Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/21/17 PUBLIC HEARING March 21, 2017 Present: Jillian Ryan Chairman Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner Bryan Treu Interim County Manager Beth Oliver Interim County Attorney Kathy Scriver Deputy Clerk to the Board Absent: Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner This being a scheduled Public Hearing,the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Commissioner Updates Commissioner McQueeney gave a shout out to the electric vehicle efforts. The county had a partnership with four dealers that, starting in April,would be having special deals and incentives that went along with state and federal rebates. The local dealerships hoped to sell 50 electric vehicles between April and June. Chairman Ryan gave an update on health care legislation. House Bill 17-1235 would provide relief for folks on individual health care. The bill was a temporary fix but would help folks maintain their health insurance until there was a better handle on the market rates. Consent Agenda 1. Approval of the Minutes of the Board of County Commissioner Meeting for January 10,January 17, January 24 and January 25,2017 Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder 2. Amendment to Grant Agreement between Eagle County and the State of Colorado, Colorado Department of Transportation, Colorado Aeronautical Board,Division of Aeronautics Grant for Funds Assistance to Extend the Current Internship Program for an Additional 600 Hours Alex Everman,Airport 3. Third Amendment to Agreement between Eagle County and Jerry Cheney for Assistance to the Facilities Management Department Ron Siebert,Facilities Management Commissioner McQueeney moved to approve the Consent Agenda for March 21,2017, as presented. Chairman Ryan seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners,the vote was declared unanimous. Constituent Input Chairman Ryan opened constituent input. Joanne Rock thanked Chairman Ryan for the update on the health care issue. She wondered if there may be a way to control costs by creating a fund for the lowest tier. She wondered about the priorities of government as far as areas of involvement. As local government relied on a lot of public money to run, she wondered if the Eagle River project was an appropriate thing for local government to be involved in. 1 03/21/2017 Chairman Ryan closed constituent input. Work Session(s) 4. Garfield Clean Energy Alice Laird, CLEER, John Gitchell NWCCOG Broadband Update Nate Walowitz,Jon Stavney Planning Files El Jebel Community Center, Sopris Room 1. 1041-5354 Mid Valley Metropolitan District Tree Farm PUD Development Adam Palmer, Environmental Policy Planner 2. PDP-4986 Tree Farm PUD Preliminary Plan Adam Palmer,Environmental Policy Planner Chairman Ryan stated that Commissioner Chandler-Henry was unable to attend due to a family emergency but she would review the video of the hearing and be in attendance at the next meeting. Staff was planning on three meetings for the file and would be taking public input at each meeting. Commissioner McQueeney disclosed her involvement with the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA)board. Although she did not believe it was a conflict to simultaneously serve on both boards, she had been advised to ask for an advisory opinion from the Independent Ethics Committee(IEC). She resigned her position on the RFTA board until the IEC ruled on the matter. Ms. Oliver explained that RFTA was a Regional Transportation Authority created by a combination of local governments,and per the IGA,one of the members of the RFTA board had to be one of the county commissioners. It was an unusual situation. Although they didn't think there was a conflict, in an abundance of caution, it was recommended she step down from the RFTA board until an advisory opinion was received in early April. Adam Palmer, Environmental Policy Planner for Eagle County stated that he would be presenting the file for Scot Hunn. Mr. Hunn had been the lead on the file for a number of years but would be leaving the County to work for himself on the private side of the sector. He introduced Eagle County Engineers,Rickie Davies and Ben Gerdes. • Jon Fredericks, LandWest Planner, introduced himself. Ace Lane,owner of the property along with his sons, introduced himself. Dave Mans, Woody Ventures, LLC introduced himself. Mr. Palmer noted that the 1041 companion file would be open at a later date. The request was for a Preliminary Plan for a Planned Unit Development(PUD). The Tree Farm PUD was located on 43 acres of the 199 acre Lane Property. The review process was pursuant Section 5-240 of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations (ECLURs). He explained the purpose of the PUD process, Sketch Plan,Preliminary Plan and then the Final Plat. The first hearing would begin with an overview of the request, a video from the applicant, a look at Master Plan conformance,the project history, and a comparison of the standards considered when reviewing these types of proposals. The second hearing would be held on April 11th.At that time staff would review the housing plan,the real estate transfer assessment(RETA),childcare,phasing plan,walkability,transit access and traffic. The third hearing would cover the sustainability plan, energy efficiently strategies,physical impact,market study,community benefits and a review of the 1041 permit looking at water and wastewater. He reviewed the rich chronology for the parcel beginning in 1993. Most recently,the Roaring Fork Regional Planning Commission in 2015 recommended denial of the application. There was support for the transit oriented mixed use design and work force housing but there were concerns with size, scale, density,parking, fire district access and police funding. It was recommended that there be a cap on commercial use not to exceed 30,000 square feet. The largest change to the project since 2 03/21/2017 being reviewed by the Planning Commission was the removal of housing units on the northeast side of the lake. Overall,the footprint shrank from 72 acres to 43 acres, and the number of proposed dwelling units decreased from 400 to 340. Mr. Lane spoke about his vision for the project.The project had been an evolution over 20 years. He was trying to make a model that worked for society and mankind. He'd been in the area since 1979 to ski race for the Aspen Valley Ski Club. He had three sons and wished to make it so young people could live in this community. Mr. Fredericks stated that their goal was to create one of the first transit oriented communities on the Western Slope for local residents and business owners. They wished to raise the bar on energy efficiency and sustainability standards. The project had to achieve these goals with financial viability. The project would be built in phases as the market conditions allowed. Glenn Rappaport,Basalt architect, spoke about the project's conformance with the local master plans. A transit-oriented development provided viable options for not using a vehicle. Over time,the project had become more compact and more focused on the transit corridor. Mr.Fredericks spoke about the various versions of the project. As a result of the Planning Commission's review, they reduced the geographic size, square footage and number of units. They completely removed the housing in the north meadow and concentrated the mixed land uses on the south and west edge of the lake. The property zone had changed over time as a result of changes in the development plan. They wished to provide affordable and mid-range housing to support current and future housing needs. The commercial spaces were intended to support local businesses.They were committed to providing 200 kHz of solar electricity to the Clean Energy Collective. He presented some illustrations of the proposed community gardens,park,playground,trail and the view of the development from Hwy 82. Mike Scanlon elaborated on the connectivity of the project. The design created a connection to place. The regional issues were environmental sustainability,affordable housing and childcare. The development team had been working diligently to address these issues and the applicant believed this was the right time and place. Mr. Palmer stated that he'd been involved with the project since 2009 and watched it evolve. He reviewed the standards by which staff based its recommendation. The proposal was in conformance with most of the standards with some variations required for dimension limitations, off street parking and adequate facilities. Riche Davies, Eagle County Engineer,reviewed the variance from Eagle County Land Use Regulations requested by the applicant. All the variances requested had been reviewed and approved by Eagle County Engineering. He reviewed the CDOT comments and requirements. Mr. Palmer indicated that the PUD was consistent with the Master Plan and conformed to the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). There were a lot of referral responses received, and he thanked everyone who took the time to respond and continued to respond. Staff recommended approval with 12 conditions. He introduced Jill Klosterman,Eagle County Housing Director. Chairman Ryan asked Mr.Fredericks about the slide referring to their Guiding Design Principles and wondered if there would be a way to limit second home owners from buying up all the housing stock. Mr.Fredericks stated that in the plan they had 43 affordable units. They were anticipating 137 apartment units and 160 free market condo and loft units.The project would have mid-range finishes and were smaller unit sizes which were geared more towards valley residents. In the PUD guide,they had a provision of"first right of offer"for Eagle County and town residents to purchase available units within the project. Chairman Ryan asked if the buildings in the video were an accurate representation. Mr.Rappaport stated that buildings in the video looked somewhat similar in terms of mass, scale and general form. The developer would sell parcels to different entities, and they will propose structures. The architecture would be much more varied. Commissioner McQueeney asked Mr.Fredericks about the 2009 rezoning to resource zone. Mr.Fredericks explained that in 2009 during Sketch Plan review the entire 200 acre property was zoned PUD. There were concerns from the community with the balance of the Lane property. To address the concerns, they created some individual home sites for their children. This was accomplished by creating a conservation subdivision. Before they could do a conservation subdivision,they needed to rezone the property to resource zone district. Mr.Palmer stated that was a companion file that had been prepared by the applicant. Mr.Fredericks stated that the Conservation Subdivision application was submitted concurrently with the Preliminary Plan in 2014.The Conservation Subdivision was being revised based on the current changes to the Tree Farm PUD. They were considering four(4)home sites of 1.5 acres each located near the top portion of the property. 3 03/21/2017 Chairman Ryan asked to hear from the applicant and the rationale behind the request for the parking variance. Mr. Fredericks stated the variances were not a result of being a Transit Oriented Development(TOD)but were based on what they believed the actual demand was for parking. They found that in apartment complex and multifamily housing projects up and down the valley,the average demand was 1.1 spaces per unit. While they were requesting 1.5,the overall average for the project was two(2) spaces per unit. They believed they had their rates exactly where they should be but were willing to make modifications after Phase 1 if necessary. Riche Davies stated that Engineering was comfortable with the request because in the applicant's PUD guide,the applicant was allowing Engineering to impose its own methodology and timing. Commissioner McQueeney asked about phasing and the timeframe for build-out. Mr. Fredericks stated that phasing was speculative at this time. Chairman Ryan opened public input. She asked everyone to speak into the microphones and limit their comments to three minutes. Laurie Soliday spoke. She believed that housing was desperately needed. She understood the traffic issues but believed the proposal was a good opportunity for workers. This was a well thought out project. She had a lot of friends and family waiting for the opportunity to own a home in the area. Dr. Aaron Nickamin spoke. He believed this was a huge need in the community and a good opportunity. Ellie Taylor spoke. She was not in favor of the project. The extra congestion was not needed. The affordable housing was not really affordable. The development would create additional congestion on Hwy 82. It would be irresponsible to approve the project without first allowing the mid valley to absorb Willits Town Center. Renee Fleisher spoke. She was concerned with all the development that could occur and believed the roads and school were not equipped to handle the numbers. Greg Smith was concerned with the number of projects in the works. The fast growth was a concern as the impact was unknown. He was against the size of the project. Bernie Grauer,Town of Basalt Council, spoke. He did not believe the project was an example of smart growth. He suggested that the proposal be changed and not compete with the urban core. He believed there were significant shortages in the proposal such as daycare and parking. Jennifer Riffle,Town of Basalt Council, spoke. She stated that the Town of Basalt identified several issues with the development. The competing commercial spaces would significantly impact the mid valley. Bob Hubble spoke. He supported the quality of life,however things always changed. Given the mid valley desirability,he applauded the Tree Farm concept. The units were affordable, environmentally sound and pedestrian friendly. He asked that the commissioners embrace and support the proposal. Yvette Trinado spoke. She supported the development. She operated a mid valley business and had two children in Basalt schools. She feared getting priced out of the home she had rented for six years. This development offered her the chance to buy. Mike Kusiac spoke. He supported the proposal. This was a great opportunity for locals in the community. Kent Taylor spoke. He worked for the Sheriff's Office and supported the proposal. He believed the project was sustainable. Nick Blastos spoke. He supported the proposal as he believed there was a lack of affordable housing in the valley. He liked the design. Dr. David Jensen spoke. He was currently a tenant on the site and wished to share it. He believed the group had done an unbelievable job of building a centralized community. He supported the project. Dave Culp spoke. He supported the proposal and believed that the affordable housing gave him options. Joshua Goldman spoke. He supported the proposal. He owned a business in Basalt, commuted to work every day and wished to be closer. Eric Olivas spoke. He traveled several miles to work every day. He believed the development would lessen the traffic, and if there were affordable housing, it would be perfect for him and many others. He supported the development. Patrice Becker spoke. She believed that development was taking over the mid valley. She expressed concerns for water, sewer and garbage. The infrastructure was currently insufficient, and adding 700 cars was irresponsible. There was already affordable housing, and if it was needed it should be supported by the counties. Everyone needed to consider the impact of this on quality of life. She asked that the Board reject the proposal to insure the safety and quality of life for the citizens that they represented. She asked that a moratorium be placed on building until the infrastructure was appropriate to handle the people in the community. 4 03/21/2017 Brian Edginton spoke. He believed the project would be a magnet for second-home owners looking for bargains close to Aspen,thus driving the prices beyond the means of the working folks. Holly Buell spoke. She supported the development and believed this type of development was needed in the area. She believed the development was designed around the pedestrian and not the car. There needed to be attainable housing not just affordable housing. David Strickbine spoke. He worked in the area and believed it would be amazing to live and work in the same area. He currently lived with family but would like to own his own home someday. He supported the new proposal and believed the development worked for the property. Brian Buell spoke. He'd been in the valley for 10 years and loved the El Jebel area. A project like this would give other developers some guidance. He believed there needed to be growth in the El Jebel area and supported the sustainability aspect. David Schoenberger spoke. He understood the traffic issues. He believed the community core values dictated that problems be solved. He believed that affordable housing, daycare and a greater health infrastructure was needed. He believed that traffic was a legislative issue between CDOT and the government. He supported the Tree Farm proposal because it provided diversity and responsible growth needed in the mid-valley. Jeff Przodek spoke. He expressed support for the project. Growth had reached this valley and growth was going to happen. The green standards were exceptional. Susan Philp, Basalt Planning Director spoke. She stated that Tuesday nights were town council meeting nights and asked if the Board would consider this when scheduling future meetings. Chairman Ryan closed public comment. Mr. Palmer clarified that the Conservation Subdivision that may or may not take place on the Recourse Zoned property surrounding the PUD was just a process articulated in the ECLURs that encouraged clustering uses. Mr.Frederick clarified that there was a process for pricing the affordable housing units. This process was established by the County and HUD. Any of the 43 affordable units would have price controlled rents. Commissioner McQueeney stated that all the referral letters received were online including a letter from the Roaring Fork School District(RFSD). The letter from the RFSD indicated that they were not concerned about the number of kids impacting the school. There was also a question about water. Ms. Oliver stated that there was a letter dated March 7,2017 from the School District and there was also a letter that addressed water online. Commissioner McQueeney asked about the current commercial space across from this proposal. Mr. Fredericks stated that they had a maximum cap of 134,000 square feet of commercial use. They were anticipating just under half of that to be lodging use. He thought Willits was approved in total for 672,000 square feet. Commissioner McQueeney asked about the parking plan and if there would be changes made between phases. Mr. Davies stated that the conditions of approval addressed the parking rate study and required coordination with the County regardless of phasing. Commissioner McQueeney moved to table the file no. 1041-5354 Mid Valley Metropolitan District Tree Farm PUD Development until April 11,2017 Chairman Ryan seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners,the vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business before . :;,;II k - meeting wtis adjourned until March 2:,2017. tom: 4, / 4 o Attest. co�.o '4// .1 i / 4W //Ai 'ler`�. the Board Chairma i 1 5 03/21/2017