Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes 09/05/06 PUBLIC HEARING September 5, 2006 _ resent: Peter Runyon Tom Stone Arn Menconi Bruce Baumgartner Bryan Treu Walter Mathews Teak Simonton Kathy Scriver Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator County Attorney Deputy County Attorney Clerk to the Board Deputy Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County CofilriiisSicmers for their consideration: GENERAL FUND 21 ST CENTURY PHOTO SUPPLY 360 TRAINING 4 EAGLE RANCH A 1 COLLECTION AGENCY AAAA SEPTIC pUMPING AFFILIATED CREDIT SERVICE AIRGAS INTERMOUNTAIN INC ALEX NEWBERRY MEMORIAL ALEXANDER HAMILTON ALEXANDERPOTENTE ALL PHASE ELECTRIC SUPPLY ALLMED HEALTHCARE MGT INC ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC ALPINE ACCOUNTING AND TAX ALPINE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY ALPINE LUMBER COMPANY ALPINE PARTY RENTALS ALPINE RESCUE TEAM AMADEO GONZALES AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AMERICAN HOTEL REGISTER AMERICAN JAIL ASSOCtA TION AMERICINN LODGE & SUITES AMY BERENS ANIMAL CARE EQUIPMENT AND ANN LOPER APS AQUA TEC SYSTEMS ARDYCEZ OMAN ARMOR HOLDINGS FORENSICS ARN MENCONI ASFPM ASSET VALUATION ADVISORS A V TECH ELECTRONICS INC AVID TECHNOLOGY INC B J ROWE BABETTE ROUFF BAILEYS SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE REFUND SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE 1 9/5/06 308.24 25.00 8,030.15 10.80 450.00 69.90 85.47 250.00 97.00 1,049.01 243.00 236.25 3,809.00 187.50 980.00 158.27 431.90 1,139.51 28.80 133.13 3,959.40 36.00 6,332.32 170.10 18.17 79.50 201.81 5,799.00 2.10 225.00 85.00 100.00 10,000.00 131.34 995.00 50.22 104.70 171.50 BALCOMB AND GREEN BASALT CLINIC PHARMACY BASALT HIGH SCHOOL BASALT QUICK LUBE BAYER HEALTHCARE BC SERVICES INC BEA TRIZ GARCIA BENJAMIN F BENDELE BERLITZ LANGUAGE CENTER BERNICE WHITE BERTHOD MOTORS BEST ACCESS SYSTEMS BETHANY VAN WYK BEYOND PLAY LLC BOB BARKER COMPANY BOLES CUSTOM BUILDER INC BONDED BUSINESS SERVICE BOYD COFFEE COMPANY BRC/HARRIS INC BRUCE BAUMGARTNER BUSHMASTER FIREARMS CALPHO CANYON INSURANCEcEAGLE CARDINAL HEALTH CARMEN LOZOYO-VELEZ CARTER & ALTERMAN CASTLE PEAK VETERINARY CATAWBACOUNTYNC CATHY KEIL CATHY ZEEB CEHA CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING CENTURYTEL CENTURYTEL OF EAGLE CHAPMAN & IS OM LAW GROup. CHARLES B DARRAH CHARLES D JONES CO, INC. CHARM TEX CHEMA TOX INC. CHERYL THOMAS CHIEF SUPPLY CHRISTY POPE CHSA CINGULAR WIRELESS CLEAN DESIGNS CLINTON MEHL CO ASSESSORS ASSOCIATION CO DEPT AGRICULTURE CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH & CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH AND CO RURAL bEVELOPMENT COLLECT AMERICA COLLECTION CENTER INC COLORADO COUNTIES INC SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REFUND REFUND SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REFUND REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND REFUND SERVICE 5,030.31 58.33 1,220.00 43.43 110.08 8.00 169.74 6,300.00 300.00 4.80 44.01 561.30 89.91 656.26 891.04 809.74 58.10 610.23 260.66 35.25 1,171.00 145.00 540.00 2,355.18 89.10 5,930.00 62.31 379.49 34.00 252.00 580.00 1,745.49 5,972.86 3,060.84 14.70 33.32 3,614.00 1,154.06 450.00 29.49 2,677.98 45.90 875.00 187.44 8,093.00 90.00 210.00 110.00 75.00 475.00 90.00 31.20 22.52 24.18 2 9/5/06 I ...-.~-- COLORADO FASTENERS COLORADO HOMES LIFESTYLES COLORADO MOUNTAIN MEDICAL :OLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLORADO NAHRO COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY COLORADO WEST MENTAL HLTH COMCAST SPOTLIGHT CONSERVE A WATT LIGHTING CONSOLIDATED PLASTIC CO CONTRACTPHARMACYSERV~E COORS DISTRIBUTING COPJ>ERMOUNTAIN RESORT COJ>Y PLUS CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS IMAGING COVA COWBOY CATERING CSU COOPERATIVE EXTENSION DAILY SENTINEL THE DALY PROPERTY SERVICES bAN CORCORAN PLS DAN SPARKMAN DAVE MOTT DAVID A BAUER DECATUR ELECTRONICS DENVER CHECKWRITER, INC. DENVER HEALTH AND DENVER NEWSPAPER AGENCY DIANA JOHNSON DIEBOLD ELECTION SYSTEMS DIRECT SAFETY COMPANY DISCOVERY EDUCA nON bON OLSEN DONALD J LAUGHLIN DOREEN CONSTANINE DUFFORD WALDECK & MILBURN DUSTY BOOT DWELL EAGLE AMOCO EAGLE COMPUTER SYSTEMS EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF EAGLE EMBROIDERY INC EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE RIVER WATER AND EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED CNL EAGLE VALLEY CHAMBER COMM EAGLE V ALLEY HIGH SCHOOL EAGLE V ALLEY HOME BUILDER EAGLE V ALLEY MEDICAL EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING ECOLAB EDWARDS BUILDING CENTER SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 12.25 22.95 153.00 6,620.80 60.00 68.00 1,620.00 6,941.70 523.56 307.75 4,123.91 3,018.67 2,152.08 529.89 11,461.I 7 2,400.47 835.00 4,010.56 597.00 1,623.51 850.00 3,380.00 161.34 166.84 67.00 158.60 302.15 193.00 808.16 180.00 1,069.76 166.34 89.95 23.89 82.50 407.27 98.42 9,000.00 19.95 74.59 5,829.00 15,571.69 779.96 1,003.18 450.51 1,179.04 35,000.00 755.33 2,620.00 375.00 1,200.00 7,170.25 747.42 15.04 3 9/5/06 ELLEN MATLOCK EMC2 EMPLOYERS COUNCIL SERVICE EPSDESIGN AND PRINT ESRI ESTHER MEHL EVERETT FAMILY FUNERAL EXTENSION PROGRAM FUND FAIRFIELD INN FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY FEDERAL EXPRESS FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC FINANCIAL EQUIPMENT COMP A FIRE SPRINKLER SERVICES FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS FITzSIMMONS MOTOR COMPANY FLORIDA MICRO FRANK J BALL FRANKLIN COVEY CAT SALES FRED PRYOR SEMINARS FRONT RANGE TRAINING FSH COMMUNICATIONS LLC GAIL GEDDES GALLS INCORPORATED GARFIELD COUNTY CLERK GARFIELD COUNTY SHERIFF GATOR HAWK ARMOR INC GEMPLERS INC GEORGIE C ZINDA GLADYS PETIT GLENWOOD SHOE SERVICE GLENWOOD SPRINGS FORD GLENWOOD SPRINGS PARKS GOLDEN MUMBY SUMMERS & GOOGLE INC GOVCONNECTION, INC GOVERNMENT CONTRACT SALES GRACE FINNEY GRAINGER INCORPORATED GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND GREG SCHROEDER GYPSUM FIRE PROTECTION GYPSUM VALLEY FEED HALL AND EVANS HANSEN STEVE R HARDEN HASS HAAG HALLBERG HART INTERCIVIC HAWTHORN SUITES HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HEART OF THE WEST COUNSEL HELEN MIGCHELBRINK HELMER HENRY SCHEIN HERTA VON OHLSEN REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT 54.00 463.36 1,450.00 410.07 2,250.00 90.00 750.00 2,487.25 112.00 2,784.45 934.51 7.36 95.00 105.00 171.00 10.00 5,495.39 65.60 205.20 149.00 5,600.00 65.00 76.80 9,386.27 76.11 13,090.00 1,059.00 872.75 805.00 736.00 54.00 25,500.00 80.00 14.70 395.00 875.14 6,039.17 38.40 1,185.44 492.48 177.40 230.00 60.00 280.19 61.86 188.00 851.25 213.00023,190.03 90.00 62.05 14,077.60 992.61 150.00 4 9/5/06 HEWLETT PACKARD HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS HILTON FORT COLLINS IOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HOME DEPOT SUPPLY HOUSING COLORADO HR DIRECT HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS HUMAN CONCEPTS LLC HV AC SUPPLY IACREOT ICC IMP ACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS IMPRESSIONS INTEGRAL RECOVERIES INTERIOR PLANTSCAPES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERNAP NETWORK SYSTEMS INTERNA TIONAL ASSOCIATION ISC INC J & G TREE SERVICE JAMES H DRIVER JAMIE HUMPHREY JAYB MATTHEWS JB T'S JEAN NUNN JEFFERSON COUNTY JENNIFER BERKMAN JENNIFER CUEVAS JEROME EVANS PH.D JERRY CHICOINE JILL HUNSAKER JIMMIE ANDERSON JOANNE CERMAK JOHN PIPPENGER JUDITH C MOSSER KAPLAN COMPANIES, INC KARA BETTIS, CORONER KATHY SCIDVER KEMP AND COMPANY INC KEN CALL KEN SEXTON KENNETH TURNER KESSLER MARY J KINDER MORGAN INC KINETICO WATER PROS KYMBERLEIGH SEMMENS KZYR-COOL RADIO LLC LAFARGE CORPORATION LASER JUNCTION LAURIE V AN CAMPEN LEDERHAUSE EDITH LEIBOWITZ & HORTON LEXISNEXIS COURTLINK INC SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REFUND SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE 12,251.02 3,462.95 356.00 41,3 IO.48 44.96 250.00 297.00 914.16 1,124.13 45.39 270.00 154.00 302.80 207.70 30.00 100.00 300.00 2,427.40 275.00 11,225.20 2,400.00 102.60 56.40 35.00 348.50 90.00 100.00 14.70 18.23 3,950.00 74.70 326.06 90.00 20.40 159.32 1,383.00 131.07 136.15 43.55 5.94 53.58 38.00 400.00 38.00 4,439.54 374.85 4.09 4,700.00 158.37 239.85 44.70 68.40 11,334.20 33.50 5 .9/5/06 LINDA CARR LINDA MAGGIORE LINDA NESTOR LINEBARGER GOGGAN BLAIR LIVEPERSON INC LK SURVEY INSTRUMENTS LORIE CRAWFORD M & M AUTO PARTS MACHOL & JOHANNES MAGNETIC CONCEPTS CORP MAIN AUTO PARTS MARGARET BABEL MARIA ANJIER MARION F LAUGHLIN MARLENE MC CAFFERTY MARY MOE MAXIMUM COMFORT POOL SPA MBIA MCCAULLEY REBECCA T MERCK A TL METRON INC MICRO FLEX MEDICAL CORP MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN MIKE KERST MOBILE VISION MOFFET CONSULTING MONICA JACOX MONITOR OUTLET INC MOORE MEDICAL CORP MOTOR J>OOL FUND MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS MOUNTAIN STATES EMPLOYERS MOUNTAIN TEMP SERVICES MOUNT AIN V ALLEY MURRAY DAHL MWI VETERNIARY SUPPLY CO NANCY SCHURR, NP NATIONAL ASSOCIA nON OF NA TIONAL DISTRIBUTING INC NATIONAL IMPRINT CORPORA T NA TIONAL TACTICAL OFFICER NCES INC NEHA ENVIRONMET AL HEALTH NEVES UNIFORMS NEW ELECTRIC INC NOBEL SYSCO FOOD SERVICES NORDIC REPRIGERA TION NORTHERN SAFECO INC NORTHWEST COLORADO NORTHWEST LEGAL SERVICES NRC BROADCASTING, INC. OC TANNER OLSON PROPERTY ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REFUND SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 20.40 95.58 29.16 14.26 990.00 424.00 111.99 9.99 46.84 78.00 28.66 90.00 10.32 90.00 196.00 48.11 2,999.00 5,371.56 ' 104.95 3,107.10 3,091.00 77.50 459.15 570.56 94.90 9,170.86 38.00 935.00 336.38 87,775.79 600.00 225.00 11,584.53 10,000,00 4,801.18 480.65 2,880.00 425.00 5,114.64 150.01 2,080.00 53.85 455.00 79.00 63.00 767.00 247.00 5,943.04 10,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 155.09 3,460.00 7,151.73 6 9/5/06 If ,~, OSM DELIVERY LLC P SCOTT LOWERY P-LOGIC SYSTEMS 'ADDYW ACKS DIST., LLC P AJ>ER DIRECT PAPER WISE PARK COUNTY SHERIFF OFF. PATMAGDZIUK PAULA A PALMATEER PDQ HOUSECLEANING INC PEARL TAYLOR PEGGY GRAYBEAL PET PICK UPS PETTY CASH PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING J>HYLISS ROUNDS PIA VIDAL PITNEY BOwEs PITNEY BOWES INCORPORATED J>LAK SMACKER CORPORATE HQ J>OCATELLO SUPPLY DEPOT POWERS PHILLIPS PC PRCA PROFESSIONAL FINANCE PROMOTIONAL SOURCE PSS,INC PURCHASE POWER QUEST DIAGNOSTICS QUILL CORPORATION QWEST RAZORS EDGE INC REALIGENT REBECCA LARSON RED BLUFF BUCKLES REGION 8 HSA RENEE DUBUISSON RESORT QUEST RESOURCE CENTER RICHARD A KESLER RICK ULLOM RITA RBOSSOW ROARING FORK FAMILY ROBIN COCK ROCKY MOUNTAIN BINGO ROCKY MOUNTAIN RECORDS ROLLY ROUNDS RSC RUTH A SHARP S CORPORATION INC SAFEW A Y :AM COLLINS SANYO E & E AMERICA CO SAWAYA AND ROSE SCHELDE NORTH AMERICA SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES REFUND SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REFUND SERVICE 443.62 156.30 10,490.32 409.40 162.83 3,113.78 7,290.00 302.13 27.00 750.00 44.28 280.00 1,319.88 59.27 1,469.49 27.60 54.73 153.00 233.36 122.12 2,462.68 36.50 1,565.00 95.70 1,623.14 2,324.98 595.53 624.98 84.88 7,714.61 2,311.00 159.90 109.15 1,425.00 45.00 289.08 1,051.50 12,000.00 8,146.61 14.98 212.1 1 2,000.00 12.99 87.36 34.50 87.30 4,169.94 33.72 24,156.17 60.00 47.49 2,328.00 55.80 461.76 7 9/5/06 SCHNEIDER MAURER SCHUTZMAN COMPANY, INC. SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SECURITY TRANSPORT SERVICEMASTER CLEAN SHAINHOLTZ TODD H DDS SHAPINS ASSOCIATES SHEAFFER KAREN SHERI MINTZ SIGN ON DESIGN SIGNATURE SIGNS SILVERADO ROPING SINTON DAIRY COMPANY SNOWHITE LINEN SOFTWARE SPECTRUM SOUTH COAST HOTEL SPRONK WATER ENGINEERS ST VINCENTS CATHOLIC STATE OF COLORADO STEPHANIE GLENWRIGHT STEPHENS NURSERY STERICYCLE INC SUEMOTT SUPPORT PAYMENT SUSAN NARDUZZI SUSPENSE FUND SYDNEY PITTMAN SYLVIA SALAZAR TAMMI MATTHEWS TASER INTERNATIONAL TAYLOR RYAN TEAK SIMONTON TENIE CHICOINE TERRIE FISCHER THE FLOWER CART THE GOURMET COWBOY THERMOWORKS INC THOMAS F FARRELL THOMPSON PUBLISHING GROUP THOMSON WEST GROUP TILE WORKS BY PAUL TIMBERLINE STEEL TOM JOHNSON TOOL CLINIC INCORPORATED TOWN OF EAGLE TOWN OF GYPSUM TOWN OF V AIL TRAJEN FBO NETWORK TRANE COMPANY TRI COUNTY FIRE UNITED PARCEL SERVICE UNITED REPROGRAPHIC URBAN LAND INSTITUTE US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE 210.00 46.48 972.03 757.12 6,866.98 830.00 6,733.75 156.33 108.10 340.92 1,833.50 2,000.00 428.90 83.70 2,620.86 686.70 545.64 500.00 945.12 180.00 244.35 743.82 90.00 363.00 90.00 153,576.14 60.00 52.38 12.96 450.00 130.44 137.29 90.00 129.50 55.00 4,500.00 501.37 45.24 349.00 3,989.06 262.64 112.27 90.95 287.76 10,740.15 80.00 219,086.80 1,059.80 3,967.88 285.00 426.61 87.30 1,395.00 30,763.11 8 9/5/06 US FOODSERVICE INC VAIL CHRISTIAN HS VAIL DAILY THE VAIL ELECTRONICS VAIL LOCK ANb KEY VAIL MOUNTAIN RESCUE GROU VAIL MOUNTAIN SCHOOL V AIL RESORTS MANAGEMENT VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTR VAIL VISION V ALAS KAREN V ALLEY LUMBER V ALLEY VIEW HOSPITAL VAN mEST SUPPL Y COMPANY VERIl'ICA TIONS tNc VERIT AS VERIZON WIRELESS, VISA CARD SERVICES VOTEC CORPORATION WASTE MANAGEMENT WECMRD WELLS FARGO WESTERN DAIRY COUNCIL WESTERN SAFETY PRODUCT WESTERN SLOPE BAR WESTERN SLOPE FENCING WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES WILLITS GENERAL STORE WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XCELENERGY XEROX CORPORATION YAMP A VALLEY ELECTRIC YOUR PERSONAL CHEF ZANCANELLA & ASSOCIA TES PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL 16, 17 & 18 4,379.37 560.00 17,754,82 16,854.64 72.50 693.54 2,040.00 1,021.45 610.55 375.00 29.16 235.67 180.00 7,016.38 280.95 1,710.00 6,706.81 42,894.24 17,562.16 5,390.84 1,245.00 511 ,299.16 40.00 21.95 188.52 1,086.04 715.13 28.00 784.67 150.79 113.13 8,334.58 345.11 287.00 356.20 1,171,785.01 3,047,775.69 ROAD AND BRmGE FUND APW A CONFERENCE APW A WESTERN SNOW & ICE BERNARD WEBER BEST WESTERN COHEN CONSTRUCTION, INC COMPLIANCE ALLIANCE INC COPY PLUS EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING ELAM CONSTRUCTION INCORPO ENVIROTECH 'AMIL Y SUPPORT REGIS1RY G M ROAD MARKING LLC GEORGE N YOST GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE 120.00 740.00 100.00 1,425.00 2,000.00 166.00 88.49 122,346.22 45.81 512.50 20,436,68 602.82 1,405.00 100,00 169.00 9 9/5/06 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 2,283.46 HOBBS EXCAVATING SERVICE 8,707.13 HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 605.61 INTERWEST SAFETY SUPPLY SUPPLIES 154.66 J&S CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO SUPPLIES 98.80 KINDER MORGAN INC SERVICE 71.11 LAFARGE CORPORATION SERVICE 279,61831 M & M AUTO PARTS SERVICE 13.78 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 10,223.19 ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO SERVICE 1,370.65 PATRIOT HIGHWAY STRIPING SERVICE 4,959.00 PAWNEE BUTTES SEED INC SERVICE 439.66 PROpBRTY IMAGING, LLC SERVICE 450.00 RA Y WNG REIMBURSEMENT 75.00 RDM EXCA V A TING REIMBURSEMENT 250.00 ROCKVILLE CHEMICAL INC SERVICE 1,598.00 SAFETY & CONSTRUCTION SUPPLIES 1,202.48 SHA WN WEYRAUCH REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 SHC NURSERY AND SERVICE 240.00 SUPER 8 MOTEL SERVICE 283.52 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 10,861.17 THERESA LADENBURGER REIMBURSEMENT 44.99 TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE 768.65 TRI PHASE ELECTRIC REIMBURSEMENT 250.00 UNITED COMPANIES SERVICE 96,159.56 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 471.67 VALLEY LUMBER SUPPLIES 32.59 WAGNER RENTS SERVICE 5,602.50 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 70.48 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 43,996.99 WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 130.55 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 284.85 PAYROLL FOR AUGUST PAYROLL 16,17 & 18 129,889.35 751,565.23 SOCIAL SERVICES FUND ANDREW TURNER REIMBURSEMENT 564.52 ANDREWS PRODUCE INCORPORA SERVICE 551.30 BETHANIE LINDAL SERVICE 150.00 CAROL PRATER REIMBURSEMENT 72.95 CAROLINE GONZALES REIMBURSEMENT 286.59 CENTURYTEL SERVICE 292.12 CHRIS MORTON SERVICE 525.00 CIMARRON VAIL SERVICE 5,700.00 COLORADO WEST MENTAL HLTH SERVICE 120.00 COpy PLUS SERVICE 109.00 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 799.80 COWBOY CATERING SERVICE 143.31 DOLPHIN CAPITAL CORP SERVICE 79.00 EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL SERVICE 3,336.08 EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING SUPPLIES 384.55 EAGLE RIVER WATER AND SERVICE 2,466.95 EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING SERVICE 1,284.75 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 2,532.52 10 9/5/06 HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC ISABEL SANCHEZ JB T'S JESSICA LUCAS KATHY REED KA TO COUNSELING KYMBERLEIGH SEMMENS LA QUINT A LARA "HEATHER" LA WDERMILK. LEXISNEXIS COURTLINK INC LISA GRIGGS LYONS KATHLEEN MARY MOE MERCEDES GARCIA MICHELLE ARANA NATALIE SWANSON NCSEA OLSON PROPERTY ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO PUEBLO COUNTY SHERIFF OFF QUILL CORPORATION RACHAELBORRE SHERATON COLORADO SPRINGS SHERATON DENVER WEST SIGNATURE SIGNS SSTABS STATE FORMS CENTER SUPPORTIVE HOUSING & SUSIE GALLEGOS SUSPENSE FUND SYLVIA SALAZAR TARA KANE VAIL HONEYW AGON L TD VERIZON WIRELESS, VISA CARD SERVICES WELLS FARGO XEROX CORPORAtION PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLLEXPD SERVICE PAYROLL 16,17 & 18 11 0.55 112.20 348.50 116.23 45.77 150.00 16.40 1 72. 00 171.70 63.95 1,780.81 8.64 5.57 59.94 227.70 23.91 300.00 875.00 57.75 39.32 98.20 89.91 356.00 357.00 6.75 435.00 599.54 220.00 14.12 13,204.52 149.04 26.73 33.50 436.06 1;575.19 39,315.63 1,117.09 89,347.96 171 ,466.62 WRAP FUND EAGLE RIVER YOUTH COAL. SERVICE 5,000.00 5,000.00 RETIREMENT FUND SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 136,902.93 136,902.93 INSURANCE RESERVE FUND COUNTY TECHNICAL SERVICES EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL RED CANYON AUTOBODY SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 2,503.50 1,380.67 10,509.29 14,393.46 11 9/5/06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND ALPINE LUMBER COMP ANY AMERICAN HOTEL REGISTER COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS CROWN MOUNTAIN PARK & EMED COMPANY INC FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS GOLDEN EAGLE ELDERLY GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND HART INTERCIVIC HEWLETT PACKARD JOHNSON KUNKEL & ASSOC KENNEY & ASSOCIA TES KOECHLEIN CONSULTING MARTINEZ WESTERN MITY-LITE, INC. NATIONAL NETWORK SERVICES NEW WORLD SYSTEMS NEWSTROM-DAVIS PEAK LAND SURVEYING INC R A NELSON & ASSOCIATES R J THOMAS MFa CO INC SHEPHERD RESOURCES, INC. SIRI NELSON TILE WORK BY PAUL TRANE COMPANY VAIL ELECTRONICS WATERWORKS INTERNATIONAL SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 43.90 3,959040 188.87 396.96 50.74 2,707.26 12,371.75 149.80 2,500.00 2,026.00 945.96 698.64 520.00 30,729.69 3,044.16 12,954.24 95,373.13 108,732.82 560.00 146,141.14 2,553.00 1,883.45 9.29 2,595.13 8,063.44 540.00 4,000.00 443,738.77 SALES TAX E.V. TRANSP. A & E TIRE INC AMERICAN DRUG TESTING BUFFALO RIDGE AFFORDABLE CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING CINGULAR WIRELESS COLLETTS COLORADO DEPT REVENUE COLUMBINE MARKET COPY COPY CORPORATE EXPRESS CUMMINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN DAVID JOHNSON DE LA RUE CASH SYSTEMS DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING FEDERAL EXPRESS FLORIDA MICRO G & K SERVICES GFI GENF ARE GILLIG CORPORATION GLENWOOD SPRINGS FORD HASLERINC SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE 10,898.15 152.40 6,080.00 645.01 283.38 195.30 6.60 32.37 196.20 1,093.61 353.56 34.00 228.00 3,570.24 45,007.72 725.00 17.19 314.00 183.60 113.02 1,405.00 417.28 189.00 12 9/5/06 'I~. HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 4,082.06 HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 2,120.70 IMP ACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS SUPPLIES 137.18 JAMES ZIEGLER REIMBURSEMENT 65.00 JEFF WETZEL REIMBURSEMENT 469.43 KELLEY S WILLIAMS REIMBURSEMENT 284.88 KINDER MORGAN INC SERVICE 249.04 KINETICO WATER PROS SERVICE 35.00 KTUN-FM RADIO SERVICE 300.00 KW CONSTRUCTION SERVICE 1,900.00 KZYR"COOL RADIO LLC SERVICE 333.00 LAWSON PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 901.93 LEGACY COMMuNICATIONS INC SERVICE 121.74 M & M AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 259.62 MAIN AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 68.18 MONEY SERVICE 10.00 MORlRYDE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLIES 268.39 MOTOR POOL FuND SERVICE 7,232.77 MOUNTAIN EQuIPMENT SUPPLIES 125.00 NEW PIG CORPORATION SUPPLIES 270.73 NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC SERVICE 1,624.50 QUILL CORPORATION SUPPLIES 314.30 QWEST SERVICE 167.57 REBECA GURULE SUPPLIES 65.00 REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS SERVICE 2,244.64 ROY C. WILK REIMBURSEMENT 532.95 SERCK SERVICES INC SUPPLIES 2,060.94 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 17,939.46 TOWN OF AVON SERVICE 300.63 TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE 2,691.65 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE SERVICE 10.00 UNITED STATES WELDING SERVICE 29.60 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 2,479.25 V AIL NET SERVICE 11.95 V AIL V ALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE 303.00 VERIZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 132.12 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 4,438.03 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 246.77 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 81,779.46 WESTERN SLOPE BAR SERVICE 16.25 WBITEALLS ALPINE SUPPLIES 317.00 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 71.67 XCEL ENERGY SERVICE 53,11 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 510.90 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 118.81 PAYROLL FOR AUGUST PAYROLL 16,17 & 18 187,737.79 397,572.63 SALES TAX E.\!. TRAILS COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 1,330.59 :OLUMBINE MARKET SERVICE 39.74 CONTECH BRIDGE SERVICE 10,123.80 COpy PLUS SERVICE 1,415.42 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 28.00 13 9/5/06 EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL FEDERAL EXPRESS GARY THORNTON GMAC MORTGAGE HEALTH INSURANCE FUND METCALF ARCHAELOGICAL SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER SUSPENSE FUND VISA CARD SERVICES WELLS FARGO WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SUPPLIES PAYROLL 16, 17 & 18 29,266.38 23.03 136.89 200.00 16.08 1,538.70 6,830.00 246.63 570.87 1,485.66 58.09 343.53 53,653.41 TRANS PORTA. VEHICLE RPLCMT GILLIG CORPORATION SERVICE 683,926.00 683,926.00 AIRPORT FUND ALL PHASE ELECTRIC SUPPLY ALPINE LUMBER COMPANY AMERICAN ASSOC AIRPORT AMERICAN PROTECTION BALCOMB AND GREEN BERTHOD MOTORS BLUEGLOBES INC CARTER & BURGESS, INC CENTURYTEL CHRIS ANDERSON COLLETTS COLORADO PAINT COMPANY CORPORATE EXPRESS DISH NETWORK DOLPHIN CAPITAL CORP ELIZABETH WILT FRONTIER RADIO GARDEN CENTER OF GYPSUM GATEKEEPER SYSTEMS GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND GYPSUM TOWN OF HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HELENA TRAINING CENTER HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC KELLEY TRUCKING INC LAFARGE CORPORATION LAWSON PRODUCTS MAIN AUTO PARTS MCGRAW HILL COMPANY METEORLOGIX MIDWEST AIR TRAFFIC MOTOR POOL FUND NASCO LLC NEXTEL OSHKOSH TRUCK CORPORATION SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 349.84 44.98 300.00 92.50 18.50 50.81 2,907.40 153,885.19 2,845.81 91.91 4,824.89 85.18 527.15 115.97 271.77 14.96 620.00 10.95 1,980.00 1,119.01 431.05 1,889.07 5,000.00 6,093.45 1,352,760.99 5,724.73 56.17 40.33 752.40 477.00 55,175.00 2,709.34 1,540.00 569.54 2,148.65 14 9/5/06 OVERLAND ANb EXPRESS COMP PACE INCORPORATED PAINT BUCKET THE R8C SERVICEMASTER CLEAN SKYLINE MECHANICAL STANDARD SIGNS INC SUMMITEX, LLC SUSPENSE FUND TAYLOR FENCE COMPANY TIRE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS TOLIN MECHANICAL ULLERICK ENTERPRISES INC US CUSTOMS SERVICE VAIL VALLEY JET CENTER VALLEY LUMBER VISA CARD SERVICES WASTE MANAGEMENT WELLS FARGO WESTERN IMPLEMENTS WESTERN SLOPE BAR WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XEROX CORPORATION PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE PAYROLL 16, 17 & 18 1,104.40 11,000.00 87.99 151.75 1,944.00 98.00 11 ,461.82 212.39 6,460.00 1,080.00 600.50 277.50 400.00 1,339.63 149.35 412.50 4,877.84 433.55 26,519.92 1,381.57 224.74 549.60 95.58 57,198.43 1,733,585.60 MICROWAVE MAINTENANCE FUNt> CENTURYTELOFEAGLE HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC MCI WORLDCOM QWEST WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 94.15 6,997.97 324.43 2,388.00 63,298.66 73,103.21 "Me-cop DEBT SERVICE FUND US BANK TRUST NA SERVICE 2,500.00 2,500.00 HOUSING FUND COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS FUNDING PARTNERS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE FUND LAND TITLE MOUNTAIN REGIONAL SUSPENSE FUND VISA CARD SERVICES WELLS FARGO SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD 966.00 10,000.00 72. 72 1,752.00 3,125.00 136.59 403.44 461.02 16,916.77 HAZARDOUSMATE~FUND HESS INC ALLIED SORBENTS IMP ACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS REIS ENVIRONMENTAL INC VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 2,494.60 1,410.00 251.50 49.28 15 9/5/06 4,205.38 OPEN SPACE FUND EAGLE VALLEY LAND TRUST SERVICE 1,280.84 1,280.84 LANDFILL FUND 21ST CENTURY SEEDERS INC AMERIGAS CAROLINA SOFTWARE CO SW ANA ROCKY MT CHAPTER DOWN VALLEY SEPTIC EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING EAGLE V ALLEY ALLIANCE HEALTH INSURANCE FUND KRW CONSULTING INC LAFARGECORPORATION LEGACY COMMUNICATIONS INC MOTOR POOL FUND NEIL HERRIDGE POWER MOTIVE RONALD RASNIC SUSPENSE FUND TIRE BROKER, INC. US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS VAIL ELECTRONICS VERIZON WIRELESS, WELLS FARGO WESTERN SLOPE BAR WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLLEXPD SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES PAYROLL 16,17 & 18 592.73 238.84 432.1 0 250.00 575.00 52,961.67 12.96 1,100.00 1,056.87 1,810.10 52,166.64 642.00 1,945.91 59.95 826.53 18.59 3,538.77 17,600.00 1,125.72 297.50 243.00 11,080.57 108.25 59.47 225.33 31,034.63 180,003.13 MOTOR POOL FUND ACE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY AIRGAS INTERMOUNTAIN INC BEA TRIZ GARCIA BERTHOD MOTORS CASTLE PEAK AUTOMOTIVE CCG SYSTEMS CENTURY EQUIPMENT COMP ANY CENTURYTEL COLLETTS DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EATON SALES & SERVICE FARIS MACHINERY CO G & K SERVICES GLENWOOD NATIONAL GLENWOOD RADIATOR REPAIR GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHRYSLER GOLDEN EAGLE ELDERLY SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT 89.00 206.88 30.91 2,383.60 40.36 1,140.00' 126.46 147.76 188,615.33 903.92 4,263.00 2,782.73 1,013.47 622.20 435.12 180.00 963.80 1,213.52 16 9/5/06 GOODYEAR WHOLESALE TIRE GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HENSLEY BATTERY HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HONNEN EQUIPMENT KINDER MORGAN INC LAFARGE CORPORATION LARA "HEATHER" LAWDERMILK LAWSON PRODUCTS LIGHTHOUSE, INC., THE M & M AUTO PARTS MAIN AUTO PARTS MN HUNTER SySTEMS INC MOTOR POOL FUND NAPA AUTO PARTS-CARBONDLE NORFOLK MARRIOTT W A TER- NOVUS AUTOGLASS o J WATSON COMPANY INC PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING POWER EQUIPMENT COMPANY POWER MOTIVE PREMIER TIRE TERMINAL RENEE DUBUISSON SAFETY KLEEN (WHICITA) SIRI NELSON SNAP ON TOOLS SUSPENSE FUND TIMBERLINE STEEL TIRE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS TOWN OF GYPSUM TWO RIVERs CHEVROLET US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS VEEDE~ROOTCOMPANY VISA CARD SERVICES WAGNER EQUIPMENT COMPANY WASTE MANAGEMENT WELLS FARGO WESTERN COLORADO WESTERN SLOPE PAINT WHITEALLS ALPINE WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY PAYROLL FOR AUGUST SERVICE SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES PAYROLL 16, 17 & 18 2,830.98 123.15 1,215.90 686.00 1,565.74 1,003.37 183.87 20.00 33.99 1,149.89 339.14 1,489.18 51.59 115.00 3,688.42 306.21 654.00 3,031.00 471.69 38.70 185.12 603.17 1,206.30 86.50 385.04 9.01 54.75 3,688.40 56.41 909.00 1,987.28 62.64 2,047.03 378.48 115.14 2,484.62 182.20 12,776.43 611.77 30.23 78.00 187.74 30,730.75 283,011.89 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND DENMAN GREY AND COMPANY JEFFERSON PILOT FINANCIAL MOUNTAIN STATES ADMIN. MUTUAL OF OMAHA UNITED STATES LIFE INS EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 2,100.00 8,249.09 83,922.56 7,592.40 1,294.20 103,158.25 ENHANCED E911 FUND 17 9/5/06 CENTURYTEL LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES NOMAD TECHNOLOGIES ODS COMMUNICA nONS INC QWEST SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 185.42 1,053.42 850.00 7,799.46 2,393.97 12,282.27 8,116,042.08 Executive Session It was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to go into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice and discussing matters that may be subject to negotiations regarding Town of Eagle water/sewer agreement and lease discussions with the Humane Society which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to C.R.S. 24~6A02(4)(b), and (e) Colorado Revised Statutes. At the close of the discussion, it was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjoUl11 from Executive Session. Consent Agenda ChairI1lan Runyon stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of bill paying for the week of September 4, 2006 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Mike Roeper, Finance B. Approval of the minutes of the Eagle County Board of Commissioners meeting for June 27 and July 11, 2006 Teak Simonton, Clerk & Recorder C. Project Agreement to Cooperative Road Agreement No. 82-RO-II021500-005 Modification No.6 for East & West Brush Creek Roads; Red Sandstone and Piney River Roads between USDA Forest Service, White River National Forest and Eagle County, Colorado Brad Higgins, Road & Bridge D. Modification No.5 to Project Agreement Forest Road Agreement No. 82-RO-II021500-005 forYeoman parking areas East Brush Creek Roads between USDA Forest Service, White River National Forest and Eagle County, Colorado Brad Higgins, Road & Bridge E. Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment for the Tobacco Education and Prevention Program Kathleen Forinash, Health & Human Services F. Professional SerVices Agreement between KRW Consulting, Inc. and Eagle County for design services for airport de-icing facility Rick Ullom, Facilities Management G. Department of Local Affairs Immigration Certification County Attorney's Office Representative H. Advertising Agreement between Eagle County and Colorado Mountain Express County Attorney's Office Representative I. Resolution 2006-095 establishing the rate of change for emergency telephone service County Attorney's Office Representative 18 9/5/06 -, J. Resolution 2006-096 :Regarding the Matter of Amending the Eagle County Land Use Regulations; To fucorporate Language Pertaining To Updating Chapter IIl- Building Resolution (Eagle County File No. LUR-0066) Dan Stanek, Community Development Chairman Runyon asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Bryan Treu, County Attorney stated that there were no changes. Cortn11issioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A-J. Cortnnissioner Stone seconded the .motion. The vote was declared unanimoUs. Citizen Input There was none Resolution 2006..097 calling an election on November 7, 2006 to authorize a mill levy increa.se for Basalt Regional Library District operations and maintenance relating to a proposed new regional library facility; setting the ballot title and content for the ballot issne for the election; providing for other matters relating thereto; and providing the effective date for this resolution COunty Attorney's Office Representative Mr. Treu stated that the resolution would authorize the issue to be place on the ballot in November. Chairman Runyon opened and closed public comment, as there was none. Co.m.missioner Stone .moved to approve the Resolution 2006-097 calling an election on November 7, 2006 to authorize a mill levy increase for Basalt Regional Library District operations and maintenance relating to a proposed new regional library facility; setting the ballot title and content for the ballot issue for the election; providing for other matters relating thereto; and providing the effective date for this resolution Cortnnissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2006-098 calling a special election for November 7, 2006 for the purpose of Snbmitting to the registered electors of Eagle County, Colorado a ballot question concerning the adoption of a proposed Eagle County Home Rule Charter and in connection therewith approving the form of ballot question, certifying the ballot content to the County Clerk & Recorder, and ordering that notice of the election be given County Attorney's Office Representative Mr. Treu stated that the special election would be placed on the November ballot. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Resolution 2006-098 calling a special election for November 7,2006 for the purpose of submitting to the registered electors of Eagle County, Colorado a ballot question concerning the adoption of a proposed Eagle County Home Rule Charter and in connection therewith approving the form of ballot question, certifying the ballot content to the County Clerk & Recorder, and ordering lat notice of the election be given. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. 19 9/5/06 Commissioner Stone stated that he didn't need any more time. He wondered why someone didn't just come out and say they were delaying the process. He stated that he would not be voting for it in the general election but would be involved in further discussion later. Chairman Runyon opened and closed public comment, as there Was none. The motion passed by a vote two to one with Commissioner Stone voting against. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re-convene as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared un.animous. Eagle County Liquor License Authority Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office APPLICANT: DBA: REPRESENTATIVE: The Rumpus Room, Inc. The Rumpus Room William (Bill) Woodruff, OwnerlManager Sterling Bradbrook, Owner 1140 Edwards Village Plaza II B201-203 in Edwards Kathy Scriver None LOCATION: STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: CONCERNS / ISSUES: DESCRIPTION: This is an application for Transfer of Ownership of a Hotel and Restaurant License. This license is currently held by Tavo1accio, Inc d/b/a Tavolaccio and is located in Edwards. The license expires September 12,2006. The applicant currently possesses a Temporary Permit issued on June 27, 2006. STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS EST ABLISIDNG THE NEIGHBORHOOD This step is not necessary under the rules for a transfer of ownership. NEEDS AND DESIRES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD This step is not necessary under the rules for a transfer of ownership. OTHER FINDINGS >- This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, all the proper forms have been filled out, and all fees have been paid. >- The premises where the alcoholic beverages will be sold is currently licensed by the state and local licensing authorities and was valid as ofthe date of receiving the application. >- The applicant is reported to be of good moral character. >- Applicant is currently operating under a temporary license issued by this Board. >- An affidavit of transfer and statement of account for all alcohol beverages sold has been filed and signed by both parties. >- The applicant is over 2l, fingerprints are on file, and his Personal History Record is on file. >- Public notice has been given by the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises on August 16th, 2006, 11 days prior to the hearing. Publication of the notice is not required for a transfer of ownership. 20 9/5/06 '~" ~ The premises are not within 500 feet of a location for which, within 2 years preceding the application, a license of the same class was denied for the reason that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the adult inhabitants were satisfied by existing outlets. ~ The premises are not for the sale of fermented malt beverages at retail where, within One year preceding the date of the application, a license has been denied at the same location for the reason that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the adult inhabitants Were satisfied by existing outlets. )> The premises are not within 500 feet of any public or parochial school or the campus of any college, university, or seminary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: All findings are positive and staff recommends approval. Ms. Scriver presented the application to the Board. She stated that although there had been two complaints filed in the Clerk's Office there appeared to be some people present that had concems. She stated that all fees had been paid and the required documents had been received. Sterling Bradbrook stated that the establishment is a bar, live music venue and dance club; they are no longer an Italian restaurant. They serve food startingW ednesday from 11 :OOam to 2:00am, and provide a full range of meals open to all ages until lO:OOpm. He stated that they provide live and local entertainment; it is more of a sports bar than a restaurant. Chairman Runyon wondered if it was shift away from the service of food. Mr. Bradbrook stated that ideally, they would like to sell more food than alcohol but they are presently trying to sell what people want to buy. He is familiar with the responsibilities of liquor license ownership. Security is in place and they have tried to cooperate with the local community. They recently employed a sound engineer to mitigate sound issues. He believes they are a fit for the neighborhood. Chaiffilan Runyon st.ated that he sees over service as being a big problem because the entrance is a wide- open stairwell, which would have potential for people falling. Mr. Bradbrook stated that all their servers were Tips trained. If there were ever someone over served, they 'ould personally walk him or her down the stairs. They are aware of the pitfalls. He personally monitors the door I make certain that no drunken individuals are permitted to enter and anyone leaving that has been over served is tertded to by a responsible party. Chairman Runyon opened public comment. Christine Sena, resident of lOwer Homestead spoke. She is concerned about the music going on until 2 a.m. She believes that this type of activity will have a negative impact on their property values and a negative impact on the designated open space that serves as a small buffer between the commercial and residential areas on Edwards Village Boulevard. She requested that the license be denied. Bethany Johnson, Stag's Leap Condominium resident spoke. She agreed with Ms. Sena. She is inconvenienced by noise at least once a night. Chip Howard, Stag's Leap resident spoke. He is often times woken up from sleep by the loud voices of people who frequent the Rumpus Room. He recently met with Mr. Brandbrook to discuss the problem and believed the noise had only gotten louder. He continues to see trash strewn about the neighborhood. He requested that the Commissioners deny the liquor license. Commissioner Menconi wondered about the discussion between Mr. Howard and Mr. Bradbrook and if there were specific goals discussed. Mr. Howard stated that they discussed the noise issues and Mr. Bradbrook agreed to monitor the sound and pick up any trash. He stated that there had been no change with either matter since their discussion. Mr. Bradbrook stated that any litter found in the common area was a result of residents leaving their homes with open containers. He personally monitors the sound nightly from the common area and believes other establishments in the area are at times louder. Bill Woodruff stated that a lot of money had been spent on soundproofing. Mr. Bradbrook stated that the exit doors face commercial properties. There would never be anyone exiting om the back door, which faces the residential properties. They are willing to do whatever it takes to address the nOIse Issues. Mr. Woodruff stated that they are interested in maintaining the value of their investment. 21 9/5/06 Commissioner Stone stated that he did not believe the application should be approved. He believed that the applicant may have applied for the wrong kind of license and the Board could not approve the license because they may not be meeting the requirements of a Hotel and Restaurant license. He further stated that there should be no inebriated individuals leaving the establishrnent. Mr. Treu stated that a Hotel and Restaurant requires that 25% of the total gross income come from the sale of food. A Tavern License requires that only snacks and sandwiches be available. Commissioner Stone stated that he would like to be sure that the any problems are addressed right up front. He believes that it is important to start on good ground. Because it is a substantial change in use and approach, a Tavern LicenSe may be more appropriate. Commissioner Menconi wondered what authority the local licensing authority had to exercise when granting a Transfer of Ownership. Mr. Treu stated that a Transfer of Ownership only requires that the local authority look at the moral character of the applicant and whether the fees had been paid. Commissioner Menconi asked the applicant if they could provide proof that 25% of their business is from food service. Mr. Bradbrook stated that they were not interested in a Tavern License and could provide proof of food sales. They would like their establishment to be a place were people could go for dinner and listen to music. Commissioner MenConi suggested that the applicant come back with proof of food sales. Mr. Treu stated that it would be appropriate for the applicant to provide proof of food service but the local authority could not direct them in which liquor license to apply or regulate the activities of the establishrnent. He stated that land use regulations included a noise ordinance that applies to all businesses and the applicant should be aware of the ordinance. Commissioner Menconi asked Mr. Treu what could be done in regards to the noise issues and what choices were at the Board's disposal. Mr. Treu stated that the Board is not able to oppose live music or begin applying restrictions to a new license. Commissioner Stone suggested tabling the file for further consideration. Mr. Woodruff stated that he believes that they meet the requirements of a hotel and restaurant license and would continue to meet those needs. Commissioner Menconi suggested that the applicant become familiar with the noise ordinance and show that they are working within the guidelines of the regulations. Mr. Treu encouraged the applicant to bring back evidence of meal sales and some options for addressing the residents concerns. Mr. Bradbrook stated that he provided a contact number for the residents to call if they had concerns or the music was too loud. Chairman Runyon stated that name of the establiment has all sorts of implications as being a rowdy establiment. Nobody names a restaurant the Rumpus Room. Mr. Bradbrook stated that they have a 2000 square foot kitchen that they fully intend to use. Commissioner Stone moved that the local licensing authority continue the file until September 19,2006 at 11 :00 a.m. for further information. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Pier 13 Liquor, Ine d/b/a Pier 13 Liquor Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing Mr. Treu stated that the Avon Police Department and Eagle County Sheriffs Office did a county wide liquor compliance check on retail establishments, August 3,2006. Pier 13 Liquor fail the compliance check because they sold an alcoholic beverage to 19-year-old cooperating individual, working with the Eagle County Sheriff's Office, without asking for proper identification. A motion is required by the Board authorizing the Chairman to issue an order to show cause and a notice of hearing. 22 9/5/06 COm111issioner Stone moved that the local licensing authorize the Chairman to issue an order to show cause and a notice of hearing to Pier 13 Liquor, Inc d/b/a Pier 13 Liquor. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re-convene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Planning Files 1041-0065 - Vines at Vail pun Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Community Development NOTE: ACtION: Tabled from 3/28,5/16/06,7/11/06 & 8/1/06 Installation of water and wastewater treatment facility and related water storage and infrastructure to service the Vines at Vail PUD and residents of Wolcott. LOCATION: Vines of Vail and BLM lands accessed from Hwy. 13l; Wolcott. Section 15, Township 4S, Range 83W; Wolcott TITLE: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District / KIW A Associates, LLC (Vines at Vail) FILE NO./PROCESS: 1041-0065/1041 Permit LOCATION: Accessed from Hwy 131; Wolcott. Section 15, Township 4S, Range 83W APPLICANT: Kiwa Associates, LLC / Eagle River Water and Sanitation District :EPRESENTATIVE: Sid Fox, Fox & Company REQUEST: A l041 Permit to allow for the installation of public water and wastewater treatment facilities and construction of a water storage tank for the benefit of the Wolcott area north of the Eagle River up to 100 SFE. In the future, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District will be required to successfully complete a second 1041 permit application before it will be able to serve the balance of the Wolcott vicinity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions 1. SUMMARY The purpose of this 1041 Permit application is to allow the installation/creation of interim public water and wastewater treatment systems for the Wolcott area, north of the Eagle River (up to 100 single family equivalents). the interim facilities are to be located within the proposed Vines at Vail PUb (owned by KIW A Associates, LLC). A 400,000 gallon water storage tank is also proposed in this 1041 application; it is located adjacent to the 'Vines at Vail PuD' property on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. The tank has been located in an area most suitable to address operational and visibility issues. The water tank shall be owned and operated by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District's (ERWSD or the District) as part of its regional system. The interim water and wastewater treatment facilities shall be privately operated until such a time as when the District establishes permanent water/wastewater treatment facilities for Wolcott, resulting in the elimination of the interim facilities located in the Vines at Vail PUD. The KIW A Associates, LLC property, along with several of the surrounding properties, were included in the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District after most Wolcott area residents voted to be included in the District in 2005. As such, KIW A Associates, LLC, who is proposing the Vines at Vail PUD, is obligated to work in conjunction with 23 9/5/06 the District for water and wastewater services. The District, within the next lO years plans to remove the water and wastewater treatment equipment from the KIW A Associates, LLC property after constructing a new water and wastewater treatment plant in the nearby vicinity; the 400,000 gallon water tank shall remain in its proposed location. Currently, the District owns property in Wolcott, downstream from the proposed Vines at Vail PUD on the south side of the Eagle River. The District will be obligated to apply for a separate 1041 permit for their proposed facilities and will be evaluated for potential impacts and/or mitigation at that time; this l041 is limited to certain properties and does not include all areas within the entire District boundary (see attached exhibits A and B). The Vines at Vail :PUD proposes a mixed use development with both commercial and residential aspects throughout; areas neighboring the Vines at Vail PUD include several non-conforming properties currently with ongoing residential or comrnerciallindustrial uses. The proposed interim potable water facility will consist of an Eagle River raw water intake structure and a water treatment plant. The water supply lines are proposed to travel from the river within the Hwy 131 right-of-way and along the main acceSS to the Vines at Vail PUD. Treated water will then be pumped from the Vines at Vail PUD into a 400,000 gallon water storage tank on BLM lands. As designed, raw water will be permanently used for irrigation purpoSes. Currently, the applicant has a case pending in the District Court of Colorado Water Division requesting conditional water rights to serve the proposed 1041 permit area, and has contracted water from the Colorado River Conservation District for water releases from Eagle Park and Wolford Mountain Reservoirs. The interim wastewater treatment facility will consist of a buried re-circulating filter system with discharge returning into the Eagle Rivet (downstream from the raw water intake). Infrastructure will be built to District standards and will be able to connect to the District's facilities later on upon permanent facility construction. 2. BACKGROUND &CHRONOLOGY Historically, the KIW A Associates, LLC parcel and surrounding community were utilized for livestock and railroal related activities. In 1974, the subject parcel, once privately owned, was sold to Holy Cross Electric. In 2004, Holy Cross Electric sold this prOperty to KIW A Associates, LLC. It is currently zoned Resource and encompasses approximately 39 acres. CHRONOLOGY: 1974- The Meades sold the subject parcel to Holy Cross Electric 2004- The property was purchased from Holy Cross Electric, by the applicant. 2005- The applicants receive approval for the Vines at Vail PUD Sketch Plan from both the Eagle County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners 2005- This property (along with surrounding properties) is included in the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District after Wolcott area residents vote to be included in the District; the applicant was now obligated to work in conjunction with the District for water and wastewater services 2006- The ERWSD water storage tank Location and Extent application, a component of the overall District/Vines of Vail water/wastewater system receives approval by the Planning Commission for its location on the adjacent Bureau of Land Management property. The water tank is part of the ERWSD regional water system. 3. REFERRALS This 1041 Permit Application was referred to the following departments and agencies with a request for comment: · Eagle County Assessor's Office · Eagle County Attorney's Office · Eagle County Engineering Department · Eagle County Department of Environmental Health · Colorado Department of Transportation 24 9/5/06 II .,.."> · Colorado State Health Department - Water Quality Division · Colorado State Health Department - Air Quality Division · Colorado Division of Wildlife · Colorado Division of Water Resources · BUreau of Land Management · Northwest Colorado Council of Governments · Greater Eagle Fire Protection District · Eagle COllnty Planning Commission As of this writing, the following agencies have responded with comments: Eagle C6untyPlal111ing Commission: The Planning Commissioners provided the following comments: . Conce:rn.ed about project's impact on wildlife- critical winter range, critical wildlife habitat and migration corridor . There is a concern by the Planning Commission that the construction of the water storage tank is the prelude to a public wastewater treatment facility which in turn leads to development of entire Wolcott area. .. The ECPC has not had the opportunity to update sub-area master plan for quite some time; development potential may get too far out ahead before it is updated . The 1041 should not degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy . No adverse a.ffect on quality or quantity of recreational opportunities and experiences - As this relates to wildlife, there is the potential for the expansion ofthis project to reduce the ability of hunters to use the BLM property for their recreational purposes . Degrade existing visualquality- building the tank may have some impact on visual quality NorthWest Colorado Council of Governments: Please refer to the attached response dated March 8, 2006. NWCCOG's review focused on whether the application meets the recommendations of the Areawide Water Quality C [a.na.gement Plan (208 Plan). Based upon the information submitted and NWCCOG's understanding of the roposed project, it is in compliance with the policies and recommendations ofthe 208 Plan. The attached letter provides a detailed summary of how the proposed project satisfies the 208 Plan Policies. 4. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. Pursuantto Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Section 6.04.01, Permit Application Avproval Criteria for Matters of State Interest, and as more specifically described in the application materials, the following analysis is provided. The Avvroval Criteria is numbered and indicated in bold. A summary response is provided with the recommendation indicated in the findings box. (1) Documentation that prior to site disturbance for the Project, the applicant will have obtained all necessary property rights, permits and approvals. The Board may, at its discretion, defer making a final decision on the application until outstanding property rights, permits and approvals are obtained. The applicant for this project, Kiwa Association, LLC, is the owner ofthe Vines at Vail property. The Vines at Vail is located on approximately 39 acres accessed from via Highway 131 and is located in the heart of Wolcott. The Vines at Vail project consists of multiple planning parcels/open space areas within the proposed PUD; the 1041 encapsulates the entirety of the 39 acres (including all planning parcels and open space areas) and several private properties to the west and south of the subject parcel (see attached map Exhibit A). The primary objective of this application is to allow for the construction of water and wastewater facilities to be located on the Vines at Vail property and a 400,000 gallon water tank located on BLM lands north ofthe project site. Water will be used from the Eagle River. KIW A Associates, LLC is actively working and communicating with the Eagle River Fire Protection District and will adhere to the district's regulations and requirements prior to construction. The project wiU have hydrants served by the potable water system spaced along the proposed roadway. Additionally, the 25 9/5/06 buildings will be sprinkled and alarmed. Water for fire fighting purposes will be available from the 400,000 gallon water storage tank. The proposed 400,000 gallon water tank site and water lines, and access road into the Vines at Vail has been approved by the Bureau of Land Management; the Eagle County Planning Commission recently approved the ERWSD Location and Extent application to locate the tank on BLM lands. Please note that the water tank is not subject to the Vines at Vail PUD Preliminary Plan and Zone Change applications. At this time, the applicant proposes at least two' points of access to the development, located on the western portion of the proposal; the applicant has received an emergency access easement from the owners of the neighboring Gallegos property. A new Highway Access Permit has been obtained for the proposed development. Near the river, infrastructure will have to cross Union Pacific Railroad; this approval has also been obtained. Prior to site disturbance, ERWSD/KIW A Associates, LLC will need to obtain the following outstanding permits and approvals*: · Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Stormwater · Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and permits related to water and SewerTreatment Plants · Eagle County Special Use Permit review waiver · 404 U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Wetlands Permit (If Applicable) · Water court-approved augmentation plan · CDOT row permit for placement of utility lines *USACOE Nationwide 7 and the State Site Approvals are delayed, pending local approval. [+/-] FINDING: (1) Rif!hts. Permits and Aoorovals. The applicant HAS NOT obtained all necessary permits; howe er, they applicant WILL HAVE obtained all necessary property rights, permits and approvals prior to site disturbance. (2) The Project will not impair property rights held by others. The project will not impair property rights held by others; neighboring private properties will not be negatively affected by this 1041. [+] FINDING: (2) Prooertv ri1!hts of others. The project WILL NOT impair property rights held by others. (3) The Project is consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans. The applicants have worked to ensure that the project site is in conformance with the Eagle County Master Plan and sub-area plans (this application was received prior to the adoption ofthe Eagle County Comprehensive Plan). The application is also sensitive to the goals of the Eagle River Watershed Plan proposes integration of Best Management Practices to minimize water quality impacts associated with their development. The NWCCOG was sent a copy of this report for review. The review did not identify any conflicts between this project and the 208 plan. A portion of the 208 plan contains a policy of non-proliferation of water systems. This project is not intending to permanently owned and operated by the developer. Ultimately, the public system will be owned and operated by Eagle River Water and Sanitation District after the District has obtained future 1041 approvals and begins service for the Wolcott area. 26 9/5/06 ~.T-~r m'T~C"'I'--" The proposed water system is intended to serve a currently un-serviced area and will provide additional fire protection for properties in and around the Vines at Vail PUD. [+] FINDING: (3) Consistenev with olans. The Project IS consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans. (4) The applicant has the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all the requirements and conditions. Kiwa Associates, LLC and the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District have retained a team of experts to ensure the proposed system will be designed according to local and State standards. Upon permitting and construction, Zancanella and Associates, Inc., who has been working with the District and employs state certified operators, will likely be obtained to operate and manage the interim facilities. KIW A has also entered into an agreement with the District to assure the necessary expertise and financial capability is in place to operate the facilities until the District provides service in the future. [+] FINDING: (4) Exoertise and. financialcaoabilitv, The applicant DOES HAVE the necessary expertise and fin cial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all requirements and conditions. (5) The Project is technically and financially feasible. The applicants have insured that the site is accessible to construction equipment. In addition there are no known historical, cultural or environmental factors which would impede installation of a water tank and water line to enhance the overall service to the area. Once built, tap fees will be paid by individuals for the operation and maintenance of the systems at an estimate $45 per month (per SFE) for wastewater service; $30 per month (per SFE) for water. The long-range master planning for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has accounted for the possibility of an increase in development in the Wolcott area. Financial models and planning have accounted for the needed increase in water supply facilities as well as operation and maintenance services. As proposed, the District will pay for the construction of the water storage tank; KIW A and the District will pay for the pipelines and water storage; and KIW A will pay for the initial treatment facilities. No insurmountable technical challenges have been identified which would hinder development of the proposed project. [+] FINDING: (5) Feasibilitv, The Project IS technically and financially feasible. (6) The Project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards. The development site is not subject to significant risk from any natural hazards which could cause a system operational breakdown. No severe geologic conditions, which would make development infeasible, were identified on the site. [+] FINDING: (6) Risk from hazards. The project IS NOT subject to significant risk from natural hazards. (7) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. All of the properties in this 1041 are zoned Resource, with the exception of a small parcel zoned Rural Center (Re). Currently, there are two, non-conforming, grandfathered uses found in the immediate vicinity of the Vines at Vail. They are the BFI Waste Management site, and the Gallegos site. These properties, which are south and west of the subject property, are industrial/commercial in nature, with no 27 9/5/06 r residential uses present. Parcels to the west of Hwy 131 and sOilth of the railroad also contain grandfathered, non-conforming residential uses. The largest land owner, BLM, is fOUfld to the north and to the east of the l04l permit area. The proposed systems will provide benefit to more than the Vines at Vail PUDalone, and are being designed to enhance the overall system for existing properties. The proposed water/wastewater systems for this portion of Wolcott is intended to enhance the capability of the existing system upon connection, by creating more storage water for increased fire protection as well as offering potable water and reliable wastewater system for properties which currently do not have adequate methods of potable water or ISDS. Speaking specifically about land use patterns, the Vines at Vail PUD appears to be in accordance with the Eagle County Master Plan and Wolcott Area Master Plan expectations of future development for this area of Wolcott. ill addition, this 1041 is a beginning "phase" of the future planriing efforts of the District. The District had contemplated the inclusion of Wolcott into the District boundary for many years; the current service plan does not need to be amended for the District to include the properties anticipated to benefit from this 1041. [+] FINDING: (7) Land use oatterns, Land use patterns in the Wolcott area will not be compromised as a result of his 1041 Permit application. The land use patterns have been anticipated and, in this instance, this 1041 Permit application wil have no bearing on the ultimate land use pattern or participation from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. (8) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the capability of local governments affected by the Project to provide services, or exceed the capacity of service delivery systems. The project will not involve additional services by local governments and no new special districts will be created. The proposed water system will be funded by the District and KIW A Associates, LLC. Once built, the water/wastewater systems Will enhance the Wolcott area by providing water storage for increased fire protection, and certain properties, currently without a reliable potable water source, will be able to be served by a regulated system. In Addition, by working with the governing fire district, fire hydrants will be introduced into the area. Currently, Wolcott area residents around the Vines at Vail are within the service area of the Greater Eagle Fire Protection District (GEFPD), out of Eagle. The introduction of this water system will greatly increase the GEFPD' a ability to fight fires in this area. The developer of the Vines at Vail have also been in discussions with ECO Trails for additional trail development along Hwy 13l; are providing adequate, onsite housing opportunities for local residents; and will be re-developing a portion of Highway 131 to increase the site distance to a currently dangerous curve near the entrance for the Vines at Vail PUD. It has been determined by the School District, that cash in lieu ofland Will be satisfactory to meet their needs. [+] FINDING: (8) Service Caoacitv. The Project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on the capability of ocal governments affected by the Project to provide services, or exceed the capacity of service delivery systems it exceed he capacity of service delivery systems. (9) The Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. The proposed water system will be funded by both the KIW A Associates, LLC and the District. Through an inclusion agreement, already in place District expenditures associated with the Project will be funded from existing fund balances. KIW A and the District have agreed to cost-sharing for the storage tank and pipeline. Other costs associated with the provision of water and sewer services have been addressed in the Agreement between KIW A and the District. The Project will not create an undue financial burden on the existing or future residents of Eagle County and the District does not anticipate any significant effects on wastewater discharge permits. According to 28 9/5/06 I I !"I..,." the applicant, revenue impact analyses conclude that the increased assessed valuation and revenue sources resulting from the Project should be sufficient to fund operating and capital costs incurred by the various public entities providing service to the area. The long-range master plan for Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has projected for additional development in the Wolcott area. Financial models and planning have accounted for the needed increase ih water supply facilities as well as operation and maintenance services. [+] FINDING: (CJ)Financial Burden. the Project WILL NOT create an undue financial burden on existing or fut e residents of the County. (10) The Project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector ofthe local economy. The project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. Conversely, the proposed development will help to diversify the county's economy. The project will participate in the overall revenue generated from many sectors of the local economy, including construction, small business development and tourism. In addition, there will most likely be an increase in land values because of improved water supply, wastewater treatment and fire protection. Finally, approval of this 1041 will not result in the loss of any agriculturally productive lands. [+] FINDING: (10) Protection of local economv. The project WILL NOT significantly degrade any current or for seeable future sector of the local economy. (11) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities and experience. This 1041 permit will not have an adverse effect on the quality or quantity of any existing outdoor recreation facilities. Although access to the water tank roadway on BLM land is limited and will be controlled (as per the conditions of the access easement put in place by the BLM), access to BLM lands exists elsewhere in the nearby vicinity. Please note that previous to the District obtaining an easement through BLM lands to the water tank location, the previous access easement was held by Holy Cross Electric; access from Hwy 131 to this location has always been through the private property- currently owned by KIWA Associates, LLC (formally owned by Holy Cross Electric). Crossing private property to access public lands without permission is trespassing. The Vines at Vail PUD will provide additional recreational opportunities in lieu of offsite access for BLM including pedestrian walkways and trails throughout the proposed Development and along Hwy 131 to close proximity to the river. The amount of water required for the 1041 will neither change the duration ofkayaking and rafting seasons nor will it affect access to river recreation. Changes in stream flow will be minimal as the proposed wastewater discharge is located downstream of the water intake. The quality and quantity of fisheries will also be protected by the implementation of the applicable water decree and augmentation plan; permitted discharge/effluent limitations; in maintaining minimum stream flows; and through careful evaluation and considerations of the 404 Permit that will be required prior to construction. [+] FINDING: (11) Protection of recreational oooortunities. The Project WILL NOT have a significant adverse ffect on the quality of public recreational opportunities and experience. (12) The planning, design and operation of the Project shall reflect principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. The project will create an overall improvement in resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling and/or reUse by following current design criteria and accepted industry standards and following 29 9/5/06 guidelines as specified by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. In order to emphasize the most efficient use of water, to conserve energy and resources, the Project will develop a separate raw water irrigation system for the proposed development to eliminate the use of treated water for irrigation purposes. In addition, KlW A Associates, LLC has worked diligently to enSure that the proposed development appropriately and sufficiently mitigates environmental and ecological impacts and sets an example to this area of Wolcott by setting an ecological and environmental design philosophy. [+] FINDING: (12) Resoutce Conservation. The planning, design and operation of the Project DOES reflect princ pals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. (13) The Project will not significantly degrade air quality. During installation of the proposed water system, construction activities may cause some temporary adverse air quality impacts as well as other nuisance factors typical with major construction activities. These impacts will be negligible, and controlled. There will be no long tetin adverse air quality impacts due to the proposed water system. During construction, water trucks will most likely be utilized to prevent air-borne dust from dispersing into the atmosphere. After construction, the roads within the project will be paved and vehicle traffic dust will not exist. The homeowners along Hwy 131 may be affected by increased construction-related traffic during construction. A such, it is a requirement that an "Hours of Operation Plan" will be established to control the amount of construction vehicle traffic before and after business hours and to reduce amount of vehicle (diesel and gasoline) fumes. Once build out occurs additional traffic along a limited portion ofHwy 131 will most likely be from the residents and visitors of the Vines at Vail PUD. [+]FINDING: . (13) Air qualitv. The Project will hot significantly degrade air quality. (14) The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality. During installation of the proposed water system, construction activities may cause temporary adverse scenic impacts as well as other nuisance factors typical with major construction activities. An erosion control plan will be implemented prior to construction. The water/wastewater lines will be buried and no permanent vegetation impacts will occur along the Hwy 131 roadway. The access to the proposed water tank has been located to minimize the visual impacts to the area and will be constructed in accordance with BLM Visual Resource Management objectives to protect the 1-70 viewshed and includes special stipulations, including but not limited to: BLM color selection and an on-site consultation with BLM visual resource management specialist. As per the BLM access easement agreement, improvements to the water tank access are limited and have been conditioned to mi~imize visual affects. [+) FINDING: (14) Visual qualitv. As mitigated, the Project WILL NOT significantly degrade visual quality. (15) The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. The project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. As a precautionary measure it is been proposed to implement proper design and the utilization of Best Management Practices during construction. The Project is located approximately 300 feet from the Eagle River which is the nearest perennial hydrologic feature. Project development will adhere to Eagle County's stream setbacks; erosion control; drainage; and stormwater control regulations. Increased surface water runoff during storm events will be mitigated through a storm water mitigation plan and storm water detention ponds. The onsite detention pond will serve as erosion mitigation during construction ofthe Project. In addition, a Nationwide Permit 30 9/5/06 "'T'-"-T-'- I , -''-'''-'T:' Number 7 for intake and outfall structures has been applied for work within these areas with the US Army Corps of Engineers. There are no outside impacts to adjacent owners. [+] FINDING: (15) Surface water qualitv. The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade surface water quality. (16) The Project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality. The project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality. [+] FINDING: (16) Ground water tlualitv. The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade surface water quality. (17) The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas. The project will not significantly degrade wetlands, and riparian areas. The proposed location of the Project intake on the Eagle River will be located on the north bank ofthe river where the existing abutment for the old Highway 131 bridge is to be removed. The abutment area does not contain wetlands and impacts will be limited to an intake structure being located on the bank out of the wetlands that were identified by the CDOT highway bridge reconstruction mapping. The wastewater outfall structure will be located downstream of the water intake structure and will be placed within the bed of the river and will not be exposed to the side of the river bank. The US Army Corps of Engineers has been contacted with regards to the intake and outfall structures' and Zancanella and Associates, Inc. is completing the appropriate Nationwide Permits to assure the project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian area [+) FINDING: (17) Wetlands and riparian areas. The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade wetlands and ripa ian areas. (18) The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic anil11allife or its habitats. The project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. A comprehensive Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan was developed for the Project which includes all applicable measures to avoid and minimize development impacts to local and regional terrestrial and aquatic communities. In addition, the applicant has, and continues to work with the Division of Wildlife to ensure that impacts to any wildlife species will be minimal. Best Management Practices will be implemented throughout the construction and development of the Project to ensure the terrestrial plant life and habitat is not significantly degraded by the Project. Landsca.ping and reclamation conditions; the utilization of native and indigenous vegetation; seasonal construction closures; and other concerns from both the DOW and from the BLM have been acknowledged by the applicant and incorporated into future development plans. There are no aquatic habitats onsite. The proposed location of the infiltration gallery at a site previously disturbed by bridge construction will minimize impacts to the aquatic habitat. The permitted wastewater discharge will be located directly downstream of the water intake to minimized impacts to the Eagle River and the associated aquatic animal life and habitat. [+) FINDING: (18) Terrestrial or aquatic animal life. The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade terrestrial or quatic (19) The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. The project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. During construction activities, Best Management Practices will be utilized to mitigate any small effects on existing terrestrial 31 9/5/06 plant life. Types of vegetation re-seeding will include native species. Following construction, re- vegetation and reclamation of disturbed areas shall occur. The project will adhere to the recommendations provided through the Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, DOW recommendations and conditions established by the BLM. I [+) FINDING: . (19) Terrestrial olant life, The Project WILL NOT significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or jlant habitat. (20) The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. The project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. In addition, no severe geological conditions which would make the development infeasible were identified at the project site. (21) The Project will nofcause a nuisance. Construction activities could cause some temporary adverse impacts as well as other temporary nuisance factors typical with major construction activities. These impacts, although minor, include noise, diesel fumes, and traffic associated with the movement of equipment. Temporary controls will be incorporated to reduce impacts due to construction. These controls consist of water control such as grading and providing water barriers to protect the site from soil erosion. Water trucks will be utilized to prevent air- borne dust from dispersing into the atmosphere. Traffic controls such as on-site flag persons a.nd on- site/off-site temporary signage notifying motorists of construction activity. An "Hours of Operation Plan" will be established to stop construction noise during off business hours and to reduce amount of vehicle (diesel and gasoline) fumes thereby minimizing undue auditory, ocular and olfactory impacts upon existing residents of Wolcott. [+) FINDING: (21) Nuisance. The project will not cause a nuisance. (22) The Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic, or archaeological importance. The project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic or arChaeological importance. The Cultural Resource Study by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. found no historic properties affected in the project area and recommended nothing further concerning cultural resources. [+) FINDING: (22) Paleofltolo1!ical. historic or archaeolo1!ical areas. The Project WILL NOT significantly degr de areas of paleontological, historic or archaeological importance. (23) The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. During water line and water tank construction, the construction equipment fuel and lubricants could constitute a possible release of hazardous materials. To ensure the reasonableness of the risk, the contractor will be required to submit and adhere to a fuel mitigation plan prior to commencement of work. The proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities will be administered by a licensed operator with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. [+) FINDING: (23) Hazardous materials. The Project WILL NOT result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazar ous materials. 32 9/5/06 (24) The benefits accruing to the County and its citizens from the Project outweigh the losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources within the County, or the losses of opportunities to develop such resources. The proposed water tank and water lines will provide certain residents of the Wolcott area with the benefit of water storage for increased fire protection; potable, reliable drinking water; and public wastewater treatment As the proposed water /wastewater systems are on private land, there will not be any loss to agricultural lands within this area of Eagle County. Currently, many of the properties in this area of Wolcott have difficulty in obtaining a reliable potable water source for their homes. As such, residents have to bring in wa.ter for cisterns to serve their homes. Fire protection is currently very problematic in that there is not enough water stored in the Wolcott vicinity to help in the event of a fire. (+] FINDING: (24) Benefits outwei1!h losses. The benefits accruing to the County and its citizens WILL outweigh he losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources within the County or the losses f opportunities to develop such resources. B. PurSuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.02, Additional Criteria Avvlicable to Municipal and Industrial Water Projects, and as more specifically described in the application materials, the following additional analysis is provided. (1) The Project shall em.phasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water. For efficiency purposes, the Project includes a separate raw water irrigation system to eliminate the use of treated water for irrigation purposes. In addition, the following methods and policies will be implemented to ensure the most efficient use of water within the service area: a) The adoption of the District Water Conservation Master Plan which is designed to encourage increased efficiency in the residential, commercial and public sectors, and includes a metering program of all water users b) The use of efficient low water consumptive drip and spray irrigation systems. c) A leak detection program, which includes auditing of monthly metered water uses, scheduled sounding of mainlines and leak repair. d) The use oflow-flow showerheads and low flow toilets. e) Return of treated wastewater flows directly to the Eagle River. (+] FINDING: (1) Efficient use. The Project SHALL emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the rec ling, reuse and conservation ofwa.ter (2) The Project will not result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. The Project will not result in excess capacity of existing water or wastewater treatment services in the area. Although the l041 Permit Area has been included into the District, District service has yet to be provided to the area. KIW A and the District have agreed to jointly develop the Project facilities in such a manner as will avoid duplicate services [+] FINDING: (2) Excess capacitv / duplicate services. The Project SHALL NOT result in excess capacity in exis 'ng water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. 33 9/5/06 ... (3) The Project shall be necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project. The proposed water and wastewater systems are necessary to meet the anticipated growth projections within the service area; there are no other water or wastewater providers in the area that could serve the proposed Vines at Vail PUD; the existing residential properties; or the potential redevelopment of the nearby parcels. [+] FINDING: (3) Necessitv, The Project SHALL BE necessary to meet community development and population emands in the a.reas to be served by the project. (4) Urban development, population densities and site layout and design of storm water and sanitation systems shall be accomplished in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. The Project in conjunction with the development of the Vines at Vail pun will allow for clustered, mixed use development within the service area boundary in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. The ground water is of poor quality and will not be used as a domestic water source. This 1041 proposes to build a centralized sewer system that will treat the wastewater from the Project in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. The wastewater treatmentfsanitatioIl system will discharge to surface water and will not affect or impact the groundwater aquifer systems. A drainage report has been prepared and a storm water management plan is being prepared to effectively mitigate storm water runoff from the proposed Vines at Vail PUD. The proposed manufacturer of the filter system is Orenco Systems, Inc. an industry leader in on site wastewater systems. The discharge to the river system will be scrutinized carefully with monthly discharge reporting to the CDPHE and the EP A for compliance with the approved discharge standards. [+] FINDING: (4) Protection of Aquifer Rec:haT/!e Areas. C. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.03, Additional Criteria Applicable to Maior New Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment Svstems and Maior Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment Svstems, and as more specifically described in the application materials, the following additional analysis is provided. (1) The Project shall be reaSOnably necessary to meet projected community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project, or to comply with regulatory or technological requirements. The Project is necessary to meet anticipated community development approvals (Vines at Vail PUD) and projected population demands in the 1041 service area. The interim systems have been designed to provide service consistent with reasonable growth projections and local land use plans, until such time as the District establishes permanent water and wastewater treatment facilities. Currently, there are no other water or sewage treatment service providers in the area that could serve the land included within the 1041 service area. [+] FINDING: (1) Necessitv or reffulatorv / technolol!ical comoliance. The Project SHALL be reasonably necess y to meet projected community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project or to comp with regulatory or technological requirements. (2) To the extent feasible, wastewater and water treatment facilities shall be consolidated with existing facilities within the area. 34 9/5/06 I I The Project is located within the District and an Agreement is in place that anticipates "consolidation" as public District facilities become available. There are no existing central wastewater treatment facilities in the area; therefore there is no opportunity for consolidation with existing providers. The nearest District waste water treatment facility is in Edwards, located 4 Y2 miles upstream of the Wolcott Inclusion. Utilizing this facility would require wastewater to be pumped back upstream to the treatment facility. This option has been determined to be not feasible and not a reasonable consolidation. The closest water treatment facility to the project is located south ofI-70 and serves the Red Sky Ranch Subdivision. The Red Sky Ranch water system currently pumps raw water from the Eagle River to a treatment plant located in the Red Sky Ranch Subdivision. Consolidation with the Red Sky Ranch water system would not be a long term solution and would result in additional cost and environmental impacts as this system was not designed for additional development. [+] FINDING: (2) Consolidation (}ffacilities. To the extent feasible, wastewater and water treatment facilities S LL be consolidated with existing facilities within the area. (3) New domestic water and sewage treatment systems shall be constructed in areas which will result in the proper utilization of existing treatment plants and the orderly development of domestic water and sewage treatment systems of adjacent communities. It has been determined by the District that a new domestic water and sewage treatment systems will be necessary to serve the 1041 area as there are no existing systems or service providers that could reasonably serve the Wolcott vicinity. Based on the area included into the District it is anticipated that the Project will result in the orderly development of water supply and wastewater treatment systems for the Wolcott area. [+] FINDING: (3) Proper utilization of existiml treatment plants, New domestic water and sewage treatment systems SHALL be constructed in areas which will result in the proper utilization of existing treatment plants and the orderly development of domestic water and sewage treatment systems of adjacent communities. (4) The Project shall be permitted in those areas in which the anticipated growth and development that may oCCur as a result of such extension can be accommodated within the financial and environmental capacity of the area to sustain such growth a.nd development. The proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities are temporary until such a time as the District establishes permanent public facilities. The proposed systems will serve not only the proposed Vines at Vail PUD, but other properties in the near vicinity. Given the physical constraints (public lands, railroad, topography and the river), the systems appear to be sufficient at this time; further growth of the Wolcott vicinity is not immediately anticipated. Environmental factors will be mitigated by adhering to expert agency recommendations including the DOW, BLM, the District, etc. [+] FINDING: (4) Financial and environmental caoacitv. The Project SHALL be permitted in those areas in whic the anticipated growth and developrnent that may occur as a result of such extension can be accommodated within the fin cial and environmental capacity of the area to sustain such growth and development. D. Special Use Permit Waiver: In accordance with Chapter II, Article 3, Section 3.310.1.2, Waiver Provision. of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the Special Review Use Permit application for water and sewer projects may be waived in whole or in part by the Board of County Commissioners upon a written petition by the applicant showing that: 3.310.I.2.a. A permit application pursuant to Chapter 6, Sections one through five of the Eagle County Guidelines and Regulations for Matters of State Interest has been submitted to the Eagle 35 9/5/06 County Permit Authority relative to this land use which would be the subject of a special use permit application. 3.310.I.2.b. Compliance with the Special Use Review Permit requirements would be unreasonably burdensome for the applicant. The applicant has requested a waiver of the Special Use Review Permit requirements as such application would serve no further legitimate planning, zoning or other land use objective. DISCUSSION: Ms. Markowitz presented a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the project. The presentation included various photos of the prOperty. Commissioner Menconi asked Ms. Markowitz to review the concerns that had been brought up on August 1, 2006. Ms. Markowitz stated that the housing plan had been an issue as well as architectural quality and the scale of the project. In addition, there was some discussion of heights of the buildings being proposed. Finally there was much discussion abOut the 1041 permit. Commissioner Menconi mentioned that the size of the affordable housing had also been an issue. Ms. Markowitz stated that the visual analysis was created in a short time frame and with incomplete information. She showed some superimposed images on actual photos of the prOperty, which reflected the proposed buildings and landscaping. John Staight presented a three-dimensional simulation of the proposed development. Sid Fox, planner spoke. He stated that he was aware of engineering concerns and the right of way issues. Other issues needing resolution included the 1041 permits. Mr. Fox reviewed the basic intent of the PUD. They are trying to achieve a destination attraction focused around the winery, pavilion and lodge. They are also trying to minimize the surface parking. The site is surrounded by BLM land on the north and the east. This limits the scope ofthe project and potential for future development. The waste management site would likely relocate to Gypsum. Gallegos masonry also has a stone yard in Gypsum and they may consider some future relocation. He presented a site plan of area B-l. The access could be extended in the future out of this area if the existing properties were to vacate. The adjacent properties were considered in context with the proposal. They have attempted to provide a reasonable housing plan including on-site units, including 11 rental units, 10 deed-restricted units and 1 accessory dwelling unit. They have included a payment in lieu option or a purchase of housing credit option for Habitat for Humanity. Area B-4 was also highlighted, which is the area in which the 10 deed restricted units would be built. He presented the floor plans for the different size units. These units would be administered by Eagle County, but marketed and sold by KIW A. He asked for discussion about appreciation caps, flex space and Area C. The applicant prefers a fixed rate cap for appreciation of 7%. The applicant also asked that some flex space be allowed. They asked to reinstate six single-family lots in area C. He showed the site plan for area C, reducing the total lots from 7 to 1 lot. Patrick Churchill, applicant spoke. He stated that the square footage of the rental units would be increased to 700. Chairman Runyon asked about the configuration of the residential and commercial units. Mr. Churchill stated that the units would still be sold separately. Owhers would have the option of having a live/work unit. The flex space size is about 200 square feet out of 1600 - 2000 square feet. Chairman Runyon stated that many people have offices in their homes, but the issue is whether or not there are customers. He asked for more clarification on the live / work designation. He stated that a deed connection between the commercial and residential units is really how live / work situations are defined. Mr. Fox stated that the zoning helps distinguish this type of arrangement. He explained the engineering conditions and asked for Board consideration about the right-of-way and lane width. Commercial road standards suggest a 70-foot right of way. Theyare suggesting a 60-foot right of way and narrowing down to 50-feet at a lower point. They suggest one five-foot sidewalk and a six-foot sidewalk on the other side. They requested a variation from improvement standards. He provided similar road section right of way examples. Lee Wittington, Engineer for the project spoke. He showed a picture of Homestead Road, Lake Creek road and Miller Ranch road to highlight examples of the type of road engineering they are requesting. 36 9/5/06 I ,----- T --,-r~ r : ..~. Mr. Fox stated that he believed that the variation was justified and reduces any environmental impacts. There would be no through traffic in the development. One of the issues is the multiple access points. He showed . e design and the ability to move traffic in and out. He showed the various accesses into the different buildings, ld provided justification to all flow issues. Mr. Wittington explained the internal traffic flow. Chairman Runyon wondered about how man.y cars per day might leave and enter the entire project. Mr. Wittington stated that there had been a traffic study performed. CDOT is requiring turn lanes. Chairman Run.yon asked again for the number. Mr. Wittin.gton stated that he did not recall these numbers. Mr. Fox stated that the traffic study was factored into the access permit and considered by CDOT when they granted access. Phillip Bowman spoke. He stated that the average daily traffic for the development would likely be over 1500 per day, and 90-100 trips per hour during peak hours. The reports are available. A good rule is that about 10- 15% ofthe total trips per day will fall during the peak periods. Mr. Wittington stated that all of the streets would easily handle at least that many trips per day with 12 foot lanes. Mr. FoX stated that the trip generation manual used to estimate trips is based on individual homes. Their plan is designed to minimize trip generation. The protocol for trip generation doesn't take into account mixed used plan.ning. Chairman Runyon wondered about schools, post offices, grocery stores etc. that would also generate trips. Mr. Fox spoke about public benefits. The water storage tank would be owned by a public entity, water, seWer infrastructure will be built to district standards, and the agreement in place between the district and the applicant will allow smooth transition to the district in the future. They believe this will provide a new destination in Eagle County and will support the tourist and recreation economy while diversifying the local experiences. Commissioner Menconi wondered about the orientation of the architecture and landscape. Mr. Fox showed some slides depicting these details. The focus of the site plan is to capture the mountain 'ews to the southeast. As one gets into the second and third stories, views of the Eagle River become available. ike path connections are also available down to the Yacht Club Drive. Tab Bonhedy spoke on behalf of the applicant. He believes there's a Mission I Tuscan feel to the project. Commissioner Menconi was concerned about the Planning Commission's limitations on height. Mr. Bonnedy stated that the original design was to step back into the hillside, with taller elements backed into the hillside. Mr. Fox stated that they had increased the building height from 50 to 60 feet. They feel that architectural icons are important to the project. Chairman Runyon opened public comment. Fred Green spoke. He is the president of the Golf Club immediately adjacent to the proposed development. He asked the Board to urge vision in relation to the Wolcott development master plan prior to approving the project. He believes that there is an opportunity to plan for the future, carefully and with great detail which would enable everyone owning land in the area to participate in the process. Chairman Runyon closed public comment. Chairman Runyon stated that he has some serious problems with the file based on compatibility with surrounding uses. The two properties adjacent to the project are zoned resource and are non-conforming. He feels as though there isn't sufficient information. This project would change the style for the surrounding use and as such feels, it would be incompatible. On the issue of community need, he feels the need isn't evident. He doesn't find this a compelling project and as such will not vote for approval. Commissioner Menconi stated that he liked the progress that had been made, and believes there is a way to alance this progress with the sub area community plan. At each meeting, there had been a greater enhancement of .e project. The landscaping benefits the need for live I work opportunities. He wondered what the Engineering Department had recommended for the street. 37 9/5/06 Mr. Bowman stated that the engineering department did not support the variation request reducing the lanes to l2 feet. None of the areas presented in the photos were adjacent to high traffic commercial components. For this reason, the Engineering Department supported a more traditional commercial standard. Commissioner Menconi wondered about the access points. Mr. Bowman stated that the number of access points is of concern. An ideal situation would be to have th access points separated by 300-500 feet. If an accident were to occur, there would be a risk of roadway blockage for emergency access. Commissioner Menconi stated that he is concerned about the housing. 10 units were added in but the 7 lots of concern to the planhing commission were added in. He would like to move forward in approving the file without the additional 7 lots. Mr. Churchill stated that they are down to 25 units of housing. Commissioner Menconi wondered about a compromise. Mr. Fox stated that 6 additional deed restricted units were added. They felt the best way to enhance the housing units was to increase the units in B-4. Mr. Churchill stated that section C is valuable property. Mr. Fox wondered about putting more housing units above other commercial areas, such as B-3. Mr. Churchill stated that in sketch plan, housing was at lO% and the commission has asked for 20%. This makes the project difficult to break even. Commissioner Menconi wondered where Commissioner Stone stood on the project. Commissioner Stone wondered if Commissioner Menconi was concerned about the density or the location. Commissioner Menconi stated that he was not attached to development on lot C; however, the Planning Commission was quite concerned about the lot. He wished to see more density inside the development. Commissioner Stone stated that he would support clustering the development. Ms. Markowitz suggested placing a multi family structure near the single-family lot and clustering closer to the development. Commissioner Menconi wondered if there were other options to make the deed restricted properties viable. He believes that 7 one-acre lots changes the development. Mr. Bonnedy stated that he is in favor of spreading out the density as it approaches the open space. He likes the transition. Ms. Markowitz stated that the Division of Wildlife did not support this development on the perimeter due to the people in this area. Moving the people closer the urbanized area was preferable. There had been a concern about unit size. These units could be made smaller and add more units. The other option is multi family clustering. Small patio homes sell very well. Mr. Fox reminded the Board that the project carries a significant wildlife mitigation plan. 80% of the site is open space. Mr. Churchill stated that there is a rock fall line berm. This project is in the winter migration but there isn't a lot of meaningful vegetation. He stated that 7 single homes, 12 patio homes or 24 multi family units would be possible. K.T. Gazunis spoke to the Board. She stated that 7 units would change the formula moderately, 24 would definitely change the formula. Mr. Churchill stated that B-3 might be able to be expanded with relation to affordable housing units. Commissioner Menconi stated that given the type of plan they are trying to create he is not uncomfortable with the request for road width variations. K.T. Gazunis stated that she disagreed with the appreciation amount. She requested that this amount be consistent with other deed-restricted units in the county. Commissioner Menconi stated that lot C would have 7 units and an agreed upon cap on size of the units. Mr. Churchill stated that they would like 4000 square feet with an allowable accessory dwelling unit. Commissioner Menconi stated that accessory dwelling units would increase the housing guidelines. Previous discussions also included patio homes. Ms. Markowitz stated that patio homes usually have two to five feet between the homes, and surrounding the homes is common space. Commissioner Menconi asked for clarification on the numbers of units. Ms. Markowitz stated that it took a number of hearings for the Planning Commission to settle on positive support. She hesitated on the single-family homes due to the DOW concerns. The developer had left one single family home and moved the other 6 to B-4. 38 9/5/06 InT IT" Commissioner Menconi stated that ifthere were 7 homes, each 4000 per sf, that would equal $7,000,000.00 in sales revenue. They are trying to find a tradeoff between the DOW concerns and the planning commission oncerns. He would like to see these units clustered. Commissioner Stone stated that he isn't in favor of the accessory dwelling units. Mr. Bonnedy stated that patio homes are a great concept. He believes the topography is too steep to cluster homes. Commissioner Stone stated that another way to reduce the impact would be duplex units. Commissioner Menconi asked if the parcel C issue could be considered later. Bob Morris from the Attorney's office stated that he thought that would not be a good idea. Commissioner Stone wondered which three units could be eliminated if the duplex units were proposed. Ms. Markowitz stated that clustering the lots on the lower portion would be better due to topographical concerns. She suggested reconfiguring the building envelopes, clustering along the roadway and using the lowest slopes available. Commissioner Menconi asked the applicant whether he wanted the file tabled, but wanted to make sure the rrtathwas being done correctly and that the DOW concerns were being considered and finally figuring out the parcel C situation. Mr. Churchill stated that the road doesn't have to loop all the way around. He could put a landscape easement across the back of the lots. Five duplexes with a belt of vines across the back would be acceptable, or 7 units on one acre lots with no accessory dwelling units. Ms. Markowitz suggested the possibility that since the housing is in phase 3, there could be a site specific development review prior to moving into phase 3. Commissioner Stone stated that there is a specified amount of density allowed in this situation. Mr. Churchill suggested the 7 single-family lots with a bell curve of vines behind the property. Mr. Fox stated that the existing wildlife mitigation plan considers this as impacted winter range. Commissioner Menconi stated that 7 units and a limit of 4000 square feet would be acceptable. There would be an additional deed restricted unit in B-3. Commissioner Stone moved that the Eagle County Permit Authority approve File No. 1041-0065, waiving the requirement for Special Use Review Permit and incorporating the following conditions: 1. That except as otherwise modified by the Permit, all material representations of the Applicant in this permit application, correspondence, and public meetings shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 2. Any grading plans must include detailed site plans identifying erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs); construction staging areas for equipment stage and a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC). 3. Prior to site disturbance, the applicant must either obtain a 404 Permit or concurrence that a 404 Permit is not necessary from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 4. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit an "Hours of Operation Plan" will be established by the applicant to stop construction noise during off business hours and to reduce amount of vehicle (diesel and gasoline) fUmes. Copies ofthis plan shall be provided to the County. 5. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) must be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to obtaining a grading permit. 6. A Dust Suppression Plan must be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to obtaining a grading permit. The plan shall be kept onsite and implemented at all times during construction. The plan must identify who can be contacted immediately to abate dust issues. 39 9/5/06 r 7. Failure to adhere to these conditions will result in the cessation of work until appropriate measures have been taken to restore compliance. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of two to one with Chairman Runyon voting against. PDP-00033 & ZC-00079 Vines at Vail lena Skinner-Markowitz, Community Development NOTE: ACTION: Tabled from 3/28, 5/16/06, 7/11/06 & 8/1/06 To create a mixed use PUD on 39.0 acres in Wolcott including: a winery complete with tasting room; lodge/inn; community pavilion; educational spaces; low-impact commercial uses; conference facilities; both free market residential including live/work residences and employee housing rentals; recreational and agricultural and landscape features. LOCATION: Accessed from Hwy 131; Wolcott. Section 15, Township 4S, Range 83W FILE NO./PROCESS: LOCATION: OWNER: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PDP-00033 / ZC-00079 / PUD Preliminary Plan/Zone Change Accessed from Hwy 131; Wolcott. Section 15, Township 4S, Range 83W Kiwa Associates, LLC Owner Sid Fox, Fox & Company STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY: The proposed Vines at Vail Planned Unit Development lies on approximately 39.0 acres in Wolcott. The Vines at Vail PUD Sketch Plan envisioned, "... a village atmosphere..." with, "... simple architecture, generous public walking paths and sun-dappled plazas and gardens..." The Preliminary Plan, ".. .represents further refinement of the concepts approved through the Sketch Plan." This applicant for the proposed project seeks to create a mixed use development with both commercial and residential aspects throughout. More specifically, the proposed uses for this project include: A working winery complete with tasting room (the focal aspect ofthe proposal); a lodge/inn with independent suites for guests; a community pavilion; residential units including live-work residential units above a pedestrian oriented plaza; one (1), single family property; employee housing units; office space; recreational; agricultural, and landscape features; educational spaces; a library; medical offices; galleries; restaurants; arts and crafts studios; private clubs spaces; retail shop spaces; resort support services; child care and animal care facilities; and conference facilities. The development is organized into several planning areas, with each area accommodating a variety of uses. These uses are listed in the associated Planned Unit Development Guide. Please note that this file has been modified since the distribution of the file referral. While the majority of information as contained within the text remains the same, the site plan, housing plan, wildlife mitigation plan, and PUD guide have been modified and are attached to this Staff report for your convenience. B. CHRONOLOGY: 2004- The property was purchased from Holy Cross Electric, by the applicant. 2005- The applicants receive approval for the Vines at Vail PUD Sketch Plan 40 9/5/06 ~., 2005- This property (along with surrounding properties) is included in the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District after Wolcott area property owners vote to be included in the District; the applicant was now obligated to work in conjunction with the District for water and wastewater services 2006- The ERWSD water storage tank Location and Extent application, a component of the overall District/Vines of Vail water/wastewater system receives approval by the Planning Commission for its location on the adjacent Bureau of Land Management property. The water tank is part of the ER WSD regional water system and, if the 1041 permit is approved, will be owned and maintained by the District. c. SITE DATA: Surrounding Land Uses / Zoning: East: BLM / Unplatted / Resource West: ROW: Hwy 13l / BPI (Waste Management) Property / Resource North: BLM / Unplatted / Resource South: "Commercial" Gallegos Property / Unplatted / Resource Existing Zoning: PUD Total Area: 39.0 acres Water: Public- Onsite water treatment*/Augmentation water from the Eagle River Sewer: Public- Onsite wastewater treatment system* Access: Prom Hwy 131 *The Vines at Vail water/wastewater treatment is proposed as a public system; however, it will be maintained privately until such a time that the ER WSD establishes a neW water treatment facility for Wolcott and replaces the temporary facility located in the Vines at Vail PUD (the water tank shall remain offsite on BLM lands; the water/wastewater treatment equipment will be removed from the Vines at Vail property at that time) D. PLANNING COMMISSION HEARlNGS/DELIBERATIONS: The applicants for the Vines at Vail files had participated in four (4) Planning Commission hearings in an effort to work through certain concerns held by the Commission. The Planning Commission's original/primary concern focused on the potential affects the project may have on Wildlife. With a split vote at the first hearing (with a split vote at the first hearing, undecided Commissioners requested more information regarding wildlife mitigation), the applicant requested a tabling to allow them the opportunity to meet with the DOW and discuss their plan. At the second hearing, the applicant responded by providing additional/requested information; the applicant also had additional meetings with the Division of Wildlife to ensure their mitigation plan and overall plan was adequate and receptive; and made other modifications to the proposed plan and/or housing plan. The applicant requested a second tabling to work on the building height definition, as this was a previously unstated concern of the PC. The applicant requested a third tabling in order to further refine the proposed building height (still a concern by the PC) and to reconsider/possibly eliminate the last major wildlife concerns the PC had regarding the seven (7) single family homes in Area C, the eastern most proposed development on this site. At the final hearing held June 21 S\ 2006, the Planning Commission was pleased to see that the applicant, once again, modified the Vines at Vail site plan to alleviate certain wildlife concerns held by the PC and the DOW; however, there were still concerns regarding the remaining single family home on Area C. Although the seven (7) single family homes were reduced to one (1). The size of the proposed building envelope and home is significant, and that the Wildlife mitigation plan was not updated to reflect the amended landscaping plan for Area C. The PC still had two (2) remaining issues including: 1) that the proposed water augmentation plan in that it did not offer 100% in-basin augmentation (water has been purchased from both Eagle Park and Wolford); and 2) that the definition of height for the buildings, although the buildings are currently proposed to be no higher than what is permitted in the underlying zone district is not 41 9/5/06 I"'" as is it is currently defined in the ECLURs. As such, the applicants are requesting a deviation to the height definition in order to measure the heights from finished grade instead of, "... finished or natural grade, whichever is more restrictive." It was suggested that the applicant table to work on the remaining issues; however, ultimately, both the Planning Commission and the applicant felt it was time send the application forward to the Board of County Commissioners to hear the file. A motion to approve the file with Staff and additional conditions was made; however, a second to this motion was not given. A motion to deny was made (and seconded) and was based on the following concerns: · The proposed mitigation plan needed to be updated to reflect the current site layout/proposal (which \Vas modified in response to the previous hearing) · That the proposal (specifically, in regards to the water augmentation plan) \Vas not in compliance with the Eagle River Watershed Plan (The basis for the interpretation of non-compliance of the proposal with the Watershed Plan was based on a conflict between a "Recommended Strategy" (not a policy) and the proposed augmentation plan. More specifically, the strategy, "Adopt A Local Position on Augmentation Plans" discusses the creation of policies utilizing in-basin augmentation versus other augmentation sources in an effort to support objective 4.3.2: "Develop Cooperative Land Use and Water Planning Policies that Address Future Growth, Water Supply and Stream Flow Protection. " To date, a policy for required use of in-basin augmentation has not been established by the Board of County Commissioners.} · The remaining single family home in Area C was too big and needed to be reduced · The heights of the buildings should be limited to the calculation method as found in the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. E: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion: [5:1] The Planning Commission Recommended to deny files PDP-00033 and ZC-00079. 2. STAFF REPORT F. REFERRAL RESPONSES: (see attached) Applicant responses have not included in this section; the applicant has responded to every referral received for this application. Environmental Health, email dated March 8th, 2006: · I may have missed it but I didn't see erosion control or dust suppression plans included in an environmental hazards or impacts mitigation plan. · These two things could easily be tied to the grading permit if I can count on our Building Division and Engineering Department for support; please condition Housing Department, m.emo dated March 7th, 2006: · The applicant has submitted an employee housing plan that completely provides housing for all of the low income jobs as required by Eagle County Residential Linkage and Commercial Linkage Guidelines. · The applicant acknowledges the need for an additional 7 moderate income units to meet the inclusionary housing guidelines. · The applicant may choose to deed restrict some of the "for sale" units within this development or may opt for the "payment-in-lieu" calculation attached. · The Housing Department will consider some other method to meet the inclusionary housing needs if the applicant chooses to propose another alternative. 42 9/5/06 ..,.IT ECO Trails memo, dated March 6th, 2006: . I met with the applicant and consultants March 2 to review the spur trail route; it is appropriate to end the spur trail at the north side of the railroad corridor at this time due to landownership issues and the alignment of the new bridge and shoulders. . Arroyo Engineering will determine the final alignment of the trail which is dependent on the design of side slopes and guardrail as required by CDOT and the Corps of Engineers. Relative to design status of the spur trail, I have prepared a draft condition for your staff report. . Concurrent with construction of other public improvements for the first phase of the project, the developer shall construct an 8 foot wide unpaved trail along Highway 131 from the project entrance to the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad corridor per an approved design which is satisfactory to ECO Trail and County Engineering staff and conforms with the construction standards ofthe Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan (see condition 14). . Regarding the spur trail maintenance, this note should be included in the PUD guide: . The Vines at Vail project owner or owners association will maintain the length of the spur trail as part of the development approval. Maintenance shall consist of regular trash removal, weed control and annual re-compaction to maintain the 8 wide platform as usable. . As stated in my February 22 memo, paving of the spur trail will be sought from adj acent properties that redevelop or expand. . The Vines at Vail developer is being asked to construct the trail beyond their project boundaries and has agreed to comply. . The applicant's engineering consultant, Lee Whittington, asked for guidance on how to work with CDOT on permitting the trail. I have requested information from the County Engineer regarding permitting of a similar spur trail and will advise Lee upon receipt of that information ECO Transit, electronic memo dated February 27, 2006: . To maintain acceptable transit travel times along the 40-mile bus route between Dotsero and Vail, ECO will continue to use the current bus stops in the vicinity of the 1-70 interchange at Wolcott; ECO Transit will not access the Vines at Vail development and these stops will remain the nearest location to access ECO Transit. . The applicant explained that the road from the entrance to the development to Lot D2 (Vines at Vail Drive) and" King Alex's Way" have the width and turning radii to allow tour buses to enter, pick up and drop off passengers, park, and exit the property. . If local transit were to be implemented in Wolcott at a later date, this would be the route that buses would use to access and egress the development. . Buses will require a minimum 12' travel lane. According to sheet C-7, the plan and profile of Vines at Vail Drive, the travel lanes are 11'. . For full-size transit coaches, an 11' travel lane is acceptable as long as the flat surface occupied by curb and gutter extends the flat surface travel lane width to a minimum of 12'. I do not see a plan and profile showing the width of King Alex's Way. . The turning movements for Area D (King Alex's Way) show a potential conflict between the landscape feature on the southeast comer and the turning vehicle. . The applicant should consider scaling back this feature to ensure the year-round unobstructed movement of emergency vehicles and buses. . Should King Alex's Way become part of a transit route, the parking within King Alex's Way will become a conflict for the efficient movement of transit vehicles and may need to be relocated. Since future transit to the site is speculative, I mention this for informational purposes only. Engineering memo, dated February 1 S\ 2006: . The Drainage Report for the proposed development has not been reviewed because the analysis is invalid. The Developed Drainage Plan included in the report does not reflect the site layout shown in other sections of the application. The Drainage Report should be revised with the following considerations: . Several of the developed drainage basins on site range in size from less than 1 acre to approximately 3 acres. Drainage basins of this size are too small to be modeled with TR-55 43 9/5/06 (recommended for basins with Tc greater than D.l hr.), and should be modeled with the Rational Method. · The Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) methodology for sizing water quality control features should be used. · There is no discussion of debris flow capacity for any of the proposed culverts on major drainages, and no bulking factors have been applied to peak flow rates to model debris flow conditions. · Storm water detention requirements should be calculated based on the proposed site plan, and the location of all detention ponds should be shown on the drainage plans and site plans. · A total often (10) individual access points are proposed along the first 1100' of Vines at Vail Drive. This number of access points is very large, and will likely result in conflicting turning movements along this section of road. · Based on input from CDOT during the access permit review process, it was discussed that access points along Hwy 131 should be consolidated north of the RR and Eagle River Bridge. The construction of the new access proposed with this site would appear to present the opportunity to combine access with any future development of the BFI site at the southwest corner of this property. However, the currently proposed site plan only provides a 25' wide easement for this purpose, and there appear to be considerable constraints along the proposed alignment of the easement. A plan for allowing a workable access to the BFI site should be included with this submittal. · A full size set of preliminary plans is requested for review. Based on a limited review of the half size plans, the following concerns were noted: · There appears to be no rockfall mitigation berm incorporated into the grading plans as recommended by the CGS letter dated November 14,2005, from Andy Gleason. · The site utility plans should incorporate the off-site improvements including water and sewer located in Hwy 131, and the off-site water tank. · It appears that the site entrance design has been modified when compared to plans previously submitted with the Sketch Plan and the CDOT Access Permit application. It does not appear that a right and left turn lane are proposed for exiting the site onto Hwy 131. All access design is subject to CDOT review and approval as a condition of the access permit. · If phased construction of the site is proposed, a preliminary phasing plan should be included with the plan set. · In general, all civil plans submitted with the preliminary plan application should be 70-80% drawings of final construction plan detail. This includes plan and profile of appropriate utilities, and additional detail with the storm drainage items. · The Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment section of the application includes conceptual level plans, a preliminary design report, and water rights court filings. It does not appear that any of these items have received final approval from the necessary agencies (i.e. permits for the WWTF, court approvals for water rights). Furthermore, both the water and waste water systems are highly dependent on approvals from off-site property owners (CDOT for utilities in Hwy l31 and near the Eagle River Bridge, BLM for water tank construction) which have not been secured. · The "Deviation from Improvement Standards" section appears incomplete. The applicable standard that is being deviated must be referenced, and then the proposed modification to the standard must be stated (which is not included). Furthermore, the section does 110t appear to address all deviations required (such as 9' drive lanes in the residential area). It is recommended that all deviations be summarized in a table as in the example attached. · The Engineering Department does not support the reduction of lane width that appears to be proposed for Vines at Vail Drive (11' in commercial area and 9' in residential area) Office of the State Engineer, memo dated January 20th, 2005: · We have reviewed the above-referenced proposal to create a mixed Use PUD on 39 acres including a winery, a lodgelinn, a community pavilion, educational spaces, low-impact commercial uses, conference facilities, residential units, and open space. · The water supply is to be provided by a diversion from the Eagle River. Sewage disposal is to be provided through an engineered on-site recirculating filter system. · Total potable water use is estimated at 39.2 acre-feet, and total irrigation use is estimated at 9.3 acre-feet, for a total diversion of 48.5 acre-feet. 44 9/5/06 II I 1;--' . The submittal included a copy of the original application in Case No. 04CWl94 for conditional water rights and approval of a plan for augmentation, as well as the first and second amendments to the application. . A third amendment to the application was filed on December 22,2005. . No information was provided concerning the physical adequacy of the water supply. . As stated in CR.S 30-28-133(3)(d), the subdivider is required to submit "Adequate evidence that a water supply that is sufficient in terms of quality, quantity, and dependability will be available to ensure an adequate supply of water for the type of subdivision proposed." Adequate evidence is usuaIly provided in the form of a water resource report, prepared by a professional engineer or water consultant, which addresses the quality, quantity, and dependability issues. . A report of this nature was not provided. See the Guidelines for Subdivision Water Sup?lv Plan Reports (online at www.water.state.co.us/pubs/policies/memo .subdivisions.pdf ) for the necessary information. . Due to the lack of a water court-approved augmentation plan, it is our opinion, pursuant to CRS 30- 28-136(1 ) (h) (I), that the proposed water supply will cause material injury to decreed water rights and is inadequate. Please resubmit the water supply plan with a copy of the decree signed by the water court for our review and comment. Bureau of Land Management, memo dated January 9, 2006: . This letter concerns thePUD only. Issues concerning the water tank and road construction on adjacent public lands are being analyzed in Environmental Assessment (EA) C0140_2005_137ea.cgs. The pending decision record for the EA and the right-of-way grant will contain specific information/mitigation for the water tank and road improvements. . Specifically; BLM requests administrative access through the PUD to the water tank access road. This will be consistent with the pending right-of-way grant being processed for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. We also request that the access route be gated on or near the private public land boundary to enSUre only authorized vehicle use occurs. . Generally it should be noted that traditional public land uses sometimes conflict with the expectations of new residents and developers. The applicant should be aware of and respect the following values and existing uses ofthe adjacent BLM lands. 1. Wildfire. Protecting homes from wildfires is a concern in the wildland-urban interface areas. Modifying desigrt plans or reducing fuels to create a defensible space on private property is recommended. Future fuel reduction actions on public lands should not be considered as the preferred remedy for mitigation of wildfire concerns. 2. Livestock Grazing. The applicant should be advised that the adjacent public land has current permits for livestock grazing. Under Colorado statutes, it is the owners' responsibility to construct, and maintain in good condition a lawful fence protecting their property in order to recover any damages from trespass livestock. If a livestock fence is not presently in place, a fence built along the privatelBLM boundary is recommended to reduce potential future problems. . Should any fence construction be considered along the privatelBLM boundary, the fence standards should allow for easy passage of wildlife. This office can provide additional information regarding fence standards upon request. 3. Trespass. The applicant should be mindful of the location ofBLM property boundaries to ensure no encroachment occurs on public lands. 4. Recreation/Travel. The adjacent public lands are managed to offer a variety of dispersed recreational activities (motorized and non-motorized). Motorized and non-motorized travel is managed in accordance with the Glenwood Springs Field Office - Resource Management Pan. This broad range of activities will likely continue to occur contiguous to the private lands. Our office can provide additional information on recreation, travel and access as necessary. 5. Hunting and Target Shooting. The adjacent BLM lands are open to hunting and target shooting. The BLM does not establish safety zones or no-shooting zones to restrict hunting. 6. Mineral Rights. The Bureau has not researched the mineral rights to determine ifthey are reserved to the federal government on the subject lands. 45 9/5/06 Colorado State Forest, memo dated January 18th, 2006: · The Colorado State Forest Service has given Vines at Vail development a wildfire hazard rating of moderate. · A moderate rating means that structures on the property may be threatened by average wildfire activity. · Vegetation on this property consists of scattered pinion pine, and juniper with sagebrush being the dominant ground cover. · These fuels along with a slight slope, southern aspect, and only one entrance/exit Were all considered when rating this property a moderate fire hazard. After development this property would most likely be given a low rating. · We recoritnlend the following: · All single family lots keep vegetation green around residences · Non combustible roofing material be used at all times · Refer to Creating Wildfire Defensible Spaces no. 6.302 found at www.ext.colostate.edu. for minimum reference guidelines Colorado Division of Wildlife memo, dated January l7th, 2006: · The Division of Wildlife has reviewed this project and we offer the following coritnlents for your consideration. · OVerall the preliminary plan has few changes from the sketch plan in regards to impacts on wildlife. The preliminary plan has not addressed many of the concerns identified in the Division's earlier letter on this project, a copy of which is enclosed. · The Vines at Vail project, the proposed water tank road and water tank on BLM lands are all located in mule deer winter range, severe winter range and migration corridor. The preliminary plan, as presented, would have significant wildlife impacts from developing in mule deer winter range, severe winter range, and migration corridor. · The project as presented does not meet the 1996 Eagle County Master Plan's; Environmental Quality, guiding policy #1; Protect, maintain and enhance critical wildlife habitat areas. Avoidance of critical wildlife habitat areas by development is the County's preferred approach. When avoidance is not feasible or conflicts with other County policies, require development to be so located, designed and used that the functions the critical habitat serves for each species are preserved. Thesefunctions may included, but are not limited to providing food supply or cover, production areas, nesting or roosting sites Or areas for migration and travel. Specific comments include: · The wildlife enhancement plan as presented does> not address the impact to the migration corridor. · The enhancement plan states there will be a permanent loss of 13.16 acres on the Vines at Vail property. Sheet A 1.0 in the preliminary plan show development area A has 7 acres, development area B had 4 acres development area C has 3.6 acres, development area D has 1 acre and tracts A and C are the roads with 1.9 acres. This would bring the total acres lost to 17.5. The remaining 21 acres is contained in areas E and F both are listed as open space and recreation. However, there is nothing in the definition of open space and recreation that prevents the property from having uses that will be incompatible with wildlife. · The wildlife mitigation plan relies almost totally on covenants to enforce restrictions or to protect critical wildlife habitat. Covenants are generally not effective in achieving the necessary level of protection. · The mitigation plan does not address how the development will prevent impacts from extending into the surrounding BLM lands. The plan does state ttte Resort might work with BLM and CDOW to prepare an access control plan to maintain the habitat effectiveness. If the habitat effectiveness of the surrounding public lands is to be maintained an access control plan would be needed. Further, if the open space in development areas E and F are to function as big game winter range then seasonal closures would be necessary to avoid or minimize impacts to wildlife. 46 9/5/06 111'-- . The section on big game management has a statement, "the CDOW would encourage Resort management to allow continued public access into this area". The DOW has not had any discussion with the developer on access issues for this project. . The vegetation plan does not provide a species list for trees. Since the project is planned in big game winter range the DOW would suggest that landscaping trees and shrubs should be selected for their low palatability to big game. In addition, the use of fruit or berry producing trees in landscaping should be minimized in order to reduce the attraction for bears. . The preliminary plan does not address impacts from residents or guests dogs on wildlife. . Building envelopes in development area A are only 7.5 feet to 22.5 feet from the BLM boundary. The west end of the parking lots in development area B is only 7.5 feet from the BLM boundary. Without appropriate setbacks, the impacts to wildlife from the development and recreation will extend outside the boundaries of the PUD onto the surrounding public lands and negatively affect wildlife using these critical areas. . The preliminary plan states the development minimized the impacts to wildlife from clustering developrnent in the southwestern corner. The development is not clustered in the SW corner it covers 50% of the site. . The mitigation plan is using an updated cost per acre for fertilization treatments. The current cost for aerial fertilization is approximately $94.00 per acre. Eagle River Concerns: . The preliminary plan shows water being removed from upstream of the Highway 131 bridge and the effluent being released just downstream of the Highway 131 bridge. This would minimize the stretch of river impacted from reduced flows. However we are concerned that the temperature of the treated water being released will be higher than the water taking from the river and will contribute to the nearly annual outbreaks offurunculosis in trout that is seen on the Eagle River. The effluent could also impact the aquatic invertebrates and result in increased aquatic vegetation including algae. . The preliminary plan does not show how runoff from the numerous parking lots will be handled. . The preliminary plan does not provide any information on how recreation paths and open space will be protected from erosion due to increased human use. The soils in this area are poor and runoff from this entire area already contributes to sediment issues in the Eagle River and affects the aquatic ecosystem for several miles downstream. · As you can see from the above comments, they are very similar, if not identical, to our earlier ones. The Division is disappointed that, despite our extensive comments in 2005, very few have been included in this revised proposal and that significant wildlife issues still exist with this project. Since this letter was received by Staff, the applicant has provided several memos responding to the concerns of the Division of Wildlife, as well as participated in an onsite meeting with the Division agent. In addition, the applicant has also amended the proposed Wildlife Enhancement and Mitigation Plan accordingly (see attached). Colorado Geological Survey, memo dated January 10th, 2006: · In response to your request I have reviewed the preliminary plan for the Vines at Vail development. This development was previously reviewed by CGS in letters to your office dated 1-14-05 and 11-14- 05. · Included in the new review package were a project description (11-23-05), a PUD preliminary plan by TAB Associates (11-21-05), a Geologic and Geotechnical Update by CTL Thompson (11-16-05), a drainage report by Arroyo Engineering LLC (5-19-05), and a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation by CTL Thompson (5-4-04). · The comments from my letter ofJanuary 14,2005 on soils and subsurface properties and drainage remain the same. · The rockfall hazard outlined in the letter from November 14,2005 remains the same. I would like to see the rockfall hazard line on the same map as the lots in Phase 3. The letter of 11-14-05 also addressed the need for a rockfall mitigation berm on the uphill side of the building envelopes in Phase 47 9/5/06 ... .. 3 according to Liv Bowden of CTL Thompson. There is no mention of a mitigation berm in the Geologic and Geotechnical Update by CTL Thompson, nor is it on any plat. · Before final approval of this project I recommend that the rockfall hazard line and a rockfall mitigation berm are included on the plat. Eagle Connty Schools, memo dated December 23rd, 2005: · This preliminary plan is proposing 7 single-family units and 24 multi-family units. This would result in a 0.166 acre dedication requirement as follows: · 7 single-family units X 0.Ol5l acres per unit 0.106 acres · 24 multi-family units X 0.0025 acres per unit = 0.060 acres · As the land dedication is minimal, the district will accept cash in lieu ofland for this subdivision. · Per the County Land School Dedication Standards, the value of this cash payment will e determined by appraisal of land submitted with the application for final plat. Additional Referrals Were sent to the following agencies and Homeowner's Associations: · Eagle County Attorney, Assessors, Road and Bridge, Animal Control, Sheriff, Sheriffs Office, Wildfire Mitigation Specialist, Weed and Pest · CDOT (Grand Junction and Local Offices) · Natural Resource Conservation Service · Ambulance and Fire Districts · Colorado and Eagle County Historical Societies, Postmaster- Wolcott · Red Sky Ranch HOA, Bellyache Ridge HOA G. STAFF DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a Preliminary plan for PUD: STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD. The Applicant has demonstrated that the entire area affected by this PUD Preliminary Plan is in single ownership. [+] FINDING: Uilified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is art of this PUD IS owned or controlled bone 1 erson and/or entit . 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.3f, Variations Authorized. The current zoning for the project is Resource. As such, many of the proposed uses are permitted only in the commercial zone districts, or are permitted With Special Use Permit orvia Limited Review approval. The PUD zoning provides flexibility in this regards to develop 'mixed use' developments. The applicant has submitted a comprehensive list of use Variations for consideration. Since the Sketch Plan (as a recommendation of the Planning and EnvirOhmental Health Department), the applicant has developed several mitigation aspects to the project: A Hazardous Materials Plan/Contingency 48 9/5/06 11,1 I Plan has been developed and included in the PUD Guide as Appendix C to ensure that materials will be handled properly throughout the development; parking and loading areas are adequate- residential and commercial parking has been considered; and noise, lighting have been evaluated and incorporated as part of the PUD to minimize nuisances. The applicant has also come forth and proposed onsite safety/enforcement staff to ensure that maintenance, compliance with proposed covenants and/or restrictions, compliance with aspects ofthe Wildlife Enhancement and Mitigation Plan. In examining the proposed uses through the Sketch plan and Preliminary Plan, it would seem plausible with use of the proposed mitigation, integration of the typically commercial uses with residential uses is reasonable. [+/-] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] AS CONDITIONED The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in either Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule" or Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule". The majority of residential uses ARE uses allowed in the Resource zone district; however, the commercial/industrial uses ARE NOT currently per111itted in the underlying zone district. An itemized list of all Variations for the Board's consideration has been submitted and anal zed. The current use variations a ear to be acce table. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply to thePUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations ",jor the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authdrized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snowmelt between buildings. The following dimensional limitation Variations have been itemized in detail as part of the Preliminary Plan application. *Dimensional Standards: Minimum Lot Area- The current limitation in the Resource zone district is a minimum of 35 acres per lot. With the total lot size being 39 acres, the PUD proposes smaller development lots clustered on the west end of the property, with larger, open space lots on the eastern portion. All lots will be less than 35 acres. Minimum Setbacks- The side and rear setbacks will be varied and may be smaller or larger than as required in the Resource zone district; the front, 50 foot setback will be maintained. Also, building envelopes will be utilized to control development. Maximum Building Height- The maximum building height is currently 35 feet for residential structures and 40 feet for all other uses in the Resource zone district, with a 30% height bonus for appurtenances and towers. The applicant is requesting a maximum height of 52' for the tower; 35 feet for residential structures; and 40 for other uses. The ability to build at this height will allow the development to utilize underground parking, limiting surface parking. Although these heights meet the tnax heights for the underlying zone district, these heights are based on measurement from finished grade only; a variation from what is currently dictated by the ECLURs. The Variation request for heights is to modify their definition for height measurement to be from finished grade, not "...finished or natural grade, whichever is more restrictive. " Engineering variances from improvement standards/deviations are being requested and are included in the application in a table dated February 16,2006. Variances from improvement standards/deviations are approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Currently, the Engineering department DOES NOT support the proposed commercial road deviation (lane width = 12' from the required 17"). [+/-] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE NOT those specified under the existing zoning; however, this finding may be found positive assuming approval of the Variations and/or deviations by the Board of County Commissioners at Preliminar Plan. 49 9/5/06 STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division I, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the PUD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met; or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the projects residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division I, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard. Given the nature of this proposal, and the proposed design of the buildings for the multiple uses, a site specific parking plan has been developed and submitted as part of Preliminary Plan application. Staffhas one concern regarding residential parking for the live/work owners in that these spaces must be located near the residences. The applicant has agreed with Staff regarding this concern, and has proposed designated areas for these spaces; parking spaces for the residences can either be condominiumized or "reserved" and signed as such. To ensure this aspect of the project carries forward to either the condominium plat or building permit, Staff is requiring this nuance be carried forward by virtue of Condition 3. The parking plan adequately addresses vehicular and pedestrian circulation and loading areas. [+) FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] AS CONDITIONED The applicant HAS demonstrated that off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD CAN comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards, without a necessity for a reduction in the standards, at Preliminary Plan a lication. STANDARD: Landscaping and Lighting. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaving and Illumination Standards. Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. A detailed landscaping plan has been submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan application. The plan details all types and location of landscape materials to be utilized as part of this development. A cost estimate may be necessary for collateralization purposes. The applicant plans to integrate grape vines and native landscaping materials. A concern that arose during final the Planning Commission hearing was in relation to Area C. The applicant wishes to plant grapevines on the majority of the single family building site in a potential wildlife migration area with significant, native vegetation. Staff and Planning Commission agree that the amount of grapevines in Area C be limited in order to preserve as much native vegetation as possible. In order to ensure that the development plan, for Area C is adequate and sensitive to wildlife, Staff suggests a comprehensive review of the site specific development plan by Planning Staff prior to receiving a Building Permit (see condition 13). Site lighting and illumination standards have also been satisfactorily addressed with the Preliminary Plan application. [+) FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] It HAS been demonstrated that landscaping provided in the PUD can comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landsca in 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 Regulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs AllOwed 50 9/5/06 in a Planned Unit Development (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. A Comprehensive Sign Plan has been submitted with the Preliminary Plan application as the project proposes multiple uses. [+) FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations. The PUD guide rovides a satisfactor si Ian. STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. Electricity, telephone and cable, solid waste removal, as well as emergency service providers are available for service to this property. Although, this property is within two (2) fire districts, development is located entirely within the Greater Eagle Fire Protection District. Both districts (the other district governing the undeveloped, last V4 of the development to the east is within the Eagle River Fire Protection District), appear to agree with the fire protection measures as proposed in this application. ill regards to water and wastewater service, it was necessary for the Applicant to apply for 104l permit approval as multiple residences and commercial uses will be served as part of this development; the proposed development exceeded the 1041 threshold of 10 equivalent residential units (EQR). Since the Sketch Plan was approved, this and several other properties in the Wolcott area were included in the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. As such, the applicant has been working to ensure that all proposed infrastructure meets the standards of the District; the District will eventually provide water and wastewater service to this area. ill the interim, agreements are in place with the applicant at this time. The proposed water supply augmentation plan is under review by the water courts. It is necessary to obtain this decree prior to applying for Final Plat (see condition 4). The applicants have shown preliminary road layouts for this application. As a condition of the Sketch Plan Engineering memo date January 21 st, 2005, the applicant is required to adhere to the Eagle Comity road standards, unless Variations from those standards are approved by the Board at Preliminary Plan. Presently, Engineering Staff does not agree with the proposed road width the applicant is proposing (l2' from the required 17'). This variation/deviation must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to the approval of this Preliminary Plan. ill regards to access to this development, the applicant has received an access permit from CDOT. [+/-] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] The Applicant HAS demonstrated that the development proposed in this Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for solid waste disposal. The applicant HAS NOT clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will have adequate facilities for potable water and sewage disposal as the augmentation plan has not been approved by the Courts. It is also necessary to obtain 1041 approval for the proposed infrastructure prior to Preliminary Plan approval. It HAS BEEN demonstrated that the proposed PUD will be conveniently located in relation to schools, olice and fire rotection, and emer enc medical services. STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or 51 9/5/06 ... achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (d) (e) (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 by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way Or a commonly owned easement. 1 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. Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to fotm a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off- site. Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted fot emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. 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 majot 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 toads outside of the PUD, unless the COUllty determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. . (b) (c) The applicant has attempted to meet all minimum County and/or Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) standards regarding road designs, unless, Variations from Eagle County standards is granted by the Board of County Commissioners during this Preliminary Plan process. As previously mentioned, the Engineering Department does not concur with the applicant regarding the current road width as proposed. At this time, the applicant proposes at least two points of access to this development, located on the western portion of the proposal; the applicant has received an emergency access easement :from the owners of the neighboring Gallegos property. A new Highway Access Permit has been obtained from CDOT prior this Preliminary Plan. The current Preliminary Plan adequately addresses the pedestrian movements throughout the proposed development. In speaking with the Transportation Planner for ECO, pedestrians should be able to safely navigate from inside the development to Hwy l31 (no new bus routes are planned for this area at present); however, the nearest bus stop is located on the opposite side ofI-70. As such, the applicant has provided the potential for a future ECO Transit turnaround/stop within the development if such a time as the transit routes are expanded to Hwy 131, and is committed to developing a pedestrian trail from the property south towards the river (see conditions 11 & 12). [+/-) FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] AS CONDITIONED It HAS NOT been clearly demonstrated that the improvements standards applicable to the development will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards regarding: (a) Safe, Efficient Access; (b) Internal Pathways; (c) Emergency Vehicles; (d) Principal Access Points; (e) Snow Storage; however, this finding MAY BE found positive assuming approval ofthe Variations and/or deviations by the Board of County Commissioners at Preliminary Plan. STANDARD: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.E3.e (9)] - The development proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. 52 9/5/06 All the land surrounding this development is zoned Resource. Currently, there are two, non-conforming, grandfathered uses found in the immediate vicinity of the Vines at Vail. They are the BFI Waste Management site, and the Gallegos site. These properties, which are south and west of the subject property, are industrial/commercial in nature, with no residential uses present. To the west (see below detail), Rural Center (RC) Zoning exists. Parcels to the west ofHwy 131 and south of the railroad also contain grandfathered, non-conforming residential uses; there are no structures on the Bureau of Land Management property to the north and east of this site. This development is zoned Resource; RC zoning exists in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. According to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the purpose of the RC zoning is to, "recognize and provide for existing small residential centers or crossroads developments. Uses permitted in this zone district include relatively moderate to lower density residential uses and convenience-oriented cotnI11ercial uses that serve the needs of residents in the surrounding area and visitors and other passers-by." The intent of this development is compatible with the intent ofthis nearby zone C:istrict. The focal point of this development is the winery and tasting room. The applicant proposes to plant grapevines and other landscaping elements throughout the property. Architecture is to be reminiscent of, ".. .Italian hill tOwns." Also proposed are open areas for community gatherings, a market, weddings, etc. Most likely, patrons will visit this development as a final destination; impulse visits by passers by; and local residents will utilize this area for shopping/retail purposes. This development proposes to function as a small village with residences and commercial retail intermixed. As such, the proposed mix of uses must be able to compatibly co-exist. When considering the proposed design, the more intense commercial uses are being clustered at the western portion of the development, with more transitional, lodge and residential uses towards the eastern end of the site. It is not anticipated that the proposed development will compromise the character of this vicinity of Eagle County and represents an opportunity to enhance the character of the area. [+) FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)) All as ectS of the develo rtlent rO osed for the PUD ARE com atible with the character of surroundin land uses. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is on a broad conceptual level, i.e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANAL YSES * BELOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. *This application was received prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and has been analyzed accordingly. EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN 53 9/5/06 "" Environmental Quality Affordable Housing Trans x x x x x2 x3 Countryside! FLUM ~ Community Center/Countryside. The Future Land Use Map indicates that the Vines at Vail property is within two designated areas of the FLUM: 'Community Center' and 'Countryside'. Community Center has a suggested residential density of3-12 dwelling units per acre, in areas typically found along major transportation routes which are accessible public water and sewer, and have not been identified as sensitive lands. This designation promotes Community Centers as appropriate locations for affordable housing, with cluster and Planned Unit Developments being encouraged. Community Centers are also places where a mix of non-residential activities takes place, including neighborhood commercial activities to serve the population of the Community Center and community-oriented commercial or service which may serVe surrounding areas or the entire COunty. Development in a Community Center is primarily served by centralized water supply and sewage treatment facilities. Countryside suggests low residential densities of2-35 acres per dwelling, consisting of primarily single family residences. Open space in these subdivisions is typically found within individual lots and not as common open space. Newly developing Countryside lands provide transitionareasbetween the County's more densely populated areas and its less densely settled Rural Lands. This is created by clustering development in the most suitable portion of the site allowing the hazard, resource and recreation lands to be protected. Countryside is not typically associated with local-serving commercial uses, although isolated commercial activities which are permitted by special review may be permitted within or adjacent to designated Countryside when they are compatible with the character of adjacent uses and meet other criteria ofthe Land Use Regulations. Development on Countryside lands is typically served by on-site or small community water supply and wastewater disposal methods. This proposal does try to encapsulate the intent of the FLUM by clustering commercial development in the Community Center area, while open space and the single family lot is proposed in Countryside. Pursuant to the Master Plan intent for Countryside, commercial uses, permitted via Special Use Permit may be considered in the designation, The site has been designed with respect to drainage and other potentially hazardous situations, as well as emergency access locations and open space considerations. x2_ Environmental Quality. The applicant was required to apply to the Bureau of Land Management for the ability to locate the Water tank and related infrastructure on public lands; necessary for the overall water/wastewater system. During this process, the applicant had to address and satisfy the requirements of the BLM including, but not limited to: geology, visual impacts, erosion control and wildlife. As a result, the applicants were successful in obtaining their approval of the agreement, with several conditions and controls that the applicants will have to adhere to prior to and during construction. 54 9/5/06 Pursuant to the Eagle County Master Plan guiding policy: Protect, maintain and enhance critical wildlife habitat reas. Avoidance of critical wildlife habitat areas by development is the County's preferred approach. When 'oidance is not feasible or conflicts with other County policies, require development to be so located, designed and used that the functions the critical habitat serves for each species are preserved. These functions may included, but are not limited to providing food supply or cover, production areas, nesting or roosting sites or areas for migration and travel. According to the Division of Wildlife memo dated January 17th, 2006, the Division of Wildlife has many concerns and questions surrounding this development. The applicant has responded to these concerns and met onsite with the Division on multiple occasions. Staffhas not received any new information from the Division of wildlife in response to the applicant's modifications to this plan (see attached Wildlife Enhancement and Mitigation Plan and amended site modifications labeled Exhibits B, C and D); however, the Wildlife Mitigation Plan appears to be consistent with the Master Plan policies. The reason this aspect of the Master Plan has received a mixed findings is because Staff has not received a written response from the DOW establishing whether they are in support of this document, or if other modifications to the plan are still necessary. x3_ During the Planning Commission hearings, multiple plan modifications were made to the overall plan. Subsequently, these changes have affected the amount of housing units generated for Commercial Linkage. In discussions with the Housing Director on July 6th, 2006, it appearS as though the applicant will need to: 1) provide additional employee housing units; 2) provide a significant amount of cash-in-lieu of housing; or 3) decrease the amount of commercial space, resulting in a decrease in the amount of housing needed for this development. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN x1_ The Vines at Vail is not located in a recognized unique landform area of the county; however it may be located in a natural hazard area. As such, rockfall mitigation has been required for this application. x2_ There are also some concerns with wildlife in the area (as mentioned), as this is severe winter range for mule deer, and bears have been seen in this area as well. EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Quality x x x x x The Vines at Vail currently is located near an area with historic fish kills. Although the river is located south of the rail road tracks, and not directly continuous with the subject property, the concern then becomes not of 55 9/5/06 , enVironmental pollutants, but for water quantity. According to the Colorado DiVision of Wildlife, it will be crucial to replace the water from where it is proposed to be drawn from to ensure the sustainability of the existing trout population. According to the applicant, this will be achieved through in-basin water augmentation by water purchased from the Eagle Park reservoir, and with treated water returned in extreme proximity to the intake. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN VISION STATEMENT: Housing for local residents is a major priority of Eagle County. There should be a wide variety of housing to fulfill the needs of all its residents, including families, senior citizens, and those who work here. Elements of Eagle County's vision for housing are: · Housing is a community-wide issue. · Housing should be located in close proximity to existing community centers, as defined in the Eagle County master plan. · Development oflocal residents housing should be encouraged on existing transit routes. · Housing is primarily a private sector actiVity [but] without the active participation of government, there will be only limited success. · It is important to preserve existing local residents housing. · Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate housing opportunities within the county for other infrastructure needs. · Development applications that will result in an increased need for local residents housing should be evaluated as to whether they adequately proVide for this additional need, the same way as they are evaluated. POLICIES: ITEM 1. Eagle County will collaborate with the private sector & nonprofit organizations to develop housing for local residents 2. Housing for local residents is an issue which Eagle County needs to address in collaboration with the municipalities. . . x 3. Steps should be taken to facilitate increased home ownership by local residents and workers in Eagle County x 4. Additional rental opportunities for permanent local residents should be brought on line. Some. . . should be for households with an income equivalent to or less than one average wage job x 5. Seasonal housing is part of the problem & needs to be further addressed. It is primarily the responsibility of. . . employers. . . x 6. New residential subdivisions will provide a percentage of their units for local residents x 7. Commercial, industrial, institutional, and public developments generating increased employmen.t will provide local residents housing. The first preference will be for units on-site where feasible, or ifnot feasible, in the nearest existing community center. . . x 8. The County will seek to make land available for local residents housing in proximity to community centers 9. Mixed use developments in appropriate locations are encouraged x 10. Factory-built housing is an important part of Eagle County=s housing stock x 11. There is a need to segment a portion of the housing market to protect local residents from having to compete with second home buyers. Where public assistance or subsidies are provided for housing, there should generally be limits on price appreciation, as well as residency requirements x 12. Eagle County recognizes that housing for local residents is an ongoing issue 56 9/5/06 WOLCOTT AREA COMMUNITY PLAN :xl x2 x x x x x x x3 l~ The majority of the commercial retail, etc. space is clustered at the western end ofthe development in the 'Activity Center' where the more intensive activity is to occur. According to the Wolcott Area Community Plan, "Types of uses proposed include commercial, light industrial, warehousing, agricultural activity and small residential. Any use which utilizes hazardous materials should be located in this area." x2_ The proposed development is inline with the intent for areas outside of the activity center. According to the Wolcott Area Community Plan uses like Inns, lodges, restaurants, dude ranches, and recreational, educational or cultural oriented operations are recommended and appropriate. x3_ In discussions with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), there appear to be several potential impacts which may affect wildlife in the area. Currently, a Wildlife Enhancement and Mitigation Plan has been considered and incorporated as part of the Preliminary Plan application; however, Staff has not received an updated memo from the Division of Wildlife discussing the current plan. [+/-] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] The proposed Preliminary Plan IS NOT entirely consistent with all stated purposes, goals, objectives and policies of applicable master plans, primarily due potential wildlife im acts, and issues with the to osed housin Ian. STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Plan Jor PUD shall include a phasing plan Jor the development. If development oj the PUD is proposed to occur in phases, then guarantees shall be provided Jor public improvements and amenities that are necessary and desirable Jor residents oj the project, or that are oj benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase oJthe project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. The current phasing plan has been evaluated to reflect all the necessary details such as timing on actual road construction and platting or which parcels will be platted in what order, etc. Construction plans have also been submitted as part of the Vines at Vail 1041. STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] ~ The PUD shall comply with the Jollowing common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum oJ25% oJthe total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum oj ten (10) acres oj common recreation and usable open space lands Jor every one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents oj the PUD. In order to calculate the number oj residents oj the PUD, the number oj proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two 57 9/5/06 and sixty-three hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy. each dwelling unit in Eagle County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan. (b) Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-ofways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. (c) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat area riparian areas, and one hundred (JOO) year floodplains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (d) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed andfully improved according to the development schedule establishedfor each development phase of the PUD. (e) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for PUD. To ensure that all the common open space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or covenants shall be placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any common open space. (/) 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. As quoted above, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations recommehd that, ".. .that a minimum of 25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi- public." The total acreage of the Vines at Vail property is approximately 39 acres. Development is clustered on the western portion of the property, with the remaining area left as open space. Landscaping will enhance any lands not covered by asphalt or buildings. Currently, the applicant has stated that the project will have 21 acres of open space (82%) with at least 10 acres as usable (unrestricted) (26%). The two (2) areas- Areas E and F- are the Open Space Parcels; Area E is restricted Open Space while Area F is Open Space Recreation. Pursuant to Article 5 Administration, parking areas and areas of 30% slope are not considered useable open space areas. Information regarding maintenance responsibilities has been provided as part of the PUD guide. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (12)] AS CONDITIONED The PUD HAS clearly demonstrated that the proposed development will comply with the common recreation and open space standards 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. Pursuant to the memo dated January lOth, 2006 from the Colorado Geological Survey, rockfall mitigation should still be utilized and a condition has been placed on this Preliminary Plan (see condition 5). 58 9/5/06 I To ensure both water and erosion control (storm water management) the Environmental Health Department recommends that specific documents pertaining to these environmental spects of development are developed and submitted to Staffprior to obtaining a grading permit (se conditions 9 and 10). [+/-] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [ Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] AS COND TONED The PUD DOES demonstrate that the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents ava lable at the time the application was submitted, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Arti Ie 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered in the design; however, there ma still be outstanding wildlife im acts. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of a Preliminary Plan for Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] be coltSistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the The proposed subdivision shall aster Plan. The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan revie is on a broad conceptual level, i. e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a develo ment proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspe ts of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANALYSES BEL 0 CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. See previous discussion on page 17. [+/-] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] i This Preliminary Plan IS NOT entirely consistent with all stated purposes, goals, objehives and policies of applicable master plans, primarily due potential wildlife impacts. STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.t.3.e (2)] B The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Develovment Standards. Article 4, Site Development Standards [+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) AS CONDITIONED- #3 [+] Landscaping and fllumination Standards (Division 4-2) [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3). [+/-] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4) AS CONDITIONED- #8,9, 10 [+/-] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) [+] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) AS CONDITIONED- #5,8 [+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) [+] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) AS CONDITlONED- #6 [+] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) [+] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) [+] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) [+] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6) [+/-] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) Engineering is not in support of the proposed road lane width deviation [+] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) AS CONDITIONED- #11, 12 [+] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) [+] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) [+] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) AS CONDITIONED- #9, 10 [+] Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) [+/-] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) AS CONDITIONED- #4 [+] Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) 59 9/5/06 [+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) Impact fees are associated with this proposal, and are anticipated to be paid at the time of Building Permit. [+/-] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] AS CONDITIONED The Applicant HAS NOT fully demonstrated that the proposed subdivision fully 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. STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] B The proposed subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. (1) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions shall be consistent with the Eaele Countv Road Capital Improvements Plan. (2) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines. (3) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. This development is located next to a major roadway and has access to all available utilities. No new public roads are proposed with this development. Statements have also been made by the applicants which propose that the new, wastewater treatment system be designed for future Connection to public systems and will also provide interim options for other Wolcott properties to tie into the private systems. [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] The proposed subdivision IS located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)]B The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or human-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. The development, as proposed, has been located on the most suitable locations for development (see conditions 5 & 8) [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] The property to be subdivided IS NOT entirely suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or hazards that may affect the potential development of the property; however, the development IS located on the more suitable areas for development avoiding steep slopes and hazard areas. STANDARD: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] B The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. See previous discussion on page l6. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existin land uses in the area and SHALL NOT adversel affect the future develo ment of the 60 9/5/06 I III I I . surrounding area. Requirements for aZone Chanl!e. In Section 5-240.D., Standards, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations provide that "the wisdom of amending the Official Zone District Map or any other map incorporated in these Regulations is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the Board of County Commissioners and is not controlled by anyone factor. Based on the above analysis and other available information, Staff makes the following findings as provided in this Section of the Land Use Regulations: STANDARD: C(jnsistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)]..... The subdivision shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). See previous discussion beginning on page l7. STANDARD: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zOne district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district; PUD is [+] FINDING: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2] The development proposed for the subdivisionMA Y BE considered com atible with the character of surroundin land uses. STANDARD: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3] Whether and the extent to which there are changed conditions that require an amendment to modify the use or density/intensity; As the Eagle Valley continues to grow, properties which are suitable for development are becoming increasingly sparse. This parcel proposed for the Vines at Vail was previously owned by Holy Cross Electric and was sold to the current applicant in 2004. This property is 39 acres in size and will be accessed fromHwy 131. The Wolcott Master Plan has anticipated growth consisting of a mix of development for over 10 years. Since the document was created in 1992, activity in the Wolcott area has grown with approvals like the Lazy J Ranch, Red Sky Ranch, and the issuance of upwards of 100 building permits for this area. The Vines at Vail PUD proposal will provide commercial and recreational amenities, to the benefit of the residents of the Wolcott area, and provide opportunities for small businesses with the live/work aspect of the proposal. Currently, the Wolcott Yacht Club is the only public restaurant in the vicinity with all other commercial amenities/services in the closest developed areas of either Edwards or Eagle. In 2005 (after the Sketch Plan approval), the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District approached the property owners of Wolcott to consider extending the District to this area; the area residents voted to approve the District expansion into Wolcott. The District has been considering expansion to Wolcott for several years, and is actively working with he applicants of the Vines of Vail PUD project to accomplish their ultimate goal of serving the Wolcott area. STANDARD: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.D.4] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands; 61 9/5/06 This property, formally owned by Holy Cross Electric, was once a livestock holding and grazing area; is accessed directly from Hwy l31 and lies adjacent to railway ROW. No structures currently exist on this property . A concurrent 1041 permit for the creation of a water and wastewater treatment system to serve both this property and adjacent properties is also being processed to allow temporary potable water and wastewater treatment systems. These temporary systems will eventually be replaced by ERWSD facilities when they are eventUally constructed. The water tank, now proposed will remain as part of the District's infrastructure. The applicant has been working closely with the District and with all other applicable entities concerned with water quantity and quality. Through careful site design and infrastructure, the proposal appears to be consistent with applicable regulations and should not negatively impact the Eagle River, including aquaticlbiotic wildlife. The applicants have been diligently working with the Division of Wildlife to address the DOW's apprehension of the proposal. The applicant has proposed a Wildlife Enhancement and Mitigation Plan, in addition to specific site design elements to aid in minimizing the effects of development on wildlife. To date, Staff is not certain if the Division of Wildlife opinion regarding the proposed mitigation has changed from the original memo, as the DOW has neither provided updated coinments for the Preliminary Plan/Zone Change files, nor for the 1041 application. As Staff has participated in some of the meetings between the DOW and the applicant since the January memo from DOW was supplied to Staff, it may be correct to state that the proposed plan has been modified to respond to, and/or in response to DOW concerns. Further, the plan in its most current form has responded to the DOWs most considerable concern regarding the previously proposed single-family homesites, of which six (6) homes have now been eliminated. (+/"J FINDING: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.D.4] Although water, air, noise, stormwater management, vegetation, and wetlands should not be affected with this development; the proposed amendment MAY result in certain im acts to the wildlife habitat on this ro e . STANDARD: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment addresses a demonstrated community need; This re-zoning if approved result in a unique development opportunity for the Eagle Valley. The development is anticipated to be a diverse, mixed-use project providing live-work/small business opportunities as well as some needed commercial amenities currently unavailable to the residents of Wolcott. Current residents are forced to travel to either Edwards or Eagle for grocery items, dining, or shopping. The proposed mix of commercial uses should create a niche within Wolcott. In addition, this project will attract new tourists to Eagle County, expanding the economic base as a destination resort for tourists seeking alternative experiences. The Vines at Vail PUD will provide employee housing rental units, live/work units and free market single- family residential units. Affordable housing opportunities are also a community need. [+] FINDING: Community need [Section 5-230.D.5] The proposed amendment DOES address a community need. STANDARD: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and not constitute spot zoning, and whether the resulting development can logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services,' The applicants have also received their CDOT access permit, and BLM pernlits associated with their main access and theERWSD has received Location and Extent approval to install a water tank on BLM land north of the Vines at Vail to be used as part of the potable water system and for firefighting purposes. The main area for development is situated in immediate proximity to other 62 9/5/06 .. developed properties, and all services are, or will be available for this development. Further, this property is included and recognized as part of both the Wolcott and Eagle County Master Plan A change of zoning to PUD will not constitute spot zoning. [+] FINDING: Developmen.t patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6] The proposed amendment IS the result of a logical and orderly development pattern and DOES NOT constitute spot zoning. Further, the resulting development IS currently provided with necessary public facilities and services. STANDARD: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7] Whether and the extent to which the area to which the proposed amendment would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area. The Vines at Vail PUD offers several benefits to the Wolcott area and to the greater Eagle County. It offers the public a unique environment where small businesses may flourish; where local residents can shop, dine and recreate, and it adds to the overall economic base of Eagle County by adding/contributing to the tourism industry. This development may be considered a defining factor for Wolcott in regards to planning and future development. [+] FINDING: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7] The extent to which the area to which the amendment would apply HAS changed and continues to change. It MAYbe in the public interest to encourage this new use to this area of Eagle County. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Stone moved to approve File No. ZC-00079, Vines at Vail incorporating all Staff findings. Commissioner Menconi seconded. The motion passed by a vote of two to one with Chairman Runyon voting against the motion. Mr. Churchill stated that in the possibility of a down turned market he would like to have some options of providing fee in lieu for affordable housing. Commissioner Menconi confirmed that at this point the units are required to be on-site deed restricted units. Commissioner Stohe stated that the on-site housing would be required at this point. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve File No. PDP-00033, Vines at Vail incorporating all Staff findings and including the following conditions, removing condition 7, regarding the engineering memo and replacing with area C. Area C will include 7 units ata maximum of 4000 square feet with accessory dwelling units. Condition 14 would be adding an additional deed restricted 1 bedroom unit in area B. 1. The buildings should utilize architectural finish materials and colors designed to "blend" in with the surrounding landscape; 2. Residential parking spaces in mixed-use areas of the development should be located in close proximity to residences; 3. A copy of the approved, water augmentation plan must be received by Staff prior to the submittal for Final Plat; 4. The recommended condition from the Colorado Geologic Survey (memo dated January 10th, 2006) which suggests, ".. .that the rockfall hazard line and a rockfall mitigation berm are included on the plat" must be incorporated as part ofthe Final Plat application; 5. Only one (1) wood burning device shall be permitted in the Vines at Vail POO. The device shall be permitted in the lodge building only, and shall consist of a convehtional open-hearth fireplace as is currently proposed in the POO Guide; 63 9/5/06 .... 6. All comments pursuant to the Engineering Memo, dated February 1 st, 2006 must be adequately addressed prior to BoCC hearing; 7. Soils Analyses are required at building permit for each building site in order to obtain site-specifir information regarding soil engineering properties; 8. A Dust Suppression Plan must be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to obtaining a grading permit. The plan shall be kept onsite and implemented at all times during construction. The plan must identify who can be contacted immediately to abate dust issues; 9. A Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) must be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to obtaining a grading permit; 10. Concurrent with construction of other public improvements for the first phase of the project, the developer shall construct an 8 foot wide unpaved trail along Highway 131 from the project entrance to the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad corridor per an approved design which is satisfactory to ECO Trail and County Engineering staff and conforms with the construction standards of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan. 11. Bike path construction plans shall be included with the construction drawings required for Final Plat. The plans shall include specific information regarding the type of materials to be used for the path, as approved by ECO Trails. 13. The site plan for Area C must be reviewed and approved by Planning Staff prior to the issuance of a Building Permit to ensure that any proposed development is in harmony with the both the approved Wildlife Mitigation Plan and final Preliminary Plan approval. Commissioner Stone seconded. The motion passed by a vote of two to one with Chairman Runyon voting against the motion. Chairman Runyon stated that many of the aspects of the file are appealing to him. In the final analysis, he has to come down against the file, as he doesn't believe the community needs 1700 car trips a day coming out onto Highway 131. PDS-00049 The. W est End PUD Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Planning Department NOTE: ACTION: Tabled from 8/15/06 Proposal for mixed-use development planned unit development, which includes multi-family residential dwelling units; employee housing units; and commercial uses including office, restaurant, and retail-oriented business units. LOCATION: 34019 Hwy 6; Edwards (Commonly known as the Havener Parcel) TITLE: FILE NO./PROCESS: LOCATION: The West End PUD PDS-00049 / PUD Sketch Plan 34019 Hwy 6, Edwards (Formally known as the Havener Parcel); west of the Edwards Spur RdlHighway 6 intersection. Urban Legends, LLC OWNER: 64 9/5/06 APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: Owner Sid Fox, Fox and Company TAFFRECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY: The applicant wishes to create a mixed use PUD which is comprised of between 55-65 free-market residences with an additional 8-12, onsite local residents/employees housing units. As part ofthe PUD Guide, the residential dwellirtg units/uses may include: apartments and/orcondominiums/townhomes; condominium hotel/time-share/fractional fee condo units; bed and breakfast; and boutique hotel. All new residential units (as proposed per current site plan) are proposed above commercial space, with private parking areas provided beneath the strUctlires. In addition to the residential component of this PUD, the applicant is currently proposing an approximate, 40,000 sq ft of commercial retail/office space, with a potential 9,000 sq ft more of either commercial or residential square footage by use of 'flex' space. Some of the proposed commercial uses include: restaurants; drive-thru business; common retail establishments; office and professional services; health- related services; and service oriented establishments such as a tailor, photography studio or dry-cleaning facility (pick-up only). The West End development project is a proposed redevelopment of the Havener property located off of Highway 6 in the commercial core of Edwards, CO. Currently, the property hosts a variety of uses including: a small mobile home park; trucking operation; a 'defunct' refueling site; a construction materials storage yard; and a masonry storage and delivery yard. The mobile home park is in very poor condition with many homes over 25 years old. In addition to the variety of uses on the property, there are several 'out' buildings that are old and decrepit. According to the applicant, the current Sketch Plan has been designed and oriented according to, "... a pedestrian scale". Further,"... the project will consist of lively streets with appealing storefronts, ample sidewalks, street furniture, landscaping and on- street parking that will create a vibrant and convenient place for residents and visitors to interact, work, dine and shop." The West End is also directly adjacent to Eagle River Preserve Open Space parcel. As such, the applicant is willing to incorporate necessary buffering and/or improvements between the West End and the Eagle River Preserve Open Space parcel; to more effectively manage the current topography which includes a drop in elevation from the West End property, to a significantly lOwer grade onthe Open Space parcel (12 feet in certain portions of the property edge). B. CHRONOLOGY: 1969- Havener purchased the subject property 1974- RSL zoning was placed on the properties when Eagle County introduced zoning in September, 1974 C. SITE DATA: Surrounding Land Uses / Zoning: East: Commercial: Kemp / Unplatted / CG West: Commercial: Vogelman / Unplatted / CG North: Eagle River Preserve Open Space Parcel/Resource South: Highway 6 Existing Zoning: RSL Total Area: 3.28 acres (142, 876.8 sq ft) Water: Public- as proposed 65 9/5/06 "'" Sewer: Access: Public- as proposed Direct from H wy 6 D. PLANNING COMl\1:J:SSION HEARINGS/DELIBERATIONS: The applica.nts of the West End participated in two (2) Planning Conunission hearings. At the second and final hearing, the following comments/ideas/concerns were shared by the Planning Commission: · The architecture was well received by the Planning Commission; however, there were concerns regarding the massing of the buildings along the property edge shared by the Eagle River Preserve · The minimal side setbacks, especially on the western side of the property was a. concern · Planning for the entire corner and connection to adj acent property, and not just the West End property was appreciated · Smaller studios or one-bedroom condos should be considered in the mix of housing options; people may not want roommates · Design guidelines will be an important consideration; especially if the County adopts design guidelines through the sub-area plan or by some other means · Current plan does not offer any "communication" with the Eagle River Preserve and abruptly stops at the property line · Needs to be more pedestrian and mass-transit oriented · (Anticipated) Market study will be important to show the need of the proposed uses · The proposal offer good public benefit; however, the final housing plan is critical A motion to approve the file with Staff and additional conditions was made with the understanding that this application still needs "work" and that the applicant should incorporate Planning Commission concerns regarding massing and setbacks as part of the Preliminary Plan application. E. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion: [4:1] The Planning Commission recommended to approve file PDS-00049 incorpora.ting Staff findings and conditions, and with the understanding that the applicant will incorporate Planning Commission concerns regarding massing and setbacks. 2. STAFF REPORT F. REFERRAL RESPONSES: (see attached) Environmental Health Department, telephone conversation, Julyl2th, 2006: · A 1041 may be necessary if the applicants cannot show sufficient evidence that the water and wastewater generation for the West End is less than or equal to the previously approved 1041 for the Havener mobile home park. · It is recommended that incompatibilities between land uses internal to the project and issues that may arise regarding compliance with the Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards outlined in the Eagle County Land Use Regulations be the responsibility of the Property Owners Association. · The property remains subject to our Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards as it involves off-site impacts. Engineering Memo, dated July 7th, 2006: · The proposed access plan to Highway 6 is inconsistent with the guida.nce provided by the "US 6 Corridor Feasibility Study" for this area. · The proposed main entrance is in compliance with the guidance in the Corridor Study, but the existing access at the west end of the property is identified for closure. 66 9/5/06 . This access should be closed and a shared access provided to the property to the west with the development of this site. . The proposal does not address improvements required for Highway 6 outlined in the Corridor Study. . This section of Highway 6 is identified for additional lanes, paved shoulder and bike path, curb and gutter, and attached sidewalk with a total ROW width of 110'. . This full section may not be required for construction by this developer, butthe development proposal must accommodate the ROW required and not prevent these future improvements. . The proposed main entrance to the site appears to be problematic in providing the necessary stacking distance for cars exiting the site, and necessary separation from conflicting movements for cars entering the site. . Similar access configurations in the River Walk development have had operational problems. . The proposed grading from the site onto the open space property is very significant (15' vertical +/-), and would impact the use ofthe open space property. . This appears problematic and alternatives should be considered. . The proposed grading at the east and west property lines of the site includes significant retaining walls. . These retaining walls could be difficult to construct, and pose drainage conflicts in later phases of design. . Based on a review of the overall utility plan, there appear to be numerous challenging conditions that will need to be addressed with the preliminary plan for this site. . These issues include site drainage (especially overland conveyance of runoff in the event that inlets are plugged), detention and storm water quality, and sanitary sewer routing across the open space parcel. . Based on the comments cited above, the Engineering Department feels that significant revisions to the proposed site plan are justified. . If revisions to the proposal are made, please refer the revised plans to this department for additional review and comment. ECO Trails, email dated July 6th, 2006: . A 10' trail should be provided on this property per the US Highway 6 Corridor Plan that anticipates pedestrianlbike facilities on both sides of Highway 6 in the core of Edwards. . The 2003 Access Plan details a more precise vision than the 2001 Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan for the highway 6 corridor circulation in Edwards, including routes vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. . The trail should be constructed by the development on the private property per CDOT's preference and to allow for future expansion of the highway. . As an example, the trail across the highway on the Edwards Village Center property is located on an easement obtained from the private property owner, not on CDOT right-of-way. . Development should provide a connection to the adjacent open space lands which are often cited in the proposal as a proj ect asset . A paved 8 foot spur trail, built to county standards is recommended unless the Eagle River Preserve planning and managing entity prefers otherwise . A corridor for the trail connection and responsibility for construction should be described in the final project approval language ECO Transit, email dated July 6th, 2006: . We continue to search for a site for a transfer center in Edwards, similar to Avon Center, where we can provide efficient access to Edwards from 1-70. . This may be our chance, but there are many challenges. . I understand they are considering structured parking. . Great idea for a small site with intensive use. . Perhaps a level of underground parking could incorporate a turnaround area for buses. This would make the site attractive for shoppers and employees who take the bus and a small underground transit center would be visually unobtrusive. . However, I'm sure it would be very expensive. 67 9/5/06 · We do not have a lot of money to contribute to such a project. · Another issue is access: I think we would need some sort of dedicated or semi-dedicated lane directly to Edwards Access Road, but it would have to cut through private, developed property to the East. · Ifwe travel Highway 6 to the Access Road, all the turning movements (particularly left-hand) and signalization will cause travel time delays. · It would be difficult to justify the cost of an underground facility without having efficient access. Colorado Geological Survey, memo dated July 6th, 2006: · The proposal is a redevelopment of a mobile home park into a mixed use development with multi-family, retail and office; the site is approximately 3 acres with an average slope of 5% · Reports regarding geotechnical con.straints or geologic hazards Were not submitted with this application; existing hazard mapping indicates that there are no hazards that would preclude development. · Soil survey information indicates that soils on the site may have properties that could impact the design of structures, roads and utilities (e.g.) soil-induced chemical action. may corrode steel or that basements may be difficult to construct due to rock. · The site's soils also appear to be underlain by evaporate bedrock that may be susceptible to subsidence. · The County should require that a geotechnical report be submitted before approval of final layout and construction plans. Colora.do Division of Wildlife, telephone response, July 7th, 2006: · The DOW does not have any comments for this file. Eagle County School DiStrict, memo dated June 10th, 2004 · The Sketch Plan is proposing 55-65 multi-family units. The units would result in the dedication requirement as follows: 55 Multi-family Units X .0025 acres per unit = 0.1375 acres or 65 Multi-family Units X .0025 acres per unit = 0.1625 acres · As the land dedication acreage is minimal, the District will accept cash in lieu of land for this Subdivision Sketch Plan. · Per the recently revised County School Land Dedication Standards, the value of this cash payment will be determined by an appraisal of land provided by the developer with the application for Final Plat. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, memo dated June 28th, 2006: · The application refers to the ERWSD (District) as the water provider; the water provider is the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority. · Engineered construction drawings must be submitted to the District Construction Review Team for review of the water and sewer infrastructure prior to the beginning of construction · Because this PUD constitutes an up-zoning of the existing development area dedication of water rights may be required. · Construction drawings will not be approved until water rights issues have been resolved and an Ability to Serve letter has been issued. · Following the Ability to Serve process, connection to the District and Authority system may be made once the applicable fees have been paid. · The development site is located in the ERWSD for sanitary sewer service. · An Ability to Serve letter from the District and payment of fees is required prior to connection. · The applicant has been in contact with the District and the Authority concerning water rights issues and the process is currently underway. Additional Referrals were sent to the following agencies and Homeowner's Associations: · Eagle County Attorney, Assessor, Housing, Road and Bridge, School District (Transportation), Sherifr s Office · CDOT 68 9/5/06 . Ambulance District . Edwards Metro District, Eagle River Fire Protection District . Eagle County Historical Society, Eagle Valley Land Trust, Postmaster for Edwards . Homestead BOA, Riverwalk HOA, Edwards Village Center !lOA, Old Edwards Estates HOA, Singletree HOA South Forty HOA, Lake Creek HOA, Heritage Park HOA G. STAFF DISCUSSION ANDFINDIN'GS: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a Sketch Plan for PUD: STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD. The Applicant has demonstrated that the entire area affected by this PUD Sketch Plan is in single ownership. [+) FINDING: Unified ownership or controL [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that ispart of this PUD IS owned or controlled by one (l) person and/or entity. STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] - The uses that may be developed in the PUD shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts UseSchedule", 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.3j, Variations Authorized. Thesl1bjectproperty was zoned RSL (Residential Suburban Low Density) when zoning was applied to unincorporated Eagle County, in 1974. 'This proposal contemplates 55~65 free-market residences; and 8-12 local resident housing units. In addition, a variety of commercial uses are also proposed. Of the proposed forms of residential uses, residential dwelling units are the 'uses by right'. In addition to residential dwelling units, there are a few residential-type uses permitted via Limited Review including: bed and breakfast and home business. Hotel, or 'boutique hotel', is not a residential use pursuant to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations; and is permitted via Special Use Permit pursuant to the proposed West End PUD guide. Most of the proposed uses are currently permitted in the RSL zoning; however, time-share/fractional-fee and hotel uses are not. Pursuant to the Edwards Community Master Plan, this area is slated for "mixed use" development. Uses may include, ".. . commercial, residential high-density, 69 9/5/06 ~ office recreation, among others," in this area of Edwards. The majority of the proposed residential and commercial uses are found within a typical residential/mixed- use neighborhood; however, as the West End PUD offers a multitude ofuses for this property, it is imperative that the applicant continue to examine the PUD guide to ensure that the site would be able to accommodate all of the proposed uses in any configuration, and at any time. It is not constructive to simply permit certain uses as 'Special Uses' and transfer the site review analysis to Staffto investigate if that use would be acceptable and be able to function on the site after final designs a.nd approvals are obtained from the Board of County Conunissioners. Without the benefit of a full use analysis at Preliminary Plan, subsequent use approvals, not considered at Preliminary Plan may have an affect on local resident/employee housing needs and transportation infrastructure. The PUD guide must be clear and concise, and provide understanding in how to administer the variety of uses throughout the project. Where extreme caution should be taken is in how the proposed uses would be able to function together, all at the same time; there is nothing in the PUD guide limiting the number ofuses at anyone time (aside from the amount of available square footage), or where the uses would be located to ensure that the shared parking areas would be evenhanded. This PUD offers so many uses, that it is difficult to understand how this Sketch Plan PUD would function if approved at this time. Fortunately, the applicant is utilizing a multi- step process. At this concept-level phase, Staff and applicant can continue to work on analyzing the types and functionality of the proposed uses. Staff's biggest concern at this point, is to ensure that the stated intent ofthis Sketch Plan is maintained; that this project is both a residential and commercial project. Staff recommends that the PUD be pared down/amended to the following uses: (mandatory) residential dwelling units; hotel as a commercial use- not residential; commercial uses including but not limited to: service oriented uses such as tailor, salon, photography studio, veterinary, and banks; retail establishments; office, business and professional uses; drive-thru establishment in Building 2 only; and a limited number of restaurants. This site is not a very large property, and would have difficulty in supporting the number and types of uses proposed with this development. Based on the submitted site plan, proposed uses like 'grocery store', would have difficultly setting up without being implemented from the onset of the planning process (loading docks would be necessary), like the proposed drive-thru has been. As such, it is recommended that for the Preliminary Plan the applicant look at potentially tying uses to buildings or creating planning nodes to further control the organization of uses on the site. None of the commercial uses, as proposed, are currently permitted in the RSL zone district. Many of the proposed residential uses are permitted in the RSL zone district as uses by right, Limited Review or via Special Use Permit; however, some of the uses are also not permitted in this zone district. Uses not currently permitted in RSL, but are permitted in the proposed PUD guide, will require a Variation to be approved by the Board of County Commissioner prior to the approval of the Preliminary Plan. (See condition 4) [+1-] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] AS CONDITIONED The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in either Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule" or Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule"; however, many ofthe commercial uses ARE NOT currently permitted in the underlying zone district. This finding may be found positive assuming approval of the Variations by the Board of County Commissioners at Preliminary Plan. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (3)]- The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340,"Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3f, 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. The following Variations will be also be requested by the applicant in the Preliminary Plan application: 70 9/5/06 1. Maximum lot, floor area and impervious coverages. 2. Setbacks. 3. Heights. The applicants are proposing development on the majority of this property. Given the necessary infrastructure needs for parking and commercial road layout and design, the applicants are proposing minimal side and rear setbacks; less than what is currently permitted in either the underlying zoning, or as required in standard commercial zoning. In response to the current site plan, the Planning Commission provided direction to the applicants to revisit their design and proposed layout focusing on functionality and architecture, with a recommendation to 'step or terrace' the buildings away from the property lines to ensure that the proposed buildings do not act as a wall between neighboring properties (buildings are currently massed along the west and north property lines, using minimal setbacks). A complete list of possible Variations must be submitted by the applicant as part of the Preliminary Plan. More Variations, than identified in this application, could be requested. (See condition 14) [+1-] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] AS CONDITIONED The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE NOT those specified in the existing Plarmed Unit Development Guide for these properties; however, this finding may be found positive assuming approval of the Variations by the Board of County Commissioners at Preliminary Plan. STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the PUD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met; or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard. With the nature of this proposal, and the design of the buildings for the multiple uses, a site specific parking plan will have to be developed and submitted as part of Preliminary Plan. The parking plan must adequately address loading areas, residential, employee, visitor and commercial patron parking. The maximum number and viability of any shared-use parking spaces must also be addressed in the parking plan. At this time, Staff is most concerned with the implementation of a hotel; business necessitating loading dockslbays; and garbage removal using the current parking and/or circulation plan as proposed. Further, based on the comments from the Engineering Department, potential access modifications may affect the proposed parking and/or site plan. Staff is also concerned with the amount of surface parking shown on the proposed plan. Although the plan apparently reflects the proposed uses, this current site appears to be designed for the automobile, and does not necessarily incorporate pedestrian design throughout the site. Currently, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings are not shown as considerations from the West End shopping district to either of the future east and west connections to neighboring properties; nor are there designated crosswalks coming into the site from the bike trail on the south property line. Given that this is a Sketch Plan, however, the applicant has ample time to incorporate these considerations for Preliminary Plan. (See conditions 4 & 6) [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] AS CONDITIONED Given the Sketch Plan level detail of the development plan, it is likely that the applicants WILL be able to demonstrate that off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD CAN comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards, without a necessity for a reduction in the standards, at Preliminary Plan. 71 9/5/06 STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaving and Illumination Standards. Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. A detailed landscaping plan is required to be submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan. That plan should detail all types and location of landscape materials to be utilized as part of this development. A cost estimate will also be necessary for collateralization purposes. Site lighting and illumination standards must also be satisfa.ctorily addressed with the Preliminary Plan. (See conditions 7 & 8) [+) FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] AS CONDITIONED It WILL be demonstrated that landscaping provided in the PUD can comply with the standa.rds of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. llIumination standards must be considered as part of Preliminary Plah. STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned UnitDevelovment (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. The applicant has made statements that a Comprehensive Sign Plan will be included with the Preliminary Plan application. Signs should be focused at the pedestrian level, and at a scale that would attract persons from greater distances, off the West End site. (See condition 5) [+) FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] AS CONDITIONED . The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Rel!ulations. The PUD guide properly references that signs shall be as allowed pursuant to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. A Comprehensive Sign Plan is required to be submitted with the Preliminary Plan application. STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. Existing facilities such as electricity (telephone, gas, cable, etc.), and fire protection currently service the residents living on the proposed property. Solid waste removal areas should be designated on the Preliminary Plan; waste receptacles should be wildlife-proof containers. In regards to water and wastewater service, it may be necessary for the Applicant to apply for 1041 approval. The applicants have provided the required "Ability to Serve" letter from the appropriate entities. In addition to the submittal of a 1041 permit (if warranted), all materials, as required in Section 5-240.F.3 Preliminary Plan for PUD must be submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan. This also includes detailed information regarding water and sewer service. The applicants have shown preliminary road layouts on their Sketch Plan which provide internal connections to future developments to both the east and west. All Eagle County road standards must be adhered to, unless a Variation or a Deviation from those standards is approved with the Preliminary Plan. In addition to adherence to Eagle County road standards, the applicants will also need to apply for and obtain a Highway 6 Access Permit from CDOT. Pursuant to the Engineering memo dated July th, 2006, the applicants have been advised to revise their current site plan to adequately anticipate these improvements to, specifically, Hwy 6, among other things. Currently, they do not have detailed designs of this aspect as of yet. It is imperative that all road designs and access/Hwy 6 improvements be recognized and incorporated as part of the Preliminary Plan application. (See conditions 3 & 4) 72 9/5/06 . ~ [+/-] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] AS CONDITIONED The Applicant HAS NOT clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in this Sketch Plan for PUD Will be provided adequate acceSs and feasible, internal roads. The applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Sketch Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water and sewage disposal, and HAS also demonstrated that the proposed PUD will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police, fire protection, and emergency medical services. STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Imvrovements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off- site. (c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. (d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots, units or buildings shall not be permitted. Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected with roads outside of the PUD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. (e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal street network andfrom off-street parking areas. This development will have to meet all minimum County and/or Colorado Division of Transportation standards regarding road designs (including access entrance and highway 6 improvements), unless a Variation from Eagle County standards is granted by the Board of County Commissioners during the Preliminary Plan process. A new Highway 6 access permit must be received prior to the approval of the Preliminary Plan. Pursuant to the Engineering memo dated July 7th, 2006, the applicants have been advised to revise their current site plan to adequately anticipate future improvements to Hwy 6 and access, among other things. Staff is also concerned with the site design and the number of uses proposed in the pub guide. There is not enough information within this Sketch Plan to effectively ascertain whether the access is adequate. Although this is a Sketch Plan application, leaving the full analysis to Preliminary Plan may result in significant modifications to this plan. As such, the Preliminary Plan could not go forward, and the Sketch Plan would have to be amended/re-evaluated. Currently, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings are not shown from the West End shopping district to either of the future east and west connections to neighboring properties; nor are there designated crosswalks coming into the site from the bike trail on the south property line. Given that this is a Sketch Plan, however, the applicant has ample time to incorporate these considerations for Preliminary Plan (See conditions 3, 10 & 13) 73 9/5/06 ... [-] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] AS CONDITIONED It HAS NOT been clearly demonstrated that the improvements standards applicable to the development Will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards regarding: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. (b) Internal Pathways. (c) Emergency Vehicles (d) Principal Access Points. Snow Stora e. STANDARD: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The development proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. Currently, the underlying, residential property is compatible with the character of the lands surrounding it. Both the proposed residential and commercial uses are uses which could benefit the Edwards area for both residents and visitors; the Edwards Area Community Plan recognizes this property as suited for mixed use development. This development, if properly executed, will be compatible with the entirety of the Edwards core. [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD IS com atible with the character of sUIToundin land uses. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is On a broad conceptual level, i.e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANALYSES BELOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREIlENSlVE PLAN ]j C aJ E 5.?: s.:.,;= '5 ~ &10' Conformance x x x x x x x x x X General Governance - Conforms with the policies of this Section of the Comprehensive Plan. Development ~ The residential component of this development is currently permitted in the underlying zone district, albeit, not all dwelling types are permitted as a use by right (timeshare/fractional-fee units, and hotel uses are prohibited in RSL zoning). The proposed uses must be thoroughly evaluated to ensure true compatibility between the residential and commercial uses, and mitigation must be implemented to ensure that this compatibility is feasible. Hotel, as a residential use, is also a concern. Currently, hotel is solely permitted in commercial zone districts, and should not be able to replace true residential dwelling units. Mixed use developments have been development in Edwards as part of the Riverwalk and Homestead subdivisions. The existing site (and neighboring site) is unplatted and may contain "grandfathered" uses or uses which may now 74 9/5/06 require a greater level of detail/review than previously permitted through past regulations. This proposal will potentially eliminate the grandfathered uses, ensuring that the site is analyzed and properly developed. ignificant policies in this Section of the Comprehensive Plan relate to preserving quality of life attributes, maintaining or enhancing cOmn1urtity character, and limiting economic development to a scale and type that is consistent with local character. This is an extremely important aspect of this analysis; Eagle Courtty has hired a consultant to analyze this site, and the majority of the Edwards core to ensure proper planning and functional developments are implemented as part of the core area. This property is one of the last, undeveloped properties of the Edwards area. Economic Resources - The proposed commercial uses would tend to support and enhance the regional economic structure and local economic drivers. In addition, the proposed development would not significantly detract from economic activities that depend on healthy natural environments and ecosystems. With commitments to satisfy the recommendations of the Housing Guidelines, local residents, currently traveling elsewhere for employment, would have the opportunity to travel less and work closer to their homes. Hou.sing - The applicant, from the onset of this application, is proposing 8-12 units oflocal workforce housing to be provided onsite for employees, in the event that an employee may need a place to reside. There currently is not enough information to fotmulate an opinion to how many units will be actually necessary, given the number and type of uses proposed in the PUD guide; Comments from the Housing Department qualifying this amount of housing have not been received. Infrastructure and Services ~ Highway 6 has been improved and is sufficient for the needs of this proposal; however, pursu.ant to the Engineering memo dated July 7th, 2006, additional review and modifications to the proposed plan require further review and modification, which may affect the design of the site. Water Resources - It appears that ground and surface water sources would be protected with respect to negative mpacts from sediment transport, nutrients, dissolved metals or other contaminants; negative impacts due to extended periods of low flows; or negative impacts on aquatic habitats or riparian areas. Wildlife Resources - The development would not directly negatively impact the quality of wildlife habitat or species of lesser economic importance. Sensitive Lands - As little or no vegetation exists on this property, the applicant will re-introduce needed "greenspaces" around the development, wherever possible. Environmental Quality - The proposed development will not impede diurnal (dOWn-valley) air flows. Generated noise would not likely diminish the enjoyment of the general area, but may affect onsite residential properties without proper mitigation. The proposal encourages walking or biking by contributing to the construction of a sidewalk north ofHwy 6; however, the proposed pedestrian pathway may not be sufficient to replicate what is required for a trail. This business is also located near a mass transit stop, allowing customers to utilize ECO Transit. Future Land Use Map (FLUM) - The site of the proposed development is in the designated Edwards Area COlml1unity Plan. That particular plan designates this property as "mixed use." EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN 75 9/5/06 ,.. x The West End is not located in a recognized unique landform area of the county, nor is it located in a natural hazar area. EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN x x x x x The West End is currently is in the "District" for water and wastewater service. An 'Ability to Serve' by the District is required, and has been provided to Staff. Most likely the applicant will be able to provide cash in lieu of water rights the District and purchase water from sources in the Eagle River basin and Colorado River systems. If deemed necessary, 1041 approval must be obtained prior to Preliminary Plan approval to ensure efficient utilization of water and wastewater. It is not anticipated that the proposed development will compromise either the Eagle River watershed or the Eagle River. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREIlENSIvE HOUSING PLAN VISION STATEMENT: Housing for local residents is a major priority of Eagle County. There should be a wide variety of housing to fulfill the needs of all its residents, including families, senior citizens, and those who work here. Elements of Eagle County's vision for housing are: · Housing is a community-wide issue. · Housing should be located in close proximity to existing community centers, as defined in the Eagle County master plan. · Development oflocal residents housing should be encouraged on existing transit routes. · Housing is primarily a private sector activity [but] without the active participation of government, there will be only limited success. · It is important to preserve existing local residents housing. · Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate hOUSing opportunities within the county for other infrastructure needs. · Development applications that will result in an increased need for local.residents housing should be evaluated as to whether they adequately provide for this additional need, the same way as they are evaluated. POLICIES: ITEM 1. Eagle County will collaborate with the private sector & nonprofit organizations to develop housing for local residents 2. Housing for local residents is an issue which Eagle County needs to address in collaboration with the municipalities. . . x 3. Steps should be taken to facilitate increased home ownership by local residents and workers in Eagle County Xl 76 9/5/06 ITEM YES NO N/A 4. Additional rental opportunities for permanent local residents should be brought on line. Some... should be for households with an income equivalent to or less than one average wage job X2 5. Seasonal housing is part of the problem & needs to be further addressed. It is primarily the responsibility of. . . employers. . . x 6. New residential subdivisions will provide a percentage of their units for local residents X3 7. Commercial, industrial, institutional, and public developments generating increased employment will provide local residents housing. The first preference will be for units on-site where feasible, or ifnot feasible, in the nearest existing cOIl1lT1unity center. . . x 8. The County will seek to make land available for local residents housing in proximity to community centers 9; Mixed use developments in appropriate locations are encouraged x 10. Factory-built housing is an important part of Eagle County=s housing stock x 11. There is a need to segment a portion of the housing market to protect local residents from having to compete with second home buyers. Where public assistance or subsidies are prOvided for housing, there should generally be limits on price appreciation, as well as residency requirements x 12. Eagle COunty recognizes that housing for local residents is an ongoing issue Xl- Local resident housing is proposed with this development. X2"' The proposed employee housing units will most likely be rental units. 3- See Xl. EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Conformance Non-Conformance Mixed Confonnance Not Applicable Land Use X Housing X TranSportation X Open Space X Potable Water and Wastewater X Services and Facilities X Environmental Quality X Economic Development X Recreation and Tourism X Historic Preservation X Implementation X II Future Land Use Map X 77 9/5/06 Land Use - The stated goal is, "The location and type of land uses balance the physical, social, cultural, environmental and economic needs of the current and future resident (& tourist) population. Land uses are located in a manner that protects and improves the quality of the natural and man made environment, ensures the timely, cost-effective provision of public facilities and services, and retains the unique variety oflifestyles and quality of life found in Edwards". This proposal does serve to balance the physical, social, cultural, environmental and economic needs of the entire Edwards Community. Housing - "Affordable" housing is anticipated in the current application; however, at this point, there is no indication dfwhat rental or sales prices will be for the housing unit component of this application, or if the amount of units being offered is sufficient for the number and type of proposed uses. Transportation - The applicant needs to work with the Eagle County Engineering Department and the Colorado Department of Transportation to secure appropriate access permits. A bus stop is anticipated in or near the entrance of this development. Open Space - "Open Space preservation is promoted within the Edwards Planning Area through coordination with land owners, developers and other agencies and organizations". This proposal does not represent a coordinated effort to preserve any of the subject site as Open Space which, in turn, helps to define a buffer between developments; however, landscaping will be found throughout the development, and as this property is contiguous with the Open Space parcel, it may be found moot to preserve additional, onsite open space areas. Potable Water and Wastewater - Public potable water and sanitary sewer service is anticipated to be made available to serve the proposed development, however, according to the ERWSD, the applicant will have to pay cash in lieu to the District before service will be provided. An ability to serve letter has been provided to the applicant. Services and Facilities - This element of the Edwards Area Community Plan pertains to the management of solid and hazardous wastes and the support of public schools, occupational training and higher education. These particular goals do not apply to this development; however, educational space is a proposed use by right in this development. Environmental Quality ~ This proposal does not necessitate the creation of any new wastewater or water supply facilities and it addresses stormWater runoff related issues; however, as proposed, stormwater is anticipated to be discharged onto the Open Space parcel. To date, no indication has been provided to Staff verifying that this is acceptable. This issue will have to be addressed in more detailed drainage plans to be submitted with the Preliminary Plan and possibly, the 1041 application. Economic Development - The proposal attempts to promote a balanced mix of land uses in the Edwards community to encourage a diverse economy. The applicant has stated that a "market study" has been developed; however, this study has not been provided to Staff. Recreation and TOllrism - The stated goal is, "Parks, river access, recreational facilities and open space are provided to meet current and future needs of the residents of Edwards and Eagle County. These are designed in such a way as to ensure increased accessibility and provide a more even distribution to the Edwards Planning Area's parks and open space system". This application does not offer any community recreational or open space amenities; however, other pedestrian-friendly provisions have been provided throughout the development. Historic Preservation - No historic resources were identified on the subject property. At the time of this writing, neither the Eagle County Historical Society had provided COl11ment. Implementation - If approved, the proposed development will be required to efficiently utilize public infrastructure. Compliance with the Hwy 6 Access Control Plan is strongly recommended as well, with highway improvements most likely to be constructed by the applicant, or at a minimum, accommodated with the site plan. According to the applicant, water and wastewater services will be provided, although an 'Ability to Serve' letter has not been received from the District. Future Land Use Map (FLUM) -The proposed commercial site is identified on the FLUM as an area appropriate for mixed use development; the plan does not offer site-specific goals or guiding statements. [+/-) FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Sketch IS NOT entirely consistent with all stated purposes, goals, objectives and policies of applicable master plans; however, more information will be provided at Preliminary Plan which may accomplish compliance with the Comprehensive Plan (i.e. final housing plan; final infrastructure plans and design) STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Plan for 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 78 9/5/06 I residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. The current phasing plan has development slated for one phase; however, this needs to be verified with the Preliminary Plan. STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of 25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents of the PUD. In order to calculate the number of residents of the PUD, the number of proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two and sixty-three hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy each dwelling unit in Eagle County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan. (b) Areas that Do Not COUllt as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-ofways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. (c) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usablej by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (d) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development schedule established for each development phase of the PUD. (e) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for PUD. To ensure that all the common open space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or covenants shall be placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any common open space. (/) 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. As quoted above, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations only recommend that 25% of the total PUD area be utilized as open space. The total acreage of the West end is approximately 3.28 acres. Development will occur on the majority of property, with minimal area left as useable open space. Landscaping will fill in any lands not covered by asphalt or buildings, with the exception of a small courtyard and potential rooftop patio. The West End does not plan to reserve areas for parks or reserved recreation areas at this point; development of the site will be maximized. Where this project is unique is that the north property line is adjacent to the Eagle River Preserve Open Space parcel. The Board of County Commissioners may find that 25% common open space would not further benefit this project. Information regarding maintenance responsibilities has been provided as part of the PUD guide. The PUD guide submitted with the Preliminary Plan application should more specifically explain that maintenance irtcludes items such as landscaping, roads, snow removal for parking lots, etc. 79 9/5/06 [+/-] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (12)) The PUD RAS NOT demonstrated that the proposed development will comply with the common recreation and open space standards 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. Pursuant to the memo dated July 6th, 2006 from the Colorado Geological Survey, a geotechnical analysis must be submitted with the Preliminary Plan. As the stormwater drainage proposes to collect onsite runoff, which discharges onto the Open Space Parcel, agreements supporting this proposal must be received prior to Preliminary Plan. (See condition 10 & 16) [+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] AS CONDITIONED The PUD DOES demonstrate that the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents available at the time the application was submitted, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered. OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARDS: The finding from the Eagle County Land Use Regulations is as follows: Pursuant to Section 5-240.F.2.a.(15).(a): (15) Any or all of the following requirements, as determined by the Community Development Director, based on the complexity of the proposal: (a) Supporting data to justify any proposed commercial a.nd industrial elements in an area not so zoned; To date, no justification of the commercial uses has been provided for this project; although the applicant has stated at Planning Commission that a "market study" was underway. DISCUSSION: Ms. Skinner-Markowitz presented a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation included a vicinity map, various aerial photos of the site and photos of the surrounding area. She stated that the applicant wished to create a mixed use PUD that would include 55-65 free market residences, 8-12 onsite local residents/employee housing units approximately 40,000 square feet of commercial retail office space. The proposed commercial uses would include restaurants, common retail establishments and service oriented establishments. The residential units would be located above the commercial area and all residential parking would be underground. Surface parking would be dedicated to commercial retail. The West End development project is a proposed re-development of the Havener property. She indicated that Staff recommended approval with conditions. The Planning Commission also recommended approval with conditions, but with several recommendations. Brian Bair, Partner spoke. He presented a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation addressed the existing condition of the site and the proposed re-development. He stated that the overall intent was to create a pedestrian friendly environment with a range of ground and second floor commercial and retail space needed to provide services and shopping for local residents and visitors alike. A current market study illustrated that there was a very small vacancy rate in the commercial core. The Plaza will be a unique space for pedestrian activity and 80 9/5/06 viewing of the Eagle River Preserve Open Space. He explained the planning aspects and illustrated the access, vehicular connections pedestrian and bike paths and view corridors. The site plan illustrated the proposed retail lace, residential space and parking areas. An additional site plan illustrated circulation, trails and sidewalks. 'here were concerns regarding the massing of the buildings along the property edge shared by the Eagle River .L reserve, the applicant had proposed a buffer at the applicants expense. Tyler Pollesch, explained the proposed architecture. The buildings would be broken down into 3 sections to allow for interior and exterior activities. The first floor would be accentuated with canopies, awning and signage. The rooflines would be flat. A bell tower was illustrated in the northern view illustration. The building materials would include, stone, stucco, brick and wood. The buildings colors would be conservative with some accel1t colors. The applicant believes that the architecture would be visually appealing. Commissioner Stone requested that the applicant address the proposed parking. Mr. Bair explained the Eagle River Preserve transition and connection. There were a couple options discussed for the buffer/transition area. The applicant believes that there is a tremendous opportunity to connect the project to the open space but the topography currently doesn't allow for it. There would be designated underground residential parking and an overall controlled parking plan. Sid Fox stated that there was one space per 350 square feet of commercial and two spaces per unit for residential. Commissioner Stone wondered how the proposed parking plan related to the county land use regulations. Ms. Jena stated that the plan is fairly consistent with the land use regulations. Without knowing all the uses it's difficult to determine the number of needed spaces. Mr. Bair explained the UIlderground parking access. COlYlmisSioner Stone stated that he didn't believe the parking access was adequate. He stated concerns with the underground parking and circulation plan. He requested that the applicant go beyond the minimum required parking. Alex Ariniello, Traffic Consultant spoke. He presented a presentation that illustrated the flow in and out of the development. He addressed key traffic, access and control issues. Staff had stated some concerns about <;tacking at the main entrance. The possibility of a stop signal was considered. Phillip Bowman, County Engineer spoke. He stated that the presentation didn't accurately illustrate the flow of traffic. He stated that there were no easy fixes, but it would be best to address any issues now rather than in the future. He believes that getting approval of an additional stop signal would be difficult do to the closeness of the existing traffic signal. Chairman Runyon stated his concerns for the proposed access. Mr. Bowman suggested the applicant prepare a traffic study that would illustrate current traffic conditions. Chairman Runyon wondered how much traffic would be generated during peak hours. He believes that during peak hours, stacking would be inevitable. Mr. Bowman explained the current traffic control mechanisms. He stated that CDOT may not be in favor of a stop. Chairman Runyon stated that a light may not be helpful and wondered if the applicant had considered a driving circle. He believes that under the current conditions, there would be a considerable amount of stacking during peak hours. Mr. Bowman stated that it was a dicey situation with the access point being so close to the stop signal. Mr. Fox explained the housing component and on site rental units that would be structured to conform to the housing guidelines. He stated that the housing plan would be delivered with the preliminary plan. He summarized the major strategies of the comprehensive plan. The applicant believes that the site is appropriate for mixed use commercial, office, and residential high density. Mr. Bair explained the environmental elements. The applicant intends on using LEED/Green building techniques. Some of the community benefits of the project would include, "in-town" housing, commercial space, and the development would clean up a brown field site. There would be no loss of native habitat. The applicant believes that maximizing the site would allow a higher level of architecture to the Edwards area. Chairman Runyon opened public comment. Mr. V ogelman, adjacent property owner spoke. He expressed concerns for the access point that is currently shared with his business. He sees no room for roads and is concerned with the density and traffic. He doesn't 81 9/5/06 ... believe the proposal works with the open space. He suggested that the applicant consider lower building heights closer to his property line. The four-story building that is proposed is not visually friendly. Chairman Runyon closed public comment. Commissioner Stone stated that he is in general approval but believes that the traffic is a real issue. He believes that the access would require a roundabout. He is not concerned with the massing on the west side. He likes the design and architecture much better than the Riverwalk. He stated he believes the development is right for the area. He wondered about the size of the traffic lanes. Mr. Bowman stated that the county standard was 12 feet in each direction. Commissioner Menconi wondered why so many square feet were dedicated to commercial. Mr. Bair stated that there were 80,000 square feet dedicated to commercial and 39,000 square feet to residential. Commissioner Menconi stated that because the proposal was a 4-story project there should be more consideration for community benefit in the form of housing. He requested concrete eVidence that more housing would be available. He would like the plazas to blend in with the park. Commissioner Stone requested visual aides that would illustrate the impact fromHwy 6 looking west. Chairman Runyon stated that he is concerned with traffic, total amount of jobs generated and the low numbers of deed-restricted units. He doesn't believe the proposal is compatible at this time with the surrounding properties. Commissioner Menconi stated that the project might be required to down size or build a roundabout. He wondered if the cost of a roundabout would be shared. He would like see more housing, safe access, access to the park and pedestrian safety. KT Gazunis spoke. She stated that the comprehensive plan requires that 100% of workforce housing being replaced. The applicants housing plan would need to address the existing 8-12 mobile homes on the site. Mr. Bair stated that they would include those details in the preliminary plan. Commissioner Stone stated that he only likes to approve a plan that he believes will have a good likelihood of succeeding at preliminary plan. He would like enough detail so the Board understands where they are going. Chairman Runyon stated that he didn't believe the existing roads would accommodate the added growth. Commissioner Stone stated that the traffic issues form a challenge. Mr. Bair stated that the applicant would be willing to address the traffic issues, housing issues and the community benefit issues. Commissioner Stone moved that the Board of County Commissioners table File No. PDS-00049, until October lO, 2006, at the applicant's request. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 1. Except as otherwise modified by this Permit, all material representations made by the Applicant in this application and in public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 2. The buildings should utilize finish materials and colors designed to "blend" in with the surrounding landscape, prohibiting bright finish colors. 3. All comments pursuant to the Engineering Memo, dated July 7th, 2006 must be adhered to with comments addressed and provided prior to the Board of County Commissioner hearing. 4. Applicant shall review the proposed uses in the PUD Guide to ensure that they are reasonable; that they all may coexist simultaneously especially- with regards to shared parking needs; can be comprehended/administered easily by Staff and public; and that the site can accommodate the needs of each of the proposed uses. 5. A Comprehensive Sign Plan shall be developed and submitted as part ofthe Preliminary Plan application. 82 9/5/06 Attest ~'t: 6. A site specific parking plan shall be developed and submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan application. 7. A detailed landscaping plan is required to be submitted as part of the Preliminary PHm application. Further, infofIfiatiort regarding maintenance of common areas must also be submitted with the Prelimina.ry Pla.n application. 8. Comprehertsive lighting artd illumination standards shall be established in the PUD guide submitted with the Prelimirtary Plan application. 9. A detailed geotechnical report shall be submitted with the Preliminary Plan application. 10. A trail shall be provided on this property per the US Highway 6 Corridor Plan that anticipates pedestrianlbike facilities on this side of US Highway 6. The trail design must be approved by ECO Trails prior to Preliminary Plan approval. 11. The West End PUD shall be designed anticipating a potential paved spur trail, built to County standards, to be connected to the adjacent open space lartds. 12. This property must accommodate through-connections to both the east aIld west sides of the development, in anticipation of redevelopment on both the adj acent Kemp and V ogelman properties. Through connections should include both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. 13. The internal roads within the West End PUD shall be designed to attoIhmodate potential bus service from US Highway 6, through the West End to the eastern property lirte. 14. A complete list of Variations and/or deviations must be submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan a.pplicatiort. 15. The applicant must obtain permission from the land owner of the Eagle River Preserve to install any drainage structures, and/or any other structures as proposed on the neighboring open space parcel. c~~~ 83 9/5/06