Loading...
Minutes 05/14/2002 PUBLIC HEARING MAY 14,2002 Present: Michael Gallagher Am Menconi Tom Stone Tom Moorhead Jack Ingstad 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 Agenda Chairman Gallagher welcomed the Seniors who were present for the meeting. He stated they will be joining them for lunch today for meatloaf. Chairman Gallagher stated the first item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for the weeks of May 13,2002 and May 20, 2002, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of payroll for May 16,2002, subject to review by County Administrator C) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioner meeting of April 23, 2002 D) Agreement between Eagle County Health and Human Services and Catherine Zakoian E) Approval of the grant renewal application to the Division of Criminal Justice for Juvenile Wraparound Services for the 2002-2003 State Fiscal Year F) Resolution 2002-067, authorizing final release of collateral and termination of the warranty period for Territories at Cordillera G) Holy Cross Energy, contract for electrical service at the Eagle County Community Center in El Jebel Chairman Gallagher asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Tom Moorhead, County Attorney, stated there are no changes and it is ready as it stands. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Crown Mountain Park & Recreation District, Service Plan Dianne Mauriello, Deputy County Attorney, stated the next item on the agenda was the Service Plan for the proposed Crown Mountain Park & Recreation District. She explained the action the Board must take is to accept the Service Plan and set a public hearing for June 4, 2002 at 1 :30 p.m. She stated the Planning Commission did approve the Service Plan with conditions, incorporating staff findings. Chairman Gallagher asked if they wish to comment and instruct the applicant to modify the plan, should they do so prior to the hearing. Ms. Mauriello stated that would be appropriate. She stated a draft of the plan was included in the Board's packets. Any comments can be addressed at the next hearing. Commissioner Stone moved to acknowledge the receipt the Service Plan for Crown Mountain Park & Recreation District and set the matter for hearing to June 4, 2002 at 1 :30 p.m. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 1 05-14-2002 Plat & Resolution Signing Matt Gennett, Planner, presented the following plats and resolutions for the Board's consideration: 5MB-00296. Brett Ranch PUD. Final Plat of Southfork Meadows. Phase I. A Resubdivision of Lot 201. He stated this was a Type B Minor Subdivision, the intent of which is to re- subdivide Lot 201 into twelve (12) ~ duplex lots and an associated common area. Staff findings are as follows: Pursuant to Section 5-290 (G) (1) of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: 5-290 (G) (1) Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision (G) Standards. The Board of County Commissioners and the Community Development Director shall consider the following in the review of a Type A Subdivision, a Type B Subdivision, and an Amended Final Plat. Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision. a) Access, potable water, and sewage disposal on the land to be subdivided are adequate; b. The plat does conform to Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines; and c. No Improvement Agreement is applicable. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve final plat file number 5MB-00296, Brett Ranch PUD, Final Plat of Southfork Meadows, Phase I, a resubdivision of Lot 201, incorporating staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 1041 Completeness Hearing, Donovan Parcel Bob Narracci, Planner, presented the 1041 Completeness hearing for a major extension of a domestic water and sewer treatment system to serve the Donovan Parcel. The applicant has requested waiver of special use permit. Staff findings are as follows: The action that is being requested from the Board on May 14th, 2002 is to determine completeness of a 1041 Permit application and to estimate associated processing fees. A 1041 application has been submitted for the major extension of domestic water and sewer systems to serve the Donovan Parcel residential housing project and to allow the efficient utilization of a municipal water project. Staff has reviewed the above referenced permit application and has found it to be complete. We have tentatively scheduled the permit hearings for the Planning Commission and the Permit Authority on July 3rd, 2002 and July 30th, 2002 respectively. Estimated fees for the above referenced 1041 Permit application are as follows: Environmental Health and Community Development Staff 10 Hrs @ $42.50 = $ 425.00 Engineering Staff 6 Hrs @ $42.50 = $ 255.00 Attorney Staff 6 Hrs @ $75.00 = $ 450.00 TOTAL = $1,130.00 Chairman Gallagher stated he is not comfortable with approval of an application without a file number. Bob Narracci, Planning Manager, stated the number will be assigned upon the Board finding the application complete. Commissioner Stone moved the Board accept the permit application that has been submitted for 2 05-14-2002 the construction of a major extension of domestic water and sewage treatment systems for the Donovan Parcel development as complete. The estimated fee to process this application is $1,130.00 and may be altered to cover the actual cost of review and public hearings. Also included in the motion is approval of the applicants waiver request for the requirement of a special use permit, as applied from Section 3-310 I of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Organizational Meeting, Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation Diane Mauriello stated the next item on the agenda was the organizational meeting for the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. She stated what is necessary if for the Board to change hats to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello pointed out that Kathleen Forinash was present for the hearing as she is named as a Director ofthe Corporation. She stated Katie Harper, also a Director of the Corporation, could not be present at this hearing. She stated the first order of business is to elect Officers of the Corporation. Commissioner Stone nominated Am Menconi to be Chairman of the organization. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next item is to elect a Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer. If the Board so desires they could also elect a Vice Secretary and Vice Treasurer. Commissioner Gallagher nominated Commissioner Stone as Vice President. Ms. Forinash seconded the nomination. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Menconi nominated Kathleen Forinash as Secretary of the organization. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone nominated Commissioner Gallagher as Treasurer of the organization. Ms. Forinash seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved the nominations be closed. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms Mauriello spoke to the by-laws for the corporation and suggested they should be approved. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the By-Laws of the Corporation as presented. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next item for adoption was the Fiscal Year of the Corporation. She recommended January 1 through December 31 of each year. Commissioner Stone moved to adopt the fiscal year of the Corporation as January 1 through December 31 of each year. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next item for approval is the acts of the incorporator, approving the fact that the Articles of Incorporation were received by the Secretary of State and that the SS4 form was satisfactorily formed. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the acts ofthe incorporator, approving the fact that the Articles of Incorporation were received by the Secretary of State and that the SS4 form was satisfactorily filed. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter for adoption was approval of the corporate seal. She stated the corporate seal does exist and indicates it is for the State of Colorado and has Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation around the outside. 3 05-14-2002 Commissioner Stone moved to adopt the corporate seal. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter was adoption of a banking resolution, authorizing the Treasurer to open any necessary accounts for the corporation and to execute any documents for that purpose. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adopt a banking resolution, authorizing the Treasurer to open any necessary accounts for the corporation and to execute any documents for that purpose. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next few items relate to the existing contract between Eagle County and Eagle Manor Partnership, the present owner of the Golden Eagle Apartments. She stated one of the items that will come before the Board is Assignment of the Contract. She requested once the Assignment takes place, the Board authorize the Secretary or President to sign and accept the assignment. Commissioner Stone moved to authorize the Secretary or President to sign and accept the Assignment of Contract once complete. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve a Resolution, assigning a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate dated February 12,2002, between Eagle County, a body corporate and politic, and Eagle Manor Limited Partnership, and any amendments thereto, to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter was a Resolution approving and adopting the application and all documents previously submitted to the USDA. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Resolution approving and adopting the application and all documents previously submitted to the USDA. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello requested authority for the Secretary or Treasurer to sign documents necessary to submit the SS4 and the 501C3 to the IRS. Commissioner Gallagher moved to authorize the Secretary or Treasurer to sign all documents necessary to submit the SS4 and the SOlC3 to the IRS. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2002-068, Assigning Contract, Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corp Diane Mauriello presented Resolution 2002-068, assigning a contract to buy and sell real estate dated February 12,2002, between Eagle County, a body corporate and politic, and Eagle Manor Limited Partnership, and any amendments thereto, to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Ms. Mauriello stated the purpose of the meeting just held for the Housing Corporation was to define the governing body, who will be accepting ownership. Because the County had previously entered into the contract with Eagle Manor, this is legal action to get title of the facility into the name of the Corporation. Commissioner Stone asked about the assisted living center. Ms. Mauriello replied that is a meeting that will happen in a few minutes. The Assisted Living Corporation will have its own corporation. 4 05-14-2002 Chairman Gallagher stated this resolution allows the Board of County Commissioners to assign contract to the body just formed. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve Resolution 2002-068, assigning a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate dated February 12,2002, between Eagle County, a body corporate and politic, and Eagle Manor Limited Partnership, and any amendments thereto, to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Agreement, Assigning Contract, Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corp Diane Mauriello presented an Agreement assigning a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate dated February 12,2002, between Eagle County, a body corporate and politic, and Eagle Manor Limited Partnership, and any amendments thereto, to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. She explained they are trying to satisfy the formal requirements. The agreement will be the document that contains the consent of the present owner. It is just a little different vehicle moving this through the process. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the assignment of an Agreement Assigning a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate dated February 12,2002, between Eagle County, a body corporate and politic, and Eagle Manor Limited Partnership, and any amendments thereto, to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. Commissioner Menconi asked that everyone extend their thanks to Diane Mauriello for her efforts in making this happen. Commissioner Stone asked when the closing will take place. Ms. Mauriello replied August 1,2002. Chairman Gallagher called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioner and reconvene as the Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the first item of business is the election of officers, President, Vice- President, Secretary and Treasurer. Commissioner Menconi nominated Commissioner Stone as President of the Corporation. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher nominated Commissioner Menconi as Vice-President. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi nominated Commissioner Gallagher as Treasurer of the Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher nominated Am Menconi as Secretary of the Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next item was adoption ofthe By-Laws ofthe Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation. She stated the Board has a draft of those in their packets. Commissioner Menconi moved to adopt the By-Laws ofthe Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to expand the membership of the Board of the Golden Eagle 5 05-14-2002 Assisted Living Corporation by two, being Kathleen Forinash and Katie Harper. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to transfer the secretary position to Kathleen Forinash. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter is approval ofthe acts of the incorporator, specifically filing of the Articles of Incorporation and related tax documents. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the acts of the incorporator, specifically the filing of the Articles of Incorporation and related tax documents. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated there is also a resolution for consideration, designating the President, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary, of the Board of Directors, which will be submitted with grant applications. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the resolution designating the President, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary, of the Board of Directors, which will be submitted with grant applications. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter is a resolution authorizing the President of the Board of Directors of the corporation to apply for, use and accept funding for the construction, management and operations for the Golden Eagle Assisted Living Facility in Eagle, Colorado. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve a resolution authorizing the President of the Board of Directors and the Treasurer of the Corporation, to establish any banking arrangements deemed necessary or desirable for corporation business. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter is adoption of the fiscal year for the Corporation. Commissioner Menconi moved the fiscal year for the Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation shall be January 1 through December 31 of any given year. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello stated the next matter was approval and adopting of a corporate seal, indicating this is a corporation of the State of Colorado and has the corporate name on the outside of the seal. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the corporate seal of the Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation. I Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Mauriello asked for authorization for the President or Secretary to sign the S S4 and the 501C3 documents for filing with the IRS. Commissioner Gallagher moved to authorize the President or Secretary to sign the SS4 and the SOlC3 documents for filing with the IRS. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of the Golden Eagle Assisted Living Corporation and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Liquor License Consent Agenda Earlene Roach, Eagle County Liquor Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda as follows: A) Gwendolyn J. Braatz 6 05-14-2002 Fireside Lodge This is a renewal of a Hotel & Restaurant License. This establishment is located along Highway 131 in Bond. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. B) Designs by Theresa, Inc. Asia This is a renewal of a Hotel & Restaurant License. This establishment is located along the Edwards Access Road in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. C) Gore Range Brewery LLC Gore Range Brewery This is a renewal of a Brew Pub License. This establishment is located along Edwards Village Blvd in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda for May 14, 2002, as presented. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2002-069, Older Americans Month Chairman Gallagher stated the next matter before the Board was Resolution 2002-069, designating May 2002 as Older Americans Month. Commissioner Menconi read the resolution into the record as follows: "Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado (hereinafter "the Board"), wishes to celebrate "America: A Community for All Ages" during May, 2002, which is Older Americans Month; and Whereas, the Board recognizes the Seniors in our families who represent the strength of our nation. Whereas, Seniors set the standards by which our families and our children's families live their lives as responsible citizens of our great nation; and Whereas, Seniors are the heartbeat of our communities, and give us the energy and motivation to contribute to our nation's strength, success and prosperity; and Whereas, the Board desires to recognize the many contributions that the Seniors of Eagle County have made and continue to make to the quality of life in our communities; Now, Therefore be it Resolved by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado: That, May 2002 be designated as Older Americans Month in Eagle County and be celebrated by families and communities throughout Eagle County. That, the Board hereby finds, determines and declares that this Resolution is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado. Moved, Read and Adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held the 14th day of May, 2002." Commissioner Stone moved to approve Resolution 2002-069, designating May 2002 as Older Americans Month. 7 05-14-2002 Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. In discussion, Commissioner Stone spoke to the Seniors that were present today and asked for their input. Carla Budd, Director of Human Resources, introduced Don Olsen, Senior Services, who thanked the Board for their assistance and for all they do with and for the Seniors. He apologized for Katie who was unable to be here. He introduced the Seniors who gave a presentation to the Board. Commissioner Stone thanked the Seniors for coming here and expressed their enjoyment in seeing their presentations. He thanked them for the time they put into the presentations and for their efforts. Commissioner Menconi thanked the Seniors for all the goodies delivered today. Chairman Gallagher called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. AFP-00144, Reconfiguration, Lots 1 & 2, Bearden Parcel Jena Skinner, Planner, presented file number AFP-00144, a reconfiguration of Lots 1 and 2, the Bearden Parcel, Cordillera Subdivision, Filing 24. He stated the intent of this plat is to reconfigure the building envelope on lot 5, in order to accommodate an eave which had been built too far outside the building envelope. The eave currently is 24" outside the envelope. The Cordillera PUD only allows for an 18" encroachment. Pursuant to Section 5-90.G.2. Standards for Amended Final Plat: a. Adjacent property. Review ofthe Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment DOES NOT have an adverse effect on adjacent property owners. We have not received any correspondence from adjacent property owners. b. Final Plat Consistency. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment IS NOT inconsistent with the intent of the Final Plat. c. Conformance with Final Plat Requirements. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment DOES conform to the Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines. d. Improvement Agreement. Proposed improvements and/or off-site road improvements agreement ARE adequate. e. Restrictive Plat Note Alteration. DOES NOT Apply Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve File No. AFP-00144, Reconfiguration of Lots 1 & 2, Bearden Parcel, incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDA-00036, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD ZC-00052, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD AFP-00140, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD Jena Skinner, Planner, presented file numbers PDA-00036, Pilgrim Downs BBK Subdivision PUD and ZC-00052, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD. She stated Lot 8B of the BBK Subdivision, and Lot 16 ofthe Pilgrim Downs PUD are adjacent to each other. The owner of Lot 16, inadvertently constructed improvements (retaining wall, landscaping, etc) on Lot 8B, outside of the designated easement. The owners of Lot 8B have agreed to sell a portion of their lot, which contains said improvements, to the owners of Lot 16. The applicants wish to remove part of Lot 8B of the BBK 8 05-14-2002 Subdivision, and incorporate it as part of Lot 16, of the Pilgrim Downs PUD. In order to achieve this request, three separate planning files have been processed and will require simultaneous approval. The files are as follows: a PUD Amendment, necessary to incorporate a new legal description within the Pilgrim Downs PUD (in order to incorporate the new portion of Lot 16 into the Pilgrim Downs PUD); a Zone Change file, necessary to modify the current zoning of the BBK portion of land which is currently Residential Limited (minimum 20 acre parcel) to PUD; and an Amended Final Plat which reflects the above changes on both lots. The BBK portion of land being incorporated into Lot 16 of Pilgrim Downs will consist of approximately 2.2 acres, leaving approximately 24 acres remaining in Lot 8B. The chronology of the application is as follows and as shown on staff report: June 1999: The owner of Lot 16 (Pilgrim Downs PUD) inadvertently constructed improvements on Lot 8 (BBK Subdivision) during the construction of a new residence. The owners of Lot 8 have since agreed to sell to the owners of Lot 16, the portion of their land on which the improvements have been made. Nov. 2001: Application was made to the Eagle County Community Development Department. The Planning Commission asked the applicant to explain how the improvements were inadvertently created, etc. and ultimately, had no issues with the applicant's request. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of all files related to the Pilgrim Downs/BBK Subdivision application. Referral were sent to the following but no responses were received: Eagle County Engineering, Building Division, Attorney, and Assessors Service Districts (fire, metro) Pilgrim Downs, BBK and Colorow Homeowner's Associations Staff findings are as shown on staff report and as follows: FILE PDA-00036 Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F .3.e Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary plan for PUD: STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD. The Applicant has demonstrated that the entire site is controlled by the GoltZffians and the Mathisens. [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part of this PUD IS owned or controlled by one (1) person. STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] - The uses that may be developed in the PUD shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule", or Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule", for the zone district designation in effictfor the property at the time of the applicationfor PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3.j, Variations Authorized. There are no new uses contemplated by this amendment. A new legal description will be incorporated into the PUD Guide, and will be the only change thereby increasing the overall PUD by approximately 2.2 acres. The Pilgrim Downs PUD does not limit or control the size of any lot (no maximum or minimum lot sizes), therefore, the addition of land to be incorporated into lot 16 does not have any affect on the existing text of the PUD Guide. [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural 9 05-14-2002 and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule" for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for P UD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3.j, Variations Authorized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snow melt between buildings. This proposal will not require any variations, as no new dimensional limitations are being proposed. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that apply to the PUD ARE those specified in the Pilgrim Downs Planned Unit Development Guide at the time of application. STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loadinf! Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the P UD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met,' or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard. Parking requirements shall remain the same; parking is sufficient for this property. [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] It HAS been demonstrated that off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD complies with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards, without a necessity for a reduction in the standards. STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaving and Illumination Standards. Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the P UD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. Any Building Permit application has to submit application through the Pilgrim Downs Design Review Board, which ensures all landscaping requirements of the PUD are adhered to. This PUD Amendment shall not alter current landscaping standards and/or restrictions. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] It HAS previously been demonstrated that landscaping provided in the PUD can comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Develovment (PUD). the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the P UD that is determined to be suitable for the P UD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. No new signage is being proposed as part of the amendment. 10 05-14-2002 [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE those specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, as the PUD Guide does not contain a comprehensive sign plan. STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police andfire protection, and emergency medical services. The existing Pilgrim Downs PUD has previously demonstrated this finding during the initial Preliminary Plan application. This amendment does not alter the approval of that standard. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] The Applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for sewage disposal, electrical supply, and roads; the applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water, solid waste disposal and fire protection. In addition, the Applicant HAS demonstrated that the proposed PUD will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off-site. (c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. (d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots, units or buildings shall not be permitted Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected with roads outside of the PUD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. (e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. No new improvements are proposed with this development. All improvements have been established as part of both the subdivision and lor at building permit. [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] AS CONDITIONED It HAS been clearly demonstrated that the improvements standards 11 05-14-2002 applicable to the development will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards regarding: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. (b) Internal Pathways. (c) Emergency Vehicles (d) Principal Access Points. ( e) Snow Storage. STANDARD: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The development proposed for the P UD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. As Pilgrim Downs is an existing PUD, this finding has previously been made. Staff may make a positive finding. [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD IS compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is on a broad conceptual level, i. e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. As Pilgrim Downs is an existing PUD development, all Master Plan considerations have been both made, and approved. Staff may make a positive finding. STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Planfor PUD shall include a phasing plan for the development. If development of the PUD is proposed to occur in phases, then guarantees shall be provided for public improvements and amenities that are necessary and desirable for residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. Not applicable; no new development is proposed with these amendments. [+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) A phasing plan IS NOT necessary for this application. STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents of the PUD. In order to calculate the number of residents of the PUD, the number of proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two and sixty-three hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy each dwelling unit in Eagle County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan. (1) Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-of-ways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. (2) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year flood plains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (3) Improvements Required All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown 12 05-14-2002 on the Preliminary Planfor PUD and shall be constructed andfully improved according to the development schedule establishedfor each development phase of the PUD. (4) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Planfor PUD. To ensure that all the common open space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or covenants shall be placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any common open space. (5) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association or nonprofit corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and cultural facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance, administration and operation of such land and any other land within the PUD not publicly owned, and secure adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be established prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD. The Pilgrim Downs PUD as previously satisfied this standard; no new development is proposed with this application which would alter the common recreation and open space currently existing. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] The PUD HAS demonstrated that the proposed development will comply with the common recreation and open space standards with respect to: (a) Minimum area; (b) Improvements required; (c) Continuing use and maintenance; or (d) Organization. STANDARD: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] - The PUD shall consider the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards. The Preliminary Plan has addressed this section previously. No new development is proposed with this application [+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [ Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] The PUD DOES demonstrate that the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents available at the time the application was submitted, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of both a Sketch Plan, and Preliminary Plan for Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] - The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan. See discussion above, "Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, and it IS consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] - The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts. and Article 4, Site Develovment Standards. Article 4, Site Development Standards [+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) 13 05-l4-2002 [+] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) [+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4) [+] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410)- [+] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420)- [+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) - [+ ] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) [+] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) [+] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) [+] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) [+] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6) [+] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) [+] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) [+] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) [+] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) [+] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) [+] Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) [+] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) [+] Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) [+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7)- Not applicable. All findings under this standard are either favorable or do not apply to this project. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] The Applicant HAS fully demonstrated that the proposed subdivision complies with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Development Standards. STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] - The proposed subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. (a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions shall be consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines. (c) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. This proposal will not cause inefficiencies, nor will it be a leapfrog pattern of development, as this is an existing development. [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] The proposed subdivision IS located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] - The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. 14 05-14-2002 [+] FINDING: Suitability/or Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] The property proposed to be subdivided IS suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. The all suitability issues have been address at Preliminary Plan, and/or during the Building Permit process. STANDARD: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] - The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not adversely affect the future development o/the surrounding area. See previous discussion. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and SHALL NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F .3.a.(3) Preliminary Plan for pun Application Contents: Applicant shall submit the following: "Proposed PUD guide setting forth the proposed land use restrictions and standards of development." An amended Planned Unit Development Guide is provided as part of the application which appears to be sufficient. Staff makes a favorable finding in this regard. [+] FINDING: Preliminary Plan/or PUD Application contents [Section 5-240.F.3.a.(3)] Applicant HAS submitted a PUD guide that demonstrates that the requirements of this Section HAVE been fully met. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F. 3.m Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD: STANDARD: Amendment to Preliminary Plan/or PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.] - No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of section 24-67-104(1)(e) Colorado Revised Statutes that,' 1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development. The proposal will not alter the original intent of the P UD. The modification is to simply add a legal description to the P UD Guide for Pilgrim Downs. 2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment DOES NOT effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or the public interest. The Homeowners Association of Pilgrim Downs is in full support of the change to lot 16. Individual property owners have commented on this application. 3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. This application was a joint application with the lot owners of BBK and Pilgrim Downs, as well as the Pilgrim Downs Homeowners Association. [+] FINDING: Amendment to Preliminary Plan/or PUD The proposed PUD Amendment (1) IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development, (2) DOES NOT affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the planned unit development or the public interest, and (3) IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. FILE ZC-00052 Requirements for a Zone Change In Section 5-240.D., Standards. the Eagle County Land Use Regulations provide that "the wisdom of amending the Official Zone District Map or any other map incorporated in these Regulations is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the Board of County Commissioners and is not controlled by anyone factor. Based on the above analysis and other 15 05-14-2002 available information, Staff makes thefollowingfindings as provided in this Section of the Land Use Regulations: STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Xl- The designation of this property is Wilderness Land. The Master Plan does not give any recommendations for this area. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN This property is not within significant open space areas. The new portion of Lot 16 will not have any development which would affect the open space of Pilgrim Downs, or wildlife in the area. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN Housing for local residents is a major priority of Eagle County. There should be a wide variety of housing to fulfill the needs of all its residents, including families, senior citizens, and those who work here. Elements of Eagle County's vision for housing do not apply to this application as the residence on the property is already existing. 16 05-14-2002 The addition of land to Lot 16 of Pilgrim Downs will not alter or affect the watershed in which it lies as the lot has been previously disturbed in building a residence. Drainage for the building was approved as part of the Building Permit. [+] FINDING: Consistency with the Master Plan. [Section 5-230.D.1] The proposed zone change designation IS consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM of the Eagle County Master Plan. STANDARD: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district; The portion of Lot 8B in the BBK subdivision is zoned Resource Limited. In order to incorporate the additional land as part of Lot 16 of the Pilgrim Downs PUD, a zone change will be necessary. The approximately 2.2 acres will not compromise the compatibility of the neighboring parcels, as this change is very insignificant in scope. The lots in Pilgrim Downs range in size from less than 2, to over 10 acres. [+/-] FINDING: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2] The zone amendment IS compatible with the uses that surround the applicant's property, and IS the appropriate zone district for the land. STANDARD: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3] Whether and the extent to which there are changed conditions that require an amendment to modifY the use or density/intensity; The purpose for this Zone Change is to incorporate a portion of Lot 8B, of the BBK Subdivision, into Lot 16 of Pilgrim Downs. The owners of Lot 16 currently accesses their property via an access easement which travels through Lot 8B. Certain improvements were made outside of the easement area; the owner of Lot 8B has agreed to sell that portion of his property on which the improvements have been made. This is the 'changed condition' which warrants the amendment. [+] FINDING: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3] There ARE changed conditions that require an amendment to modify the zoning. STANDARD: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.D.4] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water, air, noise, storm water management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands; Lot 16, as previously mentioned, already contains an existing residence; it is not anticipated that any further disturbance of the property will occur. [+] FINDING: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.D.4] The proposed amendment WILL NOT result in significantly adverse impacts to the natural environment. STANDARD: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment addresses a demonstrated community need; The need for this zoning is to legitimize existing improvements the neighboring owner of Lot 16 inadvertently installed on the property of Lot 8B. Both property owners, as well as the Pilgrim Downs Homeowners Association are is full support of this proposal. [+] FINDING: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5] The proposed amendment DOES address a community need. 17 05-14-2002 STANDARD: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and not constitute spot zoning, and whether the resulting development can logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services; The zoning amendment will not affect the development pattern of the area, as both Lot 8B and Lot 16 are part of established subdivisions. It will not constitute spot zoning because these properties have already been re-zoned; the zoning amendment is to incorporate a piece of land into an established Planned Unit Development. [+] FINDING: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6] The proposed amendment WILL result in a logical and orderly development pattern and WILL NOT constitute spot zoning. Further, the resulting development can logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services. STANDARD: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7] Whether and the extent to which the area to which the proposed amendment would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area. The Zone Change neither encourages a new use nor density in the area. It is simply to legitimate the improvements the neighboring owner of Lot 16 installed on the property of Lot 8B. [+] FINDING: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7] The extent to which the area to which the amendment would apply HAS changed, however, it will not continue to change, nor will it encourage a new density in the area. AFP-00140 Pursuant to Section 5-90.G.2. Standards for Amended Final Plat: a. Adjacent property. Staff has determined that the proposed amendment DOES NOT have an adverse effect on adjacent property owners. No letters of opposition have been received by the Community Development department. b. Final Plat Consistency. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment IS NOT inconsistent with the intent of either of the Final Plats for BBK and Pilgrim Downs subdivisions. c. Conformance with Final Plat Requirements. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment DOES conform to the Final Plat requirements for both subdivisions and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines. d. Improvement Agreement. Proposed improvements and/or off-site road improvements agreement ARE adequate. The improvements have already been created and installed. e. Restrictive Plat Note Alteration. DOES NOT Apply Chairman Gallagher stated he doesn't understand the reason for the zone change. Ms. Skinner stated there are two different zone changes, the portion of land being incorporated into Pilgrim Downs has to be changed to conform to the PUD. Diane Larson, representing the co-applicants, stated they are in agreement with staff s presentation. She stated the mylar will be delayed but they will produce it for signature. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve of File No. PDA-00036, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD, incorporating Staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve of File No. ZC-00052, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD, incorporating Staff findings. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 18 05-14-2002 Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. AFP-00140, Pilgrim Downs, BBK Subdivision PUD, incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. In discussion, Commissioner Stone asked if they do or don't have the plat. Ms. Larson stated they do not have the plat here today, but would ask for approval and they will submit it shortly. Commissioner Stone asked Commissioner Menconi to amend the motion to authorize the Chairman to sign the plat once it has been received and deemed by the Attorney's Office to be acceptable for signing. Commissioner Menconi amended the motion to authorize the Chairman to sign the plat once it is submitted and deemed acceptable for signing. Commissioner Stone seconded the amendment. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Gallagher called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Hearing on Enacting Minimum Standards and Requirements for the Conduct of Commercial Aeronautical Service and Activities at the Eagle County Airport Chairman Gallagher welcomed everyone to this afternoon's gathering. He asked how long the presentation is going to take. Bryan Burns, President of Vail Valley Jet Center, replied it could take up to two hours. Chairman Gallagher reminded everyone that they are not here today to discuss whether or not there should be another FBO. He stated today's discussion is to address the minimum standards for the Eagle County Regional Airport. He asked comments be taken on only those items that have been presented. Bryan Bums stated he talked with Commissioner Stone weeks ago concerning their belief that they needed ample air time to tell their story. That story includes minimum standards, rules and regulations and an economic story. He stated the intent from the beginning was to allow up to three to four hours to tell that story. He stated that is what they came here prepared to do. Chairman Gallagher asked the other Commissioners for their opinion. Commissioner Stone stated that is correct, they did have that conversation. He stated his desire is to provide ample time for due process. He stated general discussion will not help them out much in the discussion of minimum standards. He suggested the applicant should be able to say what it is they came here to say. Mr. Bums stated it is a portion of the conversation. Commissioner Menconi stated he believes they are all aware that this meeting is scheduled until 7:00 p.m. this evening and suggested he is fine with discussion on other components that all make up the components of the Airport. He suggested the applicant has a goal in mind and they should have at it. Commissioner Stone suggested that he is looking for pertinent discussion around the issue of minimum standards. Chairman Gallagher stated that the Board has agreed to hear the presentation and asked that they, as much as possible, present information as it relates to the minimum standards. Tom Moorhead stated what they have prepared is a document for the Commissioners that reflects all of the comments that have been received. He stated he and Ed Storer, Airport Manager, charted the comments and those indicate the party, the date, the comment, any recommendation they have and any action that has been taken. This applies to minimum standards and rules and regulations. He identified the comments they have received thus far. He stated they have not received written comments from Mr. Moran. Commissioner Stone asked about the recommendation column and where it came from. 19 05-14-2002 Mr. Moorhead stated those are collaborative between he and Ed Storer. Bryan Burns, President of Vail Valley Jet Center, and Michael Hodges, President of Airport Business Solutions, thanked the Board for the opportunity for this time. There are three issues, minimum standards recommendations, rules and regulations suggestions and the economic analysis. Chairman Gallagher stated the reason this was scheduled so that everyone would have the opportunity for input. He asked if the Jet Center indicated they need more time. Mr. Burns stated not knowing the changes that will be proposed, he is not sure he can comment at this time. Mr. Hodges stated there are three primary issues that will be addressed today. Vail Valley Jet Center is a strong proponent of enhanced Minimum Standards at the Eagle County Airport. The current general aviation economics at the Eagle County Airport will not support a second FBO without creating a negative return on investment for both operators. New Minimum Standards / Rules and Regulations and soliciting a second FBO are not and should not be synonymous. He spoke to the primary differences in the 1986 document and what is currently proposed. The 1986 document provides for a fair and reasonable opportunity, without discrimination, shall be accorded to all applicants to qualify and compete, in a public bid process, for available airport facilities. The current document does not include this. There was a pre-qualification requirements that requires a five year pro-forma cash flow and minimum experience of operator. The current document does not speak to this. The standards shall not be retroactive to existing operators. The current document requires all operators to come into compliance within 90 days. Lease terms will be 25 years for air-side development, 30 years for FBO's. The current document states that lease terms are negotiable according to proposed capital improvements. The Vail Valley Jet Center recommends if an additional commercial service provider is solicited by Eagle County, there should be a public bid process which clearly sets forth the criteria and selection standards. They concur with the requirements of a five year cash flow projection and minimum experience requirements, but also suggest the County require any prospective operator to submit a business plan to insure a positive cash flow and reasonable return after a specified period of time. Despite the fact that Vail Valley Jet Center meets or exceeds all proposed standards, new minimum standards should not be imposed on them retroactively. The new standards would be imposed at which time there is a change in ownership of 51 % or more, or the Jet Center requests an amendment to their existing agreement. While the Jet Center does not disagree to associating lease term with capital investment, there should be a maximum lease term provided in the document. Currently the minimum fuel storage is two 10,000 gallon tanks. The new proposal is for 20,000 gallons for Jet-A, 10,000 gallons for Avgas. Currently there shall be two 1,200 gallon trucks. The new proposal speaks to 1,200 gallons trucks for each grade of fuel, but is vague as to the requirement if Avgas is provided by a self service facility. The minimal principal building area is 17,500 square feet currently and the new proposal is for six acres. The minimum terminal area is currently 5,000 square feet and the new proposal keeps it the same. Vail Valley Jet Center recommends the minimum fuel storage of 40,000 gallons of jet and 10,000 gallons of A vgas. A minimum of two jet fuel trucks with a capacity of at least 5,000 gallons each, and one Avgas truck of at least 1,200 gallons of capacity. Mr. Hodges stated they believe one Avgas truck should be required even if the FBO offers a self service island. The Jet Center is agreeable with the minimum land area at 6 acres and principal building area of 17,500 square feet. The minimum terminal area should be at 7,500 square feet to provide adequate public amenities. Mr. Hodges stated the minimum hangar area is currently 12,500 square feet with a 100 foot door opening and a 30 foot door height. The proposed standards have the wording adequate to accommodate the largest corporate aircraft. Under paved aircraft area, the current standards required the principal building area and ramp to be constructed immediately. The new proposal indicates ramp construction can be phased in over three years. The leased premises specifically refers to leased areas in the old 20 05-14-2002 standards and may include land leased, subleased or otherwise controlled in the new standards. In the old standards subleasing must be approved by the County and in the new standards subleasing is not mentioned. Vail Valley Jet Center recommendations are the minimum hangar area should be 40,000 square feet with a minimum door opening of 100 feet and door height of 30 feet. All improvements required to meet minimum standards should be completed at the time of initial construction. Land areas necessary to meet minimum standards should be required to be fully comprised of land leased from the County. Subleases should be approved by the County to protect their interests and maintain knowledge of Airport tenants. Mr. Hodges spoke to insurance requirements in the old standards and in the proposed new standards. Vail Valley Jet Center recommends Aircraft Liability be $10,000,000, Comprehensive Liability be $10,000,000, Hangarkeeper's Liability be $5,000,000, Products Liability be $1,000,000, Student and Renters Liability be $1,000,000 and Motor Vehicle Liability be $1,000,000. Mr. Hodges spoke to other Airport Standards in Aspen and Scottsdale. Vail Valley Jet Center's recommendation is there should be a flight training requirement within the Minimum Standards for FBO. That is a requirement within VVJC's current lease. There should be experience and training requirements set forth for various FBO personnel, as well as a dedicated staff requirement if the FBO services the airlines. There should be minimum staffing requirements for an FBO. The FBO should have the ability to modify price and fee structures for volume purchasers or other justified reasons. The Minimum Standards should specify a requirement for an additional facility for truck / GSE storage and maintenance. The definition and terms of what constitutes a lease assignment, should be clarified, and should be limited to a change in ownership of 51 % or greater. Clarify the definition of operator to be consistent with the definitions of an FBO and SASO by the FAA. The principal building requirement should be clarified. However, VVJC is less concerned about the number of buildings provided by an FBO, than with the sizes and allocation of facilities to adequately serve the needs and demands of general aviation users. Mr. Hodges reviewed the existing Vail Valley Jet Center Facilities. In accordance with the existing lease, an additional 6.2 acre parcel ofland east of Hangar 4, must be developed within the next three years. Given its location, utility, and access, this site will most likely be another hangar, providing additional hangar storage at the Airport. Mr. Hodges stated having only one FBO on an airport does not constitute exclusive rights. The presence on an airport of only one enterprise engaged in any aeronautical activity will not be considered a violation of this policy if there is no understanding, commitment, express agreement, or apparent intent to exclude other reasonably qualified enterprises. Due to the seasonality of general aviation activity at the Eagle Airport, demand does not equal existing supply. The providing of services at an airport by a single fixed base operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if it would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed base operator to provide such services. Mr. Hodges reviewed historic itinerant traffic trends and fuel volumes and growth rates. He spoke to seasonal ramp and hangar capacity and seasonality of activity. Their conclusions are that approximately 58 percent of all arrivals occur in four months of the year. Approximately 82 percent of revenues occur in four months ofthe year. Activity is only at plus or minus 25% of capacity for the remaining eight months of the year. Activity in off season is dominated by single and twin engine piston traffic. Commissioner Menconi asked if Mr. Hodges knew why there was a larger amount of traffic in August. It appears it did not grow and there were different fluctuations. Mr. Burns stated in August they attract a lot of single and twin engine planes. They do not see the jets that are seen during ski season. The recreational flyer is spending more time flying and that is what is spiking those numbers. 21 05-14-2002 Mr. Hodges spoke to FBO Economics and spoke to one FBO versus two FBO's. The probability of consistent margins in fuel, hangars and other services is highly unlikely. Existing activity levels and fuel volumes at the Eagle Airport do not support additional service providers at this time. Minimum return on investment estimated at 10%. Although prices are perceived to be high, actual margins generated by VVJC are the mid range of industry standards. The majority of all FBO revenues are derived from the sale / delivery of fuel. Therefore, Eagle Airport's seasonality has a more significant effect on an FBO's ability to generate sufficient revenues to support a reasonable return on investment. Due to the seasonality of general aviation activity at Eagle Airport, demand does not equal existing supply. The providing of services at an airport by a single fixed base operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right is it would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed base operator to provide such services. Commissioner Menconi asked if fuel sales include commercial and general aviation. Mr. Hodges stated this is the total fuel volume. The next slide will demonstrate just the jet fuel. Commissioner Menconi asked if the numbers would be affected by price fluctuations. He stated it does not appear that the airlines purchase that much fuel from the Airport. Mr. Bums stated the up-lifts are significant. Measuring in gallons, there is a split between retail and commercial. Commissioner Menconi stated he would imagine there has not been any price spikes in any of these years. In 1997 and 1998 and the price of fuel that was above the industry standards. Mr. Hodges stated in 2000 the price of wholesale fuel jumped substantially. He stated Avgas was not included in the fuel costs. Commissioner Menconi asked if changes in the price of fuel have any increase in purchasing of fuel. He asked if there was a way to tell in the last five years. Mr. Burns stated the location ofthe facility is a destination airport. When looking at changing prices, it would be difficult to measure the results of lowering the prices. Commissioner Menconi asked if the consumer really cares about the price of gas. Mr. Bums stated it depends on the customer. Including all services provided, price is not the pnmary concern. Mr. Hodges spoke to justification to the FAA to decline to permit a second FBO. The Vail Valley Jet Center allows the donation of the facilities for a pilot's lounge on the north side of the Eagle Airport. They provide a high level of service and amenities to the general aviation users of the airport. They have proposed to develop a self service fueling facility on the north side of the airport for the local based pilot. The facility would be operated at a loss to the Jet Center. Mr. Hodges spoke to industry quotes. In conclusion, the Jet Center can understand the County's desire for a second FBO under the following conditions: a. deficient hangar and ramp space b. inadequate facilities c. insufficient amenities d. poor service e. customer complaints. Perceived interest by other parties is not necessarily coupled with a long term prudent business plan. Over the years, nothing has precluded an interested party from petitioning the County to develop a second FBO at the Eagle Airport, except the market. Minimum Standards must be enhanced at the Airport and revisited periodically to insure consistency with the industry. However, this is a separate, independent issue from soliciting a second FBO. Commissioner Stone asked if it is reasonable to assume that the comments in the past concerning the Minimum Standards, are the current comments. He stated the presentation today relates mostly to a possible second FBO. 22 05-14-2002 Mr. Hodges stated approximately 50% of the presentation today was on Minimum Standards. He stated they submitted their recommendations to the Board. He stated they have also related their concerns. Mr. Bums stated there are two documents dated January 20, 2002 and April 12, 2002 which are their final comments. Commissioner Menconi stated for the record, the Commissioners were provided with a staff recommendation based on comments by interested parties. Discussion followed on the recommendations from the Vail Valley Jet Center. Mr. Moorhead stated the comments made by himself and the Airport Manager, are based principally on the objectives set forth by the FAA in developing Minimum Standards. It states that the development of Minimum Standards serves the objective of promoting safety in all airport activity, maintaining a higher level of service for airport users, protecting airport users from un-licensed and un- authorized products, enhancing the availability of adequate service for all airport users, and promoting orderly development of airport land. Therefore airport sponsors should strive to develop minimum standards that are fair and reasonable to all airport business operators and relative to the activity the standards concern. He stated he takes issue when it is stated by the Jet Center what they are telling you is in the best interest of Eagle County. He stated he submits what the Board has heard from their Airport Manager and County Attorney, is what they believe are in the best interests of Eagle County. They are concerned about a complaint that the airport is not being made available for individuals who want to take advantage of offering services at the Airport. He believes that the suggestions made by the Vail Valley Jet Center would be interpreted as attempts for the exclusive right at the Eagle County Regional Airport. J. Rob Irwin, representative of the Business Jet Center in Dallas, Texas, stated he has listened to an informative argument from the incumbent. He stated if he were the incumbent he would put on a good presentation also. He stated he does not hear the word foul anywhere. He stated he takes exceptions to those doomed to failure. He stated they are awaiting a time when they can make a presentation as to what they can bring to the County. Minimum Standards he has not heard much about this evening. He related statistically, he can make a good argument that when the "fasten seat belt sign" is turned on, it is turned on because of a switch in the cockpit and not because of the presence of turbulence. He stated he can answer questions if the Board has any. Mr. Irwin stated he has mailed correspondence to the Board. In 1997 the FBO that failed was one not purchased by the other FBO's, it was purchased but his company. He stated at that time they only had 10% market and they now have 24% market for the sale of fuel. Chairman Gallagher asked if Mr. Irwin has had the opportunity to review the proposed Minimum Standards and Rules and Regulations. Mr. Irwin stated he is familiar with them. He stated they would recognize that if they came in here as good and fair competition, the neighbor would not loan him a gallon of gas to sell to anyone else, nor their de-ice truck, nor the lav-cart to service an airplane. They would have to have those. Minimum Standards are not the concern they would address. He stated the Rules and Regulations meet the minimum standards. Commissioner Menconi asked ifhe were to have a 40,000 gallon requirement of jet fuel and 10,000 gallons of A vgas, would he object. Mr. Irwin stated if the Board adopts the Minimum Standards, then those will be the Minimum Standards. His decision will be was he ruled out of the deal or is it feasible. Personally, they would have to have that kind of capability. Those issues are business. Commissioner Menconi asked ifMr. Irwin had analyzed the market closely enough to make those kind of statements, the fuel requirements and having no problems with the proposal. Mr. Irwin stated he would have to take each one of those individually, but as a general comment, 23 05-14-2002 the answer would be no. He stated they have heard a lot of things presented. Commissioner Menconi stated he has heard that the County needs to be careful about the type of Minimum Standards they will adopt, because they would not want to have an inferior service provider at the airport. If they have higher standards than what was presented, they would have better service. Mr. Irwin stated higher standards would not stop them from establishing a business at the Airport. The idea is that selling gas out here and providing services out here, this is a rich man's sport and they demand the best service, whether day or night, and they know they have to provide that service. rfthey don't they would not get the sale. Commissioner Menconi asked if Mr. Irwin had any concerns with developing a business plan as a requirement. Mr. Irwin answered no. Jeff Kohlman, Aviation Management Consulting Group, he stated most of their comments were sent to the Commissioners. He stated they recognize it is very important that all information provided to the Board is accurate and complete. He stated he does not believe that all information provided is either of those. He stated these are minimum standards. He stated these are not wishes or desires, but rather are minimum standards. They need to be appropriate for the type of activity proposed. Some of the discussion today was around business plans. They believe it is important that a proposer provides adequate information to support their plan in developing a facility. Most of that will be focused around the facility development and the financial aspect. Is it going to be able to be supported by cash flows either ofthe operation or the investment of the developer. A general marketing plan would need to be submitted. As far as fuel farms go, they believe that what is proposed today in the Minimum Standards is adequate. When speaking with fuel suppliers, they made sure they had suppliers from the East and the West. They would have adequate fuel supply for those situations. As far as the hangar door height, if the same development guidelines from 1986 were still in place today, he would agree that lowering it to 28 feet would put the FBO at a disadvantage. By having 30 feet today, there are certain development criteria and fire suppression systems that were not required in 1986 that would put the second FBO at a disadvantage, because of the cost of constructing a hangar with a 30 foot door. He read a portion of "Exclusive Rights" for the Board. He also read the portion that was not submitted called "emphasis added" for the Board. He stated there is property that is being leased but not developed by the existing FBO. He spoke to the financial analysis. He referred to radar and related it will be coming in the future. The sub-lease agreements, while they think it important the County knows who will be sub-leasing, they recommend a standard Sub-lease Agreement be pre-approved and they be allowed to use said agreement. Commissioner Menconi asked about amortization and business plans. Mr. Kohlman stated a good business plan will cost quite a bit but it will help in the long run. Commissioner Menconi asked if Mr. Kohlman had an idea of how much capital it would take to open a second FBO at the Airport. Mr. Kohlman stated it would cost approximately 6.5 million. Commissioner Menconi asked if Mr. Kohlman believes the County's minimum standards should be reduced. Mr. Kohlman stated in his comments, it speaks to the bulk storage facility, they have no problems. They believe 1,200 gallons for A vgas is excessive. Discussion continued on fuel storage. Greg Mahanna, High Tech Aircraft, stated he manages the general aviation for High Tech Aircraft which is owned by one individual, Robert Levine. He stated he is also president of Mountain High Aviation, which owns five acres adjacent to the AARF building at the Eagle County Airport. Mr. Mahanna stated they have very few comments concerning the minimum standards. He addressed the door height of 30 feet. He stated when that number was put into the regulations in 1986, an FP A 409 did not exist. There was not a change in classification. With a 30 foot door, it will require additional fire 24 05-l4-2002 suppression, which will increase the burden on the County. Everyone will have to inspect it. There is not a single aircraft that will not fit under a 28 foot door. They still have a question about the terminal size and facilities. It stated it needs to be clarified that out of a 17,000 square foot building, 5,000 is terminal and 12,000 is hangar. Mr. Moorhead stated the County's recommendation is it can be one or more buildings for a total of 17,000 square feet. Mr. Mahanna stated there is nothing included about flight training in the minimum standards. He stated he does not think it necessary for an FBO to provide flight training. Most of the customers are destination customers. He stated they do not need any more flight training. He stated he agrees with Mr. Kohlman and questioned if the County could digest an entire business plan if presented. If that requirement stays in the standards, they will comply. Commissioner Menconi questioned when a business plan is submitted. Mr. Mahanna stated maybe before the RFP or during the lease. He stated to add a full blown business plan is not needed. He stated they are in favor of a standard lease rather than having the Board review each lease. He stated there are no over capacities at the Eagle County Airport. There is an under capacity. There is a waiting list for hangars. Commissioner Menconi questioned a feasibility study and fuel quantities required. Mr. Mahanna stated it would be important to differentiate the types of insurance. Commissioner Menconi stated it is his understanding that the important issues are hangar space, fuel storage and perhaps insurance liability. He questioned what would be the next items of importance. Mr. Mahanna stated the radar site is important. Chairman Gallagher asked for additional public comment. There was none. He closed the public comment portion of this hearing. Mr. Moorhead stated this matter is scheduled for deliberations on May 28, 2002. Mr. Bums stated Mr. Mahanna's plane was at the Eagle County Airport and they did have space for it for 42 nights. He stated a lot of the customers will call only 24 hours in advance and try to get into a hangar. In reference to radar, there will be an air traffic control users meeting tomorrow, May 15, 2002 at the Eagle County Airport. The Federal funding plays in a different role. The door height issue, the rules have changed. Flight training is mandatory in their lease and should be made mandatory in all FBO's applications. Commissioner Menconi asked if the airport needs a building envelope. Mr. Moorhead stated the flying clubs need to be moved. He stated flying clubs are exempt from the minimum standards. Commissioner Menconi asked if the County Attorney if the County is covered in receiving an adequate business plan. Mr. Moorhead stated in the Request for Proposal is where the request for a business plan should be located. Commissioner Stone stated they have satisfied the need and requirement for public comment, and suggested the Board give their comments to County Attorney before May 28, 2002 so that meeting would proceed quickly. He stated he is relying on the Airport Manager and County Attorney to make recommendations to the Board. Mr. Moorhead stated the draft was submitted to the FAA, who returned four comments. Those were included in the draft and the FAA has now approved that draft. There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned until May 28, ~ -: Attest: Q ~ Ckrk to the Bo d 25 05-14-2002