Loading...
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