HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/25/06
PUBLIC HEARING
July 25,2006
resent:
Peter Runyon
Am Menconi
Bruce Baumgartner
Bryan Treu
Walter Mathews
Kathy Scriver
Chairman
Commissioner
County Administrator
County Attorney
Deputy County Attorney
Deputy Clerk to the Board
Absent:
Tom Stone
Commissioner
This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County
Commissioners for their consideration:
Executive Session
It was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to go into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving
legal advice on a tenant issue at Golden Eagle Apartments, tipping fees with B&B at the Eagle River Preserve, and
personnel issues relating to a filed grievance all of which are appropriate topics for discussion pursuant to C.R.S.
24-6-402(4)(b), Colorado Revised Statutes. At the close of the discussion it was moved, seconded and
unanimously agreed to adjourn from Executive Session.
Consent Agenda
Chairman Runyon stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows:
A. Approval of bill paying for the week of July 24, 2006 (subject to review by the Finance Director)
Mike Roeper, Finance Department
B. Approval of the minutes of the Eagle County Board of Commissioners meeting for May 16, 2006
Teak Simonton, Clerk and Recorder
C. Second amendment to the hangar lease between Eagle County Regional Airport and America
Airline, Inc.
County Attorney's Office Representative
D. Resolution 2006-076 regarding petitions to the Eagle County Board of Equalization
County Attorney's Office Representative
E. Resolution 2006-077 concerning appointments to the Basalt Regional Library District Board of Trustees
County Attorney's Office Representative
Chairman Runyon asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda.
Bryan Treu, County Attorney stated that he had no changes or comments on the Consent Agenda.
Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A-E.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
,nammous.
1
7/25/06
Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re-convene as the
Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
Eagle County Liquor License Authority
Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office
Consent A2enda
A. Edwards Discount Liquors, Inc.
DBA South Forty Liquors
This is a request for a Change in Location Permit. South Forty Liquors wishes to relocate from its
current location at 0047 Edwards Village Blvd. in Edwards to 0105 Edwards Village Blvd. also located in
Edward. Public notice has been given. All documentation is in order and all fees have been paid.
Bryan Treu, County Attorney asked if there was anyone from the public that was not the applicant present
to discuss the file.
There was no one from the public.
Commissioner Menconi moved that the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for July 25,2006,
consisting of Item A.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re-convene
as the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
Report on the early childhood phone survey poll
Kathleen Forinash, Health & Human Services
Ms. Forinash stated that in February of 2005 the Board of County Commissioners authorized a year long
assessment and strategic planning process in early childhood. The final report will be published on the web. As an
action step following the assessment, the Board decided to have a phone survey conducted to determine the interest
and possibly place an initiative on the ballot in the fall. Venturoni Research and Surveys was contracted to conduct
the phone survey.
Linda Ventuoni, Venturoni Survey's and Research presented a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation
included various graphs that illustrated the results of the survey. The survey was conducted the weeks of July 10
and 17th. There were a total of 400 completed interviews. Ms. Ventuoni explained the questions asked in the
survey and summarized the averages. The voters were asked if they'd support a ballot measure that could increase
taxes for early childhood programs and several demographic questions, such as, household, own/rent, age, gender,
town, length of residency, voter registration, household income, education etc. The survey illustrated strong
Democrat support.
2
7/25/06
Chairman Runyon opened public comment.
Jane West, Early Childhood Mental Health Provider spoke. Ms. West stated that she was drawn into the
ield by the latest brain research. She believes that we are only as strong as our weakest link. She would like to see
financing available in the future for what she considers the most important public investment.
Beth O'Reilly spoke to the Board. She believes that the children in the county ages 0-6 need help. She has
a background in early childhood. She encourages and supports the ballot initiative.
Ms. Lee Martin, Referral Specialist for Kids First spoke. She is concerned with the availability of childcare
and supports the initiative. She believes that the shortage of available childcare could result in health and safety
Issues.
Lori Soliday spoke. She is currently in the process of opening a childcare facility in El Jebel. She stated
that they are at full capacity and have to turn down desperate families in need of childcare. She believes the
initiative is critical to the community.
Rosa Campbell, long time resident spoke. She stated her concerns for childcare provider's wages and the
quality of childcare. She believes that we are on the third or forth generation of under parented kids.
Jeanne McQueeney, Early Childhood Consultant spoke. She thanked the Board and believes that the
strategic plan has been a call to action for many groups. She believes the initiative going on the ballot will provide
needed funding.
Liz McGillvray spoke. She believes that there is a tremendous need for childcare, quality and improvement
require funding. She would like the voters to have the opportunity to decide for themselves. She believes the high
quality early experiences will not only cut down on behavior problems, but will set all kids up for success. When
she hears the statistics and looks at the addition $40-50 dollars a year going out, she can't think of a better
improvement.
Cheryl Paller spoke. She has been in the childcare for the last 15 years. She believes that childcare is
important for both the community and local business.
Chairman Runyon thanked everyone for speaking about the issue and Commissioner Menconi for making it
such an important issue. He supports the concept of early childhood development and understands its importance.
[is only question was timing. He believes it's appropriate for the voters to decide how they spend their money.
'he next step would be to craft a clear worded bill so that the voters will know exactly where the money will be
allocated.
Commissioner Menconi stated that he was recently able to get a list of names of over 60 community leaders
who support the ballot initiative. He is oveljoyed with the work that's been done and is anxious to get the item on
the ballot.
Mr. Treu stated that the Clerk would need to be notified and suggested a motion for the Board to participate
in the general election through the submission of an early childhood ballot question to be approved by the County
Commissioners.
Commissioner Menconi moved that the Board of County Commissioners participate in the general election
through the submission of an early childhood ballot question to be approved by the County Commissioners.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
Citizen Input
Lori Soliday, Eagle County resident and EI Jebel pre-school owner spoke. Ms. Soliday proposed that the
Board consider an infant care facility for the tree farm property. She believes that a parent resource center would
also be invaluable.
Chairman Runyon suggested that Ms. Soliday submit the outlines of her proposal in writing.
Commissioner Menconi stated that it would be helpful to hear from the Crown Mountain Board. He would
ove to get the ball rolling. Funding for the facility would need to be considered and the size of the area would need
to be determined.
3
7/25/06
Ms. Soliday stated that a two story facility would be ideal. She believes that it may also be a good time to
look at the needs of seniors and early head start.
Commissioner Menconi suggested she draw out a plan that would come back before the Board. He stated
that other dollars may be needed if other uses are added.
John DeNardo spoke to the Board. He questioned the Board's plans for runway paving and stated his
concerns for the recent cost of re-paving that runways at Denver International Airport to geo technical work that
had not been done properly. He wondered who was in charge of the project and who's keeping an eye on the geo
technical work being done
Mr. Treu stated that a contractor had not been selected. They are still in the dirt moving stage and that is a
two year project.
Abatement Hearings
Assessor's Office
Petitioner:
Mountain Valley Lutheran Church
Schedule No.:
R042032
Mr. Treu stated that a he received a letter requesting that the matter be rescheduled until August 1, 2006.
Commissioner Menconi moved that the Petition of Mountain Valley Lutheran Church for
AbatementlRefund of taxes for Schedule No. R042032 be rescheduled until August 1, 2006.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unanimous.
Planning Files
AFP-00233 Beaver Creek Hotel A Amended Plat and Condominium Map
Bob Narracci, Planning Department
ACTION: Amended plat to create and define "Hotel Unit H-l" from a portion of existing Hotel Unit and Unit
C-15 and to redefine the appropriate Limited Common Elements as appurtenant to Hotel Unit H-1. The creation of
Hotel Unit H-l as a separate condominium unit will permit the owner of the Hotel Unit to convey Hotel Unit H-l to
a different owner, for development of Hotel Unit H-l as a timeshare property in
accordance with Colorado Law and the Amended and Restated Guide to the Beaver Creek PUD.
LOCATION: 100 East Thomas Place
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
TITLE: Amended Plat and Condominium Map Second Amendment, Beaver Creek Hotel A Condominium A
Resubdivision of Unit C-15 And Hotel Unit Lot 25, Second Amendment To The First Filing Beaver Creek
Subdivision - Block 1, Tract A
OWNERS: Crescent Real Estate Funding XII, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership.
APPLICANT: Owner
REPRESENTATIVE: East West Partners / Tish Palmer
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. SUMMARY:
4
7/25/06
The intent of this plat is to create and define "Hotel Unit H-1" from a portion of existing Hotel Unit and Unit
C-15 and to redefine the appropriate Limited Common Elements as appurtenant to Hotel Unit H-1. The
creation of Hotel Unit H-1 as a separate condominium unit will permit the owner ofthe Hotel Unit to convey
[otel Unit H-1 to a different owner for development of Hotel Unit H-1 as a timeshare property in
accordance with Colorado law and the Amended and Restated Guide to the Beaver Creek Planned Unit
Development.
B. SITE DATA:
Surrounding Land Uses / Zoning:
East: Mixed Use 1 PUD
West: Mixed Use 1 PUD
North: Mixed Use 1 PUD
South: Ski Area / PUD
Existing Zoning: Beaver Creek PUD
Total Area: 4.6 +1- Acres
Water: Public
Sewer: Public
Access: Via East Thomas Place
C. STAFF FINDINGS:
Pursuant to Section 5-290.G.3. Standards for Amended Final Plat:
a. Adjacent property. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed
amendment DOES NOT have an adverse effect on adjacent property owners.
b. Final Plat Consistency. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed
amendment IS consistent with the intent ofthe Final Plat.
c. Conformance with Final Plat Requirements. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined
that the proposed amendment DOES conform to the Final Plat requirements and other applicable
regulations, policies and guidelines.
d. Improvement Agreement. DOES NOT apply.
e. Restrictive Plat Note Alteration. DOES NOT apply.
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Narracci presented a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation included a vicinity map and aerial
map of the area. The intent of the plat is to take a wing of the Park Hyatt of Beaver Creek and redefine the limited
common elements to allow the structure to be conveyed to a third party that then will convert it into a time share
property. The owner intends to develop it as a timeshare property in accordance with Colorado law and the
amended and restated guide to the Beaver Creek Planned Unit Development. He indicated that staff recommends
approval.
Chairman Runyon wondered if the rooms were currently being taxed at a commercial rate and once they
become residential units whether the taxes be reduced.
Mr. Narracci stated that the Assessor's Office did not respond to the application, but he believes there
would be a reassessment.
Chairman Runyon stated that he is concerned with the trend.
Mr. Treu stated that that it is an interesting problem, but not a reason to deny. The remedy may be a
egislative one.
5
7/25/06
Commissioner Menconi wondered if it was going to be only one unit.
Tish Palmer, East West Partners spoke. She stated that they are proposing to convert 55 into 15 individual
condominiums.
Commissioner Menconi wondered if all the Park Hyatt would eventually be converting.
Ms. Palmer stated that they will continue to have 190 hotel rooms.
Mr. Treu stated by loosing those 50 units you may be adding a lot more tax dollars for the residential units.
He believes the tax dollars may balance out.
Chairman Runyon opened and closed public comment, as there was none.
Commissioner Menconi moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve File No. AFP-00233
incorporating the Staff findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
SMA-00027 Belle Terre Minor Subdivision
Joe Forinash, Planning Department
NOTE:
Request to table to August 1, 2006
ACTION: Subdivide 3.1 acre site into 3 lots for subsequent development of six (6) dwellings, including one
(1) single family, two (2) duplex and three (3) triplex units.
LOCATION: 34965 Hwy 6 (North ofHwy 6, west of Reserve Road)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
PROPOSED MOTION: I move that the Board of County Commissioners table File No. SMA-00027 Belle
Terre Minor Subdivision to August 1, 2006.
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Forinash stated that there were two files related to the Belle Terre Subdivision. Both were published
but, the other related file did not show up on the agenda. The applicant has requested that both files be table until
August 1, 2006.
Commissioner Menconi moved to table File Nos. SMA-00027 and VIS-00305 Belle Terre Minor
Subdivision to August 1, 2006, at the applicant's request.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
PDA-00064 and LUR-0065 Ea2le Vail Detached Gara2e
Adam Palmer, Planning Department
ACTION: Applicant is requesting a change to the definition for a single family home within the Eagle Vail
PUD Guide which, if approved, would allow for construction of a detached garage upon single family lots in the
Eagle Vail PUD where currently all improvements are required to be included in one building.
LOCATION: 559 Eagle Drive
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
TITLE:
FILE NO./PROCESS:
Eagle-Vail Detached Garage
PDA-00064 / PUD Amendment; LUR-0065/ Land Use Regulation Change
6
7/25/06
LOCATION:
OWNER:
APPLICANT:
illPRESENTATIVE:
0559 Eagle Drive
Gordon Blaikie
Owner
Owner
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. SUMMARY: A PUD amendment that would amend the PUD Guide to allow construction of a detached
garage/outbuilding for single family zoned lots only. The current definition in the PUD guide requires that
all improvements be made in one building.
The applicant is requesting a change to the definition for a single-family home within the Eagle-Vail PUD
Guide, which, if approved, would allow for construction of a detached garage upon single family lots in the
Eale- Vail PUD where currently all improvements are required to be included in one building. The only
properties zoned as single family lots are 3 lots in the Oleson Subdivision.
Currently, the definition for Single Family Lot currently reads as follows:
"Single Family Lot" shall mean and refer to a parcel which may be used solely for residential purposes
and upon which not more than one building containing two residential dwelling units may be constructed.
One of the units may not be larger than 800 square feet and may not be further subdivided from the
primary unit.
It is proposed to be changed as follows:
"Single Family Lot" shall mean and refer to a parcel which may be used solely for residential purposes
and upon which not more than two structures, one of which can have no more than 1500 square feet of the
total available square footage, can be built. An accessory dwelling unit not larger than 800 square feet is
allowed which may not be subdivided from the primary unit.
In addition, the Eagle-Vail PUD Guide is unique in that it is the only PUD Guide that is included as a part
of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. It is speculated this was done because it was the first PUD
Guide adopted in the county, and was never removed. It is Staffs recommendation that the PUD Guide be
removed from the Land Use Regulations at this time to be consistent with all other PUD Guides and that
additional findings with respect to changing the Land Use Regulations do not necessarily apply to the
Eagle-Vail PUD.
B. CHRONOLOGY:
1972-Eagle-Vail PUD created
2000-01eson property included into Eagle-Vail PUD
2003---0Ieson property subdivided into 3 lots
2004---Single family homes constructed on Lots 2 and 3.
C. SITE DATA for Tract B - School Tract:
Surrounding Land Uses / Zoning:
East: Residential/PUD
West: ResidentiallPUD
North: Residential/PUD
South: Residential/PUD
Existing Zoning: PUD
7
7/25/06
Total Area:
Water:
Sewer:
Access:
1.6 acres on subject property; 5 acres total for Oleson subdivision
ERWSD
ERWSD
Eagle Drive
2. STAFF REPORT
A. REFERRAL RESPONSES:
Eagle County Engineer
. Engineering had no comments on the file.
Eagle County Wildfire Mitigation Specialist
. The site is located in a Moderate wildfire hazard area.
. Some wildfire mitigation would be required to create defensible space for a new structure.
Fred Pope, owner, Lot 1, Oleson Subdivision
. No concerns of proposed garage, feels that it would compliment the existing structures architecturally
in shape, form and position.
Letters from Eagle-Vail Property Owners Association
· Letter dated June 23rd supports proposal with conditions as proposed.
· Previous letter dated May 11 th did not support proposal.
Signed letter from numerous Eagle-Vail property owners approve proposal dated June st\ attached.
Letters received from other Eagle-Vail property owners in opposition to proposal:
John and Martha Farrell
Maryse M Perri gaud
Gerard and Daniel Conway
Ruth Weiss
Anonymous
Deborah Tryon
Dr. Jerry Bizer
Wayne Abbott
John Clements
Letters are attached; general concerns voiced in letters had to do with precedent set by amendment, visual
aesthetics, appropriateness and/or need of change, consistency with the rest of the PUD, and use ofliving
space above detached garage.
Phone calls were received from the following individuals in opposition to the proposal:
Susan Black, Stacy Addington, Nora Extran, Greg Hurz, Dick Hunton, Richard Stamp, Elliot Paulson
Phone calls were received from the following who did not have issues with the proposal:
Caroline Ford, Mike Dee
Other Referrals: Eagle County Assessor, Eagle County Attorney, Eagle County Environmental Health,
Eagle County Housing, Eagle River Fire Protection District, Eagle Vail Metro District, Eagle River Water
and Sanitation District, Town of Avon, Town of Minturn.
B. FINDINGS:
8
7/25/06
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.e Standards for the review of a
PUD Preliminary Plan:
STANDARD: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (1)] - The title to all land that is part of a PUD
shall be owned or controlled by one (1) person. A person shall be considered to control all lands in the PUD either
through ownership or by written consent of all owners of the land that they will be subject to the conditions and
standards of the PUD.
The Applicant is not the sole owner of the Eagle-Vail PUD. Unified control is held by the Eagle-Vail
Homeowners' Association whose board represents the 1430 propery owners in the PUD. Since this board has
stated they are in support of the proposal, unified ownership or control for the proposal is established.
1+] FINDING: Unified ownership or control. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (I)]
The control of all land that is part of this PUD IS controlled by one entity; this entity is in support of the proposed amendment.
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 that the approved uses are either
allowed uses, or appropriate variations have been granted. However, proposed uses for living space above the
Iroposed detached garage include "home office" and/or "art studio." The Eagle-Vail PUD guide requires a special
use review for home occupations. Therefore, the proposed use of a home occupation would require approval of a
special use permit as proposed. The proposed PUD amendment, however, is in compliance with the existing uses in
the Eagle-Vail PUD.
[+] FINDING: Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (2)]
All ofthe proposed additional uses that may be developed in the PUD ARE uses that are designated as uses that are allowed, allowed as
a special use or allowed as a limited use in the Planned Unit Development Guide in effect for the property at the time of the application
for the PUD Amendment.
STANDARD: Dimensional Limitations. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (3)] - The dimensional limitations that shall apply
to the PUD shall be those specified in Table 3-340, "Schedule of Dimensional Limitations", for the zone district
designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional
limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized, provided variations
shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper
ventilation, light, air and 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
'tandards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that:
No changes in required parking are proposed.
9
7/25/06
[+] 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, 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 streets capes 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.
No additional signs are proposed.
[+] 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, fugn
Regulations, and in the PUD Control Document currently in effect for Edwards Medical Center 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.
Adequate facilities exist for current development upon the subject properties and are not expected to be
impacted by the proposed PUD amendment.
[+1 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. With the recommended condition, 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, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the
development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of
infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater
sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed:
(a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all
areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a
public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway
alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the
minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that
functional classification of roadway.
10
7/25/06
(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.
Additional improvements with respect to access, pathways, emergency vehicles, and snow storage
would not be required by the amendments nor is it expected that existing improvements would be
negatively affected.
[+] FINDING: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)]
It HAS previously been determined that adequate improvements were to be provided based
on the Land Use Regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Preliminary Plan for
the PUD. The proposed PUD Amendment WILL NOT adversely affect improvements regarding: 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.
'he proposed amendment to allow a detached garage/structure in itself proposed no additional uses and is
compatible with surrounding land uses. The allowance of an accessory dwelling unit at 800 square feet currently
exists and is not proposed to be changed; this amendment would only allow it to be within a separate structure than
the primary residence. The accessory dwelling unit can not be subdivided or sold separately from the primary
residence. With the proposed size limits placed upon the separate structure, its use, size, and character are
compatible with surrounding land uses in the PUD.
[+] FINDING: Compatibility With Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)]
The development proposed for the PUD HAS been determined to be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. The
proposed PUD Amendment WILL permit uses that ARE compatible with the character of surrounding land uses within the Planned
Unit Development.
STANDARD: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)] - The PUD shall be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map (FLUM).
The PUD was previously determined to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan including, but not limited to the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The following analysis with respect to the Comprehensive 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
Quality Recreation Housinl! Services
Conformance x x x
Non
I Conformance
II Mixed
11
7/25/06
~ Conformance
Not x x x x
Applicable
The proposed PUD amendment does not adversely affect conformance of the PUD with the Eagle County
Comprehensive Plan. It has previously been found that the PUD is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed PUD Amendment is not sufficiently different in character or magnitude to alter conformance with
either the Comprehensive Plan or the Future Land Use Map.
[+] FINDING: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (10)]
The pun HAS been found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, including, but not limited to, the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM). The proposed pun Amendment DOES NOT adversely affect the consistency with the Comprehensive 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 (II)
A phasing plan IS NOT required for this pun 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.
ii. Areas that Count as Open Space. Water bodies, lands within critical wildlife habitat areas,
riparian areas, and one hundred (100) year floodplains, as defined in these Land Use
Regulations, that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even
when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space
lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD.
(b) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the
Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development
schedule established for each development phase of the PUD.
(c) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform
to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for PUD. To ensure that all the common open
space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or covenants shall be
placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any common open
space.
(d) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association or nonprofit
corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and cultural
facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance, administration
and operation of such land and any other land within the PUD not publicly owned, and secure
adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be established
prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or nonprofit
corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD.
12
7/25/06
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
.ffect 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.
The PUD amendment is not expected to have adverse of significant impacts upon natural resources.
[+] FINDING: Natural Resource Protection. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (13)]
It HAS previously been determined that applicable analysis documents were adequately considered prior to approval of the Preliminary
Plan for the PUD. With the proposed conditions, the proposed PUD amendment WILL NOT adversely affect natural resources.
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS:
Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation]: "Applicant shall submit the
following: "Proposed PUD guide settingforth the proposed land use restrictions."
Proposed changes to the PUD Guide have been provided. However, a complete, amended PUD Guide
is required. As a condition of approval, a complete amended PUD Guide should be required to be
provided by the Applicant within 14 days of the approval of this PUD amendment. [Condition # 6]
[+] FINDING: Initiation [Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8)]
Applicant HAS NOT submitted a PUD Guide which incorporates the necessary revisions to effect the proposed PUD Amendment.
HOWEVER, an amended PUD Guide may be provided subsequent to approval of this PUD amendment.
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:
1. There is concern that the change could create a precedent upon which future changes may be
made either to zoning of other lots in the PUD to Single Family Lots so that a detached garage
may be constructed, or that a future PUD amendment may be proposed in the future to allow
duplex lots to have detached structures as well. The proposed modification is not consistent
with development in the entire PUD in that detached garages currently are not allowed on
duplex lots, which although some do currently exist. However, since the extent of the current
proposal only would apply to three lots, the modification is not expected to impact the efficient
development and preservation of the entire PUD in an adverse manner.
(2) does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a
street from the planned unit development or the public interest:
13
7/25/06
2. The proposed amendment and plans submitted by the applicant are not expected to have
adverse visual impacts upon abutting properties or detract from the public interest as proposed.
(3) is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person:
3. Technically the modification would not confer a special benefit upon one person. The
applicant currently does own 2 of the 3 properties which would be affected by the amendment;
the modification would currently affect two property owners.
[+] FINDING: Amendment to Preliminary Plan/or PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m.]
With the recommended conditions, the proposed PUD Amendment
[+] (1) IS consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development, and
[+] (2) DOES NOT affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the
planned unit development or the public interest, and
[+] (3) IS NOT granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person.
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Palmer presented a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation included the applicant's request,
vicinity map of the area and aerial view of the property. The applicant is requesting a change to the definition for
single-family lot within the Eagle-Vail PUD Guide, which if approved, would allow for construction of a detached
garage upon single family lots in the Eagle Vail PUD where currently all improvements are required to be included
in one building. Mr. Palmer explained the definition of single family lot and the proposed changes. Changing the
definition would change for all three lots. Letters of support had been received from adjacent property owners.
Staff recommended that the Eagle-Vail PUD be removed from the Land Use Regulations so it would be a stand
alone document.
Chairman Runyon wondered if there was a lot of construction going on currently.
Gordon Blaikie, homeowner of lot 2 and 3 stated that presently there is a house on lot 3 and lot 2 is under
construction.
Mr. Palmer stated that the lot 1 is the existing residence that was on the original Oleson property. The lot is
part of the subdivision and would be directly affected by the change in the single lot definition, but they aren't
proposing anything at this time.
Mr. Blaikie explained that the reason for putting in the detached garage is to utilize the space rather than
putting up a retaining wall.
Chairman Runyon opened and closed public comment, as there was none.
Chairman Runyon asked about the Home Owner's Association concerns and an explanation on the letter
that was submitted.
Mr. Palmer stated that the Home Owner's Association had concerns with accessory dwelling units being
built because it could create an enforcement problem with uses. The language was changed to allow only one
secondary structure no larger than 1500 square feet. The new language seemed to appease those concerns.
Commissioner Menconi moved that the Board of County Commissioners approval File No. PDA-00064,
incorporating the staff findings. In addition, I move that the Board of County Commissioners approval File No.
LUR-0065 to remove the Eagle-Vail PUD Guide from the Eagle County Land Use Regulations as a stand alone
document.
Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. Of the two voting Commissioners, the vote was declared
unammous.
Att
~~
./
There being no further busines
14
7/25/06