No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/20/12 PUBLIC HEARING March 20 2012 Present: Peter Runyon Chairman Jon Stavney Commissioner Sara Fisher Commissioner Keith Montag County Manager Bryan Treu County Attorney Kathy Scriver Deputy Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Consent Agenda Chairman Runyon stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of March 19, 2012 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative B. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle County Commissioner Meetings for February 7 and February 14, 2012 Teak Simonton, Clerk and Recorder C. Agreement between Eagle County and GMCO Corporation for 2012 Magnesium Chloride Project Gordon Adams, Road & Bridge D. Resolution 2012 -023 Concerning Appointments to the Basalt Regional Library District Board of Trustees Attorney's Office Representative E. Resolution 2012 -024 Concerning Appointments to the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority ECO Transit Representative F. Intergovernmental Agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Eagle Regarding the Town of Eagle /Eagle County Recycling Drop -off Center Ken Whitehead, Solid Waste and Recycling G. Resolution 2012 -025 Concerning Appointments to the Zoning Board of Adjustment Bob Narracci, Planning H. Resolution 2012 -026 Concerning Appointments to the Eagle County Planning Commission Bob Narracci, Planning I. Resolution 2012 -027 Concerning Appointments to the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission Bob Narracci, Planning J. Resolution 2012 -028 Concerning Appointments to the Building Board of Appeals Dan Stanek, Building K. Resolution 2012 -029 Excluding Private, Seasonal Recreational Residences in the Fulford Historical District from Certain County Road Engineering Requirements 1 03/20/2012 Eva Wilson, Engineering L. Resolution 2012 -030 Approving the Zone District Amendment for the White -Morris Conservation Subdivision from Resource Zoning to Agricultural Limited (Eagle County File No. ZS -3513) Sean Hanagan, Planning Department M. Resolution 2012 -031 Approving the Special Use Permit for the White -Morris Conservation Subdivision (Eagle County File No. ZS -3514) Sean Hanagan, Planning Department Commissioner Stavney highlighted Item D concerning appointments to the Basalt Regional Library District Board of Trustees. He explained that the boards help was much appreciated resolving the issues in the library district. Chairman Fisher believed it was a great experience. There were 22 applicants for 4 positions. She was incredibly impressed by the applicants. She hoped the Library District would get back on the right foot for future success. Commissioner Stavney spoke about Item K. He was pleased with the outcome. John Dunn expressed appreciation for the board's efforts on the matter. Chairman Fisher spoke about the new recycling drop off center in Eagle. The cardboard compactor would be useful. Commissioner Fisher moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A -M. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Runyon thanked his fellow commissioner for the job they did at the Library District. Citizen Input Chairman Runyon opened and closed citizen Input, as there was none. Chairman Fisher spoke about the decision by the Fair Board to replace Les Ohlhauser as the fair announcer. The livestock provider would now provide the rodeo announcer. Mr. Ohlhouser announced the Eagle County rodeo for the last 24 years. It was decided by the Fair Board that the change was worth making. She thanked and acknowledged Mr. Ohlhauser for the service he'd given to Eagle County and the fair and rodeo. Resolution 2012 -032 Authorizing a Continuation of an Interfund Loan to the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority in an Amount up to One Million Dollars and Providing for Repayment of Said Loan Jill Klosterman, Housing Ms. Klosterman spoke about the resolution. This was a request was for a continuation of the loan made from the general fund to the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority. The loan was for the purpose of paying for some unforeseen items during the renovation of Riverveiw Apartments. The extension would allow the Housing Authority to remain liquid through December 31, 2012. The Housing Department was paying 3% to the general fund for the use of the funds. Commissioner Stavney moved to approve the Resolution Authorizing a Continuation of an Interfund Loan to the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority in an Amount up to One Million Dollars and Providing for Repayment of Said Loan. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stavney moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re- convene as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority. 2 03/20/2012 Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Eagle County Liquor License Authority Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office Special Event Permit APPLICANT: Taste of Vail, Inc. REQUEST: Special Event Permit EVENT: Annual Taste of Vail Mountaintop Picnic DATE: Friday, April 6, 2012 REPRESENTATIVE: Angela Mueller LOCATION: Vail Mountain — Section 18, T 5 South, R 80, west of the 6"' principal meridian. 1600 feet west of the Eagle's Nest gondola STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver CONCERNS / ISSUES: None DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a permit for the annual Taste of Vail - Mountaintop picnic being held on Vail Mountain, April 6, 2012 from 8:00 am to 5:30 pm. The event will feature wine sampling from participating wineries and food prepared and served by a number of Vail Valley restaurants. Tickets are required and a professional security firm along with staff will monitor access to the venue. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, all necessary documents have been received, and all fees have been paid. 2. Staff has had no problems in the past with events held by the applicant. 3. Public notice has been given by the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises March 10, 2012, at least 10 days prior to the hearing. 4. There have been no protests filed with the Clerk and Recorder's Office. 5. The applicant has provided proof of server training and alcohol management plan. 6. Eagle County Sheriff's Office has been notified. DISCUSSION: Angela Mueller stated that the event boundary would be slightly different due to the lack of snow. They were expecting 50 wineries and 20 restaurants to participate. Commissioner Stavney moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for the Taste of Vail event being held on Vail Mountain, April 6, 2012, *8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. *The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event. 3 03/20/2012 APPLICANT: Eagle Valley Trout Unlimited REQUEST: Special Event Permit EVENT: Fly Fishing Film Tour - Fundraiser DATE: Friday, March 30, 2012 REPRESENTATIVE: Nick Rader LOCATION: Edwards Interfaith Chapel and Community Center — 32138 US Hwy 6 in Edwards STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver CONCERNS/ISSUES: None DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a permit for a fundraising event being held at the Edwards Interfaith Chapel and Community Center in Edwards on Friday, March 30, 2012 from 5:00 to 10:00 pm. The event will feature a Fly Fishing Film, dinner, drinks, and free fishing gear giveaways. Alcohol beverages will include wine and beer. The event will be open to all ages. Moe's BBQ will be catering the food. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, all necessary documents have been received, and all fees have been paid. 2. Staff has had no problems in the past with events held by the applicant. 3. Public notice has been given by the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises March 10, 2012, at least 10 days prior to the hearing. 4. There have been no protests filed with the Clerk and Recorder's Office. 5. The applicant has provided proof of server training and alcohol management plan. 6. Eagle County Sheriff's Office has been notified. DISCUSSION: Nick Rader stated that the event would be a small family friendly event. Commissioner Stavney moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for the Eagle Valley Trout Unlimited event being held at the Edwards Interfaith Chapel & Community Center in Edwards on March 30, 2012, *5:00 to 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. *The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event. Commissioner Fisher moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re- convene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 4 03/20/2012 Planning Files LUR -3398 Eagle County Land Use Vesting Regulation Amendments Bob Narracci, Planning NOTE: Tabled from 1/17/12 and 2/21/12 ACTION: Multiple amendments proposed with intent to provide greater clarity; to eliminate unnecessary regulation; to provide greater flexibility for the elected officials; and to bring Eagle County's Vesting Allowances into conformance with the minimum requirement of Colorado State Stature for PUD Preliminary Plans, Subdivision Preliminary Plans and Special Use Permits. LOCATION: Unincorporated Eagle County REFERENCE: Staff Report 2/21/12 RE: LUR - 3398 / Vesting Regulation Amendment Package Summary of BoCC Comments from Hearing No. 1 Following are comments provided by the Board of County Commissioners, as well as, pertinent public testimony from the February 21, 2012 hearing: Commissioner Fisher: Agrees with Dominic Mauriello, the Eagle County Planning Commission and the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission that the county's Sketch Plan procedures need to be revisited and amended to facilitate a straightforward, less expensive (for the applicant and county), and quicker process. Tab Bonidy: Would like to see five year vesting for PUD Preliminary Plans remain in place. Also suggests that the term `speculative in nature' be removed from the regulatory language pertaining to extensions of preliminary plans. Chairman Runyon: Agrees with Tab's second suggestion in that all development proposals are speculative in nature. Commissioner Fisher: Likewise concurs that by its very nature, all proposed development is based upon speculation. Commissioner Stavney: Homestake II was an example of speculation by Colorado Springs and Aurora. My notes actually state, " Homestake is an example of speculation". John Rosenfeld: Subdivision and PUD Preliminary Plans should be allowed at least five year vesting and will likely require five additional years of vesting given the economic conditions. Government should not add more process or restrictions on new development. After initial approval, free it up. The county should step aside. Ease the extension process to get people back to work. Default to market demand to define vesting periods. Commissioner Fisher: A time limitation for completing the Board of County Commissioner Resolutions following final determination by the Board should be included. 5 03/20/2012 No specific direction was provided to staff to amend the draft regulations. The Board wanted to take the time to more carefully read through the amendment package proposal and further determined that the county is not in a hurry to approve these regulation amendments. Application was continued to March 20, 2012; not time - specific. DISCUSSION: Mr. Narracci presented the request. The board heard the file on February 21, 2012 and requested more time to read what was being proposed. The amendment was a cleanup measure. At the direction of the board, staff was asked to review the vesting regulations and bringing them into compliance with state statute. The other piece the board suggested was the ability to grant variances to setbacks as part of a special use permit. The vesting timeframe was questioned at the last hearing. Chairman Runyon believed that having a time -frame was appropriate. He did not like the idea of having files hanging out there. He believed that developers should have a plan to go forward. A land use file should not be a speculative proposition. Commissioner Stavney agreed with Chairman Runyon's comments. He believed there were a lot of good housekeeping aspects of the amendments. Mr. Narracci explained the investing time -frame for phasing would prevent this from happening in the future. PUD or subdivision sketch plans received a 2 -year life. Upon approval of a PUD preliminary plan for a single -phase subdivision the vesting would be 3 years unless otherwise negotiated. Multi -phase development would be negotiated for subsequent phases. This was consistent with what the other towns and surrounding towns were doing. For a single -phase subdivision, from the date the resolution was approved, the person would have 3 years to submit a final plat and install 50% of the infrastructure associated with the phase. Dominic Mauriello expressed support for the clean-up efforts but believed there should be room for negotiation when it came to the vesting time - frame. He thought it was important to allow extra time if there were special circumstances. He believed the sketch plan process should allow a minimum of 3 years. He was comfortable with the direction of staff. Mr. Narracci spoke about the extinguishment of approvals reversion of former zoning. The Colorado River Ranch property was an example of this. Staff initiated a zone change to restore the zoning prior to the PUD approval. It was not a departure from what was being done it would just clarify the procedures. Mr. Morris presented some examples of rezoning. Mr. Narracci spoke about the language in a zone change application. The amendment would simplify the process by requiring an applicant to go through an evaluation process. He detailed the findings for a zone change. The regulations identified the specific areas of the comprehensive plan that they want the applicant to address. The idea was to give a bit more clarity to an applicant applying for a zone change. It would also give the board more flexibility. Mr. Morris explained the intent to be consistent with the language throughout the regulations. Mr. Narracci spoke about the language in PUD sketch plan. They added some language again to clarify and allow the board more flexibility when considering PUD sketch plans. He stated that the vesting clock begins upon the approval of the resolution. Mr. Morris stated that part of the object was to clarify the date upon which the 30 days to file a petition would start. Chairman Fisher believed a note should be added that the resolution should be presented to the board in a timely manner after a vote of approval. Mr. Narracci explained that oftentimes staff has to wait for additional documents from the applicant for the resolution. Chairman Fisher suggested noting that it was the responsibility of the applicant to complete the processes within 30 days. Mr. Morris believed that it would require both staff and the applicant to complete the process. He believed that requesting the resolution within 30 days was reasonable. Mr. Mauriello wondered what would happen if the 30 days were not met. Mr. Morris believed that 30 days was enough if everyone tended to business. It would be a rare case that extra time would be needed. If this was the case, the board could vote to extend the period. 6 03/20/2012 Commissioner Stavney suggested a good faith clause be included rather setting a time -line. Mr. Morris believed the key was not to take a vote of approval with too many loose ends. Mr. Narracci spoke about the preliminary plan amendments. The changes would provide more flexibility in working through the preliminary plan requirements. The resolution for approval of a sketch plan shall be null and void unless an application for PUD was submitted and deemed sufficient by the Planning Director within 2 years after the date of approval. This language was a bit more lenient. Commissioner Stavney stated he was comfortable with the language. Mr. Narracci explained the board's ability to extend the life of the sketch plan in two -year increments if the applicant could provide a reasonable reason. Commissioner Stavney wondered if the county had the responsibility to notify the applicant that they were nearing the 2 -year mark. Mr. Narracci stated that they did not have that requirement. Chairman Fisher did not want the county to take on the responsibility of notifying the applicant; she believed there should be some personal responsibility. Chairman Runyon believed it was up to the applicant to keep track of the dates. Chairman Fisher believed the subject could be revisited in the future. She asked about the changes made in 2005. She wanted to be sure they were not amending an amendment that was amended for a reason. Commissioner Stavney reiterated that most of the corrections were in the spirit of clarity and not tightening up the regulations. Chairman Fisher recognized the need for review but she didn't want to get too carried away. Mr. Morris stated that past experiences had triggered some of the changes. Chairman Runyon explained that nothing in the regulations was set in concrete due to changes. There were three drivers; state statute, staff, and the board of county commissioners. He believed the only change that had implications from the board's point of view was the basic vesting guidelines. Commissioner Stavney was not comfortable with a blanket approval without reviewing each of the changes. He believed it was the board's responsibility to understand the language. Mr. Narracci continued reviewing the changes. He spoke about the PUD standards and highlighted the unified ownership and control standard. Historically there had been a grey area when there was an approved PUD and many property owners within the PUD. In the past, they had accepted applications from HOAs and they were simply adding language that clarified that. Chairman Runyon believed the language "compatibility with future uses" was subjective. Mr. Morris believed the School House Ranch was a good example of this. Current use and whether it would be compatible with future develop under the master plan needed to be considered. Mr. Narracci read the common open space standard. Given recent situations, language was added related to responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of the property. Commissioner Stavney wondered how the county could tell them that membership is mandatory in the association. He wasn't comfortable with the changes but didn't ask that they be stricken. Mr. Narracci explained the proposed changes for vesting for a preliminary plan for PUD. All preliminary plans for PUD are valid for 3 years from the date of resolution of approval and multi -phase preliminary plans for PUD would be valid for such additional period of time if any as may be specified in the county resolution. A minimum development infrastructure would be required with a final plat for PUD. Commissioner Stavney believed the 3 -year requirement for 50% infrastructure was aggressive for a significant development. He was conflicted as to whether there should be a change from 5 years to 3 with the downturn in the economy. He was not sure this was the right time for the change. Mr. Morris explained the reasoning for the change. The West End was an example of this. He believed it was hard to evaluate the effects of future development. The idea was to reduce overlapping development. Chairman Runyon stated that there was a process that allowed an applicant to come to the board for an extension. The idea was to balance the approval process. _ Commissioner Stavney was concerned with the tinxe restraint on multi -phase developments. Mr. Mauriello believed that the extension criteria needed to be revisited. Everything seemed to fall under the definition of speculative. Chairman Runyon thought that getting to the intent made more sense. Part of the process was considering the reputation of the developer. Commissioner Stavney proposed striking the requirement until there could be more discussion. 7 03/20/2012 Mr. Narracci explained the vesting regulations for multi -phase development. The regulations allowed 5 years from the date of issuance and the infrastructure requirement was the same as single -phase developments but the applicant could request that the board extend the subsequent phases to a date suitable to the commissioners. Commissioner Stavney did not see a developer hitting the mark. Mr. Narracci stated that Arrowhead was a good example of this. There were still platted areas that had not been developed within the PUD boundary. The proposed language would allow a cross check to see if further development was appropriate. Chairman Runyon stated that he was not concerned with the financials of a developer but more concerned with community growth. Eva Wilson explained the definition of infrastructure. She believed that basic infrastructure was negotiable. Chairman Runyon stated that he was comfortable with the language. He did not think 50% was an issue. It was flexible. He believed there was ample opportunity for a developer to be granted an extension if needed. Commissioner Stavney encouraged that the file be tabled to allow for further discussion on certain items. Commissioner Stavney moved to table file no. LUR -3398 Eagle County Land Use Vesting Regulation Amendments until May 8, 2012. Chairman Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Other Mr. Lewis presented the budget books for 2012. The books were now available to the public. Work Sessions (recorded) Basalt Community Campus Colin Laird, Roaring Fork Community Development Corporation There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourne..0 • Ma 4 12. / Attest: - •s..tl'i'Z };. r- Clerk to the Board 08P * Chairman % to o 8 03/20/2012