Loading...
Minutes 10/22/2002 PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 22, 2002 Present: Michael Gallagher Am Menconi Tom Stone Diane Mauriello Jack Ingstad Sara J. 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: Executive Session Chairman Gallagher stated the first matter before the Board was an Executive Session. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn into an Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on negotiations with the Water Authority concerning Berry Creek water and legal advice / negotiations on Golden Eagle Elderly Housing purchase which are appropriate topics for discssion pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(a) and (b), Colorado Revised Statutes. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Chairman Gallagher stated the next item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for the week of October 21,2002, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting for October 1,2002 C) Eagle County Ambulance Permit for Eagle County Ambulance District D) Eagle County Ambulance Permit for Western Eagle County Ambulance District E) Addendum to the Agreement between the County of Eagle and the Family Visitor Program for Early Head Start Services F) Agreement between the County of Eagle and Family Visitor Program for the use of a vehicle G) Inclusion and Exclusion Agreement with Berry Creek Metropolitan District and the Edwards Metropolitan District H) Agreement wit Kolbe Striping Inc., for taxiway and apron paint improvements I) Amendment No. Seven to Contract dated April 27, 1998, between Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc., and Eagle County J) Resolution 2002-149, adopting Eagle County T-Hangar Lease and designation of authorized representatives for its execution K) Agreement between Eagle County and the Vail Valley Jet Center for repair and maintenance of Airport Gate #4. Chairman Gallagher asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Diane Mauriello, County Attorney, stated with respect to item K, the Agreement between Eagle County and the Vail Valley Jet Center for repair and maintenance of Airport Gate #4, it should be a PUD 1 10-22-2002 hearing and discussed in an open session. Chairman Gallagher stated they will take this item off the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda being items A through J. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Item K, Vail Valley Jet Center Diane Mauriello stated there are two items for the Board's consideration. The first is a PUD hearing regarding the proposed enhancements to the gate at the Vail Valley Jet Center. The second is consideration of maintenance and repair of the gate on a long term basis. Brian Bums, president Vail Valley Jet center, stated they are applying to enhance the existing gate to the Vail Valley Jet Center facility. He stated this is the main gate through which the customers travel to the airfield. He stated they have received comments from their users that it looks like an industrial park and not an attractive entrance to the facility. He spoke to the illustrations and showed those to the Board. Chairman Gallagher asked if this is iron work with log. Mr. Bums answered yes. He stated they have researched the integrity of the gate while not jeopardizing the security to the airfield. He stated the work is actually rot-iron with mountains and trees. He stated it will be sharp. He stated he has photos of the gate as it exists today. Chairman Gallagher asked if the dimensions are going to change. Mr. Bums stated no. He stated they have designed it with the barbed wire to remain as is. They are not forfeiting any of the security issues. Chairman Gallagher asked if Texaco is sponsoring the gate. Mr. Bums stated they are. Jack Ingstad, County Administrator, suggested the waiver may need to be signed as this is a departure from the signage agreement. Mr. Bums suggested that they are enhancing the signage that is present today. He stated the existing sign stays in place. Commissioner Stone spoke to the part that says Vail Valley Jet Center. Mr. Bums stated that has been eliminated. Chairman Gallagher asked ifit is going to be Vail Valley Jet Center and Texaco. He asked about the directional signs. Mr. Bums stated they must still research the need for those. Chairman Gallagher suggested they should perhaps approve the design of the gate to bring it into compliance with the PUD. Ms. Mauriello stated they should make that motion contingent upon the subsequent agreement. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve the embellishments of Airport Gate #4, as outlined, contingent upon execution of an agreement assigning responsibility for repair and maintenance of said gate. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Gallagher suggested they should approve the signage with regard to the gate. Commissioner Stone stated it looks like the pictures they currently have has the We1come to the Vail Valley Jet Center. Mr. Bums stated there are two signs. One on either side of the gate. Commissioner Menconi moved to authorize and approve the signage as diagramed in the rendering from Vail Valley Jet Center dated 10-15-02, from William R. Stoddard. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. He asked they call the layout Exhibit A-1. Commissioner Menconi concurred. Chairman Gallagher called for the question on the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 2 10-22-2002 Ms. Mauriello stated the last issue is the agreement for the improvements and maintenance of the sign. She stated an agreement has been made. She stated the terms of the agreement identify what work will be accomplished and Vail Valley Jet Center will be solely responsible for the costs, and finally that anyon-going maintenance or repair will be the responsibility ofthe Vail Valley Jet Center. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Agreement between Eagle County and Vail Valley Jet Center LLC for the improvements, maintenance and repair of gate #4 at the Vail Valley Jet Center. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Final Settlement, Gonzales Construction Co Diane Mauriello presented final settlement for Gonzales Construction Co, for the 2002 Guardrail Project. She stated this matter was published and no claims have been received. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve final settlement for Gonzales Construction Co, for the 2002 Guardrail Project. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adjourn as the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation and reconvene as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Earlene Roach, Liquor Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda for October 22, 2002 as follows: A) Beaver Food Services Ine Zach's Cabin This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. B) Beaver Creek Food Services Ine Arrowhead Alpine Club This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. C) Beaver Creek Food Services Ine Allie's Cabin This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. D) Beaver Creek Food Services Inc Toscanini This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license. This establishment is located at along Avondale Lane in Beaver Creek. There have been no 3 10-22-2002 complaints or disturbances during the past year. E) Beaver Creek Food Services Inc Trapper's Cabin This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Vail Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. F) Vail Food Services Inc Two Elk Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Vail Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. G) Beaver Creek Food Services Inc Beano's Cabin This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. H) Beaver Creek Food Services Inc Spruce Saddle Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant liquor license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Vail Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. I) Beaver Creek Food Services Toscanini This is a managers registration for Brian Collin Baugh. He has worked for Vail Resorts since December 2001, and also for Outback Steakhouse and Starbucks since 1999. Mr. Baugh is reported to be of good moral character. J) Tavolaccio, Inc. Tavolaccio Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located along Edwards Village Blvd, behind Gore Range Brewery. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. K) Boulder Beaver LLC Rendezvous Bar & Grill This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in Beaver Creek at the base of the ski slope, in close proximity to Coyote Cafe. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. L) Boulder Beaver LLC Dusty Boot Saloon This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the St. James building in Beaver Creek, along Offerson Road. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. M) Marquez Restaurants, Inc. Fiesta's New Mexican Deli & Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located along the Edwards Access Road. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. N) The Resort Company 4 10-22-2002 The Terrace This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the Charter at Beaver Creek along Gfferson Road. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. 0) Vail Food Services, Inc. Game Creek Club This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located on Vail Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda for October 22, 2002, as presented being items A through O. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch Earlene Roach presented a new application for a hotel and restaurant license for Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC and Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC, d/b/a Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch. She stated the first order of business is to establish the neighborhood. Staff recommended the neighborhood be from the establishment in a two mile radius. Chairman Gallagher asked about using the two mile radius. He stated he can understand for a package store or a tavern, having a two mile radius however, that a lodge or resort that is not used by the public, should the boundaries be the area of the establishment. He suggested the neighborhood could be changed to the boundaries of the establishment. Ms. Roach stated when the establishments are located on the mountains it is hard to find residents to sign the petition. Commissioner Stone stated it is not just the people within the establishment, but those within the homes and in the surrounding communities. Commissioner Menconi moved to establish the neighborhood as from the establishment in a two mile radius, for Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC and Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC, d/b/a Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Roach stated the next matter is to establish the needs of the neighborhood. She related the Chairman has been handed a petition and Max Scott, Oedipus, Inc., was presented for the hearing. Mr. Scott stated he owns and operates Oedipus, Inc. and specializes in liquor license surveys. He stated he has three copies of his report and the originals were filed with Ms. Roach this morning. He stated they have been in this business for a number of years and developed their procedures and forms submitted. He spoke to the map submitted which shows the area in which the survey took place. He explained the area they surveyed. He spoke to those being eligible to sign being those who are at least six month residents and/or business owners within the area. He stated the results were 73 who were parties of interest and 97% favored the issuance of the license. Chairman Gallagher asked to see the signatures. Ms. Roach provided those to the Chairman. John Stonebreaker, Attorney on behalf of the applicant, stated they have two witnesses present. The first is James Mandel. He asked Mr. Mandel to state his name for the record. Mr. Mandel stated he is Vice President for Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC. He stated there is a need for the license. He stated there are no other liquor establishment in the immediate vicinity. Todd Harris, Manager, was present for the hearing. He stated he has managed eight other Ritz Carltons for the past nine years. He stated this is a first class luxury hotel. There are 37 guest rooms and 5 10-22-2002 they will be servicing the higher end customers. He stated there are also 23 private units on the top floors of the hotel but they will not be licensed and there will be no alcohol service to those areas. He stated they will have 24 hour room service for food but will not be serving alcohol past 2:00 a.m. He stated all employees will be TIPS trained. Chairman Gallagher asked if a copy of the liquor management plan has been submitted. Mr. Stonebreaker stated it has. Chairman Gallagher asked if the room service personnel will be TIPS trained. Mr. Harris stated absolutely. He stated all servers will received alcohol managment training. Chairman Gallagher asked who will be supervising the liquor license servers. Mr. Harris stated he will be overseeing the supervisors who will be supervising staff. Mr. Stonebreaker asked ifthere are any further questions for Mr. Scott. He requested the original petitions and documents be admitted into evidence. Chairman Gallagher asked if there is a motion concerning the needs of the neighborhood. Commissioner Menconi moved to establish the needs of the neighborhood as evidenced by the submitted petition and testimony at the hearing for Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC and Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC, d/b/a Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Ms. Roach stated the application is in order and all fees have been paid. All applicants are reported to be of good moral character. Staff recommended approval. Commissioner Stone moved to approve a new hotel and restaurant license for Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC and Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC, d/b/a Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the manager's registration for Todd Harris, Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC and Bachelor Gulch Operating Company LLC, d/b/a Ritz Carlton. 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. PDF-00074, Arrowhead River Ranch Cliff Simonton, Planner, presented file number PDF-00074, Arrowhead River Ranch. He stated the applicant is requesting final approval of a subdivision Plat that would create a 9.376 acre parcel for the purpose of developing the 20 single family homes of the Arrowhead River Ranch PUD (formerly the Donovan Parcel), which was given Preliminary Plan approval on July 30, 2002. The development site is located 1.3 miles east of the intersection of US Highway 6 and the Edwards Spur Road, immediately adjacent to and north of US Highway 6. Domestic water will be provided by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. Sewage disposal will be via extensions of existing Eagle River Water and Sanitation facilities. The companion 1041 file (No. 1041-0043) was also approved on July 30,2002. He stated he has submitted to the Board today, a memo from Eagle County Engineering stating that all items of concern have been mitigated. Similar to the manner with which other tracts at Arrowhead have been developed, the proposed homesites for the Arrowhead River Ranch PUD will be formalized through separate platting exercises once their specific locations have been determined. Those portions of the property outside of platted building footprints will exist as shared common element. Access to the private drive fronting the homes is proposed via a single entrance from US Highway 6. An emergency access route will connect the west end ofthe private drive to the future Miller Ranch Road to the west. The chronology of the application is as follows and as shown on staff report: 6 10-22-2002 The preliminary plan for the Donovan Parcel PUD (since renamed the Arrowhead River Ranch PUD) was approved on July 30,2002. No other land use application predates this activity for the subject property. Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: Eagle County Engineering. In a memo dated 09/27/02, Engineering listed 38 correction items. The applicant responded with a letter dated 10/04/02 which details response to each item. The Applicant has been advised that all items must be resolved to the satisfaction of Eagle County Engineering before the plat will be presented for signature. Benchmark Engineering Services In a letter dated 09/23/02, Benchmark submitted 36 correction items. The applicant responded with a letter dated 10/04/02 which details response to each item. It would appear that all items have been sufficiently addressed. Eagle County Assessor Has noted (verbally) that the deed separating the parcel ofland to the west ofthe subject property (labeled tract A on the plat) has not been received. It is Staffs understanding that this land transfer was completed on October 16, 2002. Eagle County Regional Trails A memo received 10/16/02 from Trails Planner Ellie Caryl indicates that the alignment of the new bike trail, and the schedule for its demolition and reconstruction, have been approved by ECO Trails. Eagle County Attorney no comment Adjacent property owners Notification was sent to Architectural Impact, Public Service Company, Oran and Paula Palmateer, Jesse Alberts, the Eagle County School District, the Arrowhead Metropolitan District, Vail/Arrowhead Inc., and the Country Club of the Rockies, Inc. No letters or phone calls were received. There are no major concerns or issues assuming that all engineering items have been fully resolved. Staff findings are as shown on staff report and as follows: Staff has been assured by the Applicant that all conditions of the preliminary Plan will be met, and that all required documents will be properly executed prior to the signing of the Final Plat. Anticipating the same, Staff makes the following findings: Pursuant to Section 5-280.B.5.b.(3) Final Plat for Subdivision - Action by the Board of County Commissioners: 1) This Final Plat for Subdivision conforms to the approval given to the Preliminary Plan for Subdivision. 2) The required improvements are adequate. 3) Areas dedicated for public use and easement are acceptable. Pursuant to Section 5-280.B.3.e Standards of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: 1) Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed subdivision IS consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan; 2) Consistent with Land Use Regulations. The proposed subdivision DOES 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 Development Standards. An approved Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA) will be executed concurrently with approval of the final plat. 3) Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. The proposed subdivision IS located and designed to 7 10-22-2002 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 ARE consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions ARE consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines ARE 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. Utility extensions DO provide the entire range of necessary facilities. 4) Suitability for Development. 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. 5) Compatible With Surrounding Uses. The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and DOES NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Rick Hermes, manager of Arrowhead Valley Developers, was present for the hearing. Chairman Gallagher asked about the commitment regarding trails. Mr. Hermes spoke to the memorandum from Ellie Caryl. Chairman Gallagher asked if that is a firm commitment from the applicant regarding the trails. Mr. Hermes stated it is. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve File No. PDF-00074, incorporating Staffs Findings, and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone commended staff and the applicant on their timely processing of this file. Mr. Hermes thanked the staff as well. AFP-00146, Lots 10 & 12, Red Sky Ranch Jena Skinner, Planner, presented file number AFP-00146, Lots 10 & 12, Red Sky Ranch. She stated the intent of this plat is to combine lots 10 and 12 into a "new" lot 10, by vacating the shared property line. The two existing building envelopes will be reconfigured into a single building envelope. The density of lot 12 has been transferred elsewhere within the Red Sky Ranch PUD; this lot may not re- subdivide in the future. Pursuant to Section 5-90.G.2. Standards for Amended Final Plat: a. Adjacent property. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment DOES NOT have an adverse effect on adjacent property owners. The following adjacent properties have been notified: Vail Corporation, 646 Aspen Bluff Lane LLC, Martin T Hart, Highline Partners LLC, and Jensen Homes, Inc. No letters of opposition have been received by the Community Development Department, from any of these owners, prior to the distribution of this Staff report. 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. 8 10-22-2002 Proposed improvements and/or off-site road improvements agreement ARE adequate. e. Restrictive Plat Note Alteration. DOES NOT Apply. However, a note was added to the plat concerning the transfer of density. See 'General Note' number four (4). Gerry Arnold, Vail Resorts, was present for the hearing. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. AFP-00161 incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Gallagher stated they will now take time and excuse themselves to attend a meeting to the Golden Eagle Elderly Housing Corporation Board Meeting. LUR-0038, Local Resident Housing Requirements LUR-0039, Inelusionary Housing LUR-0040, Residential Employee Housing Linkage LUR-0041, Commercial Employee Housing Linkage Rebecca Leonard, Planner, presented file numbers LUR-0038, Local Resident Housing Requirements. LUR-0039, Inclusionary Housing, LUR-0040, Residential Employee Housing Linkage and LUR-0041, Commercial Employee Housing Linkage. She stated this matter was tabled from September 10, 2002. She explained the purple and pink handouts are new from the last meeting. She stated she will briefly review those. She spoke to Exhibit F and showed it on the power point, comparing the numbers of deed restricted units to the occupied housing units. Commissioner Stone asked if this is based on the state demographers numbers to come up with the affordable units. Ms. Leonard stated she created a table of all the affordable and deed restricted units that have been approved. Commissioner Stone questioned if she is presenting projects they don't yet know about. Ms. Leonard suggested that would be tough to do. Commissioner Stone spoke to the graph and that the top line is using state demographer projections. The second line down is also projections and not based on reality. He stated the bottom line is only restricted to housing developments that are already known. He suggested the graph is not necessarily reality and that projections should be made there as well. Chairman Gallagher asked what occupied means. Ms. Leonard stated not vacant for other uses or second homes. She suggested with the build out of some of those units not yet built could provide for a more accurate representation. Commissioner Stone spoke to a chart he requested about what other counties have projected their goals are. He stated he would ultimately like to have the discussion understanding what counties are using the state demographer's projections, if they are going to have a goal, the goal needs to match up with the Master Plan. He projected 40,000 units in the next 20 years and where are they going to go. He spoke to the geographical constraints and distances and stated he is looking for realistic goals and projections as they relate to the Master Plan. Commissioner Menconi spoke to Commissioner Stone pointing out half of the scale is based on projections and half on what we know today. He suggested there are two different story lines. Commissioner Stone suggested he doesn't like this to get out to the public and the press because it does not provide a consistent comparison. Ms. Leonard suggested they change the top two lines to represent more of a realistic picture. Chairman Gallagher suggested the demographer is consistently low in their projections. 9 10-22-2002 Commissioner Menconi suggested rather than wearing out the staff to look at the principles of the regulations, he suggested they may want to curb the use of these graphs except in discussions such as this. Commissioner Stone stated the demographers goals are contradictory to their goals. Ms. Leonard spoke to the question of value increase of second homes compared to owner occupied. She showed a comparison of median sales prices which shows they are increasing at relatively the same rate. Commissioner Menconi questioned the condominium units. Ms. Leonard stated they are increasing as well at a rate of 47.5% over the last five years. She stated average sales prices vary considerably. Commissioner Stone suggested that graph is more germane to the discussion as they can look at what they are calling affordable they can look at the increase in price of homes of that range. He suggested there are differences in increases with the size and types of units. Ms. Leonard stated the median brings the numbers more together where the average shows more of the variances. She spoke to Exhibit H and the various costs as related to development and some of the potentials as they relate to cost. Commissioner Stone asked if Ms. Leonard could compile a list of the waivers and grants they are giving to the Berry Creek Housing Project. Ms. Leonard stated she will. She spoke to other incentives and listed those as well. She then showed Exhibit S and the request to replace existing affordable housing. Basalt requires the replacement of 100% of all affordable housing on a redevelopment site that prior to redevelopment, included more than 4 affordable units. She stated Aspen does this as well. Exhibit T, are answers to the question of why some units are deed restricted and others not. She spoke to the Villas at Brett Ranch. She spoke to other affordable units that have been lost such as Pitkin Creek Park, Timber Ridge, and Homestead Meadows. She spoke to some of the sales that have taken place and the prices of sales and rentals. She stated that is why they have recommended a permanent deed restriction. She stated these units are just a piece of the spectrum of housing and referred to the Housing Continuum. She suggested the deed restricted homes are to be just a step between renting and full ownership. She suggested it will be valuable for people to step to the next level. Commissioner Stone asked if they have statistics nation wide. He asked if people really are looking to make the next step. He suggested they speak with Andy Knutson. He asked they share with the Commissioners the Harvard 2002 study on affordable housing. Chairman Gallagher asked for the executive summary. Ms. Leonard spoke to Exhibit U and the use of Local CPI. She listed the options they might use otherwise including a 3% appreciation cap, area median income, Denver/Boulder/Greeley CPl, Eagle County CPl, real estate appreciation in Eagle County and Housing Opportunity Index. She stated the handout shows the pros and cons. Exhibit V speaks to on size incentives. She spoke to the considerations which include what are the priorities of the Board of County Commissioners, these Regulations apply only to unincorporated Eagle County, there are design solutions for the issues raised with on-site, cars and the facilities to accommodate them are costly to the homeowners and developers. She spoke to City Market and their on-site housing for employees. She stated it is good to write regulations for the baseline. Chairman Gallagher asked about municipalities. Ms. Leonard stated those discussions continue. Chairman Gallagher stated he can see incenting in some proximity, but he cannot imagine having the City Market parking lot as the front yard. He suggested they should equal the on-site/off-site. Commissioner Stone stated that is okay as a goal but he still wants to connect the dots. They can have grand plans, but if there is no place to build the homes it is a failed attempt. He stated ultimately it will be in relation to where development wants to build, is allowed to build and what the community will 10 10-22-2002 accept. Commissioner Menconi stated he would like to come to a close of the passage and the specific all together. Ms. Leonard spoke to Exhibit Wand the estimated administrative costs. She stated they are looking at 1 and Yz FTE's and approximately $1,000 per unit in administrative costs. She stated if they were to broker they would see about 2%. A 15% administrative fee would be in lieu of. Exhibit X looks to the County as broker with either mandatory listing with Eagle County for a 2% fee, option to either list with Eagle County for 2%, sell by owner, or through other brokers, or sell by owner or list through other broker only. Commissioner Menconi spoke to collaborative efforts expanding the work by one agency rather than each area incurring the administrative expenses. Ms. Leonard spoke to Exhibit Z and foreclosures which they don't actually have. Commissioner Stone stated he thinks he remembers the discussion being around the rate of foreclosures and the numbers that happen. He stated those are often effected by the rate of foreclosures. Ms. Maurillo stated they could further research those specifics. Commissioner Menconi asked if this is asking the question of what percentage of deed restricted homes go into foreclosure. Ms. Leonard stated she believes it is more the procedures of foreclosure. Ms. Mauriello spoke to the right to cure and what expenses come into play. Commissioner Menconi stated he is okay with Berry Creek but if the economy takes a significant downturn will there be remedies to help out the residents and/or the government. Ms. Mauriello spoke to changes in the Land Use Regulations with those properties already out there. Ms. Leonard spoke to Exhibt AA and inclusionary housing including California, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, New Mexico and Colorado. Commissioner Stone stated he would like to understand if the goal fits within the continum or whether they are attempting to fit the regulations to land use. He spoke to the County being more restrictive than the towns and that he does not agree with it. Ms. Leonard suggested they are trying to see that all of the sales tax does not go out to the County. Commissioner Stone asked if the Town of Vail has linkage. Ms. Leonard stated they do not. Commissioner Stone stated they would benefit from a discussion with the towns as to what is the combined goal. He questioned where they are all trying to end up and they may adjust the Land Use Regulations or they may not. Staff and the Commissioners continued to review the regulations page by page. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. Jack Lewis, Vail Resorts, Inc., stated the discussion today was very informative. He stated an important point that Vail Resorts agrees with is the notion of the developer be given the choice between on-site and off-site payment in lieu of. He stated he hopes they can consolidate that into something simpler than what is in the regulations today. Lance Badger, Cordillera, stated he wanted to offer some food for thought. There are some interesting numbers that are in the needs assessment and how this evolved from that. In the needs assessment, it identified 1,790 renters that wanted to buy. Out of that 18% were willing to accept deed restrictions, 82% were not. There appears to be a step missing between the deed restrictions and the free market. If a deed restriction with an appreciation cap is only addressing 18% of the renters, how is the County addressing the other 82% that want to buy but cannot afford the free market. Commissioner Stone stated the study Mr. Badger quoted did not say they could not afford the free market, it said they preferred not to have a unit with deed restrictions. 11 10-22-2002 Mr. Badger stated he stands corrected. That 82% did not want to buy a unit that was deed restricted. Commissioner Stone stated what he takes out of that comment, is as they go through the deed restrictions it would be nice to have a discussion on whether an appreciation cap is necessary or whether there are other restrictions that have the same net affect. Maybe there could be some sort of restriction based on the employee and that they could only come up with a certain amount. He stated a project like Chatfield Comers it is a good program and is filling part of the problem. Mr. Badger stated he agreed. He stated if they look at Brett Ranch, 90% of those are currently owned by Eagle County residents. He stated on one of the units, one of their employees paid $165,000.00 for the unit and sold it three years later she had an equity built up of $89,000.00 including her down payment. If that unit had been deed restricted there would have only been an equity of $18,000.00 after the three years. If an individual had the $89,000.00 they could take the next step. But if they are tied to a 3% appreciation cap, they could not. Brett Ranch is only deed restricted to be sold to another Eagle County resident. That restriction has been enough to keep 90% of the units as Eagle County resident units. That type of product addresses the 82% in the formula. Commissioner Stone stated he believes one of the purposes of the appreciation cap is to keep it affordable. He stated that is why he asked Ms. Leonard to come up with some statistics on those moving out of the deed restricted housing. Mr. Badger stated he spoke with the Wintergreen Development, who negotiated with the local entity to put the units on the market and if they did not sell they would then be able to sell at market prices. What they found was those wishing to buy the units were waiting for them to go on the market without the restrictions. It appears they are leaving a large group of people behind in not addressing that 82%. Chairman Gallagher stated it appears if what Mr. Badger is stating is correct, they will find themselves with vacant deed restricted units. At that time, ifnot sooner, they could change the requirements and be satisfied they met one requirement and now need to meet the other. It seems though from what they hear, meeting that portion of the requirement should come first. Ms. Leonard stated the key is choices. Commissioner Stone asked the attorney how you maintain the process. Ms. Mauriello stated what mechanism they would use but she will do some research and get back to the Board. Mr. Badger stated with a 100 unit project, look at the profit margins. It goes from 9 1/2% to 6%. It will force people to move to the second home process. There would be less risk in those. He stated they need incentives. He stated he is not against affordable housing. It is a good thing. Commissioner Stone stated the numbers presented it is helpful. He stated it would be helpful if Mr. Badger would send his idea of possible incentives to the Board. Mr. Badger stated he would work on that and send it in. Commissioner Menconi asked if Mr. Badger was in favor ofinclusionary zoning. Mr. Badger stated he does not have a problem with it but wants to understand the entire picture. It makes it on a level playing field. Commissioner Menconi stated Mr. Badger is a developer and want to know what it is that he wants the Board to do or not do. He stated he is looking at not making it a restriction for lower end housing proj ect. Mr. Badger stated if it is too restrictive in that class, nothing will get built. Commissioner Menconi stated projects are getting built under these regulations so it is working in different community. He asked if inclusionary zoning would stop development. Mr. Badger stated it shows that it takes a project from being border line reasonable to too risky and no one will build it for that kind of profit. Commissioner Menconi asked what happens if nothing gets done. In the past five years, they 12 10-22-2002 have seen a lot of higher end development. Ifnot for affordable some of these projects would not have been built. Mr. Badger stated there are so many programs concerning affordable housing. The regulations need to be drafted in such a way that it benefits everyone, includes rentals and included the down payment assistance program. There being no further discussion to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until October 29, 2002. Attest: Clerk to the Bo 13 10-22-2002