Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/22/99 PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 22, 1999 Present: Johnnette Phillips Tom Stone James Johnson, Jr. James Fritze James Hartmann Sara 1. Fisher Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Attorney County Administrator Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Consent Calendar Chairman Phillips stated the first item on the agenda was the consent calendar as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for week of March 22, 1999, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of payroll for March 25, 1999, subject to review by County Administrator C) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting of March 8, 1999 D) Resolution 99-035, re Vista Hi drive, acceptance of road for maintenance E) Resolution 99-036, accepting and appointing members of the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority, representing Minturn, Eagle, Vail and Red Cliff F) Bid Award for two new additions to the fleet, two 1999 Dodge Intrepids. Commissioner Johnson stated he misplaced the minutes for March 8 and will not be able to vote on those. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the consent calendar as presented excluding item C. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to approve item C ofthe consent calendar. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. Commissioners Phillips and Stone voting aye and Commissioner Johnson abstaining. Plat & Resolution Signing Terri Bernath, Planner, presented the following plat for the Board's consideration: 5MB-00164, Lot 9. Eagle-Vail Commercial Service Center. She stated this was a Minor "Type B" Subdivision, a resubdivision of Lot 9, Eagle-Vail Commercial Service Center to create two commercial lots, Lot 9 W and Lot 9 E, along with a common access easement. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve final plat file number 5MB-00164, Lot 9, Eagle-Vail Commercial Service Center, incorporating staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. 1 03-22-1999 Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Vail Food Services, Inc. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. Earlene Roach, Eagle County Liquor Inspector, stated on February 22, 1999 an application for change in corporate name was presented to the Board. The name change was from Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. and Vail Food Services, Inc., to Beaver Creek Mountain Dining Company and Vail Mountain Dining Company. These applications were in error. Vail Food Services and Beaver Creek Food Services did not change their names but added new entities under a new corporate name. She requested the Board rescind their motion of the February 22nd. Commissioner Johnson moved to reconsider the vote on the change in name of February 22, 1999 approving a change in corporate name for Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Renee Black, Asst. County Attorney, stated what they are really trying to do is have another trade name under which they are going to do business, but they do not wish to change the name of the license holder. Discussion took place on the how to proceed. Ms. Black suggested they make a motion not to change the corporate name. Chairman Phillips asked why they don't make the motion to withdraw the previous motion to keep it from being a negative act. Ms. Black suggested Robert's Rules would require that it be voted down. Commissioner Johnson stated they took final action on the vote and therefore can not withdraw it. Commissioner Johnson moved to change the corporate name for Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. to Beaver Creek Mountain Dining. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. All three Commissioners voted no, the motion did not pass. The corporate name is not changed. Commissioner Stone moved to reconsider the vote on the change in name of February 22, 1999 approving a change in corporate name for Vail Food Services, Inc. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Johnson moved to change the corporate name from Vail Food Services to Vail Mountain Dining. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. All three Commissioners voted, the motion did not pass. The corporate name is not changed. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDS-00014, Deer Park PUD Scot Hunn, Planner, presented file number PDS-00014, Deer Park PUD. He stated this matter was tabled from March 8, 1999. He stated this was a request to create PUD to include 106 dwelling units on 8.816 acres. Mr. Hunn stated he understood there would be additional letters handed in today. Discussion continued on wether public record was still open or not. The Board determined to hear citizens that had not spoken at a previous meeting. 2 03-22-1999 Patti Haefeli, Contra Engineering, handed out information to the Board. She spoke to the packets and explained them as being information on financing and letters in favor of the project. She spoke to the letters received from parties in opposition and their responses to those letters. Ms. Haefeli reviewed their responses. Ms. Haefeli spoke to the growth in the Edwards area and the density as it is today and potential for growth in the future. Ms. Haefeli stated they did try to reach the local homeowners in the area. She spoke to the traffic figures and the traffic control plan. Ms. Haefeli responded to other points and to the traffic. She spoke of the off site road improvements and the review of the Edwards intersection. She spoke to the impact fee that will be applied to the highway improvements. Water, there is a letter from Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation. She spoke to the Edwards Sub-area plan. She spoke to the changes in Edwards since 1985. She stated the document is dated but needs to be addressed. She explained this area, according to the plan, will be the size of Glenwood. She spoke to the view corridor and the fact it can be preserved. She spoke to the conformance with the new County Master plan. She spoke to the community center. She stated this density reduction by creating country-side designation is not appropriate. The plan stated there are a mixture of housing types and this is what Deer Park is about. She spoke to the demand of Lake Creek and Berry Creek. She spoke to the bike and pedestrian paths. She spoke to the school district's ability to serve the client base. Ms. Haefeli referred to the 4 to 6 units per acre recommendation and the creation of sprawl. She read articles "Sprawl is Like the Weather" and "Building Common Ground", both recommending higher density rather than sprawl and outdated ideas like large lots and low density development. Ms. Haefeli related the articles to the proposal. She spoke to Brett Ranch and River Pines. She spoke to density calculations and the open space at Brett Ranch which has a great deal of floodplain. She spoke to the comparison of projects which have larger acreage. She spoke to the condos comparing to the townhomes and them not being the same product and appealing to a different market. She spoke to River Pines and the floodplain there as well. She suggested it may be more similar to Deer Park than others. She spoke to speculation of the units and that this is a free market product. Resale is how it works. She stated building height is 35 feet. She stated this type of product is in great demand. She referred to the policies it conforms with in the County regulations. She suggested if the Eagle River Mobile Home Park comes forward for re-development, it should then be discussed. She stated this project should not be held to that. She referred to the letter received from Warner Development and responded to the concerns not previously addressed. She spoke to the use of Highway 6 and the lighting and density. Edwards Metropolitan District letters were addressed and she spoke to this project paying its way. She stated that will happen with road approval, school land dedication fees, water/sewer tap fees. Ms. Haefeli spoke to the other items to be addressed. Ms. Haefeli stated though the sale price of the property does not have to be disclosed, she agrees it is public information. She spoke to the developable land in Eagle County. Ms. Haefeli spoke to the transportation corridor, the airport, light rail, being two hours from Denver, telecommunications, etc. An additional 9000 residents are expected by 2010. She spoke again to the location being perfect for density. The reduction of density should start outside the community center. Ms. Haefeli spoke to the number of building permits issued and the need for additional multi-family units. Out of242 permits, Brett Ranch was the only for sale units under $300,000. She stated there is not a lot of multi family land that has not been built. Staffhas reviewed this plan and it has been considered in conformance. Ms. Haefeli stated they have people here to speak to financing from Norwest Bank and First Western Mortgage. Ginger Marshall, GMAC Mortgage, was present to speak in support of local housing. She stated she is the Chairperson for the Eagle Valley down payment assistant group. She stated she would like to support the fact of non-sprawl, high density works well. She is moving to the River Pines project. She was available to answer questions for financing. Jim Anderson asked what kind of income is needed for a person to buy a home worth $250,000 3 03-22-1999 to $300,000 with a down payment of 5%. Ms. Marshall responded a gross monthly income of $5,500. Mr. Anderson questioned the Homeowners Association and what the dues would be. Ms. Marshall stated those are taken into consideration as well as mortgage insurance because of the lack of down payment. Ms. Marshall stated this would be dual income housing for professional people. Ann Kleimer, area resident, came to the mic and read them for the record. She read the letter in care of Abby at the Vail Daily in support of the project. A second letter from Carol Moore was read into the record in support. Aaron Dygert was in support of the project. Don Ploughman, Ploughman Construction Company, also in favor ofthe project. The next letter from Scott Rivers was in favor ofthe Deer Park project. The second to last was a letter sent by Art Baker supporting the project. The last letter read was from Jason Hunter including an addendum with 13 signatures. Ms. Haefeli spoke to the graphs they submitted as requested by Commissioner Johnson. Art Kleimer spoke to the three areas. #1 is there availability - is there overbuilding. He spoke to the charts and stated there is no land available currently that is multi-family. #2 is there in fact the need- he spoke to the 48 people on the waiting list and the ad of Steve Greeley over the weekend. There have been ten more people that have shown considerable interest. He suggested they don't need to beat that horse anymore. Currently there are no properties on the market which are greater than 1,400 square feet, gas heat and two car garage for less than $270,000. He spoke to the price point issues and the base unit being $220,000 without the basement. That is the starting point. They project well below the $300,000 mark. He stated the housing just is not there even if the price goes up to $300,000. Mr. Kleimer stated this is the third step of a nine step process, sketch plan. He stated the Planning Commisison approved the site with 11 units per acre which is 97 units. They are talking about 9 more units. He stated they have spent six months working with staff to get this to what they feel is right. He spoke to the conditions which he believes are standard and they are willing to agree to. He stated they would like to have the additional one unit per acre for the people of the community. These are the dreams of our neighbors. This is morally and ethically correct and an obligation on his part to supply housing people can afford. He reminded them they will be back to show the detail and asked to be given the chance. Mr. Kleimer stated he would be happy to answer any questions. He referred to the charts they had prepared. Ms. Haefeli noted this project has never been noted as affordable and is not asking for density bonuses. She stated this is for upper middle class for which there is tremendous need and desire. She believes in this project and asks the Board vote in approval. Jim Anderson, a Homestead resident, stated when they came to Homestead they did so to find less congestion, traffic, and people. It has not been like that. Mr. Anderson spoke of their request to delay the other projects and the desire for deed restrictions. He stated they are continuing to approve more and the valley is being destroyed. He suggested that greed and money run the valley. He stated the letters are very repetitious. He spoke to the removal of nine units raising the price by $20,000. He stated the figures don't add up. He questioned the school figure. He spoke to the letters and that they total ten kids alone. He stated you have to recognize it costs money to live here. Some place it has to stop. He is not against the development, but against the concentration of the development. He asked they look at the County and not overburden the area with traffic. Elizabeth Meyers, on behalf of Homestead Owners Association, spoke to the concern of the infrastructure. She spoke to the water tank. Combinations of traffic issues and the water situation are two examples that higher density housing is not appropriate. George Gregory, a Singletree resident, suggested when the Edwards group of governing entities 4 03-22-1999 met with the County they discussed the sub-area plan. He suggested it has been updated, reaffirmed and readopted as written. He stated the fundamental problem they have is the community focus being at the center ofthe community. He stated this project would be far superior at 11, 10, or 9 units per acre. He stated the second thing that troubles him is that the architect is a friend of his. This has a metamorphosis from affordable housing to middle class housing. He spoke to the information from the lenders and the buy down programs. He stated they result in an excessive default rate. He suggested when the mortgage jumps they will find the people out of their homes. He stated they have a tape of the Planning Commission meeting. He stated if the Planning Commission approved this project based on it being affordable housing, it should go back to them. He wants the information to be accurate, current and credible to the very end. Doris Dewton, president of Singletree Homeowners and Berry Creek Metro District spoke to #1 and the high density project is Las Vistas in Singletree which was zoned multi-family housing. She stated this was four years ago. There are only five full time family owners. She asked about preferences for local purchasers. She sees nothing that says this won't be a second home owner property. There has been some discussion of deed restriction but she has heard nothing about that today. She suggested this started out as affordable housing but today is another real estate development. She stated this project does not adhere to the Master Plan or the sub area master plan. She spoke to density in the community center. She suggested she is concerned with the precedent and the new standard it will create. She doesn't believe this constitutes urban sprawl. She spoke to the open space. She stated Brett Ranch has it, Lake Creek has it. She spoke to the approval of less required for Deer Park. #3 the Metro Districts concern with the road and public safety. She stated they are embodied to look after roads and public safety which is already in jeopardy. She spoke to the needed road improvements and those not happening in the very near future. She stated Deer Park will add an additional 1100 to 1200 car trips per day. Eileen Gager, a homestead resident, stated she has concerns with the infrastructure and traffic. She stated there is a sign up that says Art and Ann Kleimer - future home of affordable housing. She suggested this is not affordable housing. Steve Greve, area resident who has never owned a house, stated he wants to buy a house and this is affordable for him. This is a chance for them to live here and own. He is paying $1200 for 1000 square feet. There is no allotted space when they add floodplains. There will be more people in the world. He stated it is frustrating. He suggested they looked at another house in Homestead and there is nothing there under $300,000. You have to give people a chance. He felt it important to be here and thanked the Board for their time. Mark Sifers, a neighbor of the property being developed, stated he was a third generation native and offered his comments. He stated since the last meeting they have not addressed the adjacent property owners concerns. He stated they have not addressed the mitigations. He doesn't begrudge people their dreams but they need to address the concerns of other people and their properties. He asked to be copied on the packets for this project. He suggested it should be denied until their concerns are addressed. Commissioner Johnson asked about easement concerns he has previously had. Mr. Sifers stated that was with Cordillera and they have not been mitigated. Janelle Bryant, Norwest Banks, spoke to the buy down program and suggested the program is in not danger. She supported the figures they submitted. George Gregory referred to a fax that he received. He stated what is not included are the dues to the homeowner. He stated the $1100 figure will be bumped to $1478 after one year and higher each year after. He suggested the interest would be at 6.62% after four years. He stated fundamentally the information received is not accurate. Ms. Bryant stated when somebody is paying rent they quote at today's market. 5 03-22-1999 Chairman Phillips asked for further public comment. There was none. Chairman Phillips stated public comment is closed at this time. Commissioner Johnson stated he would like to leave it open in case a question brings about a need for public comment. Commissioner Stone agreed. Ms. Haefeli responded to the fees. She spoke to the water tank. She stated this is a free market project but there will be restrictions. She spoke to the open space and the green space being 45% ofthe project. She spoke to the intersection and that there are monies to be spent there this summer. She suggested the 1100 traffic trips number is exaggerated and are more like 600. She spoke to Mark Sifers and the fact they will address the issues but because this is a sketch plan, if not approved, they have nothing to discuss. Commissioner Stone asked how many units the property is currently zoned for. He suggested there was a prior action on this property. Mr. Hunn responded about 30 units. Commissioner Stone asked how many units the applicant first asked for. Ms. Haefeli responded they requested 120. Commissioner Stone asked how much open space was originally suggested. Ms. Haefeli stated on the 120 none, on 106 about 6%. Mr. Hunn clarified it was 25 units per acre. Commissioner Johnson asked Janelle Bryant to step to the mic. He used the figure of $230,000 and asked with a 5% down payment and a 7% interest rate what that would work out to be. He asked how the $100 fees for dues are calculated. Art Kleimer stated it is their estimate based on the cost of landscape maintenance, snow plowing, general maintenance. He stated it reflects his experience in a development this size. He stated there are wells with non-potable water that will be used for grass upkeep. Commissioner Stone asked about the reserve account. Mr. Kleimer stated that will kick in about three years for major expenditures. He stated there will be a small amount annually during the first three years. Reserves go up as projects get older. Commissioner Johnson asked about snow removal. That is included said Mr. Kleimer, but not trash. Commissioner Johnson asked about street maintenance and reserves for the future upkeep. Ms. Bryant responded $1450 per month plus insurance of $130, $100 for homeowners dues and $50.00 per month for taxes. The taxes will go up. The total will be $1725.00. Commissioner Johnson asked what one needs to make to afford $1725. Ms. Bryant stated roughly $4500 per month which would then qualify for 3% down which would increase the payment by about $30.00 per month. Commissioner Stone asked for the information about the roads, improvements and where they are. He stated there is an obvious need for improvements and particularly at the intersection. He asked what the money they have will go for and what they can do to bring the roads up to a good level of servIce. George Roussos, County Engineer, spoke to the MOU with CDOT to identify the roles for the redesign of the intersection. He spoke to the commitment of $225,000 towards a solution which CDOT feels is adequate for redesign. He believes the solution for long range needs is more on the order of Y2 to 3/4 of a million dollars. As they undertake the design they will have a public process to address the desires. He believes there will be a funding shortfall. In terms of Highway 6, they have completed the capital improvement plan for the area. That was validated by the Edwards Access Control Plan and the Mountain Corridor Study. He spoke to the ICTE 20 year plan. He stated no project will be funded 6 03-22-1999 unless it is in the 20 year plan. The next update to the plan is not until June of 2000. They have put a high priority on the Edwards roads. He suspects those will be included in the plan and then in the six year short term plan. He stated the bottom line is looking to the developer to apply for permits and make improvements in the immediate vicinity. In his estimation it will be several years before CDOT will come m. Chairman Phillips clarified that Highway 6 is not a County road. She spoke to the on/off ramp at I -70 further west. Mr. Roussos explained the requirements and that every effort must be made to the existing interchanges. He doesn't see that happening except in Eagle-Vail and at the Airport. Commissioner Johnson asked when the study was done ifthat was before River Pines. Mr. Roussos stated that is correct. Commissioner Johnson asked about Brett Ranch. Mr. Roussos stated the plan took into consideration future development that was likely to be approved. He confirmed the study was done before Brett Ranch. Commissioner Johnson asked about the $1000 per unit and asked ifthey will stick with that or if it will vary. Mr. Roussos suggested it will be likely to be a higher fee in the future. Ms. Haefeli asked if the impact fee can be used at the intersection or at the Highway. Mr. Roussos stated it is usually applied in the more commercial area. He stated it is up to the Commissioners where it is applied. Commissioner Johnson asked how the $15,000,000 compares to the request in the transportation planning region. Mr. Roussos suggested $12 billion dollars. He stated the five county region has $4 billion in needs. $200 million is in this region for $4 billion worth of needs. Mr. Roussos stated it is an inadequate resource. Commissioner Stone asked about the product mix. Mr. Kleimer stated at the present time they will see about a $25,000 deviance from the lower price to the higher price. Commissioner Stone asked how many are 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom and the prices? Mr. Kleimer stated they all start at $225,000 with minor deviance. The 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom are the same size. They are the same size throughout the project. Some will be available with the unfinished basements which are optional. Chairman Phillips reminded everyone that this is sketch plan which is an agreement of a concept of a plan that the Board can then look at more closely. She stated it was approved by the Planning Commission and recommended for approval by the Planning Department. She suggested she would like to hear discussion on deed restriction. She knows that water is a question and traffic alleviation is a question she has as well. She felt the density of ten units was a good mix for that area. She spoke to the impacts to everyones lifestyles with the continued developments. Commissioner Johnson spoke to the sprawl and the articles Ms. Haefeli read. "Building on Common Ground" by Joseph Ornario, which says there are terms vicariously tossed around, one being mixed use development and town center. He read from that article. He doesn't believe this development helps to make Edwards more compact. In the other article, he referred to the statement "is there need to examine one and two story buildings and the impact they have compared to three and four story buildings." They are going to grow and some areas will have to be sacrifice zones. He noted they had asked if they are going to increase congestion and sprawl that the things they get out of this development will be improvements to the community. Commissioner Stone spoke to the Master plans and sub area plans as being advisory plans. He stated part of his thinking is wanting to make sure that the needs of the area and the community in a 7 03-22-1999 bigger sense are being met. If a development is answering a need of the community then they may make the subjective decision for something to happen in an area that may not be exactly what the master plan defines. He spoke to the summit he just attended and the need for appropriate housing for an area to be viable for the future. He compared the market to a menu, looking for balance. He stated Eagle County is at a deficit for properties priced under $200,000. For two average wage earners in the same household, the purchasing power is below $200,000. In looking at the big picture, he questions if the workers will be driving out of the County. Many live in Eagle and Garfield Counties. He stated he wants to make sure they have the right product mix for the County with the appropriate percentages for the future. He wants to make sure they do not continue down a path assuming a project is going to be approved. Commissioner Johnson moved to deny approval ofPDS-00014 PDS-00014, Deer Park PUD based on the application not being consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan purposes and goals, not compatible with the surrounding uses and the conditions having not changed. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. In discussion, Commissioner Stone stated there has been a lack of substantiation in providing affordable housing in the price range needed. Chairman Phillips stated she would like to see further work done on this project rather than denial at this time. Chairman Phillips called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ZC-00026 & PDSP-00007, Ranch House PUD Terri Bernath, Planner, presented file numbers ZC-00026 and PDSP-00007, Ranch House PUD. She stated this was a request to create a mixed-use PUD, six dwelling units, contractor storage, agriculture and home office. Ms. Bernath stated because of the tabling she will again review the project for the benefit of Commissioner Stone. She explained the proposal. Commissioner Stone suggested he has reviewed all of staff s proposal. Ms. Bernath explained they had originally recommended denial, however, they have reached a viable compromise. She spoke to the landscape plan which has been received and is in the PUD Guide. Pet provisions have been removed, and will be left to the discretion of the owner. Agricultural uses include four horses corral and barn provided they will be removed before construction the final single- family unit. If subdivision is ultimately desired, further conditions will be placed. Condition #4 will further define the guide. She spoke to area ratio, spill control plan having been submitted and the remaining conditions being #2 which the applicant felt was the CO being provided. If appropriate she heard the date being prior to October 1, 1999. She stated the conditions came from staff and the Planning Commission and were submitted after listening to the tapes. She stated she understands the applicant is in agreement with the conditions. She stated the Board suggested tabling until all members were present. Chairman Phillips questioned they did recommend denial however, they are now recommending approval with conditions. Ms. Bernath stated they should have the revised copy stating approval with conditions by staff and the Planning Commission. Ms. Bernath explained what was submitted on March 4 for the meeting of the 15th. Ken Long, Isom & Associates, suggested that Commissioners Johnson and Phillips are familiar with the file. Commissioner Stone stated he is as well. Mr. Long explained the project and the use for storage and of the garage for maintenance as needed. Scott Ziegler has grandfathered in the uses of storage and agricultural. It will be an addition of four employee units and continued use as is today. He spoke to condition #2 and that the final 8 03-22-1999 inspections having been made. The building officials have found those have been made and are issuing the CO now. On condition #8, the applicant has gone through expense to build the berms. One is not on his land. Commissioner Johnson stated the last time they were here they were going to purchase that piece ofland. Scott Ziegler had stated that was his intention. Mr. Long stated it was not for sale at a reasonable price. Mr. Long stated he does not foresee the berm going away but if it does he will have some permanent fencing. Mr. Ziegler stated the conditions on having his zoning there is not fair. Mr. Long stated if the berm disappears he will make sure that there is something to prevent the visual concerns. He explained the location and the fact there is no reason it can ever go away. Commissioner Johnson clarified that with the zoning, the berm won't go away but if it does the County would have the right to approve the fencing. Mr. Ziegler stated the only thing added was a shop since his house was approved ten years ago. Commissioner Johnson stated the zoning was approved two years ago. Ms. Bernath stated the Planning Commission was concerned that perhaps these uses, if not screened, would not be appropriate in this place. If not, they believe those uses should become subject to review. Mr. Loeffler stated he understood they were prepared to recommend approval of these uses because it is hidden by the berm. They imposed a condition that the berms remain, but they are not entirely on his land. He thinks Mr. Long's point is a good one and perhaps it should appear in the PUD Guide so that the land use is approved by the PUD and are linked to the existence of the berm or to any other alternative. Chairman Phillips asked about the water and the wells. Mr. Ziegler stated they were approved unanimously last week. He explained the two lines he has brought in tie him with Eagle County Water and Sanitation. He spoke to the difference of opinion between Sid Fox and Ray Merry. He stated he has done his business there for twenty years and has never had complaints. Mr. Long asked if there was public comment. There was none. Mr. Long stated there have been no letters or phone calls in complaint. Commissioner Johnson reiterated his concern with the mix of uses until the last unit is built. He spoke to uses by right and the constriction of unit 6. That portion should read constructed. Commissioner Stone asked if the concern is with the agricultural use staying? He asked if it should be removed at an earlier date. Commissioner Johnson stated he wants to keep everything in but add additional uses. Mr. Ziegler stated he has cut back a lot than what he originally asked for. He stated he has had his horses there for 12 years, since they were yearlings. He stated they are only there in the winter. He hauls all the manure out. He stated he does not plan on more horses. Commissioner Johnson asked what was magical for unit #6. Ms. Bernath stated there would no longer be any room. Mr. Ziegler spoke to the need for open space and that there would then be too much on the site. Commissioner Johnson reiterated as long as Scott owns the property everything is fine, but the zoning doesn't go with Scott, it goes with the land. Mr. Ziegler suggested if he sells the property he'll get rid of the horses. Commissioner Stone stated he is concerned this is too small a property to keep that many horses and he appreciates there have never been complaints, but somebody else may not be as responsible. He asked how many additional units they are talking about. 9 03-22-1999 Mr. Ziegler stated two single family units and a four plex. Unit number six is a single family home. He explained the three plex will be added to an existing single family. Commissioner Stone asked for clarification of where the single family home will be. Commissioner Johnson stated if they are changing the PUD, they can add if the property sold the farm animal use will no longer be a use by right. Mr. Loeffler stated the PUD guide attaches to the land not to any particular owner. He suggested they might be better off tying it to the development of unit 6 or to a period of time. Commissioner Stone asked how long this approval will be good for. Paul Clarkson, Senior Planner, responded three years. Commissioner Stone asked if the single family has to be hailtwithin a specific period of time. Commissioner Johnson stated once they start working towud completion, the zoning is there forever. Commissioner Stone asked when they will build the single f;.mily home. Mr. Ziegler stated he doesn't know when that will happen. H~ has a shop with a single family home attached now. Commissioner Stone suggested he has gone through this proces~, with a vision in mind. Mr. Ziegler related he would not have a problem with a six yeariime frame. Commissioner Stone suggested potentially the horses would have to go no matter who owns the land. Mr. Ziegler stated he would love to keep his horses. Commissioner Stone asked Commissioner Johnson if that would answer his concerns. Chairman Phillips stated the horses are there but when he applies for a building permit for unit 6 he must eliminate the horses. Commissioner Stone stated the earlier of six years or once the building permit has been requested. Mr. Loeffler stated they would have to change the PUD control guide acc~rdingly and the change would be reflected in the resolution. Mr. Long stated they have a few other changes to make as well. Mr. Loeffler stated it would be B 1 Di. \ Paul Clarkson suggested as long as they are changing the PUD guide, #8 should be addressed in the guide as well. Mr. Long asked for suggested language. , Commissioner Johnson asked for Mr. Long to get together with staff and that the.ll,mguage reflect the need for appropriate screening if the berm goes away. Chairman Phillips stated she likes the berm. Ms. Bernath suggested on condition #2, the applicant work with the building department. Commissioner Johnson stated the date should remain October 1, 1999. Chairman Phillips again asked for public comment. There was none. Commissioner Stone moved to approve file numbers ZC-00026, Ranch House PUD, incorporating staff s proposed findings and conditions. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 10 03-22-1999 Commissioner Johnson moved to approve file numbers PDSP-00007, Ranch House PUD, incorporating staff s proposed findings and conditions as well as the recommended changes the Board requested in the PUD Guide. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until March 29, 1999. Atte~: ~9 Clerk to the Boar ~~~ 11 03-22-1999