Loading...
Minutes 10/29/2002 PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 29, 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: Consent Agenda Chairman Gallagher stated the first matter before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for the week of October 28,2002, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of payroll for October 31,2002, subject to review by County Administrator C) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting for October 8,2002 D) Residence Lease for 30265 Colorado River Road E) Resolution 2002-150, for final release of collateral and termination ofthe warranty period for Cordillera Valley Club, Filing 8 F) Resolution 2002-151, for final release of collateral and termination ofthe warranty period for Cordillera Valley Club, Filing 9 G) Resolution 2002-152, for release of assignment of Certificate of Deposit No. 0263283343, for New Pipeline Installations, Inc., (Continental West Constructors, Inc., road cut permit no. 2798) H) Resolution 2002-153, for release of Assignment of Certificate of Deposit No. 10003207, for Clarke & Co., Inc., for road cut permit no. 2904 I) Resolution 2002-154, for release of Assignment of Certificate of Deposit No. 0263282338 for Road Cut Permit No. 2921 J) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. S407288/NVS372963, amended, in the amount of$123,564.93, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank: for Cordillera, Filing 26 K) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. S407274/NVS372706, amended, in the amount of$147,844.64, for the account of Stag Gulch Partners, a Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank for Cordillera, Filing 27 L) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. S407277/NVS372714, amended, in the amount of $257,940.00, for the account of Kensington Partners, a Colorado General Partnership, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank: for Cordillera Mountain Tract, Filing 34 1 10-29-2002 M) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. NZS418237/NVS418237, amended, in the amount of $149,900.43, for the account of Squaw Creek Realty Corp, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank for Cordillera, Filing 35 N) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. S407453/NVS4372998, amended, in the amount of$118809.65, for the account of Squaw Creek Realty Corp, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank for Cordillera, Filing 36 0) Resolution conferring Power of Attorney upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Bruce Strasinger, Paralegal, to act as Attorney in Fact for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. NVS382770, in the amount of $22,81 0.00, for the account of Squaw Creek Realty Corp, drawn on Wells Fargo Bank for Cordillera, Filing 39 P) Resolution 2002-155, confirming appointment to the Board of Directors of Eagle Riverview Affordable Housing Corporation, Lake Creek Affordable Housing Corporation and Mountain Glen Corporation Q Resolution 2002-156 Confirming Appointments to the Board of Directors of Eagle Lease Finance Corporation R) Agreement to Amend/Extend Contract Between Eagle County and Mountain High Aviation, LLC S) Resolution 2002-157 Authorizing Termination of the Warranty Period. T) Contracts with William E. Payne U) Resolution 2002-158 Ratification of Waiver of Election Costs for Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District Chairman Gallagher asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Diane Mauriello, County Attorney, stated that items J, K, L, M, Nand 0 can be pulled as the new Letters of Credit have been received. She stated she did correct the typographical errors in item Q and that is ready for the Board's consideration. Sara Fisher, Clerk & Recorder, spoke to item U, Waiver of Election Costs for Crown Mountain Park & Recreation District. She stated this does affect the Clerk's budget in the estimated revenues from that budget. She stated this will cost $3,000 to $4,000. Diane Mauriello spoke to item U and that it was discussed in legal pending and the applicant had requested a waiver of the costs. The Board decided at that time those could be waived. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented, pulling items J, K, L, M, NandO. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Plat & Resolution Signing Cliff Simonton, Planner, presented the following plats and resolutions for the Board's consideration: 5MB-00309. Third Supplement to the Final Plat and Condominium Map of the Villaee Townhomes at Arrowhead - Phase III. A Final Plat and Condominium Map, processed as a Minor Type B Subdivision, creating 4 additional residential condominium units, and adding land area to the Village Townhomes at Arrowhead, Phase III. Staff findings are as follows: 2 10-29-2002 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-00309, Third Supplement to the Final Plat and Condominium Map ofthe Village Townhomes at Arrowhead, Phase ill, incorporating staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Gallagher stated that item 5 on the agenda, meeting of the Eagle County Air Terminal Board has been taken off the agenda and been rescheduled for two weeks. PDF-00027, Willow Creek Joe Forinash, Planner, presented file number PDF-00027, Willow Creek. Chairman Gallagher stated Commissioner Menconi will not be present for the afternoon session of the meeting as he is on his way to Denver. Mr. Forinash stated this plat will subdivide a 1.061 acre parcel in West Vail into three residential lots, with building envelopes to provide the required setback from Gore Creek and minimize impacts on wetlands. The combined Sketch and Preliminary Plan for the Willow Creek PUD was approved in July 1997, and amended in September 1998 to increase the allowable building envelope coverage from 60% to 100%. The application for approval ofthe PUD final plat was submitted in May 1998. Pursuant to Section 1-150.E.2., Subdivision or PUD in Process, of the current Land Use Regulations (effective 1 January 1999), this plat is being reviewed under the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time application was made. The chronology of the application is as follows: 1997 - A combined SketchlPreliminary Plan and Zone Change was approved for the Willow Creek Planned Unit Development. 1998 - The Willow Creek PUD Preliminary Plan was amended to increase the allowable building envelope coverage from 60 percent to 100 percent. All referral responses have been satisfactorily addressed. Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Section 2.19.02(3). Final Plat Review - Action by the Board of County Commissioners, of the applicable Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the following findings are made: STANDARD: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(a)] Conformance to the Preliminary Plan and any information requested or required by the County Commissioners upon approving the Preliminary Plan. Outstanding conditions of approval of the PUD Preliminary Plan include [1] payment of cash-in- lieu fees for school land dedication; and [2] payment of off-site road impact fees, as determined by the County Engineer. The Applicant has agreed to make payment of $3,087.44 as cash-in-lieu fees for school land dedication prior to consideration of the plat by the Board. Road impact fees will be payable prior to issuance of building permits for the respective lots, pursuant to Section 4-710, Road Impact 3 10-29-2002 Fees, of the current Land Use Regulations. FINDING: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(a)] The final plat DOES conforms to the Preliminary Plan and all information requested or required by the County Commissioners upon approving the Preliminary Plan STANDARD: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(b)] Review of the Final Plat to determine if the proposed subdivision conforms to these and other applicable regulations. policies and guidelines. Staff has determined that the subdivision conforms to these and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines FINDING: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(b)] The final plat and the subdivision DOES conform to these and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines. STANDARD: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(c)] Adequacy of the proposed improvements agreement and/or off-site road improvements agreement is adequate when applicable in accordance with Section 2.20. A Subdivision Improvements Agreement (copy attached) has been forwarded to the Applicant, and executed copies are expected to be provided prior to consideration of the plat by the Board. FINDING: [Section 2.19.02 (3)(c)] The proposed improvements agreement and/or off-site road improvements agreement IS adequate. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve File No. PDF-00027, Willow Creek, incorporating staff findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the Subdivision Improvements Agreement and the plat, with the following conditions: 1. A letter of credit shall be submitted 2. A check for the fee in lieu of school land dedication fee shall be submitted 3. Receipt and authorization by County Attorney of the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. ZS-00097, Union Pacific Communication Site lena Skinner, Planner, presented file number ZS-00097, Union Pacific Communication Site. She stated the applicant desires to install, operate, and maintain an unmanned radio repeater Telecommunications Facility for use by the Union Pacific Railroad. The tower is proposed to be as tall as 110', however, the facility will initially consist of a 60' tall metal tower and equipment shelter. An omni directional antenna will be mounted below the 60', with a lightening rod mounted to the top (bringing the total height of the structure to 70'). The equipment will be powered by two solar panels mounted to the base, as well as a wind generator mounted to a pole adjacent to the building. All the equipment shall be contained within a 50' x 70', fenced in area. The facility is to be constructed on Bureau of Land Management property, over looking the Colorado River. Union Pacific Railroad will be using this site for communication and signaling along its tracks to the west. The Eagle County Land Use Regulations currently limit height to a maximum of 52' for such facilities. The applicant has been given approval from the Eagle County Zoning Board of Adjustment for a Variance to allow for a 110' tall facility. Initially, the facility necessitates 70', however, the long range planning needs of the railroad indicate additional height may become necessary in the future. The chronology of the application is as follows: Prior to 1999- Eagle County Land Use Regulations limited building heights only. Several cellular and radio towers exceeding 52' were constructed without necessitating a Variance, as there was no height limitation. 1999 to Present- The Eagle County Land Use Regulations were completely amended in 1999. 4 10-29-2002 Height restrictions for structures other than buildings (i.e. towers) was limited to 52' (40' for non- residential structures, plus, a 30% bonus) in the Resource Zone district. July 2002- Application for a telecommunications facility was made by the Union Pacific Railroad. October 2002- Zoning Board of Adjustment approves height Variance for a tower to up to110' in height. As of this writing, no referral comments have been received for this file. Referrals were sent to the following agents: Eagle County Attorney, Environmental Health, Sheriff, Engineering, Assessors Colorado State Forest Service, Division of Wildlife Bureau of Land Management CenturyTel, Holy Cross Electric Gypsum Fire Department Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-250.B Standards for the review of a Special Use Permit: STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.l Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. THE MASTER PLAN MATRIX THAT FOLLOWS ANALYZES THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. Environmental Open Space/ Development Affordable Transportation Community FLUM Qualitv Recreation Housing Services Conformance X BLM Land Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X Applicable EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN BLM is the designation upon the FLUM. The Eagle County Master Plan is silent in regard to Telecommunication Facilities, however, it is not anticipated that the proposed telecommunications equipment will compromise environmental quality. Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Wildlife Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance X X X X X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN 5 10-29-2002 II II Not Applicable x x The lease property is not located in a recognized unique land form area of the county, nor is it located in a natural hazard area. The telecommunication facility will be placed quite a distance from any other structure, and will not be able to be noticed from afar. This site will not compromise any of the surrounding open space. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use Permit CAN be shown to be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Master Plan and Master Plan FLUM, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.2 Compatibility. The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. There are no existing buildings within close proximity of the site, as it is on BLM land. The proposed tower will be non-reflective, with the building to be constructed / painted to blend in with the surrounding landscape. The site is located within a slight depression in the landscape, making the building and related equipment even more difficult to see from afar. The character of the surrounding vicinity of Eagle County will not be compromised by this Special Use proposal, as the topography/trees will serve as a backdrop for the facility. [+] FINDING: Compatibility. The proposed Special Use IS appropriate for its proposed location and IS compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.3 Zone District Standards. The proposed Special Use shall comply with the standards of the zone district in which it is located and any standards applicable to the particular use, as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Residential. Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3-330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and Industrial Uses. The new Telecommunication Facilities will be located in the Resource zone district. There are no specific standards for these types of uses found in Sections 3-310 or 3-330. [+] FINDING: Zone District Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES comply with the standards of the zone district in which it is located and the standards applicable to the particular use, as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Residential. Agricultural and Resource Uses STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.4 Design Minimizes Adverse Impact The design of the proposed Special Use shall minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on adjacent lands; furthermore, the proposed Special Use shall avoid significant adverse impact on surrounding lands regarding trash, traffic, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, noise, glare, and vibration, and shall not create a nuisance. This facility shall not increase the emission of any odors, noise, glare or vibrations. Due to the tower location, visual impacts will be minimal, as it can only be seen from certain elevations above the train tracks, with trees and topography adding a backdrop to the facility. Power will be generated by both wind and solar powers. [+] FINDING: Design Minimizes Adverse Impact. Approval ofthis Special Use application WILL NOT generate any undue ocular, auditory or olfactory impacts. Further, the existing access will be nominal. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.5 Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. The proposed Special Use shall minimize environmental impacts and shall not cause significant deterioration of water and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resources. The proposed wireless communications equipment will not deteriorate water, air, wildlife 6 10-29-2002 habitat, scenic or other natural resources, as there are no emissions associated with this facility. [+] FINDING: Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. The proposed Special Use WILL fully minimize environmental impacts, and will not cause significant deterioration of water and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic, and other natural resources. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.6 Impact on Public Facilities. The proposed Special Use shall be adequately served by public facilities and services, including roads, pedestrian paths, potable water and wastewater facilities, parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical servIces. The proposed facility is un-manned and therefore, will not require schools, water, sewer, parks, etc. The existing road, with certain improvements (as is proposed with this facility), used to access the site is adequate in the summer; a grading permit to improve/expand the road has previously been approved. Alternate transportation methods will be used in the winter, as BLM roads are not maintained. [+] FINDING: Impact on Public Facilities. The proposed Special Use IS adequately served by public facilities and services such as roads, pedestrian paths, potable water and waste water facilities, parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.7 Site Development Standards. The proposed Special Use shall comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards. Article 4, Site Development Standards [+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) [+] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3). [ + ] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) [ +] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) [+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) [n/a] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) No wood burning devices are proposed. [+] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) [+] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) An Environmental hnpact Report was not necessary for this Special Use Permit. [+] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) [+] Noise and Vibration (Section 4-520) [+] Smoke and Particulates (Section 4-530) Smoke and/or particulates in excess of the standards are not anticipated as a result of this development. [+] Heat Glare Radiation and Electrical Interference (Section 4-540) There have been no complaints received concerning this finding. All Telecommunication facilities have to comply with FCC standards (the regulating authority). [+] Storage of Hazardous and Non-hazardous Materials (Section 4-550) [+] Water Quality Standards (Section 4-560) [+] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) A grading permit for a new section of road has been approved by the Eagle County Engineering Department. [n/a] 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) [n/a] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7). Standards in this section do 7 10-29-2002 not apply. [+] FINDING: Site Development Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES fully comply with all applicable standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards. STANDARD: Section 5-250.B.8 Other Provisions. The proposed Special Use shall comply with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development characteristics. Only one other section of the Land Use Regulations was applicable to this proposal for a Special Use Permit. A zoning Variance to allow for the height to exceed the current standards was recently approved. [+] FINDING: The proposed Special Use DOES comply with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development characteristics, with Variance approval. Tom Broskoski, applicant, was present for the hearing. Chairman Gallagher asked if all gai wires were in the perimeter fence. Mr. Broskoski answered yes. Chairman Gallagher asked about the solar panels being so close to the ground. Roger Williams, representing the applicant, stated they will be a few feet above the surface and stated they should not be covered with snow. Chairman Gallagher asked about condition number 2, the second part concerning at the discretion of the Director of Community Development. Ms. Skinner stated if the applicant decides they will add another antenna or if they were to increase the lease space. Chairman Gallagher asked if the applicant needs a special use permit it would be for increased acreage. Mr. Broskoski stated it would be for increasing the number of antenna. Commissioner Stone stated as long as they are not increasing the area. Chairman Gallagher asked ifthere is only one tower, what difference does it make whether there are one or two receivers. Bob Narracci, Planning Manager, answered it would all be included in the approval today. Chairman Gallagher stated if they are approving 110 feet today he cannot think of a reason they would come back for further approval. Mr. Williams spoke to gai wires. Mr. Narracci stated the initial piece to be built will be built to allow for expansion. It may not be necessary any longer. Commissioner Stone moved to approve file number ZS-00097, Union Pacific Communication Site incorporating staff findings and the following conditions: 1. Except as otherwise modified by this Permit, all material representations made by the Applicant in this application and in public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 2. Applicant (Union Pacific Railroad) shall notify the Community Development Director when altering or modifying equipment on the Telecommunications Facility. Notification shall include both a written description and detailed plans showing new and/or altered equipment on the structures as well as any modifications to the equipment shelter. 3. A Building Permit must be obtained for any future expansion(s) of the facility. 4. Height ofthe facility may not exceed that allowed by the associated Variance (Eagle County File No. ZV-00021). Height limitation is 110' maximum, and includes any antenna, lightening rod, etc. which is attached to the top of the tower itself. 8 10-29-2002 Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. L UR-0044, Kennel Operations Joseph Forinash presented file number LUR-0044, Kennel Operations. He stated the Eagle Valley Planning Commission recommended approval with a condition that a Special Use Permit for a kennel or a veterinary hospital would be subject to a review after 5 or more complaints are received. The Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Forinash stated this was an application to amend the Land Use Regulations to permit the operation of kennels as a use subject to Special Review in the Commercial Limited (CL), Commercial General (CG), Industrial (I) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts. A "kennel" is defined in the Land Use Regulations as "any lot, premises or establishment in which four (4) or more dogs, cats or domesticated animals are housed, groomed, bred, boarded, trained or sold, all for a fee or compensation" [Section 2- 110, Definitions]. Currently, kennels are permitted only as uses subject to Special Review in the Resource (R) and Resource Limited (RL) zone districts. This application regarding kennels is somewhat unique in that it is being proposed by a citizen of Eagle County, rather than by County Staff. However, Staff is taking this opportunity to present for consideration permitting of veterinary hospitals in Commercial Limited (CL), Commercial General (CG), Industrial (I) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts, also by Special Review. A "veterinary hospital"is defined in the Land Use Regulations as "a place where animals are given medical care and boarding of animals is limited to short term care that is incidental to the hospital stay" [Section 2-11 0, Definitions]. Currently, veterinary hospitals are permitted only as uses subject to Special Review in the Resource (R), Resource Limited (RL), Agricultural Resource (AR), Agricultural Limited (AL), and Rural Residential (RR) zone districts. The chronology of the application is as follows: 1998 - The Land Use Regulations, generally in the current form and format, were adopted. The effective date of these Land Use Regulations was 1 January 1999. 1999,2001,2002 - Several amendments to the Land Use Regulations were approved changing various provisions, not including those under consideration with these proposed amendments. Referral responses are as follows: Eagle County Animal Control- No problem with what is being proposed. State of Colorado inspects kennels annually for health related conditions. [Per telephone conversation with Rusty Williams, Director, on 17 September 2002.] Additional Referral Agencies: Eagle County Attorney, and Eagle County Environmental Health Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-230.D., Standards for the review of Amendments to the Text of the Land Use Regulations: STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-230.D.1.] - Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM (Future Land Use Map) of the Master Plan. Environmental Open Spacel Development Affordable Transportation Community FLUM Qualitv Recreation Housing Services Conformance Xl X EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN 9 10-29-2002 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X Applicable Xl - Supports/encourages diversity of economic base; tends to locate service commercial uses in designated business parks. Community Open Space Environment Economic Affordable Circulation& FLUP Size & & & Sensitive Development Housing Transportation Map Character Recreation Areas Conformance Xl X2 X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X Applicable EAGLE AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Xl - Although commercially zoned property outside and in the vicinity of the Town of Eagle is unlikely, this proposal tends to promote concentration of development in and around the Town of Eagle. x2 - By permitting kennel and veterinary hospital uses in other than the more rural zone districts, this proposal tends to preserve these areas as rural and lessen likelihood of impacting critical wildlife habitat. Development Economy Housing Circulation Recreation Concepts Conformance Xl Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X Applicable EDWARDS SUB-AREA PLAN Xl - Tends to encourage development of services in the center of the Edwards area which serve residents of the area and the region. Housing Transpor- Community Environment EI Jebel/ Lower Ruedi Missouri tation Facilities Basalt Frving Pan Reservoir Heights Conformance Xl X2 MID-VALLEY COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN 10 10-29-2002 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X x Applicable Xl - Tends to encourage community scale commercial development in traditional small town patterns. X2 - Tends to encourage expansion of community services and facilities concentrated in and around 500 feet of existing development. Inside Outside Wildlife Open Space Water and Hazards Air, Transpor. History and Activity Activity Recreation Sanitation Odor, tation Archeology Center Center Noise Conformance Xl X2 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Xl X X X X X X x Applicable WOLCOTT AREA MASTER PLAN Xl - However, zoning for future commercial space is encouraged to be PUD. x2 - With adequate review, potentially adverse impacts can be mitigated to maintain desirable environmental conditions. Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Wildlife Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance Xl Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X Applicable EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN Xl - Encourages development in and around existing communities in order to enhance s open space values in the outlying areas. Water Quantity Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Conformance EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN 11 10-29-2002 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X Applicable [+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-230.D.1.] - The proposed amendment IS consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM (Future Land Use Map) of the 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. As noted above, a kennel is defined in the Land Use Regulations as "any lot, premises or establishment in which four (4) or more dogs, cats or domesticated animals are housed, groomed, bred, boarded, trained or sold, all for a fee or compensation" [LUR Section 2-110, Definitions]. Currently, kennels are permitted only as uses subject to Special Review in the Resource (R) and Resource Limited (RL) zone districts [minimum lot sizes 35 acres and 20 acres, respectively]. Also as noted above, veterinary hospitals are currently permitted only as uses subject to Special Review in the Resource (R), Resource Limited (RL), Agricultural Resource (AR), Agricultural Limited (AL), and Rural Residential (RR) zone districts. An apparent reason for not permitting kennels and veterinary hospitals in other residential, agricultural, commercial and industrial zone districts is the potential nuisance which might result, primarily from noise. It may be noted, however, that veterinary hospitals, including short-term (including overnight) boarding of dogs and cats, is currently permitted in commercial zone districts in other jurisdictions in Eagle County, an example being the Town of Eagle, with no apparent adverse impacts. Appropriate uses in the Rural Center (RC) zone district are identified somewhat differently. Commercial uses are to be "convenience-oriented. . . uses that serve the needs of residents in the surrounding area and visitors and other passers-by." While this description is not particularly specific, other uses permitted in the RC zone district [see Table 3-320, Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule] are such that both a kennel and a veterinary hospital are appropriate uses in the RC zone district, subject to Special Review to assure adequate mitigation of potentially adverse impacts. Given the likely intensity of uses in general in the proposed zone districts [CL, CG, I and Re], adverse impacts are more likely here than in the more rural zone districts. Noise is perhaps the most obvious. However, even the Applicant notes that, under her proposal, dogs would be taken "off- property" for walks and "potty breaks". Certainly, fouling a commercial development with evidence of a large number of dogs being allowed to relieve themselves would not be acceptable. However, these and other potentially adverse impacts could be addressed during a Special Review. It is Staffs position that kennel and veterinary hospital uses, in each case subject to Special Review, are compatible with other uses in the Commercial Limited (CL), Commercial General (CG), Industrial (I) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts. [+] FINDING: Compatible with surrounding uses. [Section 5-230.D.2.] - The proposed amendment IS compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and IS an appropriate zone district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district. 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. 12 10-29-2002 The Applicant has noted that there are currently 2,400 dogs registered in Eagle County. This number has likely been increasing generally in proportion with the significant population increases that have occurred in recent years. Accordingly, there has likely been an increasing need for kennel and veterinary services, and permitting these uses in other appropriate zone districts allows the availability of these services to better keep pace with the demand. [+] FINDING: Changed conditions. [Section 5-230.D.3.] - There ARE changed conditions that require an amendment to modify the use or density/intensity. 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, stormwater management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands. As noted above, potentially adverse impacts are likely, but an opportunity to review and require mitigation of potentially adverse impacts on the environment could occur as part of a Special Review. [+] FINDING: Effect on natural environment. [Section 5-230.DA.] - The proposed amendment WILL NOT 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. STANDARD: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5.] Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment addresses a demonstrated community need. As noted above, the Applicant has noted that there are currently 2,400 dogs registered in Eagle County. This number has likely been increasing generally in proportion with the significant population increases that have occurred in recent years. Accordingly, there has likely been an increasing need for kennel and veterinary services, and permitting these uses in other appropriate zone districts allows the availability of these services to better keep pace with the demand. [+] FINDING: Community need. [Section 5-230.D.5.] - It HAS BEEN demonstrated that the proposed amendment addresses a community need. 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 proposed amendment to the Land Use Regulations would not have an adverse effect on development or development patterns. [+] FINDING: Development patterns. [Section 5-230.D.6.] - The proposed amendment WILL result in a logical and orderly development pattern, WILL NOT constitute spot zoning, WILL 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. Given the noted benefits of addressing increasing need for kennel and veterinary hospital services, encouraging commercial uses in commercial zone districts, and the ability to mitigate potentially adverse impacts through the Special Review process, it is in the public interest to permit the proposed uses in the recommended zone districts. [+] FINDING: Public interest. [Section 5-230.D.7.] - 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 in the Commercial General (CG), Commercial Limited (CL) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts. Chairman Gallagher questioned special review. Mr. Forinash stated it goes along with the Special Use Permit process. Commissioner Stone stated he has no comment as long as the Planning Commission and the 13 10-29-2002 Board have the authority to review and deny the application if problems arise. Commissioner Stone move the Board approve File No. LUR-0044, Kennel Operations, to amend the Eagle County Land Use Regulations to permit kennels and veterinary hospitals as uses subject to Special Review in the Commercial General (CG), Commercial Limited (CL), Industrial (I) and Rural Center (RC) zone districts, incorporating the Staff findings. Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. PDA-00039, Arrowhead at Vail Joseph Forinash presented file number PDA-00039, Arrowhead at Vail. Commissioner Stone stated the Board has received a number of letters mostly in opposition of this application. He stated this was a file that has significance to the residents. He stated this matter may be tabled until all three Commissioners are present. Mr. Forinash stated the reasons for making any of the parcels in Arrowhead portion of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD exempt from the restrictive portions of this proposed PUD amendment. Distinctions between the types of timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses that would be restricted by this PUD amendment and other types of ownership arrangements (e.g., rental pools) that would not be affected. Desirability of addressing the issue through a PUD amendment as opposed to a revision to the applicable covenants. Mr. Forinash stated this was an amendment to the PUD Guide which would place restrictions on the permitted location of timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses in the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. More specifically, the proposed amendment to the PUD Guide would [1] restrict timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses in certain portions of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD platted as "Arrowhead", [2] permit timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses in other portions of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD platted as "Arrowhead", and [3] not affect permitted or restricted land uses in that part of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD platted as "Bachelor Gulch Village". As it currently stands, the PUD Guide explicitly permits interval ownership uses in certain areas of the Bachelor Gulch Village portion of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD, and is silent with respect to interval ownership as a permitted use in the balance of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD, including Arrowhead. At least in part because "interval ownership" has elements of being both a land use and an ownership arrangement, it has been the position the County Attorney's Office that interval ownership is permitted throughout the PUD. In recent years, two single family dwellings in Arrowhead have been owned and operated at interval ownership uses and have resulted, in the perception of other property owners in Arrowhead, in adverse impacts on the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. Given the opinion of the County Attorney's Office regarding the nature of interval ownership as a permitted use throughout the PUD, options available to the Applicant include seeking a PUD amendment or a revision to the applicable covenants. The Applicant is pursuing a PUD amendment as the more practical of the two. The proposed amendment, as originally submitted, would have restricted timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses in both the Arrowhead and the Bachelor Gulch Village portions of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. The response to this proposal (see attached letters dated prior to 17 September 2002) included 23 letters from property owners, 22 of which expressed opposition to the PUD amendment. A common theme in the responses has been opposition to timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses anywhere within the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. The Applicant subsequently revised the proposed PUD amendment to [1] restrict timeshare, interval ownership, and fraction share uses in most areas of the Arrowhead portion of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD, and [2] not change the provisions of the PUD Guide for the Bachelor Gulch Village portion 14 10-29-2002 of the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. Second notices, which were mailed to owners of property in the Arrowhead at Vail PUD on 17 September 2002, included additional information regarding the proposed PUD amendment and the revised text of the amendment. The Applicant has also mailed a letter to property owners providing an additional explanation of the proposed amendment. Copies of each are enclosed. The chronology of the application is as follows: 1983 - Initial PUD Preliminary Plan for Arrowhead at Vail approved. 1993 - Certain amendments to the Arrowhead at Vail PUD Preliminary Plan approved, which now authorizes a total of 2,025 dwelling units and 197,000 square feet of commercial space. Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: Eagle County Attorney - Has indicated that he has reviewed the proposed language ofthe amendment and has no problem with it, but suggests a minor wording change to proposed amendment for greater clarity. (See discussion below under the Standard for an Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.]) Other Referrals have been made to Eagle County Assessor, and the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a PUD Preliminary Plan: 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. Due to the fact that the Arrowhead at Vail Planned Unit Development is largely built-out, all of the land that is the subject ofthis PUD Amendment is not owned or controlled by one person. However, the application has been filed by Vail/Arrowhead, Inc., on behalf of the PUD as a whole. [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part of this PUD IS NOT owned or controlled by one (1) person. HOWEVER, the Applicant is Vail/Arrowhead, Inc., on behalf of the PUD as a whole. 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 effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. The proposed amendment would restrict certain permitted uses, specifically, timeshare, interval ownership and fraction sharing uses, in certain areas within the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] All of the proposed additional 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 the Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment. 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 PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized, provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and 15 10-29-2002 snowmelt between buildings. No changes in dimensional limitations are proposed as part of this PUD Amendment. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE those specified in the Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment. 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 Loading 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 PUD 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. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the adequacy of off-street parking and loading. [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] It HAS previously been found at the time that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved that adequate, safe and convenient parking and loading was being provided. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely effect the adequacy ofthe existing off-street parking and loading. 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 PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streets capes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the landscaping within the PUD. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] Landscaping provided in the approved PUD Preliminary Plan HAS been determined to have complied with the standards in effect at the time the Preliminary Plan was approved. With the recommended condition, the proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT impact existing landscaping nor require additional landscaping. 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 PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment will neither adversely impact existing signs nor require additional restrictions on sign other than those already provided in the Amended and Restated Guide to the Planned Unit Development Plan, currently in effect for Arrowhead at Vail. [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE as specified in the Amended and Restated Guide to the Planned Unit Development Plan, currently in effect for Arrowhead at Vail. 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 16 10-29-2002 and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate facilities were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the adequacy of facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads, nor will it affect the location in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] It HAS previously been determined that adequate facilities were to be provided based on the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the provision of adequate facilities with respect to potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads, or location 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, Imvrovements 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-ol-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 offsite. (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 offstreet parking areas. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate improvements were to be made. The proposed PUD Amendment will neither adversely effect the adequacy of these improvements nor warrant additional improvements. [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] It HAS previously been determined that adequate improvements were to be provided based on the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect improvements regarding: (a) safe, efficient access, (b) internal pathways, (c) emergency vehicles, (d) principal access points, and (e) snow storage. 17 10-29-2002 STANDARD: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The development proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that the development was compatible with other development in the area. The proposed amended PUD will continue to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD HAS been determined to be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect this compatibility. 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 following analysis with respect to the Master Plan and the FLUM applies only to the changes proposed in the PUD Amendment, as submitted by the Applicant. Environmental Open Space/ Development Affordable Transportation Community FLUM Qualitv Recreation Housing Services Conformance X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X Applicable EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Wildlife Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X X Applicable EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN Water Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Quanity Conformance Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X Applicable EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN 18 10-29-2002 EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN VISION STATEMENT: 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 are: Housing is a community-wide issue Housing should be located in close proximity to existing community centers, as defined in the Eagle County master plan. . . Development of local residents housing should be encouraged on existing. . . transit routes Housing is primarily a private sector activity [but] . . . without the active participation of government, there will be only limited success It is important to preserve existing local residents housing Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate housing opportunities within the county Development applications that will result in an increased need for local residents housing should be evaluated as to whether they adequately provide for this additional need, the same way as they are evaluated for other infrastructure needs POLICIES: 1. Eagle County will collaborate with the private sector & nonprofit organizations to develop housing for local residents 2. Housing for local residents is an issue which Eagle County needs to address in collaboration with the municipalities. . . 3. Steps should be taken to facilitate increased home ownership by local residents x and workers in Eagle County 4. Additional rental opportunities for permanent local residents should be brought on line. Some... should be for households with an income equivalent to or less than x one average wage job 5. Seasonal housing is part of the problem & needs to be further addressed. It is x primarily the responsibility of. . . employers. . . 6. New residential subdivisions will provide a percentage oftheir units for local x residents 7. Commercial, industrial, institutional, and public developments generating increased employment will provide local residents housing. The first preference x will be for units on-site where feasible, or ifnot feasible, in the nearest existing community center. . . 8. The County will seek to make land available for local residents housing in proximity to community centers 9. Mixed use developments in appropriate locations are encouraged x 10. Factory-built housing is an important part of Eagle County's housing stock x 11. There is a need to segment a portion of the housing market to protect local residents from having to compete with second home buyers. Where public assistance or subsidies are provided for housing, there should generally be limits x on price appreciation, as well as residency requirements 12. Eagle County recognizes that housing for local residents is an ongoing issue ITEM I YES I NO I N/A I It has previously been found that the PUD is in conformance with the Master Plan. The proposed 19 10-29-2002 PUD Amendment is not sufficiently different in character or magnitude to alter conformance with the Master Plan. Staff also finds that the proposed PUD Amendment is in conformance with the Future Land Use Map, and makes a favorable finding. [+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the consistency with the Master Plan. STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Plan for PUD shall include a phasing plan for the development. If development of the P UD 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. Phasing is not required for this PUD Amendment. [+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) A phasing plan IS NOT required for this PUD Amendment. 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 of 25% 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. i. Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-ol-ways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. ii. Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, 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. (b) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development schedule established for each development phase of the PUD. (c) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for 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. (d) 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. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate 20 10-29-2002 common recreation and open space were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the adequacy of these amenities. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] It has previously been determined that the development DOES comply with the common recreation and open space standards applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect common recreation and open space within the PUD 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. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate protection of natural resources were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on natural resources. [+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [ Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] It HAS previously been determined that applicable analysis documents were adequately considered prior to approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. With the recommended condition of approval, adequate protection of natural resources HAS been provided for. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of a Sketch 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, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the consistency with the Master Plan. 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 3, Zone Districts When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, findings were made to warrant the zone district change to PUD based on the applicable Land Use Regulations. The proposed PUD Amendment is also consistent with the provisions of Article 3, Zone Districts, ofthe current Land Use Regulations. Article 4, Site Development Standards When the Preliminary Plan was approved, it had been demonstrated that applicable site development standards had been satisfied. The proposed PUD Amendment will not alter the earlier finding. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] It HAS previously been found that the development complied with the regulations, policies and guidelines of the Land Use Regulations applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect compliance with these 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. 21 1 0-29-2002 (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. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the development would have an efficient spatial pattern The proposed PUD Amendment will not alter the spatial pattern in any way that causes inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] It HAS previously been found that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD satisfied the requirements of the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time with respect to efficient spatial patterns. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT adversely affect the spatial patterns in the area. 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. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the area was suitable for development. The proposed PUD Amendment does not alter the suitability of the property. [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] It HAS previously been determined that the site was suitable for development. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT alter the suitability of the property. 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 of the surrounding area. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that the development is compatible with other development in the area. The proposed PUD Amendment will not adversely affect the compatibility of the PUD with surrounding land uses. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] It HAS previously been determined that the development is compatible with other development in the area. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely effect the compatibility ofthe resulting development with surrounding uses. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation: Applicant shall submit the following: "Proposed PUD guide setting forth the proposed land use restrictions." A draft amended Planned Unit Development Guide is provided which incorporates the necessary revisions to effect the proposed PUD Amendment. Tom Moorhead, the County Attorney at the time this application was initially under consideration, has noted that he has met with representatives of the Applicant regarding this proposed PUD Amendment, has reviewed the proposed language, and has no problem with it. He has provided an additional suggestion, for purposes of greater clarity, that the phrase "in effect" or "existing" be inserted in the first portion of the sentence in the text of the proposed amendment beginning on the fifth line from the bottom so as to read as follows: "Any use of a Unit for Interval Ownership purposes in effect (or existing) at the time that this Section XIV is adopted. . . ." This suggestion has been provided to the Applicant, who has agreed to insert the suggested phrasing into the text of the proposed amendment. A revised amendment is attached to this staff report. 22 1 0-29-2002 [+] FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)] Applicant HAS submitted a PUD Guide which incorporates the necessary revisions to effect the proposed PUD Amendment The requirements of this Section are 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 for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3 .m.] - No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon afinding by the County. . . that (1) the modification, removal, or release 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. The proposed PUD Amendment satisfies the requirements of this Standard. [+] FINDING: Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F. 3.m . ] 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 ofland 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. Commissioner Stone asked about the Bachelor Gulch areas. Rick Plyman, representing the applicant, stated the Ritz Carlton, the multifamily development and a third of the single family homes are within the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. Commissioner Stone stated Bachelor Gulch seems to be its own community. Today is just the Arrowhead PUD. He wanted to make sure there was consistency within the Bachelor Gulch PUD. Mr. Plyman stated Greg Perkins, Counsel for Arrowhead at Vail, Tom Leinhart, President of Arrowhead at Vail, and Bill Maxwell, member of the Association, are present for the hearing. He stated a phenomenon that is occurring in Arrowhead which is the time share of single family homes. This vacation club ownership seems to have strong growth potential. There are currently two houses in Arrowhead operating under this type of ownership. He stated an organization will buy the property and sell it to individuals for a week at a time. He stated Jim Fritze, past County Attorney, felt that timeshares were an allowed use in Arrowhead. He stated Arrowhead was developed in the early 1980's and consisted of the development on the valley floor. At that time this concept did not exist. When Bachelor Gulch amended the PUD Guide to include timeshares. It is very specific as to where timeshares are allowed. He stated the PUD Guide is very specific to where Bachelor starts and stops. He stated the Homeowners Association is very interested in restricting that type of use. Chairman Gallagher asked if the applicant wants to limit interval ownership in all areas. Mr. Plyman stated that was correct with the exception of the three colored parcels noted on the plat. Chairman Gallagher asked about the yellow colored lots on the map. Mr. Plyman stated they have eliminated the language from the Bachelor Gulch portion of the plan as the PUD Guide for that area is very restrictive. Commissioner Stone asked how the lots were picked to have time shares on them. Mr. Plyman stated they are the vacant or undeveloped lots in the multi-family zoning. Commissioner Stone asked ifthere are eight vacant lots? Mr. Plyman stated that was correct. Commissioner Stone asked what happens to the current homes. Mr. Plyman stated they have grandfathered in the existing homes that are doing time shares. He pointed out the homes that are currently timeshares. Chairman Gallagher asked about ownership of the vacant lots. 23 10-29-2002 Mr. Plyman stated tracts G & H are vacant lots. Those are owned by Vail Resorts. He stated Vail Resorts owns all the vacant lots in Arrowhead. Chairman Gallagher asked why Vail Resorts was allowed to have the timeshare lots. Mr. Plyman stated Vail Resorts was concerned about giving up their interval ownership rights. Commissioner Stone stated he would like the definition of time sharing. Chairman Gallagher asked who was shown as the owner of the vacation clubs. Greg Perkins stated there are individuals that own a certain portion ofthe unit. Sometimes they are ownerships in an entity that owns the real estate. Ms. Mauriello handed the Board the definition of fractional ownership. Chairman Gallagher asked about the definition. Gregg Perkins stated it is sections 2a and 2b. Commissioner Stone stated it reads it will be considered time sharing if items one, two or three, exist it would then be time sharing. Mr. Perkins stated they tried to define interval ownership. Commissioner Stone asked if someone owns a unit and wants to sell half of the units. Tom Leinhart stated he was present to voice the Homeowners Association support of this amendment. He stated it is interesting how Arrowhead is referred to as the Arrowhead Resort. He stated all those that live in Arrowhead refer to it as a community. He stated some of the issues are that the absentee have no pride in the community and after a period of time that owner really does not care. Interval ownership does not have a place in Arrowhead. He stated their concerns were they did not want to see a Crescent Club or any other units where there is an absentee owner. He stated Vail Resorts does not have any plans for interval ownership at this time. He urged the Board to approve the amendment as presented. Chairman Gallagher asked if they have the ability to have a non-conforming use that is grand fathered until it is out of that use. Chairman Gallagher asked ifit was also in the PUD Amendment. Gregg Perkins stated what V A has committed to is that any project on any of the excluded lots from this prohibition would only be developed if the entire project is used for that purpose. Chairman Gallagher asked if there was a consensus among the members or is there opposition. Mr. Leinhart stated for the most part they are in agreement however there are those real estate people who would like the interval ownership Mr. Forinash stated there are approximately 61 letters regarding this proposal. Mr. Plyman stated there were two letters who would like to see interval ownership in this area. Bill Maxwell, area resident, stated he lived on Arrowhead Drive and two doors away is a fractional ownership. He stated there are two to three new people coming in every week. There is no real investment in these type units. He stated he is very comfortable with the plan as presented. He stated they are very supportive of the approach. He stated 50 plus homeowners are in favor of this amendment. Jack Cosen, property owner, stated he has two parties, one is under contract for village core townhome, and he has one corporate retreat type of buyer. He understands both would be prohibited under this regulation. He stated he is hearing that timeshares are a bad thing, but they will have them over here. He is also hearing that if they are managed properly it would also be okay. This group he is dealing with has a very high standard for ownership of the unit. He stated they are looking to maintain the property and have it increase in value. He stated maybe they should restrict rentals and not allow those. He stated it appears that some people are restricted and some are not. He stated if this passes he might lose a few sales. He thinks a lot of the concerns he is hearing can be dealt with through the homeowners association. These regulations are enforced. He stated he believes the proposal is unfairly restrictive. Chairman Gallagher asked if it was legal for him to rent his property. 24 10-29-2002 Mr. Cosen answered yes. Chairman Gallagher asked if it was legal for General Motors to purchase a townhome and let whoever they choose to live there. Mr. Cosen answered yes. He stated the point is that a single corporation would own the properties and the members, approximately 6 individuals who would be utilizing the home. Chairman Gallagher stated he did not understand anything about sole ownership. Mr. Perkins stated in his view the proposed buyer would not be permitted to use the property in that manner. Commissioner Stone asked about enforcement of these units. Would it be the County? Mr. Mauriello stated she believes that would be a component of the proposal. Chairman Gallagher asked if the County enforces this matter it would most likely be enforced against the Homeowners Association. Commissioner Stone stated it would be a complaint from a neighbor and it would be up to the County to find out ifthere is a problem. Mr. Cosen stated he believes he is being cut out of something at a critical moment. Matt Mullin, resident in Arrowhead, stated according to the way it is written now they would be in violation. He stated the type of people he has had problems with are those that rent their unit out on a regular basis. He stated only Vail Resorts can benefit from this proposal. Chairman Gallagher asked if Mr. Mullin liked the idea of a vacation club. Mr. Mullin stated it depends on the management of the unit. Ifthe owners have a vested interested they are more prone to follow the rules. Chairman Gallagher closed public comment. Diane Mauriello stated it is not granted solely to confer special benefit upon any person. There might be a benefit from the single family homes and by restricting it, it can also be viewed as a benefit to Vail Resorts. There are two sides of the issue. Mr. Perkins stated this use is in effect today and they are not changing what VA has the right to do but rather setting regulations to tell them how they can do it. Chairman Gallagher stated he has heard several comments about the problems with rental units. He asked ifthe HOA has considered addressing the rental portion ofthe PUD. Mr. Plyman stated the Homeowners Association really looked at a new use and a concern that it could proliferate. They tried to address that use in this amendment. He stated rental of units is not what anyone wants to get into. Mr. Cosen stated there is a property management organization on site to manage the rental units He referred to the Seasons which have approximately 70 rental units. He stated ifthere are problems those must be addressed Commissioner Stone asked if he understood that the grandfather clause would be extinguished if they change use of the property. Mr. Perkins stated they are using existing non conforming uses, which there is a lot of case law on. Ms. Mauriello stated she has the same understanding as Mr. Perkins. Commissioner Stone stated the rules should be made very clear as the County needs to have very clear direction for enforcement. Chairman Gallagher asked how many of the 2,025 units are in place. Mr. Cosen stated the original PUD allowed more density than what is there today. He stated there are 30 plus lots left for single family homes. Chairman Gallagher asked if that included Bachelor Gulch. Mr. Plyman stated he sent 900 letters to 900 owners. Commissioner Stone asked about the interest of the property owners association to limit the proliferation of time sharing. He asked if they would be willing to include the agreement with Vail 25 10-29-2002 Resorts. Mr. Plyman stated he believes they can incorporate that agreement. If the County is going to be looked to for enforcement, they need to know about all agreements in place. Chairman Gallagher asked if Vail Resorts had veto power over this. Alex Siscondarie, Vail Resort, stated the HOA asked them to help accommodate their requests, which they did, however they still have their rights to develop fractional ownerships. They are acting like an accommodating party. Chairman Gallagher asked why Vail Resorts has more rights than anyone else. Mr. Siscondarie stated these are the only undeveloped lands in the core. Chairman Gallagher asked about other undeveloped property. Mr. Plyman stated they are in the residential areas. Chairman Gallagher stated the Commissioners have spoken to better directions for enforcement that they would like added to the PUD Guide Amendment. He would like the HOA to consider a PUD Amendment that deals with a type of interval ownership relating to its management. Mr. Plyman stated they are requesting this matter be tabled to December 10, 2002. Commissioner Stone moved to table file number PDA-00039, Arrowhead PUD be tabled at the applicants request to December 10, 2002. Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until November 12,2002. Attest: Clerk to the Boa 26 10-29-2002