Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/10/96 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 10,1996 Present: George "Bud" Gates Johnnette Phillips James Johnson, Jr. Jim Hartmann Sara J. Fisher Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners: LUR-0022, Building Resolution, Chapter 3 Mike Wheelersburg, Chief Building Official, presented file number LUR-0022, Building Resolution, Chapter 3. He explained the file to the Board. Keith Montag, Director of Community Development, stated the Planning Commission recommended approval on December 4th. They went through the document in detail and made changes. He stated those changes are in the document the Board has. He stated a public meeting was held on February 20 and it was reviewed by several different agencies. He stated they went through an extensive process to obtain the feedback and it has been changed accordingly. There are a set of findings that will need to be incorporated in the motion if approved. Staff recommended approval as did the Planning Commission. Commissioner Phillips asked if these will cause more expense or can they help with the safety and welfare of any builder. She said she hoped the previous amendments would be more helpful and less costly. Mr. Wheelersburg stated they did streamline and reduce fees on repetitive plans. The plan check fee is reduced significantly. Bob Loeffler, Asst. County Attorney, stated he did not realize the formal resolution had not been distributed. What they have is a standard format which he has now distributed. He stated he will have to confirm that the copy to be attached is the revised copy. Ron Brave, representing the Eagle Valley Homebuilders Association, thanked Mike Wheelersburg for working with them as a member of the Codes and Standards Committee and discussing code issues, work with the association and fending off any problems that might have occur. They have been working with him for the last few months in bringing this to fruition. He urged the Board's support ofthis resolution. He urged the Board to restore budget for membership in the Homeowner's Association so that Mike can become a voting member and not just a guest. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve file number LUR-0022, Building Resolution, Chapter 3, incorporating Staff findings. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Plat & Resolution Signing Kathy Eastley, Planner, presented the next item on the agenda, plat and resolution signing as follows: 5MB-00019, Stoney Meadows, Phase III. She stated this was a Minor Type B Subdivision, the third phase of a town home development in The Homestead, Filing 3. The intent of this plat is to create three additional townhome units in an existing development, easements, common area and future development area. Staff recommended approval. Chairman Gates asked about the plating. Ms. Eastley responded. 1 Commissioner Phillips moved to approve file number 5MB-00019, Stoney Meadows, Phase III, incorporating Staff findings. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PD-142-96-S, Brett Ranch Kathy Eastley presented file number PD-142-96-S, Brett Ranch. She stated this was a request for a PUD Sketch Plan for 228 dwelling units being mixed use (residential, public use and commercial) Planned Unit Development which is seeking to redevelop the Brett Ranch Subdivision. The 117 acre area is currently a platted subdivision which is bisected by Highway 6, approximately 20 acres on the south side and 98 acres on the north side. Included in this application are Lots 34 and 35 , Eagle Crest Subdivision, Filing 1, located east of Lake Creek Apartments. The applicants, Wintergreen Homes, were not yet present for the hearing. James Fritze, County Attorney, suggested they wait for the applicant. Chairman Gates asked for a 5 minute break. Upon reconvening, Ms. Eastley introduced the applicant, Michael Mutter of Osprey Development and Jeff Spanel of Wintergreen Homes. The area is divided into 6 planning areas identified as Planning Areas A through F. Ms. Eastley explained the six different areas. Ms. Eastley reviewed the history of the Brett Ranch plat which was approved by the Commissioners in 1981, however minimal improvements have been completed. The current zoning is Rural Residential RR cluster which allowed for a decrease in the required 2 acre minimum lot size. The subdivision was approved for 16 single family lots on 117 acres 14 lots on the south side of highway 6, and 2 on the north side of the highway. Recent commercial industrial activity on the property has led to investigations regarding potential zoning violations at the site. Contractor's storage and material stockpiling has been occurring on the property which were not permitted by the current residential zoning and, upon issuance of a warning notice, the violation has been resolved. Ms. Eastley reviewed the site data and the various plans which reviewed the information. She clarified that this plan has been in the review plan for quite some time. Many of the referral comments in the letters have been already addressed and revisions made at this time. Ms. Eastley reviewed the referral responses that are still applicable today. Traffic, development of the Edwards area as a whole, seem to be the primary concerns. Staffhas reviewed the use of commercial on this area and feel it may be somewhat immature. The core area of Edwards now is village center. Ms. Eastley stated there are access concerns and compatibility issues. Ms. Eastley spoke to the concern with the large population and the fact that there would be no access point at the other end of the property. Chairman. Gates asked about access to the east. Ms. Eastley explained. She responded these issues must be addressed in the preliminary plan. She further explained the traffic concern. She stated there is an existing traffic concern and a control plan is being worked on. CDOT will require access permits onto the State Highway but the applicant agrees to limit those permits. Ms. Eastley stated the 50% being dedicated to open space in fact is made up mostly of flood plane. That leased a developable area of 59 acres, approximately 15 acres which would be usable open space. The applicant is proposing a swimming pool, and recreation area. This would be solidified at preliminary plan. A 1041 permit will be required and will be due with preliminary plan. Ms. Eastley stated there have been numerous pubic hearings. Voting 4 to 1 the Planning Commission accepted this sketch plan. The recommended changes to the conditions and additions were listed above. Chairman Gates asked whatever happened to the proposed reservoir site. He asked if this infringes upon the proposed site. Sid Fox, Planning Manager, stated the staff is not aware of any recent discussion regarding the reservoir. He understands that due to geological issues the site has not been considered more recently. Michael Mutter stated he spoke to Bill Williams about that and those were some of his concerns. They have reviewed this and see no conflict. Mr. Fox stated the Board may want to consider that and they may want to make a condition accordingly. Chairman. Gates suggested this may be feasible in 25 years. Michael Mutter introduced himself and stated he is representing Osprey Development and Wintergreen homes, affiliate companies of Cordillera. Mr. Mutter passed out a written synopsis. He then reviewed it. Mr. Mutter explained the units that they have done at Eagle Bend in Avon, in Basalt in Frisco and in Avon. He highlighted the sales have been to permanent local residents for the greater part. Mr. Mutter explained the problems the previous owner had with violations of the zoning. Last year the property owners, dug a pond in the wetlands putting fill into the wetland area. He explained the solution to that and 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 said they would both be returned to wetland habitat. They have plotted out all of the areas on the property of concern. Zoning violation took place by an excavation business. That has now ceased. In 1981 the subdivision that was approved and platted was shown on the map. He explained there is no collateral on the subdivision on the north side of the highway. If approved the applicant will post all of the needed collateral. Four ofthose lots are already sold. What they propose, after discussing it with the DOW, is that they address in the preliminary process all of their concerns. Mr. Mutter showed a drawing of the units stating they range from six to eight units per building with a one car garage. All of these units are for sale. He explained Planned Area A. In their proposal they are proposing three recreation amenities. Their concept is to have a tot lot, an area for elementary schoolage kids and for teenagers. They have also included a pool facility targeted for the residents. The development would have its own homeowners association. The density would be slightly less than at Lake Creek. They proposed to extend the Eagle County road to their property. They have not talked to all of the adjoining property owners to the west. As an alternative, they have spoken to the Cordillera Valley Club and obviously there is an emergency access which could be used at these units as well as Lake Creek Apartments. They would propose that it will be addressed in the preliminary planning stage. Road improvements would have to be made and they would be willing to make those. Planned Area B is at the western potion of the property, adjacent to the Eagle River Mobile Home Park. This is proposed to include a school and a water treatment plant. Planning Area C is slated for 36 townhome development on 5.74 acres of net developable area. He stated. Mr. Mutter stated Planning Area D is that which currently has the 14 single family platted lots to which no change is requested. Planning Area E on the East side of Lake Creek and where the 24,0000 square feet of commercial use is proposed. Planning Area F is the open space to be dedicated to a land trust. He stated they have preserved the wetlands and will probably develop a trail along Highway 6. The DOW would like to have a special area. They believe this area, once the grazing is stopped, will return to a very viable area. They have discovered after talking to fish specialists the fish like to spawn up Lake Creek. They are learning about some of the activities they can do to promote longevity of the fish population. They may be able to restrict access to that area to encourage spawning and wildlife concerns. Mr. Mutter stated the developers of Brett Ranch would like to develop neighborhoods that provide a wide variety of "for sale" housing opportunities, tennis, golf, etc. for Eagle county mangers and employees while preserving and enhancing the numerous environmental assets of the land. The Sketch Plan includes 156 entry level "for sale" units, 36 town houses and 14 single family homesites. In addition, the development proposes two parcels for public uses, including a water treatment facility and 24,000 square feet of commercial office space targeted to professional office users such as architects, lawyers, etc. Mr. Mutter discussed the concerns of affordable housing and their meetings with the housing coordinator. They have identified an entry level housing plan. They are looking at way to reduce the cost further. They would be offering the employees of Cordillera and Winter Green Homes and their affiliated companies, the first opportunity to purchase a housing unit of their choice with only a 1 % sales commission. Employees and residents of Eagle County will then have 30 days to purchase a housing unit of their choice with only a 3% real estate commission. The remaining units would be offered at market prices and commissions. Any units not sold to an Eagle County resident or employee will pay a transfer fee of 1 %. All transfer fees would be deposited into the Eagle County Housing Trust Fund. These fees will then become available for future affordable hosing efforts within Eagle County. This program will be administered in perpetuity. The developer would work with local banking organizations to provide financing mechanisms that reduce the initial down payment and closing costs and thereby increase the ability for the buyers to move from renting to home ownership. In addition, they will continue to pursue alternative "affordability"programs. The Brett Ranch sketch Plan is consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan based on its location, the public transportation routes available, addressing the need to minimize highway access points along Highway 6 by consolidating acceleration/deceleration lanes and providing emergency access through Cordillera Valley Club. Discussions with School officials indicate the public schools can adequately address the needs of the development. Discussions with DOW officials and wildlife experts indicate the Preliminary Plan can address their concerns. Meetings with Army Corps of Engineers has identified the development's wetland boundaries and suggestions to 3 remedy the two wetland violations. And they plan to meet with the recreational trails officials to discuss appropriate access routes. Mr. Mutter read a letter from Vail Associates supporting this Sketch Plan signed by Gerald Flynn. In conclusion, the applicant believes they have made every effort to discuss the Sketch Plan with neighborhood groups, environmental groups, Trout Unlimited and many ofthe referral agencies. They would like the Board of Commissioners to approve the Sketch Plan today, so they can proceed with engineering and addressing the remaining concerns. The Brett Ranch Sketch Plan provides for numerous public goods at no cost to the County including: providing for sale entry level housing opportunities, preserving 50% of the site as open space, enhancing the wetland ecosystem, riparian areas and fish habitats, providing a location for a water treatment facility, and managing and remedying the various land use infractions. Chairman Gates asked with 500 employees, will they have units available for sale to others. Mr. Mutter explained there will be plenty of homes available for purchase. Chairman Gates asked about resale of the units and those be restricted. Mr. Mutter stated the transfer fee is a discouragement for the seller to sell to other than an Eagle County employee. Mr. Gates suggested the 1 % will not be a deterring factor to someone intent on buying a ski condo. Chairman Gates asked about restrictions put on the Creek. Mr. Mutter explained the DOWs concerns and how their discussions have progressed. They are prepared to come up with a mitigation plan. Chairman Gates asked if there is a history of what species have been there in the past. Mr. Mutter explained the bank is deteriorating as a result of cattle grazing the willows. That is just one of the species that had been mentioned. Chairman Gates asked about beaver control. He stated they like willows better than cows. Chairman Gates asked if staff or engineering have anything to say before going to public comment. Jeannie Huff, representing the Homestead Homeowners Association, referred to the letter sent to the Board, but wanted to cover a couple of other issues. She stated in some of the meetings she has learned the Commissioners process for approval or disapproval. She asked they listen to the people. If this property isn't owned by these people and it isn't zoned accordingly at this time, the Board should wait. She stated there is so much still to be done in Edwards. She referred to the continual construction in Edwards. She then spoke to "affordable" housing. The County has not defined affordable. She said when you look in the paper you are finding the people who are earning $10 an hour or less. $150,000 as an average price is too much. She would encourage the Board before approving affordable, to define it. Is it a dream? Thirdly, she asks the Board to be very selective. It sounds like a good plan but is it the best plan at the right time. Are they creating a Vail style ghetto of the future. 400 units in one spot may cause that. She asks them to be selective. Now is not the time for this project. She said finally she does not like more commercial in with residential. B&B will not be forever, it will one day be residential as well. Susan Eves, a resident in Edwards, stated she is representing the Lake Creek Homeowners Association. She read a letter into the record and turned in a petition with approximately 75 signatures. The letter addressed the concerns of the Homeowners association. Bud Nichol, a resident of Match Point townhomes for 3.5 years, stated he has worked in some pretty big cities but has had residence here for the last 26 years. He sated he detests going to Denver and if this goes through will they have a round about. This has more to do with traffic. He stated he is impressed with Cordillera and he is not knocking them. But something has to be done with the traffic. He spoke to last year's hold up in Homestead and the blocking of the road for an emergency. Mr. Nichol stated they don't have emergency egress. Dave Sloan, a Homestead resident and on the Board at Homestead, stated they have previously submitted a petition signed by 100 residents and added another 28 names to the list. He believes these additional signatures indicate opposition even though some of the issues have been addressed. He stated they are dealing with a 12 to 13 year old master plan for Edwards. Other changes have been discussed by CDOT for highway 6. If this project is approved, there will be a huge traffic impact. They haven't discussed the 1000 trips a day on a day to day basis on a two lane county road. Regarding open space, the fifty some acres, though restricted for most of year will be so because of the water. It is an area that cannot be utilized because ofthe wetlands. He believes open space should be usable. Discussing affordable housing, $150,000 sounds reasonable if you look at the other places available. But what is that in square footage. He questioned the long range plan to keep this affordable. He suggested they not jump on that bandwagon. One of the recommendations came from Vail Associates, a large employer who is supporting moving their employees into another area. He suggested some of the employee housing be placed 4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 within the gates of Cordillera. He questioned the commercial space and they stress the need to slow down and see what they have done before this is approved. He stated one of the things that bothers him about the initial presentation, is there seems to be more wrong with the proposal than what is right. He questions the approval of the Sketch plan giving credence to the fact there is more information that needs to be provided before approval. He feels there needs to be more definite ideas on how they will correct the problems rather than hearing they may correct them. Tom Bachus, Four Eagle Ranch, stated he wants to put on record that he has a financial interest in how this thing goes. He stated he is also a real estate agent who introduced the buyers to the sellers. Mr. Bachus stated when actively in real estate he was getting involved in big pieces of land. He got to know the Brett land piece which was known as kind of crummy because of the wetlands, and the problems it had. Then it started looking better. He stated he has watched the development in the County and he sees what is happening in the state of Colorado and he has some real concerns. He believes we have a responsibility to accommodate growth. With that comes challenges with roads, and schools and hospitals, etc. What scares him more is what is really happening to the County worker. He asks about the whole middle class as well. And this is truly due to a lack of private land. When you consider 24% ofthe land is in Eagle County and two guys own most of that, we have some restrictions. Roads are a problem, there is no doubt, there are constrictions. If you want to buy land and develop, you look at the process, you'll choose to sell off 35 acre parcels. What happens to the rest of us, what happens to the middle class. He stated he sees the property as giving an opportunity to the people and does make sense for this County now. Units available can't be purchased by those who need them now. It's a good piece, it makes sense and if you look at with the obligations we have to the people here, now is the time. Gerry Flynn, represting Vail Associates, questioned hearing that this is not affordable housing. When you look at it compared to other affordable housing in the valley, this is as close as you get. They have addressed some of the issues of affordable housing. $10 an hour will not qualify for anyone living in Eagle County. This is addressing the concerns ofthose earing $30 to $40 a year. They are small but comparatively speaking, they are still affordable. We continue to see growth and have any economic success, this segment of the market must be addressed. Jerry Engle, a partner and president of Cordillera, stated he has lived here for seven years and in Summit County before that. He stated the best thing that has happened to him is that he moved here. He stated he was fortunate enough to invest and live in homestead when he moved here. The key was getting in. Even though $8 to $10 people are as important as are the middle managers. We are a world resort destination. We have issues, transportation, housing, recreation. These are our problems and the need to solve them is ours. He credited Mike Mutter and those who worked on this project. They have heard what people have said and it is getting better. Part of Cordillera's strength is having gone through this process. He suggested they move forward. You don't have a choice not to do anything. He stated we give second home owners a better opportunity than they receive anywhere in the world. The transfer fund, the trust they are setting up, are thoughtful solutions to this issue. Waiting is not the answer. The economics are not as attractive as other solutions. As a corporate citizen and someone who is going to live here a long time, asks that they look at this project and work this thing through. Jennie Huff stated she would like to say this County is not standing still. Don't we have a lot of affordable housing coming about. There are units in the MLS today between $130 and $150 thousand. The Board adjourned for a five minute break. Chairman Gates asked if not here, where. And how much, what are the impacts. He stated we've come up with a bus system but it is hard to get people to use it. Commissioner Johnson questioned the open space calculations and questioned it being different. Ms. Eastley stated since 58 acres is unusable because it's contained in the wetlands, they have taken that area out. To require that 25% of that area be dedicated, it can't. 25% of use able open space comes out to 15 acres. That is in addition to the 58 acres dedicated to the land trust. Commissioner Johnson stated they have not used this formula before and because this is not developable, is it exempt. Mr. Fox stated they have a significant area contained within the flood plain. They have deducted the land acreage because it is not very significant. In this case, you still have a need for the open space and he referred to the definition which puts emphasis on "useable". Commissioner Johnson asked what else is subtracted out as undevelopable land. Mr. Fox responded only flood plain. 5 Commissioner Phillips suggested the open space being dedicated will always be there. She asked if the 14.7 was agreeable to them. Mr. Mutter stated each of the development parcels would have their share of the open space determined. Commissioner Phillips stated nothing at this time is set in concrete. She questioned the outstanding issues with the Corps of Engineers and that they are being solved. She asked if this will be phased. Mr. Mutter responded they will develop each parcel separately but some may be done at the same time. The reality is that this is really five different development parcels. They intend to start out will 150 residential units. He said typically the pace of construction is dictated by sales. She asked about the 1 % housing trust fund. She asked Jim Fritze if it is something that can be done. Mr. Fritze responded they may do so by covenants. Commissioner Phillips asked about the 16 units. Mr. Mutter explained they have kept the 14 in tact, redesigned the two and then added. Four ofthe fourteen were sold so they don't have control. They will be able to influence those owners to participate in the public improvements however. Commissioner Phillips asked about need for commercial in that area. Mr. Mutter stated that was in response to planning commission. B & B has stated their limitation on gravel has nothing to do with their headquarters. They have said that they are concerned with having children come into their yards and they suggested a more compatible transition. He discussed the road and the challenges they will have. The entrance to B & B was a shared entrance. They have moved the entrance. The commercial use will be professional office space. Commissioner Phillips stated another concern is the traffic impact. Chairman Gates stated he has a definition of affordable housing which is whatever the consumer is willing to pay. Commissioner Johnson stated he is still concerned with the open space calculations. Another concern is the traffic using Hill Crest Drive. They are talking 426 units accessing this road without emergency access and the traffic they are looking at. Between Arrowhead and Cordillera there are somewhere around 3,500 units still to be built. He agrees with Mr. Bachus and the responsibility to accommodate growth. He stated he's not sure who all has this moral and ethical obligation and questions if it is just government. With the master plan, affordable housing is encouraged within the developments. These are things we must look at. Just because it says its affordable, doesn't mean it is. Now this will be compared to Lake Creek. Where do we go. We have over 3,000 units yet to be built and none of them will be affordable. He stated he understands it is very difficult to build affordable housing. They are trying to make this as economical as possible. This private enterprise is trying to address a public need. The 2,500 or 3,000 lots dedicated today, may not happen, its what the market will require today. Jerry Engle stated it is the velocity of build out as well. Cordillera sold 57 homesites last year and 80 finished homes. The pace of development on new homes is lower than in the past. Chairman Gates asked if less density can be lived with. Mr. Mutter stated as they have it today, it is slightly less than they have at Lake Creek, but each unit has its own attached garage. Mr. Mutter stated they are looking at all the options and when they are designing the infrastructure they may loose a building or two. Commissioner Phillips stated we are not offering incentives and have asked for affordable housing. On Lake Creek Village, she defends it as being affordable and it is totally full. They have requests all the time for those units and the people living there feel it is affordable. She said she would hate to see the price go up by making this less dense. Commissioner Johnson asked what responsibility they "government" has. He asked why they would buy the land if only 24 units were going to be sold. Mr. Mutter stated they have gone a step further than other developers in this County to make this more affordable. They are working with David Carter and want to use this as a model for future developers to follow. This is truly an affordable home and there is a program to help an applicant get in. In the program they are developing there would be bank support through the process. They are going to help the people through it. The long term issues and the # of days to have it available for locals can be worked out. It is a lot easier form them to build a $500,000 lot at Cordillera than to put this sketch plan together. They are committed to Cordillera and its employees. Commissioner Johnson asked Jerry Engle about the sale of his Homestead unit. Chairman Gates stated he is sure there are issues that will have to be addressed and he is sure there are 6 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 things that will need to be addressed. Commissioner Johnson stated there are still issues that have not been discussed. He spoke to the trail and easement on the West side of Lake Creek. Mr. Mutter stated in preliminary plan they intend to sit down with the Trails people and meet with them for recommendations. They would like to integrate into the bike paths and there will be an internal trail system. The DOW and other agencies don't always agree and they would prefer not to have a trail along Lake Creek to the river. They will have to build consensus with all agencies. Chairman Gates asked about access from the north side. Mr. Mutter explained the location for fishing access. Chairman Gates asked if they will be passing through the development. Mr. Mutter stated that will come with design and they will have to address parking issues and access points. Those will be integrated into the plan. Commissioner Johnson asked if the commercial area is necessary for this proposal. Mr. Mutter stated financially it is. They are enhancing the riparian open space so every piece of developable land needs to be developed. Mr. Mutter stated they are closing in five days. Kathy Eastley returned to staffs report and the recommended conditions. She stated other concerns will be addressed through preliminary plan and the other applicable plans reviewed at that time. She spoke to the setbacks from highway six and from the river corridor. Ms. Eastley reviewed the conditions but suggested they strike #7 leaving the use to be determined. Staff recommended approval with the following conditions: 1) The Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit requirements must be resolved prior to submittal of a Preliminary Plan 2) Avoidance of cottonwood trees and significant vegetation along Lake Creek shall be incorporated into the Preliminary Plan 3) The entry level housing plan shall be incorporated into the preliminary plan 4) A detached, paved path along Highway 6 shall be incorporated into the preliminary plan 5) The setback from Lake Creek shall be 75' 6) The setback from Highway 6 shall be 50' 7) Planning Area E shall not have a land use designation at this time, other than an interim use as a park or open space. When land use patterns change in the area, future development and land use designation may be further evaluated and approved through a PUD Amendment 8) The applicant shall provide a minimum of 14.75 acres of use able Open Space 9) The PUD Guide must include wildlife mitigation measures as recommended by the Division of Wildlife. These measurers include, but are not limited to, dog control, fencing restriction, and trash removal 10) Emergency access to the east, between the Eagle River and the railroad tracks, must be evaluated and if feasible, incorporated into the Preliminary Plan. This must include evaluation of acquisition of easements through private properties to the east. The Board concurred to change #7. Commissioner Phillips moved to approve file number PD-142-96-S, Brett Ranch, incorporating Staff findings and conditions with #7 being changed to 2,400 square feet to be determined for use. She incorporated the findings of the planning staff. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion for discussion. In discussion, Commissioner Johnson stated he would like to see more of the developers coming in with a plan for affordable housing. He said there are concerns that must be taken care of, such as traffic, and he cannot support this application at this time. Commissioner Phillips believes those issues can be discussed at preliminary plan. Chairman Gates asked if staff has a concern with these issues not being resolved at this time. Ms. Eastley stated this is sketch plan and they are looking at all means to mitigate the problems. This developer does not necessarily need to solve all the problems. Through the preliminary plan process, everything will need to be looked at a later stage. Commissioner Johnson stated, not this developer, but others who have not completed their projects, will continue to have impacts that this body has not yet seen. Chairman Gates questions at sketch plan you must substantially comply. 7 Chairman Gates called for the question on the motion. Commissioners Phillips and Gates voting aye and Commissioner Johnson voting no. Eagle County Family Center Jim Fritze asked the Board review the items tabled yesterday. He stated the first item is that of the Eagle County Family Center. Commissioner Johnson asked about the commitment oftwo months at $5000.00. Kathleen Forinash, Health & Human Services Director, explained the Family Center had previously requested this but then learned the Resource Family Center may be interested in contracting with the Family Center. The Resource Center will take over this responsibility. Ms. Forinash stated they budgeted about was $1500 per year in a work session last fall. Ms. Forinash stated ifthey are cut a check for the full amount, they will carry over the difference into next year. Jim Fritze stated it could be put in a letter but it will not alter the contract. James Fritze asked if the Family Center is a Not-for-Profit organization. Mrs. Forinash responded yes. This was item B. Item C is the change order #1 for contract with warning lites and equipment inc. of 1996 centerline marking project. Commissioner Johnson asked if the collateral will be used. Mr. Roussos responded perhaps. Mr. Fritze stated when the Board draws on collateral, there is only one opportunity. Commissioner Johnson stated he wants to be sure it will not be paid for by County funds. Mr. Roussos said it will not be county funds. Item D. is the Agreement between eagle County and Colorado West Mental Health for renewal of the Contract for the Jail. Mr. Fritze the dates can be changed on the contract but it will have to go back to CWMH for signatures. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve items labeled for yesterday's consent calendar being items B, C, D, with a change in the contract of item D to an expiration of 12/31/97. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. TEFRA Healing, Vail Valley Medical Center Bonds, Resolution 96-158 Jim Fritze, County Attorney, stated the next item on the agenda was the TEFRA Hearing, Vail Valley Medical Center Bonds and Bond Resolution Vail Valley Medical Center Development Revenue Bonds. He stated the first part is regarding the hearing. Notice was published twice in the Vail Daily and once in the Eagle Valley Enterprise. Mr. Fritze explained the loan agreement to the Board. Mr. Fritze stated since the notification publication, the Vail Valley Medical Center has asked to restrict the use of the bond dollars. He stated he has consulted with Jack Gardner, acting as council for the Board, with regard to the notice. He indicated the notice is legally sufficient for the IRS. Chairman Gates asked if anyone would like to do so. He stated they are providing assurance that their objective is to provide employee housing. He referred to a letter from Paul Johnston and asked ifthere are questions. Commissioner Johnson asked about the removal of income limits and asked what those are. David Carter, Housing Coordinator, stated the County medium income for this year is $57,000. The definition for the Board to sign off on will be half of that. 80% will be low and moderate is $68,000. This is 1996 data. That Board has not determined if they will accept the board's breakdowns. Jim Fritze stated previously they have provided council to the task force. Commissioner Johnson stated he doesn't understand where the limits come in. Mr. Fritze stated there is a percentage of income figure applied. Chairman Gates asked if people will be paying different rates of rent. Mr. Fritze stated that is not before the Board today. Commissioner Johnson asked what they need for a guarantee for the employee housing. They have preliminary plan approval and approval for employee housing. They can pull the permits because they have been approved. Jim Fritze stated the only guarantee would have to be contractual. Basically taking the letter and turning it into a contract. 8 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 Commissioner Phillips stated when they agreed to bond for the affordable housing part of the process she was very comfortable. To change here, after the agreement of affordable housing, to remodeling and equipment, she does not feel as sure. Mr. Fritze asked what the savings will be. Mr. McMahon stated the differential is .5%, about 50 basis points, approximately $20,000 per year. Discussion continued on the bonds. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the TEFRA Hearing, Vail Valley Medical Center Bonds and Bond Resolution Vail Valley Medical Center Development Revenue Bonds authorizing the Chairman to sign contingent that the contract is presented and guarantees the building of the employee housing. The Chairman and Clerk to the Board shall be authorized to sign the revenue bonds contingent on the contractual agreement to build 18 units either prior to or in conjunction to phase 2 at the Edwards site. Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Mr. Fritze clarified the Resolution and read the appropriate parts into the record. Mr. Fritze stated these bonds are not a general obligation. The vote was unanimous. Jim Fritze asked for a second motion to authorize the Chairman to sign the contract stated above. Commissioner Philip moved accordingly. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Eagle County Annex, Avon Center Mike Bradley, introduced Rex Gambrell from the Avon Center Building, stating they thought it would be worth getting an overview on this project as it stands. Mr. Gambrell is managing the project. He stated they appear to be about five days ahead of schedule with the finish date being February 5. They are through the framing and are in the process of installing the heat. The electrical has started. After signing the lease they received two bids, Mindel Allison was awarded the bid. They are located in the Seasons right next door. He stated the cost they have is $170,000 which included materials but not heat and air, the exterior windows, and taking care of all the texturing, painting, repair. There have been a few change orders on pricing and he has passed those on to Mike and Terri. Terri Ann Giandomenico, project coordinator, stated they have not yet discussed the change orders. She stated in the packet there is a list which she is questioning some of the items on that list. She asked about some of the intracity of the window exchange on the exterior windows. Mr. Gambrell responded removing the existing windows is at no cost to the County. Jim Hartman, County Administrator, asked in summary if the landlord is providing all those things previously agreed to and that they are now running behind approximately one month. Avon would not issue the permit without a contractor selected. Mr. Gambrell stated they used the drawings to lease contract proposals. SU-354-96-S, Oleson Ranch at Whiskey Creek Paul Clarkson, Planner, presented file number SU-354-96-S, Oleson Ranch at Whiskey Creek. He stated this was a request to subdivide five acres into nine parcels. He stated these applications proposed to rezone a five acre parcel in Eagle Vail from resource to residential suburban low density (RSL) and has also submitted a companion sketch plan for eight parcels: six single family units and 2 duplex units totaling 10 dwelling units. The lots will be restricted by building envelopes. The RSL Zone District requires a minimum lot area of 15,0000 square feet. Mr. Clarkson reviewed the chronology and staffs recommendations. He included those findings in the Boards packet. Staff recommended denial of the zone change but recommended approval with the following conditions of the sketch plan: 1) The proposal proceed to the preliminary staff of review as a PUD Preliminary Plan 2) The PUD Guide shall address at a minimum a) potential for temporary overflow parking, no parking off-site b) building height restrictions and method of measurement c) floor area and lot coverage restrictions d) secondary unit restrictions 9 e) building color restrictions f) lawn area restrictions 3) Building envelopes shall be located so than an 80 foot undisturbed greenbelt is maintained along the western property line of Oleson Ranch. Building envelopes shall also be located so as to minimize site disturbance and no building envelope shall be located on any natural slope that exceeds 40% 4) Engineered plan and profile designs for the road, driveway and building sites are required that demonstrate minimized cut and fill slopes 5) Items listed in a memo from the County Engineer to Planning, dated July 30, 1996, shall be addressed 6) The applicant must demonstrate the appropriateness of the less than standard road to the County Engineer who will consider the argument in his recommendation to the Board for a variance from minimum road standards 7) The applicant shall respond to the DOW is identified issues concerning bears and dogs 8) The applicant shall coordinate the preliminary plan design with Colorado Geological Survey prior to submittal in order to insure sufficient date for review. The Planning Commission did recommend denial. It was determined the owner has the right to develop the property but not if it negatively impacts the neighborhood. Mr. Clarkson asked the Board to review the packet, all issues which will be addressed by the developer or the neighbors. Mr. Clarkson introduced Mara Kleinschmidt, representing the applicant. Chairman Gates asked about the history. Paul Clarkson stated this site came before the staff about two years ago as a preliminary analysis and the proposal was for 30 townhome units. Staff felt it was inappropriate. Given the information they had at the time, they felt a reduced number may be appropriate. Shortly thereafter, thirteen units plus a bed and breakfast were proposed. Staff believed it was still too dense and recommended denial. The Planning Commission recommended denial as well. In late April of 1995, this site came before the Board two times. The first hearing was tabled but it was heard on may 30, 1995 and the Board entertained a motion on denial, it was seconded and the applicant withdrew the file. Ms. Kleinschmidt introduced Mr. Oleson. Jack Oleson, the applicant, began in 1968 when he built the existing house. He sold the surrounding properties around the five acres in 1972. He also reserved the 9.3 acres which were turned over to the school district. Around that same time, there was talk of a County Museum. He offered land but it was refused because of location. Sometime in 1968 he helped put together the Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District. He stated he made many trips out of town to deal with this. He has been a member of the Planning Commission, sat on the Water District, developed Buffehr Creek, in 1966 and 1967 he studied what is now Eagle-Vail and Beaver Creek. He was told not to ingratiate himself but to respond to some of the allegations made to his greed, his motives, lack of sensitivity to the area and the County, and the fact he never intended to subdivide the five acres. What he is asking for today is reasonable, just and well within the scope of County regulations. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated the applications presented in 1995 were done so in the tradition of the sketch plan. She stated there are two different criteria that must be considered. The standard of review is different if a parcel is not in compliance with the master plan. She stated the Eagle County master plan says this is appropriate for in-fill development. They are talking within the scheme of residential. They want to address how this fits within the scope of the community. What they consider to be the neighborhood and compatibility will be stated. She asked how far you go, only the 250 feet, beyond that, is it geologically based. The standard is the general health ofthe community. There is a predominance of duplex zoning and though people may not have built, the zoning is still duplex. They believe the single families will be less intrusive. They are trying to be site sensitive and do not want to impact the parcel any more than necessary and the single family sites do that. She asked the Board look at the other exceptions. She said they have provided an extensive analysis for them to consider as they are looking at the exceptions. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated because of lack of zoning, this was zoned resource by default. She stated there is plenty of open space available by the BLM and Forest Service lands, as well as the golf course. Jim Fritze asked if this is within in the Eagle-Vail PUD. Mr. Clarkson stated no, that was adopted in 1979. The plat was approved in 1972. Zoning was never officially placed on the parcel until 1979. The label "exception" legally describes this parcel. In this case it is called "the exception". Their certificate and dedication of the plat failed to actually except this parcel of land from the plat. Mr. Clarkson further explained. The failure to except it becomes a final plat labeled accordingly. This is a 10 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 filing # 1 plat. Mr. Fritze asked ifthere was a letter of dedication. Mr. Clarkson stated it was signed by Fred Green as Grouse Mountain. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated there is a 15 year period of time that the property was controlled by the covenants. This parcel was ignored all the way around. Mr. Fritze stated there was no pun Guide when the zoning was adopted. It was adopted by the County in 1974. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated it got the pun zoning in 1979. Chairman Gates asked about the other lots having been changed but this one was ignored. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated the applicants intention was to use the land for his retirement and that is why it has come in now. One of the exceptions was for highway six. The second exception is now condominiums. And now they have this one. Chairman Gates stated they need to clarify today what is the desire. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated they worked with staff and the very lowest density is the RSL. Staffhas indicated they believe there is an interest in turning it into a pun. Traditionally a pun zone is for mixed use, it is all residential as proposed and it is not quite five acres. The Eagle County Land Use Regulations have very particular considerations. She reviewed those under RSL. They agreed there would have to be exceptions to the size of the buildings, how the buildings will occur and remaining the integrity of the site. Part of what is attractive is to be able to live within the trees. The point being is there is a way to do this in RSL or in pun. They have to make far less exceptions going RSL than pun. They considered putting it in the Eagle Vail PUD, but zoning a duplex is inappropriate. The restrictions would require further exceptions. Amending the Eagle Vail pun is a complicated process. The realistic option is what is being presented today. Jim Fritze spoke to the zone change criteria. He stated when the County did the zoning, it was zoned Resource. That has been in a number of the resolutions. This is an unusual circumstance and there normally is not an exception. Ms. Kleinschmidt stated she was reluctant to call it resource because it is mystifying. The answer to it being non conforming, there is no doubt about it. Terrill Knight, Knight Planning, spoke to the site and the sketch plan as presented today. He stated he was not involved in the original application but then was asked to review it to see what might be appropriate. He suggested the single family homes. They proposed 11 units on the site with different configuration. His recommendation was single family with caretaker units. The master plan designates the zoning categories. Zoning as recommended 2 to 12 units an acre which is similar to what Eagle Vail is. He stated the original plan was reduced by a lot because of the concerns voiced by the neighborhood. They did listen to their comments and through this process he attended the Eagle Valley Homeowners meeting. The master plan recommends in fill development. If it occurs, some may object but the master plan says it should. They would like to have something that is equal to the development that is there today. They looked at the master plan and the criteria required. He referred to page 4 and 5 of staffs recommendations. He stated they have spent a great deal of time to get here. Commissioner Johnson asked about meeting five out of seven of the open space criteria. He stated three of the categories are not applicable. Mr. Knight concurred. He spoke of the map done 17 years ago and the conditions at that time. It had been zoned for residential development and had been built on. If those criteria were applied today, it would be different. After 17 years, clearly a reevaluation would show differently. The next issue was the question ofthe condition of the geology on the site. They hired a geologist, Dr. Young who is here today, who had two reports done and his report is quite clear that the geology is extremely safe. Dr. Young, a resident of Grand Junction, stated to understand this he realized there is something more than the average problem, he did some better mapping. He spoke to the glaciation and showed his findings on the map presented. They dug two pits and ended up in bedrock. In pit three they found soil. In pit #4 they dug down 11 feet and hit bedrock again and at the last pit they ended up having problems. Of the five pits dug, they hit bedrock on three. Any construction done will reach bedrock. Commissioner Johnson asked about the difficulties on hole #5. Dr. Young stated they found a power line and decided not to dig any deeper. Mr. Knight asked if Mr. Haynes letter is in the packet. He handed out a second copy. He asked the Board to 11 notice the concerns that proper building practices be observed. Mr. Knight referred to the first map. He showed the parcels on the map. Commissioner Phillip asked about the lot size adjacent to the proposed development. Mr. Knight stated they vary from 2 acres plus to quarter acre lots. Commissioner Phillips asked if the current Olsen residence in is that parcel. Mr. Knight responded yes and showed them on the map. They did a slope map and Mr. Knight explained that it had been irrigated. They have been very careful with the siting of the buildings. They chose to eliminate one unit entirely and they shortened the road. To do a high quality project, they are instituting design standards to maintain it. They want to follow the general trend of the Eagle Vail style. Concerning the zoning issue, this was a left over piece, though it was a legally created parcel. As the master plan suggests RSL, RSM and MF is compatible. In the RSL zone, this parcel conforms to every facet. He submitted a summary of the density. He stated they meet the minimum on every lot and exceed it in most cases. They are controlling the lot size and are committing to that at sketch plan. The issue becomes clear, the staff has determined it is appropriate for the site and the number of units. They would prefer the PUD process. Retaining walls will be used to help in the preservation of the lots. There are ways on the steeper slopes to build higher. At sketch plan hearing, another planner commented that it was fairly steep in places and they should work with those slopes. Mr. Knight pointed out the intersection on the site and stated it is very safe and provides plenty of site distance. He stated they will be happy to respond to questions. Commissioner Phillips asked if the road now encroaches upon the five acre parcel. She asked about right- of-way. They are not clear as to whether it was dedicated or if Jack owns it. As part of the process it will be dedicated. Chairman Gates opened it up to public comment. John Fenney, a resident of Eagle Vail for seventeen years, stated there is a great concern on their part about the presentation. First of all and from an emotional point of view, he would like to commend Mr. Oleson on his vision. Many of those here today bought their property with that vision. The character of this neighborhood has changed. The reality is that there are single family homes on one plus acre lots in this neighborhood. What they see of the community is rather different than what the developer is now seeing. Dr. Feeney stated the red dots on the map show those who attended the last Planning Commission meeting. He stated most of what is up there are larger lots averaging over one acre. The smallest one is about 3/4 of and acre and the largest about 2 acres. Chairman Gates asked about the duplex zoning on the lots that many of them have chosen to build single family homes. He stated many of them are willing to change the zoning on their lots. He believes they are being crammed into a legal description that will destroy their community. Dr. Feeney referred to the Brawn letter and the Land Use Regulations. Dr. Feeney stated it doesn't meet the open space master plan criteria. That at least one of the criteria is met. Dr. Feeney referred to the sketch plan criteria. Dr. Feeney asked Dr. Young about the discovery of bedrock and he does not think it is compatible with the neighborhood. There are many concerns about the site, the slopes of the site, the safety concerns, and density of the area. Chairman Gates stated that assumptions have been made and Jack Oleson was one of the first to build up there. Rick Fields, a landscape architect, analyzed the site proposal. Mr. Fields showed his slope analysis on a map. He explained the map to the Board. He stated this is not a flat lot, it is very steep. Disturbance is one of the concerns. Mr. Fields went on to explain the grading. He suggested the building enveloped be defined for each of the lots and they would like to see a grading plan as well as the building envelope locations. John Nichols, on behave ofthe Eagle Vail Metropolitan District, stated the issue is going to come down to how many homes are going to be put on this property. They are feeling three to five kitchens is appropriate. A couple of their reasons is the danger on the road. He stated they had submitted the rest of their information and wanted to reiterate their stance. Jerry Coats, a resident and homeowner in Eagle Vail for 20 years, stated he has been a homeowner and builder for many years. Mr. Coats spoke to a violation. He stated the slope and the grades are excessive. Most over 40% which creates certain limitation. He stated the homes will end up being three stories, skinny and ugly. He is concerned about parking, snow storage, and traffic. Mr. Coats showed the aspen grove on the road and believes it will be moon shaped. The water consumption is already restricted. They don't have the water. What about snow storage. The biggest impact will be on the golf course which is very unique. He suggests the visual beauty will be lost around the 18th fairway. He then discussed the slicing into BLM and into the Ole sons property. He said this is 12 ~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EAGLE, COLORADO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869 not a concern to take lightly because accidents will happen. He is concerned about the trees. He figures they are between two and three hundred years old. Four of the houses are within the Aspen grove. He stated they don't have the water to revegetate. He is concerned about the negative visual impact. He asked the Board to reject the present plan. This density is out of site. Mr. Oleson stated he's really unsure of how many golf balls have ended up there. Johnny Penwell, president of Eagle Vail Homeowners for 2 and a half years, spoke to the in-fill issue and this is not that kind of a situation. Visually, the lot is beautiful and can been seen from a great distance. He understands we are reaching a point of in-fill. We are seeing the stuff go up the hillsides. He spoke about a letter written by a geologist in 1996 because he still thinks they are relative. He read portions of the letter into the record. Lawrence Cross, area resident, spoke and said he is the next door neighbor of Mr. Oleson. He has taken and showed photographs to the Board. He stated the trees are much farther up hill than shown in the plan. Pam Cross stated she is the next door neighbor ofMr. Oleson and showed her home on the property. She stated she has 6,500 square feet on a 3/4 acre lot. She lives there and there is a lot of green area around her. The Paragos are their neighbors. Mrs. Cross stated she would clarify that the golfball issue is a real issue. She spoke of the corner and the problems in the winter. When that road was designed, the exception was there as a five acre parcel. She can't believe any engineer would design a road as such. They designed the road for what was there and it is adequate. People should show down, but they don't. She believes this is an unsafe project. Patty Penwell stated they are not NIMBY's but they believe the property should be developed responsibly and should be compatible. She stated there have been many people who have been part of this who are not present today. She read the names of those not present who are not in support of this project. She stated about four weeks ago they were before the planning commission and this was unanimously denied. She read comments from those on the planning commission voiced at the last hearing. She urged the Board to deny this plan. Michelle Perrigo, who lives on lot 113, stated he is a neighbor ofthe exception. He said they purchased their lot in 1976. He asked what the exception is and no one could explain. He stated he worked with Fred Green, Art Kelton, and Jack Oleson. They have enjoyed their home. He feels betrayed today. Ron Brave spoke to the piece of property and spoke to the fact that it is extremely steep. He understands that some development may be required. Mr. Brave spoke of the massive cuts that may be required and the disturbance of a lot of ground and a lot of trees. Without having building envelopes, they believe the number of sites proposed is too many. The top of Whiskey Hill caters to people using the recreational areas above. As far as the site distance is concerned, only allows the driver to watch the car sliding for more time. Mr. Brave spoke to the number of homes and the area that is actually buildable. He suggests they not see it as a five acre building lot, because it is not. He reiterated they would like a reasonable proposal. The one before the Board should be denied. Chairman Gates closed the public comment. The applicant chose to rebut the concerns. Paul Clarkson stated they have gone from thirty units to eight. He stated they never did consider the thirty unit plan and they are now down to ten. Mr. Clarkson stated in the development of the criteria, one has to be subjective. They did use topos and GSGS quads. The applicant has indicated they have gone beyond the requirements of a normal sketch plan. This may be true on a flat parcel but the applicant has gone beyond as a result of the geological survey and they have done one to verify that. Commissioner Johnson asked about the lack of response from the Forest Service as far as wildfire is concerned. He questioned how the last units would be serviced. Mr. Knight stated those would be full driveways. Mr. Knight stated they would not drive to the end but go down the driveway to service the home. He stated in no case would they drive into the end. Commissioner Phillips questioned staffs direction. Mr. Clarkson stated they are recommending denial of the zone change and approval of the sketch plans with conditions. He stated the zone change they see better being served by a PUD. Commissioner Johnson referred to the letter dated the 24th. Mr. Knight did respond and confirmed that there is an eight inch line. Commissioner Phillips moved to deny file number ZC-276-96, Oleson Ranch at Whiskey Creek as a zone change but approve it as a minor PUD. Commissioner Johnson stated to approve it as a PUD it would require conditions. Jim Fritze stated if they chose to do this, the sketch plan and the preliminary plan would be combined. 13 Discussion followed on the motion. Commissioner Phillips moved to deny file number ZC-276-96, Oleson Ranch at Whiskey Creek as a zone change incorporating staff findings. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion.. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Johnson moved to deny SU-354-96-S incorporating findings that will read as 2.17.02(3)(a) being not in conformance and B, C, D as listed in staffs report. Chairman Gates seconded the motion. Discussion followed on the motion. Chairman Gates called for the question on the motion. Commissioners Johnson and Gates voting aye and Commissioner Phillips voting no. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until December 16, 1996. d - A~;;~~4i\\ Attest: A () 1M~~61 Clerk to the Board '--,i:~.-~t-~1r ~.. ~~+xJL Chai 14 -