No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/29/07 PUBLIC HEARING May 29, 2007 Present: Am Menconi Sara Fisher Peter Runyon . Bruce. Baumgartner Bryan Treu Robert Morris Teak Simonton Kathy Scriver Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Manager County Attorney Deputy County Attorney Clerk to the Board Deputy Clerk to the Board This beillg a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County C01l1rfiissiolletS for their consideration: Executive SeSsion There was no Executive Session. ComIDi.ssiC:)Jlet Ruliyon was ;llotptesent for the morning portion of the meeting Sllecial Recognition Award - Steve Hansen Nota Fryklund,ij.pman Resources Eagle County Commissioners honored Assistant IT Director, Steve Hansen, for 20 years of service. Hansell began his career with Eagle County ill 1987 as a data processing assistant and has held many positions since. He survived eight differellt bosses through the years and trained countless new hires. Steve plans to retire to Branson Missouri. The commissioners and staff wished Steve and his wife, Ann, all the best in their new endeavors. Chairman Mencdnifead into the record the details ofMr. Hansen's career with the county. He thanked Mr. HanSen for his 20 years of service and presented him with a gift. Commissioner Fisher stated that Mr. Hansen held down the fort as acting Director and thanked him for his undying dedication. She wished him the best in Branson, Missouri. CnIlsentAgenda Chairman Menconi stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: Apptovalofbill paying for the week of May 28,2007 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance.Department Representative A. Approval of the minutes of the Eagle County Board of Commissioners meeting for April 24, 2007 Teak Simonton, Clerk & Recorder B. IT System Administration Independent Contractor Agreement with Steve Hansen Human Resources Representative '- C. Agreement between Eagle County and Railroad Specialties, Inc. for concrete tunnel as part of the Eagleto Gypsum Trail Ellie Caryl, ECO Trails D. Resolution 2007-061 for Final Release of Collateral and Termination of the Warranty Period for Red Sky Ranch Lots 69 and 70 1 OS/29/07 Attorney's Office Representative E. Resolution 2007-062 for Final Release of Collateral and Termination of the Warranty Period for Red Sky Ranch "Vail Slide" and Red Sky Ranch "Vail-Plath Shared" Improvements Attorney's Office Representative F. First Amendment to Study Participation Agreement Attorney's Office Representative G. Lease Agreement between Eagle County Extension Office and Xerox Extension Department Representative I. Allnual Sallitarian's Contract with the Department of Public Health & Environment, Consumer Protectioh Division Ray Merry, Environmental Health J. Agreement between Eagle County and Western Eagle County Ambulance District Kate Forinash, Health & Human Services K;. Application fot Cost of Living Adjustment for the Early Head Start Program Kate Forinash, Health & Human Services L. Agreement between Eagle County and All Valley Women's Health Kate Forinash, Health & Human Services M. Agreement between Eagle County and Vail Valley Salvation Army Service Extension Unit Kate Forinash; Health & Human Services N. Agreemerttbetween Eagle County and the Resource Center of Eagle County Kate Forinash, Health & Human Services o. Agreement between Eagle County and Vail Architecture Group, Inc. Architects & Planners for xeriscape design services Valerie Hayes, Facilities Management P. Temporary Easement Agr,eement to allow Eagle River Water and Sanitation District to drill test holes to determine the best lOcation for two wells at the Berry Creek Fifth Filing Property Facilities Management Representative Q; Resolution 2007-063 in the matter of a Special Use Permit for a Zip Line Tour, located in a Resource Zone District in unincdrporated Eagle County (Eagle County File No. ZS-00138) Lisa DeGraaf, Community Development R. Final Plat and Subdivision for Lot 11, Cordillera Subdivision, Filing 7, to reconfigure the building envelope to better utilize the Lot and save existing Aspen grove (Eagle County File No.AFP-00252). Lisa DeGraaf, Community Development Chairman Menconi asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Bryan Treu, County Attorney stated that he had no concerns with the consent agenda as presented. Commissioner Fisher moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A-R. COm1l1issioner Menconi seconded the motion. Of the two voting commissioners, the vote was declared unammous. 2 05/29/07 Citizen Input Leon Feld, Producer of the King of the Mountain volleyball tournament spoke. He produces events and tournaments all around the country. He took over the King of the Mountain tournament 5 years ago with the attitude of bringing it back to its former glory and beyond. He is interested in completing the volleyball courts in Edwards and bringing them up to championship quality. He believes that. volleyball is becoming a very big sport and the coutts would get a lot ofuse by the community. He stated that for the last 2 years nothing had been done. There iscurtelltly no water available to cool the courts down in the heat of the summer and no toilet facilities. The tournamentis ex.pandillg andhe'd like to utilize the Edwards courts. Chairman Menconi thanked Mr. Feld for his attendance. He introduced Peter Fralick from the county Ellgineering Department to ex.plain the details of the project. Mr. Fralick stated that they recently completed the netting around the courts. He was not aware of the need for landscaping, water and toilet facilities. Chairman Menconi suggested that the -Engineering Department perform an assessment and look at the water possibilities and landscaping costs. Mr. Feld suggested that a couple ofportajohlls be placed in the area temporarily. He stated that water is a defillite iSsue because it makes the courts much more comfortable in the summer. Commissioner Fisher suggested that Mr. Feld and Mr. Fralick have a conversation to make a date for a site visit SOOllt':r rather than later. Mr. Feld stated that they would like to use it the facility for upcoming events. Commissioner Fisher moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re-convene as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Mellconi seconded the motion. The vote Was declared unanimous. Eagle County Liquor Lic,ense Authority Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office ConSent Agenda Renewal A. Gloria J Deschamp d/b/a El Jebel Liquors This is a renewal for a Retail Liquor Store License in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on file ill the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. Other. Consent B. Behringer Harvard Residences at Cordillera, LLC d/bla The Lodge and Spa at Cordillera This is a request for a Temporary Permit. Behringer Harvard Residences at Cordillera, LLC has applied for the transfer of a Hotel & Restaurant liquor license with optional premises currently held by Colorado Hotel Operator, Inc. dlb/a The Lodge and Spa at Cordillera. The applicant seeks a temporary permit in order to continue liquor operations until the formal transfer is approved. The necessary forms have been submitted and appropriate fees paid. Ms. Scriver stated that Chris Hanen, General Manager for the Lodge and Spa at Cordillera and JeffNe1son were present for item B. Chairman Menconi thanked the men for their attendance. Commissioner Fisher moved that the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for May 29, 2007, consisting of Items A-B. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 3 OS/29/07 Comm:issioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re-convene as the Board of County Commissioners. Comm:issioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Presentation to and Authorization by the County Commissioners for the park improvements according to the proposed funding and site plan under the direction of the Tom Johnson, Director of Public Works Rick Cook & Tom Johnson Peter Fralick, Engineering Department stated that had worked closely with Mr. Cook. The proposal inCluded a halfpipe and basketball court for Freedom Park. Mr. Cook presented the site plan. He thanked the board for their past support. He requested a formal authorization for the park improvement and that the property be designated for the new addition. He read a letter of support from Steve Russell, Director ofWECMRD. Chairman Menconi asked what would be required. Mr. Fralick stated that the applicant is requesting approval before he moves forward into the design and construction phase. Mr. Cook stated that he would like a formal agreement from Eagle County before moving forward. Chairman Menconi stated that he is in favor of the design, half pipe and basketball courts. He is interested in knowing Where the fullding will corne from. Bruce BaUlllgartller stated that if the board approves the site plan Mr. Cook would raise most of the money needed although the county may be asked to supplement some of the money. Mr. Cook stated that he would be willing to work towards raising the money for the project. He asked if' the basketball courts were still on the county's agenda. Chairman Menconi Stated that he would place a higher priority on using county dollars for the half pipe before the basketball court. He requested the total cost for the half pipe so that it could be build as quickly as possible. Mr. Cook stated that he would like to be sure he has approval for the land use. Commissioner Fisher stated that she is in favor of the additional amenity to the skate park. She suggested that Mr. Cook come back with the total dollar amount needed to complete the area.;! Mr. Fralick stated that without a final design he estimated the cost to be from $350,000-$500,000 for both the half pipe and basketball courts. Chairman Menconi stated that the board could approve the concept but he'd like to make it clear to the. board and staff that it would be without knowing the total cost. Mr. Cook stated that knowing that the board is amenable to the property be used for the addition to the park gives him the ability to go forward and spend time and money into the project. Comm:issioner Fisher moved to approve the skate park expansion concept plan; final approval would be contingent upon cost and final design approvals. Coh1missioller Menconi seconded the motion. Of the two voting commissioners, the vote was deClared. unammous. Other Planning Files 1041-0067 Red Skv Ranch 210 Expansion Bob Narracci, Planning Department NOTE: Tabled from 12/19/06,2/20/07 & 4/3/07; Tabled to July 24, 2007 4 05/29107 1041 Permit application for extension of central water service to a proposed addition of 30 single,- family residential home sites adjacent to the west of the existing Red Sky Ranch PUD. Each of the 30 additional home sites are proposed to be served by individual sewage disposal systems that will be designed by a professional engineer to an agreed upon standard and professionally maintained and managed by the Holland Creek Metropolitan District. LOCATION: Due west and adjacent to the existing Red Sky Ranch Planned Unit Development. , -, ACTION: PDA-00065&ZC-00084 :Red Sky Ranch 210 Expansion Bob Narracci, Planning Department NOTE: ACTION: Tabled from 12/19/06, 2/20/07 & 4/3107; Tabled to July 24, 2007 PUD Amendment to add 210 acres and 30 single family residential building sites to the west of the existing Red Sky Ranch PUD. A conservation easement of 855 acres separate but concurrent with this PuD. Amendment is also proposed. tOCATION:Due west and adjacent to the existing Red Sky Ranch Planned Unit Development. CotntniSSioller Runyon moved that the Board as County Commissioners table file nos. 1041-0061, PDA- 00065 & ZC..00084, RedSky Ranch 210 Expansion until July 24,2007, at the applicant's request. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ZC-00085 Colorado Rivet :Ranch Bob Narracci, Planning Department ACTION: County initiated zOne change to replace existing "Planned Unit Development" zonin.g and restore the prior "Resource" zoning. Resource zoning is the most permissive agricultural zone diStrict within unincorporated Eagle County and is consistent with existing zoning of sUlTounding parcels. LOCATION: Along Colorado River, approximately 10.5 miles north of confluence with Eagle River. FILE NO./PROCESS: PROJECT. NAME: OWNER: APPLICANT: ZC-00085 1 Zone Change County Initiated Rezone of Colorado River Ranch S. Diane Graham Trust Eagle County 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. REQUEST.SUMMARY: On May 8, 2001 the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 2001-067 approving a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan application for the Colorado River Ranch PUD 1 File No. PDP-00018. This PUD Preliminary Plan approval was valid for five years. On February 8, 2006 the Board of County Commissioners were petitioned by the current owner of the Colorado River Ranch property with a request to extend the Preliminary Plan approval for an additional two years beyond the expiration of the initial five year validity. On March 28,2006 following a public hearing on the request held on March 14,2006, the Board of County Conunissioners, via Resolution No. 2006-032, denied the request for extension. In accordance with the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the Board of County Commissioners initiated a hearing to determine whether to extinguish the PUD Preliminary Plan. On October 23,2006, the Community 5 05/29107 Developmellt Department Director notified the property owner of a hearing before an appointed hearing officer to occur on Thursday, November 30, 2006. On November 29,2006, counsel for the property owner notified the County Attorney that his client did not wish to proceed with the hearing and waived its right to such a hearing and would not contest further the action of the BOard of COUllty Commissioners in refusing to grant a two year extension of the POO Preliminary Plan. Aside from the waiVer by the property owner, the Board of County Commissioners must still determine to extinguish the PUD Preliminary Plan, basing its determination on findings as to whether the applicant has demonstrated by competent evidence that: 1) The failure to proceed with development in accordance with the POO Preliminary Plan was beyond the applicant's control; 2) The development is not speculative in nature; 3) The development complies with the Land Use Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan, and; 4) There is a reasOnable likelihood the next step in the development application will be submitted, or the development itself will be initiated in the next two years. lnthis case, the applicant presented nO evidence to support these four required findings and, indeed, waived its right to present such evidence at a hearing before a hearing officer. Therefore, the necessary action for the Board of County Commissioners at its hearing on February 6, 2001 was to detenrtine that the applicant failed to make the required showing necessary to extend the PUD Preliminary Plan and found that said plan should be extinguished for that reason. Proposed Action Now that the PUD Preliminary Plan for the Colorado River Ranch has been officially and formally extinguished, the Colorado River Ranch Property remains zoned 'Planned Unit Development' (POO). This POO zone designation is, however, no longer supported by an approved Preliminary Plan. In other words, the subject property is currently afforded no uses-by-right and any activities presently occurring upon the property are deemed to be either legal non-collforming (in terms of zoning an historic use of the property cannot be expanded or changed to another use) or constitute a zoning violation. As such, Eagle County is initiating this zone change application to remove the Pun zone district designation and restore the former 'ResOurce' zone district designation. Resource zoning accommodates most agricultural activitieS' as uses-by-right. B. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND RECOMMENDATION: The Eagle County PlaI1I1ing Commission noted that it is not always a disadvantage to create 35-acre subdivisions and unanimously recommended approval of the proposed zone change with the following recommended condition of approval: 1) Prior to the Board of County Commissioners' hearing, it must be determined that the curtent use of the subj ect property is the same as it was in 2001 prior to approval of the Colorado River Ranch PlaI1I1ed UnitDevelopment Preliminary Plan and Zone Change and that no zoning violations are present. Staff is anticipating written verification from the current owner of the Colorado River Ranch property stating that all current land uses occurring on the subject property are consistent with the allowances of the 'Resource' zone district as it was in 2001 prior to approval of the Colorado River Ranch PUD. 2. STAFF REPORT 6 05/29/07 A. NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5-230 Amendments to the Text of These Land Use Regulations or Zone District Map Official Section Purpose: The purpose of this Section is to provide a means for changing the boundaries of the Offidal Zone District Map or any other map incorporated in these Regulations by reference, and for changing the text of these Land Use Regulations. It is not intended to relieve particular hardships, or to confer special privileges or rights on any person, but only to make. necessary adjustments in light of changed conditions. Standards: Section 5-230.D. No change in zoning shall be allowed unless in the sole discretion of the Board of County Commissioners, the €;hange is justified in that the advantages of the use requested substantially outweigh the disadvantages to the County and neighboring lands, In making such a determination, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall consider the application submittal requirements and standards. B. StAFF DISCUSSION: STANDARD: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-230.D.l} Does the proposed amendment consider the purposes and intents of the Comprehensive Plan, all ancillary County adopted Specialty and Community Plan documents, and'is it consistent with all relevant goals, policies, implementation strategies and Future Land Use Map designations including but not necessarily limited to ' the following: Section 3.2 General Development Policies a, c, e, f, g, h, i and k · Policy 'a' states that, "Those attributes that support quality of life options unique to Eagle County today should be preserved for future generations". This proposal to restore 'Res(jurce'~ zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy.J · Policy 'c' states that, "Growth should be managed toward future sustainability - a healthy; balance between economic success, quality of life and the preservation of the environment". Not applicable. · Policy 'e' states that, "Urban and suburban type growth should be appropriately designed and should be located within or immediately contiguous to existing towns and community centers". This proposal to restore 'Resource' zoning on the subject property satisfies 'this policy. · Policy 'f' states that, "New communities proposed for unincorporated areas of the County should be subject toa thorough and rigorous set of development criteria". Not applicable. · Policy' g' states that, "Redevelopment and/or revitalization of currently underdeveloped, outdated, rundown, or otherwise dysfunctional areas should be encourages". Not applicable. · Policy 'h' states that, "Open corridors between towns and community centers should be preserved". Not applicable, · Policy 'i' states that, "A cluster style of development should be encouraged, especially in areas where cultural, environmental or scenic resources at risk". Not applicable. · Policy 'k' states that, "Local communities should establish unique venues, attractions and design standards directed toward enhancing individual community character and developing a sense of place". Not applicable. Section 3.3 Economic Resources Policies b, c, d, e, f, h, j, m and 0 Ii Policy 'b' states that, "A healthy, attractive business environment, appropriate to the area's character and resources, should be fostered". Not applicable. · Policy 'c' states that, "Those qualities that make Eagle County a world class tourist destination and a great place to live, work and play should be identified, promoted and protected". This proposal to restore 'Resource' zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy. 7 OS/29/07 · Policy 'd' states that, "The potential impacts of second-home ownership and an aging resident population in Eagle County should be identified and incorporated into the decision making process". Not applicable. · Policy 'e' states that, "Commercial development should occur at a pace commensurate to growth in Eagle County". Not applicable. · Policy 'f' states that, "Commercial uses should be appropriately scaled and should be located within towns and community centers". Not applicable. ill Policy 'h' stateS that, "Commercial development should fit a regional economic structure that promotes a coherent regional 'community' while respecting sub-area character and identity". No! applicable. . Policy 'j' states that, "Agricultural land uses should be retained to preserve Eagle County's historical heritage and scenic quality for the benefit of future generations". This proposal to restore 'Resource' zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy. · Policy 'k' states that, "Timber harvesting and mining should be recognized as viable economic activities, so long as negative social, cultural and environmental impacts are appropriately mitigated". Not applicable. · Policy 'm' states that, "Economic infrastructure should be planned for in advance, and should be adequate to support existing and future business needs". Not applicable. · Policy '0' states that, "Future economic development in Eagle County should center on the area's existing amenities while encouraging new knowledge and technology based enterprises". Not applicable. Section 3.4 Housine Policies a, d, e, g a.nd n · Policy 'a' states that, "Affordable workforce housing should be located near job centers". Not. applicable. · Policy' d' states that, "Efforts to increase the stock of affordable rental units for local workers should be supported". Not applicable. · Policy 'e' states that, "Adequate housing options for Senior Citizens should be available". Not applicable. · Policy 'g' states that, "Well designed mobile home subdivisions, modular home subdivisions and mobile home parks should be encouraged where appropriate". Not applicable. · Policy 'n' states that, "Development should share responsibility for fulfilling Eagle County's workforce housing needs". Not applicable. Section 3.5 Infrastructure and Services Policies a, c, g, i,j, k, m and 0 · Policy 'a' states that, "Developed areas in Eagle County should be served by multiple modes of transportation". Not applicable. · Policy 'c' states that, "Residential neighborhoods should include an appropriate mix of community services and community centered retail spaces that can be accessed by alternative modes of transportation". Not applicable. · Policy' g' states that, "Eagle County should be adequately and efficiently served by mass transportation systems and facilities". Not applicable. · Policy 'i' states that, "Exemplary emergency and community services should be available to all residents, visitors and second home owners". Not applicable. · Policy 'j' states that, "The management and distribution of recreation areas and facilities in Eagle County should be implemented in an environmentally conscientious manner". Not applicable. · Policy 'k' states that, "Adequate and efficient infrastructure should exist within community centers and suburban neighborhoods for the delivery of domestic drinking water and for the treatment of domestic sewage". Not applicable. · Policy 'm' states that, "Communication infrastructure should be sufficient to support all anticipated needs in Eagle County". Not applicable. · Policy '0' states that, "The service and infrastructure needs of all socio-economic, age and cultural groups present in Eagle County should be fully addressed". Not applicable. Section 3.6 Water Resources Policies a, b, c, d, e, f, g, hand i 8 OS/29/07 . Policy 'a' states that, "The long term viability of both ground and surface water sources should be protected". Not applicable. . Policy 'b' states that, "Minimum in-stream flows should be maintained and efforts to establish optimum in-stream flow standards in Eagle County should be supported". Not applicable. . Policy' c' states that, "Water conservation efforts by all water users in Eagle County should be implemented". Not applicable. . Policy 'd' states that, "New water diversions and water storage projects should result in positive impacts to Eagle County's economy and environmental quality". Not applicable. . Policy 'e' states that, "Collaborative efforts on regional land and water use planning efforts to address future growth, water supply, and stream flow protection should be encouraged". Not applicable. · Policy 'f' states that, "Water quality in Eagle County should meet the highest applicable standards". Not applicable. . Policy' g' states that, "Surface and groundwater supplies should be protected from agricultural, industrial and develj)pmellt related impacts". Not applicable. . Policy 'h' states that, "Aquatic and riparian habitats should be protected from agricultural, industrial and development related impacts". Not applicable. . Policy 'i' states that, "Water-related recreation should be encouraged where appropriate at a level that will not damage related resources, ecosystems and environments". Not applicable. Section 3.7 Wildlife Resources Policies a, b, c, d, e, f and i · Policy 'a' states that, "The integrity, quality and interconnected nature of critical wildlife habitat in Eagle County should be preserved". This proposal to restore 'Resource' zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy. · Policy 'b' states that, "The well-being of wildlife species of economic importance should be actively monitored and protected". Not applicable. . Policy 'c' states that, "The well-being of wildlife species ofless economic importance and those on the rare and endangered species list should be actively monitored and protected. Not applicable. . Policy 'd' states that, "Development in areas critical to the continued well being of Eagle County's wildlife populations should not be allowed". Not applicable. . . Policy 'e' states that, "Where disturbances to wildlife habitat cannot be avoided, development should be required to fully mitigate potential negative impacts". Not applicable. · Policy 'f' states that, "Broad development patterns and the cumulative impacts of incremental development on wildlife habitat and wildlife populations should be. accounted for in the decision making process". Not applicable. · Policy 'i' states that, "Access to public lands and opportunities for public land recreation should be balanced with the need to preserve quality wildlife habitat". Not applicable. Section 3.8 Sensitive Lands Policies a, c, e and g · Policy 'a' states that, "Development should avoid areas of significant natural hazard". Not applicable. . Policy 'b' states that, "The mitigation of natural hazards should be done in a manner that protects the integrity of the natural environment and the visual quality of the area". Not applicable. · Policy 'c' states that, "Development and development patterns should preserve landscapes that include visual, historic and archeological value". This proposal to restore 'Resource' zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy. · Policy 'e' states that, "A variety of approaches should be utilized preserve land as open space". Not applicable. · Policy' g' states that, "Appropriate access should be provided to public lands and rivers". Not applicable. Section 3.9 Environmental Oualitv Policies a, c and d · Policy 'a' states that, "Air quality should meet the highest applicable safety standards, as well as the aesthetic expectations oflocal residents". Not applicable. 9 05/29107 · Policy 'c' states that, "Noise should be minimized to meet the highest applicable safety standards, as well as the aesthetic expectations oflocal residents". Not applicable. · Policy 'd' states that, "Energy efficiency and the reduction of overall energy consumption should be a primary goal for future operations and developments in Eagle County". Not applicable. Section 3.10 Future Land Use Map Policy a · Policy 'a' states that, "Zone changes and site-specific land use proposals should reflect the written policies of this Comprehensive Plan, the land use designations ofthe Future Land Use Map and the goals and objectives set forth within Area Community Plans, as applicable". Section 4 Adopted Area Community Plans All relevant goals, policies and FLUM designations · The Future Land Use Map identifies the subject property as appropriate for 'Rural' development. Thisproposal to restore 'Resource 'zoning on the subject property satisfies this policy. Additionally, all relevant goals & policies of the following plans or such equivalent plans and/or future plans, which may be in effect at the time of application for zone change: Eagle County Open Space Plan Eagle River Watershed Plan .Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan Eagle County Trails Plan (Roaring Fork) Eagle County Comprehensive Housing Plan Eagle County Airport Sub-Area Master Plan EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS NOT APPLICABLE stANDARD: Compatible with Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-230.D.2} Does the proposal provide compatibility with the type, intensity, character and scale of existing and permissible land uses surrounding the subject property? Dimensional limitations of the proposed zone district, when applied, should result in development that will be harmonious with the physical character of existing neighborhood(s) surrounding the subject property. The proposed zone change to restore 'Resource' zoning upon the subject property is compatible with the type, intensity, character and scale of existing and permissible land uses surrounding the subject property. All surrounding lands are also zoned Resource. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS NOT APPLICABLE STANDARD: Public Benefit. [Section 5-230.D.3] Does the proposal address a demonstrated community need or otherwise result in one or more particular public benefits that ojftet the impacts of the proposed uses requested, including but not limited to: Affordable local resident housing; childcare facilities; multi- modal transportation, public recreational opportunities; infrastructure improvements; preservation of agriculture/sensitive lands. 10 OS/29/07 This proposal to restore the 'Resource' zoning upon the subject property will preserve agricultural lands in a rural region of the county. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS NOT APPLICABLE STANDARD: Change of Circumstances. [Section 5-230.D.4} Does the proposal address or respond to a beneficial material change that has occurred to the immediate neighborhood or to the greater Eagle County community? The proposal addresses and responds to a beneficial material change of land use when the PUD Preliminary Plan for the Colorado River Ranch was extinguished by the Board of County Commissioners. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS NOT APPLICABLE STANDARD: Adequate Infrastructure. [Section 5-230.D.5} Is the property subject to the proposal served by adequate roads, water, sewer and other public use facilities? This amendment will not result in the need for new infrastructure. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM. STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS X NOT APPLICABLE Co REFERRAL RESPONSES: Eagle County Eng;ineering Department: Please refer to the attached memorandum dated April 17, 2007. The Engineering Department indicated that any improvements made as a result of the approval of the Preliminary PUD should be removed and the site restored to its natural state. Additional Referral Agencies - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no response received as of this writing: Attorney's Office Surveyor Department of Environmental Health Road and Bridge Department Housing Department Sheriff's Office Assessor's Office School District ECO Transit ECO Trails Addressing Colorado Division of Wildlife 11 05/29/07 Water Conservation Board Bureau of Land Management U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Natural Resources Conservation Service Century Tel Holy Cross Electric Gypsum FPD Western Eagle County Ambulance District Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Union Pacific Railroad D. SUMMARY ANAL YSIS: Benefits/Disadvantages: Benefits: · Due to the fact that the PUD Preliminary Plan was extinguished, any uses presently occurring upon the subject property are either grandfathered in or represent a zoning violation. Without a clear set ofland use allowances, on-going code enforcement issues are likely. · Restoring the 'Resource' zoning upon the subject property is' consistent with existing and allowable land uses on all adjacent privately owned parcels. Disadvantage: · Under the 'Resource' zone district (or any other standard zone district) a 35-acre subdivision of the subject property is likely. Pursuant to the Eagle County Assessor's Office records, the site consists of 977.64 acres which could be split into a maximum of27 35-acre parcels. E. BOAlil> OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OPTIONS: 1. Approve the Zone Change request without conditions if it is determined that the petition will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the proposed use is attuned with the imrnediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 2. Deny the Zone Change request if it is determined that the petition will adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and!or the proposed use is not attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is not in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 3. Table the Zone Change request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the Zone Change request with conditions and/or performance standards if it is determined that certain conditions and/or performance standards are necessary to ensure public, health, safety, and welfare and/or enhances the attunement of the use with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). DISCUSSION: Mr. Narracci presented the file and history of the proposed development. The property doesn't have any Uses by right and as such is legal non-conforming at this point or is in a violation of zoning. The proposal is to 12 OS/29/07 restote the resource zoning for the property. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval with the above conditions. The board has the option to approve the request, deny the request, table the request of approve the change with conditions and 1 or performance standards. Chairman Menconi opened and closed public comment, as there was none. Commissioner Runyon asked Mr. Narracci if returning to resource zoning would allovv 27 units to be built. He wondered about current incentives for clustering of developments. Mr. NaITacci stated that resource zone properties are not included in this type of eligibility~ Commissioner Runyon wondered what sort of clustering bonuses might be available. Mr. Narracci stated that it would allow about a 50% increase. Chairman Menconi wondered if it could be zoned as something other than 35-acre lots. Mr. Narracci stated that staff felt that resource would be the most restrictive zoning. Mr. Morris suggested that the only type of zoning available would be resource zoning. He felt there would be a spot-zoning problem if anything else were applied. COmmissioner Runyon moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve file no. ZC~00085 Colorado River Ranch, incorporating staffs findings; Com:rniSsioner fisher asked if the letter had been received. Mr. Moms stated that the ovvner might not send the letter because they had llot been responsive to any other requests. . Mr. Narracci indicated (that a code enforcement officer could visit and inspect the property. The motion failed for lack of a second. Cothmissioner Runyon moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve file no.. ZC-00085 County initiated rezone of Colorado River Ranch, incorporating the staff findings and conditioned upon satisfaction by the county code officer that there are no non-conforming uses that have arisen since the original rezoning. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ZS-00153cAckerman. ADD Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Planning Department ACTION: Owners of a nonconforming, unimproved 4.54 acre (approximate) property located in the Resource zone district are seeking a Special Use Permit in order to construct a secondary, 1273 sq ft accessory dvvelling unit (and main residence; however, the primary dwelling unit is a Use by Right). LOCATION: 1935 W. Lake Creek Road; Cattleman's Club (William's Parcels, Parcell) FILE NO.fPROCESS: OWNER: APPLICANT: RE'PRESENTATIVE: ZS-00153 / Special Use Permit Don E. Ackerman Trust Owner Thomas Cole, Point West Architecture and Land Group 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY: The applicant, Don Ackerman proposes to construct a primary dwelling unit and an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on his property in Lake Creek. Historically, there was a residential dwelling unit and storage structure on the property. The applicant's goal is to construct a new single-family with attached garage, as well as a detached, 1273 sq ft Accessory Dwelling Unit. Per the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the Resource Zone District permits an Accessory Dwelling Unit of up to 1800 square feet as a 'use by right' on conforming properties of 35 acres or greater. Mr. Ackerman's property is 13 OS/29/07 comprised of 4.54 acres rendering it a (legal), nonconforming property. As such, the ADU use requires a Special Use Pennit in lieu of a 'use by right' via building permit in order to assess the potential land use with a more detailed analysis. The Cattleman's Club is an existing "subdivision" comprised of three (3) platted parcels (Williams Parcels Subdivision) and five (5) unplatted parcels of 35 acres in size. Special Use Permits are valid for three (3) years before use implementation. With the onset of the approved use, Special Use Permits remain valid for perpetuity thereafter; unless an expiration date or exception has been placed upon the permit by the Board of County Commissioners. B. South: Residential/ Unplatted East: Residential/ Unplatted Residential! Unplatted Resource Resource ROW: Lake Creek Rd 197,762.4 N/A N/A C. CHRONOLOGYIBACKGROUND: . 1983- Williams Parcels platted. In between 1974 and 1984, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations permitted ranchers to create three (3), small, subdivided homesites of less than 35 acres on their property. Each homesite had to be at a minimum of two acres in size. This use was considered a "use by right" in the Resource zone district; the three (3), 4-acre Williams Parcels originally received approval for the homesites in December, 1983. Two years later, this homesite provision was removedfrom the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. . 2005- Williams Parcels 1-3 were incorporated into the Cattleman's Club. The Williams family ceased their ranching activities approximately 10years ago, and had been leasing the ranch out, up until about 2005 when the Williams Parcels were sold to the Cattleman's Club; however, some of the land will still be utilized for agricultural purposes. The development maintains three (3), approximately four (4) acre homesites, with the five (5) 35 acre parcels of unplatted lands surrounding the platted homesites. . 2006- Cattleman's Club 1041 approved; permitted home sites to be served by Lake Creek Metropolitan District for potable water. 14 OS/29/07 D. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION SUMMARY & MOTION: The Eagle County Planning Commission carefully considered this application. Topics of discussion during the May 16,2007 hearing focused on two of the conditions, offered to the Eagle County Planning Commission by Staff. Those conditions include: 3. The applicant must demonstrate that they have complied with the conditions as established in Eagle County file no. 1041-0064, prior to any site disturbance (see attachment 'A'); 5. The Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be nO larger than 1273 sq ft. (This number is based on the applicant's proposal). During the hearing, the applicant requested that the ECPC not "lock" the size of the Accessory Dwelling Unit to 1273 sq ft, as proposed in condition no. 5, and suggested a maximum limitation of 1500 sq ft in case the design of the detached ADU needed to be modified; the Planning Commission agreed with this suggestion, and modified condition no. 5. The other topic of discussion for this file was regarding the status ofthe Cattleman's Club 1041 (see condition no. 3 above). The applicant proposed that this condition should also be removed because it was not the Ackerman's responsibility to demonstrate compliancl? with the 1041 permit. The ECPC disagreed, and the condition remained part of the approval. The condition was created based on the Environmental Health referral comments for the Ackerman application. Staff agreed with Environmental Health that communication between the developers of the Cattleman's Club' 1041 and Eagle County needed to occur, prior to the Ackerman Special Use Permit receivillg an approval by the Board of County Commissioners. The rationale for the condition is as follows: Normally, with any subdivision, a Subdivision Improvements Agreement would have t)een reqUired to ensure all proposed development improvements were ultimately installed as specified prior to the issuance of a buildillg permit; these improvements would also have been collateralized. As the Cattleman's Club cOllsists ofthree (3) previously platted parcels, and five (5) unplatted, 35 acre parcels, no true subdivision has ever occurred; the "Cattleman's Club" is a marketing name, and not a subdivision name. As such, before approving any further land uses for the properties incorporated as part of the Cattleman's Club 1041 (which includes the Ackerman property), outstanding information needed to be provided to Staffby the developer. Ultirnately, after discussions regarding this file, the Planning ~ommission had no real issue with the specifics of the Special Use Permit; however, the Planning Commission agreed with Staff's rationale regarding the 1041 and recommended that condition no. 3 be modified in order to allow the applicant to move forward to the Board of County Commissioners hearing, while still requiring the outstanding 1041 illformation be provided to Staff. The modified condition is as follows: 5. The applicant of the 1041 (for the Cattleman's Club) must demonstrate that they have complied with the conditions as established in Eagle County file no. 1041-0064, prior to any site disturbance (see attachment' A'). Further, prior to the Board of County Commissioners hearing (for this Special Use Permit application) all concerns regarding the 1041 will have been resolved. Motion to approve with conditions was unanimous [5:0] UPDATE: Since the Planning Commission hearing, Staffhas met with the developer of the Cattleman's 1041. The developer has made a commitment to provide all necessary information prior to the BoCC hearing on May 21h. As such, Staff has removed condition no. 5 from the proposed conditions. 2. STAFF REPORT D. NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5-250 Special Use Permits 15 05/29/07 Section Purpose: Special Uses are those uses thatare not necessarily compatible with the other uses allowed in a zone district, but which may be determined compatible with the other uses allowed in the zone district based upon individual review of their location, design, configuration, density and intensity of use, and the imposition of appropriate conditions to ensure the compatibility of the use at a particular location with surrounding land uses. All Special Uses shall meet the standards set forth in this Section. Standards: Section 5-250.B. The issuance of a Special Use Pennit shall he dependent upon findings that there is competent evidence that the proposed use as conditioned, fully complies with all the standards of this Section, this Division, this Article, and these Land Use Regulations. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Board of County Commissioners may attach any conditions deemed appropriate to ensure compliance with the following standards, including conformity to a specific site plan, requirements to improve public facilities necessary to serve the Special Use, and limitations on the operating characteristics of the use, or the location or duration of the Special Use Permit STANDARD: Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-250.B. J} The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive P{an and the FLUM of the Comprehensive Plan, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. EAGLE COtJNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN x x x x x x x x Edwards Area Community Plan Xl Xl~ By definition, Accessory Dwelling Units are, ".. . designed and intended for occupancy by the caretaker of said property, persons who live and work in Eagle County, or relatives and guests of the occupants of the principal use of the property." It cannot be rented out year-round as a second home or to tourists passing by. This property will most likely he utilized by the owners of the property for guest accommodations and not for employee housing. EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN 16 OS/29/07 X Xl X X x x X Residential Ruraf x X X x Xl- This proposal does not seek to create a rental or add an additional housing unit to the more affordable market;- however, the majority of statements in the Edwards Area Community Plan appear to be directed towards new subdivision developments, and!or towards government efforts in contributing to creating housing solutions and/or providillg housing. 2R.esideritial Rural- The Future Land Use Map indicates that the property where the Ackerman residence(s) will be located is within the designation of 'Residential Rural.' Residential densities in this area are limited tootle primary residence and one accessory dwelling unit per 35 acres; however, there are other smaller, non-conforming residential lots in the immediate vicinity of the Cattleman's Club (Lake Creek Meadows contains lots ofless than two (2) acres, with the abiJity for duplex residential units). There is no specific discussion in the Edwards Area Community Plan regarding this particular location of Edwards. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN x x x x x x x ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEEts tilE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Compatibility. [Section 5-250.B.2] The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. South: Residential! Platted Residentiall Unplatted Resource x Resource x 17 OS/29/07 East: Residential/ Resource ROW: Lake X Un latted Creek Rd West: Residential/ Resource X Unplatted This land use is appropriate for the zone district and is compatible with surrounding zoning and existing uses. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS ...... MEETsTIlE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Zone District Standards. [Section 5-250.B.3} The proposed Special Use shall comply with the standards of the zone district in which it is located and any standards applicable to the particular use, as identified in Section 3~310, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Residential. Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3-330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and Industrial Uses. Review Standard: Requirements: 3.310.A Accessory Dwelling Unit Size: Sq Ft: No. Bedrooms: 2 ADU Location: Detached Parking: Two (2) parking spaces (required) Potable Water: Public Waste Water: Private- ISDS Solid Waste Disposal: Yes Electrical Supply: Yes Fire Protection: Eagle River Fire Protection District Access: Via Lake Creek Rd. At the May 16th, 2007 Planning Commission hearing, the applicant requested that condition no. 5 be amended to permit a maximum square footage limitation of 1500 be applied to this permit, instead ofl273 sq ft as proposed; the Planning Commission accepted this size restriction. See condition 5. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS · .. MEE~ THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Design Minimizes Adverse Impact [Section 5-250.B.4} The design of the proposed Special Use shall minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on adjacent lands; furthermore, the proposed Special Use shall avoid significant adverse impact on surrounding lands regarding trash, traffic, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, noise, glare, and vibration, and shall not create a nuisance. 18 05/29/07 x x x x x x x x NO See conditions 2, 5 & 7. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS . DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Design Minimizes Environment~l Impact. [Section 5-250.B.5] The proposed Special Use shall minimize environmental impacts and shall not cause significant deterioration of water and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resOUrces. See conditions 3,5,6 & 7 ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS · MEETS TIlE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Impact on Public Facilities. [Section 5-250.B.6] The proposed Special Use shall be adequately served by public facilities and services, including roads, pedestrian paths, potable water and wastewater facilities, parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. 19 05/29107 x XI x x x x Xl- Pursuant to the Cattleman's Club 1041 Permit, potable water will not be used for irrigation purposes for the homesites within the Cattleman's Club; rather, non-potable irrigation water will be utilized to irrigate limited portions of each individual property and the continued common ranching activities will be provided via the existing raw water irrigation system (ditch). See cOllditions 3 & 6 ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS ..... MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM ST ANDARnS . DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS StANDARD: Site Developmellt Standards. [Section 5~250.B.7} The proposed Special Use shall comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Develooment Standards. X Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) X Landscaping and IlluminationStandards (Division 4-2) 5 X Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) X Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) 2 X Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) 3 X Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) X Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) 7 X Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) X Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) X Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4~5) X Noise and Vibration (Section 4-520) X Smoke and Particulates (Section 4-530) X Heat, Glare, Radiation and Electrical Interference (Section 4-540) X Storage of Hazardous and Non-hazardous Materials (Section 4-550) X Water Quality Standards (Section 4-560) X Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) X Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) X Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) 6 20 05/29/07 X Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) X Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) 3 . . X Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) 5 X Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) 6 X Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) 3 ARE. X Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) APPLICABLE * *For the second dwelling unit only. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS ....... MEETS THE MAlORIT. Y OF MINlMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Other Provisions. [Section 5-250.B.8} The proposed Special Use shall comply with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development characteristics. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS .... ... MEETS TIlE MAJORITY OF M. lNIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS E. REFERRAL RESPONSES: Eagle County Environmental Department ~ Please refer to attachment dated May 2, 2007. . There are a number of conditions prior to site disturbance, the applicant must comply with all the rules of 1041-0064; . There will be two septic systems on this property, one serving the primary residence and another completely separate system for the guest house. Each ISDS systems must be designed by a Registered Professional Engineer and must include nutrient removal technology. In addition, the application must provide geotechnical information to demonstrate that primary and secondary drain field locations are available on the property to accommodate each on-site wastewater treatment system. . See condition 3 Eagle County Engineering Department - Please refer to attachment dated May 2, 2007 . (1) The letter provided by the Lake Creek Metropolitan District states that water service will be provided for "in-house domestic use"; no mention is made toward providing water for landscaping, including new trees and a lawn area, or the proposed water feature on site. Are there additional water rights for these uses? This must be addressed during this Special Use application; . (2) The project description mentions that there will be an Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS) for each dwelling, but the site plan does not show a proposed location for each ISDS and an alternative location (4 total locations). This must be addressed in the application for a building permit. . See conditions 3 Eagle County Planning Commissioner, Jim Dawkins - Please refer to attachment dated April 23, 2007 . Section 5-250, Sub-section B, Paragraph 2, Compatibility: Applicant's statement that his proposal (ADU on 4.54 acres) is in keeping with adjacent and conforming properties (ADU on 35 acres) relative to the character of surrounding land uses isn't an apples to apples comparison; detached ADDs on 35 acres can have less impact on the land than on 4.54 acres; . Paragraph 5, Design Minimizes Environmental Impact: What are the potential applications of renewable and sustainable resources, materials ana energies? Will they be utilized in the design of the 21 05/29/07 home and utilization of the land? Why just "potential"? Are they going to be used or aren't they? Will the requirement to minimize environmental impacts be reduced if they are not utilized? . Wood burning controls: Does the applicant also intend to forego the use of outdoor firepits, chimineas, etc.? Applicant response via email received, April 30, 2007: . RE: compatibility: . I'd argue that as presented the detached ADU is quite compatible with adjacent land uses that do allow the ADU to be detached. In fact, as a use by right on a 35 acre parcel, a detached ADU could be designed (and permitted) to be 35' high or spread out over a much greater footprint than we have presented impact, And as we discussed, alternate "attached" locationsfor this ADU would potentially be much more impactful; i.e. vertical attached development above the garage or main house; . RE: Environmental impact: . The owner must comply with eco-build regulations in regards to renewable/sustainable resources. They have been utilized in the design of the home and site as presented. In addition, passive solar design and building orientation combined with appropriate overhangs and window shading have been incorporated. Active solar PV and/or hot water is likely to be incorporated as well, but final determination will be made on site relative to budget and existing conditions... and we will not be able to commit to specifics prior to the ECPC review; . RE: Wood burning: . All interior and exterior fireplaces/firepits are proposed to be gas, no wood burning. . See condition 7. Eagle River Fire Protection District - Please refer to attachment dated April 18, 2007 . The above property is within the Eagle River Fire Protection District and is primarily served by Station 12. Additional Referral Agencies - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no response received as of this writing: . Eagle County: Attorney's Office; Assessor; Engineering; Sheriff's Office; Road and Bridge; Weed and Pest; Wildfire Mitigation Specialist · Colorado State: Division of Wildlife . Ambulance and applicable Metro District . Lake Creek Meadows Homeowner's Association C. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: Benefits/Disadvantages, There are not many disadvantages to this file, Benefits: in discussing this proposal with the Division of Wildlife via telephone, it was relayed to Staff that there will be no wildlife impacts associated with this proposal; ., The applicant intends to more effectively situate the primary residence and Accessory Dwelling Unit by incorporating the structures into the grade in order to reduce any potential visual and/or environmental impacts; The applicant has considered and will be implementing "green building" into the designs for both the primary and secondary units; Potable water shall be provided via the Lake Creek metropolitan District. The applicant has stated that there will not be utilizing wood burning devices. Disadvantages:None. 22 05/29/07 D. PLANNING COMMISSION / BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OPTIONS: 5. Approve the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT] request without conditions if it is determined that the petition win not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the proposed use is attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 6. Deny the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT] request if it is determined that the petition will adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and!or the proposed use is not attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is not in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle .County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 7. Table the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT] request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 8. Approve the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT] request with conditions and/or performance standards if it is determined that certain conditions and/or performance standards are llecessary to ensure public, health, safety, and welfare and/or enhances the attunement of the use with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). DISCUSSION: Ms. Skinner -Markowitz presented the file. This property lies in the resource zone district. The property is 4.74 acre-s and as such is a legal non-conforming property. Tom Cole spoke to the boa.rd as the architect for the project. He indicated that the Accessory Dwelling Unit is almost identical in location asthe location that where the barn used to be. The majority of the trees existing on the lot would be able to remain. One other use for theADU that had been discussed is acaretaker'sresidence. Chairman Menconi opened and closed public comment, as there was none. Commissioner Fisher wondered when the owners might begin construction. Mr. Cole stated that as soon as they received the building permit the project would begin. The owners want to build the primary and accessory unit at the same time. Commissioner Runyon asked about the definition of an Accessory Dwelling Unit. Mr. Skinner - Markowitz stated that the stove drove this definition. There could legally be several other units as storage without getting approval for an Accessory Dwelling Unit without stoves. Mr. Cole stated that the two units could be linked if needed. Commissioner Runyon wondered if the other property owners in the area had been advised of this proposal. Mr. Cole stated that the other two lots were still owned by the developer. He indicated that the primary residence was planned for around 11,000 square feet. , Ms. Skinner - Markowitz stated that this size was allowed based on the water rights on the property. Chairman Menconi stated thathe is concerned because of the size of the building and the service needs associated with it. The size of this home is on the larger end. Ms. Skinner - Markowitz indicated that the request for the ADU is currently 1500 square feet, but it is likely that the unit would be 1273 square feet. Mr. Cole stated that the owners felt gaining approval for a slightly larger unit at 1500 would be safer. 23 OS/29/07 Commissioner Fisher moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve file no. ZS-00153 Ackerman ADU, incorporating suggestions found on page 12 of staff's report and with the following conditions. 1. Except as otherwise modified by this development 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. All refuse must be contained in wildlife-proof receptacles or as permitted in Section 4- 41O.C Wildlife Proof Refuse Container/Dumpster Enclosure Standards. 3. Each of the Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) must be designed by a Registered Professional Engineer; designs must include nutrient removal technology. In addition, the application must provide geotechnical information to demonstrate that primary and secondary drain field locations are available on the property to accommodate each on-site wastewater treatment system. 4. The Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be no larger than 1500 sq ft. 5. All exterior lighting on all structures shall be downcast. 6. Potable water shall not be permitted for irrigation purposes. 7. Wood burning devices are prohibited. Commissioner Runyon asked the applicant to look towards as much energy efficiency as possible. Mr. Cole stated that the owners are aware of the eco build guidelines. This house requires 100 points to avoid penalties and currently without full definition of the systems, the plans included 150 points. Chairman Menconi stated that he has struggled with large size homes. This is the first home, which has exceeded the eco build goals. Cotnmissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Attest: . ," ~d, the meeting was adjourned until June 4, 2007. e 'I< 000", ~ ~'~ Q~~ c il ,..,0 jJ Chairman () T ~ ~!,?~I':> 24 05/29107