parking
. Overflow parking should not be heavily planted, especially with trees being used as parking delineators.
Trees on the perimeter are OK.
. Park meets the needs of the Valley.
. Trail connections are great; more trails are better.
. Faster the park is completed the better.
. Pedestrian safety is important.
. Overall wonderfuljob.
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY: A PUD amendment that would amend the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD Preliminary Plan to revise the
location and design of the recreation and park features and amenities from those apptoved in the site plan as part of
the PUD Preliminary Plan. In addition to the features and amenities shown on the currently approved site plan, the
revised design also includes a larger surface~level water feature (series of connected pondS), use of an existing
storage building for Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District equipment and materials, andtlfreehorseshoe
pits.
It should be Iloted that the proposed improvements extend beyond the area currently leased by thePatk and
Recreation District. The Applicant acknowledges that an expansion of the lease area is necessary to implement the
proposed site plan, and that a formal request for an expansion of the lease area will be submitted separate1yby the
District.
CHRONOLOGY:
1998 - The Mt. Sopris Tree Farm Community Park Master Plan was prepared by the ToWn of Basalt providing
aCol11tnunity Plan representing a vision for the use of the site.
20"00- Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD Sketch Plan for the proposed development Was approved.
2001 - Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD Preliminary Plan and zone change approved.
2001 ~ Final plat for the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD approved.
SITEDAl'A:
Surrounding Land Uses I Zoning:
East: Residential; Commercial / RSM; Resource; Town of Basalt
W~st: Rural; USFS Employee Housing / Resource
North: Residential; Commercial / RSM; CG
South: . Residential; Roaring Fork River / RR; Resource
Existing Zoning: Resource
Proposed No. of
Dwelling Units:
Total Area:
Water:
Sewer:
Access:
None
124.31 acres
Mid Valley Metropolitan District
Mid Valley Metropolitan District
Valley Road
STAFF REPORT
REFERRAL RESPONSES:
8
2/8/2005
Eagle County Engineer
[Memo dated 18 November 2004]
. Various technical comments. [See attached memo dated 18 November 2004.]
[Memo dated 21 January 2005]
. The plans appear to besa.tisfactory for this level of detail.
. Final construction level of detail will be required prior to approval ofthe final plat.
Eagle County Environmental Health
(Verbalcommentsfrom Ray Merry on 1 November 2004]
. Environmental Health requests that itbe advised prior to chemical applications on the site, e.g.,
fertilizer, pesticides.
Eagle County wildfire Mitigation Specialist
. Due to the Ilatuie of the project, well maintained irrigated areas will cover a majority of the site, and
produce air urban~like envirohl11ent. _
. Though the hazard ratings appear to be very low, it is suggested that various frrewise plants and
1aIldscaping techniques be used to provide a showcase of a "fire-resistant" area.
Eagle County Weed &<Pest
. Crown Mountain park & Recreation District agrees to meet the maintenance requirements for the
leased property including:
. Noxious weed mitigation measures consistent with the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Eagle
County Vi eed Management Plan.
. Art mtegrated Pest Management (IPM) program(s) for any pest species determined to adversely
affect or potentially affect human health and safety or detrimental to the site use objectives ( e.g.,
Wyoming ground squirrels, mosquitoes).
. It is requested that the seed mix, by species, for the proposed "native grass" areas be included as
described in the landscape plan.
. All the plant species listed in Appendix 11 are in compliance with the Colorado Nursery Act and
include no listed noxidUS weed species.
EagleCoullty Sheriff's Office
[Memo dated 12 November 2004 from Dave Lawson to Ken Wilson, UndersheriffJ
. The site has to have additional lights.
. A concern is whether the bike paths are wide enough to accommodate emergency vehicles, such as art
ambulance. If an injury occurs in the proposed open space, would an ambulance be able to travel to the
site of the injury? Awider bike path would also benefit the Sheriff s Office for night patrols.
. An additional concern is the locked gates: Will they restrict only cars? Are the gates going to be
electrically operated, which would help in night patrol, or will they be padlocked on a chain? Who will
be responsible for locking and unlocking the gates at morning and night?
. What codes will be enforced in regards to park rules? There are no County ordinances coveriIlg hours,
glass bottles, loud music or signage describing these items.
[Letter dated 12 November 2004 from Ken Wilson, UndersheriffJ
. The Sheriff's Office has concerns about the lack oflighting around the proposed project. This is a large
project to have only three lights.
. It is understood that the road will be gated and locked at night except for special events. However, this
will Ilot control foot and bike traffic through the area. Even the neighbors have objected to lighted
sports fields, low level lighting for security must be considered.
[E-mail dated 28 December 2004 from Deputy Dave Lawson to Ken Wilson, UndersheriffJ
9
2/8/2005
. Deputy Lawson met with Ross Stepp, Director of Crown Mountain Park, to go over concerns regarding
the lighting at the park.
. The issue of lighting has been addressed. It has been agreed as follows:
. Limit lighting to address neighbor's concerns while illuminating key areas in parkiIlg lots and on
the pedestrianlbike path near Valley Road.
. The light in one of the parking areas will also assist with illumination near the dog park.
. Lighting is not necessary in the main playing area of the park as it would "invite" the use ofthat
area.
. A gate to close the park and limit access to the park is not planned. Signage will be provided which
indicates rules and hours' of operation.
. All paths in the park will be accessible to emergency vehicles and in some cases are also
emergency evacuation paths.
. ECSOand the Park District have agreed to continue meeting through the process to address any
other concerns or ideas that may arise. The parties have started discussions regarding what can be
eIlforced by Law Enforcement and what needs to be done to get enforcement powers started in
other aspects of park rules and regulations.
. 'The District has addressed ECSO concerns and has shown an eagerness to work together in the
future.
Town of Basalt Planning and Zoning Commission
. The Basalt Recreation made the following observations:
. Fruit trees attract bears. Perhaps another type of tree for this area should be considered.
. The Park District may want to rethink the exclusion of live music or stereos at the Skateboard Park.
Competition events for younger skateboarders provide a natural venue for boom box music or for
local musicians to play. The TOWh has found that music adds to the festive atmosphere at its local
bi-annua1 events for young skateboarders.
. There are no further comments from the Planning or Public Works Departments.
. The Planning and Zoning Commission concurs with the comments of the Basalt Recreation
Coordinator.
. The Town and the cOl11l11unity would like to see the Crown Mountain Park cOIlstruction begin as soon
as possible. The Town supports this PUD Amendment.
Basalt & Ru.ral Fire Protection District
. The road access and emergency path comply with the appropriate section of the 2003 Irttemational Fire
Code.
. The fire hydrants are placed as needed to cover the concessions and storage buildings and meet the
appropriate section of the 2003 International Fire Code.
. This park will be a nice amenity for this side of Eagle County.
Mid, Valley Metropolitan District
[Letter dated 19 November 2004 from Leavenworth & Karp, P.c., attorneys representing the District]
. The District has the capacity in its water and sewer treatment plant and can and will serve the new
facilities under the proposed PUD Amendment with water and sewer services, subject to a number of
conditions, including the following:
. The Applicant shall pay all applicable water and sewer tap fees to the District prior to receiving a
building permit from Eagle County and prior to physical connection to the District's lines.
. The Applicant shall dedicate water rights to the District or shall pay the District's fees in lieu of
water rights dedication.
. The Applicant shall enter into a Line Extension Agreement or a Line Connection Agreement with
the District, as applicable, regarding the requirements for e:xtending and/or expanding District
water and sewer services to the property.
. Eagle County, as property owner, and the Applicant, as lessee, shall dedicate to the District any and
all easements necessary for the provision of District services to the development, which easements
shall be free and clear of all liens and encumbrances.
10
2/8/2005
. The Applicant shall prepare and submit engineering designs for the construction and installation of
District water and sewer services to the development subject to review and approval Of the
District's engineer.
. According to the Application, the Applicant has or leases raw water sufficient in quantity to supply
irrigation water to the project. Except as authorized by the District Board of Directors, when a raW
water irrigation system exists, no outside irrigation shall occur on the property using water from the
District's potable water system.
. ill accordance with the District's Rules and Regulations, the Applicant shall install signs notifying
the public that non-potable water is being used for irrigation and is not safe for himlan
consumption.
. Pursuant to the District's Rules and Regulations, the Applicant shall reimburse the DistriCt for all
costs incurred by the District regarding this project, including, but not limited to legal and
engineering review.
. these comments are iIltended to supplement the District's letter dated August 31, 2004, regarding the
provision of District services to the property, which letter is attached as Appendix 8 to the Application.
Northwest Colorado Councilor Governm.ents
. The Applicant recognizes the need to get a CDPES discharge permit for stormwater control onthe
construction site. The CDPES permit application requires a Stormwater Management Plan be
developed and maintained on site. Eagle County may want to review a copy ofthe St6rmwaterPlan
since this application indicates that measures to tllinimize erosion and seditlleIltation will be outlined
therein.
· The application discusses a shallow pond system for the development. DepeIlding on flow and aeration '
in the pond system it is very possible that significant algae could form, making fora visual eyesore.
Eagle County may want to discuss a management plan with the Applicant in case this occurs.
· the drainage plan contemplates the use of drywells. The Town of Basalt has notified NWCCOG that
they are having problems with maintenance of drywells because they fill with sediment and muck and
do not drain effectively. This might be a bigger problem in this location if they are installed before the
soil is stabilized. At a minimum, the drop inlets should be protected from sediment until the
surrounding, area is stabilized.
· It appears that the plan calls for surrounding the site with silt fence, which would make acCess
impossible. Vehicle mud tracking control practices should be required at the construction entrance.
Colorado Depa.rfm.eIlt of Transportation
[Referral form returned with notes added.]
· The development may require a State Highway Access Permit.
. A traffic study is necessary to make a determination.
[E~mailfrom Daniel Roussin dated 6 December 2004.]
· cDOT has reviewed its files and determined that an access permit has been approved and all issues are
covered by the permit.
· If the CrovvnMountain Park development does not exceed the permitted volumes, then no additional
permit is required.
Colorado State Forest Service
[Letter dated 9 January 2000 in response to initial PUD Preliminary Plan proposa[J
· The Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD has a low wildfire rating. The only concern regarding wildfire hazard
is adequate emergency vehicle turn-around areas.
· Cul-de-sac roads and driveways should be a maximum of 750 feet. Any cul-de-sac road or driveway
exceeding 750 feet should have vehicular turnarounds every 750 feet. All cul-de-sac turnaround pads
should have a minimum right-of-way of a 45 foot radius. Dead-end streets should not be permitted.
· From a tree health point of view, it is recommended to plant evergreens 20 feet from the building, as
they will eventually grow within the recol11tnended IO foot distance. Deciduous trees, such as aspen,
may be planted at the 10 foot distance.
11
2/8/2005
Colorado Geological Survey
[Letter dated 17 January 2001 in reSlJonse to initial PUD Preliminary Plan proposal]
. Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., performed a geologic site assessment in 2000. CGS concurs with
their assessment ofthe geological hazards present at this property.
. Deformation due to solution-induced subsidence in the underlying Eagle Valley Evaporite is a concern
in the area ofexisting ground depressions, but the depressions are located in proposed open-space areas
on the preliminary plans. H-P Geotech notes that "The risk of ground deformations in areas away from
the existing depressions is considered to be low and not greater than that present in other parts of
northwestern Colorado where the evaporate is near the surface".
. CGS observed no damage (cracks, other evidence of subsidence) in the existing concrete block
structures at the northeast comer of the property. Nonetheless, CGS recol11tnends ~ site-specific
geotechnical investigation, with subsurface explorations, at the location of the proposed government
office building, and at any other planned structures (other than picnic shelters and restrooms).
. H-PGeotech's report adequately addresses the hazard of sinkholes, and measures that maybe taken to
mitigate the hazard. Again, careful subsurface investigations will provide useful information on
alluvium thickness and the extent of solution cavities in the area.
Other Referrals have been made to Eagle County Animal Control, Eagle County Assessor, Eagle County
Attorney, Eagle County Road & Bridge, KN Energy, Mid Valley Trails conunittee, Roaring Fork Transportation
Authority, Sopris Village HOA, Summit Vista HOA, River Run HOA, Glassier Acres HOA,Blue LakeROA.
FINDINGS:
Pursuant to Eagle County bind USe Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review ofaPUJ)
preliminary Plan:
STANDARI>: Unified ownership or control. [Section5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all/and that is part of aPUD
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 afthe PUD.
The Applicant has demonstrated that Eagle County is the sole oWher of the site of the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm PUD.
A letter authorizing the Crown Mountain Park & Recreation District to submit this PUD Amendment application is
on file.
[+]FIN1>ING: 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..
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
application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3.f.,
Variations Authorized.
It has previously been demonstrated when the pun Preliminary Plan was approved, all approved uses were allowed
uses. The additional uses include a surface-level water feature, a storage building for Park District equipment and
materials, and three horseshoe pits. These uses are all allowed in the zone district in effect for the property at the
time the PUDPreliminary Plan was initially approved, although the latter two are covered under a use listed as "all
other recreation and government uses deemed consistent with the Preliminary Plan and approved by the Board of
County Commissioners. No variances are necessary.
[+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)]
All of the proposed additional 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 the
Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the roperty at the time of the application for the
12
2/8/2005
I PUD Amendment.
I
STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply
'0 the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district
designation in effectfor the property at the time of the applicationfor 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 changes in dimensional limitations ate proposed as part of this PUD Amendment.
[+] 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-Stfeet Pafking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading
provided in the PUDshall 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 Pafking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within thePUD 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 thaiithoseset
by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit toprovide
specialized transpottation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar
services) as a means of complying with this standard.
At the time: thePUD Preliminary Plan was approved, it was determined that, based on the information provided,
363 parking spaces was a reasonable minimum number. The number provided was 412, all in paved parking ateas.
Of theSe, 60 spaces were allocated to the Col11tnunity Center building.
The total number of proposed spaces available in this revised site plan for recreation patrons includes 46iri the
existing paved parking area near the Col11tnunity Center, 187 in new paved lots, 44 in a new gravel lot, 44 in a
future gravel lot, and 285 in grass "overflow parking areas". Parking spaces immediately available in either paved
or gravel areas would total 277, with another 285 in overflow parking areas for special events estimated to occur 1-
2 times per year.
The location ofthe parking areas are proposed to differ from that initially approved. The current site plan provides
for "double-loaded" parking areas to the south of much of Eagle County Drive, the Park's internal road. The
proposed parking tends to be more dispersed into specific areas. Nonetheless, the proposed parking appears to be
sufficient for the contemplated uses, with respect to both numbers of parking spaces and their distribution
throughout the Park.
[+] 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 off-street parking and
loading provided in the revised PUD DOES comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1,
Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards.
STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the
tandards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping 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, glareand
13
2/8/2005
other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the
area.
A revised landscaping plan has been provided with this application. The phasing plan indicates that the landscaping
ih1ptovements will be completed in conjunction with other Phase I improvements. The proposed landscaping plan
is consistent with the letter and intent of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and lllumination StaIldards.
The Town of Basalt Planning and Zoning Commission has provided severalcorrt:h1ents, one of which relates to the
use of fruit trees. Fruit trees attract bears, and it is suggested that non-fruit bearing trees be considered. The Wildlife
Analysis Report submitted with the PUD Preliminary Plan application and recorded as an exhibit to the Board
Resolution approVing the Preliminary Plan, along with the PUD Guide, notes that range of black bears increases
during periods of scarce food and that members of the bear population that reside on the Crown area southwest of
the Tree Farm property (approximately 2-3 miles) come down to the valley floor near E1 lebel in search of food.
The Wildlife Analysis Report includes a Wildlife Management and Enhancement Program which includes an
objective of reducing the attractiveness ofthe properly for black bears. A recol11tnended action is to "choose plants
dUring the landscaping phase that are not attractive to bears" and which goes on to say that "bears ate especially
attracted to plaIlts that produce nuts, berries andfluits. As a condition of approval, no landscape materials should be
used which are likely to be attractive to bears, including those that produce nuts, berries and/or fruits.
[CoIidition # ,1] ,
The Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator has commented on potential noxious weed and pest problems on the
site. As a condition of approval, the Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District should be required to implement
noxious weed mitigation measures consistent with the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Eagle County Weed
ManagerrtentPlan,andtopr6mptly develop and implement an Integrated Pest Martagement(IPM}program(s) for
any pe~t species determined by the Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator to adversely affect or potentially
affecfhuman health and safety or be detrimental to the site use objectives (e.g., Wyoming ground squirrels,
mosquitoes). [Condition # 2]
The Coordinator has also noted that all the plant species listed in Appendix 11 are in compliance with the Colorado
Nursery Act and include no listed noxious week species. However, detail of the tYPes of seeds in the seed mix for
the proposed "native grass" areas is not provided. As a condition of approval, the composition of the seed mix, by
species, for the proposed "native grass" areas should be provided to the Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator
prior to making any landscape improvements on the site. [Condition # 3]
Whenthe PUD was originally considered and approved in 2000, the Colorado State Forest Service indicated that
the site had a Low wildfire rating. The Eagle County Wildfire Mitigation Specialist has recently indicated that the
site has a Very Low Wildfire hazard rating. He does suggest, however, the use of various ftie-wise plants and
landscaping techniques to provide a showcase of a "fire-resistant" area.
[+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3:e (5)]
Landscaping provided in the PUD DOES comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2,
Landscaping and Illumination Standards.
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 RefJUlations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) , the applicant submits a comprehensive sign planfor 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.
A sign plan has been provided which deals mostly with information and directional signs, although a sign
consisting of 18 inch letters for "Crown Mountain Park" on a wall in the center of the roundabout at the entrance is
also proposed.
[+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)]
The Applicant has submitted a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD which IS suitable for the
PUD and DOES provide the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD.
14
2/8/2005
STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the
development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water
'upply, sewage disposal,- solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently
ocated ilirelation to schools, police alid fire protection, and emergency medical services.
At tltetime thePrelhninary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate facilitie'swere
to be provided. The Basalt & Rural Fire Protection District has reviewed the proposed site plan and has
indicated that tile road access and emergency path comply with the applicable section of the International
Fire Code. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the adequacy of facilities for
potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, or electrical supply, nor will it affect the location
in relation to schools, and police protection.
The Comity Engineer has determined that sufficient constrUction plans have been provided with a Preliminary Plan
level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to issuance of the initial grading pennit or building permit, the
Applicant shall provide complete engineering and construction drawings and other engineering detail which are
satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition #
The Eagle County Sheriff' s()ffice (ECSO) raised several questions regarding public safety access to all areas of the
site, incltlding adeqtiacyofthepedestrian pathsJor patrol and emergency vehicles, the nature ofthe locks on the
gates and its implications for night patrol access. In a subsequent meeting between a Deputy Lawson and ROIl Stepp
of the Crown Mountain District, it was determined that all of ECSO have beeh addressed to the satisfaction of
ECSO . Included in the security provisions is a limited amount of lighting at the entrance, at the paved and gravel
parking lots, near the path along Valley Road, and on the concession/restroom building and the amphitheater. It
should be noted that the PUD Guide includes certain illumination standards which are intended to preveIlt intense
flare dfilltImination that would create a nuisance which detracts from the use or enjoyment of adjoining property.
As' a cOhdition of apptoval, prior to installing any lighting" the Applicant should demonstrate that all proposed
ightingconforms to Section D., Illumination Standards, of the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm Planned Unit Development
JuidedatedMarch 27, 2001. [Condition # 5]
[+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)]
With the recommended condition of approval, it HAS been demonstrated that the development
proposed in the PUD Sketch/Preliminary Plan 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.
STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the
developmi!nt shallbe 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, Whi!n 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-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
~nits. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private
oadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance
and repair of utilities.
15
2/8/2005
(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 removed from the internal street network
and from off-street parking areas.
The County Engineer has determined that sufficient construction plans have been provided with the required
PreliminaryPlal1level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to issuance ofthe initial grading permit or
building permit, the Applicant shall provide complete engineering and construction drawings and other engineering
detaiL which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 4]
As a flirther condition of approval, prior to issuance of the initial grading permit or building permit, the Applicant
should provide a public improvements guarantee in a form satisfactory to the County Attorney and in an amount
satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 6]
[+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)]
With the recommended condition, it HAS been clearly demonstrated that the improvements
standards applicable to the development will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improveinents
Standards tegarding: (a) safe, efficient access, (b) internal pathways, (c) emergency vehicles, (d)
principal access points, and (e) snow storage.
STANDARD: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The development proposed
for the pub shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.
The Preliminary Plan approved for the PUD was determined to be compatible with surrounding land uses. The
proposed revisions to the site plan and the proposed improvements are consistent with the currently approved site
plan and continue to be compatible with surrounding land uses.
The c).IITently approved site plan shows a line labeled "Limits of Active Recreation Land Use" south of which the
area was to be "restored to native vegetation". A portion of the proposed improvements, including a pedestrian trail
and emergency access route, surface Water features (including a ditch and ponds) and some landscaped areas,
extend somewhat beyond the "Limits of Active Recreation Land Use". The Planning conunission and the Board of
County Commissioners will want to determine the appropriateness of these improvements.
The Eagle County Sheriffs Office (ECSO) has raised an issue regarding park rules, such as for hours of operation,
glass bottles, loud music or signage, and notes that there are currently no County regulations or ordinances
su.fficient for this purpose. As a condition of approval, within six months of approval of this PUD Atnendment,the
Applicant should be required to develop a comprehensive set of park rules which are satisfactory to the County
Attorney. [Condition # 7]
[+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)]
The development proposed for the PUD HAS been determined to be compatible with the character
of surrounding land uses. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL continue to be 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 PUD was previously determined to 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 the
amended PUD Preliminary Plan, subject to the recommended conditions of approval.
16
2/8/2005
Eallle Countv MasterPlan. The proposed development generally conforms to all applicable Guiding Policies of
the Eagle County Master Plan..
Eaflle'Couiltv ODenSDacePlan. The proposed development generally conforms to the Policies oftheEa:gle
County Open Space Plan.
MDlVALLEY COMMUNITY PLAN
x
x
x
x
x
Mid Vallev COlnlnunitv Plan. The proposed development generally conforms to all applicable Policies of the
Mid Valley Community Master Plan.
MT. SOPRIS TREE FARM MASTER PLAN
17
2/8/2005
Mt. SdiJris Tree, Farm Master Plan.
A number of Planning Objectives were established for the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm Master Plan, including the
following:
1. Provide area for a governmental service facility for County departmental Use.
2. Provide space for needed Mid Valley col11tnunity uses as determined by County and Town staffs and local
residents as allowed by regulations ofthe Act [authorizing transfer ofthe site from the U.S. Forest Service
to Eagle County and Pitkin County].
3. Provide substantial buffer areas, maximize open space and protect from future development.
4. Provide adequate access, circulation and parking while minimizing impact to adjacent residential areas and
Valley Road.
5. ProVide and maintain public river a~cess.
6. Maintain and protect riparian area from proposed land uses.
7. Develop site Master Plan for use as a guide for site planning and bUilding reuse.
the MasterPlan provided two goals, along with a number of Planning Objectives for each. The Government
Services Goal is to "proVide interior and exterior spaces for goVernment services as defined." Several planning
objectives are set forth which include minimizing visual impacts or other impacts on existing and proposed land
uses and certain other planning activities.
The Community Services Goal is to ''provide area(s) for future implementation of active and passive recreation
facilitie.s: while protecting open space and agricultural uses." Planning objectives are in the areas of active
recreation; passive recreation; agriculture/open space; and open space.
The Pun Preliminary Plan is in conformance with the goals and applicable planning objectives of the Mt. Sopris
Tree Farm Master Plan.
MT.SOPRIS TREE FARMCOMMUNITYP ARK MASTER PLAN (BRA Master Plan).
A Community Plan for the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm site came out of this plahIling effort which "represents the joint
visiOn of valley residents and provides for at least a portion of the numerous interest groups needs in a compromise
plan that maintains the park with a moderate level of active recreation while also incorporating a variety of other
community spaces." The Community Plan includes a list of key park elements and a site plan. The revised PUD
Preliminary Plan generally conforms to the Community Plan developed as part of this planning effort.
~
i-
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 either the Master Plan or the Future
Land Use Map.
[+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.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.
,
f_
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 desirable for residents of the project, or that are of
.
18
2/8/2005
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.
When the PUD Preliminary Plan was initially approved, it was to be developed in at least two phases. The first
ncluded the Community Center, 'associated parking and the internal road to the existing buildings near the
northwest comer of the site. The recreation portion of the site constitutes the second and subsequent development
phase.
The Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District proposes to further phase, what was initially designated the
second phase. The discussion of phasing of recreation improvements in this Pun amendment application is all
within this second phase of the overall Pun development. Detail ofthe several phases of the recreation
improvements is included in the "Addendum" to the application, specifically in a memorandum dated 13 October
2004. Phase I all infrastrUcture improvements plus landscaping, concession/restroom building, site furniture,
basketball court, tennis courts (2), dog park, playground, volleyball court, ball field #2, and the park equipment
storage building. Phase II improverrients will include, among other things, a pond and a skate park.
ConstrUction plans have been provided for Phase I improvements but not for all Phase II improvements. As a
conditioIl of approval, the constrUction plans for any improvements which have not previously been approved by
the County Engineer should be subject to review and approval by the County Engineer prior to issuance of a
building permit or grading permit for those improvements. [Condition # 8]
It should also be noted that a series of several ponds are proposed along the southwest property, only a portion of
which fall within the proposed expanded lease area. Final constrUction plans fot the ponds have not been provided.
Finallaybut of the ponds may differ from that proposed in the application. As a condition of approval, an
alternative layout of the proposed ponds may be approved by the County Attorney and the County Engineer.
[Condition # 9]
[+] FINDING: Phasing, Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)
A phasing p1anIlAS been provided for this Pun Amendment.
S'fAN])ARJ): ComlltonReueauon and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)J - ThePUD 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 PUDarea shall be devoted to open
air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum
often (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 multipliedby 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-ol-ways, and areas
with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space.
ii. Areasthat,Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian
areas, and one hundred (J 00) 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.
(b) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the
Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development schedule
established for each development phase of the PUD.
(c) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to
is intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for PUD. To ensure that all the common open space
dentified 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.
19
2/8/2005
(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 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.
At the time the Prelimin.ary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate common
recreation and open space were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse
effect on the adequacy of the open space.
[+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)]
Ithas previously been determined that the development DOES comply with the common
recreation and open space standards applicable at the time of approval of the PreliminaryPlah for
the PUD. The proposed Pun Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect col11tnon recreation and
opeIl space within the PUD with respect to (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.
At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate protection of natural
resources were to be provided. For the most part, the proposed PUD amendment would not be detrimental to
natural resources.
The Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator has commented on potential noxious Weed and pest problems On the
site. As a condition of approval, the District should be required to implement noxious weed mitigation measures
consistent with the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Eagle County Weed ManagemeIlt Plan, and to promptly
develop and implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program(s) for any pest species determined by the
Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator to adversely affect or potentially affect human health and safety or be
detrimental to the site use objectives (e.g., Wyoming ground squirrels, mosquitoes). [Condition # 2]
The Coordinator has also noted that all the plant species listed in Appendix 11 are in compliance with the Colorado
Nursery Act and include no listed noxious week species. However, detail of the types of seeds in the seed mix for
the proposed "native grass" areas is not provided. As a condition of approval, the composition of the seed mix, by
species, for the ptoposed "native grass" areas should be provided to the Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator
prior to making any landscape improvements on the site. [Condition # 3]
[+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)]
It HAS previously been determined that applicable analysis documents were adequately considered
prior to approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD amendment WlLL
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)] B 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 IS consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use
Ma (FLUM). The ro osed Pun Amendment WILL NOT adversel affect the consistenc with
20
2/8/2005
I the Master Plan.
STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] - The proposed subdivision shall
J)mply 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 3, Zone Districts
When the PrelilTIinatyPlan for the PUD was approved, findings were made to warrant the zone district change to
PlJD based on the applicable Land Use Regulations. The proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the
provisions of Article 3, Zone, Districts, of the current Land Use Regulations.
Article 4, Site Development Standards
[+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1)
As discussed under Off-Street Parking and Loading [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)], above, the proposed parking tendsto
be more dispersed into specific areas. Nonetheless, the proposed parking appears to be sufficient for the
contemphiteduses, with respect to both numbers of parking spaces and their distribution throughout the Park.
[+] Landscaping andlllumination Standards (Division 4-2)
A revised landscaping plan has been provided with this application. The phasing plan indicates that the landscaping
improvements will be completed in conjunction with other Phase I recreation imptovements. The proposed
landscaping plan is consistent with the letter and intent of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and lllumihation
Standards. However, certain conditions of approval are suggested in the discussion above under Landscaping.
rSection 5-240.F.3.e (5)].
he EagleCollrity Sheriffs Office (ECSO) raised several questions regarding public safety aCCess to all areas of the
site, includiIlgadequacy of the pedestrian paths for patrol and emergency vehicles, the nature of the locks on the
gates and its implications for night patrol access. In a subsequent meeting betweena Deputy Lawson and Ron Stepp
of the Crown Mountain District, it was determined that all of EcSO hav~ been addressed to the satisfaction of
ECSO. Included in the security provisions is a limited amount of lighting at the entrance, at the paved and gravel
parking lots, near the path along Valley Road, and on the concession/restroom building and the amphitheater. It
should be noted that the PUD Guide includes certain illumination standards which are intended to prevent intense
flare of illumination that would create a nuisance which detracts from the use or' enj oyment of adjoining property.
Asa condition of approval, prior to installing any lighting, the Applicant should demonstrate that all proposed
lighting conforms to SectionD., lllumination Standards, of the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm Planned Unit Development
Guide dated March 27,2001. [Condition # 5]
[+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3)
A sign plan has been provided which deals mostly with information and directional signs, although a sign
consisting of 18 inch letters for "Crown Mountain Park" on a wall in the center of the roundabout at the entrance is
also proposed.
[+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4)
[+] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) - No critical wildlife habitat is located on the site, although the area
south ofthe site, near the Roaring Fork River, is home to a number of amphibian, bird, mammal and reptilian
species. As a condition of approval, the District should be required to not undertake any improvement nor
'Jlement any activity that is contrary to the Wildlife Management and Enhancement Program which is part of the
dlife Analysis Report dated October 16,2000, and recorded at Reception No. 754139. [Condition # 10]
[+] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) - Certain limited geologic hazards were identified during consideration
of the PUD Preliminary Plan. Concerns relate primarily to occupied buildings exclusive of shelters and the like. A
I
21
2/8/2005
PreliminatyGeotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical has been provided with
this application. Certain recommendations are provided which should be adhered to during construction of
improvements.
[+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) - The Basalt and Rural Fire Protection District has indicated that the
road access and emergency path comply the applicable section ofthe illternational Fire Code.
[+] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) - Wood burning devices are neither contemplated nor proposed.
All uses of wood burning devices in the Pun will be required to conform to the requirements of this Section.
[n/a] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) ~ This site is not included on lands designated on the Ridgeline
Protection Map. Given the valley floor location of the site, ridgeline impacts are not a factor. The Applicant is not
required to provide a ridgeline analysis. Consequently, this Section is not applicable to this application.
[n/a] Environmental1mpact Report (Section 4-460) ~ An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is notrequired.
[n/a] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5)
There are no significant commercial or industrial operations on the proposed site which would subject this
application to the provisions of this Division.
[+] Improvement Standards (Division 4~6)
[+] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) - The County Engineer has determined that sufficient construction plans
have been provided with a Preliminary Plan level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to issuance of the
initial grading permit or building permit, the Applicant shall provide complete engineering and construction
drawings and other engineering detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [conditioIl # 4]
[+] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) - The County Engineer has determined that sufficient
construction plans have been provided with a Preliminary Plan level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to
issuance of the ihitia:l.grading permit or building permit, the Applicant shall provide complete engineering and
construction drawings and other engineering detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 4]
[+] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) - It appears that this standard will be met. However, additional
engineenngdetail is requited before the construction plans can be approved. As a condition of apProval, prior to
issuaIlce of the initial grading permit or building permit, the Applicant should provide complete engineering and
construction drawings and other engineering detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer.[Condition # 4]
The Park and Recreation District proposes two sources of water for irrigation purposes, in addition to the potable
water to be provided by the Mid Valley Metro District. The Park and Recreation District has entered into an
agreement with the Mid Valley Metro District for 1 cfs of raw water to be delivered to the site from May through
October by way of the Robinson Ditch. ill addition, the Park and Recreation District intends to use water from the
on-site wells. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Attorney prior
to issuance of the initial grading permit or building permit, or at some other time deemed appropriate by the County
Attorney, that the proposed sources of irrigation water is sufficient and consistent with existing and future leases
between Eagle County and the Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District. [Condition # 11]
In addition, Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCcOG) the potential for significant algae forming in
the shallow pond system, creating a visual eyesore. NWCCOG has suggested the need for an appropriate
management plan. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer
prior to issuance of the initial grading permit or building permit, or at some other time deemed appropriate by the
County Engineer, that an appropriate pond management plan addressing issues such as algae growth has been
developed and will be properly implemented. [Condition # 12]
[+] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) - The County Engineer has determined that sufficient construction plans
have been provided with a Preliminary Plan level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to issuance of the
.
22
2/8/2005
initial grading permit or building permit, the Applicant shall provide complete engineering and constrUction
drawings and other engineering detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 4]
Jorthwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWccOG) has raised several issues regarding drainage, including
prior review of the stormwater management plan and the use of drywells on the site. As a condition of approval, it
should be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to the issuance of the initial grading permit
or building perrriit for this site that the issues set forth in the letter from the Northwest Colorado Council of
Governments dated November 12,2004, have been or will be adequately satisfied. [Condition # 131
[+] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) - The County Engineer has determined that sufficient
constrUction plans have been provided with a Preliminary Plan level of detail. As a condition of approval, prior to
issuance of the initial grading permit or building permit, the Applicant shall provide complete engineering and
construction drawings and other engineering detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 4]
Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWcCOG) has raised several issues regarding erosion control,
including adequate vehicle mud tracking control practices on the site. As a condition of approval, it should be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to the issuance of the initial grading permit or
building permit for this site that the issues set forth in the letter from the Northwest Colorado Council of
Governments dated November 12,2004, have been or will be adequately satisfied. [Condition # 13]
[+]Utilityand Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) - It appears that the standards of this Section Will be satisfied.
[+] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) - It appears that the standards of this Section will be satisfied.
However, the Mid Valley Metro District has set forth several conditions to its "can and will serve letter" for water
treatment services. As a condition of al'Proval, it should be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer
prior to the issuance, of the initial grading permit or building permit for this site, or at some other time deemed
appropriate by the County Engineer, that all of the conditions set forth by the Mid Valley Metropolitan District in
'ts letter dated November 19,2004, have been or will be duly satisfied. [Condition # 14]
[+]SanitarySewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) ~ It appears that the standards ofthis Section will be
satisfied\. However, the Mid Valley Metro District has set forth several conditions to its "can and will serve letter"
for wastewater treatment services. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated to the County Engineer
prior to the issuance ofthe initial grading permit or building permit for this site, or at some other time deemed
appropriate by the County Engineer, that all of the conditions set forth by the Mid Valley Metropolitan District in
its letter dated November 19,2004, have been or will be duly satisfied. [Condition # 14]
[+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7)
(+] School Land Dedication Standards (Section 4-700) - No residential units are proposed on the site. No
school land dedication is required.
[+] Road Impact Fees (Section 4-710) - Road impact fees will be payable prior to issuance of any grading
permit or building permit for the proposed improvements.
Other Standards in the Land Use Regulations
Other Standards - It appears that all other standards of the Land Use Regulations will be met, except as discussed
elsewhere in this Staff Report.
[+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)]
With the recommended condition, the Applicant HAS demonstrated that the proposed subdivision
complies with all ofthe 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.
23
2/8/2005
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 dev~lopment.
(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 serviceplan. Proposed toad
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.
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the development would have an efficient
spatial pattern. The proposed PUD Amendment will not alter the spatial pattern in any way that causes
inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public fa~i1ities, or
result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development.
[+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)]
It HAS previously been found that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD satisfied the requirements of
the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time with respect to efficient spatial patterns. 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
shelllbe sUitablefor 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.
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the area was suitable for development as
approved.
[+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)]
It HAS previously been determined that the site was suitable 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.
When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the PUD is compatible with the character
of existing land uses in the area and would not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. The
amended PUD would continue to be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
[+)FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)]
It HAS previously been determined that the development is compatible with other development in
the area. With the recol11tnended condition, the proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT
adversely affect the compatibility ofthe resulting development with surrounding uses within the
PUD.
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS:
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation]: "Applicant shall submit the
following: "Proposed PUD guide settingforth the proposed land use restrictions. "
The proposed amendment to the PUD does not warrant any revisions to the approved PUD Guide.
l [+) FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)]
24
2/8/2005
A PUD Guide WAS previously approved for this PUD. NO REVISIONS to the approved PUD
Guide are necessitated by this Pun amendment
)ursuan.t to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F. 3.m., Amendment to Preliminarv Plan fot
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 satisfies this standard.
[+] FINDlNG:Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.]
The ptoposed PuD Amendment (1) IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation
of the entire Planned Unit Development, and (2) DOES NOT affect in a substantially adverse
manner either the enjoyment ofland 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;
Mr. Forinash showed a site plan and lease area. He stated that the applicant is in agreement with most of
the requested conditions, but revisions to Conditions 6 and 11 were not included. He reviewed some of the other
conditions. He raised the possibility of including an improvements guaraIltee for overlot grading and draiIlage
"mprovemeIlts, if the Board wished to pursue it. Additional input has been provided by the County Attorney's
ffice regarding the water rights issues, as well.
The applicants had no new information to offer.
Mr. Mark Fuller was present and addressed the conditions. He stated that the revised conditions 4, 12, 13,
14 were all acceptable. He spoke about condition 6 and stated that the County Attorney had provided an alternative
to this condition as was currently detailed. The revision to Condition 11,was acceptable as well.
Ms. Mauriello stated that she was uncertain as to the timing of the Water being needed. She indicated that
the Board would Ileed to make this determination.
Mr. Fuller stated that they would prefer this happen prior to installation of the irrigation system.
Chairman Menconi spoke about another possible condition related to the revised anti amended lease
agreement with the County.
Mr. Fuller agreed with this condition.
Chairman Menconi opened the floor to public comment. There was none. He closed public comment.
Commissioner Stone addressed Chairman Menconi's concern about the appropriate place to add the
wording concerning the site review ~ similar to Berry Creek.
Ms. Mauriello stated that it would be helpful to understand the Board's desire is in terms of site restoration
with both the existing and future, expanded lease.
Chairman Menconi stated that he is open to suggestions, but wants to have a review process telatedto
approval of structures on the site.
Mr. fugstad suggested duplicating the WECMRD agreement.
Mr. Fuller wondered whether this would apply to the facilities.
Mr. fugstad stated this would apply for anything that would be built. He gave the example ofWEcMRD.
When they desire to build anything, they run it by the Board for approval. He stated that it is not a formal review.
Chairman Menconi stated that the landowner does not want to be surprised.
Mr. Fuller stated that he is comfortable with this condition.
Commissioner Stone wondered if this should be included in the lease.
Mr. fugstad stated that the lease is the appropriate place toput these requirements.
Commissioner Stone wondered about the grading and the final reclamation ofthe site.
Mr. Forinash stated that Mr. Sulmeisters could respond to this question.
25
2/8/2005
Peter Sulmeisters, Eagle County Engineering Department, informed the Board that a grading permit had not
been applied for, yet, arid the preliminary plan approval is coming up. The developer would be submitting a
separate application fortheir grading. It is anticipated that this area will include the new lease boundary. The
reclamation plan will be included with the grading plan.
Commissioner Stone clarified that there are a number of decisions that had yet to be finalized.
Mr. Sulmeisters agreed that this was the case. The grading permit would have to stand on its own, and
would include many of the items listed in the NWCOG letter.
Col11tnissioner Stone asked how different the land would look after the reclamation.
Mr. Sulmeisters responded that they plan to put in berms and shaping the entire project to the proposed
shape in the application.
Commissioner Stone wondered how much dirt would be removed.
Mr. Fuller stated that it would be rearranged - not removed.
Yancy Nichols with Sopris Engineering stated that there would be areas that would change as much as five
feet - but would probably be a 1.5 feet average. He stated that the first phase would not have a significant impact
on the overall height, about 3 inches.
Conunissioner Stone wondered if any of the ponds would be built in the first phase.
Mr. Nichols stated that the existing detention pond would be reshaped and placed inside on of the ponds
that is built later.
Mr. Fuller stated it is the pond on the lower left of the revised lease area.
Commissioner Stone stated he felt that Condition 11 should be changed. He thought that the portion of this
condition that spoke to future agreements should be removed.
Mr. Fuller agreed and thanked conunissioner Stone.
Ms. Mauriello suggested the following change: has sufficient sources of irrigation water necessary to serve
the Crown Mountain Recreation District improvements and its leased property consistent with existing and future
obligations between Eagle County and the U.S. Forest Service and Mid Valley Metropolitan District, as well as
existing agreements between Eagle County and Crown Mountain Park Recreation District.
Commissioner Stone also spoke about the original PUD agreement related to the 15,000 square feet. He
statedthat this was intended to limit the Community Center to less than 15,000 square feet. He would like to add a
condition that identifies how many square feet would be built during this phase ofthe PUD.
Mr. Forinash stated that staff had relied on opinions from the Attorney's Office that all shelters do not
count against the limit.
Mr. Fuller proposed at least 4,000 square feet because the concession area is of concern. The storage and
maintenance facility has yetto be designed and flexibility would be appreciated.
Commissioner Stone stated that a memo previously received indicated that 3,100 square feet should be
adequate. He believed an agreement had been reached in the morning work session that indicated this was
reasonable.
Mr. Forinash stated that the site plan is being amended, and there are no proposed changes to the PUD.
Mr. Fuller stated that 15,000 square feet is already included.
Commissioner Stone wondered if this was specifically related to the County Col11tnunity Center. He is not
interested in making it too restrictive. He wondered if a PUD amendment process would be needed to do future
improvements.
Mr. Forinash explained that governmental or recreation use consistent with the Preliminary Plan and
approved by the Board could be allowed.
Mr. Fuller stated that they are going through the PUD process because the Board required it. He stated that
it had previously been agreed that, once Crown Mountain took over the development, the Board required it.
Mr. Forinash stated that, in addition to revisions, this also served to put the construction plans looked at in
final detail. He also believed if the preliminary plan is approved, it would set a limit on the amount of new building
that would count against the maximum allowable. There had also been a discussion of the review process within
the lease.
Commissioner Stone suggested an acknowledgement, rather than a condition, anticipating a concession
stand in the neighborhood of 1,500 square feet, with an interest in developing a maintenance building of
approximately 1,600 square feet, and that both parties agree that this would reduce the ability for future building on
the site for this combined total square footage amount.
Chairman Menconi wondered if this was included in the PUD, whether 10 or 20 years down the road it
would be possible for an additional building to be built. He asked about turning this into an acknowledgement -
and wondered whether this would be duplicating a storage facility.
26
2/8/2005
Ms. Mauriello stated that the PUD addresses the underlying zoning. This acknowledgement could be that
the County had confirmation from the applicant on the record and the lease agreement would cover the rest.
Chairman Menconi stated that he didn't want to burden Crown Mountain in future years if they want to add
Llore buildings related to recreation without amending the pun.
Commissioner Stone asked Ms. Migchelbrink if Condition 6 satisfied her concerns.
Ms. Migche1brink stated that this condition satisfied her. She is slightly concerned that the condition
doesn't address everything except for the part about the road. She feels that the water and sewer lines and the
draiIlage are equally important.
Ms. Mauriello stated that this was a policy decision for the Board involving posting security.
Mr. Fuller responded that he felt that the discussion had revolved around the question of acceptable
secUrity. As currently proposed this security consists of their statement that they would do what they say' they ate
going to do. He stated that the cost is the primary consideration and objection. The costs of bonding are
proportional to the cost of the project. , '
Ms. Migchelbrink stated that a performance bond between the contractor and the developer is outside of
Eagle County.
Commissioner Stone wondered if Eagle County could be added to the policy.
Ms. Migchelbrink stated that it is still very difficult to move on this bond.
Mr. Nichols stated it would be difficult for the developer to get a bond on leased land.
Mr. Ingstad stated that they included the road because it is such an impoitaht infrastructural part for the
community.
Commissioner Rurtyon wondered about being listed as co-insured.
Ms. Mauriello stated that this could be a request.
Commissioner Stone agreed that it made sense.
Mr. Fuller didn't believe this would add any cost.
Chairman Menconi wondered about the conditions and whether they needed to be corrected.
ColTIfui ssionet Stone moved that the Board approve File No. POA-00055, incorporating Staffundings and
with the following conditions:
1. No landscape materials shall be used which are likely to be attractive to bears, including those that
produce nuts, berries and/or fruits.
2. The Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District shall implement noxious weed mitigation
meaSures consistent With the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Eagle County Weed
Management Plan, and to promptly develop and implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
program(s) for any pest species determined by the Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator to
adversely affect or potentially affect human health and safety or be detrimental to the site use
objectives (e.g., Wyoming ground squirrels, mosquitoes).
3. The composition of the seed mix, by species, for the proposed "native grass" areas shall be
provided to the Eagle County Weed and Pest Coordinator prior to making any landscape
improvements on thesite.
4. Prior to any construction other than overlot grading and associated drainage improvements, the
Applicant shall provide complete engineering and construction drawings and other engineering
detail which are satisfactory to the County Engineer.
5. Prior to installing any lighting, the Applicant shall demonstrate that all proposed lighting conforms
to Section D., Illumination Standards, of the Mt. Sopris Tree Farm Planned Unit Development
Guide dated March 27,2001.
[This condition added by Staff subsequent to Planning Commission action.]
6. Prior to issuance of the initial grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall execute an
agreement acceptable to the County Attorney and County Engineer setting forth the plan, method
and parties responsible for completion of any required public improvements in accordance with
design and time specifications. Further the Applicant shall post security in the form acceptable to
27
2/8/2005
the County Attorney to cover 100% of road improvements prior to col11tnencement of such road
improvements.
[This condition added by Staffsubsequent to Planning Commission action.]
7. Within six months of approval of this PUD Amendment, the Applicant shall develop a
comprehensive set of park rules which are satisfactory to the County Attorney.
8. The construction plans for any improvements which have not previously been approved by the
County Engineer shall be subject to review and approval by the County Engineer prior to issuance
of abuilding permit or grading permit for those improvements.
[This condition added by Staff subsequent to Planning Commission action.]
9. An alternative layout of the proposed ponds may be approved by the County Attorney and the
County Engineer.
[This condition added by Staffsubsequent to Planning Commission action.]
10. The District shall not undertake any improvement nor implement any activity that is contrary to the
Wildlife Management and Enhancement Program which is part of the Wildlife Analysis Report
dated October 16,2000, and recorded at Reception No. 754139.
11. It shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Attorney With input from the Coun:ty's
special water counsel, that prior to issuance of any irrigation system that the Crown. Mountain Park
and Recreation District has sufficient sources of irrigation water necessary to serve the Crown
Mountain Park and Recreation District improvements and leased property consisfuntwith existing
and future obligations between Eagle County and the U.S. Forest Service and Mid Valley
Metropolitan District as well as existing agreements betWeen Eagle County and Crown M()un.tain
.Park and Recreation District.
12. It shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to construction of any pond
or ponds other than the initial detention pond that complete engineering and construction drawings
and other engineering detail for the pond(s) have been provided and an appropriate pond
management plan addressing issues such as algae growth has been developed and Will be properly
implemented.
13. It shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to any construction ,other
than overlot grading and associated drainage improvements that the issues set forth in the letter
from the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments dated November 12, 2004 have been or will
be adequately satisfied.
14. It shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Engineer that all the conditions set forth
by the Mid Valley Metropolitan District in its letter dated November 19,2004, have been or will be
duly satisfied.
15. Except as otherwise modified by these conditions, all material representations of the Applicant in
this appIicatioIl and all public meetings shall be adhered to and be considered conditions of
approval.
16. Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District shall enter into a revised or amended lease
agreement with Eagle County.
17. Applicant shall make best efforts to add the County as an additional insured party to its
performance bond With the general contractor.
18. If there are any conflicts between the requirements ofNWcOG in Condition 13 and the provisions
of Condition 12, Condition 12 shall control.
28
2/8/2005
Mr. Fuller stated that as part of Condition 12 the requirement is to develop an appropriate pond
management plan, and in Condition 13, the NWCOG letter conditions had to be met. One ofthese
conditions is a management plan for the ponds, and it conflicts with Condition 12.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
3. PDF-00087 Cattail Flats Final Plat
Joe Forinash, Community Development
ACTION:
Final plat to subdivide Tract F to create four single family lots and one multi-family lot, and two
open space tracts and a public right of way tract; and vacate an existing sewer eaSement and create
a new sewer easement in a manner consistent with the previously approved Special Use Permit for
this site (File ZS-00121)
LOCATION: Btett Ranch Tract F a!k/a 33483 Highway 6, Edwards
TITLE:
FILE NO./PROcESS:
LOCATION:
OWNER:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
Cattail Flats
PDF-00087 / Planned Unit Development Final Plat
Brett Ranch Tract F (aka 33483 Highway 6, Edwards)
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
Fox and Company (Sid Fox); Ron Siebert (ERWSD)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~tJMMARY: A final plat to further subdivide Tract F, Brett Ranch and which would:
. Create
. Four single-fami1y residential lots;
. One multi-family residential lot for five units;
. Two open space tracts totaling 1.019 acres; and
. A public right-of-way tract.
. Vacate an existing sewer easement; and
. Create a new sewer easement.
All in a manner consistent with a Special Use Permit (ZS~00121) approved in November 2004.
CHRONOLOGY:
1981 ~ Final plat approved for the Brett Ranch Subdivision which created Tract F.
1997 - PUD Preliminary Plan zone change to PUD approved for the Brett Ranch PUD which superseded
the Brett Ranch Subdivision.
1998 ~ Final plat approved for the Brett Ranch PUD which established Tract F in its present configuration.
2004 - Special Use Permit approved for a residential development consistent with this final plat.
STAFF REPORT
REFERRAL RESPONSES: All referral responses have been satisfactorily addressed.
MAJOR CONCERNS AND ISSUES:
None.
STAFF FINDINGS:
Pursuant to Section 5-280. B.5.b(3). Final Plat for Subdivision - Action bv the Board of County
Commissioners, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the following finding is made:
The Final Plat DOES conform to the approved Preliminary Plan for Subdivision for the Brett Ranch Planned Unit
Development, and
29
2/8/2005
Pursuant to Section 5-280.B.3.e, Subdivision Standards, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the
following findings are made:
(1) Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed subdivision IS consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan
and the FLUM of the Master Plan;
(2) Consistent with Land Use Regulations. The proposed subdivision DOES 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;
(3) Spatial Patterns Shall Be Efficient. 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.
(a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions ARE consistent with the utility's service
plan. Proposed road extensions ARE consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements
Plan.
(b) Serve l1ItiInate Population. Utility lines ARE sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the
service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines.
(c) Coordinate Utillty Extensions. Generally, utility extensions ARE allowed only when the entire range
of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an
otherwise un-served area.
(4) Suitability for Development. The property proposed to be subdivided IS suitable for dev'elopment,
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.
(5) Compatible with Surrounding Uses. The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character-of
existing land uses in the area and WILL NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding
area.
Pursuant to Section 4-700, School Land Dedication Standards, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the
following findings are made:
The Applicant HAS provided an appraisal in the form of a Summary Appraisal Report, completed by an appraiser
licensed or certified in the State of Colorado and dated no more than six (6) months prior to the date of the
application. The appraisal has established the full market value of the land to be platted, based on anticipated
market value after completion of platting, in the total amount of $645,000, which is a per acre value of$185,504.74
for the 3.477 acre parcel.
Further, based on a school land dedication requirement of 0.0729 acres for the Cattail Flats Subdivision, a cash in-
lieu-payment of $13.523.30 IS reasonable and appropriate.
Pursuant to Section 4-710, Road ImDact Fees, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the following findings
are made:
Pursuant to Section 4.710.E.3, Waiver by the Board of County Commissioners for affordable employee housing,
the Applicant has requested a waiver of the applicable Road Impact Fee. Planning Staff has determined that the
development, based on the Special Use Permit approved for Cattail Flats (File No. ZS-00121) and the information ~
provided with this request for a waiver, HAS satisfied the requirements of this Section.
Mr. Forinash gave a background of the property and showed photos of the final plat subdivision for Tract
F. He explained the request was to subdivide Tract F and showed a slide ofthe plat. The district is asking the
30
2/8/2005
Board to waive the Road Impact Fees due to the nature of the development, and this waiver is allowed under stafute
and reglllations. Staff findings are positive and staff recommends approval of final plat and the waiving of the
Road Impact Fees.
Col11tnissioner Stone asked about Road Impact Fees and the fact that these fees could not be waived. He
wondered if this was or Was not true.
Mr. Forinash stated that statute allows for the waiver, but the Land Use Regulations do not allow it. There
has been a provision added to the Land Use Reglllations to allow for it. He asked Mr. Matthews for his opinion.
Chairman Menconi stated that the County had paid Road Impact Fees for the Miller Ranch housing.
Mr. Matthews statedthat the statute took effect in 2004 and as such, the commissioners can now decide to
waive road impact fees.
Mr. Forinash stated that the amount is approximately $11,000.
Chairman Menconi wondered how this project would qualify as affordable housing.
Mr. Forinash stated that there are restrictions on appreciation.
Ron Seber with Eagle River Water and Sanitation District stated that they owned the property aIld the
employees, as purchasers, would not be charged for the land, but solely for the building costs. The district would
always have first right of refusal so that these units would remain affordable.
Chairman Menconi wondered about the cost for a single family home.
Mr. Seber stated that the cost would be approximately $220,000.
Chairman MeIlconi asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements.
Mr. Seber stated that some ofthe homes would be sold to economically and developmentally-challenged
individuals.
Chairman Menconi opened public comment. There was none. He closed public co:h1:h1ent.
Col11tnissioner Runyon asked about a demonstrable desire on the part of the District's employees to take
advantage of this proposal. He wondered if this was a deed-restrictive housing project. He wondered if deed
restricting is the best way to handle the demand for housing.
Mr. Seber stated that this would allow the families to purchase and keep their payments down. He stated
there has been a lot of interest in the project for single and multi-family units. This will lessen the commutes of the
mployees, especially of those that live in Leadville.
Conunissioner Runyon stated that he always has a problem with deed restrictions because the value of
these units loses pace rapidly with the market and wondered how they came up with the 3% cap.
Mr. Seber stated that he had taken the example from the Town of Vail. He indicated that there was already
a waitIng list for the project, and one unit had been separated out for the developmentally challenged group.
Commissioner Runyon asked about the size and zoning of the lot.
Mr. Forinash stated it was about 3.5acres and this was currentlyzoned as PUD, but employee housing
would be allowed.
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS:
Two motions are required
Commissioner Runyon'moved that the Board, pursuant to Section 4-710.E.3 of the Eagle County Land Use
Regulations, waive the applicable Road Impact Fee onthe affordable employee housing in the Cattail Flats
Subdivision as defined in Section 4-710, Road Impact Fees, of the Eagle County Land Use Reglllations.
Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Col11tnissioner Runyon moved that the Board approve File No. PDF-00087, incorporating the Staff
findings, and authorized the Chairman to sign the plat.
Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
4. AFP-00204 Ea21e Vail Commercial Center Excel Ener2V Site And Subdivision
ImDrovementsA2reement
Adam Palmer, Community Development
NOTE:
CTION:
Tabled from 12/14/04 & 1/18/05. To be tabled to 2/15/05.
Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 1 of the Eagle Vail Commercial Center (formerly Xcel Energy Site) are to
be reconfigured such that Lot 7 will be subdivided and merged into lots 6 and 8 respectively,
vacating previous internal lot lines to create two lots where currently three exist.
Lot 6: 40847 US Highway 6/ Lot 8: 40849 US Highway 6
31
2/8/2005
LOCATION:
Commissioner Stone moved to table AFP-00204, Eagle Vail Commercial Center Excel Energy Site and
Subdivision Improvements Agreement, at the applicant's request, to February 15,2005.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
5. AFP-00207 Tract F.. Beaver Creek 89 Elk Track Court
Adam Palmer, Community Development
NOTE:
ACTION:
To be Tabled to March 22, 2005
Reconfiguration of Building Envelope that does not change the allowable square footage of the
existing building envelope, but changes its shape and lot placement significantly.
89 Elk Track Court, Beaver Creek PUD; Tract F, Lot 5, Filing 2
LOCATION:
Chairman
32
2/8/2005