No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/18/11 PUBLIC HEARING October 18, 2011 Present: Jon Stavney Chairman Peter Runyon Commissioner Sara Fisher Commissioner Keith Montag County Manager Bryan Treu County Attorney Teak Simonton Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Recognition of Communications Department Savvy Awards Kris Friel, Communications Ms. Friel stated that the department won three awards from the City- County Communications and Marketing Association made up of counties, cities and municipalities throughout the country. The third place prize was awarded to the county for the logo for Actively Green. Abbie Rittmiller created the logo. The judges said it combined the active and green symbols effectively. They took a second place for a video award for the county attorney documentary, for highlighting his role as a local football referee. The first place award was presented for the annual report, which was designed by Lachie Thomas and included contributions from every department. Chairman Stavney commented that the TV station was important for communication to the public. He believed that it helped with public engagement. Commissioner Fisher added that it was a pleasure working with the communication department. Commissioner Runyon added his praise. He had been involved in media his entire professional life and has an enhanced perspective on the type of work. He commended the professionalism of the group. He presented the awards. Consent Agenda Chairman Stavney stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of October 17, 2011 (Subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative B. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle County Commissioner Meetings for August 30, September 20 and September 27, 2011 Teak Simonton, Clerk and Recorder C. Agreement between Eagle County and Ray & Associates for the Purpose of Designing a Community Health Center Service Delivery Model Sarah Ingersoll, Health & Human Services D. Resolution 2011 -127 Regarding Termination of the Subdivision Improvements Agreement and One Year Extended Warranty Period and Final Release of Collateral for Frost Creek and Salt Creek PUD Filing No. 1 Frost Creek File No. PDF -00091 County Attorney's Office Representative E. Resolution 2011 -128 Amending Resolution No. 2011 -119 which Conferred Power of Attorney to Draw on US Bank Letter of Credit No. SLCPPDX04336 in the Amount of $127,614.58 for the Account of Kummer Development Corporation — Salt Creek Equestrian Center 1 10/18/2011 County Attorney's Office Representative F. Resolution 2011 -129 of the Use of Open Space Funds for the Acquisition of the Beck Property Located at 5572 Highway 6, Eagle County, Colorado Toby Sprunk, Open Space G. Agreement between Eagle County and Mays Construction Specialties, Inc. for Leveling and Support of Pumpstation at the Eagle River Preserve Ron Siebert, Project Management Chairman Stavney added that item G was added late. Mr. Siebert explained the situation with the pump station. Sarah Ingersoll spoke to the board about the agreement between Ray and Associates and explained that the county which would allow the county to move forward with a Community Health Service Delivery Model. She encouraged the community to provide input. Commissioner Fisher added that there was a partnership with both local hospitals. There would be other subcommittees in the future. She stated that the county had completed the federal qualification process. Commissioner Runyon stated that the FQHC (Federally Qualified Health Center) had standards for proving income level. Years ago, this was denied due to the high median income level. Recently a waiver was granted. This waiver process took much work and credit should be given to staff. Commissioner Fisher moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A -G. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Citizen Input Chairman Stavney opened and closed citizen Input, as there was none. Commissioner Runyon moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re- convene as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Eagle County Liquor License Authority Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office Consent Agenda Renewals A. Edwards Discount Liquors, Inc. d/b /a Bottle `n Cork #14 -43341 -0000 This is a renewal of 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. B. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Zach's Cabin #04 -51098 -00006 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 2 -Opt. Premises in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. C. Vail Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Two Elk #04- 38327 -0001 2 10/18/2011 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 1 -Opt. Premises on Vail Mountain. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. D. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Trapper's Cabin #04- 51098 -0001 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 1 -Opt. Premises in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. E. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d/b /a Toscanini #04- 51099 -0015 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. F. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d/b /a Spruce Saddle #04 -51099 -0001 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 4 -Opt. Premises in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. G. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Beano's Cabin #04 -51099 -0005 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 1 -Opt. Premises in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. H. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Arrowhead Alpine Club #04 -51098 -0005 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License in Edwards (Arrowhead. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. I. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. d /b /a Allie's Cabin #04 -51099 -0000 This is a renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant License with 3 -Opt. Premises in Beaver Creek. 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 in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. Commissioner Fisher moved that the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for October 18, 2011 consisting of Items A -I. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Fisher moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re- convene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Planning Files PDS -3334 Cordillera Valley Club PUD Amendment Scot Hunn, Planning Department 3 10/18/2011 NOTE: This file has been withdrawn by the applicant ACTION: The purpose of this Planned Unit Development Amendment is to clarify certain processes within PUD Guide; clarify density provisions, and; to update preliminary plan based on current filings and platting for subdivision. LOCATION: Cordillera Valley Club Subdivision DISCUSSION: Mr. Hunn stated that the club ownership were not party to the amendment application. The property owners association and the club were sorting through some issues. 1041 -3149 Sweetwater Ranch Scot Hunn, Planning Department Greg Schroeder, Engineering Department ACTION: The purpose of this 1041 Permit is for a major new water (well and augmentation) and wastewater treatment system (ISDS) for fifteen (15) EQRs; primary purpose is to serve proposed commercial uses, inclusive of gas station, convenience store, restaurant, as well as a previously entitled Primary/Secondary residential lot within the PUD. LOCATION: Sweetwater Ranch Subdivision, Dotsero area FILE NO./PROCESS: 1041- 3149/1041 Permit (Matters of State Interest) PROJECT NAME: Sweetwater Ranch Major New Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment System LOCATION: Sweetwater Ranch PUD, Dotsero OWNER: Sweetwater Ranch LLC, C /o: Mike Young APPLICANT: Same REPRESENTATIVE: Steve Isom, Isom & Associates, Inc. /Tom Zancanella, Zancanella & Associates, Inc. REQUEST: Major New Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment System STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with conditions 1. SUMMARY This 1041 permit application by Sweetwater Ranch LLC proposes the creation of a major new water treatment system to support the development of a convenience store and gas station on Lot 2B Sweetwater Ranch PUD, as well as future development of a primary- secondary unit on Lot 2D, future commercial development on Lot 2C, and existing residential uses (caretaker apartment) on Lot 2A. The request also includes the development of two separate Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) to treat wastewater from the proposed PUD uses. One (1) new well (in addition to augmentation/supply contracts) is being proposed to serve the development. (The companion file for this request is PDA- 3118). 2. BACKGROUND & CHRONOLOGY BACKGROUND: The proposed PUD project consists of three primary land use components: service commercial, open space /recreation and residential uses. The following is proposed: • Two (2) Residential Dwelling Units on a previously entitled and platted "Primary- Secondary" lot (Lot 2D) 4 10/18/2011 • Existing Ski Lake Improvements including storage and residence on Lots 1 and 2A (unchanged uses); • 17,000 square feet of commercial uses, comprised of a convenience store, gas station and restaurant; liquor store, and; office and retail uses on Lot 2B (PUD would allow up to 23,331 sq. ft. of floor area, as proposed); • Undetermined amount of storage and/or warehouse uses such as contractor storage, RV storage and mini- storage on Lot 2C in the future (PUD would allow up to 41,301 sq. ft. of floor area, as proposed). • 25.6 acres (or approximately 62% of the site) in open space — to be preserved for conservation and active recreation purposes on Lots 1 and 3. The property is situated along the State Highway 6 corridor in Dotsero, Colorado, at the East -bound I -70 interchange. The property is bordered to the north by Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) property and the Interstate -70 Right -Of -Way; to the south by the Eagle River and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands; to the east by the Forier property (historic lava flow); and, to the west by the Union Pacific Railroad. The proposed PUD includes approximately 42 acres, with development proposed on approximately 9 acres (see attached site plan). The site is encumbered by floodplain, riparian and wetland areas. At this time, public water and wastewater services are not available in this portion of the Dotsero area. Specifically, such systems exist at the Two Rivers development which is located approximately 1/4 mile west of the project site. However, the Applicant, working in cooperation with the Two Rivers Metropolitan District, has determined that extending such service to the project site is practically and financially infeasible at this time. Therefore, the purposes of the Project are to: 1) To provide adequate potable water to support commercial, residential and open space uses within the PUD, and; 2) To provide adequate wastewater treatment facilities to support the proposed uses within the PUD. CHRONOLOGY: 2000: Grading Permit (MI -11476 and BP- 12731) issued for construction of the lake. 2006: Combined Sketch/Preliminary Plan for PUD approved for Sweetwater Ranch (ZC -00082 and PDSP- 00024) 2011: Submittal for PUD Amendment, 1041 and Final Plat to subdivide Lot 2. 3. REFERRALS This 1041 Permit Application was referred to the following departments and agencies with a request for comment: • Eagle County Engineering Department • Eagle County Attorney's Office • Eagle County Planning Commission • Colorado State Health Department — Water Quality Division • Colorado Division of Water Resources • Colorado Division of Wildlife • Colorado Water Conservation Board • Colorado Geological Survey • Gypsum Fire Protection District* • Northwest Colorado Council of Governments • Bureau of Land Management • Two Rivers Metropolitan District • Town of Gypsum As of this writing, the following agencies have responded to this 1041 application with comments: Eagle County Engineering Department: 5 10/18/2011 • Please refer to the attached response dated August 18, 2011. Eagle County Planning Commission: • At a work session held by the Eagle County Planning Commission on September 7, 2011, the Planning Commission, acting as a referral agency only, discussed the application with staff and was generally supportive of the Project. The Commission's comments are as follows: o One Commission member questioned the nature of contractual agreements between the project owner and Zancanella & Associates, Inc.; o One Commission member inquired about the ISD system to be designed and installed on the project site and how other systems in the Dotsero area are designed and operated. The same Commission member inquired as to the wastewater treatment capacity at Two Rivers Village PUD and stated support for the Sweetwater Ranch site to hook -up with Two River's system in the future; o One Commission member questioned the water supply contract terms, as well as details regarding "calls ", monitoring of water usage and termination of contracts; o One Commission member highlighted the Town of Gypsum's concerns regarding the potential impact of the (PUD) project on the local economy; o One Commission member questioned the gallons per day (GPD) load of the ISDS system (reported to handle up to 5,000 GPD), percolation rates and how the system would handle any future car wash activities on the project site; Colorado State Geological Survey: • Please refer to the attached referral response letter dated July 18, 2011. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments: • Please refer to the attached referral response letter dated April 4, 2011. Gypsum Fire Protection District: • Please refer to the attached referral response letter dated October 6, 2011. 4. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Section 6.04.01, Permit Application Approval Criteria for Matters of State Interest, and as more specifically described in the application materials, the following analysis is provided. The Approval 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. According to the application submitted, a Stormwater Management Plan/Permit will be obtained by the contractor prior to commencing any construction activities. Additionally, building permits, electrical and/or mechanical permits, grading permits and any necessary application(s) for improvements will be submitted to the appropriate agencies upon finalization of project design. Prior to any final plat approvals, the Applicant will need to provide evidence that all FEMA permitting (LOMR) regarding re- mapping of the property's floodplain and floodway boundaries has been completed; as well, the Applicant will need to provide evidence that all well permits and augmentation (supply contracts) have been secured from the water court. 1 +/ -1 FINDING: (1) Rights, Permits and Approvals. The applicant WILL HAVE obtained all necessary property rights, permits and approvals prior to site disturbance. 6 10/18/2011 (2) The Project will not impair property rights held by others. The project will not impair property rights held by others. All necessary easements or rights -of -way have been procured, and neighboring property owners have been notified of the proposed improvements. [ +] FINDING: (2) Property rights 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 project is consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use plans, specifically the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and the Regional 208 Plan. The Project does relate to the creation of additional development in the subject area. Specifically, the water and wastewater improvements are proposed to serve existing and requested development rights and to improve water quality and quantity for domestic and fire /life- safety purposes. The project will be designed to meet all requirements of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. [ +] FINDING: (3) Consistency with plans. 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. • Zancanella & Associates, Inc., the Applicant's representative and engineering consultant, have been consulting engineers since 1993 with primary emphasis on water and wastewater engineering. Their expertise stems from the design and oversight of numerous, similar projects in Eagle, Garfield and Pitkin Counties. Zancanella & Associates will monitor operation and maintenance of the proposed systems. The project will be financed by the owner, Mike Young. [ +] FINDING: (4) Expertise and financial capability. The applicant DOES HAVE the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all requirements and conditions. (5) The Project is technically and financially feasible. The application demonstrates the technical feasibility of the project and quantifies the cost for water treatment and ISDS at approximately $120,000. [ +] FINDING: (5) Feasibility, The Project IS technically and financially feasible. (6) The Project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards. A geotechnical investigation was performed at the site to determine appropriate design criteria for the ISDS. The project is not proposed to be constructed on, over or across areas of known geologic hazard, however the geotechnical report provided does recommend certain considerations for construction with regard to high ground water. As long as site specific recommendations are adhered to during design, installation and maintenance of the systems, a positive finding can be made. [ +] FINDING: (6) Risk from hazards, The Project IS NOT subject to significant risk from natural hazards. 7 10/18/2011 (7) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. The subject site received PUD zoning approval in 2006. At that time, a primary- secondary residential lot, ski lake and associated uses were approved. The propose water and wastewater projects, which respond directly to proposed PUD amendments to create two commercial lots within the PUD, will not adversely affect land use patterns outside the PUD. [ +] FINDING: (7) Land use patterns, the project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns as a result of this 1041 Permit application. (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 is designed and will be implemented to serve the PUD and is located outside the service boundaries of the nearest municipality (Town of Gypsum). However, the subdivision is within the service boundaries of the Gypsum Fire Protection District, which has indicated a willingness to serve the PUD. The water system will enhance the ability to provide water commensurate with required firefighting capacity and pressures. [ +] FINDING: (8) Service Capacity. 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 it exceed the capacity of service delivery systems. (9) The Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. The estimated cost of the project is $120,000. The commercial uses proposed within the PUD are estimated (by the Applicant) to generate annual revenues to the project owner of up to $10,000,000. The reported annual cost to maintain the water and wastewater systems is reported at $6,000. Costs to operate the system will be paid for by the developer (who intends to be the owner /operator of the convenience store and gas station), as well as through commercial leases for any tenant spaces developed. [ +] FINDING: (9) Financial Burden, the Project WILL NOT create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. (10) The Project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. The project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. Approval of this 1041 will not result in the loss of any productive agricultural and there is minimal impact to public land (BLM). [ +] FINDING: (10) Protection of local economy. The project WILL NOT significantly degrade any current or foreseeable 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. Uses proposed with the PUD are generally viewed to service local recreational uses in the Dotsero area. As long as any ISDS is an "advanced" design, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on recreation. [ +] FINDING: (11) Protection of recreational opportunities, The Project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on the quality of recreational opportunities and experience. 8 10/18/2011 (12) The planning, design and operation of the Project shall reflect principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. The Applicant proposes operation of the new system in a manner which will promote water conservation in the following manners: • Limited irrigational use for outdoor landscaping, and; • Use of low -flow fixtures in any new buildings constructed within the PUD. [ +] FINDING: (12) Resource Conservation, The planning, design and operation of the Project DOES reflect principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. (13) The Project will not significantly degrade air quality. Any development on the subject property may create fugitive dust. Generally, further disturbance from grading of the site will be minimized by the implementation dust suppression plan submitted with any future grading permit. As well, best management practices will be employed and all disturbed areas will be re- vegetated. [ +] FINDING: (13) Air quality, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade air quality. (14) The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality. The proposed plans call for installation of two Individual Sewage Disposal Systems which will be sub - grade improvements (not generally visible). Likewise, the proposed water supply and treatment system (wells and treatment equipment) will either be sub -grade or housed within the proposed convenience store on Lot 2B. The site is highly visible from both the I -70 and Highway 6 Rights -Of -Way and, for the most part, all water and wastewater treatment system improvements will NOT be visible. The only outstanding issue with regard to the visibility of the water system is any potential storage tanks required by the Gypsum Fire Protection District — to ensure proper water pressure on the site for firefighting purposes. Such details have not been determined, however staff believes that such improvements could be integrated into the design of the overall project so as not to detract from the site, visually. [ +] FINDING: (14) Visual quality. As mitigated, the Project WILL NOT significantly degrade visual quality. (15) The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. No off -site discharges into surface water bodies associated with the water and wastewater treatment systems in the vicinity are likely or anticipated. The Project's proximity to any such water bodies is shown on the attached vicinity map. Further, the Project has been designed to minimize and mitigate disturbance necessary for construction. Specifically, plans will be developed, in accordance with State Regulations for Stormwater Management, to include Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as: • Sedimentary controls (erosion control fence and straw bale checks) along and around the construction site; • Re- vegetation of all disturbed areas; • Weekly monitoring of all installed fencing and management of petroleum products or other potentially hazardous materials used during construction. [ +] FINDING: (15) Surface water quality, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade surface water quality. 9 10/18/2011 (16) The Project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality. The Project will be required to be designed as an "advanced design" system. As such, while there will still be discharge from the system, the pollutant level is lessened. In addition, due to the potential for high (shallow depth to) ground water at the leach -field site on Lot 2C, the Colorado State Geological Survey, in that agency's referral response, suggests that Eagle County verify that "the required separation distance between maximum anticipated water levels and the planned seepage bed(s) will be maintained year - round ". These comments suggest that the system should, at a minimum, be constructed using elevated mounds; an alternative would be to provide monitoring of the site - before, during and after system development. Likewise, Eagle County has identified a potential issue with regard to the reported water quantities (to be delivered by the water system on a daily basis) and the loading capacity of the proposed wastewater treatment systems. Simply, there appears to be the potential for more water usage (delivery) than the proposed ISDS might handle on a daily basis. As such, Eagle County Environmental Health Department recommends the following condition of approval: o The Applicant shall submit a water quality monitoring plan to be approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to or concurrent with the issuance of any associated building or ISDS permits. In addition, water throughput and wastewater treatment flows will be monitored by the Applicant, the results of which shall be reported (annually) to the Eagle County Environmental Health Department. [ +] FINDING: (16) Ground water quality, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade ground water quality. (17) The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas. There are no jurisdictional wetlands or riparian areas identified within the water or wastewater Project area. [ +] FINDING: (17) Wetlands and riparian areas, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas. (18) The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. The Project is proposed on sites that have historically been highly disturbed through mining, grading and fill activities. The current state of proposed sites for the ISDS system is generally flat, gravelly soil with sparse vegetative cover. The site should, therefore, not be considered "habitat" for terrestrial or aquatic animal life. No referral response was received from the Colorado Division of Wildlife. [ +] FINDING: (18) Terrestrial or aquatic animal life, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. (19) The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. See above comments. [ +] FINDING: (19) Terrestrial plant life, The Project WILL NOT significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. (20) The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. 10 10/18/2011 A geotechnical investigation was performed at the tank site to determine appropriate design criteria for the ISDS and the overall development plans for the site. The Project location contains areas of previously disturbed (mined, graded and filled) soils and substrate. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the water or wastewater treatment Project will degrade or deteriorate soils or geologic conditions. The project is not proposed to be constructed on, over or across areas of known hazard areas, with the exception of floodplain and floodway areas in proximity to the site. [ +] FINDING: (20) Soils and Meologic conditions, The Project WILL NOT significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. (21) The Project will not cause a nuisance. Construction activities will most likely occur during the 2012 construction seasons. Construction traffic to and from the site will be short-term and will not have significant nuisance impacts on the area. There are no exterior light fixtures or other mechanisms associated with the proposed water and wastewater improvements that will generate noise, glare, or odors. [ +] FINDING: (21) Nuisance, The project WILL NOT cause a nuisance outside what is typical of general construction. (22) The Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic, or archaeological importance. Staff is not aware of any areas of paleontological, historic or archaeological importance associated with the subject site. [ +] FINDING: (22) Paleontological, historic or archaeoloffical areas, The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic or archaeological importance. (23) The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. The project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. It is anticipated that all handling, use and storage of any water treatment chemicals will occur within a commercial building and be carried -out in such a manner as not to present an unreasonable risk to operators or the general public. In addition, maintenance of the ISDS system will be ongoing to ensure compliance with public health and environmental health requirements. However, due to the fact that commercial (convenience store and gas station) uses proposed may have the potential to release contaminants into the ISDS, the Eagle County Environmental Health Department recommends the Applicant verify with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the wastewater system does not need to be registered under the "Class V Injection Well" program. As well, the following condition was made part of the companion PUD Amendment (File No. PDA- 3118): o The Applicant shall prepare a "Hazardous Substance Management Plan" for each commercial land use in the development to be given to the Property Owners Association or other entity or party responsible for maintaining the subject properties. Each site specific hazardous substance management plan would detail the type of hazardous substance(s) kept within that commercial space, where the substances are stored, how they are stored and in what quantities, what actions are taken in the event of a spill and what waste materials are generated and they are disposed. The Applicant will be required to provide written evidence /documentation to Eagle County, prior to TCO of any new buildings using the ISDS, that the Plan has been registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); or that the EPA will not require registration of said Plan. The Property Owners Association or other responsible party will assure the Plan is updated annually and submitted to the local fire response agency for their information and use. The Plan will be made available to the public upon request. 11 10/18/2011 [ +/ -] FINDING: (23) Hazardous materials, The Project WILL NOT result in unreasonable risk of the release of hazardous materials. (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. There are no significant losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources with the County, nor is there a loss of opportunity to develop such resources. The site has already been mined (resource extraction) and the County's master plan documents identify the area in question as generally appropriate for service commercial uses. [ +] FINDING: (24) Benefits outweigh losses, The benefits accruing to the County and its citizens WILL 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. B. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.02, Additional Criteria Applicable 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 emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water. The plans for operation of the new system promote water conservation in the following manners: • Use of xeriscape landscape design and plant materials, and; • Use of low -flow fixtures in any new buildings constructed within the PUD. Although plans for the convenience store on Lot 2 B generally specify limited overall irrigation, and while the application has stated an intent to use "low flow" fixtures in all future buildings, staff suggests the following specific conservation measures be implemented: a) Incorporating site specific limitations on potable and non - potable irrigation within any future protective covenants and within the PUD Guide, and; b) Incorporating requirements within any future protective covenants and within the PUD Guide to ensure the use of "low flow" fixtures in all new development proposals with the subdivision. [ + / -] FINDING: (1) Efficient use, The Project SHALL emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water, where viable. (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 in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate service. The project is designed and will be implemented to serve the PUD and it has been demonstrated that connection to any existing water and/or wastewater treatment systems in the area (Two Rivers Village, for example) is not feasible or practical at this time. The proposed Project has been designed specifically to add capacity to serve based on the needs of current and future residents of this PUD. [ +] FINDING: (2) Excess capacity / duplicate services, The Project SHALL NOT result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. 12 10/18/2011 (3) The Project shall be necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project. See above comment. 1 +] FINDING: (3) Necessity. The Project SHALL BE necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas 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 ISDS system will be required to meet an "advanced" level of design, as determined and approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department. As such, a positive finding can be made. However, staff recommends that water quality on the site be monitored in the future. 1 +] FINDING: (4) Protection of Aquifer Recharge Areas. 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. C. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.03, Additional Criteria Applicable to Major New Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment Systems and Major Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Wastewater Treatment Systems, 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 existing and future community development and population demands within the Sweetwater Ranch PUD and to meet current standards for fire flow and storage capacity. 1 +] FINDING: (1) Necessity or rejiulatory / technological compliance, 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. (2) To the extent feasible, wastewater and water treatment facilities shall be consolidated with existing facilities within the area. It has been determined that consolidation with other existing treatment and supply systems in the area is not feasible, practical or desired (by the Applicant or the operators of other systems) at this time. NWCCOG (operating as a referral agency and with regard to the Regional 208 Plan) has provided comment regarding consolidation and has attached the following conditions to their endorsement, in lieu of consolidation: 1. The onsite system would be abandoned and Sweetwater Ranch would connect to Two Rivers Metro District if the District makes service available; 2. The onsite system would be designed for greater nutrient and BOD as specified by Eagle County, and; 3. Operation and maintenance will be provided by a certified operator. 13 10/18/2011 [ +] FINDING: (2) Consolidation of facilities. To the extent feasible, wastewater and water treatment facilities SHALL 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. See above comments regarding feasibility of consolidation, Eagle County Comprehensive Plan provisions regarding the potential use of the project site for service commercial uses, and the use of the systems to facilitate the orderly development of the proposed PUD. [ +] FINDING: (3) Proper utilization of existing 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 and development. • The overall PUD is of a scale, and the uses proposed are of a nature, as to ensure that the water and wastewater treatment system has been, or will be designed to accommodate the development within the financial and environmental capacity of the area. Simply, the system has been designed by Zancanella & Associates, Inc. specifically to handle the uses and loads proposed, given the site (soils and geotechnical) conditions. • • As long as the design and operation of the system adheres to the recommendations of both CGS (regarding high ground water potential) and NWCCOG (regarding nutrient loading and BOD levels), a positive finding can be made. [ + / -] FINDING: (4) Financial and environmental capacity, 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 and development. D. Special Use Permit Waiver: In accordance with Chapter II, Article 3, Section 3.310.I.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 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. Proposed Conditions. 14 10/18/2011 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. Prior to or concurrent with any building, electrical, grading or other, miscellaneous permit application related to the tank project, all comments and recommendations set forth in the following referral responses shall be incorporated into the design of the water and wastewater treatment systems, or be otherwise adequately addressed as evidenced by written documentation from the applicant, inclusive of revised plan documents: i. Eagle County Environmental Engineering Department correspondence dated August 18, 2011; ii. State of Colorado Geological Survey correspondence dated July 18, 2011; iii. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments correspondence dated April 4, 2011. 3. A dust suppression plan be prepared and submitted with the grading permit application. 4. The Applicant shall submit a monitoring plan to be approved by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department prior to or concurrent with the final design of any ISDS system. The primary purpose of monitoring on site will be to establish (verify) seasonal groundwater levels. A secondary purpose of an approved monitoring plan will be to coordinate ongoing water quality monitoring with the Eagle County Environmental Health Department. Such long -tern water quality monitoring plan shall be submitted prior to or concurrent with TCO for any new building tying into the water system. In addition, water throughput and wastewater treatment flows will be monitored by the Applicant, the results of which shall be reported (annually) to the Eagle County Environmental Health Department. 5. The Applicant shall incorporate additional water conservation techniques and methods into any Water Conservation Plan adopted for the subdivision. Measures .such as "low -flow" fixtures and site specific limits on total irrigated area shall also be incorporated into protective covenants and the PUD Guide for the subdivision. 6. The Applicant shall prepare a "Hazardous Substance Management Plan" for each commercial land use in the development to be given to the Property Owners Association or other entity or party responsible for maintaining the subject properties. Each site specific hazardous substance management plan would detail the type of hazardous substance(s) kept within that commercial space, where the substances are stored, how they are stored and in what quantities, what actions are taken in the event of a spill and what waste materials are generated and they are disposed. The Applicant will be required to provide written evidence /documentation to Eagle County, prior to TCO of any new buildings using the ISDS, that the Plan has been registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); or that the EPA will not require registration of said Plan. The Property Owners Association or other responsible party will assure the Plan is updated annually and submitted to the local fire response agency for their information and use. The Plan will be made available to the public upon request. 7. The Applicant shall coordinate final water treatment and supply system design with the Gypsum Fire Protection District. DISCUSSION: 15 10/18/2011 Mr. Hunn presented a PowerPoint slide show with details about the request. He provided an overview and some history. In 2006, the owner came through for the PUD process for the first time. This represented the first amendment to the PUD. Chairman Stavney asked if there was any potable water on site. Mr. Isom stated that there was a well system. Mr. Hunn stated that lot one was the ski lake, lot two was a large lot surrounding the lake and lot three was an open space tract. The applicants were asking for a major water and wastewater system to provide 14 EQRs. This would accommodate commercial uses on lot 2C and 2B. Lot 2D was the existing residential s o d g a primary lot. Commissioner Runyon asked questions about the various lots. Mr. Isom explained the tributaries related to the wells. Mr. Hunn showed the well and septic plan. Mr. Runyon wondered about the buildings. Mr. Isom explained that the 75 -foot setbacks were provided on his drawings. Mr. Hunn presented the thirty -two 1041 permit criteria. Staff went through each criterion and provided feedback. Staff found that in all of the 32 criteria there were positive findings. Issues were only related to design parameters. There were issues with soils and ground water on the site. There must be separation between the leech fields and ground water. The applicant would create xeriscape landscaping and low flow water systems. Chairman Stavney asked about the storage around the lake. Mr. Isom stated that the lake system was a CDOT project to mine materials for the overpass. Mr. Tom Zancanella stated that the lake was considered a well, not a storage facility. Mr. Hunn continued with water conservation methods that would be incorporated. Mr. Isom stated that they thought the word "grading" should be taken out of condition number 2, and did not object to any of the other conditions. They believed that number 3 was a bit redundant. Condition 4 anticipated the possibility of hazardous materials being stored and would be addressed. He also did not feel that number 5 needed to be added to the PUD guide. Mr. Hunn reviewed each condition. Chairman Stavney reiterated that staff recommended eliminate "protective covenants and" in condition 5, replacing it with "incorporating into the PUD for the subdivision ". Mr. Hunn concurred. Mr. Isom stated that the PUD guide would become the protective covenants. They did not object to wording about low flow and water conservation in the PUD guide. Commissioner Runyon agreed that everything should be detailed in the PUD guide. Ray Merry spoke about the conditions and the fact that they were written such that in the future it would make it easier to manage the requirements. It was a communication mechanism. The other component was relative to commercial units utilizing on -site sewage systems and EPA requirements. Chairman Stavney asked whether the project could be hooked up to Town of Gypsum public sewer systems. Mr. Merry stated that the requirement would still exist for public safety. He stated that Red Sky Ranch and the Adams Mountain Country Club had two commercial uses and required sophisticated wastewater treatment. There were very few commercial related waste water systems. Commissioner Runyon stated that approving this 1041 permit did not guarantee that the next file would be approved as well. He wondered if hazardous materials so close to the water table and river gave rise to additional concerns. He hoped the county was appropriately addressing the concerns. Mr. Merry stated that the approach was to think through the possibilities. Surface water runoff would go into the lake before the river. The design would provide levels of protection. They considered buoyancy issues, advanced levels of treatment for the wastewater system to reduce contaminants, and talked about a water quality - monitoring plan. The water quality monitoring plan comments could be incorporated into the finish product. Mr. Isom stated that they had oversized all of the containment chambers. He stated that the Gypsum Fire Department was satisfied with the solutions. Mr. Merry was more concerned with the environmental aspects. Mike Young, owner spoke about the need for a gas station, but the concern was critical to keep the water clear. Mr. Isom stated that there should be an addition of "when there will be hazardous substances on site" then the condition would apply. 16 10/18/2011 Chairman Stavney stated that if the first site developed were residential it would not trigger all of the requirements. He suggested starting condition 6 in this manner. Mr. Merry commented that rules affect local land use. This recognizes the potential threats that can be posed. Chairman Stavney spoke about ISDS systems versus hooking up to other wastewater treatment facilities. Mr. Isom stated that in the future, if a mainline system were available, they would tap into it. Mr. Merry stated that this was not a septic system. This was an advanced level of treatment, allowing the county to be as thoughtful of and less impactful to the environment. On -site systems may be the wave of the future. Commissioner Runyon wanted to be sure that Mr. Merry was comfortable with the project. Mr. Merry stated that it was not up to him. His objective was not to make it onerous or expensive for Mr. Young. He recommended waiting to approve the 1041 until the PUD was approved or denied. He felt that there might be things that become known during the PUD application process that create additional concerns. Chairman Stavney stated that they would review the PUD file. PDA -3118 Sweetwater Ranch Scot Hunn, Planning Department Greg Schroeder, Engineering Department Steve Isom, Applicant Representative Mike Young, Applicant ACTION: The purpose of this Planned Unit Development Amendment is to add certain commercial uses, inclusive of gas station, convenience store, restaurant; contractor storage and/or mini - storage uses; maintaining existing open space, recreational (ski lake) and residential uses within the PUD. LOCATION: Sweetwater Ranch Subdivision, Dotsero area FILE NO. /PROCESS: PDA -3118, Sweetwater Ranch PUD Amendment PROJECT NAME: Sweetwater Ranch Planned Unit Development LOCATION: Dotsero OWNER: Dotsero Station at Sweetwater Ranch, LLC APPLICANT: Same REPRESENTATIVE: Steve Isom STAFF PLANNER: Scot Hunn STAFF ENGINEER: Greg Schroeder 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant requests review of an amendment to the Sweetwater Ranch Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of adding certain commercial uses inclusive of a convenience store and gas station, restaurant and retail spaces, and storage. As well, the Applicant proposes to further subdivide certain lots on the subject property and to assign future potential uses to lots based on market conditions. The project consists of three primary land use components: service commercial, open space /recreation and residential uses. The following is proposed: • Two (2) Residential Dwelling Units on a previously entitled and platted "Primary- Secondary" lot (Lot 2D) • Existing Ski Lake Improvements including storage and residence on Lots 1 and 2A (unchanged uses); 17 10/18/2011 lake); Lot 2 (primary residential and future commercial), and; Lot 3 (open space). However, at that time, the Applicant was encouraged to postpone development of any specific commercial uses, as Eagle County had just initiated a master planning process for the Dotsero Area. A final plat was approved, creating the three lots. The existing (ratified) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for Eagle County shows this area of Dotsero as "Outlying Service Commercial ". The new Dotsero Community Master Plan (not yet adopted) includes a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and associated narrative sections depicting and describing where and how future development should occur. The subject site is currently identified within the "Outlying Service Commercial" land use designation on the Future Land Use Map; that designation is expected to remain, given any new sub -area master plan adopted for the area. C. CHRONOLOGY 2000: Grading Permit (MI -11476 and BP- 12731) issued for construction of the lake. 2006: Combined Sketch/Preliminary Plan for PUD approved for Sweetwater Ranch (ZC -00082 and PDSP- 00024) 2011: Submittal for PUD Amendment, 1041 and Final Plat to subdivide Lot 2. D. SITE DATA: Surrouuding Land :S /°Zoni ..x - North: I -70 ROW `R'....... %�;" South: BLM East: Vacant `R' West: Union Pacific Railroad `R' Existing ''Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) ,Proposed Zoning. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Current De lopment: Sweetwater Ranch Ski Lake Man -made ski lake and associated building improvements (storage and apartment/caretaker 4Fd Site Conditions: unit); parking for private ski club owner /members and; previously disturbed areas associated with previous gravel mine operations Total Land Area Acre 42 acres Square fcet F R: 1,818,194 sq. ft. Total Open paee Acres 25.6 acres* P 62% The ECLUR's recommend that Usable Open Spy e : Acres; 25.6 acres = 62% Percentage: 25% of the total land area he set aside as useable open space Water; Well (Permit No. ) and ;� ?"'bi N /A. Private augmentation plan ewer ` Public N /A. 'Private: ISDS r Access: ` U.S. Highway 6 *Note: Approximately 8 acres of Lot 2D is within the 100 -year floodplain, cannot be developed and, therefore, is "counted" within the overall open space total. However, this area is not proposed to be platted as open space at this time. E. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION: The Eagle County Planning Commission met twice, once on September 7, 2011 and again on September 20, 2011, to consider the amendment request. During its regularly scheduled meeting on September 20 the Planning Commissioners took action to recommend approval of the request, with conditions, and with the following comments: 19 10/18/2011 Commissioner Heicher, chairman: • Questioned the length and overall design of the proposed berming on Lot 2B, stating that without undulation and "breaks" in the berms, they would not meet the intent of the Regulations; • Suggested that berms be redesigned, with fence placed on ski lake side of berm; • Questioned proposed neon signage, stating that any such signs should be limited in size and location; • Suggested that the project should be evaluated against the standards of the Sustainable Community Index, and; • Agreed with Commissioner Cunningham regarding encouraging the Applicant to dedicate vacant land located south of the Eagle River as open space, suggesting that the parcel is land - locked and could likely not be put to residential uses. Commissioner Hammond, vice - chairman: • Stated general support for the project, along with concern with regard to housing mitigation, suggesting that requirements under the Housing Guidelines should not be waived; • Questioned the adequacy of proposed parking plan for Lot 2B; • Expressed concern regarding the "unknown" nature of certain aspects of the PUD, specifically the multiple potential uses proposed for Lot 2C, and; • Concurred with Commissioner Carpenter's recommendation that building height on Lot 2C be limited to 25'. Commissioner Brock: • Expressed general support for the project, as well as the proposed berming and fence details, as proposed, based safety and privacy needs of the Applicant. Commissioner Carpenter: • Expressed general support for the project, but questioned 35' building height requested for Lot 2C, expressing general concern with regard to the proximity Lot 2C to I -70, and; • Suggested that building heights for storage uses be maintained at 25'. Commissioner Snowden: • Agreed, generally, that berm and fence details should be revised on the Landscape Plan to ensure berm and fencing is broken -up; • Suggested the Applicant add a provision within the PUD Guide requiring future architectural design intent for Lot 2C to match the standards established for Lot 2B; • Questioned the visibility of 64 sq. ft. business center signage from 1 -70; • Questioned the adequacy of design of the Individual Septic Disposal System (ISDS) with regard to "future use" car wash shown on the plans, and; • Suggested adding standards for fencing details on Lot 2C. Commissioner Cunningham: • Expressed general support for the project, but also concern regarding the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) proposed for Lot 2C; • Suggested that residential uses on Lot 2D come back to the Planning Commission for site specific review, similar to the intent with Lot 2C, and; • Questioned whether vacant land owned by the Applicant on the south side of the Eagle River (but not included within the PUD) should be dedicated as open space and brought into the PUD. F. REFERRAL RESPONSES: Referral copies of this application were sent to nineteen (19) agencies for review on July 1, 2011. The following section references the comments of all agencies that submitted an official referral response to Eagle County prior to the date of this writing: 20 10/18/2011 Eagle County Engineering Department — Please refer to attached referral response letter dated August 18, 2011. • See condition(s): 2 Eagle County Housing Department — Please refer to attached referral response letter dated August 10, 2011, with regard to housing mitigation and potential land dedication to meet the requirements of the Housing Guidelines. • See condition(s): 2 ECO Trails — Please refer to attached referral response letters dated July 21, 2011, and August 29, 2011, with regard to the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan, the subject property and proposed trail and easement alignments. • See condition(s): 2 State of Colorado Geological Survey — Please refer to attached referral response letter dated July 18, 2011, with regard to geologic, soils and groundwater conditions existing on the site. • See condition(s): 2 State of Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) — Please refer to the attached email correspondence dated July 6, 2011, with regard to CDOT's review of the Applicant's traffic study and the conditional access permit issued for the property. • See condition(s): 3 Town of Gypsum — Please refer to the attached letter dated July 21, 2011, with regard to commercial development in unincorporated Eagle County. Additional Referral Agencies - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no written response received as of this writing: • Eagle County: Environmental Health, Assessor's Office; Attorney's Office; Road and Bridge; Eagle County Wildfire Mitigation Specialist • Colorado State: Division of Water Resources; Division of Wildlife; Health Department; Water Conservation Board • Federal: Bureau of Land Management • Service Districts: Gypsum Fire Protection District; Two Rivers Metropolitan District • Other: Dotsero Mobile Home Park; NWCCOG* Note: NWCCOG provided comments with regard to the companion 1041 application's compliance with the regional 208 Plan. 2. STAFF REPORT A. NECESSARY FINDINGS: • PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5 -240 F.3.m — Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD; Section Purpose: No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be pennitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of section 24- 67- 104(1)(e) Colorado Revised Statutes that; 21 10/18/2011 (1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development; (2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment does not effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or the public interest; (3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. Standards: Section 5- 240.F.3.e., Standards; Section 5- 280.B.3.e Standards and Section 5- 230.D Standards is used to evaluate a Sketch & Preliminary Plan for PUD (with subdivision) application. All standards that would be met at a Preliminary Plan level must addressed by the application materials. It must therefore be determined, based on submitted evidence, whether applicable standards have been met at this stage. If the information supplied is found to be sufficiently vague or if it is doubtful that the proposal would be able to meet a specific Standard, a negative finding must be made for that Standard. 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (2)] — The uses that may be developed in the PUD shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3 -300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule" or Table 3 -320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule"; for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5 -240 F.3 f, Variations Authorized. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS X DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Permitted in Underlying .:. Normally Permitted As: Nature of variation Proposed Uses Zoning Y No By ht ZS LR Mixed -Use: (Commercial, X Variations for allowed uses. Residential, Recreation) The property was zoned Resource prior to 2006 when the County approved a zone change to PUD. The PUD allowed for residential, open space recreation and uses associated with the ski lake. Therefore, `underlying' zoning, is PUD, which at this time does not permit (by right, or by special or limited review) 22 10/18/2011 commercial uses such as retail, contractor and mini- storage, restaurant and gas station. Therefore, such uses are being applied for pursuant to Section 5 -240 F.3.f., Variations Authorized as part of this application for Preliminary Plan for PUD. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (3)] — The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3 -340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5 -240 F.3.f., 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Intent of PUD/Use of PUD Zoning: _ Yes Necessary for integration of mixed uses; Yes To allow for greater variety in the type, design, and layout of buildings; To promote a more efficient land use pattern including an opportunity for public transportation Yes and for safe, efficient, compact street and utility networks that lower development and maintenance costs and conserve energy; _ Yes To increase open space; _ Yes The property is constrained - use of conventional standards limits quality design; _ Yes To increase compatibility with neighboring developments; _ Yes Other- to minimize site disturbance PUD Zoning PUD zoning is in place and the Applicant proposes to amend the PUD to allow for certain commercial, service and light- industrial /storage uses. Therefore, the proposed amendment is being applied for in this instance to specifically allow for a greater mix of commercial, service, residential and recreational uses associated with the development of the subject property. PUD Intent The intent of this PUD proposal is to provide additional uses, and to promote greater efficiencies in land use patterns by locating service commercial uses (gas station and convenience store) near existing interstate interchanges, state highway frontage and existing residential neighborhoods. Land Use Pattern The proposed PUD locates higher intensity uses such as service and retail commercial as well as gas station facilities along State Highway 6. Such uses are located in close proximity to a proposed CDOT parking facility at the east I -70 interchange in Dotsero. Constrained Design Without the use of PUD zoning the potential for development on the subject property would be somewhat constrained. The PUD Guide (as approved in 2006, and as proposed with this amendment) contains certain variations to underlying standards, including: Floor Area Ratio (FAR), and; total impervious cover. Following review by the Planning Commission, the Applicant has revised the submittal to propose no variations in side and rear yard setbacks (now proposed to match minimum standards of the ECLUR's @ 12.5'). As well, the Applicant has reduced the proposed Floor Area Ratios (FAR) in the PUD Guide since starting the review process with the Planning Commission. Originally, the Applicant proposed 100% FAR for Lots 23 10/18/2011 2B and 2C. Acting on a recommendation from staff, this percentage was reduced to fifty percent (50 %). Such FAR would have allowed approximately 58,327 sq. ft. of floor area on Lot 2B (currently planned for between 12,000 and 17,000 sq. ft.), and 61,333 sq. ft. of floor area on Lot 2C. For comparison, the Commercial General Zone District allows for 60% FAR, while Industrial Zone District allows 50 %. Based on more recent discussions with staff and the Planning Commission, the Applicant has revised the FAR downward once more: • Lot 2B: 20% FAR = 23,331 sq. ft. (116,654 sq. ft. lot x .20 FAR) • Lot 2C: 35% FAR = 41,301 sq. ft. (118,004 sq. ft. lot x .35 FAR) Staff suggests such ratios are more appropriate for the site, in light of the concepts being proposed, site - specific development constraints and future land use designations prescribed by Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the area. STANDARD: Variations Authorized [Section 5- 240.F.3.f. - provides that in order for a variation to be granted, it must be found that the granting of the variation is necessary for the purpose to be achieved, and that the Sketch Plan for PUD achieves one or more of the following purposes: EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS PUD Achievement(s):.� Yes Obtains (applicant's) desired design qualities *; Yes Avoids environmental resources and natural resources * *; Yes Provides incentives for water augmentation; Yes Provides incentives for trails; Yes Provides incentives for affordable housing; No Provides incentives for public facilities. Note: * Several uses proposed are not permitted under the previous zoning designation (Resource) or the existing PUD zoning approved in 2006. Therefore, the Applicant is effectively requesting "variations authorized" during this amendment process (which essentially is a Preliminary Plan submittal). Such variations, specifically to allow for a certain mix of uses including service commercial and retail - oriented uses, and storage are identified as potentially appropriate under the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and may create desired design qualities by permitting "the integration of mixed uses ", pursuant to Section 5- 240.F.3.f. ** The Applicant has generally designed the project to avoid any development on, over or within existing wetlands or floodplain areas on the subject property. The proposed amendment does not alter previously approved uses on Lots 1 (ski lake), Lot 2D (Primary- Secondary residential) and 3 (Open Space). Proposed Dimensional Limitation l CLUB Justification for Variation ' - Requirement Front 50' (or building 2 5 '/5 0' N/A envelope) Rear 12 12.5' or %2 ht of N/A tallest building Side 12' 12.5' or '/z ht of N/A tallest building 24 10/18/2011 Proposed Dimensional Limitation ECLUR Justtficat�on for 'Variation Requiretnent Stream 75' or 100 year 75' or 100 year Pre - existing access road located within 75' setback on south side of floodplain floodplain Lot 1 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 1 -> O Proposed Uses g z, v s c s Z cry z„ " Z '.T. Yes Nty gYos No Primary - Secondary 3 /D.U. 3 X Residential Retail, Service 1/250 s.£ 1/250 s.f. Commercial and (NLFA)* (NLFA)* X X X X Office Restaurant 1/ four seats 1/ four seats X X X X Recreation X X (1) Per the ECLURs, one (1) "van accessible parking space shall be provided for every five (5) accessible parking spaces, or fraction thereof." The Applicant has provided details on the site plan for Lot 2B demonstrating conformance with the minimum requirements for handicap /van accessible parking spaces per the ECLURs. (2) Per the ECLURs, one (1) off - street loading berth shall be provided for commercial buildings with a gross floor area "Up to 10,000 sq. ft. "; two (2) off - street loading berths shall be provided for commercial buildings "Greater than 10,000 sq. ft." The plans submitted for commercial development on Lot 2B depict dedicated off - street loading area for the convenience store and restaurant, in accordance with the ECLUR's. (3) The proposed plans for commercial and residential units meet the required parking standards. The proposal makes no specific provision for "shared parking Note * NLFA — Net Leasable Floor Areas include only those areas that are designed to be leased to a tenant and occupied for commercial or office purposes, exclusive of any area dedicated to foyers, 25 10/18/2011 bathrooms, stairways, circulation corridors and mechanical areas and storage areas used solely by tenants on the site. STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (5)] — Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Type of ° g y Development: g X Commercial:. .o w ... Residential o ani a oy y Mixed Use a o �, a. g 1.4 o 2 o. d o S 1, as ai c 8 a a v3 Era a O a v� Exceeds ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR Requirements X X X 2 X X X X X X X Does Not Satisfy ECLUR Xs Requirements Is Not Applicable (1) Plans generally depict the types and locations of proposed `living cover' — as re- vegetation materials and methods as well as permanent landscape treatments. As the plans are further developed and prior to any submittal of a building permit for any new use (gas station, convenience store or other commercial and/or residential structure), the Applicant will be required to submit detailed plans and specifications regarding the location, installation and irrigation details demonstrating conformance with ECLUR standards. (2) Plans submitted generally specify the use of some native and/or compatible plant species. Likewise, the plans have been revised to include more Xeriscape plant spec (3) Plans submitted generally depict tree and shrub sizes to meet or exceed the minimum standards of the ECLURs. (4) The plans meet the requirements of the ECLUR's. (5) The plans propose earthen berms along the south and west sides of Lot 2B to screen the gas station and convenience store from the water ski lake. The berm shown on the south side of the gas station exceeds 220' in length; maximum allowed length is 150' before a FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact) is required. The Planning Commission recommended that the berms and associated fencing be revised to create a more natural, `undulating' appearance. • See condition(s): 6 26 10/18/2011 STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (6)] — The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, unless, as provided in Section 4 -340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Development (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. Comprehensive Sign Plan Provided? X Yes No The sign plan included within the PUD Control Document (PUD Guide) includes details of proposed locations, sizes (dimensioned), materials, color schemes; lighting and installation specifications should be provided along with any sign pen it application. Overall, the sign plan is in conformance with the County's sign code regulations. STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (7)] — The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the (Sketch) 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS , a Excess ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR, Requiremeepts x' x x X X Not Applicable/No `- I Requirements. Does,: Not Satisfy ECLUR x s Rea utreements Deviation/VIS Requested � . � No In proximity to schools, police & tire protection, & emergency medical services* X Yes X No (1) Potable water for the project is provided by an existing well (Dotsero Well No. 1). The Applicant has provided evidence demonstrating that, in addition to Well No. 1, a Water Supply Contract for additional water (augmentation) has been granted; similarly, the Applicant has applied to the District Court, Water Division No. 5, for an additional well (Dotsero Station Well No. 2) to serve the project and to eventually replace Well No. 1. (2) Sewage disposal for the project is proposed to be via Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS). Such systems will need to be Engineer designed to meet advanced standards due to proximity of proposed leach fields to floodplain and ground water tables on the subject site. (3) The applicant has not provided evidence of solid waste disposal (service) for the project. (4) Road networks proposed within the PUD are generally acceptable and provide adequate circulation within and through the development. However, the 25' access easement for Lots 2C and 2D will require addition approval (new easement) from CDOT (access drive crosses CDOT property and is 27 10/18/2011 currently located outside of the easement) or the Applicant will be required to construct a road platform within property boundaries prior to obtaining building permits for Lots 2C and /or 2D. Note: The project is in proximity to Gypsum Fire Protection District Station No. 13, in Dotsero. This station is used primarily for training purposes, but is manned part time. However, the project site is not generally located in proximity to emergency medical, police or school services. See Condition(s): 2, 3, 4 & 7 STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5- 240.F.3.e (8)] — The improvement standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvement 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 and from off - street parking areas. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Safe, Efficient Internal Emergency Principal .. Access Pathways Vehicles - Access Pts , , Snow storage Exceeds ECLUR Requirements X Satisfies ECLUR Requirements X' X X X Does " Not Satisfy', ECLUR Requirement Not Applicable/No ECLUR Requirement Deviation/'VIS Requested 28 10/18/2011 (1) See proposed Eagle County Engineering Department memorandum, dated August 18, 2011. See Condition(s): 2 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS i Potential Coi Surrounding Land Uses / Zoning',ripattbrltty Issues North: 1-70 R.O.W. R' X South: Federal Lands `RP' X East: Vacant `R' X West: Union Pacific RR `R' X STANDARD: Consistency with Comprehensive 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. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS g a FLUM ... ti Designation u , .... Vs Exceeds Recommendations Incorporates Majority of X X X X` X X X X Recommendations Does not Satisfy Majority of X Recommendations Not Applicable X Below are the Comprehensive Plan Policies, as well recommended strategies to improve the application's conformance with the stated policy: 29 10/18/2011 (1) Development • "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to preserve the natural beauty and environmental integrity of Eagle County". The proposed development has been designed to preclude development in unsuitable areas of the site such as wetlands and floodplain areas. Within those areas of the site that are developable, the applicant has presented a land plan that generally locates the most intense uses (gas station, restaurant, retail and storage) on the north side of the property on lands previously disturbed by industrial activity (mining and fill) and closest to Highway 6. The Applicant intends to maintain previously approved and platted open space totaling approximately 62% of the overall 42 acre site. Open space uses include passive and active (recreational) uses including the ski lake and limited fishing access to the Eagle River. The subject site has been previously disturbed due to mining and fill operations. However, improvements made — to landscaping and protection of river and riparian areas - since the current owner purchased the property and created the water ski lake are indicative of the opportunities apparent with additional development on this highly visible site. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Further minimizing paved areas by seeking design variations from Eagle County Land Use Regulation design standards for road widths, parking and loading standards and committing to use permeable pavement materials, where possible; • Integrating "Distributed Stormwater Management" strategies into the layout and design of the PUD as well as individual buildings to improve overall performance of drainage and stormwater discharge systems while committing to a higher level of environmental protection; • Incorporating provisions within the PUD Guide for alternative energy production (solar arrays, etc); • Introducing building orientation guidelines within the PUD Guide for residential uses to maximize solar access. • "Work to identify and preserve quality of life characteristics like outstanding recreational facilities, open space, clean air and water, uncrowded roads, quiet neighborhoods, unique cultural events and quality services". The proposed development concept is generally consistent with goals associated with preserving the existing quality of life characteristics of the surrounding vicinity. Specifically, the plans strive to provide generally low impact commercial and service uses commensurate with the `Outlying Service Commercial' Future Land Use designation in the Dotsero area. Although the proposed development is projected to impact local roads by introducing approximately 2,852 additional vehicle trips per day to the area (mostly attributed to the gas station and convenience store), the proposed commercial retail and service uses may provide an opportunity for local residents in the Dotsero area to reduce overall vehicle trips for certain service, commercial and employment needs. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Integrate an on -site solar "farm" or array to ensure a minimum percentage of energy needs are met on -site; • Integrate an on -site recycling program for the PUD. • "Incorporate population and job growth data compiled by the State Demographer into development decisions and long range planning objectives" 30 10/18/2011 The Applicant has provided cursory information and opinion regarding the need for the project relative to local demographic, interstate travel and market trends; while asked by staff to provide a market and needs analysis during file sufficiency review, the Applicant has elected not to provide detailed studies or analysis at this time. The draft Dotsero Area Community Plan (Land Use Goal 2a) specifically calls for applicants to "demonstrate that development proposals address an existing demand and /or provide a service or amenity that is not currently met in the area ", and; to "utilize current market studies and economic trend analysis to determine the feasibility of land use proposals ". Therefore, staff suggests a detailed needs analysis and market study may be required to better understand such things as future demand for commercial and industrial space in the area and to justify the overall amount and type of commercial uses proposed. • "Promote compact, mixed -use development within or adjacent to existing community centers" The proposed project is designed as a multiple -use development. The property is identified within the Dotsero Area Community Plan as being potentially appropriate for service commercial; residential uses have already been approved. Therefore, the site could be considered a "multiple -use" development. Although the project is located in proximity to a community center, the site does not generally lend itself to typical "mixed -use" development design or layout. • "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to improve social equity': Although the project presents several potentially positive social attributes such as potential job creation and the provision of community- oriented service uses, the Applicant has not proposed a mitigation plan sufficient to meet the minimum requirements of the Eagle County Housing Guidelines at the time of writing. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Provide a qualified housing mitigation plan presenting public benefit to Eagle County; • Include provisions for "affordable commercial" space within the PUD. Similar to proposed affordable and resident occupied housing, the applicant may gain credits for meeting the Eagle County Affordable and Resident Housing requirements by introducing affordable, deed restricted and/or resident occupied commercial space within the development to attract local buyers and entrepreneurs. • "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to maintain a healthy economy: The applicant has provided a brief financial overview (statement) of the projected fiscal impacts of the development. However, little (detailed) analysis has been provided showing the need for the proposed amounts, types and sizes of commercial uses. Likewise, while the Applicant did provide some information related to the impacts on county services, no information or analysis was provided regarding the impact on jobs to housing ratios. Even for a project of this size, such analyses are necessary to understand the potential impacts of the project on the local economy as well as understanding the overall need for the proposed uses. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Complete detailed commercial needs analysis and market study, tied to the most current demographic and regional jobs to housing data, prior to any action to approve the proposed amendment. 31 10/18/2011 • "Intersperse parks and properly scaled public spaces within and throughout areas of higher - density development". The PUD includes both public and private spaces that should not be considered parks, per se, but which will provide open areas for travelers and future residents to use and enjoy. As well, the private ski lake provides active recreation to club members. • "Consistently apply and enforce Eagle County Land Use Regulation development standards': The Applicant proposes several variations to development standards. Overall, the PUD Guide maintains the intent of the ECLUR's. In particular, the Applicant has addressed specific areas related to parking standards, landscape standards, as well as proposed lighting and signage standards. Nevertheless, staff has suggested certain revisions to the PUD Guide. • "Analyze development applications for conformance to the County's Future Land Use Map ". The Eagle County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies the subject property as being within the "Outlying Service Commercial" area of Dotsero. Although the Dotsero Area Community Plan is not yet adopted, the draft Plan (Land Use Policy LU1a) states: "Land uses should serve residents, commuters, sightseers and recreational users in the Dotsero planning area as a priority." • "Continue to allow variations from underlying zoning standards to be obtained through a Planned Unit Development but require clustering within the PUD to the benefit of the surrounding community" The proposal concentrates (clusters) development within limited portions of the site. Approximately 62% of the site is preserved as open space. • "Require new commercial development to provide workforce housing or to provide land for workforce housing': Except for the potential to construct an on -site managers unit or nighttime security quarters, the Applicant has stated a preference to not provide on -site local resident housing to offset jobs that will be created as a result of proposed commercial uses. Rather, the application points to existing housing stock in nearby developments (Two Rivers Village and Stratton Flats) as adequate to address any housing demand create by the development. Staff has consistently advised the Applicant since the initial "completeness" review of the application that a detailed housing mitigation plan will be required. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Present a qualified housing mitigation plan or strategy addressing the requirements and flexible public benefit provisions of the Eagle County Local Resident Housing Guidelines. • "Design and locate development to minimize and / or mitigate identified impacts" The project has been designed to accommodate certain commercial and residential uses within those portions of the subject property that are outside the 100 -year floodplain, floodways and wetland areas. However, the application shows evidence of potential conflicts between proposed development (including underground septic and gas storage tanks) and ground water. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: 32 10/18/2011 • Ensure all septic and gas storage tanks and related improvements are specifically designed and installed to avoid impacts to or from high ground water. (2) Economic Resources • "Ensure that commercial / retail development occurs in locations that are compatible with surrounding uses" The project is designed, in part, to provide service commercial uses for the local community. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Perform detailed needs and market analyses to enhance the project's long -term viability. • "Consider the impact of each second home development on the jobs to housing balance. The proposal is not intended to be a second home development. • "Develop the services and businesses that will benefit a growing senior population" The project does not specifically address this Comprehensive Plan goal. • "Encourage retirement housing as part of mixed -use developments in existing towns and unincorporated communities': The draft Dotsero Area Community Plan does not identify the Dotsero area as being appropriate for retirement housing. • "Select sites for retirement housing that are suitable in regards to local support services, emergency services and transportation ". See above comments. • `Apply Workforce Housing Guidelines and require commercial developers to mitigate their project's impact on the jobs to housing balance of the area" See above comments. • "Limit the expansion of commercial zoning in unincorporated Eagle County to that necessary to serve the needs of the immediate local population" The proposed commercial uses are intended to serve the needs of the immediate local population as well as those traveling on the I -70 and U.S. Highway 6 corridors. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Perform detailed needs and market analyses to ensure the project serves the needs of the immediate local population as a priority, while ensuring the project is viable regionally. • "Allow the development of new service commercial and industrial uses in suitable locations provided such uses are properly buffered from surrounding properties': 33 10/18/2011 The project includes new service commercial and light - industrial uses in close proximity to the community core and major transportation corridors. Due to topography and other natural or man -made barriers, the subject site is buffered from surrounding properties. • "Encourage but limit commercial development in residential neighborhoods to local businesses that serve the basic needs of nearby residents" The proposed commercial and service commercial uses are limited in relation to residential uses on the property and in context to the surrounding Dotsero area, and are proposed to serve the needs of nearby residents and travelers. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Perform detailed needs and market analyses to ensure the project serves the needs of the immediate local population as a priority, while ensuring the project is viable regionally. • Include provisions for "affordable commercial" space within the PUD. Similar to proposed affordable and resident occupied housing, the applicant may gain credits for meeting the Eagle County Affordable and Resident Housing requirements by introducing affordable, deed restricted and /or resident occupied commercial space within the development to attract local buyers and entrepreneurs. • "Encourage live -work arrangements within community centers by promoting compact mixed -use development, pedestrian scaled retail areas and intercommunity public transportation" The project does not include any provision for live -work arrangements or uses; however such uses may be appropriate and viable on the site. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Study options and appropriateness of allowing live -work arrangements; • Revising the land plan and PUD Guide to include provisions for "affordable commercial" space. Similar to proposed affordable and resident occupied housing, the applicant may gain credits for meeting the Eagle County Affordable Housing and Resident Housing requirements by introducing commercial and/or live -work space within the development that is deed restricted to attract local buyers and entrepreneurs. (3) Housing • "Affordable workforce housing should be located near job centers". The subject property is generally not located within or near the County's existing job centers. In addition, the Draft Dotsero Area Community Plan (Land Use Goal la) specifically advises that land uses in Dotsero should "serve residents, commuters, sightseers and recreational users in the Dotsero area as a priority" and to "Promote other specialty businesses and light industrial uses of a nature, scale and design appropriate to the Dotsero Area." That same land use goal "discourages" the creation of new workforce housing "that is not directly linked to jobs in the Gypsum/Dotsero area ". The proposed uses add to the potential for the project to meet the above stated (draft) goals of the area community plan; specifically by adding business, and creating employment opportunities to local residents. However, the project's impact on (or ability to mitigate) jobs -to- housing ratios should be addressed by the Applicant prior to any action to approved the requested amendment. 34 10/18/2011 Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Provide a qualified housing mitigation plan presenting public benefit to Eagle County. • "Provide incentives to developers who develop workforce housing ". The Applicant is not proposing to develop local resident (workforce) housing at this time. Incentives include additional, significant entitlements (up- zoning) of the property to produce increased property values, increased revenue generation and therefore higher rates of return on investment. • "Continue to require a Local Resident Housing Plan for all new development applications as required by the Local Resident Housing Guidelines" See above comments. • "Mandate that attainable workforce housing be considered part of the required infrastructure for all new development applications." See above comments. • "Continue to utilize Inclusionary Housing and Employee Housing Linkage as defined in the Local Resident Housing Guidelines in the review of development applications': See above comments. (4) Infrastructure and Services • "Locate new development in areas served by adequate roads and paths, and within reasonable distance to a mass transit hub" The subject property is served by adequate public roads however mass transit services in the area are currently limited or curtailed due to low ridership in the Dotsero area. • "Assure that road and trail improvements are completed concurrent to the completion of new development ". CDOT has approved an access permit for the property with the condition that a right turn lane be added on Highway 6. ECO Trails has commented on the proposal and is recommending that the Applicant participate in and contribute towards construction of a trail segment running the length of the property and along or within CDOT Right -Of -Way. If this PUD proposal is ultimately approved, at Final Plat a Subdivision Improvements Agreement and collateral will be required to ensure that all necessary infrastructure improvements are installed correctly in a timely manner. • "Ensure appropriate transportation considerations are included in subdivision improvement agreements" This is the primary purpose of subdivision improvement agreements. • "Work with mass transit providers to expand service ". 35 10/18/2011 The creation of new jobs on the subject site may precipitate the need for mass transit in the future. • "Encourage transit oriented development': Not applicable. • "Promote pedestrian malls and provide adequate parking on the perimeter of shopping areas to encourage walking ". Not applicable. • "Encourage a network of walking trails within towns and community centers that connect typical community destinations (bus stops, schools, businesses, parks, playgrounds, etc.) with seamless pedestrian infrastructure" See above comments. • "Within towns and community centers, retrofit public roads with parallel pedestrian routes and marked street crossings" The regional trail will most likely be located along the front property line for this development; ECO Trails is recommending that in the event CDOT will grant an easement for construction, the Applicant be required to contribute to the cost of designing and constructing the trail segment. • "Design streetscapes to include pedestrian friendly amenities like window spaces, store fronts, landscaping, plaza areas, marked cross walks and traffic speed controls': Not applicable. • "Promote the use of Planned Unit Developments to increase flexibility in planning and design" This is an approved PUD where some degree of flexibility has already been applied. The proposed amendments, inclusive of new or expanded uses `By Right' are generally compatible with existing uses and the PUD Guide allows some degree of flexibility in future uses based on market conditions. • "Promote live -work arrangements where appropriate" The project currently does not include any provision for the development of live -work residential and commercial real estate offerings. This is one area of the plan that may warrant further consideration upon completing detailed needs and market analyses. • "Encourage an appropriate mix of retail and office locations in new neighborhoods to reduce reliance on personal cars" The proposed commercial uses introduce a mix of restaurant, convenience store, retail and service commercial /light - industrial uses to the Dotsero area. • "Evaluate all development proposals using Eagle County Land Use Regulation Road Standards" The proposal complies with the ECLUR roadway standards, with the exception of the access road on the north side of the ski lake which may need to be rebuilt in certain sections to meet the County's standards and to remove the road from CDOT property. • "Assure adequate access for emergency responders" 36 10/18/2011 The County has received a referral response from the Gypsum Fire Protection District. • "Require demonstration that all new developments will be adequately served by emergency and community services" See above comment. • "Encourage new commercial development to provide childcare as an amenity': The number of residential dwelling units may not warrant such services or amenities. • "Use House Bill 1041 powers to fully evaluate proposals for new water and sewer lines and proposals for new or expanded water or sewer treatment plants" A 1041 permit for Major New Domestic Water and Wastewater facilities has been submitted concurrent with this PUD Amendment. • "Require the installation of water and sewer service infrastructure concurrent to development': This proposal entails installation of new infrastructure (ISDS) concurrent with building permits for proposed commercial and residential uses; an existing well provides potable water and the Applicant has filed for augmentation and another well on the site for future uses. • "Require detailed transportation analysis at the preliminary approval': The Applicant has provided traffic analysis. The proposal has been reviewed by CDOT (see attached referral response email and copy of revocable Access Permit). • "Provide a diversity of housing choices and prices throughout the entire county". The project includes a rima - seconda lot (previously approved); an a apartment exists on Lot 1 (ski lake) rY rY (p Y p ( ake) and the commercial building on Lot 2B is currently planned with a manager's /night security unit. (5) Water Resources • "Require developers to demonstrate that a legal and physical water supply exists for their development". The Applicant has submitted evidence of physical water for the property. In addition, the Applicant has provided a copy of a contract for augmentation for future uses. • "Use a standard of extended drought conditions to determine the viability of the physical water supply proposed for a new development': See above comments. • "Utilize current water quantity information in all development applications and planning reviews" The Applicant has provided evidence of testing (pump tests) on site demonstrating adequate water quality. • "Protect source water areas and reduce the potential for source water contamination" During site construction, Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be required for storm water management, erosion control and dust suppression. The Applicant will be required to implement "advanced" wastewater treatment system design — to be designed by a Registered Professional engineer. 37 10/18/2011 Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Investigate integration of a "Distributed Stormwater Management" strategy into more areas /aspects within the design of the project. • "Use pervious surfaces instead of impermeable surfaces when possible ". The application does not preclude the use of pervious surfaces (permeable pavements, for example). Such materials and construction techniques should be incorporated where practical within the project in addition to other efforts to reduce the amount of storm water runoff from the site to highest extent possible. • "Ensure that development does not adversely affect the recharge of groundwater resources ". Overall, the project preserves a significant amount of the total property acreage in open space. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Provide ground water monitoring stations within the PUD boundaries. • Incorporate the use of permeable paving and "hard - scape" throughout the development. • "Encourage the use of water efficient landscape materials and landscape irrigation methods ". The Applicant has provided a revised Landscape Plan for Lot 2B. Generally, the plan adheres to water efficient design and use of materials. • "Evaluate efficiencies of non potable water usage for golf courses and other landscaped areas ". The application states that potable water from the ski lake, or water from wells (both the same source) will be used to irrigate. • "Implement water reuse and recycling systems". The application does not address water reuse at this time. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Integrate water reuse and recycling components into the building, landscape and irrigation plans. • "Support the implementation of voluntary and mandatory water conservation measures". No such strategies or measures are proposed at this time. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Incorporate specific limits and /or controls regarding the maximum areas per lot to be irrigated within PUD Guide documents and/or within protective covenants. • "Require the demonstration of the availability of real (wet) water supply at Sketch Plan stage of development application ". See comments above. • "Participate in water quality monitoring efforts". No water quality monitoring has been proposed for this site. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: 38 10/18/2011 • Partner with local educational and not - for -profit organizations to provide ongoing water quality and riparian restoration monitoring. • "Follow the recommendations of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Regional 208 Water Quality Management Plan" The use of Best Management Practices for on -site storm water management will be required. NWCCOG provided comment with regard to the companion 1041 application. • "Follow the recommendations of the Eagle River Watershed Plan" The application has been reviewed against the recommendations of the Plan. • "Promote the appropriate best management practices for the control of storm water runoff and work to identify and treat other non point sources of pollution" Best Management Practices will be required with regard to storm water management and grading activities. See above comments related to integration of "Distributed Stormwater Management" Strategies. • "Require an effective water quality management plan be implemented with new development': Plans do show details regarding drainage and detention of water on -site, including a drainage /catchment basin and separation chamber system design for the convenience store and gas station parking lot. The State will require certain management plans and monitoring. • "Adhere to established Land Use Regulations and implement appropriate water quality best management practices (BMP's) on all development proposals': Best Management Practices will be required with all final construction documents and plans. • "Require buffer areas of natural vegetation between new developments and created or natural drainage ways' The development currently has a natural buffer between previously approved improvements on the south side of the PUD and the Eagle River corridor. Lot 3 (previously platted as open space) along the Eagle River provides protection to the riparian areas. With the exception of limited fishing access by members of the ski club and the owner of Lot 2D, the Eagle River will be protected from development or other activity, the plan seeks to avoid disturbance of wetlands and natural drainage ways. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Revise the PUD Guide document to specifically list allowed uses and management /maintenance standards for Lot 3 open space; at a minimum, add language to the PUD Guide establishing the intent of the open space in context to stated County goals and policies. • "Minimize the extent of impervious surfaces within new developments and encourage the use of pervious paving systems". Following discussion with staff and the Planning Commission, the Applicant has revised the PUD Guide (attached) to list site cover (all building and impervious materials) for each lot. Staff suggests that the proposed maximum coverage percentages are appropriate for each lot. (6) Wildlife Resources 39 10/18/2011 • "Support projects intent on removing or minimizing human -made barriers to wildlife migration': The applicant has provided mapping showing potential wildlife habitat and movement corridors. Of greatest concern by staff is the proximity of the project to Osprey foraging and nesting habitat along the Eagle and Colorado rivers. The Colorado State Division of Wildlife did not respond to the County's request for referral comments on this application. • "Develop and implement projects that enhance existing wildlife habitat': The project generally avoids development impacts to high value habitats contained within riparian areas. In addition, the applicant proposes to maintain open space designation on Lot 3; with no further development proposed along the southern portion of the PUD. • "Prevent contaminants from entering local streams and rivers': The use of Best Management Practices for on -site storm water management will be required. In addition, the Applicant proposes to use a 1,000 gallon "interceptor" within the parking lot design for the convenience store and gas station to capture, separate /treat stormwater runoff before discharge to the ski lake. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Integrate additional "Distributed Stormwater Management Strategies" into the design of the project, where bio- swales, permeable pavement, and rain gardens are used to filter run -off. • "Direct development away from areas of critical wildlife habitat': There are no identified `critical' areas of wildlife habitat; generally, existing and proposed development is located away from mapped raptor and big game habitats, foraging and nesting areas, and movement corridors. • "Implement and enforce referral recommendations of local wildlife officials" No referral response was received from CDOW. • "Consider the impacts of each new development proposal in context with other existing or potential developments" The application evaluates existing conditions within or surrounding the subject property, including previous mining/gravel extraction, interstate travel corridors, the potential development of an additional CDOT parking area directly across from the subject property, as well as other barriers and impacts to wildlife habitat and movement corridors that have occurred in the immediate vicinity. • "Encourage high - density development within existing community centers': The project does not propose `high- density' development; the project is not located in an identified community center. • "Minimize site disturbance during construction" The site is already disturbed as a result of historic mining, fill and grading activities. A construction management plan, dust suppression plan and other Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be required as part of any development approvals. 40 10/18/2011 • `If ornamental landscape plants are used, encourage species that are unpalatable to wildlife': Ornamental tree species are proposed as part of the conceptual landscape plan for the development. This issue should be addressed in sufficient detail with the submittal of any building permit. • "Require wildlife proof refuse containers for all new and existing subdivisions ". The Applicant will be required to adhere to the ECLUR standards for wildlife refuse containment. (7) Sensitive Lands • "Require the evaluation of all geologic hazards and constraints as related to new land use". The attached Colorado Geological Survey response dated July 18, 2011, references geologic reports, soils and percolation testing reports by the Applicant indicating that the subject property is potentially encumbered by subsurface conditions (high ground water due to ski lake levels) that may warrant specific construction, slab design, surface drainage and septic system design considerations. Accordingly, the CGS response suggests that "Prior to preparation of construction plans and issuance of a building permit, site - specific groundwater levels at proposed building locations should be verified through a groundwater monitoring program consisting of regular observations made throughout the season(s) when the lake is filled." All recommendations of the Colorado Geological Survey have been made conditions of approval. • "Minimize alteration of the natural landform by new development improvements to the greatest extent possible' See previous comments regarding site disturbance. • "Avoid the aggravation or acceleration of existing potential hazards through land form or vegetation modification" All CGS recommendations encouraging further site - specific investigations and studies will be made conditions of approval. • Continue to refer all development plans to the Colorado Geological Survey for comment". The application was referred to CGS. • "Require the incorporation of all recommendations of CGS and other hazards experts into development plans". All CGS recommendations encouraging further site - specific investigations and studies will be made conditions of approval. • "Consider the cumulative impact of incremental development on landscapes that include visual, historic, and archeological value during the decision making process': The project is not located in an area of particular visual, historic and archeological value, with the exception of the adjacent property to the east (lava flow). • "Determine the features that make a particular open space parcel valuable given its intended use as open space and ensure that these features are preserved". 41 10/18/2011 The proposed development plan calls for preservation and /or creation of open space totaling approximately 62% of the overall 42 acre site. Such open space is proposed to include passive and active (recreational) uses including a private ski lake, as well as river, riparian and wetland areas included within the open space tract (Lot 3). In addition, the majority of Lot 2D is encumbered by floodplain and is proposed to be "open" for grazing of domestic livestock (horses) in the future; those portions of Lot 2D within the floodplain "count" toward open space but are not proposed to be platted as such. (8) Environmental Quality • "Assure access to multi -modal transportation options for all residents, second home owners and visitors' The project is not generally located in close proximity to existing multi -modal transportation options (ECO Transit bus service has been curtailed in the Dotsero Area due to low ridership). However, future improvements in the area which the Applicant can contribute towards include construction of a regional multi -use recreational trail which will further the County's goal to assure access to multi -modal transportation options. • "Provide affordable housing opportunities in close proximity to job centers to reduce personal vehicle trips' See previous comments regarding affordable housing. • "Focus development within towns and communities to reduce the need for daily commuting'. The project is located within general proximity (3/4 mi) to an existing community center (Two Rivers Area). The proposed commercial and retail uses could generate new employment opportunities for area residents, which may reduce overall daily commuting for those who otherwise may commute to job centers up- valley (Vail, Avon, Edwards, Eagle and Gypsum). • "Set limits for construction site disturbance, require temporary revegetation of stockpiles and permanent revegetation of all disturbed areas once final grades have been established': Site - specific grading and erosion control plans will be required with any building permit application. The Applicant should be required to re -grade and otherwise "clean -up" existing berms, dirt and stone stockpiles existing on site. • "Require periodic watering and track -out control devices at all construction site access points': Site specific grading and erosion control plans will be required with the PUD Preliminary Plan and Final Plat processes. • "Utilize motion detectors to minimize the duration of security lighting': The draft PUD Guide establishes general standards for exterior lighting. However, detailed lighting specifications will be required with any building permit. • "Ensure that noise levels are safe for residents, visitors and employees" No uses are proposed that would generate unsafe noise levels. • "Include an analysis of potential noise when making the finding of compatibility with surrounding uses for all new development proposals" No uses are proposed that would generate unsafe or incompatible noise levels. 42 10/18/2011 • "Promote transit - oriented development, and encourage plans that minimize reliance on personal motorized vehicles': The subject site does not generally lend itself to transit - oriented development patterns. • "Design communities in a way that reduces fossil fuel consumption for heating or cooling". See previous comments regarding energy efficiency and on -site alternative energy production. In addition, all new construction is required to meet EcoBuild and Sustainable Communities Index (SCI) regulations. Staff encourages the Applicant to work with "sustainable design" experts, including Eagle County ECO Build Coordinator, to integrate specific design and construction strategies within the land plan, site design and building designs during design development of site specific development permit applications. • Implement energy efficiency guidelines. See previous comment regarding the design of the project. • Implement energy saving techniques. See previous comment regarding the design of the project. Future Land Use Map Designation The Eagle County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area of Dotsero as "Outlying Service Commercial ". According to the Plan: "It is the intent of this Comprehensive Plan that outcomes regarding zone changes and site - specific• land use proposals should reflect the written policies of this Plan, the Comprehensive Future Land Use Map and the goals and objectives set forth within Area Community Plans, where applicable." — Eagle County Comprehensive Plan, pg. 169 With regard to future land use designations, the Plan is explicit: "Furthermore, it is not anticipated that zone districts will necessarily be changed to correspond to land use designations indicated by the FLUM, as there are many other factors contemplated in the zone change process. Rather, the designations are intended to depict where various land uses and densities may be appropriate." - Eagle County Comprehensive Plan, pg. 169 Outlying Service Commercial The Plan narrative highlights several salient considerations regarding this proposal and the subject site which is located in general proximity (approximately 3,500 feet) from a mapped community center: `In keeping with the policies of this Comprehensive Plan, service commercial functions should be located within the Towns, Community Centers and Rural Centers of Eagle County. However, certain uses that are locally or regionally important may not always be compatible with community center uses. The Outlying Service Commercial designation includes lands which already contain or could be developed to contain a variety of low impact commercial or industrial services. Domestic water and sewer service is generally not available in these areas. Potential uses include warehousing (but not big box retail), lumber yards, brick yards, utility service facilities, contractor service yards, recreation sites, recreation vehicle parks, and other low- impact, non-polluting, industrial, manufacturing or research facilities. 43 10/18/2011 At present, suitable areas for outlying service commercial are located east of the Dotsero Community Center and east of the County Landfill in the Ute Creek/Wolcott vicinity. Lands east of Dotsero are prominently visible to travelers on Interstate 70, and as such specific design and development standards must be implemented to include a requirement for appropriate architecture and the screening of outdoor storage areas." Staff suggests that the proposal is in general (and specific, in certain instances) conformance with the stated intent of the Outlying Service Commercial designation. Further, the Applicant has provided site specific, detailed architectural renderings for improvements proposed for Lot 2B (convenience store, gas station) which demonstrate an intent to effectively `raise the bar' architecturally and visually for the Dotsero Area. However, no conceptual drawings have been presented for potential development schemes on other lots (Lots 2C and 2D) and the PUD Guide (as amended) provides only general direction regarding materials and colors of future improvements (buildings). The Planning Commission has added a suggested condition of approval to address this issue. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Exceeds Recommendation X Satisfies Recommendation X X X X X X Incorporates Majority of Recommendations Does Not Incorporate Recommendations Not Applicable (1) To the extent the Applicant revises the PUD to limit fencing heights (except for screening of storage uses on Lot 2C) to five (5') feet, the project meets the master plan policy of cooperating with other agencies (CDOW general recommendations to limit fencing to five feet). (2) The project provides open space and recreation land within the PUD well in excess of the minimum recommended and required open space pursuant to the ECLURs. (3) The Plan defines Unique Land Forms as "Lands having unique or outstanding characteristics." As well, definitions provided by the State Historical Commission provide that "unique geological or ecological systems that have historic or prehistoric associations and that have not been disturbed...natural features having a historic or aesthetic and visually pleasing characteristic." Large portions of the subject property have been previously disturbed by industrial activities. However, to the extent the project clusters development on the site, and specifically avoids development of valuable riparian areas, the policy is met. (4) This site is highly visible from I -70. Certain improvements have been made to the property (ski lake and associated structures and landscape planting) which have generally improved the aesthetic quality of the site and the surrounding area. The Open Space Plan prioritizes Visual Quality. While appropriate levels of detail have been provided on plans for the gas station and convenience store, additional details regarding architecture, materials, lighting, landscaping, screening and signage related to any future mini - storage and /or contractor storage on Lot 2C should be provided within the PUD Guide. 44 10/18/2011 (5) To the extent the project avoids development on slopes exceeding 40 percent and generally focuses development within and around existing community (centers) in order to enhance open space values in the outlying areas (of Eagle County), the policy is met. (6) To the extent the project avoids development within the floodplain and avoids construction within areas of high ground water, the policy is met. There are no other identified natural hazards on the subject property. To the extent the Applicant completes the LOMR permit from FEMA, and to the extent recommendations of the CGS are adequately addressed with any building permit submittal, the policy is met. EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Water Quantity ! Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Exceeds Recommendation Incorporates Majority X Xz X3 X' of Recommendations Does Not Incorporate Recommendations Not Applicable X (1) Water Quantity The Applicant proposes specific water conservation methods such as the use of non - potable irrigation water and low flow fixtures in any new development. As well, Zancanella & Associates will provide monthly monitoring of the water system. Commitment by the Applicant to ongoing conservation practices on this property will be critical to reducing the overall amount of domestic water demand for the project and, therefore, protection of local groundwater supplies. Strategies to improve conformance with this master plan goal include: • Reducing the overall amount of irrigated lawn area for Lot 2B and specify within the PUD that drought tolerant, native grasses and forbes are to be used in all landscapes; • Revising the PUD Guide to embellish the section on Landscaping — to specifically declare an intent (xeriscape, drought tolerant, native) for the site; to set forth suggested lists of plant species, and; to establish general landscape planting, installation and maintenance standards within the PUI) Guide (and placing a limit on the amount of irrigated sod) for Lot 2D. (2) Water Quality The Applicant proposes to install advanced - design septic system (ISDS) within the PUD and a 1000 gallon `interceptor' on Lot 2B designed "to contain any unavoidable gasoline or oil spills" as well as sediment and other runoff from the convenience store and gas station. Overall, the plans for detention/separator improvements on Lot 2B, in addition to the use of the ski lake for tertiary filtration or treatment of storm water runoff, effectively equates to "Distributed Stormwater Management" techniques to treat runoff from Lot 2B — distributing treatment throughout the site and using natural processes and features to improve water quality. Further, the Applicant will be required to utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) during and after construction of the project. Strategies to improve or enhance the project's conformance to the stated Comprehensive Plan policy include: • Reducing the total amount of impervious surfaces on Lots 2B and 2C; • Integration of additional "Distributed Stormwater Management Strategies" throughout the property, but especially on Lot 2B, such as bio- retention designs (swales and natural filtration) within the Landscape Plan. 45 10/18/2011 (3) Wildlife To the extent the development does not hinder, harm or preclude river and riparian habitat restoration projects, the project meets the objectives of the Plan. Measures should be taken to minimize the impact of direct access points to the Eagle River. (4) Recreation See above comment regarding direct access to the Eagle River. (5) Land Use The development follows the recommendation of the Plan by limiting building activity to those areas outside the floodplain while protecting riparian areas. Open space and recreational uses are listed as "appropriate" uses in proximity to rivers and streams. Revising the PUD Guide to specify allowed uses and details regarding the maintenance /protection of the open space in future will increase conformance and better meet the objectives of the Plan. 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 residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. Phasing Plan Provided? X Yes No EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS The Applicant has provided conceptual phasing information. 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 Comprehensive Plan. (b) Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right -of -ways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. (c) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (d) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed 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. 46 10/18/2011 (� Organ If common ope anization 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 o 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 P. Membership in the association or nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners UD in the PUJ with). X EXCEEDS MINIMUM MEETS MINIMNDARD STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY UM STANDARD OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Total subject Land Arda: - 42 acres square feet Reeerurnended 25% of Total. Land Area "as 10.5 ac. 457,291 380 square feet feet Usable open Space Additional Amount of Open Space 2 DU x 2.63 persons /1000 population = 5.26 new 05 ac. residents x 10 acres /1000 population 05 acres = = . Required Pei 1000 Persons = 2 square 10.055 acres Total ppesa space Re 4i Provided," i ded (per ECLU 25.6 acres prove Private and quasi - Public lawn areas near convenience Public, Quasi - Public or Private? Describe store; private ski lake and private p ublic river access Ski lake is reserved for members of Private; limited the ski club; access to Lot 3 is IeStrictions on Space: access Describe: restricted to owners of Lot 2D and members of the ski club. The overall amount of open space exceeds the requirements in the ECLURs. STANDARD: Natural Re source 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X M EETS MINIMUM STAND MEETS THE MAJORI OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS ,E 4 Exceeds ECLU Requirements Satisfies` ECLUR.12equirement X X' X X X > oes Not ',Satisfy ECLUR Re ui X Not Applieable/No ECT UR Requ !' 47 10/18/2011 (1) The comments set forth in the Colorado Geological Survey's response dated July 18, 2011must be adhered to prior to or concurrent with any building permit submittal. (2) Development of the site must comply with all applicable ECLUR wildfire regulations as well as any future recommendations of the Gypsum Protection District (the District did not respond to this referral). (3) The PUD Guide has been revised to address wood burning devices. OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARD(S) FOR PUD SKETCH/PRELIMINARY PLAN: The finding from the Eagle County Land Use Regulations is as follows: Pursuant to Section 5- 240.F.2.a. (15): 15. (a) Supporting data to justify any proposed commercial and industrial elements in an area not so zoned (e.g. needs and market analyses); See above comments regarding the Applicant's response to this requirement. (b) Proposed schedule of development phasing; The proposal includes general information regarding the Applicant's intent to phase the project. (c) Statement as to the impact of the proposed PUD upon the County school system; Although the Primary - Secondary lot was previously approved (PDSP- 00024), staff is unaware as to whether a fee -in -lieu amount was paid at the time of Final Plat application in 2006. (d) Statement of estimated demands for County services; The Applicant has not provided a statement of estimated demands on County services. (e) Statement of projected County tax revenue based upon the previous year's County tax levy and a schedule of projected receipts of that revenue; The Applicant has provided a general statement of sales tax revenues based on projected gasoline sale revenues. No statements regarding other tax revenues (property) have been provided. (f) Conceptual site plans, and conceptual architectural plans; A conceptual site plan, landscape plans, circulation plan, and architectural renderings have been provided for proposed improvements on lot 2B. At the time of building permit application for improvements on Lots 2C and 2D greater detail and typical renderings of site and architectural design, mass and bulk will be required. (g) Proposed method of fire protection. Including information demonstrating a legal, adequate water supply for fire fighting purposes; See above comments. 48 10/18/2011 (h) Employee housing plan. The Applicant has not submitted a housing plan acceptable to the Housing Director at the time of writing; however the Housing Director has provided an estimated payment -in -lieu amount to the Applicant and the Applicant and staff have discussed means to meet the minimum standard of the Guidelines. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 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 Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5- 280.B.3.e (1)] B The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and the FLUM of the Comprehensive Plan. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Please reference the Comprehensive Plan evaluation detailed above. STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5- 280.B.3.e (2)] B The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Development Standards. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS ' ' Article 4, Site Development Standards Conditions X Off - Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4 -1) X Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4 -2) X Sign Regulations (Division 4 -3) X Wildlife Protection (Section 4 -410) X' Geologic Hazards (Section 4 -420) 2 X Wildfire Protection (Section 4 -430) X Wood Burning Controls (Section 4 -440) 49 10/18/2011 47 � w � g_ . Article 4, Site Development Standards Conditions 4 5 .5 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) 2 X Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4 -630) 2 X Irrigation System Standards (Section 4 -640) X Drainage Standards (Section 4 -650) X Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4 -660) X Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4 -670) X Water Supply Standards (Section 4 -680) X Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4 -690) X Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4 -7) Applicable (1) Refer to previous comments regarding CGS referral response. (2) The Applicant will be required to comply with the State with regard to fuel storage (tank design, maintenance and monitoring) for the gas station; no information was provided relative to other potential storage uses (either on Lot 2B or Lot 2C). Therefore, the PUD Guide should be revised to address potential hazardous and non - hazardous storage and should specifically include a mechanism/process to ensure that any change in use on Lots 2B and 2C which include hazardous and non - hazardous materials storage is first approved by Eagle County. (3) Refer to the Engineering Department memorandum dated August 18, 2011 regarding internal access road. (4) Refer to referral response letter from ECO Trails dated July 21, 2011 and a follow -up memorandum dated August 28, 2011. 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 i nefficiencies 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 Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (2) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under -sized lines. 50 10/18/2011 (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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS The project is located such that it would not result in a `leapfrog' pattern of development and the site is already served certain utility /service lines. 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS No natural or human -made hazards have been identified at this level of review that would absolutely preclude successful development of the subject property as proposed if properly mitigated pursuant to the recommendations of the certain referral agencies (CGS, NWCOG and Eagle County Engineering). 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Please refer to the Compatibility discussion above. Additional controls and potential revisions to the site plans and PUD Guide may be necessary to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses and with applicable master plan goals and policies. Staff has been provided no evidence to suggest the proposal would preclude or adversely affect the development of the surrounding area in the future. C. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: Benefits: • The subject property is generally located in proximity to a community center and directly adjacent to a major local and regional transportation corridor. Overall, the project has been planned to take advantage of the opportunity to create commercial and service commercial uses close to 1 -70 and any future CDOT truck parking lot. • The project is generally compatible with existing open space and residential land uses in the immediate vicinity. • Additional development in this area of Eagle County may serve to enhance quality of life for existing residents; enhance visual resources along a major travel corridor, and; enhance job opportunities for local residents. 51 10/18/2011 • The project generally meets the Future Land Use Map by providing "low- impact" service commercial uses in the `Outlying Service Commercial' land use designated areas of Dotsero. • The project preserves significant amounts of usable recreation and conservation oriented open spaces. • The project creates the opportunity to secure regional trail easements and to partner with the Applicant to construct of a portion of the Eagle Valley Regional Trail system. • The project creates the opportunity to advance alternative energy production goals of Eagle County. Disadvantages: • Any additional development in the Dotsero area will produce additional traffic impacts on local highways and roadways. • Any additional development in the Dotsero area may incrementally degrade environmental integrity in this vicinity of Eagle County. • Development of this site, installation of gasoline storage tanks and the creation of on -site wastewater disposal systems (ISDS) will create more exposure to geologic hazards and natural resources (shallow groundwater) than what exists currently and may increase the potential to degrade surface and groundwater quality in the area. • Development of the site may create impacts (housing) that, if left unmitigated, may produce burden on the taxpayers of Eagle County. D. SUGGESTED REVISIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES: The following items have either not been addressed by the Applicant, were not discussed with the Planning Commission, or serve as additional (optional) revisions that could enhance the PUD and the PUD Guide document: • Incorporating provisions within the PUD Guide for alternative energy production (solar arrays). • Include provisions for "affordable commercial" space within the PUD. • Integrating "Distributed Stormwater Management" strategies into the layout and design of the PUD as well as individual buildings to improve overall performance of drainage and stormwater discharge systems while committing to a higher level of environmental protection. • Perform detailed needs and market analyses to ensure the project serves the needs of the immediate local population as a priority, while ensuring the project is viable regionally. • Integrate water reuse and recycling components into the building, landscape and irrigation plans. E. SUGGESTED FINDINGS: Staff suggests the application meets the following findings necessary for the approval of any PUD Amendment: (1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development; (2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment DOES NOT effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or the public interest; (3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. F. BOCC COMMISSION OPTIONS: 52 10/18/2011 i 1. Approve the [PDA -31181 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 • 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). 2. Deny the [PDA -31181 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 [PDA -31181 request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the [PDA -31181 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). G. SUGGESTED 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. Prior to or concurrent with the recording of any Final Plat, all comments and recommendations set forth in the following referral responses shall be incorporated into the design of the PUD or otherwise adequately addressed by the Applicant: i. Eagle County Engineering Department memorandum, dated August 18, 2011; ii. Eagle County Housing Department memorandum, dated August 10, 2011; iii. ECO Trails recommended condition dated September 21, 2011; iv. State of Colorado Geological Survey letter, dated July 18, 2011. 3. The Applicant shall adhere to all conditions set forth in the State of Colorado Department of Transportation conditional State Highway Access Permit No. 311003. 4. The Applicant shall coordinate any and all future design development (prior to building permit) for Lots 2C and 2D with the Gypsum Fire Protection District and other applicable emergency service districts for the purpose of ensuring all access roads provide safe, efficient access and that such roads /driveways are in conformance with applicable codes. 5. The Applicant shall revise the PUD Guide to add a provision stating that the general design and construction standards related to site design, building and parking area (solar) orientation; architectural intent; allowed materials and minimum material percentages, and; preferred color pallets for Lot 2C shall be consistent with design concepts established for Lot 2B. 6. The Applicant shall revise the Landscape Plan for Lot 2B to specifically indicate undulation of proposed berms (both horizontally and vertically) as well as proposed wood safety and privacy 53 10/18/2011 fencing, which should be broken -up (both horizontally and vertically) to move with the contours of berming; fencing on Lot 2B is to be located on the ski lake side of any berms constructed. 7. All septic and gas storage tanks and related improvement and installation details shall be designed by a Registered Professional Engineer to achieve an "advanced" avoid impacts to or from high ground water. 8. The Applicant shall prepare a "Hazardous Substance Management Plan" for each commercial land use in the development to be given to the Property Owners Association or other entity or party responsible for maintaining the subject properties. Each site specific hazardous substance management plan would detail the type of hazardous substance(s) kept within that commercial space, where the substances are stored, how they are stored and in what quantities, what actions are taken in the event of a spill and what waste materials are generated and they are disposed. The Applicant will be required to provide written evidence /documentation to Eagle County, prior to TCO of any new buildings using the ISDS, that the Plan has been registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); or that the EPA will not require registration of said Plan. The Property Owners Association or other responsible party will assure the Plan is updated annually and submitted to the local fire response agency for their information and use. The Plan will be made available to the public upon request. 9. The Applicant shall revise the PUD Guide Standards to limit building heights to 25' or any and all storage uses proposed on Lot 2C. 10. All lighting within the PUD shall be designed and installed to adhere to Dark Sky lighting principles. 11. Required Housing mitigation associated with current development proposals within the PUD shall not be waived. 12. The proposal shall be reviewed against the standards of the Sustainable Community Index and the PUD shall be amended accordingly and where practical, to increase the project's conformance with the County's Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. DISCUSSION: Mr. Isom provided an overview of the request. Mr. Young had initially requested inclusion into the Two Rivers Metropolitan District. The District indicated that they were not interested in this inclusion. They found that the water table was 1 foot below the ski lake. This meant that there would be 16.5 feet above the water table at the site of the possible future fuel station. They were also 8 feet above the 100 -year flood level. Mr. Hunn presented the PUD amendment file. He showed some photos and maps of the site. Commissioner Runyon wondered about the details related to the storage, mini - storage and warehouse expectations. Mr. Hunn explained that the Planning Commission was also concerned about this, and asked for an additional required level of review. Commissioner Runyon wondered why the applicant would list the specific use rather than leaving it general and having to change it in the future. Mr. Isom stated that they listed the uses they felt most likely would be needed. Commissioner Fisher wondered if people could pull into the convenience store and take their dog for a walk or a swim. Mr. Isom stated that there would be berming and fencing to mitigate this type of use. Mr. Hunn stated that almost 62% of the site was open space, which included the lake. Mr. Isom stated that the open space was designed for use by members of the Ski Lake and residential lot. He showed the future car wash location, berms, propane tank location, Commissioner Runyon wondered if the location would service the truck community. Mr. Isom stated that they preferred not to service semis. 54 10/18/2011 Mr. Young stated that CDOT had put in parking on the west side. He did not want a truck stop. Mr. Isom showed a potential future pedestrian access route over the interstate. Commissioner Fisher wondered why the applicant didn't want a truck stop. Mr. Young stated that he simply did not want to deal with this concept and was not interested in this type of facility. Mr. Isom stated that the site was not large enough to accommodate a truck stop. Commissioner Fisher was hoping that there would be services for the truck community during closures. Mr. Hunn explained some factors, which contributed to recommended conditions for approval. Many considerations had already been addressed. Conceptual and architectural plans were prepared. The employee - housing plan had been discussed. The Comprehensive Plan considerations identified the area as Outlying Service Commercial, which included low impact commercial, recreation, storage type facilities. He reviewed other Comprehensive Plan considerations. He showed the Future Land Use map, which identified the Outlying Service Commercial area. Commissioner Runyon stated that there was an area in the Two River's development for this type of convenience store concept. He wondered if this was the best place for this type of facility for the community. Mr. Hunn stated that the Planning Commission discussed this issue. There was an element within the situation that they could not control, which was the timing of either development. There was 20,000 square feet of commercial development previously approved for Two Rivers. Commissioner Runyon wondered if the board could put a time constraint or limit on the building window. Mr. Treu stated this could happen in the final plat stage. Mr. Isom stated that they would support having a convenience store on both sides. By 2020 there would be 30,000 cars going past this facility each day. Two Rivers has been talking about a truck stop, but the residents don't want that, nor did they want a convenience store. Commissioner Fisher stated that commercial development should be pushed into existing towns rather than allowing it in unincorporated areas of the county. Part of the argument for Two Rivers was to keep it small enough so that it wasn't another magnet for another town concept. The Town of Gypsum had a gas station along the interstate as well. Mr. Young stated that he bought the property in 1999 he always envisioned some sort of commercial development. He had always felt like the commercial development would be high quality, which would encourage people to stop. He did not think it would hurt the Gypsum station. Chairman Stavney wondered if Gypsum had discussed annexation with the owner. Mr. Isom stated that the owners hoped to stay unincorporated if possible. Chairman Stavney spoke about Dotsero and the imbalance of sales tax, the unsightliness of the trailer park, and the need for a municipality or entity to help clean up the area. He wondered if there was any willingness for the owner to charge a fee to customers for maintenance of the area. Mr. Isom and Mr. Young indicated that they had never thought about it. Mr. Isom stated that all the way up the Colorado River Road this would be the only facility. The people who spoke to the owners on the project had been very supportive. Chairman Stavney spoke about one of the objections to approving development in unincorporated areas of the county. Mr. Young stated that he was relying on the possibility that his upgraded development would encourage others to follow the standard. Commissioner Runyon stated that this was how Edwards became Edwards. He did not know where previous boards should have put their foot down and required it to become a town. He tried to change rules and regulations at the state level to deal with issues like Edwards. He was neutral on the project, but was quite concerned with the longer term and larger picture. Mr. Isom stated that in the entire area there were only 10 properties. There was no potential for large -scale developments. Chairman Stavney stated that it may not be town making, but would be place making. It was a crossroads and could be a significant entry point. This was a property that could potentially create some revenue. Mr. Young stated that he was willing to annex into Gypsum. Commissioner Fisher did not want to have an antagonistic relationship with Gypsum. Mr. Isom indicated that the Town of Gypsum would like to have some of the tax revenues, and had no objection to the use. 55 10/18/2011 Commissioner Fisher stated that the board's information was slightly different. The Town of Gypsum expressed concern about the difference in tax structures. With the formation of a special district and tax rates to support this, the tax differences could be reduced. Chairman Stavney read from the letter from the Town of Gypsum. He didn't believe that Dotsero belonged in Gypsum as they were not providing water or sewer. It would only be a protective move in order to gain the sales tax revenue. A special district would be a property tax, and a sales tax would be paid by the customers. Commissioner Runyon stated that a Local Improvement District could be funded by sales tax. Mr. Hunn continued with issues and opportunities. Mr. Young stated that this structure would create hundreds of jobs. Mr. Hunn stated that the housing component would need to be considered based on the expected jobs created. He reviewed the need, trail opportunities, groundwater protection and monitoring, riparian habitat protection, PUD guide and design standards opportunities, visual quality of the area and alternative - energy production strategies. The site was adjacent to a major transportation corridor. The request was in general conformance with the outlying service commercial definition within the comprehensive plan. The project was compatible with the existing open space residential and light industrial land uses. The project avoids the flood plain and preserves significant amounts of undevelopable lands as open space. The project provides employment opportunities. He summarized the project, impacts and concerns. Overall, staff believed there were more benefits than disadvantages. Mr. Isom provided some slides with landscaping details and progress about approvals already received. He provided information about recent daily and peak hour traffic. He indicated that the commercial property could be seen from the highway. Commissioner Fisher asked about people heading westbound and wondered if they visited the facility whether would there be increased traffic on the frontage roads and bridges. Mr. Isom stated that CDOT did not have concerns for degradation of the classification. Chairman Stavney spoke about the PUD guide and reference to architectural materials. Mr. Hunn reviewed the conditions. Chairman Stavney spoke about consistency. He would like to see a list of the 20 items in an Engineering Memorandum. Mr. Isom spoke about some of the conditions and stated that he agreed with them. In meeting with the Housing Department, it was agreed that the convenience store impact would be about $70,000.00. The value of the property had decreased, so this amount could be reduced. They still asked that the county commissioners wave the housing requirement. They did intend to have a manager's unit for security purposes. CDOT would only allow one access point. Chairman Stavney stated that condition 5 could be stricken. Mr. Hunn stated that condition 6 was part of the Planning Commission's wishes. Chairman Stavney wondered why this needed to be included in the PUD guide. Mr. Hunn stated that this covered the possibility that in the future someone else could come in to build the convenience store. Mr. Treu stated that the felt the landscape and berm plan should be included in this approval. Chairman Stavney wondered about approving a specific landscaping guide at the PUD level. Mr. Treu stated that the approval authority should be the board. Mr. Hunn stated that they would be required at building plan to address the berm and landscaping issues. The berm needed to be undulating and natural in appearance. Mr. Treu stated that there needed to be an opportunity to review the landscape plan. Mr. Isom spoke about condition 7 and the trigger being enacted when and if there are site - specific hazardous substances on site. He spoke about condition 8 and their request that the limit be 35 instead of 25. Commissioner Fisher spoke about the expanded commercial uses. Contractor yards gave her cause for concern. She was challenged with the visual aspects of this type of use. Mr. Isom indicated that this was a possibility and this type of use was needed in the county. Screening would be used. Commissioner Runyon wondered about limiting the building to two stories. Commissioner Fisher was concerned about a storage facility. Mr. Isom spoke about condition related to lighting. He preferred that the term "Dark Sky lighting principles" not be used. He felt their PUD guide adequately addresses the lighting issue. 56 10/18/2011 Mr. Hunn stated that the Planning Commission requested this condition. There was discussion about the definition and limitations of dark sky lighting. Mr. Isom spoke about the housing requirement and opposed condition 11. Chairman Stavney wondered about the specific requirements that should be detailed. Mr. Hunn stated that the condition related to the Sustainable Community Index meant that the applicant would meet with staff to ensure all that could be done towards this goal would be done. Chairman Stavney wondered when the Sustainability issues would be discussed. Mr. Isom stated that the open -ended PUD guided did not make sense. Commissioner Fisher wondered if this was a standard planning incorporation for PUDs. Mr. Isom listed costs associated with this development including housing, road impacts, bicycle path, emergency fees, and efficient building codes were not only expensive, but with a convenience store, it was impossible to comply with the efficient building codes. This was one reason they were asking for the waving of the housing requirements. He was worried about the ability to finance the property with all of the county fees. Commissioner Runyon wondered about the annual overall revenue projections. He stated that the overall revenues would be around 16 million dollars. Mr. Isom stated that there were substantial taxes on gasoline and the profit could be as low as 5 -7 %. Commissioner Runyon spoke about broadening the potential mitigation of the housing needs, including open space and other community benefits. They negotiated with Jill Klosterman from $338,000 down to $70,000. The open space was not public access. Chairman Stavney stated that the board had the ability to look at other benefits and make an exchange. The bike path would be paid for by the property owners and would not need to be funded by the ECO Trails. Commissioner Fisher stated that the housing component was not an issue at this time, but she expected as the economy improved this would change. At build -out there would likely be jobs at the facility for a minimum of 5 employees. Mr. Isom spoke about the county putting an 18 month moratorium on the fees associated with development. He believed this made a lot of sense. Commissioner Runyon disagreed that the fees were preventing building. Mr. Isom stated that to be able to build in today's market the fees could be onerous. He spoke about the estimated revenues and associated revenues to the county. Commissioner Runyon stated that with eastbound traffic this facility would be taking sales from other entities up the valley. He stated it would not represent a pure revenue gain to the county. Chairman Stavney stated that the point was whether it was the appropriate thing for that location. The board needed to make sure there were enough guidelines in place to ensure it was built right. He was not concerned about this moment in time in terms of housing. He did not think the location was appropriate for work force housing nor should the other benefits mitigate the fee. Commissioner Runyon believed it was a community benefit, and he encouraged a Local Improvement District (LID) for the benefit of the future maintenance needs. Mr. Treu indicated that a condition would be very difficult and complicated. He suggested a tabling to allow time to explore the options related to a LID. Commissioner Runyon believed that in the long term a LID was much more important than $70,000 in the housing. Mr. Young expressed concern for a lengthy tabling, as there were other players on hold. Mr. Isom stated that the problem with a LID was that there was no one in the community that could step up to the plate or agree to a payment of any kind, but they would agree to help implement it over a period of time. Mr. Hunn stated that the fee in lieu for housing would not be assessed until building permit anyway. Mr. Isom stated that there was strong benefit to this project. Chairman Stavney added that this LID would not come out of the owner's pocket; it would come out of the consumer's pocket. Commissioner Fisher stated that the $70,000.00 could be earmarked or held in escrow towards the Local Improvement District in lieu of housing. This amount could be the basis for earning some interest and take the place of Mr. Young's commitment to a shared investment in the future. Chairman Stavney was not opposed to an improvement district. Mr. Hunn stated that the PowerPoint was incorrect and that there were 12 proposed conditions listed in the staff report. Chairman Stavney stated that every one of his concerns related to the 1041 permit were addressed through the process of the discussion. There were conditions 1 - 7 that had some recommended changes. In conditions 2, it was requested that the word "tank project" would be substituted with "waste water and water ". In condition 3, it was noted that underground utilities didn't require a grading permit and a dust suppression plan would be required 57 10/18/2011 prior to any site disturbances. In condition 5, "protective covenants" would be stricken in the last sentence. In condition 6, it was recommended it begin with "when an approved commercial use will have hazardous substances then the applicant would prepare..." There were no additional conditions. Mr. Hunn stated that there were 2 motions. Motion No. 1 (Eagle County Permit Authority): Commissioner Runyon moved that the Eagle County Permit Authority APPROVE File No. 1041 3149 incorporating the following conditions 1 -7 as modified in the hearing. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Motion No. 2 (Eagle County Board of County Commissioners: Commissioner Runyon moved that the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners waive the requirements for special use, in accordance with Chapter II, Article 3, Section 3.310.1.2, Waiver Provision, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations permit. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Runyon stated that the applicant requested that condition 5 be stricken and the board agreed with that request. In condition 9, it was requested that the height be limited to 2 stories, not to exceed 35 feet. The real problem was condition 2, and the housing department memorandum and the fee of $70,000. He was willing to discuss this further. Mr. Isom stated that the item could be discussed further at final plat. Chairman Stavney agreed with the request. Commissioner Runyon encouraged the applicant to find a dollar value for the open space. He believed the open space was a community benefit even if there was no community access. Mr. Isom stated that in condition 2 they requested that the language be changed from "final plat" to "building permit ". Commissioner Stavney stated that number 8 on the 1041 was the same as condition 7 on this file, and the language needed to be amended so that they were the same. Commissioner Fisher believed it was important to maintain a good relationship with the town of Gypsum. She wanted it documented that they supported the proposal. She encouraged a broader discussion. There were other services that would be required and with those added services, there would be additional expenses that would need to covered. Mr. Isom believed this could be done prior to final plat. Chairman Stavney stated that the county had recently invested in properties in the area and didn't want the area to become another town but a nice place. Sherriff Hoy stated that in any new development there would be an increase in the requests for public safety assistance. There would be an additional burden on his office. Depending on the size there may need to be 1 or 2 more deputies in the area. Chairman Stavney stated that they could approve the file as discussed knowing that there would language in a resolution at a later date or table the file. Mr. Treu struggled with the housing issue. He suggested making the following revisions to condition 11: The housing mitigation plan or alternative plan for funding community benefits in the Dotsero area shall be approved by the county prior to final plat. Commissioner Runyon wanted to make sure staff had the appropriate direction. Mr. Treu stated that the only item being put off until the final plat was the landscaping plan. He believed that was something staff could handle. The board would also have the opportunity to review the housing mitigation at that time as well. Condition 12 should be stricken. Mr. Isom wondered if the applicant could build without a final plat. Lot 2 was a legal lot. Mr. Treu stated that applicant could not build a convenient store or gas station without getting a final plat approved. Mr. Treu quickly reviewed the changes to the conditions. He stated that the language in conditions 2 was changed from "building permit" to "final plat ". Condition 5 was deleted. In condition number 6 it would be added that "the applicant shall revise at building permit at the landscape plan ". The language in condition 9 was being changed to "2- stories, not to exceed 35 feet ". Condition 10, the word "adhere" would be removed. Conditions 11 would read as follows: The housing mitigation plan or alternative plan for funding community benefits in the Dotsero area shall be approved by the county prior to final plat. Condition 12 should be deleted. 58 10/18/2011 Commissioner Stavney opened and closed public comment, as there was none. Commissioner Runyon moved to approve the file with the conditions as presented. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion for further discussion. Chairman Stavney clarified that the housing mitigation was currently per lot. Mr. Treu stated the housing was based on the proposed gas station and convenient store. If they did the PIF, it would apply. This would be discussed at final plat. Mr. Hunn stated for the record that the staff memo and back up were forwarded to the Planning Commission. The vote was called. The vote was declared unanimous. Work Sessions (recorded) Capital Improvements Projects 2012 Tom Johnson, Public Works There being no further business before the.Beard,,the mee • . as adjourned unti j I ctober 25, 2011. imp Attest: �� %� 4 Ii Clerk to the Board Chai • t 59 10/18/2011