Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/18/03 PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 18, 2003 Present: Michael Gallagher Am Menconi Tom Stone Jack Ingstad Diane Mauriello Teak Simonton Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator County Attorney Clerk to the Board These 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 item before the Commissioners was an Executive Session. Commissioner Stone moved the Board of County Commissioners adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on issues concerning negotiations on the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Gypsum and Eagle County and issues regarding negotiations on the Pre-Annexation Agreement between Town of Gypsum and Eagle County; potential settlement in Remonov and CO., v. Board of County Commissioners and concerning negotiations for the process of tax appeal cases and arbitration and finally concerning purchase of real property located in the vicinity of the justice center all of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to c.R.S. 24-6- 402(4)(b)(c) and (e). Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. At the close of the discussion Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn from Executive Session and reconvene into the regular meeting. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated Chairman Gallagher had to leave to attend a meeting with the Colorado Department of Transportation. He stated the next item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Bill Paying for the Weeks of November 17,2003 and December 1, 2003, subject to review by the County Administrator B. Approval of the Payroll for November 26,2003, Subject to Review by the County Administrator C. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle Board of County Commissioners Meeting for October 28, 2003 D. Agreement for Recycling Services between the County of Eagle and Waste Management of Colorado, Inc. E. Lease Agreement between Eagle County and Western Eagle County Metropolitan Recreation District F. Resolution2003-144, for Release of Assignment of Certificate of Deposit for Road Cut Permit No. 3059 for Donald J. and Marion Laughlin G. Resolution 2003-145, Conferring Power of Attorney Upon Diane H. Mauriello, County Attorney, Walter Mathews, IV, Deputy County Attorney, Bryan R. Treu, Assistant County Attorney and Debbie Faber, Assistant County Attorney to act as Attorney In Fact for the County of 1 November 18, 2003 Eagle, State of Colorado, with respect to Letter of Credit No. 523 in the amount of $56,722.31 for the account of PPG Red Sky Corporation drawn on Weststar Bank and Expiring on December 7, 2003 H. Agreement Concerning Miller Ranch Community Center 1. Memorandum of Agreement between Eagle County and Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District - Tree Farm J. Lease Agreement between Eagle County and Crown Mountain Park and Recreation District - Tree Farm K. Resolution 2003-146, Approving the Amendment of Resolution No. 2002-165: Resolution Establishing Regular Public Meeting Days for the Eagle Board of County Commissioners for Fiscal Year 2003 and Establishing Days and Office Hours for County Offices to Transact County Business for Fiscal Year 2003 and Designating Legal Holidays for Fiscal Year 2003 L. Lease Agreement between Eagle County and Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. M. Agreement with Wright Water Engineers to provide professional civil engineering services for the Berry Creek Pond N. Agreement with Easter Owens, a Colorado Corporation, to provide maintenance services for the jail electronic locking system at the Eagle County Detention Center 0.2004 Colorado Discretionary Aviation Grant contracts to participate in air traffic control tower construction and certification at Eagle County Regional Airport P. Colorado Medical Assistance Program: Provider Enrollment Q. Agreement Regarding Provision of Consulting Services for Eagle County between County of Eagle and CommunityViz R. Agreement Regarding Provision of Consulting Service for Eagle County between Eagle County and Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Diane Mauriello, County Attorney, requested item N, the agreement with Easter Owens be pulled from the Consent Agenda to be considered later. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented pulling item N, the Agreement with Easter Owens to be considered later. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Agreement with Easter Owens, a Colorado Corporation, to provide maintenance services for the jail electronic locking system at the Eagle County Detention Center, and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement when received and approved by the Attorney. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Plat and Resolution Signing Cliff Simonton, Planner, presented the following plats and resolutions for the Board's consideration: Resolution 2003-147, To Approve a Limited Review Permit for a Tree Storage Facility Eagle County File No. LR-00033~ The Board considered the Applicant's request on October 2St\ 2003. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2003-147, to approve a limited review permit for a tree storage facility, Eagle County File number LR-00033. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. 2 November 18, 2003 Interest Report for Quarter 3 - 2003 Karen Sheaffer, Eagle County Treasurer, presented the Interest Report for the third quarter, 2003. Ms. Sheaffer stated things could be better. She related if the budget was revised down to $1.2 million they will make those figures. Interest rates are going up some but not a lot. The Board thanked Ms. Sheaffer for her report. Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation Meeting President Menconi stated the first matter before the Corporation was approval of the minutes of August 26, 2003. Board Member Stone moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 26,2003. Board Member Roeper seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. President Menconi stated the next matter is approval of the Airline Agreement with Delta Airlines. Board Member Ingstad stated these Agreements are all three year agreements with the exception of U.S. Air, which is a one year agreement. Board Member Stone stated the Agreement with American Airlines ends at that time so they will be able to negotiate with all of them at the same time. Board Member Stone moved to approve of the Airline Agreement with Delta Airlines. Board Member Roeper seconded the motion. In discussion, President Menconi questioned if it was possible to include the other agreements in this motion. Ms. Mauriello stated the Board can include the agreements with Delta, Continental and Northwest can be included. She related Mesa and US Airways are to have their agreements to her by Federal Express today. She stated she will need a motion to authorize the President to sign those upon receipt. Board Member Stone amended his motion to include approval of the agreements for Continental and Northwest Airlines. Board Member Roeper seconded the amendment. The vote was declared unanimous. Board Member Stone moved to approve the agreements with US Airways, Inc. and Mesa Airlines and authorize the President to sign said agreements once they have been received and approved by County Attorney. Board Member Roeper seconded the motion. In discussion, Board Member Ingstad stated he believes they have seen the signatures on the agreements. Ms. Mauriello stated she has only seen the signature of Mesa Airlines. She stated she has not seen executed agreements with US Airways. She related she called their office this morning and they have assured her the agreement was Federal Expressed yesterday. Board Member Ingstad stated he believes they are okay with US Airways as they do not start flying in until the next Board meeting. The issue with Mesa Airlines is that in the event they do not receive a signed agreement, the lease will have expired with Air Wisconsin, does the Board want to consider a higher rate. Board Member Stone asked if they could limit that approval. Board Member Ingstad stated he believes if they do not receive the document today, the Board authorize a non signatory rate and begin billing them in advance. He related they have been dealing with them for the past six months and things have not gone well. If the documents are not here today they should pay a penalty. 3 November 18, 2003 Board Member Stone asked if there should be two motions. He stated they should give Mesa Airlines until the end of the week. Board Member Stone amended his motion to remove Mesa Airlines from the motion. Board Member Roeper amended his second. The vote was declared unanimous. Board Member Stone moved to give conditional approval ofthe Airline Agreement with US Airways, Inc., contingent upon receipt of a signed agreement from Mesa Airlines no later than November 21,2003. Furthermore if said agreement is not received by that date penalty charges will be applied for them to continue to operate at the Eagle County Airport. Said payment shall be required in advance. Board Member Roeper seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Board Member Roeper presented the proposed 2004 Airport Budget. He referred to a slide presentation as follows: Eagle County Air Terminal Corp 2004 Budget Operating and Maintenance Expenses Oepreciation Bond I nterest Expense Bond Principal PFC Proceeds COOT Loan proceeds-Tower COOT loan payment - Principal COOT loan payment -Interest Miscellaneous Revenue Interest Earnings Total Operating Revenue Cash Flows Revenues as above Operating and Maintenance I nterest Expense as above Interest accrued - not yet paid Principal payment as above PFC Proceeds as above Interest Earnings as above COOT Loan proceeds-Tower COOT Loan payment 2004 2003 Requested Approved Increase Budaet Budget (Decrease) I 2003 Actual (9/30/03) 1,380,814 2,207,974 -827,160 804,264 840,000 840,000 0 608,000 1,667,152 1,761,280 -94,128 1,288,389 735,000 715,000 20,000 935,000 -605,600 -603,800 -1,800 -350,229 0 990,000 -990,000 -990,000 90,413 0 90,413 0 19,800 0 19,800 0 0 0 -48,000 -48,000 0 -194,976 4,079,579 5,862,454 -1,782,875 7,645,329 3,690,887 3,888,580 -197,693 3,004,245 3,690,887 3,888,580 -197,693 3,004,245 -1,380,814 -2,207,974 827,160 -804,264 -1,667,152 -1,761,280 94,128 -1,288,389 -735,000 -715,000 -20,000 -935,000 605,600 603,800 1,800 350,229 48,000 48,000 0 194,976 0 990,000 -990,000 990,000 -110,213 4 November 18, 2003 Positive (Negative) Cash Flow Income Statement (GAAP Basis) Revenues as above Interest Earnings as above Operating and Maintenance Expenses as above Less Capital expense Depreciation as above Interest Expense as above PFC Proceeds as above Net Income (Loss) $451,308 $846,126 -394,818 $1,511,797 3,690,887 3,888,580 -197,693 3,004,245 48,000 48,000 0 194,976 -1,380,814 -2,207,974 827,160 -804,264 80,000 1,005,800 -925,800 4,032 -840,000 -840,000 0 -608,000 -1,686,952 -1,761,280 74,328 -1,288,389 605,600 603,800 1,800 350,229 0 0 0 $516,721 $736,926 -220,205 $852,829 Board Member Ingstad requested Mr. Roeper go through Exhibit B. He stated the County is providing $300,000.00 to subsidize the Airlines that have agreed to the three year lease. Ms. Mauriello stated there is an Exhibit B that is attached to the Mesa, Delta, Northwest and Continental Agreements, which states there is no rent premium because they are entering into a three year lease. On page one, that document shows the square footage for each of the carriers for their specific space rent and joint use space of 36,328 square feet, and terminal rent which is the $2,150,000.00 which relates to the bonds, or the ECAT subsidy of$300,000.00. This appears solely on the documents for those signing a three year lease. Board Member Ingstad stated the calculations were done by Steve Horton with Liebowitz and Associates. He stated Mr. Horton has been very involved in the Airport negotiations and has been very careful that the calculations can withstand challenge by the Airlines. Board Member Roeper moved to approve the 2004 Airport Budget as presented. Board Member Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Board Member Stone moved to adjourn. Board Member Roeper seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2003-148, Appointing Members to the Citizen's Open Space Advisory Committee Cliff Simonton presented Resolution 2003-148, appointing members to the Eagle County Citizens Open Space Advisory Committee. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2003-148, appointment of members to the Eagle County Citizens Open Space Advisory Committee. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. 5 November 18, 2003 Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Liquor License Consent Agenda Earlene Roach, Liquor Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda as follows: A) 4 Eagle Ranch, Inc. 4 Eagle Ranch This is a renewal of an optional premise license. This establishment is located along Highway 131 in Bond. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. B) Buxman Enterprises, Inc. Village Market This is a renewal of an optional premise license. This establishment is located along Highway 6 in the Riverwalk Center in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. C) Edwards Discount Liquors, Inc. South Forty Liquors This is a renewal of a retail liquor store license. This establishment is located along Edwards Village Blvd, next to Stop and Save in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. D) The Resort Company The Terrace This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license. This establishment is located in the Charter at Beaver Creek along Offerson Road. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. E) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. Beano's Cabin This is a renewal of a private hotel & restaurant license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. F) Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc. Spruce Saddle Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel & restaurant license with optional premises. This establishment is located on Beaver Creek Mountain. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda for November 18, 2003 as presented. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Beaver Creek Resort Company Earlene Roach presented an application for a special events permit for Beaver Creek Resort for December 6, 2003 from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. She related Environmental Health has a concern with the lack of hand washing facilities at past establishments. She stated she has prepared a motion for the 6 November 18, 2003 Board including a condition that there is appropriate hand washing facilities at this event. This application is in order and all fees have been paid. Staff recommended approval with a condition. Mike Kloser, applicant, was present for the hearing. He stated he realizes there have been concerns in the past and they are addressing this item with management. He assured the Board the portable hand washing facilities will be at the event this year. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked about another comment regarding food temperature requirements. Ms. Roach stated that is a standard statement that all those letters have advising the applicant to watch their food temperatures. Mr. Kloser stated their premises is much smaller this year and is in the Beaver Creek Plaza by the main fountain. He stated this event is the Beaver Creek World Cup Opening Ceremony. It used to be called the Public Pic hosted by the Vail Valley Foundation. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve a special events permit for Beaver Creek Resort Company for December 6, 2003 from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Lodge at Cordillera Earlene Roach presented managers registration for Paul Pas to or, Kensington Management Company, d/b/a Lodge at Cordillera. Staffhas no concerns with this application. She stated this application is in order and all fees have been paid. Mr. Pastoor is reported to be of good moral character. Staff recommended approval. Paul Pastoor, manager, was present for the hearing. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked for Mr. Pastoor's background in liquor service. Mr. Pastoor stated he has spent the past 25 years in the hotel industry and managed his own restaurant in New Mexico. He stated he has experience in Colorado at the Cordillera Lodge for the past year. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked if the applicant has the Colorado Liquor Code. Mr. Pastoor stated he does and has taken the required server training. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated in Eagle County the Board takes liquor service very seriously and liquor violations can be deadly mistakes. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve a manager's registration for Paul Pastoor, Kensington Management Company, d/b/a Lodge at Cordillera. Chairman Pro-tern Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Public Hearing - 2004 Budget Mike Roeper, Director of Finance, stated the next matter was the public hearing for the proposed 2004 County Budget. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated the Board has been having periodic work sessions and retreats concerning the proposed 2004 budget. This is an opportunity for the public to have input on this budget. 7 November 18, 2003 Mr. Roeper presented a power point presentation concerning the proposed 2004 County Budget as follows: Highlights 2.5% reduction in General Fund Staffing reduction of 5 One time internal transfers of $2 million $15.5 million reduction in proposed spending Merit Increases fully funded No change in Health Insurance Key Accomplishments Bond Rating maintained at A level General Obligation Debt only 6.4% of allowable (No additional debt) Award for Financial Reporting Excellence Balanced Budget (Expenditures=Revenue) Healthy Fund Balances Clean Audit Opinion Solid, Safe Investment Portfolio Increased Services with no new positions, no layoffs Continued Employee Benefit Package Conservative Spending Patterns Budget Guidelines Continue core business at a high level of quality Keep revenue forecasts conservative Maintain positive cash flow and healthy Fund Balance Ensure County's ability to repay debt and not incur additional debt Meet operational expenses Maintain quality work force Continue Capital Improvement Program Revenue Assumptions Sales Tax - 5% increase Mill Levy - 6.999 -- No change Property Tax - Down 2.7% Licenses & Permits - Up 14.9% Interest Earnings - 14.3% reduction Proposed Budget Revenue in $ millions (Total $79.2) Property Tax Distribution Eagle County 11.8% School Districts 45.2% Local Special Districts 37.9% Towns 5.1% Proposed Budget Expenditures in $ millions (Total $78.2) Where County Property Taxes Go Road & Bridge 22.3% Public Safety 18.2% Health Services 7.6% Debt Service 4.5% Open Space 17.6% 8 November 18, 2003 General Govt. 29.8% Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked for public comment. There was none. Chairman Pro-tern Stone stated the County is not as dependent on sales tax revenues as are other entities. He believes the balanced group of revenue sources helps the County weather any storms. He stated the 14.9% increase in fees at the Landfill seem huge but is not as much of an increase in dollars. Mr. Roeper stated it is just not growth but several categories. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated the sales tax is 5% over this years actual. He asked how much it would be over the budget. Mr. Roeper stated it would be 11 %. Mr. Ingstad stated the August numbers came in at 15% ahead of previous years. The economy will be much stronger next year as it was this year. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked if there was a way to track the sales tax revenue from Home Depot and Super Wal Mart. Mr. Ingstad stated Avon was showing a 50% or more growth over the same period as last year. It does not mean that Avon is getting all that money but the County's portion goes to the County. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked ifMr. Ingstad knew what that was in dollars. Mr. Ingstad stated he believed it was around $150,000.00. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked where they go from here. Mr. Roeper stated December 9,2003 they will be adopting the budget and approving the mill levy. PDA-00047 Edwards Medical/Shaw Regional Cancer Center Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated he was informed that one of the files on the agenda was to be tabled today. He asked that it be tabled now before the rest of the agenda. Terrill Knight, Knight Planning, stated the applicant is requesting this matter be tabled to December 9, 2003. Commissioner Menconi moved to table file number PDA-00047, Edwards Medical Shaw Regional Cancer Center to December 9,2003 at the applicant's request. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. PDSP-00018 & ZC-00063 McCoy Springs @ Arrowhead 1041-0049 McCoy Springs @Arrowhead PUD Joe Forinash, Planner, stated the presentation with file numbers PDSP-00018 and ZC-00063, McCoy Springs at Arrowhead. He stated the Planning Commission recommended denial. Their concerns include: wildlife impacts, setback issues, zone change in general, density, and suitability for development. Planning Commission deliberations included the following: Location of proposed sidewalk with respect to right-of-way and any guardrail along Cresta Road. Location of parking of truck which might be used to remove snow. Ski house Distance from dwelling units. Who would be able to use parking spaces? Impact of wildfire mitigation on nearby trees. Possibility of ski house parking west of Cresta Road to allow skier house to be moved further from McCoy Creek. Lack of parking for people using the skier house 9 November 18, 2003 Appropriateness of ski house structure with residential uses between Cresta Road and McCoy Creek. Impacts on wildlife, especially as that relates to the elk herd that can be seen wintering in the area. Impacts of development in the vicinity of McCoy Creek. Potential wildfire hazard on the site - adequacy of proposed mitigation. Topography of the site - suitability for development. Summer uses of ski trail, including public use. Need for energy dissipaters inside debris flow tunnels. Need for grates at either end of debris flow tunnels for safety. Potential for rocks falling into developed area. Whether all concerns of the Arrowhead at Vail Association (see letter from John Goodman dated 31 July 2003) have been addressed. Proposed development as it relates to the Edwards Area Community Plan. Adequacy of retaining walls and the associated maintenance easements. Responses from adjacent property owners and whether their concerns have been addressed and lack of response to revised development plan. Potential safety of pedestrians at crossing near skier house. Whether the proposed development meets the standards for a zone change, especially with respect to resource protection, suitability for development, demonstrated need and public interest. Number of variances and amount of mitigation required for the development. Mr. Forinash stated this is a combined Sketch and Preliminary Plan for a residential development on a 41 acre parcel. The original proposal included 11 single-family homes and a ski house/caretaker unit. Three of the single-family homes and the ski house/caretaker unit were to be located between Cresta Road and McCoy Creek. The proposal has been revised to include eight single-family homes west of Cresta Road in two clusters of four homes each, accessed by private cul-de-sac roads from Cresta Road. In addition, a lot to include an employee/caretaker unit, a free-market condominium unit, and a common ski storage locker unit (all in a single structure) is proposed in the area between Cresta Road and McCoy Creek to the east. A skier bridge and skiway is proposed to cross McCoy Creek near the caretaker unit / condominium unit / common ski storage locker structure and provide access to an adjacent skiway. The chronology of the application is as follows and as shown on staff report: 2001 - Cresta Road and utility infrastructure were extended through the McCoy Springs parcel to serve Arrowhead Mountain Lots in Development Area P ofthe Arrowhead at Vail PUD. Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: Eagle County Engineering Department Memo dated 30 Julv 2003 Construction drawings do not provide sufficient detail to verify compliance with the Land Use Regulations. Information needed includes road and drainage design detail. A supplemental sheet needs to be included to detail all drainage, retaining and bridge structures to be constructed as part of the roadway. Road approaches are required to intersect other roadways at ninety degrees for a tangent distance of one hundred feet from the centerline intersections. Driveways for lots 7 and 8 do not appear to meet the permissible angles with the right-of-way of between 60 and 90 degrees. Maintenance measures for proposed storm water structures, including access, schedules, costs and designation of party responsible, have not been identified. 10 November 18, 2003 A Floodplain Development Permit and a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit (or a letter from the Corps indicating that the site is exempt) is required for the proposed bridge crossing McCoy Creek. McCoy Creek is a designated floodplain hazard area per the applicable FIRM map and will require a Letter of Map Amendment for the proposed development. The proposed development is located in a debris flow area. Concerns include: Maintenance of the 4x4 and 6x6 culverts. Manholes need to be included along both box culverts for maintenance access. If these culverts clog, as potentially identified in the geological hazards report submitted by the Applicant, an overflow surface channel needs to be implemented. The lower vegetation near Cresta Road will be removed as the development is constructed, reducing the amount of vegetated surface needed to trap sediment. As designed, debris would be discharged onto Cresta Road and into McCoy Creek. The design lacks sediment and debris catch basins prior to debris flow entering the basin. A drainage map is required showing greater detail for 10 year and 100 year storm events and volume flow rates for all drainage paths. An erosion and sediment control plan should be included in the plan set. Vehicle travel paths for emergency vehicles needs to be provided for McCoy Springs Trail and McCoy Springs Court. Vehicle travel paths need to be shown for all parking spaces at the proposed ski house. A letter from the Eagle River Fire Protection District is required accepting the proposed emergency access to the development. An area ofthe parking lot (for the ski house) needs to be designated for snow removal, while still allowing for vehicles to maneuver out of the parking area and on to Cresta Road. All portions of retaining walls including soil nails or tie backs from MSE walls need to be within the right-of-way or within a maintenance easement. Other design and detail comments. Various comments regarding the preliminary plat. Memo dated 18 September 2003 It is not clear how the sediment is detained and removed from storm water flows prior to entering McCoy Creek. The report by Golder Associates Inc. states that debris flows may contain material of up to one foot in diameter and that "ungrouted riprap would not be expected to survive debris flood/flow events." Sediment control basins, including calculations shall be provided. Clarification is needed regarding how "periodically" the box culverts will be maintained, the physical method used to clean the box culverts, and who is responsible for conducting the maintenance. The erosion control plan needs more protection for prevention of debris flow onto Cresta Road. Manholes need to be included along both box culverts for maintenance access, including at all horizontal and vertical bends. An emergency overflow surface channel needs to be implemented and shown on the Preliminary Plans. Easements of not less than 25 feet are required within the proposed development for accommodation of water lines, sanitary sewer lines and storm water drainage. A new delineation of the 100 year flood basin of McCoy Creek and a Letter of Map Amendment will be required. Detail showing the new gas line crossing McCoy Creek is required. Construction of the gas line will also require a Floodplain Development Permit prior to construction. The proposed I-phase Transformer UMl-3 is located too close to the base of where the 4x4 box culvert will discharge. 11 November 18, 2003 The phone service line for Lot 8 needs to be relocated so that it does not extend underneath the proposed riprap basin of the 4x4 box culvert. A letter stating all variances being requested, and how each complies with the Land Use Regulations is required. A gas line easement needs to be shown on the preliminary plat for the two inch gas main running along McCoy Creek and up to Cresta Road. Other technical items. Memo dated 24 October 2003 The Applicant has not demonstrated that the direct discharge of sediment laden run-off will be equal or less than historical rates. A Storm Sewer Maintenance Plan has been submitted, which, if followed, satisfies all concerns regarding maintenance of the drainage facilities. The construction plans which have been submitted are satisfactory for preliminary plan review. Additional detail will need to be added for the review of the final construction plans. The design the Applicant has provided requires variances from the Land Use Regulations for: Tangent Length, Single Access, and Switchback Radius. Engineering has determined that the designs will provide for an equivalent level of public safety and will be equally durable so that normally anticipated user and maintenance costs will not be increased. The design also requires variances regarding the width of utility easements and for detention and treatment of run-off. The Applicant will need to demonstrate that a variance from these standards will satisfy the applicable section ofthe Land Use Regulations. Eagle County Surveyor Various comments regarding the preliminary plat. Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority (ECa Trails) No comments pertaining to this application. Eagle River Fire Protection District Memo dated 6 August 2003 Water supply is called out as being provided by Arrowhead Metropolitan District. The Wildfire Hazard Assessment and Management Plan appear to meet Eagle County requirements. Road grades appear acceptable at less than 10%. Requires a site plan showing vehicle turning radii and clearances for emergency vehicles based on Pierce Quantum criteria. Memo dated 19 August 2003 Based on previous comments, Alpine Engineering has reviewed the turning radius with respect to emergency vehicle access. The review submitted confirms access and adequate turn-a-rounds. Eagle River Water & Sanitation District The District has granted preliminary plan approval for this project. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Applicant recognizes a need for a CPDES (Colorado Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Such a permit requires a Storm water Management Plan. A complete Storm water Management Plan has not been provided. The erosion control plan to prevent sediment impacts during construction is provided. Information provided in the companion 1041 application is not complete in this regard. Plans for erosion control during construction and post-construction storm water control at the home sites should also be part of the overall erosion control and drainage control plans. NWCCOG suggests that Eagle County require as a condition of approval that the applicant obtain and comply with the CPDES Storm water Discharge Permit to put Eagle County in a position to meet the requirements of the CDPES permit. 12 November 18, 2003 Attachment K of the 1041 permit application does not identify the post development increase in peak flows as a result of the proposed project, but instead indicates that because this development disturbs only a small portion (0.001 %) of a larger, undeveloped watershed it should have no measurable impact. Those discharges are likely to be erosive in force and may contain oil and grease from parking lots, suspended solids, etc. Some form of detention or treatment should be provided. The 1041 application indicates the intent to discharge storm water by spreading it out down slope where the culverts discharge. Preliminary design for debris flow mitigation suggests grading should be designed to minimize infiltration to reduce potential for soil collapse. No real reason is given why the development is not located more than 50 feet away from the identified wetlands, per Eagle County requirements. The 208 plan suggests that the location for fuel storage and other hazardous materials be located a minimum of 100 feet horizontally from any water bodies, away from storm drains, and utilize a containment system for on-site fuel storage. Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) Letter dated 1 August 2003 Expressed serious concerns about the four structures (3 home sites and the ski house/caretaker unit) proposed on the McCoy Creek side of Cresta Road. There are no flow-regulating structures (i.e., dams) upstream on this site. It is very likely that the existing drainage channel has not yet adjusted its profile to changed runoff and sediment load conditions caused by recent development within the McCoy Creek watershed upstream of this site. Structures built too close to the channel are at risk of being undermined by erosion, slope undercutting and channel migration. [Emphasis added by CGS.] CGS strongly recommends that Eagle County require the applicant to evaluate channel and floodplain hydraulics based on current and anticipated development plans, perform slope stability analysis for slopes below all four proposed structures, and adhere to current county stream setback requirements. [Emphasis added by CGS.] On page 13 of the applicant's debris flow hazard mitigation report, Golder states "The stability of the McCoy Creek Channel and banks should be investigated for final design. Some potential areas of instability have been identified. . . but a thorough evaluation and development of mitigation strategies has not been performed within the scope ofthis report." Several new town homes immediately north of this site have been constructed too close to the McCoy Creek channel, and are at high risk of being damaged by erosion and undercutting along McCoy Creek. All ofthe structures in the Cresta Town homes development are vulnerable to damage caused by stream erosion, and should not have been permitted so close to the creek without well-designed, engineered channel stabilization in place. Golder's report provides a thorough evaluation of existing conditions and potential hazards on the portion of the property that lies west of Cresta Road. Their report contains appropriate recommendations for reducing the risk of damage to structures caused by hydrocompactive soils. Golder's debris flow analysis and mitigation recommendations are also very good. CGS states as its only debris flow-related concern relates to the proposed box culverts that carry flow across the debris fans and past the proposed homes. It is unclear how Golder determined that the maximum particle size of "material which has been transported to the areas proposed for development is relatively small, generally less than one foot in average diameter", since trenching was not performed. A maximum size of one foot is entirely possible, considering that the source rock is Eagle Valley Evaporite, but debris flows can be extremely blocky and viscous. The very long (275' and 245') box culverts propose across the north and south fans seem susceptible to plugging by debris, will be difficult to maintain, and would be expensive to clean out. Open trapezoidal surface channels, with short box culverts passing only under driveways and streets, are preferred. . [Emphasis added by CGS.] Letter dated 25 September 2003 13 November 18, 2003 CGS official met with Nancy Dessenberger of Golder Associates, Inc., to discuss concerns previously outlined. Ms. Dessenberger has accurately summarized the conclusions of our discussion in a letter dated 27 August 2003, with the following clarification. lfEagle County elects to waive the 50-foot stream setback requirement for this project, hydraulic and slope stability analysis would be needed for all structures within the waived setback zone to provide a design basis for the engineered mitigation structures that would be necessary to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures. [Italics added by CGS.] While open, trapezoidal surface channels, with short box culverts passing only under driveways and streets, remain the preferred debris flow mitigation method for this site, Ms. Dessenberger provided evidence that the proposed culverts have been appropriately sized according to site-specific debris flow modeling. It is imperative that a responsible party be designated to ensure that culvert maintenance, including regular inspections and cleaning of the full length of both proposed culverts is performed on an annual basis. This party should be identified prior to final plat approval, and a building performance agreement should be in place prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy for any structure within this subdivision. [Emphasis added by CGS.] Colorado State Forest Service Three of the four development areas are rated extreme wildfire hazard, with the fourth area rated high wildfire hazard. The location of the project in a natural chimney could potentially expose the project to extreme wildfire behavior. Wildfires tend to get funneled through natural chimney features with rapid fire spread and a concentration of smoke and super-heated gases. All roads are designed to Eagle County specifications. Water hydrants are located within 500 feet. Fire resistive construction materials and class A roofing will be required. Creating defensible space in accordance with the Eagle County Wildfire Regulations will minimize the hazard to people and property. Implementation of a maintenance program will enhance the defensible space. Colorado Division of Water Resources The proposed water supply will not cause injury to existing water rights so long as the District operates according to the terms and conditions of their existing water rights decrees. US Army Corps of Engineers The 1995 wetland delineation information identified in the Planned Unit Development report expired on October 4, 2000. Additional Referral Agencies: Eagle County Attorney, Eagle County Environmental Health, Eagle County Housing Division, Eagle County Road & Bridge Department, Eagle County Sheriff, Eagle County Animal Control, Eagle County Address Coordinator, Eagle County 911 Coordinator, Eagle County School District, Western Eagle County Ambulance District, Arrowhead Metro District, Colorado Department of Transportation, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Colorado Historical Society, US Forest Service, Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA), CenturyTel, KN Energy, Holy Cross Energy, Arrowhead at Vail HOA. Staff findings are as shown on staffreport and as follows: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary Plan for a PUD: STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (I) 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. Warner Developments, Inc. is both the Applicant and the owner of the land that is to be a part of the Planned Unit Development. 14 November 18, 2003 [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part of a PUD IS owned or controlled by one (1) person. STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] - The uses that may be developed in the PUD shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule", or Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule", for the zone district designation in 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.3f, Variations Authorized. The uses proposed for this PUD are 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"; including single-family residential and accessory dwelling units, resort recreational facility, and temporary uses (e.g., construction trailer and sales office). [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] The uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE 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" for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3f, Variations Authorized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snowmelt between buildings. Several of the proposed dimensional limitations are less restrictive than those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations". Variations from these normal limitations are permitted pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3.f., Variations Authorized, if the Board of County Commissioners finds that the Preliminary Plan for PUD achieves one or more of the following purposes and that the granting ofthe variation is necessary for that purpose to be achieved: [a] to obtain desired design qualities, [b] to avoid environmental resources and natural hazards, [c] to create incentives for water augmentation, [d] to provide incentives related to the County's multi-use trails system, [e] to extend incentives to assure that long term affordable housing is provided, and [f1 provide incentives to develop certain public facilities. Minimum lot size of as little as 0.332 acres is being proposed, compared to a minimum of 35 acres for the Resource (R) zone district. In addition, certain building envelopes are within 7 12 feet of side lot lines and 5 feet of front lot lines, compared to the normal limitations provided in Table 3-340 of 12 12 feet and 25 feet, respectively. These reduced front and side yard setbacks appear to primarily accommodate the constrained homesites. One or more of the required bases noted above for a variation for the front and side yard setbacks may be justified. Three residential lots and the one ski house were initially proposed east of Cresta Road that included building envelopes that were all much closer to McCoy Creek than the 50 foot live stream setback specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations". The proposal has been revised to include only one parcel east of Cresta Road (that is, Tract F) on which a single structure is proposed which would include a 1,500 square foot employee/caretaker housing unit, a 600 square foot common ski and boot storage locker room, a 2,600 square foot residential condominium unit, and six covered parking spaces. The proposed structure would be outside of the 100-year floodplain, but within 40 to 47 feet of the high water mark of McCoy Creek. The justification provided by the Applicant for a variation from the 50 foot live stream setback to allow encroachment of as much as 3 to 10 feet into the setback is that the proposed building site is an 15 November 18, 2003 existing clearing and would require no significant tree clearing and no disturbance to wetland or riparian areas. The Applicant further notes that the location of Cresta Road is such that it creates a "hardship" to locating a building envelope that is completely out of the required 50 foot setback. The Applicant has also noted that a significantly reduced live stream setback from McCoy Creek had previously been allowed in the Arrowhead at Vail PUD. The Vegetation & Wildfire Hazard Assessment & Management Plan prepared by Western Ecological Resource, Inc., refers to and makes use of a wetlands delineation prepared in 1995 entitled Wetland Permit Application for the Arrowhead Village & Terrell Creek Road Projects, which Staff understands to include the construction of Crest a Road. The Army Corps of Engineers had noted that the 1995 "wetland delineation information" expired in 2000. A new delineation of the wetlands is being completed by Western Ecosystems and has been forwarded to the Army Corps of Engineers for its review. It appears that the revised delineation of the wetlands between McCoy Creek and Crest a Road in the vicinity of Tract F will show that the wetlands are more confined than had been the case in 1995. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated that the recent delineation of the wetlands along McCoy Creek in the vicinity of the caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure, as approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, does not extend any further beyond McCoy Creek toward the proposed structure than had been the case in 1995. [Condition # 1] Strong concerns were raised by the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) regarding the proximity of four structures initially proposed immediately adjacent to McCoy Creek. More specifically, CGS noted that: [a] There are no flow-regulating structures (i.e., dams) upstream on this site. It is very likely that the existing drainage channel has not yet adjusted its profile to changed runoff and sediment load conditions caused by recent development within the McCoy Creek watershed upstream ofthis site. Structures built too close to the channel are at risk of being undermined by erosion, slope undercutting and channel migration. [b] Several new town homes immediately north of this site have been constructed too close to the McCoy Creek channel, and are at high risk of being damaged by erosion and undercutting along McCoy Creek. All of the structures in the Cresta Town homes development are vulnerable to damage caused by stream erosion, and should not have been permitted so close to the creek without well-designed, engineered channel stabilization in place. While the proposed development has been revised to reduce the number of structures east of Cresta Road to the one containing the caretaker unit, common ski storage and locker facility, and a condominium unit; and to move the structure as much as 40 to 47 feet away from McCoy Creek, CGS continues to note that certain specific mitigation to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures would be required for any development within the 50 foot live stream setback. As a condition of approval, hydraulic and slope stability analysis should be provided prior to issuing building permits for all structures within the 50 foot setback zone to provide a design basis for the engineered mitigation structures that would be necessary to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures. [Condition # 2] Granting of variations from the prescribed dimensional limitations by the Board of County Commissioners may be appropriate. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE NOT 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. Further, the Board MAY grant a variation from these dimensional limitations pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3.f., Variations Authorized. 16 November 18, 2003 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 parkingfor 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 Loadinf? 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. Three parking spaces are to be provided at each of the single-family dwellings. At the caretaker unit/common ski locker facility/ condominium unit on Tract Feast of McCoy Creek, a total of six parking spaces is proposed. This parking is sufficient to accommodate the two residential units in this location. The common ski locker facility is to be used exclusively by residents and guests of McCoy Springs. No provision has been made for parking for skiers (residents of the lots west of Crest a Road and their guests) living other than on Tract F. The site design has been revised to include a footpath and sidewalks from the home sites west of Cresta Road to the common ski locker facility on Tract F. [See the discussion below under Improvements (Section 5-240.F.3.e (7) and elsewhere regarding necessary maintenance of the footpath and sidewalks.] [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] It HAS been demonstrated that off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD complies with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards, without a necessity for a reduction in the standards. STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] -Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaoing 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 streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. A landscape plan, including a cost estimate, for the intersections at Cresta Road of McCoy Springs Trail and McCoy Springs Court has been provided with the application, and has been subsequently revised. The Landscape Plan satisfies the requirements of this Section. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] It HAS been demonstrated that the landscaping proposed for the PUD complies with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Develooment (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. A comprehensive sign plan is provided in the PUD Guide which allows [1] one sign, not to exceed 10 square feet in size and 10 feet in height, within the boundary of the property in the vicinity of each of the road entrances, and [2] an identification plaque not to exceed 5 square feet within or on entry monuments at each driveway. The comprehensive sign plan is sufficient. [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6) 17 November 18, 2003 The signs within the PUD will NOT be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, and may conflict with certain critical provisions of the Sign Regulations. However, the Comprehensive Sign Plan IS suitable for the PUD STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. [+] Potable water supply. - Water service is to be provided by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has provided a "can and will serve" letter. The Colorado Division of Water Resources has indicated that proposed water supply will not cause injury to existing water rights so long as the District operates according to the terms and conditions of their existing water rights decrees. With the approval of a separate 1041 permit, this requirement will be satisfied. [+] Sewage disposal. - Sanitary sewer services is to be provided by the Eagle River and Sanitation District, which has provided a "can and will serve" letter. With the approval of a separate 1041 permit, this requirement will be satisfied. [ +] Solid waste disposal. - Solid waste disposal services are generally available in the area. [+] Electrical supvlv. - Electrical service will be provided by Holy Cross Energy. [+] Fire protection. - This site is within the service area of the Eagle River Fire Protection District (ERFPD). ERFPD has indicated that it is satisfied with the proposed development, and that it is has been demonstrated that the site design provides access and adequate turn-a-rounds for emergency equipment. [+] Roads. - Eagle County Engineering has determined that the construction plans submitted with this application are sufficient for preliminary plan review and approval. Additional detail will be required prior to approval of the final plat. As a condition of approval, the Applicant should provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 3] Certain variances are required with respect to the design of the roads. Variances are required for the minimum tangent length of McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail at their respective intersections with Cresta Road; for the lack of dual access to the public roadway system; and for the reduced radius ofthe switchbacks on McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail. In each of these instances, Eagle County Engineering has determined that the designs proposed provide for an equivalent level of public safety and are equally durable. As a condition of approval, variances for [ a] minimum tangent length of McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail at their respective intersections with Cresta Road; [b] lack of dual access to the public roadway system; and [c] reduced radius of the switchbacks on McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail should be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. [Condition # 4] [+] Proximity to Schools - Public elementary and middle schools currently exist in the Avon and Edwards area. A high school currently exists in Eagle-Vail. Schools are in reasonable proximity of the site. A payment of cash-in-lieu of school land dedication will be required with this proposal. [+] Proximity to Police and Fire Protection. and Emergencv Medical Services. - Public safety services would be provided by the Eagle County Sheriff s Office, Eagle River Fire Protection District and Eagle County Ambulance District. The proposed PUD is in reasonable proximity to these emergency servIces. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] With the recommended conditions of approval, it HAS been demonstrated that the development proposed in the PUD SketchlPreliminary Plan will be provided adequate facilities for potable water 18 November 18, 2003 supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads and will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe. Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathwavs. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off-site. (c) Emergencv 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 removedfrom the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. As noted immediately above, Eagle County Engineering has determined that the construction plans submitted with this application are sufficient for preliminary plan review and approval. Additional detail will be required prior to approval of the final plat. As a condition of approval, the Applicant should provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 3] Further, as a condition of approval, variances for [a] minimum tangent length of McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail at their respective intersections with Cresta Road; [b] lack of dual access to the public roadway system; and [c] reduced radius of the switchbacks on McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail should be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. [Condition # 4] Also noted above, the common ski locker facility is to be used exclusively by residents and guests of McCoy Springs. No provision has been made for parking for skiers (residents ofthe lots west of Crest a Road and their guests) living other than on Tract F. The site design has been revised to include a footpath and sidewalks from the homesites west of Cresta Road to the common ski locker facility on Tract F. In order to make these footpaths and sidewalks useable, it will be necessary to regularly remove snow. Otherwise, residents and guests using the common ski locker facility will be forced to walk within Cresta Road itself, presenting certain hazards to these pedestrians. A sidewalk including numerous steps is currently shown on the plans from the cul-de-sac on McCoy Springs Court (to the south) down the hillside to Cresta Road, at which point it becomes a sidewalk which is adjacent to Cresta Road 19 November 18, 2003 continuing to a point across from the entrance to the caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium structure. In addition, a footpath is proposed from the dwelling on Lot 4 (on McCoy Springs Court) to intersect the sidewalk. No design information has been provided for either the footpath or the sidewalks. It appears that that the footpath will include minimal improvement. During the winter, when there is likely to be the greatest pedestrian traffic from the individual dwellings to the common ski storage and locker facility, adequate snow removal will be critical. At the same time, snow removal will be difficult for several reasons: [1] the footpath may not readily lend itself to snow removal by even a small tractor; [2] the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road, with the extensive number of steps, will most likely have to be cleaned regularly by manual shoveling; and [3] the sidewalk along Cresta Road will likely be where snow plowed from Cresta Road will tend to accumulate and be stored, making snow removal more difficult. Unless a very diligent effort is maintained, often on a daily basis, there is a significant possibility, due to accumulation of snow and difficulty of snow removal, that these pedestrian routes will be unusable during the winter season when the need is greatest. In addition, there does not appear to be an access easement provided for the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road. As a condition of approval, construction plans for the pedestrian footpath and sidewalks, satisfactory to the County Engineer, should be provided prior to approval of a final plat for this development. [Condition # 3] Another condition of approval is that an appropriate access easement should be provided on the final plat to accommodate the use of the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road. [Condition # 5] As a further condition of approval, common walkways and steps shall be maintained and snow removed as provided in the Snow Removal Maintenance Plan dated October 31,2003. [Condition # 6] [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - With the recommended condition, it HAS been clearly demonstrated that the improvements standards applicable to the development will be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards regarding: (a) safe, efficient access, (b) internal pathways, ( c) emergency vehicles, (d) principal access points, and ( e) snow storage. 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. Surrounding uses consist of open space and residential, the latter being located some distance from this site. The proposed development is compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. \ [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD IS compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Environmental Open Space! Development Affordable Transportation Community FLUM Quality Recreation Housing Services Conformance X1 X2 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X 20 November 18, 2003 ij Applicable Xl - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Master Plan. x2 - The proposed development is in an area designated as "resort". The proposed use is appropriate. EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Conformance Non- Mixed Not Conformance Conformance Applicable Land Use X1 Housing x Transportation x Open Space x Potable Water and X2 Wastewater Services and Facilities x Environmental Quality X3 Economic Development x Recreation and Tourism x5 Historic Preservation x Implementation X4 Future Land Use Map X5 X 1 - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Edwards Area Community Plan. x2 - Adequate potable water and sanitary sewer service is available for the development. x3 - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Edwards Area Community Plan. x4 - Public facilities and infrastructure is efficiently utilized. The proposed development has demonstrated how it will maintain the effectiveness of the infrastructure. x5 - The Future Land Use Map shows the site in an area appropriate for development at a gross density of equal to or less than 1 unit per acre. Land Use Open Space Unique Char. 21 November 18, 2003 Development Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X Applicable X 1 - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Open Space Plan. X2 - With the recommended conditions, the proposed development will encourage development which is sensitive to open space values, and provide areas along streams in a natural condition by restrictin~ development in these areas. X - The proposed development is compatible with preservation of the high visual quality of the County. X4 - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Open Space Plan. X5 - The proposed development is compatible with wildlife in areas critical to sustaining the viability ofthe wildlife group. EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Water Quantity Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Conformance X1 X2 X3 Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X Applicable X 1 - With the recommended conditions, water quality impacts from run-off will be minimized. X2 - This proposal would permit development within the 50 foot live stream setback, but with an appropriate variation to dimensional limitations may be deemed to be consistent with this provision of the Watershed Plan. X3 - The development protects adjacent sensitive areas and open space. 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 22 November 18, 2003 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: ITEM YES NO N/A 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 X address in collaboration with the municipalities. . . 3. Steps should be taken to facilitate increased home ownership by local X residents 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 one average wage job X 5. Seasonal housing is part of the problem & needs to be further addressed. X It is primarily the responsibility of . . . employers. . . 6. New residential subdivisions will provide a percentage of their units for X1 local residents 7. Commercial, industrial, institutional, and public developments generating increased employment will provide local residents housing. The first preference will be for units on-site where feasible, or if not feasible, in the X 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 on price appreciation, as well as residency requirements X 12. Eagle County recognizes that housing for local residents is an ongoing issue X 1 - It is anticipated that the caretaker unit associated with the ski house would accommodate a local resident. [+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] 23 November 18, 2003 The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, and IS consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Planfor PUD shall include a phasing plan for the development. If development of the PUD is proposed to occur in phases, then guarantees shall be provided for public improvements and amenities that are necessary and desirable for residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. The PUD will be developed in one phase. Therefore, a phasing plan is not required. [+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) A phasing plan is NOT REQUIRED for this development. STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every one thousand (I,OOO) 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-of- 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 ofthe 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. Per this Standard, the recommended amount of open space for this development of 41 acres is approximately 10.25 acres. The total open space is 32 acres, of which 4.863 acres is useable, that is, with a slope ofless than 30 percent. Over half (2.745 acres) ofthe useable open space consists of Tract A, which is most of the area east of Cresta Road except Tract F (caretaker unit / common ski locker facility / condominium unit). That part of Tract F which straddles McCoy Creek (excluding the structure) will also be designated as open space, making both sides ofthe length of McCoy Creek as it crosses this 24 November 18, 2003 parcel open space. All of the open space will be owned by the McCoy Springs at Arrowhead Homeowners Association. While the total open space is approximately 78 percent of the site, only about 11.9 percent of the site is useable open space, as defined in the Land Use Regulations. Given the extensive unusable open space that will not be developed, Staff is satisfied that the intent of this standard will be met. Proposed uses-by-right in the Open Space/Recreation Tracts (A & E) are "foot trails, picnic areas, ski ways". [See page 6 of the PUD Guide received 9 October 2003.] The Open Space/Recreation Tracts include most ofthe riparian area and those areas within the 50 foot live stream setback within the development. As a condition of approval, all areas within the 50 foot live stream setback should be protected in its natural state as provided in Section 3-340.C.6., Stream Setbacks, ofthe Land Use Regulations, except as allowed for the caretaker unit / common ski locker facility / condominium unit and the skier bridge. [Condition # 7] [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] The applicant HAS demonstrated that the PUD will comply with the common recreation and open space standards with respect to: (a) minimum area; (b) improvements required; (c) continuing use and maintenance; or (d) organization STANDARD: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] - The PUD shall consider the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards. Several considerations warrant attention in the review of this proposed development. Harrington penstemon - Western Ecological Resources, Inc., has indicated Harrington penstemon, a USFS sensitive plant species, may be present and has recommended an additional survey to ascertain its presence or absence. The Applicant has indicated that its consultant will identify and transplant any Harrington penstemon that may exist in the proposed development area following approval of this preliminary plan. Erosion and undercutting along McCoy Creek - Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) expressed "serious concern" regarding the four structures (three dwellings and the ski house / caretaker unit) initially proposed on the McCoy Creek side of Cresta Road and noted that "structures built too close to the channel are at risk of being undermined by erosion, slope undercutting and channel migration." CGS "strongly recommend[ ed] that Eagle County require the applicant to evaluate channel and floodplain hydraulics based on current and anticipated development plans, perform slope stability analysis for slopes below all four proposed structures, and adhere to current county stream setback requirements." The proposed development has subsequently been revised to reduce the number of structures east of Cresta Road to the one containing the caretaker unit, common ski storage and locker facility, and a condominium unit; and to move the structure as much as 40 to 47 feet away from McCoy Creek. CGS continues to note that certain specific mitigation to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures would be required for any development within the 50 foot live stream setback. As a condition of approval, hydraulic and slope stability analysis should be provided prior to issuing building permits for all structures within the 50 foot setback zone to provide a design basis for the engineered mitigation structures that would be necessary to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures. [Condition # 2] Debris flow hazard mitigation - Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has also expressed concerns regarding the proposed box culverts that carry flow across the debris fans and past the proposed homes. CGS notes that the very long (275 feet and 245 feet) box culverts proposed across the north and south fans seem susceptible to plugging by debris, will be difficult to maintain, and would be expensive to clean out. Eagle County Engineering has raised related concerns regarding maintenance of the culverts. 25 November 18, 2003 However, in subsequent discussions between Golder Associates (the Applicant's consultant) and both CGS and Eagle County Engineering, these concerns have been eased. CGS maintains its position that open, trapezoidal surface channels, with short box culverts passing only under driveways and streets are preferred, but has determined that the proposed culverts have been appropriately sized according to site-specific debris flow modeling. CGS recommends that a responsible party be designated to ensure that culvert maintenance, including regular inspections and cleaning of the full length of both proposed culverts on an annual basis. The Applicant has provided a Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual dated October 2003, prepared by Golder Associates, which addresses regular maintenance of the box culverts intended to channel debris flow on the site. The Homeowners Association will be responsible for maintenance of the debris flow structures. Eagle County Engineering has determined that the Manual, if regularly and properly implemented, should be adequate. As a condition of approval, the Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual dated October 2003, prepared by Golder Associates, should be regularly and properly implemented. [Condition # 8]. Wildlife - The proposed development is located within elk winter range, severe winter range and winter concentration areas. The Applicant has proposed mitigation in the form of a one time contribution of $4,432.67 to the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Trust Fund (a correction from the initial application). As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated, prior to approval of a final plat for this development, that the proposed payment to the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Trust Fund has been made. [Condition # 9] Wetlands - The Vegetation & Wildfire Hazard Assessment & Management Plan prepared by Western Ecological Resource, Inc., refers to and makes use ofa wetlands delineation prepared in 1995 entitled Wetland Permit Application for the Arrowhead Village & Terrell Creek Road Projects, which Staff understands to include the construction of Cresta Road. The Army Corps of Engineers had noted that the 1995 "wetland delineation information" expired in 2000. A new delineation of the wetlands is being completed by Western Ecosystems and has been forwarded to the Army Corps of Engineers for its review. It appears that the revised delineation of the wetlands between McCoy Creek and Cresta Road in the vicinity of Tract F will show that the wetlands are more confined than had been the case in 1995. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated that the recent delineation of the wetlands along McCoy Creek in the vicinity ofthe caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure, as approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, does not extend any further beyond McCoy Creek in the direction of the proposed caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure than had been the case in 1995. [Condition # 1] A ski bridge is proposed across McCoy Creek in the vicinity of the caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure east of Cresta Road. The Applicant has asserted that an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit will not be required. No confirmation has been received from the Army Corps of Engineers. As a condition of approval, if an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit is required for any construction in the vicinity of McCoy Creek, such a permit shall be obtained and all conditions and requirements of the permit should be adhered to. [Condition # 10] [+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [ Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] The PUD DOES demonstrate that the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents available at the time the application was submitted, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary Plan for a 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)]. 26 November 18, 2003 [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, and IS consistent with the Future Land Use Map (PLUM). 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 Development Standards. Article 3, Zone Districts Except as modified under the provisions of a PUD and with the recommended conditions [see discussions above], the proposed development complies with all of the standards and provisions of the Land Use Regulations, including Article 3, Zone Districts. Article 4, Site Development Standards [+] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) Three parking spaces are to be provided at each of the single-family dwellings. At the caretaker unit/common ski locker facility/ condominium unit on Tract Feast of McCoy Creek, a total of six parking spaces is proposed. This parking is sufficient to accommodate the two residential units in this location. The common ski locker facility is to be used exclusively by residents and guests of McCoy Springs. No provision has been make for parking for skiers (residents of the lots west of Cresta Road and their guests) living other than on Tract F. The site design has been revised to include a footpath and sidewalks from the home sites west of Crest a Road to the common ski locker facility on Tract F. [See the discussion above under Improvements (Section 5-240.F.3.e (7) and elsewhere regarding necessary maintenance of the footpath and sidewalks.] [+] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) A landscape plan, including a cost estimate, for the intersections at Cresta Road of McCoy Springs Trail and McCoy Springs Court has been provided with the application, and has been subsequently revised. The Landscape Plan satisfies the requirements of this Section. [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) A comprehensive sign plan is provided in the PUD Guide which allows [1] one sign, not to exceed 10 square feet in size and 10 feet in height, within the boundary of the property in the vicinity of each of the road entrances, and [2] an identification plaque not to exceed 5 square feet within or on entry monuments at each driveway. The comprehensive sign plan is sufficient. [+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4) [ +] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) - The proposed development is located within elk winter range, severe winter range and winter concentration areas. The Applicant has proposed mitigation in the form of a one time contribution of $4,432.67 to the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Trust Fund (a correction from the initial application). As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated prior to approval of a final plan for this development, that the proposed payment to the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Trust Fund has been made. [Condition # 9] The Vegetation & Wildfire Hazard Assessment & Management Plan prepared by Western Ecological Resource, Inc., refers to and makes use of a wetlands delineation prepared in 1995 entitled Wetland Permit Application for the Arrowhead Village & Terrell Creek Road Projects, which Staff understands to include the construction of Cresta Road. The Army Corps of Engineers had noted that the 1995 "wetland delineation information" expired in 2000. A new delineation of the wetlands is being completed by Western Ecosystems and has been forwarded to the Army Corps of Engineers for its review. It appears that the revised delineation of the wetlands between McCoy Creek and Cresta Road in the vicinity of Tract F will show that the wetlands are more confined than had been the case in 1995. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated that the recent delineation of the wetlands along McCoy Creek in the vicinity of the caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / 27 November 18, 2003 condominium unit structure, as approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, does not extend any further beyond McCoy Creek in the direction of the proposed caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure than had been the case in 1995. [Condition # 1] A skier bridge is proposed across McCoy Creek in the vicinity of the caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure east of Cresta Road. The Applicant has asserted that an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit will not be required. No confirmation has been received from the Army Corps of Engineers. As a condition of approval, if an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit is required for any construction in the vicinity of McCoy Creek, such a permit should be obtained and all conditions and requirements of the permit should be adhered to. [Condition # 10] [+] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) - CGS has determined that the proposed culverts for channeling debris flow have been appropriately sized according to site-specific debris flow modeling. CGS recommends that a responsible party be designated to ensure that culvert maintenance, including regular inspections and cleaning of the full length of both proposed culverts on an annual basis. The Applicant has provided a Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual dated October 2003, prepared by Golder Associates, which addresses regular maintenance of the box culverts intended to channel debris flow on the site. Eagle County Engineering has determined that the Manual, if regularly and properly implemented, should be adequate. As a condition of approval, the Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual dated October 2003, prepared by Golder Associates, should be regularly and properly implemented. [Condition # 8]. CGS notes that, even with the reduced number of structures proposed between Cresta Road and McCoy Creek and the increased separation from McCoy Creek, certain specific mitigation to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures would be required for any development within the 50 foot live stream setback. As a condition of approval, hydraulic and slope stability analysis should be provided prior to issuing building permits for all structures within the 50 foot setback zone to provide a design basis for the engineered mitigation structures that would be necessary to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures. [Condition # 2] Eagle County Engineering has determined that the construction plans submitted with this application are sufficient for preliminary plan review and approval. Additional detail will be required prior to approval of the final plat. As a condition of approval, the Applicant should provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 3] [+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) - The Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS) notes that three of the four development areas are rated extreme wildfire hazard, and the fourth is rated high wildfire hazard. The location ofthe project in a natural chimney could potentially expose the project to extreme wildfire behavior. CSFS also notes that creating defensible space in accordance with Eagle County Wildfire Regulations will minimize the hazard to people and property, and recommends implementation of a maintenance program to enhance the defensible space. The application includes the required Vegetation Management Plan, which conforms to the required standards of this Section. As a condition of approval, the Wildfire Mitigation Plan should be required to be implemented. [Condition # 11] The development has only one access, that being by way of Cresta Road. A variance from this required improvement standard has been requested. Engineering has determined that the designs will provide for an equivalent level of public safety and will be equally durable. As a condition of approval, a variance for lack of dual access to the public roadway system should be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. [Condition # 4] [ +] Wood Burninz Controls (Section 4-440) - The proposed PUD Guide is silent with respect to wood burning controls. Consequently, the provisions of this Section ofthe Land Use Regulations will apply. 28 November 18, 2003 [+] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) - The Applicant notes that the site is located within the area designated as potentially sensitive, and states that the site would not be visible from 1-70. Exterior lighting, other than at individual residences, is limited to entry sign illumination. [+] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) - Taken together, various components ofthe application constitute an adequate Environmental Impact Report. [+] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) The provisions of this Division are not applicable. [+] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6) [ +] Roadwav Standards (Section 4-620) - As noted above, Eagle County Engineering has determined that the construction plans submitted with this application are sufficient for preliminary plan review and approval. Additional detail will be required prior to approval of the final plat. With variances approved as requested, the requirements of this Section will be satisfied. As a condition of approval, the Applicant should provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 3] [ +] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) - The site design has been revised to include a footpath and sidewalks from the homesites west of Cresta Road to the common ski locker facility on Tract F. As noted above, in order to make these footpaths and sidewalks useable, it will be necessary to regularly remove snow. Otherwise, residents and guests using the common ski locker facility will be forced to walk within Cresta Road itself, presenting certain hazards to these pedestrians. No design information has been provided for either the footpath or the sidewalks. It appears that that the footpath will include minimal improvement. During the winter, when there is likely to be the greatest pedestrian traffic from the individual dwellings to the common ski storage and locker facility, adequate snow removal will be critical. At the same time, snow removal will be difficult for several reasons: [1] the footpath may not readily lend itselfto snow removal by even a small tractor; [2] the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road, with the extensive number of steps, will most likely have to be cleaned regularly by manual shoveling; and [3] the sidewalk along Cresta Road will likely be where snow plowed from Cresta Road will tend to accumulate and be stored, making snow removal more difficult. Unless a very diligent effort is maintained, often on a daily basis, there is a significant possibility, due to accumulation of snow and difficulty of snow removal, that these pedestrian routes will be unusable during the winter season when the need is greatest. In addition, there does not appear to be an access easement provided for the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road. As a condition of approval, construction plans for the pedestrian footpath and sidewalks, satisfactory to the County Engineer, should be provided prior to approval of a final plat for this development. [Condition # 3] Another condition of approval is that an appropriate access easement should be provided on the final plat to accommodate the use of the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road. [Condition # 5] As a further condition of approval, common walkways and steps shall be maintained and snow removed as provided in the Snow Removal Maintenance Plan dated October 31,2003. [Condition # 6] [+] Irrif!ation Svstem Standards (Section 4-640) - The requirements of this Section will be satisfied. [ + ] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) - Eagle County Engineering has determined that the construction plans submitted with this application are sufficient for preliminary plan review and approval. Additional detail will be required prior to approval of the final plat. As a condition of approval, the Applicant should provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer. [Condition # 3] [+] Excavation and Grading Standards (Section 4-660) - The Applicant will be required to conform to the requirements of this Section. 29 November 18, 2003 [+] Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-665) - The Applicant will be required to conform to the requirements of this Section. [+] Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) - Eagle County Engineering has noted that certain utility easements along Cresta Road do not meet Eagle County standards for width. As a condition of approval, it should be demonstrated prior to approval of this combined sketch/preliminary plan that the proposed utility easements along Cresta Road either meet Eagle County standards or a variance from improvements standards should be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. [Condition # 12] [ +] Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) - Water service is to be provided by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has provided a "can and will serve" letter. The Colorado Division of Water Resources has indicated that proposed water supply will not cause injury to existing water rights so long as the District operates according to the terms and conditions of their existing water rights decrees. With the approval of a separate 1041 permit, this requirement will be satisfied. [+] Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) - Sanitary sewer services is to be provided by the Eagle River and Sanitation District, which has provided a "can and will serve" letter. With the approval of a separate 1041 permit, this requirement will be satisfied. [+] Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) [+] School Land Dedication Standards (Section 4-700) - The Applicant intends to make a payment of cash in lieu of a school land dedication. [+] Road Imvact Fees (Section 4-710) - payment of road impact fees will be required pursuant to this Section. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] It HAS been demonstrated that the proposed subdivision complies with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions ofthese Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Development Standard STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] - The proposed subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. (a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions shall be consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines. ~ 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. No inefficiencies have been identified with respect to this development. [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] The proposed subdivision IS located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] - The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. 30 November 18, 2003 A number of factors related to suitability for development are discussed elsewhere in this Staff Report. The property is suitable for development as currently proposed, with the recommended conditions of approval. [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] The property proposed to be subdivided IS suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. 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. Surrounding uses consist of open space and residential, the latter being located some distance from this site. The proposed development is compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and SHALL NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation: Applicant shall submit the following: A Proposed PUD guide setting forth the proposed land use restrictions. A revised PUD Guide was received on 9 October 2003. The proposed PUD Guide is generally adequate. However, certain provisions are included in Section 4.3, Modifications to This Guide, which should be revised for clarity and consistency with the Land Use Regulations. Consistency with the Land Use Regulations in this instance has to do with reference to and use of existing procedures for amending the PUD preliminary plan and related plats. Under the Sub-Section of 4.3 entitled Maior Modifications, as a condition of approval, the discussion should be modified to delete the criteria for a major modification (instead deferring to the provisions of the Land Use Regulations) and to include the following: Major modifications shall be defined and processed in accordance with Section 5-240.F.3.m., Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. Under the Sub-Section of 4.3 entitled Minor Modifications, as a condition of approval, the discussion should be modified to delete the sentence regarding appeals to the actions of the Director of Community Development with respect to minor modifications, and to include the following: Applications for Minor Modifications shall be processed in accordance with Section 5-300, Limited Review Use, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and may be approved ifit is found to be consistent with the established goals of the McCoy Springs at Arrowhead PUD Guide and Preliminary Plan. Under the Sub-Section of 4.3 entitled Building Envelope Adiustments, the discussion should be modified to delete any discussions of procedures which tend to establish a review procedure other than one provided in the Land Use Regulations. As a condition of approval, the revised Sub-Section should be modified to include the following: Administrative Process for a Building Envelope Amendment - If it has been demonstrated that [1] all property owners within 75 feet ofthe outer boundaries ofthe lot in which the building envelope adjustment is being proposed and [2] the McCoy Springs at Arrowhead Design Review Board have approved the proposed Building Envelope Adjustment, such an application may be processed in accordance with Section 5-290, Minor Subdivision, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, as a Type B Subdivision involving the subdivision of condominiums, town homes and duplexes. In addition to other standards provided in Section 5-290, the Director of Community Development shall also be required to determine that: 31 November 18, 2003 a. The proposed amendment will not substantially impact in an adverse manner that view corridor of any property owner to whom notice of the proposed building envelope adjustment has been sent, or the proposed change is required due to geologic or other hazard considerations; b. The envelope change does not adversely impact wildlife corridors; c. The envelope change does not adversely impact ridgelines nor create any increase in impacts to ridgelines; d. The envelope amendment is not inconsistent with the intent of the Final Plat; and e. The envelope amendment is not an alteration of a restrictive plat note. Public Process for a Building Envelope Adjustment - An application for a building envelope adjustment which does not qualify for the Administrative Process shall be processed in accordance with Section 5-290, Minor Subdivision of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, as an Amended Final Plat. In addition to other standards provided in Section 5-290, the Board of County Commissioners shall also determine that: a. The proposed amendment will not substantially impact in an adverse manner the view corridor of any property owner to whom notice of the proposed building envelope adjustment has been sent, or the proposed change is required due to geologic or other hazard considerations; b. The envelope change does not adversely impact wildlife corridors; c. The envelope change does not adversely impact ridgelines nor create any impacts to ridgelines; d. The envelope adjustment is not inconsistent with the intent ofthe Final Plat; and e. The envelope adjustment is not an alteration of a restrictive plat note. [Condition # 13] Otherwise, the PUD Guide is acceptable. [+] FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)] With the recommended conditions of approval, the Applicant HAS submitted a PUD Guide that demonstrates that the requirements of this Section have been fully met. Requirements for a Zone Chan2.e. In Section 5-230.D., Standards, the Eagle County Land Use Regulations provide that "the wisdom of amending the. . . Official Zone District Map or any other map incorporated in these Regulations is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the Board of County Commissioners and is not controlled by anyone factor." Based on the above analysis and other available information, Staff makes the following findings as provided in this Section of the Land Use Regulations: (1) [+] Consistency with Master Plan. The proposed PUD IS consistent with the purposes, goals, policies and FLUM of the Master Plan; (2) [+] Compatible with surrounding uses. The proposed amendment IS compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and, with the proposed development, it IS an appropriate zone district for the land, considering its consistency with the purpose and standards of the proposed zone district; (3) [+] Changed conditions. There ARE changed conditions that require an amendment to modify the present zone district and/or its density/intensity; (4) [+] Effect on natural environment. The proposed amendment WILL NOT result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment [beyond those resulting from development under current zoning], including but not limited to water, air, noise, storm water management, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and wetlands. (5) [+] Community need. It HAS been demonstrated that the proposed amendment meets a community need. (6) [+] Development patterns. The proposed amendment WILL result in a logical and orderly development pattern, WILL NOT constitute spot zoning, and WILL logically be provided with necessary public facilities and services. 32 November 18, 2003 (7) [+] Public interest. 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. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked when the change was made to the plan, before or after the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Forinash stated this is the same file seen by the Planning Commission. Cliff Simonton continued with the presentation with file number 1041-0049, McCoy Springs at Arrowhead PUD. He stated this 1041 application is for the extension of existing water and sewer lines to serve a proposed development often (10) residential units on Cresta Road above (south of) the Arrowhead PUD. Access would be via Cresta Road and two new roads, McCoy Springs Court and McCoy Springs Trail, short access drives that each serve a cluster of four home sites located on the west side of Cresta Road. The two remaining units, one an upscale condominium and the second a caretaker's unit, would be constructed in a single structure on the east side of Cresta road near McCoy Creek, which runs south to north (essentially parallel to and east of Cresta Road) through the east end of the property. This same structure would accommodate a ski locker facility proposed to be used exclusively by the residents of this development. A skier bridge would be constructed across McCoy Creek at the location ofthe ski locker structure to provide ski-in / ski-out access to the Arrowhead Ski Area. While not within the boundary of the Arrowhead PUD, the subject 40 acre property is with in the boundary of the Arrowhead Metropolitan District, and would be served by domestic water and sewer lines owned and operated by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. Referral responses are as follows and as shown on staff report: This 1041 proposal was referred to the following departments, agencies and homeowner's associations for review and comment. Eagle County Engineering Eagle County Attorney's Office Eagle County Environmental Health Eagle River Water and Sanitation Eagle County Planning Commission US Army Corp of Engineers US Environmental Protection Agency The Town of Avon Colorado Geological Survey Colorado Division of Wildlife Colorado Division of Water Resources Colorado State Forest Service Colorado Health Department Arrowhead Metro District Arrowhead Homeowners Association NWCCOG As ofthe writing ofthis report, the following agencies had responded (see attached copies): Eagle County Engineering: Memo of July 30, 2003 A letter indicating whether or not a 404 permit is needed from the Army Corp of Engineers is required. A flood plain development permit may be required for the proposed skier bridge. A letter from the fire protection district accepting the proposed access configuration is required. Reference a memo, sent July 30, 2003 to Joe Forinash, 30 items need to be resolved prior to the project being found to conform with applicable land use plans (these are related to the companion McCoy Springs PUD file, PDSP-00018). 33 November 18,2003 Noted that the project is in an area subject to hazards from potential debris flows and hydrocompactive soils. Memo of November 10,2003 An updated wetland delineation is required, and Eagle County Engineering will evaluate the need for permits once this update is completed. A determination as to whether or not a floodplain development permit will be required will be based on the final design for the skier bridge and the updated wetland delineation. Emergency access to the site is adequate. All technical comments listed in the memo of July 30th have been addressed. Eagle County Engineering acknowledges the comments of the Colorado Geological Survey regarding debris flow mitigation and maintenance in their letter of 09/25/03. The project has not yet satisfied the requirements for surface water quality. Water quality features have been provided to improve the quality of water released from the site, however, on-site detention requirements have not been met as basins designed to pond water are excluded to prevent infiltration into hydrocompactive soils. Eagle River Water & Sanitation District (August 12, 2003) As ability to serve letters has been obtained by the Applicant, the District has no further comment on this file. Colorado Geological Survey (July 31, 2003) Noted serious concerns for the close proximity of proposed structures to McCoy Creek, and the possibility that they would be subject to damage by erosion, slope undercutting and channel migration. Recommended an evaluation of channel and floodplain hydraulics and a slope stability analysis for structures near the creek. Noted the thorough work done by Golder Associates regarding mitigation for the debris flow hazard on the site. Sited continued concern, however, for the long box culverts proposed as a means to carry flows through the project, and recommended open, trapezoidal surface channels, with short box culverts passing only under driveways and streets, as a more preferred approach. Erosion protection requirements will need to be determined based on channel velocities calculated during final design. Second Letter of September 25,2003 Hydraulic and slope stability analysis will be needed for all structures located within the 50' setback adjacent to McCoy Creek. The preferred debris flow mitigation remains open, trapezoidal surface channels, with short box culverts passing only under driveways and streets. However, Golder Associates has provided information indicating that the long box culverts have been appropriately sized according to site specific debris flow modeling. It is imperative that responsible party be designated to insure that culvert maintenance, including regular inspections and cleaning ofthe full length of both culverts is performed on an annual basis. A binding performance agreement should be in place prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any structure within the subdivision. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments NWCCOG (July 22,2003) Conformance with 208 Plan cannot be made because insufficient information is contained within the application. No Storm water Management Plan was submitted Information not given regarding post development peak flow increases Plans contain inconsistencies regarding the treatment of storm water released from the site, stating that it will be allowed to spread out after leaving culverts, but noting that infiltration should be minimized to reduce the potential for soil collapse. 34 November 18, 2003 Impacts from domestic water use should be minimal as the development is within a service district and will use public water sewage treatment. No reason is given to justify the encroachment by structures into the stream setback. No erosion control plan is provided. Additional information has been submitted, much of it related to the issues outlined above, including a storm water management plan and an erosion control plan. Eagle County Engineering has reviewed this additional information and found it appropriate and sufficient for preliminary plan application State of Colorado, Division of Water Resources (August 5, 2003) No comment. Referenced a letter to Ray Merry dated March 30, 1998 that explained why the Division is not responsible for providing comments on 1041 files. Note: The referral response from the Division of Water Resources for the companion land use file for McCoy Springs, PDSP-00018, indicated that no injury to existing water rights would result so long as the Metro District operates according to the terms and conditions of their water rights decrees. Colorado State Forest Service (August 6, 2003) Three ofthe four development areas are rated extreme and the remaining area is rated high for wildfire hazard. The location of the project in a natural chimney could expose the project to extreme wildfire behavior Roads meet County specifications. Water hydrants are located within 500 feet. Fire resistive materials and class A roofing will be required. Creating a defensible space will help minimize the hazard to people and property. Department ofthe Army, Corp of Engineers (August 7, 2003) The 1995 Wetland Delineation referenced by the application has expired. Project number 200375267 has been assigned should a 404 Permit be required. Eagle River Fire Protection District (August 6, 2003) Water supply is provided by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District Wildfire Hazard Assessment and Management Plan appears to meet Eagle county Requirements Road grades are acceptable at less than 10%. Site plan showing vehicle turning radii and clearances for emergency vehicles is required Letter of August 19, 2003 Adequate access and turnarounds have been provided. Arrowhead at Vail Association Board of Directors (letters of July 28th and July 3rt, 2003) Oppose the project, providing a variety of reasons including nonconformance with dimensional limitations, steep slopes, geologic and wildfire hazards, large amounts of soil disturbance, stream bank erosion hazards, impacts to riparian areas, there is not a demonstrated community need and it is not in the public interest to encourage increased density in the area. Indicated special opposition to the homes proposed for the east side of Cresta Road near McCoy Creek. Letter of October 10, 2003 Noted changes made by the applicant to remove the homes from the east side of Cresta Road, and indicated that the amended plan addressed many oftheir initial concerns. The Association does not actively oppose this revised application. Eagle County Planning Commission (Verbal response at work session of November 4,2003) Expressed a concern for disruption to wildlife winter range, especially that used by elk, in the area. Noted the location of the proposed development in relation to steep slopes and a concern for hazards associated with debris flows, poor soils, and wildfires. Indicated a concern that approval of this project on such a "difficult" site would set a poor precedent for future land use decisions as regards general development patterns. 35 November 18, 2003 Noted a concern for impacts to water quality given the close proximity ofthe project to McCoy Creek. Felt that the site was not suitable to this level of development. Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.01, Permit Application Approval Criteria for Matters of State Interest, and as more specifically described in the application for the McCoy Springs 1041, the following analysis is provided. Note: The Approval Criteria is numbered and indicated in bold. The Applicant's response to each criteria is summarized in standard text. Staffs comment and/or response is summarized in italicized text. The resultant recommendation is indicated in the findings box. (1) Documentation that prior to site disturbance for the Project, the applicant will have obtained all necessary property rights, permits and approvals. The Board may, at its discretion, defer making a final decision on the application until outstanding property rights, permits and approvals are obtained. All permits will be obtained prior to site disturbance. A storm water discharge permit may be required. No wetlands will be impacted, and a floodplain development permit and Army Corp 404 are not required. The proposed improvements will occur within existing easements and/or on property owned by the Applicant. Reference the letter dated 08/07/03 from the Army Corp of Engineers and the memos dated July 3dh and November 1 dh from Eagle County Engineering, a new wetland delineation and a floodplain delineation through the project are required. These delineations will indicate whether a 404 permit will be needed for the development. A flood plain development permit is required for any bridge structure crossing a creek. The floodplain development permit cannot be issued by Engineering without a updated floodplain study and detailed construction plans for the proposed skier bridge, which have not yet been submitted. It should be possible, however, for the applicant to meet these requirements and obtain a permit prior to site disturbance. According to the Applicant, wetlands on the site have been recently staked by Ecological Resources and surveyed by Alpine Engineering. The Army Corp was supposed to have visited the site on Thursday, November 13, to verify the work in the field. Further, a review by Staff of staking done in the field by the Applicant's engineer would indicate that the ski locker facility structure will not impact any riparian areas. It would appear that the Applicant will be able to obtain all necessary permits prior to site disturbance (see conditions #1 and #2). [+/-] FINDING: (1) Rif!hts, Permits and Approvals While the Applicant HAS NOT provided the necessary documentation to assure that all necessary property rights, permits and approvals will be in place prior to site disturbance, it would appear that the Applicant will be able to meet the requirements of this standard. (2) The project will not impair property rights held by others. Development does not extend past the boundary of the property owned by the developer. The existing road that crosses the property will not be compromised by the development, and all utility extensions will take place in dedicated easements and right-of-ways. The applicant has worked closely with all adjacent property owners, the Arrowhead Homeowners Association and the Arrowhead Design Review Board in designing the proposed layout. The proposed improvements will occur on property owned by Warner Developments, Inc. within easements dedicated to local service providers for utilities and infrastructure. Water and sewer service for the new development will be provided by the Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District, which has available potable water through existing rights and augmentation plans owned by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District, and which has existing treatment capacity at the Edwards Sewer Treatment Plant. 36 November 18, 2003 Reference letter from Colorado Division of Water Resources dated 08/05/03, no injury to downstream water users is anticipated. [+] FINDING: (2) ProperfV ri1!hts of others The project WILL NOT impair property rights held by others. (3) The project is consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans. The project is consistent with current land use and water quality plans, with the exception of the 50' set-back from the stream in the vicinity of the proposed ski locker facility. A 13 foot encroachment is proposed, however, no construction will extend into the McCoy Creek riparian zone. Provisions will be added to the PUD Guide that will outline the use of pesticides, sediment control and other water quality protection measures. A Storm Water Discharge permit will be obtained prior to construction. Erosion control measures will be implemented before during and after construction. The plan conforms to the Edwards Area Future Land Use Map, which indicates this area as Residential Low Density. The area where the 13 foot encroachment into the stream setback is proposed is an area previously disturbed as a historic roadbed. The ski locker facility will not require the removal of any stream corridor trees, and will not impact any identified wetlands. The applicant has acknowledged the need to comply with all provisions of the Regional 208 Plan, as identified in the referral response from NWCCOG dated 07/22/03, and the recommendations ofCGS regarding slope stability and erosion control, as detailed in their letter of 09/25/03 (see condition #3). [+/-] FINDING: (3) Consistencv with plans The project IS consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans, with the exception of one structure which will encroach on the required 50' stream setback.. (4) The applicant has the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all requirements and conditions. Warner Developments, Inc. has been working in Eagle County for 25 years, developing other successful developments like the Homestead PUD. All improvements will be paid for by the Developer, with public improvements secured through a Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA). [+] FINDING: (4) Expertise and financial capabilitv The applicant DOES HAVE the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all requirements and conditions. (5) The Project is technically and financially feasible. The project is technically feasible as indicated by submitted engineering studies and plans. The project is financially feasible given the perceived value of the resulting single family lots and homes. The resulting residences will be similar in quality and appearance to the adjacent developments of Cresta and Trailside (the Arrowhead Mountain Lots). The Developer will pay all costs, and there is no debt associated with the project. [+] FINDING: (5) Feasibilitv The Project IS technically and financially feasible. (6) The project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazard. Potential geologic risks from debris flows, avalanche, rock fall and hydrocompactive soils have been identified, with the most significant being the hazard from debris flows. Proposed mitigation of debris flows include berming and the construction of two large culvert systems to gather and direct flows through the site. Mitigation for hydrocompactive soils includes engineered foundations and assuring positive drainage from the site. Development will occur entirely outside the 100 year floodplain of McCoy Creek The site also has a high to extreme Wildfire risk, which will be mitigated through the paving of roads, burying of utilities, the installation of fire hydrants, the creation of defensible space and the use of fire resistive building materials and construction practices. All development will be accordance with Eagle County Wildfire Regulations. 37 November 18, 2003 The Applicant's engineer worked closely with the Colorado Geological Survey to resolve differences regarding the mitigation of debris flow hazards on the site. While the method preferred by CGS was not utilized, CGS has indicated acceptance of the Applicant's plan (letter of 09/25/03), so long as assurances are provided that the long box culverts designed to carry debris flows through the project are inspected and maintained by a responsible party on an annual basis (see condition #4). In addition, CGS has requested that a site specific hydraulic and slope stability analysis be performed for any structure located within the 50' stream setback to assure proper engineering of foundations and/or bank erosion protection improvements (see condition #3) Access to the project has been found to be adequate by the local fire district (letter of 08/19/03), and the Applicant will be required to adhere to applicable provisions of Eagle County's Wildfire Hazard Regulations (see condition #5). [+] FINDING: (6) Risk from Hazards As proposed and mitigated, The project IS NOT subject to significant risk from natural hazard. (7) The project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. The project will not adversely affect land use patterns. The project is essentially an infill development, and is consistent with land use plans associated with patterns of development. The project will cluster 10 dwelling units on 40 acres ofland, leaving approximately 30 acres as open space. The primary access road and infrastructure is in place, requiring only short extensions of new service lines. The proposed units will be designed to be similar in appearance and quality to the developed areas above and below the subject property. The Eagle County Planning Commission, in their referral comments of November 4th. indicated a concern for the precedence set by allowing development of this sort on steep, hazard prone sites as it relates to future land use patterns in the County. Staff would note that the Trailside development further south on Cresta Road (Arrowhead Mountain Lots) is similar in density, design and topography. [+] FINDING: (7) Land use Patterns The project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. (8) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the capability of local governments affected by the project to provide services, or exceed the capacity of service delivery systems. The existing road through the project is maintained by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. New roads proposed will be private, and will be maintained by the McCoy Springs Home Owners Association. The project is small, and additional public transportation is not expected to be required. Centralized sewer and water already exist in the road that travels through the property, which is included in the boundaries of the Arrowhead Metropolitan District. The Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority and the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District have provided letters indicating a willingness to serve. The necessary water system capacity has been included in the design of the Arrowhead Mountain Lots (Trailside), a development approaching build-out above and south ofthe project. All service line extensions and utilities will be paid for by the Developer. [+] FINDING: (8) Service caoacities The Project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on the capability oflocal governments affected by the project to provide services, NOR WILL it exceed the capacity of service delivery systems. (9) The Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. The proposed development will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents within the development area and source development area. All costs associated with the project will be borne by the Developer. The construction of homes will be phased to match sales activity, and the Developer does not anticipate carrying a significant tax burden for the project. The parcel will have an increased valuation as a result of the development, and additional taxes will be paid 38 November 18, 2003 to the County. The area is already included in the Arrowhead Metro District service area for water and sewer. [+] FINDING: (9) Financial Burden The Project WILL NOT create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. (10) The project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. The proposed development should generate more revenue for the community in the form of employment and taxes. Construction equipment and materials will be contracted and/or purchased locally. Owners of the new homes are expected to have above average incomes, and could contribute generously to the local economy. [+] FINDING: (10) Protection of Local Economv The project WILL NOT significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy (11) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality of recreational opportunities and experience. Currently there are no public or private hiking trails on the project. McCoy Creek is not used by the public as a fishery, and its narrow confines provide little opportunity for human interaction. The proposed skier bridge will allow residents to cross the creek on foot in the summer and on skis in the winter to access recreational opportunities on the nearby Arrowhead Ski Area. Hikers have been witnessed using Cresta Road. Some short term impacts and nuisance factors will be encountered during the construction phase, with noise, dust and truck traffic being most noticeable. These impacts will cease once the project is completed. [+] FINDING: (11) Protection ofrecreational opportunities The Project WILL NOT have a significant adverse effect on the quality of recreational opportunities and experience. (12) The planning, design and operation of the Project shall reflect principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. Resource conservation techniques will be used on the project, as outlined in Eagle County Land Use Regulations, the Uniform Building Code and the Eagle County Building Code. Further, the project will be subj ect to the Arrowhead Mountain Guidelines, which have landscaping standards that encourage the use of native species and restrict outside irrigation to 1000 square feet. Xeriscape watering techniques are required, and water usage will be metered. In addition, the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority has implemented a Water Conservation Plan designed to encourage increased efficiency in water use. This plan will be followed where applicable to this project. [+] FINDING: (12) Resource Conservation The planning, design and operation ofthe Project SHALL reflect principals ofresource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. (13) The Project will not significantly degrade air quality. During construction, air quality standards will be maintained in accordance with standard construction practices. Less that 25 acres will be disturbed, and as such the project is exempt from having to apply for an air pollution emission notice. No wood burning devises will be allowed, and only new technology pellet and gas stoves will be allowed per Eagle county Standards. Increases in heating and vehicle emissions from the proposed development is expected to be negligible The proposed project is not expected to cause any adverse long term effect on ambient air quality. Some short term impacts may result during construction. [+] FINDING: (13) Air Oualitv The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade air quality. (14) The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality. The project is proposed for a site that is not identified as a scenic area and that cannot be seen from the Interstate 70 corridor or other areas of the Eagle River Valley floor. Homes will be built to follow the Arrowhead Mountain Lots Design Guidelines, which require an even higher design standard than that seen in much of Arrowhead. The new homes are close to the Arrowhead ski runs and Cresta Road, and will not be noticeably different in appearance from existing homes in the area. The 39 November 18, 2003 establishment of defensible space for wildfire hazard mitigation will result in the modification of some existing trees and native vegetation in proximity to the new homes [+] FINDING: (14) VisualOualitv The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade existing visual quality. (15) The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. A Storm water Management Plan, Best Management Practices and a Storm Water Discharge Permit will be prepared and/or obtained prior to construction. During construction, possible short term increases in suspended sediment in McCoy Creek will be minimized through use of erosion control structures such as silt fences and straw bales. These construction practices, along with re-vegetation after construction, should minimize and filter runoff from construction sites. An erosion control plan sufficient for preliminary plan approval has been received, and provision for the treatment of storm water runoff, utilizing overland flow through vegetated channels has been included in the plans. While features have been provided to improve the quality of water releasedfrom the site, basins designed to pond (detain) water are excluded to prevent infiltration into hydrocompactive soils. As such, on-site detention requirements have not been met. The applicant will request a variance from applicable County standards. Given the generally small amount of impervious surface created by this plan, and the fact that McCoy Creek travels through several large golf course ponds on its way to the Eagle River, no significant degradation in water quality is expected. [+] FINDING: (15) Surface Water Oualitv The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade surface water quality. (16) The Project will not significantly degrade ground water quality. There are no known wells on the property and the project as proposed will not introduce contaminants into the local ground water supply. As indicated by test bores, local aquifers exist at elevations lower than any of the project's proposed excavation depths. [+] FINDING: (16) Ground Water Oualitv The Project WILL NOT significantly degrade ground water quality. (17) The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas. A Vegetation Assessment completed by Western Ecological Resource indicates 0.6 acres of wetlands and 1.17 acres of riparian forest on the subject property, all associated with the McCoy Creek stream corridor. Amended plans will avoid these areas completely, with the possible exception ofthe Ski locker Facility and the skier bridge. The water quality of wetlands will be protected by implementing water quality control devises during and after construction. Reference the letter from the Army Corp of Engineers dated August 7, 2003, the Wetland Delineation performed in 1995 has expired. A new wetlands delineation for the project is required (memo from Engineering dated 11/10/03), which will then be used to determine whether any wetlands permit will be required. The Ski Locker/Condominium/Caretaker structure is proposed to encroach some 13 feet into the stream setback, however, it will be constructed on previously disturbed soils and would appear to not encroach on riparian areas. Measures to protect the foundation of this structure from flooding and stream bank erosion may. however, involve work within the riparian zone (see conditions #1 and #3). [+] FINDING: (17) Wetlands and Rivarian Areas As conditioned, the Project WILL NOT significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas. (18) The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. According to Western Ecological Resource, Inc., there are no State or Federal endangered species present at the site. The area is delineated as elk winter habitat/concentration area, but is outside areas used for calving or migration. The site is not designated as critical deer habitat. Only 15% of the property is proposed for development, the rest will be left to support all wildlife species currently present. The riparian area will not be impacted by the current plan. Habitat enhancement and other 40 November 18,2003 measures proposed in the Wildlife Mitigation plan for the project should help minimize elk winter range impacts and other wildlife-related development effects. The Eagle County Planning Commission, in their referral comments of November lh, indicated considerable concern for the loss of native land that, according to the Applicant's consultant, " represents foraging habitats that are moderately to heavily used (by elk) during winter". Staff would note the lack of referral response from the Colorado Division of Wildlife, and would assume that no significant impacts to terrestrial or aquatic wildlife will result from the proposed development. [+] FINDING: (18) Terrestrial or Aquatic Animal fife The Project as proposed WILL NOT significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats (19) The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. The proposed project will eliminate a total of approximately 5 acres of native vegetation. None of the vegetation types that would be affected are rare or unique, and all are widely distributed in western Colorado. Trees and shrubs would be thinned on an additional three acres for the purpose of providing defensible space against wildfires. There are no threatened, endangered or candidate plants in Eagle County or on the subject site. However, Harrington Penstemon, a US Forest Service sensitive species could be present. If any penstemon are found, the plants will be relocated to a suitable adjacent site. [+] FINDING: (19) Terrestrial Plant Life The Project WILL NOT significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. (20) The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. Most natural drainage features are being retained, and where they are modified, channels and culverts will be used. Soil erosion will be minimized by quickly revegetating disturbed areas, and utilizing erosion control devises. Soils have been extensively studied and Golder and Associates has made recommendations regarding the mitigation of possible debris flows and hydrocompactive soils on the site. The project will not exacerbate any seismic concerns in the area In their referral response of April] 0, 2003, the Colorado Geological Survey noted concerns for structures built within the stream setback, and for the methods proposed to reduce the risk to damage from potential debris flows. The Applicant responded by directing their engineers to work closely with CGS to resolve soils and geologic issues. CGS has subsequently written a second letter, dated September 25, 2003, indicating acceptance of the plan with the condition that a hydraulic and slope stability analysis shall be provided prior to the issuance of building permits for any structure located within the 50 foot stream setback (see condition # 3) and the condition that debris flow mitigation structures designed for the project shall be inspected and maintained by a responsible party on an annual basis (see condition #4). [+] FINDING: (20) Soils and Geologic Conditions The Project WILL NOT significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. (21) The project will not create a nuisance. Some short term impacts and nuisance factors will be encountered during the construction phase, with noise, dust and truck traffic being most noticeable. These impacts will cease once the project is completed. The nearest residents are approximately 900 feet away. [+] FINDING: (21) Nuisance The project WILL NOT create a nuisance (22) The project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic or archaeological importance. The project area is not identified as having any paleontological, historic or archaeological features. +] FINDING: (22) Paleontological, Historic or Archaeological areas The project WILL NOT significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic or archaeological importance. 23) The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. 41 November 18, 2003 During construction, proper construction techniques following OSHA and EP A rules and guidelines will be used to prevent any releases of hazardous materials from the site. No hazardous materials are anticipated to be kept on site once the project is complete. +] FINDING: (23) Hazardous Materials The project WILL NOT result in umeasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. (24) Benefits accruing to the County and its citizens from the project outweigh the losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources within the County, or the losses of opportunities to develop such resources. The subject property has not been used for any agricultural, grazing or recreational uses since the owner purchased the property in 1979, nor was it believed to have been used in this manner by previous owners. Its topography is such that it does not lend itself to these uses. The property is currently zoned Resource, and is depicted on the County's Future Land Use map as Residential Low Density, an intensity of use consistent with other developments above and below this site on Cresta Road. Possible benefits lost to commercial or industrial uses of the parcel are therefore not applicable. The population continues to grow in Eagle County. This project is targeted at seasonal/vacation home ownership, which continues to be in demand. The benefits to Eagle County, through tax revenues generated by the residential development of this land, far outweigh any other foreseeable benefits of the other permitted uses of this site. Staff would note that some elk winter range will be lost, although its value may have been diminished considerably when Cresta Road was extended south through the property some years ago. [+] FINDING: (24) Benefits OutweiJ!h Losses The benefits accruing to the County and its citizens from the project DO outweigh the losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources within the County, or the losses of opportunities to develop such resources. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 6.04.02, Additional Criteria Apvlicable to Municival and Industrial Water Pro;ects, and as more specifically described in the application for the Cordillera Southern Parcel Water Tank, the following additional analysis is provided. The Project shall emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water. The project is included in the Upper Eagle Valley Water Authority service area, and will be served by a central water facility. The Authority recently implemented a Water Conservation Plan, which will be followed where applicable. Water use will be metered, and low flow fixtures and toilets will be used as required by local codes. Exterior landscaping will utilize xeriscape techniques, and irrigation will be limited to 1000 square feet per structure. [+] FINDING: (1) Efficient Use The Project SHALL emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water. The Project shall not result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. The project is included in the service area of existing central water and wastewater facilities, and will utilize short extensions from existing lines which already pass through the project. Water capacity for this project was considered in the design ofthe Arrowhead Mountain Lots, which exist further south and above this location. The Developer has obtained a letter indicating a willingness to serve from both the Water Authority and the Sanitation District. No other water systems will serve the affected area. [+] FINDING: (2) Excess Cavacitv/Duvlicate Services The Project SHALL NOT result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. The Project shall be necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project. The project will be located in an area of limited development potential given the steep terrain to the west and the stream corridor to the east. Lines will be sized appropriately for the density proposed, 42 November 18, 2003 and no additional density is anticipated that would require water and sewer service via the lines for this project. [+] FINDING: (3) Necessitv The Project SHALL BE necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the project. Urban development, population densities, and site layout and design of storm water and sanitation systems shall be accomplished in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas The project is not indicated to be in an active aquifer recharge area. Sanitation will be accomplished through connection to a domestic treatment system. Storm water will be directed off site through stable channels and culverts, and infiltration of storm water in the vicinity of any structures will be avoided due to the presence ofhydrocompactive soils. [+] FINDING: (4) Protection of Aquifer RecharfIe Areas Urban development, population densities, and site layout and design of storm water and sanitation systems SHALL BE accomplished in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. Special Use Permit Waiver In accordance with Chapter II, Article 3, Section 3.310.1.2, Waiver Provision of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, "the Special Review Use Permit application for water and sewer proj ects may be waived in whole or in part by the Board of County Commissioners upon a written petition by the applicant showing that: 3.310.I.2.a. A permit application pursuant to Chapter 6, Sections one through five ofthe Eagle County Guidelines and Regulations for Matters of State Interest has been submitted to the Eagle County Permit Authority relative to this land use which would be the subject of a special use permit application. 3.310.I.2.b Compliance with the Special Review Use permit requirements would be unreasonably burdensome for the applicant. The applicant has requested a waiver ofthe Special Use Permit requirements, as such application would serve no further legitimate planning, zoning or other land use objective. Commissioner Menconi asked about the recommendation for approval, it appears that many of the conditions were to work in the concerns of the Planning Commission. Mr. Forinash stated this is the same presentation as presented to the Planning Commission and they chose to recommend denial. He stated the Planning Commission saw the development as not being appropriate to the site. They were concerned about density, impacts related to the proximity of McCoy Creek, slope, and a difference in judgment on a number of issues regarding wildlife impacts, setback issues, suitability of the site and reconciling the approval with the seven findings the Board must make. Commissioner Menconi asked ifthere was discussion between staff and the applicant concerning if some of those concerns have been worked out. Number on was the location of the sidewalk in anticipation of the guardrail on Cresta Road. Mr. Forinash stated that has been resolved as there is no guardrail on that side of Cresta Road. Commissioner Menconi stated the second concerned the location of truck parking. Mr. Forinash stated they will be parked at the Caretakers unit. Commissioner Menconi questioned the ski house which has concerns of distance from the Creek and who will be able to use the parking. Mr. Forinash stated there was discussion as to whether the residents will walk down to the ski house and take advantage of that. There are some people who prefer to take a bus down to Arrowhead. There were questions as to if that fully satisfied the Planning Commission. There is not parking at the ski house for the eight units to the west of Cresta Road. Staff asked the applicant to include a pedestrian access and that has been incorporated along with sidewalks. The applicants have provided a snow removal maintenance plan. Commissioner Menconi asked, in glancing down at the remaining items, does staff believe that all of those concerns have been addressed. 43 November 18, 2003 Mr. Forinash stated all ofthe issues have been answered. The question on some of those was had these been addressed or is this an appropriate use of the property. He stated he does not know if those issues were sufficiently answered. The ski house was another issue. It is an issue as to whether that is an appropriate use. Pedestrian access was questioned. This application requires skiers to walk down to the site. Commissioner Menconi asked what the applicant has a right to build on the property. Mr. Forinash stated a single family and accessory dwelling or agricultural dwellings. Chairman Pro-tern Stone stated it seems there are a few instances where the applicant will be requesting a variance from the Improvement Standards. If the Board goes along with an approval of this would they be requesting a variance after the fact. Mr. Forinash stated the Regulations allows for variances in separate applications or as a part of a PUD application Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated if this application is approved the applicant will have both sketch and preliminary plan approval before any variances are approved. Mr. Forinash stated within the materials submitted there is information on the variance requests. Ms. Mauriello stated Mr. Forinash is saying the information the Board needs to grant variances is included in the application. She stated it is imperative for the Board to understand exactly what they are granting today. Chairman Pro-tem Stone read from staff findings relating to the variances being requested. He stated it is alluding to the fact that the variances would be a future approval and not a concurrent approval as a part of this application. Mr. Forinash stated the intent is that the variances be included as part of the application. Rick Plyman, PJA Land Planning, introduced Bob Warner, Warner Developments. He stated they do have variance requests on the design road standards. He stated generally in several applications he has been involved with, they have requested variances as a part of the application in order to shown the Board why they are requesting the variances. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated it generally has its own VIS file. He stated Cordillera is a perfect example. Those items need to be addressed specifically for everyone's benefit. Mr. Plyman stated staff engineers helped put the requests together which includes the reasons for the requests and the hardships that would be incurred. Ms. Mauriello stated for clarification, 5-270-G(1), the Board has the authority to approve, approve with conditions or disapprove variances from Improvement Standards. It also allows an applicant to submit an application or consolidate with the other applications. She read from the standards as follows: 1. General. The Board of County Commissioners shall have the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove variances from Article 4, Division 6, Improvement Standards. Any person seeking a variance from the improvement standards shall file an application with the Community Development Director, or shall consolidate said application with any other application the applicant is submitting. The application shall be determined sufficient, and a staff report prepared pursuant to Section 5-21 O.D, Common Procedure for Review of Applications. 2. Standards. In determining whether to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application for Variance to Improvement Standards, the Board of County Commissioners shall balance the hardships to the applicant of not granting the Variance against the adverse impact on the health, safety, and welfare of persons affected, and the adverse impact on the lands affected. In approving or approving with conditions said Variance, the Board of County Commissioners may impose such conditions that are necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of this Subsection, these Regulations, and the Master Plan. "After the public hearing, the Board of County Commissioners shall approve or disapprove the Exemption for Subdivision based on whether: the division is within the purposes of Section 5-280, 44 November 18, 2003 Subdivision; adequate access, potable water, and sewage are available; and whether the exemption will not create hazards and the lot will contain a safe, adequate building site." Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated he would like specific discussion concerning the variances during the applicant's presentation. Mr. Plyman stated the McCoy Springs parcel is a 41 acre parcel and is an out parcel to the Arrowhead property. It has been included in the Arrowhead Metropolitan District and the Arrowhead Homeowners Association but from a zoning standpoint, it is not in the Arrowhead PUD. There are 9 units in the ski house including the employee unit. Originally the application was for a total of 11 units. They met with the Arrowhead Metro District who wrote a letter supporting the proposal with concern of the houses on the creek side. After submitting the application to the County, Arrowhead came back and indicated they were not comfortable with the houses along the creek and asked they be removed. While staffwas going through the review process, staffhad similar concerns with the homes on the creek side. The applicant deleted the three building sites along the creek and moved the ski house to one of the home sites that was less impacting. They have resolved the objections with the homeowners association. The property has been under the current ownership since 1979. In 1998 the property was included in the declarations and into the homeowners association. In 1999 it was included in the Metropolitan District. In 2001 there was a final plat approval of the Arrowhead Mountain lots. The road, utilities and infrastructure through this subdivision. With road access and utilities in place they submitted their application for this proposal. Mr. Plyman did a slide show presentation ofthe property. He stated they have an agreement with Vail Resorts and Vail Arrowhead Inc. to cut a ski trail to the location of the skier bridge. It will be a nine foot wide ski trail. The lower level of the ski house is a 1,500 square foot caretakers unit and a 600 square foot locker room. The mid level is all parking and the third level is a 2,500 square foot condominium. They eliminated two units and three building sites. He stated there were questions of how the parking would work. The furthest unit is a 550 foot walk to the ski house. They have also purchased Alpine Club Memberships for all units. They can also call dial a ride which is included in the Club Memberships. He stated 37 feet is the closest house to the stream. They only encroach by 13 feet. He stated the old road bed contains a culvert rather than a stream bed. They have minimized the impacts. He spoke to the Edwards Area Community Plan, They are proposing 9 free market units and 1 caretakers unit which is well below the suggested density. This project very much meets the Edwards Area community plan and the County Master Plan. The entire project will be designed to the Arrowhead Mountain Guidelines and incorporates the Bachelor Gulch designs. The setback issues, they are encroaching on the 50 foot stream setback, it is not a long stretch of houses and they have been sensitive with the design. The Planning Commission expressed concern with the zoning and he did not understand that. This development area was indicated for future development. It has always been considered a development parcel. The density is low. Multi family was eliminated from the plan. This low density has some support from the Arrowhead homeowners. This parcel is suitable for development. Colorado Geologic Survey wants to make sure that since they are enclosing the debris flow the mitigation is correct. He related they believe all staff findings are positive. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked for public comment on the 1041 permit. There were no members ofthe public to comment. He closed public comment. Chairman Pro- Tem Stone read from the staff comments regarding the 1041 file and related there are two findings that he believes are both positive and negative as follows: "While the Applicant HAS NOT provided the necessary documentation to assure that all necessary property rights, permits and approvals will be in place prior to site disturbance, it would appear that the Applicant will be able to meet the requirements of this standard." "The project IS consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans, with the exception of one structure which will encroach on the required 50' stream setback." 45 November 18, 2003 Furthermore in a letter from Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, regarding the 208 plan, "Lane Wyatt comments are as follows: "The application addresses water quality in very general and incomplete terms making it impossible to determine the nature and magnitude of potential impacts or to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures. The application confuses the need to evaluate peak flows from the development with changes in peak flows in McCoy Creek. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated he would like the applicant to address all ofthese concerns. Mr. Plyman stated the ski house does have an encroachment into the 50 foot setback. He stated the referral response was based on the original application. They have changed the number of units in that setback. He stated their hardship is the existing location of Cresta Road. He stated there is no portion of that property, the creek side, that they could put a building without encroaching the setback. They have pushed the building as close to the road as they can. The original easement is 50 feet wide. Engineering staff asked them to set that at 60 feet. They responded they could not and staff allowed it to be 50 feet. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated they take their 1041 authority seriously and give all files equal consideration. He asked County Attorney, if they can allow this exception. Ms. Mauriello stated they can. Commissioner Menconi stated he has no problem with that exception. Chairman Pro-tern Stone stated the other concern is with water quality. Kent Crane, Alpine Engineering, stated most of the discussion has been on the NWCCOG concerns with being close to the creek. In regards to the 208 plan, they are in conformance with that except with the building setback. He stated a lot of the water quality features are identified on that submittal. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked if they have measures to control and treat storm water. Mr. Crane stated the two plans address that, the erosion plan and the drainage plan. The applicant will be required to obtain a discharge and erosion permit. Commissioner Menconi moved the Permit Authority approve File No. 1041-0049, McCoy Springs at Arrowhead, waiving the requirement for Special Use Review and incorporating Staffs findings, with the following conditions: 1) That, reference the letter from the Army Corp of Engineers dated 08/07/03 and the memo from Eagle County Engineering dated 11/10/03, should the recently updated wetland delineation for the property indicate the need for a 404 Permit, said Permit shall be in place prior to any construction on the site. 2) That, reference the memo from Eagle County Engineering dated 11/10/03, updated flood plain information be submitted and a flood plain development permit for the proposed skier bridge be obtained prior to any disturbance on the site. 3) That, reference the letter from the Colorado Geologic Survey dated 09/25/03, hydraulic and slope stability analysis shall be provided prior to the issuance of building permits for any structure located within the 50 foot stream setback, and that the design of foundations and mitigation structures shall be based on this information in order to protect structures from potential damage from erosion, undercutting and/or slope failure. 4) That, reference the letter from the Colorado Geologic Survey dated 09/25/03, debris flow mitigation structures designed for the project shall be inspected and maintained by a responsible party on an annual basis. 5) That, reference the letter from the Colorado State Forest Service dated 08/06/03, the Applicant's Wildfire Mitigation Plan shall be implemented consistent with Eagle County Land Use Regulations. 46 November 18, 2003 6) That except as otherwise modified by the Permit, all material representations of the applicant in this permit application, correspondence, and public meetings shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked for public input on the zone change and PUD files. Dana Dunbar, Arrowhead homeowner, stated she has watched the development change since 1989. She stated she has no problem with the plan but questioned the need for a ski house but that is the developers thought and if they want it they should be able to have it. Ed Leavy, Arrowhead homeowner, voiced his support for the project and believes it is appropriate to place 9 dwelling units on 41 acres. He believes a lot of time and effort has been put into this plan. Chairman Pro-tem Stone closed public comment. Commissioner Menconi asked the County Attorney to explain the handout. Ms. Mauriello stated she pulled page 164 from the packet showing the variance requests. She asked the Board in considering this application, to balance the hardship to the applicant of not granting the variance versus any impacts to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants. She requested the Board follow the findings. Commissioner Menconi asked if this was an alternative in finding number 4. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated it would also apply to number 12. He stated number 4 is variances for minimum tangent lengths. Number 12 is proposed utility easements along Cresta Road. Ms. Mauriello stated that was correct. Mr. Crane spoke to the variance requests as follows 1. Tangent Length, both of the roads service four homes and one of the hardships is that this is a very steep hill and will push that tangent length further back into the hill which impacts the land and increases the height of the wall. Would it be safe and could fire trucks be able to get up there. He pointed out turning diagrams for large fire trucks. He stated there is also a letter from Carol Mulson speaking to adequacy of the access and the turn around. 2. Single Access, with the steep hillside for the ski hill it is not practical to provide that. He stated there is a pedestrian skier emergency access on the hill. Cresta Road does have a physical connection to the Arrowhead Mountain Road, so in the summer there is emergency access. 3. Switchback Radius, with the steepness of the hill and height ofthe retaining wall it will work better with the land. 4. Utility Easement Width, the code requires a 25 foot minimum width. They do have some that are smaller but in all cases the owners and operators of those utilities related it does meet their retirements and they will own it and maintain it. To increase the width ofthe easements unduly burdens the land. 5. On Site Detention, because of their small amount of pervious area there is no impact as far as increased developed flows. Likewise the hydro-compacted soils would not be good to house ponds. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board, having heard evidence and received materials and balanced the hardships to the applicant of not granting the adverse impacts on the health, safety and welfare ofthe persons and the land, approve the following variances: 1) Tangent Length, Land Use Regulation 4-620.J.9.c (8) 2) Single Access, Land Use Regulation 4-620J.1.h 3) Switchback Radius, Land Use Regulation 4-620J.1.f 4) Utility Easement Width, Land Use Regulation 4-670.A 5) On Site Treatment Detention, Land Use Regulation 4-650.B.1.b Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. 47 November 18, 2003 In discussion Chairman Pro-tem Stone asked that the McCoy Springs Variance Request Sheet be labeled VIS Exhibit 1 and be attached to the motion. Commissioner Menconi concurred and added that to the motion. Chairman Pro-tem Stone called for the question on the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Chairman pro-tem Stone asked about the wildfire hazard rating Ben Garrett, Wildfire Mitigation Specialist, stated when he originally looked at the site there were several features included within this plan. The site in the beginning was rated in the extreme category. After seeing the revised plan, the applicant has distanced themselves from all of the features. There is one building that will require some mitigation. They have removed everything from the chimney features. They are bringing in fire hydrants and water, a landscape plan has been developed to mitigate the local hazard and they are using fire resistant materials. It is now considered to be in the low hazard category if everything submitted is completed. Chairman Pro-tem Stone stated condition number II reads the plan must be implemented. Mr. Garrett concurred. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. ZC-00063, McCoy Springs at Arrowhead, incorporating the staff findings. Chairman Pro-tem Stone seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. PDSP-00018, McCoy Springs at Arrowhead, incorporating the staff findings, and with the following conditions: 1. It shall be demonstrated that the recent delineation of the wetlands along McCoy Creek in the vicinity ofthe caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure, as approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, does not extend any further beyond McCoy Creek in the direction of the proposed caretaker unit / common ski storage and locker facility / condominium unit structure than had been the case in 1995. 2. Hydraulic and slope stability analysis shall be provided prior to issuing building permits for all structures within the 50 foot setback zone to provide a design basis for the engineered mitigation structures that would be necessary to protect homes from potential damage caused by erosion, undercutting and slope failures. 3. The Applicant shall provide, prior to approval of the initial final plat for the development, complete engineering and construction drawings which are satisfactory to the County Engineer, including but not limited to roads, drainage structures and pedestrian footpath and sidewalks. 4. An appropriate access easement shall be provided on the final plat to accommodate the use of the sidewalk from McCoy Springs Court to Cresta Road. 5. Common walkways and steps shall be maintained and snow removed as provided in the Snow Removal Maintenance Plan dated October 31,2003. 6. All areas within the 50 foot live stream setback shall be protected in its natural state as provided in Section 3-340.C.6., Stream Setbacks, of the Land Use Regulations, except as allowed for the caretaker unit / common ski locker facility / condominium unit and the skier bridge. 7. The Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual dated October 2003, prepared by Golder Associates, shall be regularly and properly implemented. 8. It shall be demonstrated prior to approval of a final plat for this development, that the proposed payment to the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Trust Fund has been made. 9. If an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit is required for any construction in the vicinity of McCoy Creek, such a permit shall be obtained and all conditions and requirements of the permit shall be adhered to. 10. The Wildfire Mitigation Plan shall be required to be implemented. 48 November 18, 2003 11. With respect to the PUD Guidelines for McCoy Springs at Arrowhead, those portions of Section 4.3, Modifications To This Guide, entitled Major Modification, Minor Modifications and Building Envelope Adjustments, shall be modified as set forth in the Staff Report in the discussion of the Standard Section 5-240.F.2.a(8), Initiation. 12. Except as otherwise modified by these conditions, all material representations of the Applicant in this application and all public meetings shall be adhered to and be considered conditions of approval. 13. A Letter of Map Amendment for McCoy Creek shall be obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prior to issuance of a building permit for any structure on the east side of Cresta Road. Chairman Pro-tem Stone 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 December 9, 2003. Ch~' ~ 49 November 18, 2003