The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes 12/09/03 PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 9, 2003 Present: Michael Gallagher Am Menconi Tom Stone Jack Ingstad Diane Mauriello Earlene Roach Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator County Attorney Deputy Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: GENERAL FUND 21ST CENTURY PHOTO SUPPLY 4 EAGLE RANCH A 1 COLLECTION AGENCY A.P.S. AAA COLLECTORS ABBOTT LABORATORIES ABC LEGAL MESSENGERS ACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS ADAMS COUNTY SHERIFF AFFORDABLE PORTABLE AIMS MULlMEDIA ALL PRO FORMS INC ALLlANT FOOD SERVICE, INC AMADEO GONZALES AMERICAN AIRLINES AMERICAN MANAGEMENT AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOC AMERICINN LODGE & SUITES AMERIGAS AMICH AND JENKS INCORPORA ANIXTER COMMUNICATIONS ANN LOPER ANTLERS ADAM MARK APEX SECURITY APOGEE COMPUTER SOLUTIONS ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERIFF ARNOLD AND ARNOLD AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES BAILEYS BALCOMB AND GREEN BASALT FAMILY RESOURCE BEAR PROOF INC. BEEP WEST RADIO PAGING BENDELOW LAW FIRM BERLITZ LANGUAGE CENTER BETTY ABBEY BLAKEWOOD BUSINESS PROD. BLOOMS ON MAIN BOB BARKER COMPANY BRAD BARKEY BURNSLEY HOTEL CAPITOL ADVANTAGE PUB. SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE 88.94 11,920.20 6.00 660.00 83.68 189.98 50.00 55.90 90.00 93.00 149.95 1,119.75 2,412.81 54.90 20,595.41 1,895.00 1,745.00 523.20 838.03 270.00 582.60 180.00 510.00 227.50 753.00 255.00 53.14 2,130.96 75.00 6,579.67 1,000.00 1,248.00 40.00 13.02 250.00 82.50 59.82 42.40 428.08 76.96 224.00 31.90 I 12-09-03 CARLA HAGGART CARMEN LOZOYO-VELEZ CASTLE PEAK VETERINARY CATERINA GIBSON CEDARS FLOWER SHOP CENTENNIAL CREDIT CORP CENTRAL CREDIT CORP CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING CENTURYTEL CHADWICK, STEINKIRCHNER CHARLES B DARRAH CHARLES 0 JONES CO, INC. CHARLES H WILLMAN CHELEWSKI PIPE AND CITY OF LAKEWOOD CO ASSESSORS ASSOCIATION CO DEPARTMENT OF CO DEPT AGRICULTURE CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH & CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH AND CO ST ASSOC COUNTY CLERK CO STATE ASSOC CLERK AND CO STATE TREASURER CO WEST MENTAL HEALTH COLLECTION CENTER INC COLLEEN WIRTH COLORADO COUNTIES INC COLORADO LEGAL DIRECTORY COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLORADO STATE ARCHIVES COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY COLORADO WEST MENTAL HL TH COLUMBINE FORD COLUMBINE MARKET CONTRACT PHARMACY SERVICE COREY M DICKSON LLC CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS IMAGING COUNTY OF YOLO COUNTY SHERIFFS COLORADO CUISINE CATERING DAN CORCORAN PLS DAN SMITH DARLING BERGSTROM MILLGAN DAVE MOTT DAVID A BAUER DAVID GUINNEE, DVM DEEP ROCK WEST DELL INC DENVER CARDIOLOGY GROUP DENVER CHECKWRITER, INC. DENVER NEWSPAPER AGENCY DEPT OF LABOR EMPLOYMENT DIANA KAFKA DINSE KNAPP & MCANDREW DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE DOCTORS ON CALL DON OLSEN DOYLE ZAKHEM SUHRE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 175.00 121.44 195.42 20.70 49.26 39.26 34.30 1,565.04 17,279.08 11,000.00 29.34 21.05 18.18 64,982.57 495.00 25.00 9,264.44 100.00 365.30 141.00 25.00 210.00 5,954.04 7,500.00 19.46 160.00 400.00 105.00 125.00 11,444.12 179.75 10,753.59 2,000.00 19,645.90 55.58 1,648.97 750.00 3,822.82 351.84 25.00 450.00 175.00 900.00 1.38 20.00 51.00 46.20 1,540.00 280.41 4,022.83 1,257.00 104.30 1,092.15 225.00 105.57 10.00 17,788.34 410.00 23.77 2.48 2 12-09-03 DUNN & CAUSEY DYNAMAC CORPORATION EAGLE AMOCO EAGLE CARE MEDICAL CLINIC EAGLE COMPUTER SYSTEMS EAGLE CONVENIENCE STORE EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL DIST EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE RIVER WATER AND EAGLE VAIL ANIMAL HOSPITA EAGLE VALLEY CHAMBER COMM EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING EARL GLENWRIGHT EARTHLlNK, INC. ELDER & PHILLIPS EMILIA GONZALEZ EMS COUNCIL EPSON ACCESSORIES ESI, ELEVATOR SERVICE,INC EXECUTIVE TOWERS INN FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY FARRELL & SELDIN FEDERAL EXPRESS FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS FIRST BANKS FITZSIMMONS MOTOR COMPANY FLORIDA MICRO FORINASH KATHLEEN FRED PRYOR SEMINARS FRONTIER PRECISION INC GE CAPITAL GEMPLERS INC GEORGE MCLACHLAN GIS ANNO CO GLENDA WENTWORTH GLENWOOD SHOE SERVICE GRAINGER INCORPORATED GREENBERG & ASSOCIATES GREGORY ADAIR DDS HAMPTON INN DENVER WEST HART INTERCIVIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HELEN MIGCHELBRINK HERMAN MILLER INC. HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS HILLCARA LLC HOFHEIMER FERREBEE PC HOLIDAY INN DENVER WEST HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC IACREOT IAPMO IMAGE DENTAL IMAGINIT EMBROIDERY IMPACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS INTEGRAL RECOVERIES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERNATIONAL LAW INTUIT INFORMATION REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE 2.48 28,333.32 133.00 3,757.00 3,023.00 400.00 420.00 384.85 153.29 10.00 600.00 1,343.00 43.50 269.17 15.00 32.50 60.00 9.98 90.00 170.00 1,910.84 25.00 515.12 90.00 25,941.94 10.00 6,902.00 239.18 149.00 155.25 159.99 126.40 25.00 6,300.00 243.59 46.00 629.07 17.78 55.00 168.00 10,742.66 210.39 8,143.88 56.88 528.40 322.95 10,000.00 30.62 444.00 139.90 12,720.68 100.00 150.00 1,122.00 375.54 7,560.00 20.00 200.00 600.00 1,795.00 3 12-09-03 IRVIN BORENSTEIN JAMIE HUMPHREY JANET CONNORS JEAN NUNN JEANETTE HURSEY JENNIFER MCGRAY JEROME EVANS PH.D JILL BARON JIM DUKE JOHN 0 DRIES JOHN LOWERY JOHNSON AND HELD L TO JOLlE B RAMO JOSEPH L FORINASH JULIE SNYDER JUNIPER VALLEY PRODUCTS KARA BETTIS, CORONER KATHLEEN WALSH KATHY LAWN KATHY REED KELLY L1EKIS KEMP AND COMPANY INC KESSLER MARY J KINDER MORGAN INC KINETICO WATER PROS LANDS END INCORPORATED LASER JUNCTION LEGACY COMMUNICATIONS INC LEO V JIMENEZ LEONARD VALDEZ LESLIE KEHMEIER LEXIS NEXIS MATTHEW LEXISNEXIS LIGHTNING SERVICES LORIE CRAWFORD LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES M KELLY L1EKIS RN M LOURDES QUINONES MACHOL&JOHANNES MARGERY STONE MARIA ANJIER MARIA WOOD MARILYN MENNS MARLENE MC CAFFERTY MATRIX DESIGN GROUP INC MCCLURE & EGGLESTON LLC MCI WORLDCOM MEDICAL CENTER OF EAGLE MELINDA EASLEY MESA COUNTY EXTENSION MESA COUNTY HEALTH DEPT MICHAEL BARCA MICHAEL E BEGG MICHAEL R DUNLEVIE MICRO PLASTICS MIKES CAMERA INC. MILLER & COHEN MONTAG KEITH P MOORE MEDICAL CORP REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES 25.00 113.85 66.00 241 .80 80.00 75.00 350.00 1,266.00 4.80 25.00 218.98 1,900.00 300.00 70.73 150.88 18.75 71.46 350.00 45.95 30.36 1,420.00 92.50 45.37 3,059.71 120.00 2,814.05 129.90 31.12 141.29 12.00 182.77 18.21 221.80 246.45 69.16 259.00 112.12 43.47 99.38 3.11 51.60 1,148.10 24.60 70.86 1,040.04 50.00 5,580.19 82.00 68.00 90.00 37.50 125.00 25.00 26.24 174.90 850.00 14.88 35.45 388.29 4 12-09-03 MOTOR POOL FUND MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS MOUNTAIN GLEN HOUSING MOUNTAIN STATES EMPLOYERS MOUNTAIN TEMP SERVICES MTN VALLEY DEVELOPENTAL NATE IVIE NATIONAL 4H SUPPLY NATIONAL INFORMATION DATA NATURAL RESOURCE CONSER. NEDBO CONSTRUCTION NETTIE REYNOLDS NEVES UNIFORMS NEW SHOES NICOLETTI FLATER ASSOC NOBEL SYSCO FOOD SERVICES NOBLE WELDING NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT NW CO LEGAL SERVICE PROJ OSM DELIVERY LLC PAT MAGDZUIK PATRICK & COMPANY PATTERSON NUSS & SEYMOUR PEGGY GRAYBEAL PET FOOD L TD PETER SULMEISTERS PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING PETTY CASH MOTOR POOL PITNEY BOWES INCORPORATED POSITIVE PROMOTIONS POSTMASTER EAGLE BRANCH PRCA PRECINCT POLICE PRODUCTS PREMIER ELECTRIC CO INC PRIMEDIA WORKPLACE PROGRESSIVE BUSINESS PSS, INC PURCHASE POWER QUEST DIAGNOSTICS QUILL CORPORATION QWEST QWEST INTERPRISE NETWRKNG QWEST MEDIA EAST RAYMOND P MERRY REINARZ & ASSOCIATES RENTX INDUSTRIES RESOURCE ENGINEERING RIVER OAKS COMMUNICATIONS ROBERT LAWSON ROBERT W REED ROCKY MOUNTAIN RECORDS ROGER MOORE ROSIE MORENO ROTARY CHILD RSC SALVATION ARMY SANDRA L SKILES SCHWAAB SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SETCOM SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE 47,338.71 942.65 31,694.57 160.00 181.13 5,000.00 575.00 351 .72 48.90 25,266.90 201.00 139.50 81.95 1,000.00 80.00 2,110.61 795.00 34.60 1,000.00 437.00 52.66 738.50 24.38 180.00 974.12 159.98 1,250.86 14.77 8.22 239.90 5,000.00 750.00 135.20 1,014.67 388.00 299.00 644.59 5,240.23 419.26 33.99 5,547.79 270.00 48.89 40.00 400.00 3,993.02 25.50 9,596.87 106.78 25.00 31.60 25.00 78.13 2,000.00 30.00 3,000.00 75.90 30.55 68.27 63.82 5 12-09-03 SHEAFFER KAREN SHERIDAN FOUR POINT SINTON DAIRY COMPANY SIRCHIE FINGERPRINT SKI COOPER SKILLPATH SEMINAR SMITH EDWARD SNOWHITE LINEN SOUTHERN ALUMINUM SPECIALTIES INCORPORATED SPIECKER HANLON & GORMLEY STEPHANIE GLENWRIGHT STEPHEN D FOSTER STEPHEN DALE WARREN STEPHEN ELZINGA STERICYCLE INC SUE MOTT SUMMIT LUMBER SUSPENSE FUND SYBIL SETTERLlND SYDNEY SUMMERS T ASER INTERNATIONAL TERENCE J QUINN ATTY AT L THE BASKET PROVIDERS THE FIREPLACE COMPANY THE MIRAGE THOMAS F FARRELL TOWN OF BASALT TRANSCOR AMERICA INC TRANSERV SYSTEMS TRANSOFT SOLUTIONS, INC. UNIFORM KINGDOM UNITED PARCEL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV UNITED STATES TREASURY UNIV COLORADO AT BOULDER US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY VAIL BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE VAIL ELECTRONICS VAIL LOCK AND KEY VAIL RESORTS INC VAIL VALLEY EMERGENCY VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTR VAILNET INC VALLEY SIGNS VALLEY VIEW HOSPITAL VERIZON WIRELESS, WANDA ABBEY WASTE MANAGEMENT WELLS FARGO WENDY BOGNER WESTERN EAGLE COUNTY WESTERN SLOPE BAR WIDEBAND COMMUNICATIONS WILDLAND FIREFIGHTER MAG WIND RIVER TREES WINNING ATTITUDE WOLPOFF AND ABRAMSON WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS XEROX CORPORATION REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE 254.85 344.00 898.19 92.58 166.16 200.00 168.36 152.38 320.37 163.50 25.00 88.20 55.00 20.00 154.43 478.59 78.00 473.36 77,199.76 105.00 24.60 1,606.90 19.22 98.00 34.15 310.65 25.00 1,645.00 7,100.61 27.48 265.00 668.95 230.15 1,000.00 1,140.03 80.00 5,900.00 270.00 175.00 4.50 17,995.00 630.00 830.05 67.80 29.60 210.00 2,265.61 75.00 401.70 271,227.21 153.15 850.00 703.56 3,266.00 84.95 651.93 1,020.00 24.38 918.94 841.60 6 12-09-03 ZERO TO THREE SERVICE 114.00 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 629,831.15 1,614,638.24 ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND COLORADO L TAP SERVICE 40.00 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 36.55 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 37.25 EAGLE PHARMACY SERVICE 18.08 EAGLE VALLEY MEDICAL SERVICE 81.00 GMCO CORPORATION SERVICE 6,853.39 GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SUPPLIES 705.60 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 660.52 HIGGINS BRAD REIMBURSEMENT 651.36 HOL Y CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 431 .27 INTERWEST SAFETY SUPPL Y SUPPLIES 175.81 JP TRUCKING, INC. SERVICE 5,051.37 KINDER MORGAN INC SERVICE 86.92 LANDFILL FUND SERVICE 1,299.52 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 144,964.10 NAPA AUTO PARTS-CARBONDLE SUPPLIES 16.91 NOBLE WELDING SERVICE 750.00 RAGAN COMMUNICATIONS INC SERVICE 51.14 RICK ETTLES REIMBURSEMENT 68.94 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 5,642.73 VALLEY LUMBER SUPPLIES 37.25 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPO 24,693.74 WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. SERVICE 1,000.00 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 17.95 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 58,702.33 252,073.73 SOCIAL SERVICES FUND BERTHA CAMPBELL SERVICE 500.00 CATHERINE CRAIG REIMBURSEMENT 156.69 CATHERINE ZAKOJAN, M.A. SERVICE 480.00 CHRIS MORTON SERVICE 120.00 CMPN PREVENT TEEN PREG SERVICE 59.90 COLORADO WEST MENTAL HL TH SERVICE 8,923.79 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 67.31 DARLENE T HOFFMAN SERVICE 240.00 EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF SERVICE 77.24 EC SOCIAL SERVICES SERVICE 20.00 FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY REIMBURSEMENT 404.83 FORINASH KATHLEEN REIMBURSEMENT 408.45 GRAINGER INCORPORATED SUPPLIES 1,260.00 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 734.44 HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS SUPPLIES 76.05 JENNIFER WORCESTER REIMBURSEMENT 174.92 JERRI OLSON REIMBURSEMENT 219.38 JOSE BANUELOS SERVICE 1,440.00 KAREN LAJOY SMITH MA LPC SERVICE 360.00 KATHY REED REIMBURSEMENT 160.28 LANDS END INCORPORATED INCENTIVE 854.42 7 12-09-03 LYONS KATHLEEN REIMBURSEMENT 233.79 MARGERY STONE REIMBURSEMENT 13.11 MESA COUNTY SHERIFF SERVICE 35.00 MICHAEL CLAUSSNER SERVICE 600.00 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 208.25 NAEYC SERVICE 75.00 NICOLE KELSAY REIMBURSEMENT 95.54 PITNEY BOWES INCORPORATED SUPPLIES 6.72 QUILL CORPORATION SUPPLIES 88.82 RENEE RICHARDS REIMBURSEMENT 95.25 RITA WOODS REIMBURSEMENT 26.49 SAMARITAN CNTR OF ROCKIES SERVICE 240.00 STATE FORMS CENTER SERVICE 140.12 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 6,500.06 VANASK WAREHOUSE COMPANY SERVICE 252.46 VERIZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 299.45 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 17,209.02 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 37,318.87 80,175.65 WRAP FUND PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING SERVICE 200.00 TERRI ALLENDER SERVICE 76.95 WALMART AVON SERVICE 300.00 576.95 RETIREMENT FUND SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 65,506.99 65,506.99 INSURANCE RESERVE FUND COUNTY TECHNICAL SERVICES SERVICE 10,581.12 10,581.12 OFFSITE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG SERVICE 22,443.82 22,443.82 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND AMERICINN LODGE & SUITES SERVICE 402.00 ARAPAHOE ROOFING INC SERVICE 45,516.60 BAND B EXCAVATING SERVICE 178,664.29 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 34.00 ELAM CONSTRUCTION INCORPO SERVICE 90,933.05 GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SUPPLIES 1,288.91 HEPWORTH PAWLAK GEOTECHNI SERVICE 2,835.63 JOHNSON KUNKEL & ASSOC SERVICE 2,507.15 LAFARGE CORPORATION SERVICE 276.43 LORIS & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE 6,857.16 8 12-09-03 MARTIN/MARTIN CONSULTING PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING IN PEAK LAND SURVEYING INC PETER BERGH ROARING FORK FENCING SIGNATURE SIGNS SOFnNARESPECTRUM STEVENS HOME CARE INC VOGELMAN WEST ASSOCIATES WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES 2,492.00 8,230.00 5,702.50 1,875.00 3,931.00 101.20 112,491.78 12,461.13 3,085.00 8,012.94 155.64 487,853.41 SALES TAX E.V. TRANSP. A1 AUTO ELECTRIC COMPANY ABARTA MEDIA ALL YSON SCHWARTZ AT & TWIRELESS SERVICES B & H SPORTS BRODY CHEMICAL CCG SYSTEMS CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING COLLETTS COLORADO MOTOR PARTS COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLUMBINE STORAGE CENTER COPY PLUS CORPORATE EXPRESS CRESTLlNE CO. INC CUMMINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN DDI EQUIPMENT DEEP ROCK WEST DESIGN GLASS INCORPORATED DOCTORS ON CALL DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING EAGLEBEND HOUSING EPS DESIGN AND PRINT FEDERAL EXPRESS FIREBUSTER SOLUTIONS G & K SERVICES GAY JOHNSONS INC GENERAL ELECTRIC GEORGE KUERSTEN GILLIG CORPORATION GLENWOOD MEDICAL ASSOC GLENWOOD RADIATOR REPAIR GUSTY KANAKIS HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC IMPACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS JAY MAX SALES KELLEY WILLIAMS KINDER MORGAN INC KINETICO WATER PROS LANDS END INCORPORATED SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 1,605.31 1,320.00 48.90 524.23 274.68 619.30 1,400.00 911.64 1,078.51 559.75 350.00 1,873.75 96.00 232.49 3,439.26 2,634.52 2,827.07 35.80 2,160.00 455.00 7,109.94 32,716.25 3.29 400.00 5,125.00 207.19 21.05 358.35 641.18 2,933.04 565.24 16.61 1,762.82 908.00 45.00 79.32 1,218.00 1,510.23 5.00 205.84 27.30 304.38 35.00 337.97 9 12-09-03 LAWSON PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 420.74 LIGHTS ON BROADWAY SUPPLIES 124.52 MAIN AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 96.24 MEDICAL CENTER OF EAGLE SERVICE 202.80 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 4,628.00 MYRON CORPORATION SERVICE 218.42 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL SERVICE 103.78 QWEST SERVICE 387.33 RICHS UPHOLSTERY SERVICE 89.87 RON E BECK SERVICE 3,400.00 SAFETY KLEEN (WHICITA) SERVICE 135.82 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF THE REIMBURSEMENT 64.56 SERCK SERVICES INC SUPPLIES 2,185.91 STEWART & STEVENSON POWER SUPPLIES 257.93 STEW ART AND STEVENSON SUPPLIES 2,090.00 SUMMIT LUMBER SUPPLIES 315.16 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 10,403.46 UNITED STATES WELDING SERVICE 27.54 VAIL RESORTS INC SERVICE 150.00 VERIZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 37.00 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 49,467.86 WHITEALLS ALPINE SUPPLIES 233.80 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 722.38 XCELENERGY SERVICE 313.14 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 229.83 ZEHREN & ASSOCIATES SERVICE 107.40 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 115,055.92 270,451.62 SALES TAX E.V. TRAILS ALPINE ENGINEERING SERVICE 27,470.66 APPRAISAL OFFICE ASPEN L T SERVICE 1,200.00 BEAUTY BEYOND BELIEF SERVICE 182.10 FEDERAL EXPRESS SERVICE 24.85 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 5.36 HIGH COUNTRY SHIRTWORKS SERVICE 189.00 NEXGEN CONSTRUCTORS SERVICE 229,694.30 NORMAN R HELWIG PC SERVICE 117.00 QUILL CORPORATION SUPPLIES 136.40 SUMMIT LUMBER SUPPLIES 10.76 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 138.14 TOWN OF EAGLE SERVICE 20,000.00 TOWN OF VAIL SERVICE 38,285.78 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPO 855.94 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 31.50 YEH & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE 12,648.30 330,990.09 AIRPORT FUND AMERICAN ASSOC AIRPORT SERVICE 420.00 AMERICAN AVIONICS INC SERVICE 57.00 APEX SECURITY SERVICE 5,243.77 BALCOMB AND GREEN SERVICE 2,093.11 BRIAN SCHOFIELD REIMBURSEMENT 304.00 CHIEF SUPPLY SUPPLIES 121.00 10 12-09-03 CO DEPT TRANSPORTATION SERVICE 9,750.00 COLORADO MOTOR PARTS SUPPLIES 180.00 COLUMBINE MARKET SUPPLIES 7.79 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 90.57 CRYOTECH DEICING TECH SERVICE 26,866.90 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 274.41 DEERY AMERICAN CORP SERVICE 4,122.00 DOCTORS ON CALL SERVICE 110.00 DRAGONS BOOT & SHOE SERVICE 118.96 EAGLE COUNTY GOVERNMENT SERVICE 1,000.00 EK EKCESSORIES SERVICE 140.74 ENSEMBLE CARE & SERVICE 278.00 FLORIDA MICRO SERVICE 517.00 GRAINGER INCORPORATED SERVICE 233.33 GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SERVICE 72.52 GYPSUM TOWN OF SERVICE 431.05 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 467.37 HILL & COMPANY SERVICE 2,380.75 HOL Y CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 2,716.13 IDVILLE SERVICE 1,406.90 IMAGINIT EMBROIDERY SERVICE 489.32 JAY MAX SALES SUPPLIES 38.80 JIM JACKSON REIMBURSEMENT 580.71 KINDER MORGAN INC SERVICE 389.23 LAFARGE CORPORATION SERVICE 202.19 LANDS END INCORPORATED SERVICE 1,619.18 MCI WORLDCOM SERVICE 132.18 MIDWEST AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE 51,516.00 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 820.80 SASR SERVICE 150.00 SERVICEMASTER CLEAN SERVICE 1,161.49 SUMMIT LUMBER SUPPLIES 73.94 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 1,835.27 UPBEAT INCORPORATED SERVICE 136.97 URS CORPORATION SERVICE 21.52 VAIL ELECTRONICS SERVICE 1,220.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 684.71 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 10,287.55 WESTERN IMPLEMENTS SERVICE 765.05 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS SERVICE 494.80 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 105.00 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 22,989.21 155,117.22 DEBT SERVICE FUND US BANK TRUST NA SERVICE 784,250.00 784,250.00 JMC-COP DEBT SERVICE FUND JMC CONSTRUCTION FUND SERVICE 65,625.10 US BANK TRUST NA SERVICE 877,841.15 943,466.25 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL FUND 11 12-09-03 ALL METALS SERVICE 8,109.00 NAPA AUTO PARTS - VAIL SERVICE 73.85 TTCI SERVICE 1,295.00 9,477.85 LANDFILL FUND ACZLABORATORYINC SERVICE 2,406.00 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 74.50 DOWN V ALLEY SEPTIC SERVICE 360.00 EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL SERVICE 38.58 GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SERVICE 5.55 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 356.14 KRW CONSUL TING INC SERVICE 3,137.05 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 41,160.77 ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMEN SERVICE 66,805.39 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 1,589.63 SW ANA SERVICE 133.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 125.00 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPO 6,098.29 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 13.99 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 15,483.68 137,787.57 MOTOR POOL FUND AL-JON INC SERVICE 2,995.85 BERTHOD MOTORS SERVICE 123.80 BRIAN MEIKLE REIMBURSEMENT 26.90 BRODY CHEMICAL SUPPLIES 65.18 CCG SYSTEMS SERVICE 3,325.00 CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING SUPPLIES 687.34 CENTURY EQUIPMENT COMPANY SUPPLIES 393.09 COLBY RUSSELL REIMBURSEMENT 7.51 COLLETTS SUPPLIES 37,446.32 COLORADO AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 241.75 COLORADO COUNTIES INC SERVICE 325.00 COLORADO MOTOR PARTS SUPPLIES 1,833.64 COpy PLUS SUPPLIES 113.19 CRAIG POFF REIMBURSEMENT 9.00 DAN BYRD ENTERPRISES INC SERVICE 246.25 EAGLE AMOCO SERVICE 33.00 EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING SERVICE 145.00 EATON SALES & SERVICE SERVICE 816.31 EDDIE VELASQUES REIMBURSEMENT 18.04 EMED COMPANY INC SERVICE 26.33 FABIAN LOPEZ REIMBURSEMENT 16.73 FORCE AMERICA SERVICE 88.73 G & K SERVICES SUPPLIES 326.67 GAY JOHN SONS INC SERVICE 1 ,484.44 GIL GILBERT REIMBURSEMENT 70.43 GOODYEAR WHOLESALE TIRE SUPPLIES 1,584.85 HANSON EQUIPMENT SERVICE 1,849.76 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 316.36 HELEN MIGCHELBRINK REIMBURSEMENT 27.59 HENSLEY BATTERY SERVICE 198.85 12 12-09-03 HOL Y CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 1,115.02 HONNEN EQUIPMENT SERVICE 125.22 INTERMOUNTAIN SWEEPER SERVICE 444.00 JIM PARIS TIRE COMPANY SERVICE 2,789.50 KINDER MORGAN INC SERVICE 224.72 LAWSON PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 379.87 M & M AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 12.68 MACDONALD EQUIPMENT CO SUPPLIES 1,201.63 MAIN AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 6.17 MIKE ALDRICH REIMBURSEMENT 34.90 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 6,088.72 NOVUS AUTOGLASS SERVICE 1,111.00 POWER MOTIVE SERVICE 326.20 REY MOTORS INCORPORATED SUPPLIES 135.44 RHONDA PARKER REIMBURSEMENT 49.01 SAFETY KLEEN (WHICITA) SERVICE 125.94 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF THE REIMBURSEMENT 64.62 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 1,829.61 TERRI VROMAN REIMBURSEMENT 45.30 TONY PADILLA REIMBURSEMENT 24.29 TRANSWEST TRUCKS INC SUPPLIES 115.72 TWO RIVERS CHEVROLET SUPPLIES 35.82 UNITED STATES WELDING SERVICE 274.91 WAGNER EQUIPMENT COMPANY SERVICE 282.94 WEAR PARTS EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES 82.11 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPO 8,828.97 WESTERN IMPLEMENTS SERVICE 85.99 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 23.37 PAYROLL FOR NOVEMBER PAYROLL 23 & 24 24,008.27 104,714.85 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND DENMAN GREY AND COMPANY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 1,025.00 MOUNTAIN STATES ADMIN. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 35,629.63 PROVIDENT LIFE/ACCIDENT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 4,122.65 UNITED STATES LIFE INS EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 4,616.00 45,393.28 ENHANCED E911 FUND JOHNSON KUNKEL & ASSOC SERVICE 913.75 LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES SERVICE 49.75 QWEST SERVICE 15,016.98 15,980.48 5,331,479.12 Executive Session Chairman Gallagher stated the first matter before the Board was an Executive Session. Commissioner Stone moved the Board adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions and acquisition of property rights including Bair Ranch, contract issues with URS, legal advice concerning guidelines and contract negotiations relating 13 12-09-03 to project Financing of Miller Ranch and ASW Realty Partners/Berry Creek, LLC; and for the purpose of receiving legal advice and discussing negotiations concerning water law matters to include Bolts Lake, Eagle Park Reservoir Company Shares and the Cahtcart water case all of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to 24-6-402(a)(b) and (e) CRS. Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi was not present during the Executive Session. Commissioner Stone moved to adjourn from the Executive Session and reconvene into the regular meeting. Chairman Gallagher seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners the vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Chairman Gallagher stated the next matter before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of December 8, 2003, subject to review by the County Administrator B. Approval of Payroll for December 11, 2003, subject to review by the County Administrator C. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle Board of County Commissioners Meeting for November 18, 2003 D. Residential Lease Agreement for 30265 Colorado River Road between Eagle County and Kelsy McCoy E. Change Order #1 for the Avon to Dowd Junction Trail, Phase I Construction Agreement F. Intergovernmental Agreement between Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and Eagle County for I-70/Vail Pass Sand Control Project G. Resolution 2003-149, Authorizing and/or ratifying the signature of the LEAF Contract by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners for Funding a LEAF Project for the enforcement oflaws pertaining to driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs H. Encroachment Easement Agreement between Eagle County and Joseph Ferrara I. Resolution 2003-150, concerning Ratification of appointments to the Emergency Telephone Service Authority Board J. Resolution 2003-151, for Order of Cancellation of Certain Uncollectible Taxes K. Hertz Rent A Car Lease Agreement. Chairman Gallagher asked the County Attorney if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Diane Mauriello, County Attorney, stated there are no revisions or modifications to today's Consent Agenda. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Menconi 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 2003-152, To Approve a Permit to Construct Major Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment Systems and for the Efficient Utilization of a Municipal Water Project in Order to Serve the McCoy Springs Planned Unit Development (Eagle County File No. 1041-49). The Board considered the Applicant's request on November 18t\ 2003 14 12-09-03 Commissioner Stone moved to approve Resolution 2003-152, to approve a permit to construction major extensions of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems and for the efficient utilization of a municipal water project in order to serve the McCoy Springs PUD, file number 1041-49. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2003-153, Concerning an Additional Appointment To the Citizens' Open Space Advisory Committee. This resolution would appoint Mr. Ramon Montoya, nominated to represent the Town of Red Cliff, to the Committee. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2003-153, concerning the additional appointment to the Citizens Open Space Advisory Committee. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2003-154, New Fee Schedule for Land Use Applications Keith Montag, Director of Community Development, presented Resolution 2003-154, to Adopt a New Fee Schedule for Land Use Applications Pursuant to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. He stated these fees have not been raised for ten years. He stated they would like to review the fees every year in the future. He stated the Resolution proposes to adjust or increase the various planning file fees approximately 35%. In dollar amount they anticipate a $19,000.00 increase in the total fees collected. He stated there is a matrix of the costs incurred as the files are processed. In general terms these proposed fees would cover the cost of processing applications. Commissioner Stone asked if it is over, under or about right. Mr. Montag stated they are under a little bit under yet. There are certain applications such as exemptions and limited review files where individuals are encouraged to go through those processes and the fees are set low. To recover those costs they would have to raise them approximately $1,000.00. Chairman Gallagher asked about keeping up with this in the future. Mr. Montag stated he believes the fees should be looked at every year. Commissioner Stone moved to approve Resolution 2003-154, to Adopt a New Fee Schedule for Land Use Applications Pursuant to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Final Settlement, Elam Construction Diane Mauriello presented final settlement for Agreement for Overlay Project between Eagle Board of County Commissioners and Elam Construction, Inc. for Overlay and Shoulder Gravel on Frying Pan River Road, Valley Road and Squaw Creek Road. She stated this matter was published and no claims have been received. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve final settlement for Overlay Project between Eagle Board of County Commissioners and Elam Construction, Inc. for Overlay and Shoulder Gravel on Frying Pan River Road, Valley Road and Squaw Creek Road. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Food Stamp Quality Assurance Recognition for Eagle County Kathleen Forinash, Health & Human Services Director, stated the next matter before the Board was the Food Stamp Quality Assurance Recognition for Eagle County. She stated those in attendance have been recognized for an error free first nine months of 2003 in its food stamp program. They have 108 households that involve 272 individuals who receive food stamps on a regular basis. She stated the value for the last fiscal year was $236,000.00. Last month they issued approximately $28,000.00 in food stamp benefits. She introduced Kathy Lyons, who introduced Mary Jane Gonzales, team leader, 15 12-09-03 Craig Smith, Income Maintenance Technician, Michelle Arana, Family and Children Medicaid, Guadalupe Ontiveros, working on all programs and Virginia Avila, Food Stamp program and Medicaid Program for the El J ebel area. Chairman Gallagher stated it is pretty amazing to be recognized for excellence. He thinks it is fantastic. Commissioner Menconi thanked everyone for all their hard work. Commissioner Stone thanked everyone for coming in and for doing everything that they do. Commissioner Stone moved the Board commends the Eagle County Public Assistance Staff for their quality service in the Food Stamp Program in 2003. The Board notes that the Eagle County Program has been error free for the first nine months of fiscal year 2003 and that the program assists over 100 households with nearly 300 individuals, with an annual issuance of$236,635.00. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Public Hearing - Resolution 2003-155. Set Mill Levy Resolution 2003-156, Adopting the 2004 Budget Mike Roeper, Director of Finance, stated the next matter before the Board was adoption of the 2004 County Budget and setting the Mill Levies for 2004. He stated the mill levy has increased to 8.499 mills which includes the 1.5 mills approved by the voters last year for the open space. He stated they are based on an assessed valuation from the Assessor of$1,987,096,880.00. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Stone stated the mill levy really did not increase but now has 1.5 mills for the open space. The mill levy can only be increased by a vote of the people. Jack Ingstad, County Administrator, stated they have temporarily reduced the mill levies in the past and are keeping the option open to raise the mill levy back up at a later date if needed. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2003-155, setting the mill levy at 8.499 mills for 2004. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Mr. Roeper presented Resolution 2003-156 adopting of the 2004 budget. The total amount of all funds of$79,518,998.00. He highlighted portions of the budget for the Board as follows. He stated the General Fund is set at $27,196,866.00. Mr. Ingstad stated this budget does reduce staffby 5 employees. The proposed budget is $10.3 million dollars less in spending than they believe this year will end. That is related to a number of factors. They are a little ahead in matching revenues. They see an Airport runway coming in the next few years that will cost $20 million. If they look at the ending match, they are a couple of million dollars ahead ofthe game. He stated there was a $1,980,000 addition in the revenue stream this year because of fund transfers. It is a one time transfer. The Board gave direction to totally fund the health insurance benefits. Employee merit increases are fully funded. The $100.00 employee incentive also remains in the budget along with the County picnic. The management retreat has been removed. Capital budget anticipates $3.8 million in spending. Those projects are the fire suppression vehicle for Sheriff, a transfer of monies to the trails fund for trails from Avon to Dowd Junction, the Berry Creek pond is funded at $600,000. He stated he had questions on the integrated county wide computer dispatch system of $235,000 and stated he heard that may be put on hold. Cooley Mesa Road design costs of $275,000 go back into the budget. The Basalt Road & Bridge Shop gets designed next year for $125,000, the Water Shed Plan at Black Gore Creek gets funded at $106,000, Information Technologies gets upgraded technology, the Sheriffs mobile command gets funded because of a grant, County building improvements get funded and the Sheriff s mobile in-car computer system gets funded. He asked for guidance from the Board on the County wide dispatch system. Chairman Gallagher stated he would be able to give better guidance after a meeting he has scheduled this week. 16 12-09-03 Commissioner Stone stated when this was discussed, they never could figure out the entire plan. Records management was a part of it. Chairman Gallagher stated there was also an integrated records sharing program Commissioner Menconi stated he is in support ofthis project. He stated many ofthe capital proj ects they are looking at is what is going to come up in the near future. Mr. Ingstad stated Mr. Roeper has listed a number of items in the Resolution, and would like to keep the East Vail repeater site, Weed and Pest pesticide containment, pedestrian improvements, Fairgrounds west access, Basalt Recycle Center, Eagle River Diversion project, road initiatives, West Vail Fire Station, Edwards Spur Road construction materials and recycle station at the Landfill. He stated not all of which will be funded. He spoke to the summer flight program. He stated it is his intent to move monies from this year to next year. They have hired Kent Meyers as a consultant again. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Stone stated there were a couple of other major items they had spoken about. Mr. Ingstad stated one was daycare which has $1 million allocated for it. Whatever the dollar amount that is needed this year will be used and the rest released unless they are instructed to hold over the remainder of the monies. Commissioner Stone asked about records management system. Mr. Roeper stated it was a separate issue. Chairman Gallagher stated the Clerk's Office and Sheriffs Office both have been requesting records management Mr. Ingstad stated he gave the Clerk & Recorder preliminary approval with the initiative with records management and storage. He stated Ms. Simonton asked for approval and he tentatively gave approval on Board direction that this problem needs to be solved. He stated they are being more positive with the revenue projections next year than they have been in the past. He stated collections were down about 1'2 percent last September. He stated that concerns him being that Home Depot and Super Wal-Mart have opened. Avon is showing a huge increase in sales tax revenue from the County collection standpoint but they are not seeing that County wide. Those box businesses may be pulling monies away from the smaller businesses. It is too early to tell. The airport travel looks very good. They are getting other indicators that things look good. He stated he spoke to the Vail Daily concerning financial conditions and they have seen an increase from the community in advertising. Commissioner Stone stated he would like to place special attention to the health benefits. He stated the cost to the County went up 46% last year and the employees did not have to bear any of those costs. They must figure out how to keep people healthy and save money. The Commissioners do have a commitment to the employee. The Healthcare Task Force is something that will help. Mr. Roeper asked if the Board wants to deduct the $235,000.00 from the budget. Mr. Ingstad stated those funds will not be released until the Board approves the expenditure. Commissioner Stone moved to approve Resolution 2003-156 Adopting the budget and making appropriations for fiscal year 2004. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Resolution 2003-157, Regional Mortgage Credit Certificate Program Resolution 2003-158, Mortgage Credit Certificate Election David Carter, Housing, presented Resolution 2003-157, authorizing participation in a Regional Mortgage Credit Certificate Program and delegating authority to issue such certificates to Eagle County. He explained the program to the Board. He stated the State has unexpected surplus and have invited this region to apply for those funds. He stated the Board will recall that Eagle County has had three Mortgage Certificates in the past. They currently have some funds left. Qualified home buyers are allowed to take a 20% credit towards their federal taxes. This then frees up monies to make their mortgage payment. He stated over the years they have put together a total of $80,000,000.00. 17 12-09-03 Chairman Gallagher stated it is amazing the State can find $20 million dollars to apply to this program. Mr. Ingstad asked if the other Counties do not use their funds that money could be assigned to Eagle County. Mr. Carter stated that is tentatively correct. He stated Garfield and Summit County approved the Intergovernmental Agreement. He stated he also understood that Grand County approved the Agreement this morning. Mr. Ingstad asked if the other Counties do not use their full allocation could those be allocated to the rest of the Counties. Mr. Carter stated that was correct. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve Resolution 2003-157, authorizing participation in a Regional Mortgage Credit Certificate Program and delegating authority to issue such certificates to Eagle County. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved to approve Resolution 2003-158, authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado to file a Mortgage Credit Certificate Election for and on behalf of Itself and Certain Other Participating Counties in an Amount not to exceed $20,000,000.00 with the Internal Revenue Service; Authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado to Certify the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Local Affairs that Eagle County has implemented a Regional Qualified Mortgage Credit Certification Program and Develop Program Guidelines Relating thereto; Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of Certain Related Documents and Certificates; Ratifying Certain Action heretofore taken; and Repealing Action heretofore taken in conflict herewith. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Abatement Hearings Jon Harrison, Appraisal Coordinator, presented a petition for abatement for Colorado Mountain News Media, Schedule No. P026637. He stated due to an error made by the taxpayer in reporting personal property for the year 2002, items were reported by the taxpayer and also the leasing company causing a double assessment. Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute 39-10-104.5, taxes illegally or erroneously levied shall be refunded. The Assessor stated the original assessed value was $1,833,640.00 with a tax amount of$108,789.88, with an abatement of$I,098,ll0 and a tax amount of$65,150.88, leaving a balance of$735,530 assessed value with a tax amount of$43,639.00. Jon Harrison presented a petition for abatement for Australian Capital Equity USA, Schedule No. R046453. He stated review ofthe property and sales in the area revealed the property was over valued. Pursuant to CRS 30-10-114, this abatement should be granted for overvaluation. The original assessed value was $598,430 with a tax amount of$41,910.44, with an abatement of$193,190 and a tax amount of$13,529.86, leaving a balance of$405,240 with a tax amount of$28,380.58. Jon Harrison presented a petition for abatement for Australian Capital Equity USA, Schedule No. R046454. He stated review of the property and sales in the area revealed this property was over valued. Pursuant to CRS 39-10-114 this abatement should be granted for overvaluation. The original assessed value was $578,760 with a tax amount of$40,532.88, with an abatement of$212,950 assessed value and a tax amount of$14,913.74, leaving a balance of$365,810 with a tax amount of$25,619.14. Jon Harrison presented a petition of abatement for Larry and Sandra Britt, schedule number R045273. He stated an interior inspection of the property found that the square footage was incorrectly calculated. Corrections were made to the record resulting in a lower value. The new value can be supported by comparable sales. Pursuant to CRS 39-10-114, this abatement should be approved in part due to erroneous valuation for assessment. For 2002, the original assessed value was $29,790 with a tax amount of$3,015.00, with an abatement of$250.00 and a tax amount of$25.32, leaving a balance of 18 12-09-03 $29,540.00 with a tax amount of$2,989.68. For 2001, the original assessed value was $29,790 with a tax amount of$2,816.20, with an abatement of$250.00 with a tax amount of$23.64, leaving a balance of$29,540.00 with a tax amount of$2,792.56. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Stone moved to approve petitions for abatement for Colorado Mountain News Media, schedule No. P026637, Australian Capital Equity USA, schedule No. R046453, Australian Capital Equity USA, schedule No. R046454 and Larry and Sandra Britt, schedule number R045273 as recommended by the Assessor. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Jon Harrison presented a petition for abatement for San Juan Investment Properties, LLC, schedule number R052015. He stated although the appraisal date was in June 30, 2000, the assessed value is based on the condition of the property as of January 1. The parent parcel was split during 2001. The value placed on the subject property was the value that was prorated from the parent to the sibling parcels per statute. A subdivider discount was not applicable because over 80% of the subdivision was sold as of the assessment. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Menconi moved to deny schedule number R052015, San Juan Investment Properties LLC, as recommended by the Assessor. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDF-00081 Arrowhead at Vail Filing 27 Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Planner, presented file number PDF-00081, Arrowhead at Vail, Filing 27. She stated the intent of this plat is to: subdivide Parcel A-I into one single family lot and common area; subdivide Parcel C-2 into four single family lots and four common areas; create a 15 foot drainage easement within Lot 13 and 14; subdivide Parcel D-l into two single family lots and one common area; adjust the lot line between Lot 13 and Tract E; create an access and utility easement. Pursuant to Section 5-280.B.5.b (3), of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: (1) This final plat DOES conform to the approved Preliminary Plan for subdivision. (2) Required improvements ARE adequate. (3) Areas dedicated for public use and easements ARE acceptable and; Pursuant to Sections 5-280.B.3.e. of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: (1) Consistent with the Master plan. The proposed subdivision IS consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the Future Land Use Map of the Master Plan. (2) Consistent with Land Use Regulations. The proposed subdivision DOES comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4 Site Development Standards. (3) Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. The proposed subdivision IS located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. The intent of th is plat is to further subdivide a previously subdivided portion of Arrowhead. a. Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions ARE consistent with the utility's service plan or shall be required prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions ARE consistent with the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan. b. Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines ARE sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption which would occur if under-sized lines had to be upgraded. 19 12-09-03 c. Coordinate Utility Extensions. Utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. This area IS presently served by the Arrowhead Metropolitan District, as well as other utilities. d. Suitability for Development. The property proposed to be subdivided IS suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural, or human-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, as well as existing and probable future public improvements to the area. e. Compatible with Surrounding Uses. The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and DOES NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. This plat is the third plat for Arrowhead at Vail Filing 27. Filing 27 was originally platted April 2001. All development for the current plat, PDF-00078, was contemplated previously on plats PDF-00057, PDF-00073, as well as in the Arrowhead PUD Guide. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve File No. PDF-00081 incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the Plat. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDA-00046 Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Amendment Jena Skinner-Markowitz presented file number PDA-00046, Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Amendment. The applicant wishes to amend the Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Guide. The purpose of the amendment is as follows: To increase the amount of "Flexible Space" in Riverwalk, by decreasing the amount ofthe fixed Commercial Space floor area allotment (see attached Exhibit B). Flexible Space permits the developer to choose whether commercial, residential or fraction fee ownership uses are best suited for a particular location in the development, thereby better satisfying market demand. Floor area, building height and all previously approved permitted uses will remain the same; the developer must still comply with all applicable landscaping and parking requirements. At this time approximately 1,786 sq. ft. ofthe 28,000 currently allocated Flexible Space has been utilized for employee housing purposes and 17,499 has been utilized for free-market residential housing. In the event that all ofthe square footage being transferred from the 'Commercial' category to the 'Flexible Space' category is actually constructed as commercial space, there will still not be a net gain in the total amount of commercial square footage. To amend the square footages as written in Section IILB Land Use Table (see attached Exhibit B). Please note that the square footages are also to be amended in Section VIII Lot Coverage (of the PUD Guide) so that the total mix of square footage designations will be consistent throughout the PUD Guide. To remove the current Flexible Space bullet which reads, "4,000 sq ft (which may be devoted to commercial, Fractional Fee Estate, and/or residential space, and if commercial with a corresponding increase in employee housing spaces)." The development already includes 173 employee-housing spaces, which is 23 spaces more than the developer was originally required to provide. The re-introduction of the Gross Floor Area illustration (see attached Exhibit C), which was inadvertently left out ofthe last PUD Guide amendment recorded April 13, 2000. The chronology of the application is as follows and as shown on staff report: 1992- Riverwa1k PUD Sketch Plan was approved. 1993- Riverwalk PUD Preliminary Plan and Zone Change was approved. 1994-2000- Several PUD Amendments and PUD Final Plats were approved (Riverwalk has been platted in phases). 2003- Application for the current PUD Amendment was made. 20 12-09-03 The Planning Commission had no issues with the proposed application. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this proposal. Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: Colorado Department of Transportation, dated October 9th, 2003 Access should be addressed by the US 6 Corridor Study dated 2003. Eagle County Housing Division, dated October 29th, 2003 They have no objection to changing the allocation of square feet for commercial and residential uses to "flexible" as long as the words, "... with a corresponding use (increase) in employee housing spaces. . ." remains. We recommend that these words be inserted as a condition of approval per Sections IlLB and VIlLA. In examining the original PUD, it appears that approximately 18% of the total square footage was dedicated to employee housing. It is our recommendation that the square footage dedicated to employee housing remain consistent with the original PUD. Additional Referrals were sent to the following, with no response: Eagle County Attorney, Environmental Health, Engineering, Sheriff and Assessor Homestead, River Pines and South Forty Homeowners Associations Applicable Fire and Metro Districts Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary plan for PUD: STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD. The Applicant has demonstrated that the areas that will be affected by this PUD Amendment are owned by Eagle II Developers; the Homeowners Association Board of Directors has also provided a letter of approval/support, on behalf of property owners other than Eagle II Developers. [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part of this PUD IS owned or controlled by one (1) person and/or entity which represent the homeowners ofRiverwalk STANDARD: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] - The uses that may be developed in the PUD shall be those uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural and Resource Zone Districts Use Schedule", or Table 3-320, "Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts Use Schedule, "for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. These amendments neither alter nor introduce any new uses; uses will remain the same as currently exist within the Riverwalk PUD. [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] The uses that may be developed in the POO ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in Table 3-300, "Residential, Agricultural 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.3j, Variations Authorized, provided variations shall leave adequate distance between 21 12-09-03 buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snowmelt between buildings. These amendments do not alter any of the dimensional limitations as currently exist within the Riverwalk PUD. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time ofthe application for PUD. STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loadinf! Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the PUD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met; or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parkim! and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard. Riverwalk is required to meet a set parking requirement as was previously approved with this development. This will not change with this amendment. [+] 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, Landscaping 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. Riverwalk is required to meet a set landscaping requirement as was previously approved with this development. This will not change with this amendment. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] It HAS previously been demonstrated that landscaping provided in the PUD can comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscaping and Illumination Standards. STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Ref!ulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Sif!ns Allowed in a Planned Unit Develovment (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. Riverwalk currently has a comprehensive sign plan which has been previously approved and accepted by Eagle County. New signage will be consistent with existing signage. [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] The sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE NOT as specified in Article 4, Division 3, fugn Regulations. However, the current the Cordillera PUD has a comprehensive sign plan, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that IS suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within 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 22 12-09-03 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. The Riverwalk PUD originally contemplated all existing and future development as part of past Preliminary Plan approvals. Any new development (buildings) will have to comply with existing development standards. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] The Applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for roads; the applicant HAS clearly demonstrated that the development proposed in the Preliminary Plan for PUD will be provided adequate facilities for potable water, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply and fire protection. In addition, the Applicant HAS demonstrated that the proposed PUD will be conveniently located in relation to schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvements standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-ol-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off-site. (c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. (d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots, units or buildings shall not be permitted. Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected with roads outside of the PUD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. (e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. The Riverwalk PUD originally contemplated all existing and future development as part of the original Preliminary Plan approval. Any new development will have to comply with existing development standards as delineated in the Riverwalk PUD, as amended. [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] 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. 23 12-09-03 ( 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. No new uses are proposed and the proposed amendments solely affect the interiors of the buildings; the height and bulk of the buildings will not change. As such, compatibility remains constant with the original approval. [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD IS compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The consideration of the relevant master plans during sketch plan review is on a broad conceptual level, i.e, how a proposal compares to basic planning principles. As a development proposal moves from sketch plan to preliminary plan review, its conformance or lack thereof to aspects of the master plans may not necessarily remain static. THE MASTER PLAN ANALYSES BELOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Environmental Open Affordable Community Quality Spacel Development Housing Transportation Services FLUM Recreation Conformance Commu X X X X X X nity Centere Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable FLUM - Community Center. The Future Land Use Map indicates that Riverwalk is designated as community center, which is consistent with much of the Edwards core. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Wildlife Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance X X X X X X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X Applicable Riverwalk is not located in a recognized unique landform area ofthe county, nor is it located in a natural hazard area. 24 12-09-03 EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Water Quantity Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Conformance X X X X X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable The Riverwalk PUD has an established stream setback standard, as the development borders the Eagle River to the north. This amendment does not alter these requirements; all new development must comply with the PUD. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN VISION STATEMENT: Housing for local residents is a major priority of Eagle County. There should be a wide variety of housing to fulfill the needs of all its residents, including families, senior citizens, and those who work here. Elements of Eagle County's vision for housing are: Housing is a community-wide issue. Housing should be located in close proximity to existing community centers, as defined in the Eagle County master plan. Development of local residents housing should be encouraged on existing transit routes. Housing is primarily a private sector activity [but] without the active participation of government, there will be only limited success. It is important to preserve existing local residents housing. Persons who work in Eagle County should have adequate housing opportunities within the county for other infrastructure needs. 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. Riverwalk has already incorporated employee housing as part of the original approvals. With the Flexible Space alteration in Section IILB.Land Use Table, a potential increase in employee housing units available may be realized. In any event, the developer has currently exceeded their minimum employee-housing obligation. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. The proposed Special Use Permit CAN be shown to be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Master Plan and Master Plan FLUM, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Plan for PUD shall include a phasing plan for the development. If development of the PUD is proposed to occur in phases, then guarantees shall be provided for public improvements and amenities that are necessary and desirable for residents of the project, or that are of benefit to the entire County. Such public improvements shall be constructed with the first phase of the project, or, if this is not possible, then as early in the project as is reasonable. Not applicable and/or necessary with this proposal. [+] FINDING: Phasing Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) A phasing plan IS NOT necessary for this development at this time. 25 12-09-03 STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)]- The PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents of the PUD. In order to calculate the number of residents of the PUD, the number of proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two and sixty-three hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy each dwelling unit in Eagle County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan. (b) Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-ofways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. (c) Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas, riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, as defined in these Land Use Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (d) 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. (e) 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. (/) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association or nonprofit corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and cultural facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance, administration and operation of such land and any other land within the PUD not publicly owned, and secure adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be established prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD. The open space requirement previously approved with this development will not be affected by this amendment. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] The PUD HAS demonstrated that the proposed development will comply with the common recreation and open space standards with respect to: (a) Minimum area; (b) Improvements required; (c) Continuing use and maintenance; or (d) Organization. STANDARD: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] - The PUD shall consider the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards. Any Natural Resource Protection requirements previously approved with this development will not be affected by this amendment. [+] 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 26 12-09-03 referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards, have been considered. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of both a Sketch Plan, and Preliminary Plan for Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] B The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan. See previous discussion. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, and it IS consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] B The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Develovment Standards. Article 4, Site Development Standards [ +] Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) [+] Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) [+] Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) [+] Natural Resource Protection Standards (Division 4-4) [ + ] Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) B [ +] Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) B [+] Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) B [ +] Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) [ + ] Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) [ +] Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) [+] Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4-5) [ +] Improvement Standards (Division 4-6) [ +] Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) [ + ] Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) [ +] Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) [ +] Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) [ +] Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) [+ J Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) [+ J Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) [ + J Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) [+ J Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) No Impact fees are associated with this proposal, as this is a pre-existing subdivision. [+] FINDING WITH CONDITIONS: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5- 280.B.3.e (2)J The Applicant HAS fully demonstrated that the proposed subdivision complies with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts, and Article 4, Site Development Standards. STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] B 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. (1) 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 Eae:le County Road Capital Improvements Plan. 27 12-09-03 (2) 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. (3) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. This development has already been assessed for efficiency as part of the original approval for the Riverwalk at Edwards PUD. [+] 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)] B The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or human-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. This property is suitable for development; very little remains to be developed. [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] The property to be subdivided IS suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or human-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)] B 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. See previous discussion. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] The proposed subdivision IS compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and SHALL NOT adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. The proposed changes to the PUD guide will not result in any undue impacts and will not adversely alter the character of the area. Further traffic analyses may become necessary as additional uses are implemented. Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD. No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of section 24-67-104(1 )( e) Colorado Revised Statutes that; (1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development; (am 3/12/02) (2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment does not effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or the public interest; (3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. The application has been submitted by the developer, who is directly affiliated with the Homeowners Association for Riverwalk. It's the developer's contention that this amendment will create a more efficient PUD in terms of being able to respond with current development trends. Chairman Gallagher asked about the 28,000 square feet of flexible space as a percentage of the total space. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated the applicant has a maximum of 356,000 square feet. Ofthat amount 28,000 square feet is flexible space. Terrill Knight, Knight Planning, was present representing the applicant. He introduced Debbie Cristner, applicant. He stated they started this process 12 years ago. As they near the end they are 28 12-09-03 requesting this flexibility. This is not a subsequent change to the original approval, the square footage stays the same, employee units remain the same and parking remains the same. The diagram was based on Eagle County Regulations, but as this is a PUD it was put in the PUD Guide as slightly different. This site was previously a gravel pit. Building height was a concern. This was a way to deal with that and still meet the gravel pit holes. Yes someone could live in the shaded area if they would meet the requirements. Currently it is only parking and storage. This has been a key element in the Edwards community. It has a wide variety of purposes. This does give a little flexibility and still meets the code. The building has fulfilled its original commitment. This is an improvement and will allow them to fulfill their original commitment. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Menconi it appears they are trading out 50,000 square feet of commercial space and defining it as flex space. It then allows the ability to define it as, commercial, residential or fractional ownership. Mr. Knight stated that was correct. Debbie Cristner, Eagle II Developers, stated if they would have to use just commercial they would have to have taller buildings. She stated residential would be a better use. Commissioner Menconi stated it appears the market is saying residential would be a better use. Ms. Cristner stated that was correct. Commissioner Menconi asked about the diagram and if they are speaking to Tract A. Ms. Cristner stated the remaining portion of Track A is being divided into two more lots and two more buildings. Commissioner Menconi spoke to the changes stating it appears there are two lot coverage's. Ms. Cristner stated they are limiting it to two buildings but could put five buildings. Commissioner Menconi stated there are two changes being requested, each roughly 50,000 square feet. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated it is close to the same number just listed in two different spots. Commissioner Menconi spoke to the 173 employee housing units and questioned if that was for the entire development. Ms. Cristner answered yes and related there were to be 150 units and they ended up with 173. Commissioner Menconi asked about non employee housing units. Ms. Cristner stated there are currently 36. Commissioner Menconi asked how they define employee housing. Ms. Cristner stated there is a deed restriction on who can occupy the units. Mr. Knight explained it requires to be first offered to the employees of the development, then to employees of the County, and lastly to anyone. Commissioner Menconi asked about resale and it would first have to be offered to an employee of the Riverwalk area. Mr. Knight stated that is correct and it is monitored by the County Housing Department. Chairman Gallagher asked if there are restrictions for salary, resale, etc. Ms. Cristner answered no. Commissioner Menconi stated the applicants have related they will build one or several buildings that will have a total of380,000 square feet and the projection is that 210,000 square feet will be commercial and the remainder will be flex space. Ms. Cristner stated that was correct. Commissioner Menconi asked if they are looking at employee house. Ms. Cristner stated the remaining buildings would all have to be commercial. They would like to reallocate some of the commercial into residential. It will not be employee housing. Commissioner Menconi asked what will be built. Ms. Cristner stated they are planning loft units of 1,200 square feet to 1,600 square feet. Commissioner Menconi asked about the market. 29 12-09-03 Ms. Cristner stated these units will have higher end finishes. Chairman Gallagher asked if the PUD Amendment limits itself to Tract A or is it throughout the development. Mr. Knight stated the purpose of the amendment was to make a permanent change. When built, if someone wanted to make a substantial change they would have to come back to the Board. Commissioner Menconi asked ifthere are complaints about parking being a problem. Ms. Christener stated she believes this proposal will help the parking because it will be spread out. Offices use more parking but normally only in the daytime. Mr. Knight stated they have also heard the same comments. There has always been excess parking just not right in front of the buildings. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board of County Commissioners approve file PDA-00046, Riverwalk at Edwards PUD Amendment, incorporating all Staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. PDA-00047 Edwards Medical/Shaw Regional Cancer Center Joe Forinash, Planner, presented file number PDA-00047, Edwards Medical/Shaw Regional Cancer Center. He stated the Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions. The Planning Commission expressed appreciation of the value of the Shaw Regional Cancer Center and its contribution to a more diverse economy. Note: The conditions of approval recommended by the Planning Commission differ from those recommended by Staff. See "Recommended Motion" below. The Planning Commission deliberations are as follows: Operational hours ofthe Shaw Center. How sign will be illuminated; whether wattage can be varied. How much value the sign would be for people trying to find the Shaw Center; whether illuminated sign is best way to direct people to Shaw Center. Proposed timing of illumination of the sign; whether it is needed at all. Sign is tasteful and would not represent an unfavorable precedent. Mr. Forinash stated this was a PUD amendment that would amend the PUD Guide to allow an additional sign (60 feet long and 2.5 feet high) on the south facing side of the Shaw Regional Cancer Building. The chronology of the application is as shown on staff report and as follows: 1995 - PUD Preliminary Plan and zone change approved. 1996 - Final plat approved. 1997 - PUD amendment approved which revised the approved site design and phasing plan, and re-named the development from Eagle Valley Health Center to Edwards Medical Center. 1999 - PUD amendment approved which revised the approved site design, increased the maximum building height, added certain allowed uses, and revised the manner in which the employee housing requirement is to be satisfied. Referral responses are as follows and as shown on staff report: Eagle County Engineer No comments. Other Referrals have been made to Eagle County Attorney, Homestead HOA, Singletree HOA, South Forty HOA, Lake Creek Meadows HOA, Arrowhead HOA, Reserve HOA, Cordillera HOA, Cordillera Valley Club HOA, Northstar HOA, Eagle River MHP HOA, River Pines HOA, Brett Ranch HOA. Staff findings are as follows: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a PUD Preliminary Plan: 30 12-09-03 STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD. The Applicant has demonstrated that it is the sole owner of the site of the Edwards Medical Center PUD. [+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] The title to all land that is part ofthis 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.3j, Variations Authorized. It has previously been demonstrated when the PUD Preliminary Plan was approved and amended that the approved uses are either allowed uses, or appropriate variations have been granted. [+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)] All of the proposed additional uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as a special use or allowed as a limited use in the Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment. STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for P UD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snowmelt between buildings. No changes in dimensional limitations are proposed as part of this PUD Amendment. [+] FINDING: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] The dimensional limitations that shall apply to the PUD ARE those specified in the Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application for the PUD Amendment. STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Off-street parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the PUD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met; or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard. No changes in parking either required or provided are proposed. [+] FINDING: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] It HAS previously been found at the time that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved that adequate, safe and convenient parking and loading was being provided. STANDARD: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] - Landscaping provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 2, Landscapinf! and Illumination Standards. 31 12-09-03 . 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. No additional landscaping is necessary or proposed. [+] FINDING: Landscaping. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (5)] Landscaping provided in the approved PUD Preliminary Plan HAS been determined to have complied with the standards in effect at the time the Preliminary Plan was approved. STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Develovment (PUD), the applicant submits a comprehensive sign plan for the PUD that is determined to be suitable for the PUD and provides the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within the PUD. The Sign Regulations provide in Section 4-330.E.3., Signs Without Backing, that the "area of all signs without backing. . . shall be measured by determining the sum of the areas of each square, rectangle, triangle, portion of a circle or any combination thereof that creates the smallest single contiguous perimeter enclosing the extreme limits of each word, written representation (including any series of letters), emblems or figures of similar character." Based on this provision of the Sign Regulations and the information provided as part of this application, Staff calculates that the area of the sign is approximately 1 02.5 square feet. Pursuant to the Land Use Regulations, the maximum size of a business sign permitted on any street frontage is 64 square feet. The proposed sign is intended to "serve as directional and identification of the building location". Building identification and directional signs are currently provided north ofthe building along Beard Creek Road near the access to the site. While business signs facing Interstate 70 are permitted in other areas of unincorporated Eagle County (e.g., the Eagle-Vail commercial area), those signs are easily visible from 1-70. Visibility ofthe proposed sign from 1-70 would be limited due to the close proximity ofthe building to the 1-70 right-of-way and the height ofthe building above the 1-70 roadway. The sign would be visible primarily from across the valley in other parts of Edwards. Staff questions the utility of such a sign for directional purposes, and the desirability of an identification sign that exceeds the standards applicable in the traditional zone districts. An additional purpose of the proposed sign is to "recognize the extremely generous donation given by Mr. and Mrs. Shaw." While this purpose is laudable, alternative means of recognizing the donors' generosity are available. As proposed, the sign is not suitable for the PUD and does not provide the minimum sign area necessary to direct people to and within the PUD. Further, the precedent of allowing a particularly large, illuminated sign, visible throughout this part of the valley, may prove to be problematic to the extent that other enterprises might seek similar identification of their locations. However, a sign which meets the maximum size requirements for traditional zone districts might be appropriate. As a condition of approval, the size ofthe Major Identification Sign should be limited to 64 square feet, as provided in Section 4-340.C.I., Individual Business Signs. At the same time, illumination of a sign which is visible across such a large portion of the adj acent valley may not be appropriate. As a further condition of approval, illumination of the Major Identification Sign should be prohibited from 11:00 P.M. until the following day, unless for a special event. [+] FINDING: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e(6)] With the recommended conditions, the sign standards applicable to the PUD ARE as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations, and in the PUD Control Document currently in effect for Edwards Medical Center PUD. Further, the proposed amendment to the comprehensive sign plan for the 32 12-09-03 PUD IS suitable for the PUD and DOES provide the minimum sign area necessary to direct users to and within 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. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate facilities were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the adequacy of facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, or electrical supply, nor will it affect the location in relation to schools, and police protection. [+] FINDING: Adequate Facilities. (Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] It HAS previously been determined that adequate facilities were to be provided based on the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the provision of adequate facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, and 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, Imvrovements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off-site. (c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. (d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots, units or buildings shall not be permitted. Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected with roads outside of the PUD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. (e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removedfrom the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate improvements were to be made. No additional improvements are required. [+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] It HAS previously been determined that adequate improvements were to be provided based 33 12-09-03 on the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect improvements regarding: safe, efficient access; internal pathways; principal access points; and 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. The Preliminary Plan approved for the PUD was determined to be compatible with surrounding land uses. Given the size of the sign which exceeds that permitted in traditional zone districts and the visibility across this part ofthe Valley, the PUD amendment as proposed is not compatible with the character of the surrounding land uses. However, a sign which meets the maximum size requirements for traditional zone districts and for which the hours during it is illuminated would be compatible. As a condition of approval, the size of the Major Identification Sign should be limited to 64 square feet, as provided in Section 4-340.C.1., Individual Business Signs. As a further condition of approval, illumination of the Major Identification Sign should be prohibited from 11 :00 P.M. until the following day, unless for a special event. [+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] The development proposed for the PUD HAS been determined to be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. With the recommended condition, the proposed PUD Amendment WILL permit uses that ARE compatible with the character of surrounding land uses within the Planned Unit Development. STANDARD: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The PUD was previously determined to be consistent with the Master Plan including, but not limited to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The following analysis with respect to the Master Plan and the FLUM applies only to the changes proposed in the PUD Amendment, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. EAGLE COUNTY MASTER PLAN Environmental Open Space! Development Affordable Transportation Community FLUM Qualitv Recreation HousinQ Services Conformance Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not X X X X X X X Applicable The proposed PUD amendment does not adversely affect conformance ofthe PUD with the Eagle County Master Plan. EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Conformance Non- Mixed Not Conformance Conformance Applicable Land Use X 34 12-09-03 Housing x Transportation x Open Space x Potable Water and x Wastewater Services and Facilities x Environmental Quality x Economic Development x Recreation and Tourism X Historic Preservation x Implementation x Future Land Use Map x The proposed PUD amendment does not adversely affect conformance of the PUD with the Edwards Area Community Plan. It has previously been found that the PUD is in conformance with the Master Plan. The proposed PUD Amendment is not sufficiently different in character or magnitude to alter conformance with either the Master Plan or the Future Land Use Map. [+] FINDING: Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the consistency with the Master Plan. STANDARD: Phasing [Section 5-240.F.3.e (11)] - The Preliminary Plan for PUD shall include a phasing plan for the development. If development of the 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. Phasing is not required for this PUD Amendment. [+] FINDING: Phasing, Section 5-240.F.3.e (11) A phasing plan IS NOT required for this PUD Amendment STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of 25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every one thousand (1,000) persons who are residents of the PUD. In order to calculate the number of residents of the PUD, the number of proposed dwelling units shall be multiplied by two and sixty-three hundredths (2.63), which is the average number of persons that occupy each dwelling unit in Eagle County, as determined in the Eagle County Master Plan. i. Areas that Do Not Count as Open Space. Parking and loading areas, street right-of- ways, and areas with slopes greater than thirty (30) percent shall not count toward usable open space. 35 12-09-03 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. r d) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association or nonprofit corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and cultural facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance, administration and operation of such land and any other land within the PUD not publicly owned, and secure adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be established prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate common recreation and open space were to be provided. The proposed PUD Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the adequacy of the open space. [+] FINDING: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] It has previously been determined that the development DOES comply with the common recreation and open space standards applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect common recreation and open space within the PUD with respect to (a) minimum area; (b) improvements required; (c) continuing use and maintenance; or (d) organization. STANDARD: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] - The PUD shall consider the recommendations made by the applicable analysis documents, as well as the recommendations of referral agencies as specified in Article 4, Division 4, Natural Resource Protection Standards. At the time the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was determined that adequate protection of natural resources were to be provided. The proposed PUD amendment would not be detrimental to natural resources. [+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)] It HAS previously been determined that applicable analysis documents were adequately considered prior to approval of the Preliminary Plan for the PUD. The proposed PUD amendment WILL NOT adversely affect natural resources. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of a Sketch Plan for Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] B The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Master Plan and the FLUM of the Master Plan. See discussion above, Consistency with Master Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] [+] FINDING: Consistent with Master Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] 36 12-09-03 The PUD IS consistent with the Master Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the consistency with the Master Plan. STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] - The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts. and Article 4, Site Development Standards. Article 3, Zone Districts When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, findings were made to warrant the zone district change to PUD based on the applicable Land Use Regulations. The proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the provisions of Article 3, Zone Districts, ofthe current Land Use Regulations. Article 4, Site Development Standards Division 4-3 - Sign Regulations The Sign Regulations provide in Section 4-330.E.3., Signs Without Backing, that the "area of all signs without backing. . . shall be measured by determining the sum of the areas of each square, rectangle, triangle, portion of a circle or any combination thereof that creates the smallest single contiguous perimeter enclosing the extreme limits of each word, written representation (including any series of letters), emblems or figures of similar character." Based on this provision of the Sign Regulations and the information provided as part of this application, Staff calculates that the area of the sign is approximately 1 02.5 square feet. The maximum size of a business sign permitted on any street frontage is 64 square feet. The proposed sign is intended to "serve as directional and identification of the building location". Building identification and directional signs are currently provided north of the building along Beard Creek Road near the access to the site. While business signs facing Interstate 70 are permitted in other areas of unincorporated Eagle County (e.g., the Eagle-Vail commercial area), those signs are easily visible from 1-70. Visibility ofthe proposed sign from 1-70 would be limited due to the close proximity ofthe building to the 1-70 right-of-way and the height of the building above the 1-70 roadway. The sign would be visible primarily from across the valley in other parts of Edwards. Staff questions the utility of such a sign for directional purposes, and the desirability of an identification sign that exceeds the standards applicable in the traditional zone districts. An additional purpose of the proposed sign is to "recognize the extremely generous donation given by Mr. and Mrs. Shaw." While this purpose is laudable, alternative means of recognizing the donors' generosity are available. As proposed, the sign is not suitable for the PUD and does not provide the minimum sign area necessary to direct people to and within the PUD. Further, the precedent of allowing a particularly large sign, visible throughout this part of the valley, may prove to be problematic to the extent that other enterprises might seek similar identification of their locations. However, a sign which meets the maximum size requirements for traditional zone districts might be appropriate. As a condition of approval, the size of the Major Identification Sign should be limited to 64 square feet, as provided in Section 4-340.C.1., Individual Business Signs. At the same time, an illumination of a sign which is visible across such a large portion of the adj acent valley may not be appropriate. As a further condition of approval, illumination of the Major Identification Sign should be prohibited from 11:00 P.M. until the following day, unless for a special event. Otherwise, the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the provisions of Article 4, Site Development Standards, of the current Land Use Regulations. [+] FINDING: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] It HAS previously been found that the development complied with the regulations, policies and guidelines of the Land Use Regulations applicable at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for the 37 12-09-03 PUD. With the recommended conditions, the PUD amendment WILL continue to be consistent with the Land Use Regulations. STANDARD: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] - The proposed subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. (a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions shall be consistent with. the Eagle County Road Capital Improvements Plan (b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines. (c) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the development would have an efficient spatial pattern. The proposed PUD Amendment will not alter the spatial pattern in any way that causes inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. [+] FINDING: Spatial Pattern Shall Be Efficient. (Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] It HAS previously been found that the Preliminary Plan for the PUD satisfied the requirements ofthe Land Use Regulations in effect at the time with respect to efficient spatial patterns. The proposed PUD Amendment DOES NOT adversely affect the spatial patterns in the area. STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] - The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the area was suitable for development as approved. [+] FINDING: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] It HAS previously been determined that the site was suitable for development. STANDARD: Compatible with Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] - The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. When the Preliminary Plan for the PUD was approved, it was found that the PUD is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and would not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. With the recommended conditions, the PUD amendment would continue to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. [+] FINDING: Compatible With Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] It HAS previously been determined that the development is compatible with other development in the area. With the recommended condition, the proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect the compatibility ofthe resulting development with surrounding uses within the PUD. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation]: "Applicant shall submit the following: "Proposed PUD guide setting forth the proposed land use restrictions. " A proposed amendment to the PUD Guide has been provided. [+] FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)] Applicant HAS submitted a PUD Guide which incorporates the necessary revisions to effect the proposed PUD Amendment If the recommended conditions are approved, the requirements of this Section MAY be fully met by the Applicant providing an appropriately revised PUD Guide. 38 12-09-03 Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F. 3.m., Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD: STANDARD: Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.] B No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County. . . that (1) the modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development, (2) does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment ofland abutting upon or across a street from the planned unit development or the public interest, and (3) is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. With the recommended conditions, this Standard may be met. [+] FINDING: Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.] With the recommended conditions, the proposed PUD Amendment (1) IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation ofthe entire Planned Unit Development, and (2) DOES NOT affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment ofland abutting upon or across a street from the planned unit development or the public interest, and (3) IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. Terrill Knight introduced Stan Anderson, Administrator, and Paul Johnston, Board member. He stated this is a very important use for the valley. He stated the sign will give it better notice. He showed a power point presentation of the building and discussed how important this center is to the valley. He stated the purpose is to create a visual identity for its users, many of which are from areas other than Eagle County. They also want to ensure that the sign is compatible in scale and in size. He stated they believe individual letters attached to the building would be best. It is not for advertising purposes. He spoke to the County sign code. He stated they will be submitting a comprehensive sign plan. This is similar to a multiple business center. He stated they agreed with staff to shut the light off at 11 ;00 p.m. He stated the Planning Commission was not in favor of lights at all. Stan Anderson presented photographs of several different versions of the signs. Any other configuration would not be able to be seen from the Highway. He stated the sign they are proposing is back lit and is neon light. He presented a nighttime photograph of the cancer center and believes an unlit sign will not be seen. Commissioner Menconi asked how many letters would there be. Mr. Anderson stated there are 24. Paul Johnston stated the regional component is most important. When there are people traveling from other areas the lighting behind the sign is important. He stated they are very excited about the cancer center. They support the proposal. Mr. Anderson stated periodically they do have nighttime meetings. Mr. Knight stated they are requesting approval and believe this application is consistent with the County sign codes. It is essential to have better notice on the building. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Commissioner Stone asked the applicant if they are requesting approval with one Planning Commission condition and two staff recommended conditions. Mr. Knight stated that was correct. Commissioner Menconi stated he prefers the applicant offer a suggestion to not illuminate the sign. He has heard a lot of discussion in the community that with night lighting in the valley they have . lost the ability to see the stars. Commissioner Stone stated he considered that and this light will be less than what comes out of the windows. Mr. Knight stated not illuminating the sign makes it less effective. They agree that the sign should not be obtrusive. They are next to the freeway and other commercial areas. He stated they have talked to people with the same concerns. 39 12-09-03 Chairman Gallagher stated if that was an 80 foot wall he believes that is what the applicant would be asking for. He asked for the dimensions of the individual letters. Mr. Anderson answered 2'6". He stated it will be compared to a 40 watt glow. Chairman Gallagher stated he is inclined to let the sign be as presented with the condition it not be lit after 11 :00 p.m. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve File No. PDA-00047, Edwards Medical/Shaw Regional Cancer Center, incorporating the staff findings, and with the following conditions: 1. The size ofthe Major Identification Sign shall be limited to 120 square feet, as provided in Section 4-340.C.1., Individual Business Signs. 2. Illumination of the Major Identification Sign shall be prohibited from 11 :00 P.M. until the following day and shall be lighted as presented today. 3. 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. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. LUR-0046 Building Resolutions Dan Stanek, Eagle County Building Official, presented file number LUR-0046. Building Resolutions. He showed a power point presentation as follows: The Eagle County Building Resolution adopts the building codes enforced in Eagle County and contains all local amendments to the referenced codes. The proposed amendment to the resolution is to update the currently adopted codes in Chapter 3 ofthe Land Use Regulations to the new editions of each of the codes Proposed changes in codes Current Codes 1997 UBC 1997 UMC 1997 UPC 1999 NEC 1997 UFC 1999 NFPA 13 New Codes 2003 IBC/IRC 2003 IMC 2000 UPC 2002 NEC 2003 IFC 2002 NFPA 13 Summary of the new codes The 2002 National Electrical Code, 2000 Uniform Plumbing Code have been adopted by the State of Colorado. The proposed Eagle County resolution has updated to these codes. The 2003 editions of the International Building Code, Fire Code, Residential Code and Mechanical Codes are proposed to be adopted. These are the latest editions of the codes The International Codes were developed jointly by all three major code organizations in the country. These code organizations have now consolidated into the International Code Council. Code committees meet to evaluate code requirements and make changes as necessary. Public input is received at annual code hearings and proposed code changes are voted on for introduction to the codes. New codes reflect the latest thinking in building safety The International Codes are being adopted at the state and local levels throughout the U.S. Having and single set of codes throughout the country benefits code officials, designers and builders. 40 12-09-03 The American Institute of Architects and The National Association of Home Builders have supported the development and adoption of the International Codes. The International Residential Code contains all code requirements for one and two family dwellings. This will now allow residential designers, contractors and homeowners to review residential code requirements without reading through commercial building code requirements. Permit Fees Permit Fees Timeline October 2, 2003: Draft available to public October 15th-16th: Public meetings November 19th: Eagle County Planning Commission November 20th: Roaring Fork Regional Planning Commission Proposed effective date: Building permit applications received after January 1,2004 would be reviewed under the new codes On November 19, 2003 the Eagle County Planning Commission and on November 20,2003 the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval ofLUR- 0046 with no conditions. Mr. Stanek stated this amendment is to allow for modification of the Eagle County Building Resolution as follows: a. Clarification of Chapter 3 of Eagle County Resolution b. Updating current building codes to the (2003 International Building, Fire, Mechanical Codes, 2000 Uniform Plumbing Code, 2002 National Electric Code, 2002 NFPA 13 Code). Referral responses are as shown on staff report and as follows: The proposed amendment package was referred out to the following agencies: County Attorneys Office County Department of Environmental Health County Engineering Department Town of Vail Fire Department Basalt & Rural Fire Protection District Gypsum Fire Protection District Greater Eagle Fire Protection District Eagle River Fire Protection District Eagle Valley Homebuilders Association Department of Local Affairs NWCCOG Town of Avon Town of Basalt Town of Eagle Town of Gypsum Town of Minturn Town of Red Cliff Town of Vail Additionally, these proposed regulations were referred out to 370 Homeowner's Associations, Architects, Contractors, and Developers that are associated with Eagle County's Community Development Department. Responses were received from the following agencies, firms or individuals: Fire Districts The Basalt, Gypsum, Greater Eagle, Eagle River, and Vail fire districts have expressed their support ofthe modifications to the Eagle County Building Resolution. Tom McMahon with Fire Tech 41 12-09-03 Requirements for residential fire sprinkler systems be allowed to use booster pumps in place of fire pumps because of cost. Eagle County requires wiring to pumps to be in a one hour rated shaft and will allow Booster pumps in R-3 occupancy. Staff findings are as follows and as shown on staff report: 1. Pursuant to Chapter 1, Section 1.15.04 Referrals of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: The proposed amendments HAVE been referred to the appropriate agencies, including the applicable towns within Eagle County, and to the Colorado Division of Local Affairs, and their recommendations have been considered. 2. Pursuant to Chapter 1, Section 1.15.05 Public Notice of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: Public notice HAS been given. 3. Pursuant to Chapter 1, Section 1.15.06 Board action of the Eagle County Land Use Regulation: The Building Resolution, as proposed, is in general conformance with the policies and regulations of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. 4. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 5-230.B Initiation ofthe Eagle County Land Use Regulations: (a) The proposed amendments AMEND ONLY THE TEXT of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, and do not amend the Official Zone District Map. (b) Precise wording of the proposed changes HAS been provided. 5. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 5-230.D Standards of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations as applicable: (a) The proposed amendments ARE consistent with the purposes, goals, policies, and Future Land Use Map of the Eagle County Master Plan. (b) The proposed amendments DO address a demonstrated community need. (c) The proposed amendments ARE in the public interest. Chairman Gallagher asked about staff training. Mr. Stanek stated all of the staffhave gone to two seminars and there will be a third in January. Chairman Gallagher asked about training for the Fire Departments. Carol Mulson, Eagle River Fire Protection District, stated the fire departments have participated in the training. Tom Wagonlander, Greater Eagle First Protection District, stated last February they started going through classes. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Chairman Gallagher stated he has two documents and asked which one is for approval. Mr. Stanek stated the one with the big "draft" across it is the one for approval Chairman Gallagher asked why they are eliminating solar heat for swimming pools. Mr. Stanek stated it is located in the IBC and the 2000 IRC. Chairman Gallagher asked if the IBC is commercial and the IRC is residential. Mr. Stanek stated that was correct. Chairman Gallagher asked on page 17, paragraph G, heating equipment has been eliminated and there is substitute language in the IRC. Is it covered somewhere else. Mr. Stanek stated it is in the body of the IBC. Chairman Gallagher asked on page 14, it states the owner of a mobile home does not have to have the appropriate snow load roof if they promise to shovel their roof, Mr. Stanek stated some ofthe mobile homes brought into Eagle County are older and have roofs that are not up to Eagle County Standards. They must guarantee they shovel to roofs or mitigate it another way. Chairman Gallagher stated on page 15, he questioned the depth of 48 inches. Mr. Stanek stated most of the reports from soils engineers indicate that 48 inches is the magic number concerning frost. 42 12-09-03 Chairman Gallagher stated on page 21, emergency escape, are the dimensions set forth somewhere else. Mr. Stanek stated in the IRC uninhabited basements would not require outside egress. This plan requires outside egress regardless of what the basement is being used for. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File Number LUR-0046, Building Resolutions, incorporating the Staff findings. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until December 16,2003. Attest:~:1- Clerk to the Board , "'-\~ ., c~.Gt$' i\ Y 'r<t ,Ie ,/--"",-'0. _ ,) .., /~, li\ ,,~\ ~t 'it ~ ~ I ~\ l11'of ,,,' ~ ~. :.\.~'J........,.J:} " C'o ;;;'~1:;:l" Ch:i& ~ 43 12-09-03