HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/29/2023 PUBLIC HEARING
August 29, 2023
Present: Kathy Chandler-Henry Chairman
Matt Scherr Commissioner
Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner
Jill Klosterman Chief Financial Officer
Beth Oliver Deputy 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:
Constituent Input
Chairman Kathy Chandler-Henry opened and closed constituent input,as there was none.
Commissioner Updates
Commissioner McQueeney wished to make everyone aware of the Eagle River Cleanup put on by the Eagle
River Watershed Council, The event was being held Saturday, September 9th.
Commissioner Scherr spoke about a tour and presentation he attended in Summit County regarding
workforce housing. It demonstrated that a lot of resort communities had been dealing with affordability in a lot of
different ways. He believed it would be high on the Governor's list of priorities during the next legislative session.
Chairman Chandler-Henry gave an update on the Colorado River Drought Taskforce. The group was
formed though Senate Bill 23-295 focused on makingrecommendations to the legislature on actions that the state
g g
could take to deal with drought,continuing pressures on the river, and with interstate negotiations. There was a
website called crdroughttaskforce.com that listed all of the meetings, and there was also a virtual option for anyone
interested.
County Manager Updates
Jill Klosterman,Eagle County Chief Financial Officer,recognized all the teams working hard on managing
the budget. She also noted that county offices would be closed on Monday for the Labor Day holiday.
Consent Agenda
1. Agreement for Services between Eagle County and Ewing Trucking and Construction LLC. -Daggett Lane
Bridge Construction Contract
Rickie Davies,Engineering
2. Intergovernmental Agreement Between Eagle County and Eagle County School District RE-50J for Funding of
Prevention Coordinators for Eagle County Schools 2023
Maria Gonzalez,Public Health&Environment
3. Resolution 2023-056 Approving the Use of Open Space Funds for Transaction Costs Associated with the Eaton
Forest 160 Property
1
08/29/2023
Peter Suneson, Open Space and Natural Resources
4. First Amendment to Agreement Between Eagle County and Alliance Electric Solutions for Installation of Service
Upgrade at Eagle County Airport
John Gitchell,Resiliency
Commissioner Scherr moved to approve the Consent Agenda for August 29,2023 as presented.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Commissioner McQueeney moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and
reconvene as the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority.
Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Eagle County Housing and Development Authority
1. Agreement for Procurement and Installation Services between Riverview Apartments, LP and RAL Architects,
Inc.
Daniel Murray,Housing
Executive Summary: The confined space and sewer pump system outside of Building E is failing so needs to be
replaced before the winter months set in and the ground freezes. When the ground freezes, it moves the tank and
adjusts the drain lines which is causing the system to fail. If the system is not repaired and replaced,Riverview
may have a non functioning system. The full repair will take approximately two weeks. Meanwhile,the residents
will still have access and use of the system,as it will only need to be turned off for a short period when changing
out the tank.
Daniel Murray, Eagle County Housing Manager, stated that the contract was for the sewer pump and
holding tank outside Building E as it was beginning to fail. There would be a complete replacement to avoid any
environmental issues, and they hoped to get this done before winter. No residents would be affected by the work.
Commissioner Scherr moved to approve the agreement for procurement and installation services between
Riverview Apartments,LP and RAL Architects, Inc.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Commissioner McQueeney moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority
and reconvene as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Scherr seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
Event/Groundbreaking - Minturn
1. Ground Breaking Ceremony for the Eagle Valley Trail Minturn Segment
Kevin Sharkey, ECO Trails
Executive Summary: We will celebrate new construction for the Eagle Valley Trail Minturn Segment with a
Groundbreaking Ceremony.
2
08/29/2023
Site Tour - Wolcott
1. Site Visit for ZS-009241-2022 Wolcott Planned Unit Development(PUD)
Karl Barton, Community Development
Executive Summary: Board of County Commissioners site visit in advance of public hearing. The meeting
location/parking is located on the south side of Highway 6 just south/southeast of the Wolcott Post Office at 28000
Highway 6,Wolcott, CO 81655.
Planning File - Eagle County Room
1. PDS-009421-2022 Wolcott Planned Unit Development(PUD)
Karl Barton, Community Development
Executive Summary: Request for approval of a Sketch Plan for PUD application for a mixed-use development
consisting of a maximum of 360 single and multi-family dwelling units and 10,000 square feet of commercial
space.
Project Name: Wolcott PUD File No.: PDS-009241-2022
Location: 28246 Highway 6,Wolcott area(Assessor's Parcel#1941-232-00-038 & 1941-232-00-37).
Owners/Applicants: Hadcott,LLC
Representative: Jeff Townsend-Resort Concepts
Staff Planner: Karl Barton,AICP,
Staff Engineer: Ben Gerdes,P.E.
County Attorney: Beth Oliver, Deputy County Attorney
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Eagle County has received an application from Hadcott LLC, represented
by Resort Concepts (the "Applicant"), for a Sketch Plan for Planned Unit Development(PUD)to allow
for a mixed use development consisting of single and multifamily residential, commercial and open space
uses on 72.17 acres (the "Application" or"Wolcott Sketch PUD") of a 133.29 acre property.
The property is located in the Wolcott area, east of the Highway 131 and US Highway 6 intersection,
extending from the Eagle River south to Interstate-70 (the "Property"). A portion of the proposed PUD is
located south of I-70.
The Property is currently in agricultural use and consists of two parcels. At this time the boundaries of
these parcels do not exactly match the boundaries of the proposed PUD. The Applicant will be required to
create legal parcels that correspond to the boundaries of the PUD; and to resolve issues concerning any
resulting remnant parcels. If the remnant parcels are nonconforming and cannot be legalized through a
separate platting action, it may be necessary for the Applicant to incorporate the remnant parcels into the
PUD. If at the time of application for Preliminary Plan the boundaries of the Wolcott PUD must be
amended from those depicted in the Sketch PUD application, or if planning area boundaries, use
allowances or dimensional standards must be adjusted as a result of the boundary amendment, staff would
consider those changes to be in conformance with this Application, and any Sketch Plan approval. If the
Preliminary Plan is approved, the resulting PUD boundary would be formally established through the
final plat.
Karl Barton, Contract Staff Planner working on behalf of Eagle County, introduced himself and gave a brief
introduction of the project. Staff recommendation was approval with conditions. The project was located in
Wolcott on the valley floor with a portion located to the south of I-70. The total parcel acreage was about 133
3
08/29/2023
acres. The actual PUD acreage was 72 acres. The development proposal was 360 residential units max, 10,000 sq.
ft. commercial, and 26.76 acres of open space. The purpose of the sketch PUD was to define whether the PUD
would comply with the land use regulations. He presented a conceptual plan and noted that as a Sketch PUD, it
was a concept level. There was a proposal for mixed residential at the north end of the site. To the south,there was
some open space and larger units. Staff found that the use was compatible with the surrounding uses. The public
benefit would be evaluated during the Zone Change process which would happen during the Preliminary Plan. The
application went through a couple rounds of referral review,and he highlighted a couple of significant changes that
had occurred between the first and second round. The area of development south of I-70 was reduced as well as the
number of units. They also spent some time refining the process for transferring the planning areas.
Jeff Townsend with Resort Concepts presented. He stated that the plan was on the Chris Jouflas section of
land in Wolcott. The development was primarily residential units and would be designed around parks and green
space. The existing Jouflas home and pond would remain. The higher density residential units would be near the
interchange. The planning area on the southside of the property included 10 single family homes and a fire station.
The property had substantial water rights which had already gone through the water court and were available for
use with development. They also had secondary water rights for irrigation and water storage. The Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District(ERWSD)had expanded their service boundary to encompass Wolcott in anticipation
of future development. They had been working with the ERWSD from a general sense on this plan. There was a
small plant for wastewater treatment currently onsite. They agreed with staff that 53%of the units would have
some sort of deed restriction. The applicant agreed on a condition that would allow them in the Preliminary Plan
process to work with staff to determine what the 53%would consist of. The applicant was proposing 10,000 sq. ft.
of commercial space at the primary entry to the project. The intent was to serve the units with neighborhood
services. There were two access points off of Hwy 6 which had already been approved by CDOT. He worked with
ECO Transit and one of the topics included accommodating transit stops within the community. The applicant
added two spaces within the development to accommodate the internal circulation. There would be sidewalks as
well as soft trails that would connect to a community garden. There would be a dog park and a general park. He
met with staff onsite to review a trail connection. All the single family homes and townhomes would have electric
car charging. With regards to landscaping, they were considering the use of native plants and restricting the use of
sod. Most of the variances being requested were minor and had to do with engineering standards per radius within
the road section. He believed there were generally positive comments made by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Barton finished his presentation focusing on the functional aspect and process. The property was
subject to the expired Wolcott PUD which was done in 2013 and extinguished in 2020,but the zone was still the
previously expired Wolcott PUD. What could be expected moving forward was a zone change to revert the
property to Resource(R)and then to rezone it for the new Wolcott PUD. This was a much smaller proposal than
the previous one. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions and declined to make any
changes to the conditions. There were nine planning areas with specific uses and dimensional standards. The
variations were not being formally approved at this time; staff was still reviewing them to ensure that there were no
issues. He reviewed the project standards and indicated that the proposal met the standards. With regards to the
Comprehensive Plan,the proposal met the goals of growth and development, commercial development,housing,
infrastructure,water,wildlife, and habitat protection. He reviewed the recommended conditions and indicated that
staff recommended approval with conditions.
Commissioner Scherr wondered if there could be greater density.
Mr. Townsend stated that the multi-family was driven by parking. The parking count would help drive the
type of units,number of bedrooms,etc. They tried to design a development within their means with regards to
water and density.
Commissioner Scherr asked about the river access and the safety concerns with residents trying to get to the
river crossing Hwy 6.
Mr. Townsend stated that the area from the northern edge of Hwy 6 to the centerline of the river was private
and would remain that way. Access to the river was not conducive to people hiking down.
Mr. Barton added that during the review process safe crossing across Hwy 6 was discussed, and based on
CDOT's requirements, it would be very difficult.
Commissioner Scherr asked if Holy Cross mentioned a micro grid.
4
08/29/2023
Mr. Townsend stated that this was discussed, and it sounded interesting,but at this time he had no details.
Commissioner McQueeney stated that most of her questions were related to public benefit. She believed
there would be more details provided during the PUD process but requested clarification with regards to the
recommended river setbacks and short term rentals.
Mr. Barton stated that the setback from the river was 75 ft. and within that there were limitations as to what
could occur. There was also a wetland setback which was different.
Beth Oliver,Deputy Eagle County Attorney, stated that based on the land use regulations,there was a 75 ft.
stream setback and from 75 ft. from the wetlands.
Mr. Townsend believed there was buildable space in the Planning Area near the river.
Mr. Barton stated that there was a condition that would allow staff to further examine the setbacks.
Mr. Townsend added that there were no short term rentals proposed.
Commissioner McQueeney asked for more details with regards to public benefit and believed the trail
would be beneficial if it were built.
Chairman Chandler-Henry asked about the water rights and if they were diverted from the Eagle River.
Mr. Townsend stated that the water would come from the Eagle River and Holland Ditch.
Chairman Chandler-Henry asked about the traffic impacts.
Mr. Townsend stated that they did extensive traffic studies through the CDOT process.
Chairman Chandler-Henry requested a detailed housing plan and a plan that leans towards workforce
housing. The wetland setback was also a concern. She would also like more discussion of the wildlife impacts,
public lands, and mitigation.
Mr. Townsend stated that they removed 35 acres on the south end of the property to eliminate access to the
BLM property.
Commissioner Scherr mentioned the south 35 acres as being a public benefit and asked if a conservation
easement would be an option.
Ms. Oliver stated that one of the things they were concerned about was not wanting to create illegal parcels.
One option would be to bring the 35 acres back in and put a conservation easement on as part of the public benefit
offer.
Mr. Townsend stated that there would likely be utilities that would come through the acreage.
Ms. Oliver stated that the public benefits were to offset the impacts of the development so believed it made
sense to have the property within the PUD and a conservation easement put on it so it could be counted as part of
the public benefit of the project.
Chairman Chandler-Henry opened public comment.
Tommy Fannsworth III,with Eagle Springs Golf Course, asked to defer his time to James Oefelein.
James Oefelein, General Manager of Eagle Springs Golf Club spoke. They were requesting review of the
secondary entrance to the PUD, so they did not have traffic affecting their entry and exit. If the entry must be there,
they asked for an addition of a roundabout to increase safety for.tti&L members and the public. They were also
requesting berming along Hwy 6. With regards to height restrictio =y ask that the board not grant a variance to
allow for an additional 10 ft. They also asked that if the board appit•= the application,that it creates a mandate
•
that ties the applicant to the project through completion, so the PUP„k ;ti'bt sold in the future. He spoke about the
traffic and threat to wildlife as the elk population. He believed that Eagle County did not have a housing shortage,
simply poor property management.
Jacki McKenna spoke. She requested that CPW recommendation be adopted. It was appreciated that the
developer adjusted the Planning Area(PA) 5 area,however,the risk to an active bald eagle's nest in the area was
still possible. The geologic hazard was also concerning as it related to landslides in the same area. At some point
wildlife interests must be prioritized. She asked that the board deny development of PA 5.
Jan Strauch, a local resident for 25 years, spoke. He recommended that the board not move the proposal
forward on three issues. The eagle's nest had been there for over five years and was protected wildlife by the Bald
Eagle Protection Act of 1940 which prohibited interference with the breeding, feeding, agitating or otherwise
disturbing eagles. He also noted buildings in the area required a Federal Permit. The traffic,people,kids, dogs,
5
08/29/2023
recreation,and 24-hour fire station,were incompatible with the federal law. He did not believe a fire station was
necessary in that location. He believed there was a much better location near the valley floor. He also noted that in
the plan there was no visual analysis.
Chairman Chandler-Henry closed public comment.
Mr. Townsend responded to the Eagle Springs comments. He had met with the group on multiple
occasions, and the proposed landscaping had been in response to their concerns. The only building variance they
requested related to the multi-family units on the western end of the site. The single homes across from Eagle .
Springs had no building variances requested. Their goal was to be in the project long term. As far as the entry
point, CDOT regulated the distance between access points. With regards to the eagles,they worked with the
Department of Wildlife and have done everything asked of them.
Mr. Barton stated that a ridgeline visual analysis was only specific to certain roadways,and it was based on
whether a structure would penetrate the ridgeline,not based on whether or not the structure would be visible. That
said,the application was found to be compliant with that requirement.
Commissioner McQueeney thanked everyone for their comments and the applicant for a comprehensive
Sketch Plan. She believed that the issues brought today with conditions help to approve the file as a Sketch Plan.
Commissioner Scherr stated that this was a Sketch Plan and was an opportunity to provide feedback. As
the application progresses,there would be more details provided and changes could be made based on the
comments. He asked about the project timeline and the goal of the trail timeline. He would consider a parking
variance and thought it was in a good location for transit options.
Chairman Chandler-Henry concurred with her colleagues. The board was not approving the plan today,
simply approving a Sketch Plan. She appreciated the public comments and encouraged the public to stay informed
on the project. She believed the application met the conceptual standards for a Sketch Plan approval.
Commissioner Scherr moved to approve file no. PDS-009241-2022 incorporating staff's findings and
recommended conditions,including the revision to condition 9 as discussed during the meeting because this
application as conditioned, is conceptually consistent with the standards for approval of a Sketch Plan for PUD
application found in Section 5-240.F.3.e of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
r h�Ps_of EA64
(e.. a
K
There being no further busines )3o,` : ard,the meeting was adjourned until September 5,2023.
Attest. --, /_`/%
Clerk to the Board Chairman
6
08/29/2023