Loading...
Minutes 01/08/08 Present: Am Menconi Sara Fisher Peter Runyon Bruce Baumgartner Bryan Treu Robert Morris Teak Simonton Kathy Scriver PUBLIC HEARING January 8, 2008 Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Manager County Attorney Deputy County Attorney Clerk to the Board 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: DECEMBER 2007 BILL PAYING & PAYROLL GENERAL FUND 911 SOLUTIONS INCORPORATED A & A SEPTIC SERVICES A FULL HOUSE CASINO CO IN ABBIE RITTMILLER ABBOTT LABORATORIES ABC LEGAL SERVICES INC ADVANTAGE NETWORK SYSTEMS AFFILIATED CREDIT SERVICE AIR COMPRESSOR SERVICE AIRBORNE ALEXANDER CLARK PRINTING ALL PRO FORMS INC ALMA VARELA ALPINE LUMBER COMPANY AMADEO GONZALES AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC AMERICINN LODGE & SUITES AMERIGAS AMY BERENS AMY KEELEY ANN LOPER APEX SOFTWARE APPLIED TRUST ENGINEERING APPRAISAL INSTITUTE APPRAISAL OFFICE ASPEN L T ARMY & FACTORY SURPLUS ARN MENCONI ARTHUR AND PERLMUTTER ASFPM AT ANDT A V TECH ELECTRONICS INC AVON CENTER AT BEAVER CK AVON COMMERCIAL OWNERS BAND B EXCAVATING BJROWE B J TRADING LLC SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES 2,587.50 1,400.00 6,005.00 31.59 202.70 30.00 300.00 748.30 2,266.87 1,700.00 732.36 5,753.03 332.40 186.83 28.80 369.00 256.00 183.72 5,014.06 62.91 7.68 6.00 1,980.00 155.00 425.00 119.29 69.98 85.00 60.00 290.00 33.57 992.06 2,170.07 2,658.61 0.79 7.70 9,860.00 1 01/08/08 B&H SPORTS BALCOMB AND GREEN BARBARA McDOUGALL BARBARA WHITFORD BEACH CAMERA BEEP WEST RADIO PAGING BENTLEY SYSTEMS INC BERTHOD MOTORS BEST ACCESS SYSTEMS BETHANY VAN WYK BLACK DIAMOND RESEARCH BOB BARKER COMPANY BONJOUR BAKERY OF VAIL BOYD COFFEE COMPANY BRC/HARRIS INC BRIAN JACK BRUCE BAUMGARTNER C & H DISTRIBUTORS INC C STAN HAL VORSOM CA STATE DISBURSEMENT CARMEN LOZOYO- VELEZ CASTLE PEAK VETERINARY CBS ACCOUNTING LLC CDW CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING CENTURYTEL CENTURYTEL OF EAGLE CHARLOTTE NESTOR CHARM TEX CHEF DE CUISINE EPICUREAN CHEMATOX INC. CHERYL THOMAS CHOLPON LORD CHRISTINA HOOPER CLERK RECORDER AVON ANNEX CLIFFORD D ZINDA CLINTON MEHL CO ASSESSORS ASSOCIATION CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH & CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH AND CO STATE ASSOC CLERK AND COLLECTION CO OF AMERICA COLORADO CHAPTER OF ICC COLORADO CORRECTIONAL COLORADO DOORWAYS COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLORADO RESTAURANT COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY COLORADO WATERWISE COLUMBINE MARKET COMMSYS TECHNOLOGY CORP COMPUCOM COMPUTER RECYCLING & CONSERVE A WATT LIGHTING SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES 78.48 5,884.42 38.40 21.60 249.00 186.00 60.00 270.00 757.07 39.29 360.00 133.87 75.00 1,872.76 2,220.00 30.00 45.50 1,621.88 3,137.50 278.76 115.83 103.28 2,110.10 41,869.66 268.12 12,994.37 869.98 45.36 200.50 20,048.35 240.00 39.95 32.81 159.57 3.29 173.00 90.00 3,056.00 150.00 819.75 175.00 14.30 1,885.00 7,000.00 766.86 2,700.00 7,998.85 60.00 376.00 100.00 77.02 152.67 26,610.00 1,536.00 404.02 2 01/08/08 CONTRACT ONE SERVICE 6,1 02.40 CONTRACT PHARMACY SERVICE SERVICE 745.63 COpy PLUS SUPPLIES 162.60 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 8,602.01 CORPORATE EXPRESS IMAGING SUPPLIES 1,265.52 CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTS SUPPLIES 1,770.02 COUNTY SHERIFFS COLORADO SERVICE 150.00 COWBOY CATERING SERVICE 5,024.50 CRL ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE 1,389.23 CURASCRlPT SUPPLIES 2,850.00 DALY PROPERTY SERVICES SERVICE 435.00 DAVID A BAUER REFUND 11.90 DEENA EZZELL REIMBURSEMENT 21.00 DIANA JOHNSON REIMBURSEMENT 54.00 DOCTORS ON CALL SERVICE 1,170.00 DON OLSON REIMBURSEMENT 30.09 EAGLE CARE MEDICAL CLINIC SERVICE 4,474.00 EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF REIMBURSEMENT 410.50 EAGLE PHARMACY SUPPLIES 271.87 EAGLE RIVER WATER SERVICE 571.85 EAGLE V ALLEY LAND TRUST SERVICE 3,235.87 EAGLE V ALLEY MEDICAL SERVICE 6,000.00 EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING SUPPLIES 2,195.00 EAGLE V ALLEY TEMPS SERVICE 2,142.00 EAGLE XM SUPPLIES 9,530.72 EARLINE BRONN REIMBURSEMENT 31.50 EARLY CHILDHOOD PARTNERS SERVICE 3,501.55 EASTER OWENS ELECTRIC CO SUPPLIES 31.00 ECONOMIC COUNCIL OF EAGLE SERVICE 10,000.00 ED GRANGE REIMBURSEMENT 72.00 EDWARDS STATION LLC SERVICE 1,000.00 EKTRON INC SERVICE 5,150.00 EMPLOYERS COUNCIL SERVICE SERVICE 120.90 ETHAN ANDREE REIMBURSEMENT 1,140.00 EVA WILSON REIMBURSEMENT 262.55 EVERETT F AMIL Y FUNERAL SERVICE 650.00 EVERYTHING FOR OFFICES SUPPLIES 4,212.25 F AMIL Y SUPPORT REGISTRY SERVICE 3,439.18 FEDERAL EXPRESS SERVICE 131.46 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG SERVICE 3,613.21 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES 760.59 FIRE SPRINKLER SERVICES SUPPLIES 1,538.00 FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS SUPPLIES 1,400.00 FIRST INDEMNITY OF AMER. SERVICE 964.30 FITTJE BROS PRINTING INC SUPPLIES 16,639.99 FLATIRONS INC SERVICE 1,400.00 FLORIDA MICRO SERVICE 3,706.00 FOODS OF V AIL, HOME SERVICE 305.96 FORINASH KATHLEEN SERVICE 10.00 FREDERIC LEE MARTENS SERVICE 285.00 FRONT RANGE GREASE SERVICE 100.00 FSH COMMUNICATIONS LLC SERVICE 70.00 G & S TOOL CLINIC LLC SERVICE 903.29 GALLS INCORPORATED SERVICE 650.06 3 01/08/08 GARTNER GOVCONNECTlON, INC GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY GRAINGER INCORPORATED GREAT AMERICAN LEASING GREAT DIVIDE FENCING, INC HD SUPPLY FACILITIES HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES HEART OF THE WEST COUNSEL HENRY SCHEIN HEWLETT PACKARD HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES HOGAN AND HARTSON HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS HV AC SUPPLY IAAO INN AT RIVERW ALK INTERIOR PLANTSCAPES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERNAP NETWORK SYSTEMS IRCAMERAS, INC lP.CooKE CO JAMES H THERRELL IV JANET CONNORS JARA DIVERSIFIED SERVICES JBTS CUSTOM SILK JEFFERSON COUNTY JENNIFER CUEVAS JENNY BECKMAN JILL HUNSAKER JIM DUKE JOES W ALLBAORD & SUPPLY JOHN BADE JOHNNETTE PHILLIPS KARA BETTIS, CORONER KAREN HOEGER KVS INFORMATION SYSTEMS I KZYR-CooL RADIO LLC LA QUINT A WESTMINSTER MAL LABELS DIRECT LAFARGE CORPORATION LAW OFFICE OF LEFTHAND NETWORKS LEONA PERKINS LINDA JOHNSON LINDA PANKUCH LOISLAW.COM LORI GUNTHER REBECCA LARSON REBECCA LARSON LORRAINE VASQUEZ LUCY BARKER LUZ AVILA SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REFUND REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REFUND SERVICE REI REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 27,500.00 427.80 225.00 343.88 1,423.71 9,380.00 97.95 3,100.00 688.13 223.39 6,913.00 2,471.88 165.60 677.48 18,072.22 1,433.84 191.39 875.00 40.00 125.00 200.00 2,427.40 6,194.47 235.68 90.80 39.60 77.93 90.00 250.00 12.15 49.35 217.21 16.80 129.00 19.80 21.00 194.40 43.27 12,030.00 1,700.00 154.30 102.35 352.24 25.00 30,388.00 419.23 62.40 53.58 707.94 90.95 25.15 90.72 142.00 26.40 133.65 4 01/08/08 LYNDA SAMPSON M& MAUTO PARTS M LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS MAIN AUTO PARTS MARIA SIPPOLA DBA MARK LINN MARTHA SUTHERLAND MARTINEZ WESTERN MARY JANE HESS MASONS TOY DRIVE MBIA MCCAULLEY REBECCA T MEADOW MOUNTAIN PLUMBING MEDI BADGE, INC. MEGAN MORRISSEY MELISSA ZINTSMASTER METRO PATHOLOGISTS MICHAEL MITCHELL PC MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN MIKE GRUBER MILLER & COHEN MITY -LITE, INC. MOFFET CONSULTING MOORE MEDICAL CORP MOTOROLA MOTOSAT MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS MOUNTAIN EQUIPMENT MWI VETERNIARY SUPPLY CO MX LOGIC, INC NANCY NOTTINGHAM NANCY SCHURR, NP NAPA AUTO PARTS NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION NATIVE ELECTRIC INC NEHA ENVIRONMETAL HEALTH NERO, INC. NEVES UNIFORMS NICOLETTI FLATER ASSOC NORDIC REFRIGERATION NORTHWEST COLORADO NRC BROADCASTING, INC. OCTANNER OHIO CHILD SUPPORT OLSON PROPERTY ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO OSM DELIVERY LLC OTTALIE FABER-CARLIN PACIFIC SURVEY SUPPLY PAINT BUCKET THE PAPER DIRECT PAPER WISE PAULA A PALMATEER PEGGY ORA YBEAL PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REFUND SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REFUND SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 150.00 9.85 704.00 43.64 14.01 96.39 16.42 5,400.00 110.05 1,000.00 11,862.02 623.20 2,062.37 114.90 226.80 25.48 502.00 30.00 377.54 16.15 30.00 2,661.56 6,294.85 101.30 632.19 1,188.60 3,831.00 1,652.00 775.36 900.00 313.20 162.00 72.97 300.00 131.92 95.00 487.30 9.99 6,666.00 175.60 195.00 5,000.00 1,490.53 451.94 5,420.00 88.78 372.00 61.20 5,842.35 25.56 32.94 4,449.75 39.90 120.00 2,164.94 5 01/08/08 PHYLISS ROUNDS PITNEY BOWES PITNEY BOWES INCORPORATED PRESCRIPTION ALTERNATIVES PRINTRITE PROFESSIONAL FINANCE PURCHASE POWER QUEST DIAGNOSTICS QWEST R & S NORTHEAST LLC RA YMONDS OFFICE MACHINES REBECCA LARSON RED BLUFF BUCKLES RED CANYON CAFE REGISTER TAPES UNLIMITED RENEE RUMVILL, DVM. REXEL RYALL ELECTRICAL RICHARD COWELL RITA R BOSSOW ROARING FORK SHCooL DISTR ROCKYNET.COM INC ROLLY ROUNDS RON SMITH &ASSOCIATES,INC ROTARY CLUB VAlUEV ROY HOWELL SAN ISABEL TELECOM INC SAYNOMOREPROMOTIONS SCHMIDT POLYGRAPH SCOTT LINGLE SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SECURITY TRANSPORT SECURUS, INC SENTRY SECURITY FASTENERS SERVICEMASTER CLEAN SHAMROCK FOODS CORP SHAPINS ASSOCIATES SHCNURSERY AND SHEAFFER KAREN SHERI MINTZ SIMON PROPERTY SERVICES SINTON DAIRY COMPANY SONJA FARNUM SOURCE GAS SPRONK WATER ENGINEERS STATE OF COLORADO STATE OF FLORIDA STEPHANIE GLENWRIGHT STEPHEN ELZINGA STERICYCLE INC SUPPORT PAYMENT SUSAN NARDUZZI SUSPENSE FUND TAMMI MATTHEWS TEAK SIMONTON REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REFUND SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 17.40 153.00 5,832.75 63.00 1,344.15 57.20 300.00 878.05 3,770.33 277.11 164.95 198.05 350.00 804.05 750.00 2,045.00 46.87 952.00 11 0.30 20,000.00 300.00 63.60 550.00 265.00 528.36 117.42 1,940.57 400.00 144.03 167.85 2,764.92 1,101.83 168.72 2,991.00 1,144.22 6,788.99 39.80 113.27 232.07 1,135.00 342.84 22.59 3,881.43 986.10 472.56 851.84 112.20 9.03 1,616.56 363.00 69.00 290,919.25 53.10 515.77 6 01/08/08 TETRA TECH RMC, INC. SERVICE 11,671.67 THE FLOWER CART SERVICE 42.99 THE OLD GYPSUM PRINTER SUPPLIES 137.00 THE PARENTS HANDBOOK SUPPLIES 1,200.00 THOMSON WEST GROUP SERVICE 5,858.26 TODD BONATTI REFUND 44.00 TONI BERNS REIMBURSEMENT 174.60 TOWN OF EAGLE SERVICE 4,724.91 TOWN OF REDCLIFF SERVICE 601.42 TRANECOMPANY SERVICE 16,938.00 TRAVIS YOUNG REFUND 41.90 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC SERVICE 2,350.00 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE SERVICE 288.58 UNITED SITE SERVICES SUPPLIES 163.20 UNITED WAY OF EAGLE SERVICE 20.00 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 22,020.44 US FooDSERVICE INC SUPPLIES 2,589.01 VAG INCORPORATED SERVICE 1,717.65 V AIL BOARD OF REALTORS SERVICE 275.00 VAIL DAILY THE SERVICE 1,676.02 V AIL ELECTRONICS SERVICE 1,122.78 V AIL MOUNTAIN COFFEE SUPPLIES 121.50 V AILNET INC SERVICE 11.95 V ALLEY LUMBER SUPPLIES 286.95 V ALLEY VIEW HOSPITAL SERVICE 180.00 VAN DIEST SUPPLY COMPANY SERVICE 487.00 VERIFICATIONS INC SERVICED 893.55 VERlZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 7,116.15 VIRGINIA BAIR REIMBURSEMENT 7.20 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 38,681.07 VISffiLE COMPUTER SUPPLY C SUPPLIES 249.76 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 1,528.54 WECMRD SERVICE 1,100.00 WELLS FARGO SERVICE 622,303.39 WESTERN SLOPE BAR SUPPLIES 61.60 WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 1,215.48 WILLIAM G HOLBECK PC SERVICE 9,526.88 WINZENBURG,LEFF,PURVIS REFUND 30.00 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS SERVICE 928.13 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 19.13 XCEL ENERGY SERVICE 310.55 XEROX CORPORATION SUPPLIES 6,536.09 Y AMP A V ALLEY ELECTRIC SERVICE 88.28 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 590.69 ZERO TO THREE SERVICE 144.30 ZOBEYDA ARGELIA REYES SERVICE 200.00 1,650,791.83 DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 &26 1,370,956.74 3,021,748.57 ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND ACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 138.00 ADAMS RIB RECREATIONAL REFUND 250.00 AMERIGAS SERVICE 2,208.80 7 01/08/08 BAND B EXCAVATING BELLYACHE RIDGE METRO DIS BRATTON ENTERPRISE, INC. CHARLIE COOPER COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COPY PLUS CORPORATE EXPRESS EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE VALLEY MEDICAL ELAM CONSTRUCTION INCORPO ENVIROTECH FRED BURTON GLENDA'S CATERING GROUND CONTROL EXCAVATING HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HOMESTEAD OWNERS ASSOC. HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS JOHN T HARRIS KUMMER DEVELOPMENT LAFARGE CORPORATION LAUREN A. GAYLORD LONCO INC MODESTO SANCHEZ MOUNTAIN EQUIPMENT NAPA AUTO PARTS-CARBONDLE OLSON PROPERTY PAPER WISE RAY LONG SAFETY & CONSTRUCTION SOPRIS ARCHITECTURE TOWN OF GYPSUM US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS VALLEY LUMBER VISA CARD SERVICES WASTE MANAGEMENT WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XEROX CORPORATION Y AMP A VALLEY ELECTRIC DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL EARLY CHILDHOOD FUND AGNES HARAKAL ALANNA DENISE HART AMY DRUMMET ANDREW JOHN LINKE ANNE HELENE GARBERY BROWN ATHENA MCCORMICK CATHERINE MARIE SPANGLER CHAD YOUNG CHANTELLE Marie KIEFER COLLEEN D. WIDLAK SUPPLIES REFUND SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REFUND SERVICE REFUND SERVICED SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REFUND SUPPLIES REFUND SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REFUND SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICED SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE 120,957.40 250.00 142.74 75.00 37.28 9.71 133.72 3.00 80.00 169,274.43 10,369.53 100.00 730.00 100.00 603.66 137,452.00 1,441.72 75.00 1,315.00 61,969.15 100.00 1,573.67 75.00 5,958.00 1.99 72.67 46.14 150.00 876.73 9,959.77 338.33 363.28 42.49 7.26 48.46 24.35 13,200.00 274.75 579.77 120.47 541,529.27 126,441.19 667,970.46 PAYROLL 25 & 26 REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 200.00 500.00 800.00 600.00 600.00 200.00 200.00 1,100.00 1,100.00 300.00 8 01/08/08 COURTNEY E SNOWDON REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 CYNTHIA A. LAGACE REIMBURSEMENT 800.00 DARLENE PRITCHARD REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 ELIZABETH ANNE REIMBURSEMENT 600.00 ELIZABETH LINDSAY HINTON REIMBURSEMENT 800.00 ELIZABETH ROBINSON REIMBURSEMENT 700.00 ERIKA ROSENBERGER REIMBURSEMENT 700.00 FAMILY LEARNING CENTER SERVICE 30,000.00 GLORIA VASQUEZ REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 HEATHER J POTTS REIMBURSEMENT 1,500.00 HEATHER WEST REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 HOLLY K. BERRY REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 JACL YN C. EISENMANN REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 JANE M. MERTEN REIMBURSEMENT 800.00 JENNIFER WADE REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 JENNY J. HEJMANEK REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 JESSICA MARIE DEERR REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 JUDY ASKELSON REIMBURSEMENT 600.00 JULIE K. LINGLE REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 KAREN M GALLAWAY REIMBURSEMENT 600.00 KASSANDRA J GERBER REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 KATHY REED REIMBURSEMENT 400.00 LIDIA X. BONILLA REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 LISA JEAN CHAPLE REIMBURSEMENT 900.00 LUCIA ANITA YEO REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 MARC THOMAS REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 REBECCA A YOUNG REIMBURSEMENT 1,100.00 MARSHALL KELLY CLAMONS REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 MICHELLE OGER REIMBURSEMENT 900.00 NICOLE PIECHOCK REIMBURSEMENT 900.00 PAMELA T. MATTSON REIMBURSEMENT 800.00 PATRICIA ANDERSON-HAND REIMBURSEMENT 400.00 RAQUEL VILLASENOR REIMBURSEMENT 1,100.00 REBECCA A YOUNG REIMBURSEMENT 600.00 RONDA DENE LEE REIMBURSEMENT 700.00 SANDRA JENNINGS REIMBURSEMENT 1,100.00 SHANDISE TARANGO REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 SHARON THOMPSON REIMBURSEMENT 1,750.00 SHELLY R. BAKER REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 SUSAN L. ARBANEY REIMBURSEMENT 400.00 TERESA LIN MUCKELRATH REIMBURSEMENT 700.00 VERlZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 27.02 VIRGINIA L MALLON REIMBURSEMENT 700.00 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 936.05 61,013.07 HEALTHY BABIES FUND DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 & 26 10,055.12 SOCIAL SERVICES FUND ADELA JIMENEZ REIMBURSEMENT 193.63 AIDAN FLEMING REIMBURSEMENT 108.51 AMY DAVIS REIMBURSEMENT 254.98 ANGELICA DUQUE REIMBURSEMENT 126.36 BEVERLY J. ADAMS SERVICE 350.00 9 01/08/08 CATHERINE ZAKOIAN, M.A. COLORADO WEST MENTAL HLTH CORPORATE EXPRESS DARLENE MONTANO OOLPHIN CAPITAL CORP DOREEN CONSTANINE EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF EAGLE RIVER WATER AND FORINASH KATHLEEN GARFIELD COUNTY SHERIFF HEWLETT PACKARD HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INSIGHT JEFFREY APODACA AND/OR JOHN C COLLINS PC JOHN FAY KIDS FIRST LABORATORY CORPORATION OF LEXISNEXIS COURTLINK INC LITERACY PROJECT LYONS KATHLEEN NICHOLAS J HOEGER OLSON PROPERTY PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING QUILL CORPORATION RACHAEL BORRE REBECCA LARSON SWEEP STAKES UNLIMITED VAIL HONEYWAGON LID VERIZON WIRELESS, VISA CARD SERVICES XEROX CORPORATION DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL WRAP FUND JAPAN KARATE ASSOC VAIL VISA CARD SERVICES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND ADAIR BUSINESS SYSTEMS BAND B EXCAVATING CARTER & BURGESS, INC CEA VCO AUDIO VISUAL CORNERSTONE MASONRY EVANS CHAFFEE HAMMOND CUSTOM BUILDERS LAFARGE CORPORATION NEW WORLD SYSTEMS PACIFIC SURVEY SUPPLY PEAK LAND SURVEYING INC SOPRIS ARCHITECTURE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES 225.00 405.00 250.77 67.77 79.00 125.96 30.60 178.41 17.82 26.80 2,055.00 752.34 181.11 1,606.12 300.00 8,092.00 116.71 6,830.00 414.00 53.35 34,421.22 74.45 343.26 1,915.00 100.00 88.87 290.24 455.46 45.00 97.31 725.69 1,277.85 563.41 63,239.00 119,287.43 182,526.43 PAYROLL 25 & 26 SERVICE SERVICE 270.00 150.00 420.00 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE 349.80 15,517.00 11,391.55 2,595.00 8,092.50 300,000.00 3,617.59 268.85 6,455.20 4,995.00 3,557.50 3.939.48 10 01/08/08 360,779.47 SALES TAX E.V. TRANSP. A & E TIRE INC Al AUTO ELECTRIC COMPANY ALPINE LUMBER COMPANY ARAMARK CO AT ANDT BUFFALO RIDGE AFFORDABLE BURT CHEVROLET, INC CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING COLLETTS COLORADO DEPT REVENUE COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLUMBINE MARKET CORPORATE EXPRESS CUMMINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN DANIEL DAVIS DELTA KITS DEX MEDIA EAST LLC DOCTORS ON CALL DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE EMBROIDERY INC EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING FEDERAL EXPRESS FLORIDA MICRO GEORGE KUERSTEN GILLIG CORPORATION GOODYEAR WHOLESALE TIRE GREGORY BARRETT HI CRANES INC HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC IMP ACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS INNOVATIVE ENERGY INSTA-CHAIN INC J J KELLER JANET FIELD KINETICO WATER PROS KKCH RADIO KSKE-NRC BROADCASTING KTUN-FM RADIO KZYR-CooL RADIO LLC LUMINATOR M&MAUTOPARTS MENENDEZ ARCHITECTS PC MYRON CORPORATION NATE ME OLSON PROPERTY PAPER WISE PST ENTERPRISES INC QUILL CORPORATION QWEST SERCK SERVICES INC SILVER CREEK DEVELOPMENT STEWART AND STEVENSON SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES 6,196.44 134.44 75.13 705.68 257.57 7,580.00 475.03 417.23 1,019.18 17.60 3,910.87 50.64 976.08 2,751.92 184.00 226.01 274.62 1,315.00 6,468.83 122.00 95.00 123.23 227.00 86.00 5,017.43 580.84 240.00 385.00 2,113.87 374.10 4,546.00 4,342.00 399.24 75.34 35.00 500.00 500.00 1,000.00 2,833.00 2,311.41 42.54 4,392.88 353.88 145.00 254.46 161.57 349.32 356.73 161.51 54.12 2,200.00 2,768.81 11 01/08/08 STEWART TITLE SERVICE 267.50 TOWN OF AVON SERVICE 10,541.51 TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE 1,184.77 UNITED STATES WELDING SERVICE 28.91 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 1,272.14 V AIL V ALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE 275.00 V ALLEY LUMBER SUPPLIES 14.49 VERlZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 218..95 VlEV A J DEGRAW SUPPLIES 97.55 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 1,580.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 159.21 WESTERN SLOPE BAR SERVICE 8.80 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 19.07 XCEL ENERGY SERVICE 171.63 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 572.63 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 142.45 86,519.21 DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 & 26' 259,186.52 345,705.73 SALESTAXE.V. TRAILS COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 516.52 COPY PLUS SERVICE 100.60 FEDERAL EXPRESS SERVICE 18.13 IMP ACT GRAPHICS & SIGNS SUPPLIES 180.00 LEAGUE OF AMER BICYCLISTS SERVICE 35.00 NICOLA RIPLEY SERVICE 260.00 RAILROAD SPECIALTIES INC SERVICE 97,800.88 , SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER SERVICE 7,997.06 SEEDING THE ROCKIES INC SERVICE 4,375.00 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO SERVICE 27,630.27 VlEV A J DEGRAW SUPPLIES 35.50 WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE 1,105.00 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 88.44 140,142.40 TRANSPORTA. VEHICLE RPLCMT INTERMOUNTAIN COACH SUPPLIES 94.418.00 94,418.00 AIRPORT FUND ADAIR BUSINESS SYSTEMS SUPPLIES 1,848.50 AIRGAS INTERMOUNTAIN INC SUPPLIES 17.67 ALL PHASE ELECTRIC SUPPLY SUPPLIES 1,215.29 BALCOMB AND GREEN SERVICE 71.00 BERTHOD MOTORS SUPPLIES 17.95 BRIAN SCHOFIELD REIMBURSEMENT 255.45 CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING SUPPLIES 79.00 CHARLES PATTERSON SERVICE 239.42 CHRIS ANDERSON SUPPLIES 14.19 COOPER CROUSE HINDS SERVICE 574.21 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 11.18 CORPRATE ENVIRONMENTS SERVICE 632.15 COWBOY CATERING SERVICE 373.75 12 01/08/08 CROUSE HINDS AIRPORT DISH NETWORK DIVISION OF FIRE SAFETY DRIVE tRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE EMBROIDERY INC EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS GLENN TAYLOR HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS IDEAL FENCING CORP JAMES Y ANTZER JAY MAX SALES JENNY BECKMAN JJ KELLER AND ASSOCIATES KANSAS CITY MISSOURI LAF ARGE CORPORATION MAVERICK FLOORING MCI WORLDCOM MCNEIL'S TRUCK AND MIKE KELLY MOORE MEDICAL CORP MSK AVIATION SERVICES LLC NEXTEL OJ WATSON COMPANY INC OJ. WATSON COMPANY,INC ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO PAUL'S AIRLESS REPAIR PETTY CASH ACCOUNTING PIONEER MATERIALS RLM SOFTWARE INC ROBERT SWIER SAFETY & CONSTRUCTION SAFETY VISION LP SERCO MANAGEMENT SERVICES SHERWIN INDUSTRIES INC SKYLINE MECHANICAL SOURCE GAS SUMMITEX, LLC TIRE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS TOWN OF GYPSUM UNITED PARCEL SERVICE US CUSTOMS AND BORDER VAIL ELECTRONICS VALLEY LUMBER VISA CARD SERVICES WAGNER RENTS WASTE MANAGEMENT WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES 1,065.14 1,185.87 20.00 153.10 260.22 290.00 1,692.00 125.00 11,226.99 58.05 3,793.50 200.00 721.92 88.01 556.65 10,000.00 742.50 2,145.00 2.28 1,605.53 90.31 114.65 150.00 683.33 317.16 6,345.00 60.50 70.00 102.42 3,513.00 80.00 261.56 395.04 314.23 8,006.55 417.00 637.85 901.55 189.32 35.00 455.05 16.04 20,774.36 2,151.25 4.65 4,459.39 597.65 314.67 159.29 3,750.00 222.24 96,870.58 110,487.85 207,358.43 PAYROLL 25 &26 13 01/08/08 800 MHZ FUND CENTURYTEL OF EAGLE SERVICE 94.58 HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 3,694.90 MCI WORLDCOM SERVICE 3,254.84 QWEST SERVICE 5.101.80 12,146.12 HOUSING FUND AVID ONLINE DESIGNS SERVICE 24.00 CENTURYTEL SERVICE 134.45 CORPRATE ENVIRONMENTS SUPPLIES 252.86 EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING SUPPLIES 330.00 FUNDING PARTNERS FOR SE 71,833.00 GARFIELD COUNTY HOUSING SE 1,102.00 GOLDEN EAGLE ELDERLY SE 26,000.00 KATRINA COOPER REIMBURSEMENT 19.24 KIM BELL WILLIAMS REIMBURSEMENT 222.14 MCMAHAN & ASSOCIATES LLC SERVICE 1,275.00 MOUNTAIN REGIONAL SERVICE 3,125.00 MURRAY DAHL SERVICE 9,654.49 RRC ASSOCIATES SERVICE 1,075.00 VAIL DAILY THE SERVICE 470.30 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 233.14 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 295.86 116,046.48 DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 & 26 5,742.44 121,788.92 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL FUND DIVISION OF FIRE SAFETY SERVICE 20.00 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 121.82 141.82 OPEN SPACE FUND AMERICAN CIVIL CONSTRUCTR SERVICE 25,000.00 FIRST AMERICAN HERITAGE SERVICE 2,100,000.00 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 771.20 2,125,771.20 LANDFILL FUND AG GUTTERS SERVICE 300.00 ALAMOSA COUNTY SUPPLIES 11,880.00 ALL PRO FORMS INC SERVICE 243.40 AMERIGAS SERVICE 4,457.92 B&H SPORTS SERVICE 10.00 CAROLINA SOFTWARE SERVICE 376.40 CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH & SERVICE 652.23 DOWN V ALLEY SEPTIC SERVICE 755.00 EAGLE COUNTY AIR TERMINAL SERVICE 112,559.05 EAGLE V ALLEY ALLIANCE SERVICE 35,000.00 EMPIRE SAFETY & SUPPLY SUPPLIES 3,563.99 EVERGREEN ANALYTICAL, INC SERVICE 128.00 GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SUPPLIES 188.88 GREAT AMERICAN LEASING SERVICE 202.42 HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 813.93 14 01/08/08 KRW CONSULTING INC SERVICE 983.42 MAVERICK FLOORING SERVICE 7,265.00 POWER MOTIVE SERVICE 20,926.54 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 405.00 WESTERN SLOPE BAR SUPPLIES 82.00 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 17.43 XEROX CORPORATION SUPPLIES 20.00 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES 167.84 200,998.45 DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 &26 39,141.57 240,140.02 MOTOR POOL FUND AIDAN FLEMING SUPPLIES 69.60 AIRGAS INTERMOUNTAIN INC SERVICE 42.21 ARAMARK CO SUPPLIES 802.73 BIGHORN MOTORS SUPPLIES 162.06 BURT CHEVROLET, INC SUPPLIES 707.48 BURT FORD ON ARAPAHOE INC SUPPLIES 65.78 BURT -OODGE,CHRYSLER,JEEP SUPPLIES 564.52 CASTLE PEAK AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLIES 119.57 CENTURYTEL OF EAGLE SERVICE 175.37 COLLETTS SERVICE 159,284.40 CORPORATE EXPRESS SUPPLIES 278.14 CRAIG POFF REIMBURSEMENT 400.00 DOCTORS ON CALL SERVICE 105.00 DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES SUPPLIES 127.90 EAGLE EMBROIDERY INC SERVICE 97.50 GLENWooD RADIATOR REPAIR SUPPLIES 309.90 GOODYEAR WHOLESALE TIRE SUPPLIES 2,338.72 HANSON EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES 369.39 HENSLEY BATTERY SUPPLIES 958.62 HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 1,560.70 HONNEN EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES 228.30 JJKELLER SUPPLIES 171.25 JOHN FAY SUPPLIES 10.01 KAREN HOEGER SUPPLIES 27.46 M&MAUTOPARTS SUPPLIES 1,238.58 MAIN AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 13.59 NEW PIG CORPORATION SUPPLIES 259.22 NICHOLAS J HOEGER SUPPLIES 39.89 NOVUS AUTOGLASS SERVICE 1,335.00 OJ WATSON COMPANY INC SUPPLIES 328.11 OLSON PROPERTY SERVICE 187.87 PAPER WISE SUPPLIES 119.29 POWER MOTIVE SUPPLIES 1,680.54 PREMIER TIRE TERMINAL SUPPLIES 663.72 PST ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES 1,096.62 ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLEET SERVICE 210.00 SAFETY KLEEN SERVICE 207.40 TIMBERLINE STEEL SUPPLIES 61.38 TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE 874.72 US CLEANING PROFESSIONALS SERVICE 1,973.33 VISA CARD SERVICES SERVICE 438.30 WAGNER EQUIPMENT COMPANY SUPPLIES 2,437.87 15 01/08/08 WASTE MANAGEMENT WESTERN COLORADO WESTERN SLOPE SUPPLIES WHITEHALL'S ALPINE WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XEROX CORPORATION ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE 114.54 209,306.71 63.25 395.51 41.40 100.68 242.91 392,407.04 66,994.40 459,401.44 DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 & 26 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND AFLAC ATTN:RPS DENMAN GREY AND COMPANY MOUNTAIN STATES ADMIN. MUTUAL OF OMAHA SUSPENSE FUND THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE UNITED STATES LIFE INS SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 3,188.18 3,234.95 54,351.04 4,028.92 81.75 4,799.96 2.786.80 72,471.60 ENHANCED E911 FUND LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES QWEST ROAM SECURE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 634.55 11,423.33 18.600.00 30,657.88 DECEMBER 2007 BILL PAYING DECEMBER 2007 PAYROLL PAYROLL 25 &26 6,046,363.42 2.108.293.26 TOTAL 8,154,656.68 Executive Session It was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed to go into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice and discussing matters that may be subject to negotiations regarding a pending real estate sale which is an appropriate topic for discussion pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b) and (e) Colorado Revised Statutes. It was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn from Executive Session. Consent Agenda Chairman Menconi stated the fIrst item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of bill paying for the week of January 7, 2008 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative B. Approval of the minutes of the Eagle County Board of Commissioners meeting for November 13,2007 Teak Simonton, Clerk & Recorder C. Agreement between Eagle County and Heritage Park Building and Development, Inc. for snowplowing services Road & Bridge Department Representative D. Engagement Letter between Eagle County and Genesis Inc., for airport branding services 16 01/08/08 Justin Finestone, Communications E. Service Agreement between Eagle County and Granicus, Inc. for the purchase of software, hardware and professional services to facilitate streaming and distribution of live and archived video and audio content Justin Finestone, Communications F. Third Amendment to Agreement for Service and Support of the Eagle County 800 MHz Smartzone Communications System between County of Eagle, State of Colorado and Legacy communications, Inc. County Attorney's Office 1 Emergency Management G. Amended Easement Agreement between Bruce C. Eaton, Grimshaw Eaton, LLC and Eagle County County Attorney's Office Representative H. Agreement between Eagle County and John Collins, P.C., Special County Attorney Marian McDonough, Health & Human Services I. Agreement between Eagle County and Early Childhood Partners for "Child Find" program Health & Human Services Representative J. Joint Funding Agreement between Eagle County and the US Geological Survey for water resources investigations Ray Merry, Environmental Health K. Cordillera Subdivision Filing No. 23, Lot 1 & Lot 2. The intent of this plat is to vacate the lot line between Lot 1 and Lot 2 in order to allow for a buffer zone and increase the size of Lot 1 (Eagle County File No. AFP-00262) Lisa de Graaf, Planning Chairman Menconi asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Bryan Treu, County Attorney stated that the agenda was appropriate for approval. Commissioner Runyon moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A-K. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Citizen Input There was none Service Plan for Ruedi Shores Metropolitan District - Receipt of Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission's Recommendations and Scheduling of Hearing for January 22, 2008 County Attorney's Office 1 Community Development Mr. Treu stated that it is a statutory requirement that within 10 days ofthe Planning Commission hearing this file the board must receive the recommendation and schedule a hearing. Commissioner Runyon moved that the board accept the recommendation of the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Planning Commission and schedule the hearing for January 22, 2008 at 1 :30 pm. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Fisher made note that she would not be present for that hearing. Commissioner Runyon moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and re-convene as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority. 17 01/08/08 Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Eagle County Liquor License Authority Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office Consent Agenda Renewals A. EI Jebel, LLC d/b/a EI Jebel Convenience Store This is a renewal for a 3.2% Beer License in El Jebel. There have been no complaints or disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on file in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. B. Marko's Pizzeria of Edwards, Inc. d/bla Marko's Pizzeria This is a renewal for a Hotel and Restaurant License in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on file in the Clerk's Office and proof of server training has been provided. Other Consent C. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc d/bla Saddleridge Restaurant This is a Manager's Registration for Saddleridge Restaurant in Beaver Creek. Beaver Creek Food Services, Inc wishes to register Jeffrey Baker as its new Manager. The application is complete and the necessary fees have been paid. Mr. Baker is of good moral character, based upon Sheriff and CBI reports. Commissioner Runyon moved that the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for January 18, 2008, consisting of Items A-C. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Fisher moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re-convene as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation County Attorney's Office 1 Airport Representatives 1. Approval of minutes of October 30, 2007 meeting. Ms. Fisher moved to approve the minutes of October 30, 2007 meeting Mr. Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 2. Consideration of First Amendment to Agreement for Operation of Retail Concession between Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and Charlie's Shirts. Mr. Anderson stated that the agreement would extend the contract for operations through April 15, 2008. Mr. Runyon moved to approve the Agreement for lease extension between Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and Charlie's Shirts. Ms. Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 3. Consideration of Agreement for Operation of Retail Concession between Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and Victoria Thorpe. 18 01/08/08 Mr. Anderson stated Victoria Thorpe is a massage therapist. This agreement would allow her to offer chair massage services in the terminal concourse. So far, the response has been positive. They would like to enter into an agreement with Victoria for ongoing Friday and Saturday chair massage services through April. It would be at a share of 25% of gross revenue. Ms. Fisher moved to approve the Agreement for Operation of Retail Concession between Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and Victoria Thorpe. Mr. Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 4. New Business Ms. Fisher wondered about the recycling program at the terminal. Mr. Anderson stated that the recycling center for the terminal is undergoing its final steps in the construction phase. They are working on getting receptacles into the terminal by the end of January, or early February. They will first start with recycling glass, aluminum, plastic, cardboard and paper. Chairman Menconi asked Mr. Anderson to summarize what worked and did not work over last couple of weeks, the busiest time of year, at the airport. Mr. Anderson stated that almost everything worked outside of the weather. There were very few delays and cancellations however, 99% of the flights were able to run through the winter season. The airport was even able to accept some diversions that were supposed to land at DIA. With the new radar and instrument landing system, it has really increased the airport's capacity and the landing ability for other aircraft. Inside the airport terminal, the new food and beverage concessions have increased their point of sale outlets and the lines have completely dwindled. Passengers are commenting and giving positive feedback on menu choices, the speed and efficiency of the service and the quality of food which has been positive. The TSA checkpoint on the busiest day; last Saturday did not exceed a 25-minute wait. Overall, everything has been running well. Mr. Menconi stated that he was told that a United flight had come in and used the same conveyer belt when others were open. He wondered how this could be corrected and whether ot nor it happened. Mr. Anderson stated that there have been two occasions to his knowledge where one carousel was used for two flights. This can happen in one of two instances. One, if there are more airplanes being unloaded than there are carousels. The other would be if a baggage handler put two flights on one carrousel. This is a matter of training. Mr. Menconi wondered if during Christmas week it is abnormal to walk up to the counter and rent a car for $500 dollars a week or more. The concern ofthe complaint was price gouging. He wondered what responsibility the county has as the operator of the airport. Mr. Baumgartner stated that the county exercises a practice of street pricing which provides some flexibility of what the market is for similar places and similar products. Pricing is addressed in the lease terms. Mr. Treu stated that they try to address through competition as well. They have brought two new rental car operations on into the terminal. Mr. Menconi stated that he didn't want to get too far into controlling prices. Mr. Anderson stated that the airport could take a deeper look into the contracts, talk to the individual owners, and update the board on what they fmd. Mr. Runyon stated that he understands that there is seasonal pricing, but at some pointthere needs to be reasonable limits. Mr. Baumgartner stated that he would provide a report next week. Commissioner Runyon moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Air Terminal Corporation and re-convene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 19 01/08/08 Planning Files PDS-00053 OK Corral Camp Lisa de Graaf, Planning Department ACTION: The purpose of this Planned Unit Development/Sketch Plan is to build a camp for children with chronic medical conditions. FILE NO./PROCESS: PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: OWNER: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PDS-00053/Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan OK Corral Camp Planned Unit Development On the Colorado River Road, approximately 8 miles north of Dotsero Ruth Johnson/Shipley Craighead LLC Owner Tom Braun 1 Braun and Associates 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY OF REOUEST: This proposal request is for a Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan on an 85-acre parcel along the Colorado River Road. The project proposes an overnight camp that will provide a safe, fun environment for children with chronic and life-threatening medical conditions. The parcel is currently zoned Resource. Resort Recreational facilities are allowed via special use review in the Resource zone but does not allow for the range of uses and development contemplated by the project; therefore a PUD is being sought. Please see attached map. The Camp was approved for 501(c)(3) status as a tax-exempt entity on June 21, 2006 and has an existing Board of Directors comprised of local community-minded people. The design of the Camp is being led by Morter Architects. Hermes Resort Property was chosen as the contractor; all offering their time on a pro bono basis. It is expected the Camp will be built in three phases. Initially after phase 1 construction, the Camp would serve up to sixty (60) campers and when full build-out is completed; up to 120 kids could be served at anyone time. Programming will be typical camp programming including arts and crafts, wood shop, a ropes course, fishing and boating in a pond, indoor and outdoor games, horse back riding, swimming, archery and more. The Camp will employ approximately twenty-one (21) full-time year-round staff; including the camp director, assistant director, medical director, facilities, administration, etc. It is anticipated that one-half of these employees will work out of an office in Edwards and half would work at the Camp. Of those at the camp, all will have housing except for seven (7) full-time seasonal employees such as cooks and housekeepers that will not be provided housing at the Camp. In addition, thirty-six (36) counselors will be filled via national and state-wide recruitment and will have housing at the Camp as will the forty (40) volunteers. Ultimately there will be up to 104 employees and 120 campers. The buildings being contemplated for the Camp and their approximate sizes are: . Dining hall 12,000 SF . SportS & recreation building at 12,000 SF plus an attached indoor pool at 4,70081<' . Indoor theater 10,000 SF . Medical center 6,000 SF . Arts & crafts center 5,000 SF . 2 storage & maintenance buildings totaling 4,000 SF . 12 camper cabins at 3,000 SF each . Up to 3 staff & volunteer housing buildings at 4,000 SF each . Director housing 6,000 SF 20 01/08/08 . Open-air riding arena 12,000 SF . Horse barn 2,500 SF . Gate house 200 SF B. SITE DATA: East: Private owned Private owned Union Pacific rail ROW /Private owned Colorado River 1 BLM Resource Resource North: South: Resource Package Plant Via Colorado River Road 3,702,600 SF N/A N/A N/A N/A C. CHRONOLOGYIBACKGROUND: 2007 Application for this PUD Sketch Plan proposal was received by Eagle County. D. PLANNING COMMISSION DELffiERATION SUMMARY & MOTION: The Eagle County Planning Commission heard this file on December 19,2007. There was an extensive and informative presentation by the applicants' representative, Tom Braun and there were three people who spoke at the public comment portion ofthe meeting. Their concerns include: . Impacts to wildlife in winter - limit use of camp and limit types of use such as no snowmobiles or ATV's; include closures from December 1st through March 1st . The development is not clustered; move structures more to the middle of the parcel and centralize the development. . The parcel may be a good location for a Fire House; may consider as a public benefit to allow fire district to use a portion of the property. . The parcel would be a centralized location for heath services that could be provided to the public. . The sketch plan application shows the development would have approximately 100,000 + square feet of floor area. Too much for the site. This varies too much from the underlying zone district (Resource). 21 01/08/08 · Two commissioners disclosed they had some distant interest in the Camp, but had no fmancial gain; a citizen thought that the commissioners should reconsider this in their review of the file. · A strong concern this file would open development (pressures) to the Colorado River Road and set precedence that may not be good for the area. · A citizen cautioned if this file is approved, the County should extend the same density of development to others on the River Road. In the deliberation from the Planning Commissioners' , many items of concern were mentioned; they include: . Although the applicant has done a good job listening to the neighbors and adjusting the development to address their concerns, more work needs to be done and encourage the applicant to continue to work with the community. · A strong beliefthat the approval ofthis file may set precedence to develop up the River Road. . Further development on the River Road may set up more demands from residences for services and more development will be needed. . Impact fees (new) should be considered as well as ECO Build. . All commissioners should look at the file from a land use prospective and not necessarily as a kid's Camp. . A public benefit should be provided. . All concerns from housing, engineering and others need to be addressed prior to Preliminary Plan application. . More design information is needed. . This could be a positive "landmark" for the County. . More clustering is needed. . The sense that this file could be precedent setting should be over-looked when reviewing the file. . One condition was added: To work with the DOW for an agreement to mitigate wildlife impacts, prior to Preliminary Plan submittal. File PDS-00053, OK Corral Camp was unanimously recommended for approval with conditions. 2. STAFF REPORT A. NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5-240 Sketch Plan for PUD Section Purpose: For the Applicant, the County and the public to evaluate and discuss the basic concepts for development of the proposed PUD, and to consider whether the development of the property as a PUD will result in a significant improvement over its development as a conventional subdivision. The degree to which the plan conforms to the intent of applicable land use regulations and provisions of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan is determined, as is the compatibility of the proposal with surrounding land uses. General agreement is reached regarding the types of uses, dimensional limitations, layout, access, and the means of water supply and sewage disposal. The outcome of sketch plan review should be an identification of issues and concerns the Applicant must address if the project is to receive approval of a Preliminary Plan. 22 01/08/08 Standards: Section 5-240.F.3.e., Standards is used to evaluate a Sketch Plan application. Given its conceptual nature, standards that must be met at Preliminary Plan will likely not be fully addressed by sketch plan material. It must therefore be determined, based on submitted evidence, whether applicable standards will be able to be met at Preliminary Plan. H the information supplied is found to be sufficiently vague or if it is doubtful that the proposal would be able to meet a specific Standard, then a negative finding must be made for that Standard 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 P UD. The subject property will not be subdivided, although it will be platted, and as such will be owned/controlled by one entity. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 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 effectfor 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. Recreational facility, day cam Duplex/muliti- famil dwellin s The Camp will include uses not currently allowed in the Resource Zone District. The applicant confirms that a formal application for Variations Authorized will be made as part of the Preliminary Plan submittal. H the Board of County Commissioners approves the PUD Preliminary Plan then, they will also have granted a variation to the land uses. X Special Use required X ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 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",jor 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 F3j, 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. 23 01/08/08 Yes Yes Poss Yes Yes Yes Section 5-240.F.3.f., Variations Authorized, provides that in order for a variation to be granted, it must be found that the granting of the variation is necessary for the purpose to be achieved, and that the Sketch Plan for PUD achieves one or more of the following purposes: Pun Achievement(s): Yes Obtains desired design qualities; Yes A voids environmental resources and natural resources; No Provides incentives for water au~entation; No Provides incentives for trails; No Provides incentives for affordable housing; No Provides incentives for public facilities. Dimensional Limitation ECLUR Justification (Proposed) Requirement , ..'".,. , Setbacks Front: Building NI A Compliant ParkinJ:!; 25 Feet 50 Feet Rear: Building NI A Compliant Parking 15 Feet 12.5 Feet Side: Building NI A Compliant ParkinJ:!; 15 Feet 12.5 Feet Stream: N/A 75 Feet Compliant Heicl1t: 35 Feet 35 Feet Compliant Floor Area Ratio: N/A N/A Max Impervious: N/A N/A Max Footprint: N/A N/A Although the setbacks and other information was not provided by the applicant, the site plan indicates that the proposed structures will meet the ECLUR Standards ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOESNOTMEET~MUMSTANDARDS 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 24 01/08/08 and Loading Standards. A reduction in these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that: (a) Shared Parking. Because of shared parking arrangements among uses within the PUD that do not require peak parking for those uses to occur at the same time, the parking needs of residents, guests and employees of the project will be met; or (b) Actual Needs. The actual needs of the project's residents, guests and employees will be less than those set by Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The applicant may commit to provide specialized transportation services for these persons (such as vans, subsidized bus passes, or similar services) as a means of complying with this standard The applicant responded that definitive parking requirements will be determined during the preliminary plan design process, however the applicant anticipates that parking will be in compliance with County standards. The applicant provided the following information: 40 parking spaces will be located for staff housing; 40 parking spaces will be provided for the administration building, medical facility and additional housing areas; 10 parking spaces will be provided in the area associated with the barn. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM 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. Variationsfrom 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. x x x X Xl Xl X X X Xl X Xl J:>l>.~~?~ Re uirem Xl - The Conceptual Landscape Plan provides a glimpse of where there will be shrubs, trees and turf; however no specific information is given on types or sizes. Also, specifics relative to landscape berms and installation and maintenance is not provided. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Signs. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (6)] - The sign standards applicable to the PUD shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 3, Sign Regulations. unless, as provided in Section 4-340 D., Signs Allowed in a Planned Unit Development (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. 25 01/08/08 D Comprehensive Sign Plan Provided? DYes [L1 No Signage is proposed to conform to all applicable ECLUR standards and will be provided at Preliminary Plan. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Adequate Facilities. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (7)] - The applicant shall demonstrate that the development proposed in the (Sketch) 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. Exceeds ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR Requirements NotApplicableINo ECLUR Requirements Does Not Satisty ECLUR Re uirements I)eviationlVIS Requested In proximity to schools, police & fire protection, & emergency medical services .. ~ <I.l ~ <1,)= ~.... ] .2>. ~.~ .c- ~.~ "'0:::10 '.s,C ~.. ~ ~ ~ =~ y c.. .<1,) c.. <I,) is 0'- ~..::S Q..,.Q) lZl lZlCl ~lZl X X X X X Xl Xl: The Gypsum Fire District did not respond, therefore the determination of sufficiency is not available at this time. It has been relayed to staff however that access for emergency vehicles is adequate and the needs for fire suppression/sprinkling buildings would be finalized at preliminary plan ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Improvements. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (8)] - The improvement standards applicable to the development shall be as specified in Article 4, Division 6, Imorovements 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 26 01/08/08 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. x x Xl Xl: No information regarding snow storage has been provided, although it is likely that adequate snow storage can be met on the 85 acre site. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.FJ.e (9)] - The development proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. East: Residence! Ag Residence/Ag Residence/BLM Resource X X South: Resource x West: Resource X The subject property has adjacent neighbors on nearly every side of the property, although some may not be close in proximity. All existing uses are agricultural in character. The applicant has worked closely with the neighbors and has done a good job adjusting the 27 01/08/08 project to address their concerns; thereby increasing compatibility between the dissimilar uses. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Consistency with Comprehensive 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. EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN u u a 5 ;> o o 5 8- .9 u ;> u Q u '" .- 8 g ~ 6 ~ ~~ ~ 'fil ~ e '" .a 8 H _ a '" u e 5 ;:l 1<1 ~ ~~ '" <2 8 :=~ -00 := 00 ~~.. '" -0 a ...:l u .~ ... 'fil is CIl <;j 5 ~ ~ . E.~ .... <;j ~ ::l >:Ll0' Exceeds Reconunendations Incorporates Majority of Recommendations Does N91 InC()rporate Recommendations Xl X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 Not Applicable x Below are the Recommended Strategies to accomplish each of the stated Comprehensive Plan Policies: Xl: DeveloDment · "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to preserve the natural beauty and environmental integrity of Eagle County". The subject property, in its current state, is not natural and the proposed development will necessitate complete modification of the site conditions. · "Work to identify and preserve quality of life characteristics like outstanding recreationalfacilities, open space, clean air and water, uncrowded roads, quiet neighborhoods, unique cultural events and quality services". This facility will incorporate a "quality of life" entity to all that visit. · "Incorporate population and job growth data compiled by the State Demographer into development decisions and long range planning objectives". Population and job growth data were not addressed in the application materials, and it is uncertain how many employees will be brought in from outside of Eagle County. · "Promote compact, mixed-use development within or adjacent to existing community centers". This is not applicable to this development. . "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to improve social equity". The proposed development creates this through its Mission. . "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to maintain a healthy economy". The camper's families, staff and volunteers will provide a benefit to the local economy. · "Intersperse parks and properly scaled public spaces within and throughout areas of higher-density development". This is a private development that does provide many green areas for the campers to enjoy. · "Consistently apply and enforce Eagle County Land Use Regulation development standards". This is the purpose of the PUD Sketch Plan evaluation. . "Analyze development applications for conformance to the County's Future Land Use Map". The subject property is designated on the Future Land Use Map as Rural Lands. 28 01/08/08 · "Continue to allow variations from underlying zoning standards to be obtained through a Planned Unit Development but require clustering within the P UD to the benefit of the surrounding community". The proposal will require variations for uses but clustering is not anticipated. Indeed relaxing the standards is necessary and appropriate for this proposal. Whether or not the proposal will benefit the surrounding community is subjective. · "Require new commercial development to provide workforce housing or to provide land for workforce housing". Housing for employees and volunteers is a component of the application, however if it's completely sufficient is still being negotiated. · "Design and locate development to minimize and / or mitigate identified impacts". The site design of the proposed development has been well thought out; no structures will be built in the flood plain, camper's cabins are clustered with recreation and medical buildings and staff housing has been separated for privacy and convenience. D: Economic Resources · "Ensure that commercial/retail development occurs in locations that are compatible with surrounding uses". Is not applicable to this development. · "Consider the impact of each second home development on the jobs to housing balance ". This proposal is not expected to effect second home owner development. · "Develop the services and businesses that will benefit a growing senior population". The proposal does not specify services and business to support a growing senior population. · "Encourage retirement housing as part of mixed-use developments in existing towns and unincorporated communities". This is not applicable to this development. · "Select sites for retirement housing that are suitable in regards to local support services, emergency services and transportation", The project does not target retirement housing. · "Apply Workforce Housing Guidelines and require commercial developers to mitigate their project's impact on the jobs to housing balance of the area". On-site housing is an important component of the Camp. Four dwelling units are proposed as well as "dormitory-style" housing for approximately 40 staff members and volunteers. · "Limit the expansion of commercial zoning in unincorporated Eagle County to that necessary to serve the needs of the immediate local population". This is not applicable to this development. · "Allow the development of new service commercial and industrial uses in suitable locations provided such uses are properly buffered from surrounding properties". This is not applicable to this development. · "Encourage but limit commercial development in residential neighborhoods to local businesses that serve the basic needs of near by residents". This is not applicable to this development. · "Encourage live-work arrangements within community centers by promoting compact mixed-use development, pedestrian scaled retail areas and intercommunity public transportation". Four dwelling units are proposed as well as "dormitory-style" housing for approximately 40 staff members and volunteers. X3: Housinf! · "Affordable workforce housing should be located near job centers". On-site housing is an important component of the Camp. Four dwelling units are proposed as well as "dormitory-style" housing for approximately 40 staff members and volunteers. · "Provide incentives to developers who develop workforce housing", This proposal is not for affordable housing but some housing is provided for employees. · "Continue to require a Local Resident Housing Planfor all new development applications as required by the Local Resident Housing Guidelines", On-site housing is an important component of the Camp. Four dwelling units are proposed as well as "dormitory-style" housing for approximately 40 staff members and volunteers. · "Mandate that attainable workforce housing be considered part of the required infrastructure for all new development applications". The applicant intends to negotiate and work through the employee housing component of this proposal in detail at preliminary plan since the numbers may change slightly as the proposal becomes more definite. See letters of correspondence attached. · "Continue to utilize Inclusionary Housing and Employee Housing Linkage as defined in the Local Resident Housing Guidelines in the review of development applications". The Eagle County Housing Director 29 01/08/08 and the applicant are in the process of negotiating the specific number of housing units to employees that should be provided. X4: Infrastructure and Services · "Locate new development in areas served by adequate roads and paths, and within reasonable distance to a mass transit hub ". The development associated with this proposal is located 8 miles from Dotsero. It is anticipated that most campers will arrive to the Camp by means of shuttles and buses either from Eagle or Denver. · "Assure that road and trail improvements are completed concurrent to the completion of new development". Access to the Camp is provided buy the Colorado River Road. Improvements to the one-lane bridge adjacent to the subject property are planned for the future and will be funded by the County. See attached letter from the County engineer department. · Ensure appropriate transportation considerations are included in subdivision improvement agreements ". This is the purpose of a Subdivision Improvements Agreement. · "Work with mass transit providers to expand service ", ECO Transit did not respond to this proposal and may not be applicable to this development. · Encourage transit oriented development ", This is not applicable in regards to this proposal. · "Promote pedestrian malls and provide adequate parking on the perimeter of shopping areas to encourage walking ". This is not applicable in regards to this proposal. · "Encourage a network of walking trails within towns and community centers that connect typical community destinations (bus stops, schools, businesses, parks, playgrounds, etc.) with seamless pedestrian infrastructure ". The proposal does include pedestrian circulation throughout the subject property and include playgrounds for the campers. · "Within towns and community centers, retrofit public roads with parallel pedestrian routes and marked street crossings ". This proposal does not include any off-site pedestrian routes. · "Design streetscapes to include pedestrian friendly amenities like window spaces, store fronts, landscaping, plaza areas, marked cross walks and traffic speed controls ". This is not applicable in regards to this proposal. · "Promote the use of Planned Unit Developments to increase flexibility in planning and design ". Of all possible development scenarios, the Planned Unit Development process provides the greatest flexibility in planning and design. · "Promote live-work arrangements where appropriate ". The development application does propose to include housing for employees at the camp. · "Encourage an appropriate mix of retail and office locations in new neighborhoods to reduce reliance on personal cars ". This is not applicable in regards to this proposal. · "Evaluate all development proposals using Eagle County Land Use Regulation Road Standards ". Eagle County does review all development proposals using the Eagle County Land Use Regulation Road Standards. In this instance, there are concerns regarding the main access road; staff requests that the road meet County standards up to turn off for camper cabins. · "Assure adequate access for emergency responders ". The Gypsum Fire District did not respond to the referral however the details are expected to be finalized at preliminary plan. The fire flow requirements are not known at this time. Building construction may need to incorporate more fire resistant materials and sprinkling. · "Require demonstration that all new developments will be adequately served by emergency and community services", To date, only the ambulance district has responded by asking questions about what type of medical conditions are anticipated and what are the medical services provided at the Camp; their letter is attached. · "Encourage new commercial development to provide childcare as an amenity". This is the nature ofthe proposal. · "Use House Bill 1 041 powers to fully evaluate proposals for new water and sewer lines and proposals for new or expanded water or sewer treatment plants ". If this PUD Sketch Plan is approved then, concurrent with the PUD Preliminary Plan application, a 1041 Permit for new water and sewer lines and efficient utilization of water and sewer infrastructure will be required. · "Require the installation of water and sewer service infrastructure concurrent to development". If this PUD Sketch Plan is approved then, concurrent with the PUD Preliminary Plan application, a 1041 30 01/08/08 Permit for new water and sewer lines and efficient utilization of water and sewer infrastructure will be required. Installation of the water and sewer infrastructure will be required concurrent to the development. · "Require detailed transportation analysis at the preliminary approval". A traffic study has been provided and reviewed; there are no anticipated problems at this time. · "Provide a diversity of housing choices and prices throughout the entire county". This is not applicable in regards to this proposal. X5: Water Resources · "Require developers to demonstrate that a legal and physical water supply exists for their development". If this PUD Sketch Plan application is approved, concurrent with the PUD Preliminary Plan, a 1041 Permit must also be obtained. The 1041 Permit process will delve into the legal and physical water supply for the proposed development. · "Use a standard of extended drought conditions to determine the viability of the physical water supply proposedfor a new development". With the 1041 Permit, the viability of the physical water supply will be addressed. · "Utilize current water quantity information in all development applications and planning reviews". Again, the issue of water quantity will be thoroughly addressed with the subsequent 1041 Permit. · "Protect source water areas and reduce the potential for source water contamination". There is no development proposed in the riparian areas located along the Colorado River, with the exception of a small sewer treatment building. · "Use pervious surfaces instead of impermeable surfaces when possible" The development proposed will keep with a "western" feeling by only paving necessary surfaces. · "Ensure that development does not adversely affect the recharge of groundwater resources". Grading of the site and on site stormwater management will require the use of Best Management Practices to protect groundwater and surface water resources. · "Encourage the use of water efficient landscape materials and landscape irrigation methods". The application proposes the use of native grasses and low water consumptive plant materials. · "Evaluate efficiencies of non-potable water usage for golf courses and other landscaped areas". It is anticipated that the irrigation of landscape improvements will be done using the property's water rights. · "Implement water reuse and recycling systems". This concept is not proposed. · "Support the implementation of voluntary and mandatory water conservation measures". Via the subsequent 1041 Permit evaluation, water conservation measures are mandatory. · "Require the demonstration of the availability of real (wet) water supply at Sketch Plan stage of development application". This concept is not proposed. · "Participate in water quality monitoring efforts". This concept is not proposed. · "Follow the recommendations of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Regional 208 Water Quality Management Plan". As part of the subsequent 1041 Permit evaluation, adherence to the Regional 208 Plan will be mandatory. · "Follow the recommendations of the Eagle River Watershed Plan", This is not applicable. · "Promote the appropriate best management practices for the control of stormwater runoff and work to identify and treat other non-point sources of pollution". Best Management Practices will be required with regard to stormwater management and grading activities. · "Require an effective water quality management plan be implemented with new development". With the subsequent 1041 Permit, water quality management will be thoroughly evaluated. · "Adhere to established Land Use Regulations and implement appropriate water quality best management practices (EMP's) on all development proposals". Best Management Practices will be required with all final construction documents and plans. · "Require buffer areas of natural vegetation between new developments and created or natural drainage ways". At this sketch plan level of detail, it is unclear if any surface drainage ways are proposed. · "Minimize the extent of impervious surfaces within new developments and encourage the use of pervious paving systems". The development proposed will keep with a "western" feeling by only paving necessary surfaces. 31 01/08/08 X6: Wildlife Resources · "Support projects intent on removing or minimizing man-made barriers to wildlife migration". · "Develop and implement projects that enhance existing wildlife habitat". The subject property is not a critical wildlife habitat. · "Prevent contaminants from entering local streams and rivers". The use of Best Management Practices for on-site stormwater management will be required. · "Direct development away from areas of critical wildlife habitat". The subject property is not critical wildlife habitat. · "Implement and enforce referral recommendations of loca/wildlife officials". A letter dated December 14,2007 from the Colorado Division of Wildlife is attached; bear-proof refuse containment receptacles will be required on-site. · "Consider the impacts of each new development proposal in context with other existing or potential developments". Minimize or exclude winter use of the Camp. · "Encourage high-density development within existing community centers". Not applicable to this file. · "Minimize site disturbance during construction". No portion of the site will remain undisturbed. · "If omamentallandscape plants are used, encourage species that are unpalatable to wildlife". This has not yet been addressed. · "Require wildlife-proof refuse containers for all new and existing subdivisions". Wildlife-proof refuse containment will be required on-site. X7: Sensitive Lands · "Require the evaluation of all geologic hazards and constraints as related to new land use". The Colorado Geological Survey's concern with the sizing of a culvert has been addressed and states that future issues can be handled in preliminary plan. · "Minimize alteration of the natural landform by new development improvements to the greatest extent possible". The proposed development will not affect the natural landform. · "Avoid the aggravation or acceleration of existing potential hazards through land form or vegetation modification". There are no potential hazards. · Continue to refer all development plans to the Colorado Geological Survey for comment". Please refer to the attached email from Colorado Geological Survey response dated December 12,2007 and response letter from Tom Braun dated December 11, 2007. · "Require the incorporation of all recommendations of CGS and other hazards experts into development plans". All recommendation s of the Colorado Geological Survey will be incorporated into the development plans. · "Consider the cumulative impact of incremental development on landscapes that include visual, historic, and archeological value during the decision making process". The subject property is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by open agricultural lands. The western heritage is being incorporated in the site design. · "Determine the features that make a particular open space parcel valuable given its intended use as open space and ensure that thesefeatures are preserved". The subject property will have a 60 + acre open space area which provides a development buffer between the river and the rest of the Camp. X8: Environmental Oualitv · "Assure access to multi-modal transportation options for all residents, second home owners and visitors ". ECO Transit did not respond to this proposal and may not be applicable to this development. · "Provide affordable housing opportunities in close proximity to job centers to reduce personal vehicle trips". On-site housing is an important component of the Camp. Four dwelling units are proposed as well as "dormitory-style" housing for approximately 40 staff members and volunteers. The applicant intends to negotiate and work through the employee housing component ofthis proposal in detail at preliminary plan since the numbers may change slightly as the proposal becomes more definite. See letters of correspondence attached. · "Focus development within towns and communities to reduce the needfor daily commuting", The proposal is located 8 miles from Dotsero and plans to use shuttles to bring campers to the Camp. The on-site employee housing will help reduce the number of vehicle trips also. 32 01/08/08 · "Set limits for construction site disturbance, require temporary revegetation of stockpiles and permanent revegetation of all disturbed areas once final grades have been established". The proposed development is intended to occur in 3 phases. Site disturbance has not been addressed in the Sketch Plan review. · "Require periodic watering and track-out control devices at all construction site access points". These grading mitigation efforts are mandatory. · "Utilize motion detectors to minimize the duration of security lighting". With application for preliminary plan, a comprehensive lighting plan will be required. · "Ensure that noise levels are safe for residents, visitors and employees". As with other existing similar developments; residents, visitors and employees will be subjected to sometimes incompatible noises. · "Include an analysis of potential noise when making the finding of compatibility with surrounding uses for all new development proposals". Residents, visitors and employees will be subjected to sometimes incompatible noises however this can be addressed at preliminary plan. · "Promote transit-oriented development, and encourage plans that minimize reliance on personal motorized vehicles". The proposal is located 8 miles from Dotsero and plans to use shuttles to bring campers to the Camp. The on-site employee housing will help reduce the number of vehicle trips also. · "Design communities in a way that reduces fossil fuel consumption for heating or cooling". The possibility of using ECO Build and LEEDS standards for development have been discussed with the applicant, however no definite plans to use sustainable design is known at this time. · Implement energy efficiency guidelines. No definite plans to use sustainable design are known at this time. Please see attached architectural sketches. · Implement energy saving techniques. No definite plans to use sustainable design are known at this time. · Implement energy efficiency guidelines. The possibility of using ECO Build and LEEDS standards for development have been discussed with the applicant, however no definite plans to use sustainable design is known at this time. · Implement energy efficiency guidelines. No definite plans to use sustainable design are known at this time. X9: Future Land Use MaD Desiflnation The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area Rural Lands. These are normally found is this area and often zoned Resource. Public facilities are not usually associated with the development of lands with a Rural designation and often rely on nearby Community Centers or Rural Centers to serve daily needs. Commercial or other uses are permitted by special review by the County, which is the process the applicant is using with now. 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. [J Phasing Plan Provided? D Yes ~ It is anticipated that the Camp will be developed in three construction phases however no details were provide at this time. Specifics of the phasing plan will be presented at preliminary plan. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Common Recreation and Open Space. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (12)] - The P UD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. 33 01/08/08 (a) MinimumArea. 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-of-ways, 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 pun and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development schedule establishedfor 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. (f) 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. Total Subject Land Area: 85 Acres 3,702,600 SF Total Impervious Surface: N/A I Per RegUlations 25% Open Space Yes AdditionalAmount of Open Space N/A Reauired Per 1000 Persons = T~tal ()pen Space Per Regulations N/A Total Open Space Proposed 68.4 acres 2,962,000 SF 100 % of open space Usable Open Space Proposed: 68.4 2,962,000 SF provided is usable per , application Public, Quasi-Public or Private? Private Describe: Areas within the floodplain and lands . adiacent Restrictions on Open Space: Yes Describe: No proposed development .. QrgtIDizatjonResponsible for Mllintenance: . Property Owner ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 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. 34 01/08/08 · The proposed development will not adversely impact wildlife. · All recommendations ofthe Colorado Geological Survey must be adhered to. · The wildfire hazard rating to low. · Impacts of the proposed development upon the natural resources will be negligible ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARD(S) FOR PUD SKETCH PLAN: The fmding from the Eagle County Land Use Regulations is as follows: Pursuant to Section 5-240.F.2.a.(15): 15. (a) (b) (c) Supporting data to justify any proposed commercial and industrial elements in an area not so zoned (e.g. market study); This is not a commercial application. Proposed schedule of development phasing. The development is anticipated to be constructed in three phases; however no phasing plan has been submitted at this time. Statement as to the impact of the proposed PUD upon the County school system. No impact to the school system is anticipated. (d) Statement of estimated demands for County services; per the application, the most significant demand on county services would be on emergency services, specifically the County Sheriff's Department, the Gypsum Fire District and the Western Eagle County Ambulance District, most have no comments. Anderson Camp located very near the proposed OK Corral Camp is being used as a "benchmark" given that it is similar. The Fire District has indicated to the applicant a very, very low number of calls from Anderson Camp have occurred over the past 3 years as was also indicatedfrom the Sheriff's office. (e) Statement of projected County tax revenue based upon the previous year's County tax levy and a schedule of projected receipts of that revenue; No information was provided. (f) Conceptual site plans, and conceptual architectural plans; Conceptual plans have been provided. 35 01/08/08 (g) Proposed method of fire protection. Including information demonstrating a legal, adequate water supply for fire fighting purposes; it has not been confirmed that water for fire suppression is antiquate. (h) Employee housing plan. Please see letters attached. . ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MlNIMUM STANDARDS B. REFERRAL RESPONSES: . Eagle County Engineering Department - Please refer to the attached responses dated November 19,2007 and December 13,2007. The responses delineate concerns and questions pertaining to the bridge improvements, flagging and road standards. . Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) - Please refer to the attached letter dated November 19,2007 and email dated December 12, 2007. The CGS provided comment with regard to drainage. . Eagle County Housing Director - Please refer to the attached letter dated December 11, 2007 and Tom Braun's response letter. . Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) - Please see letter dated December 14,2007 . Colorado State Engineer - Please refer to the attached letter dated November 1,2007 · Eagle County Environmental Health - Please refer to the attached emails last dated December 4, 2007. . Western Eagle County Ambulance District - Please refer to the attached letter dated December 13,2007. No outstanding issues are pending Additional Referral Agencies - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no response received as of this writing: . Eagle County Road and Bridge Department; School District Administration and Transportation; ECO trails; ECO Transit; Weed and Pest; . Colorado State: Colorado Department of Transportation; Division of Water Resources; Health Department; Water Conservation Board . Federal: BLM . Service Districts: Gypsum Fire; C. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: Benefits: · Providing a service like the OK Corral Camp to chronically ill children at no charge is a wonderful mission. · Provides many job and volunteer opportunities and may offer economic benefits to the community. · The architecture will reflect the character of the area. Disadvantages: · The traffic related to the project may have a negative impacts on the Colorado River Road · The project may not fit in with surrounding uses D. PLANNING COMMISSION 1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OPTIONS: 1. Approve the PUD Sketch Plan request without conditions if it is determined that the petition will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the proposed use is attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 36 01/08/08 2. Deny the PUD Sketch Plan request if it is determined that the petition will adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and/or the proposed use is not attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is not in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 3. Table the PUD Sketch Plan request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the PUD Sketch Plan request with conditions andlor performance standards if it is determined that certain conditions and/or performance standards are necessary to ensure public, health, safety, and welfare and/or enhances the attunement of the use with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). DISCUSSION: Lisa De Graaf presented the file. She provided some details about the request. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval with conditions. Commissioner Fisher asked about the location. Ms. De Graaf indicated that the bridge plans are currently being created. She reviewed each recommended condition as presented in the staff report. Tom Braun spoke to the board as the planner for the file. Ruth Johnson, Executive Director of the camp was also present. Ms. Johnson spoke about the goals and mission for the camp. The board has been working on the file for more than a year - and the camp will be for children with life threatening illnesses. Consultants agreed that there are approximately 35,000 seriously ill children who could enjoy this type of facility. They are a "Hole in the Wall" camp. These camps were started by Paul Newman and have served over 100,000 children. The board chose Eagle County due to the board of director's base here. Of the 20 members on the board, 18 have homes or second homes ih the county. The camp has a good proximity to airports and the Children's Hospital of Denver as well as proximity to solid backup medical facilities. The elevation of the site was also beneficial. A relatively flat site was 41so important due to the children's limited mobility. They have raised 50% of the capital money for phase 1. they have hired the core staff for the camp and planning for future operations. Mr. Braun spoke about the sketch plan. There is a regional need for the facility. There is not a lot of private land in the county that is at the right elevation. He provided a site assessment. They completed a floodplain analysis. They considered slopes, riparian areas, vegetation types, geology, and wildlife. He showed conceptual plan drawings. They plan to build on the upland flat areas of the property. The neighbors have been greatly ihvolved. The buildings will reflect Western Colorado and the history of the region. They anticipate simple building forms. This could include teepees, water towers and other whimsical versions of western architecture. the camp would be in full operation for 8 weeks during the summer, and a few other select weekends, dccommodating 60 kids to start and 120 at fmal build out. He spoke about staffing and housing. There will be some employees living at the property. There will be 21 full time 1 year round staff, 7 full time seasonal jobs, 36 counselors, and 40 volunteers. There will be on site physicians and nurses with a clinic that would handle the day to day medical needs. The traffic use is unique due to the nature of the use and the time that the camp will be operating, they estimate approximately 172 trips per day during periods that the camp is operating. During non- operational periods, there could be 20 trips per day. They intend to build according to Green standards. He spoke about the water rights. The property does have some water rights and some contract rights. He explained the request for a planned unit development rather than a special use permit. The first reason is flexibility and the second is control for the county. It also allows a sketch plan process before providing more detailed designs. This type of approval will limit the use to a camp format for kids. The master plan speaks about rural land use and allows this type of use. 80% of the site will be open space. They will provide more details at Preliminary Plan related to size of buildings. Neighbors wondered if this application would create a precedent for future similar uses. He doesn't believe this will be an issue. He believes the master plan opens the door for this type of application on a case-by-case basis. 37 01/08/08 Chairman Menconi opened public comment. Scott Hoover, adjacent property owner spoke. He is self-employed. He has some challenges with the camp and is concerned that the names behind this proposal are too big to be stopped. Two years ago at the Bums Baptist Church, the concerns about development along the river road were discussed. He questions the scope of the project. He believes it represents commercial development. There will be over 600 meals prepared every day. There is a big difference between Anderson Camp and this proposal. . Anderson camp is isolated with no homes in close proximity. He would be more comfortable with if it were more clustered and in line with the master plan allowances. He finds it to be strange planning. The camp is out of character with what is already in the area. He would like to see the bridge significantly enhanced. He recently learned about the history and location of Sweetwater, which used to be located exactly where this property is located. He provided exhibits from the Denver Public Library. Sweetwater is shown as a settlement and on the railroad. He is concerned with future development. He believes it will set a precedent for future developments. He requested a sub area plan prior to approval. Chairman Menconi closed public comment. Commissioner Runyon asked about the board of directors and whether they served the entire Hole in the Wall organization. Ms. Johnson eXplained that this board was formed due to exposure to the concept from a founder of another Hole in the Wall camp who has a residence in Beaver Creek and he recruited people to serve on the board. Commissioner Runyon expressed some concern with the location as there is no shade on the site and the area gets very hot in the summer. He wondered whether this was of concern. Mr. Braun stated that they are concerned about this and these concerns will be addressed with the building design and landscaping. Commissioner Runyon assumed that the Hole in the Wall directors were happy with the location. Ms. Johnson stated that this is the case. Commissioner Runyon encouraged tighter clustering as well. He wondered how it compared in size to the Anderson Camp. Ms. Johnson indicated that the Anderson Camp is approximately the same size camp. The 8-week sessions would take more than 8 weeks, as they would not be contiguous. Commissioner Runyon wondered how many staff would live on site year round. Mr. Braun stated that likely only a couple would live there year round. They will know more at the preliminary plan process. Commissioner Runyon asked if the land is owned. Ms. Johnson stated that the land has been purchased by two supporters of the camp and will be transferred to the camp owners upon PUD approval. Commissioner Fisher thanked them for the presentation. She is concerned about the housing component related to the year round employees. She doesn't believe the commitment to long-term housing needs to be addressed more clearly. She is curious about the idea ofthe wells being close to the river and how this might affect ~ater rights. She is also curious about the sewage treatment. Mr. Braun indicated that the property has water rights, but they are not sufficient. They will be working with the water courts to increase the availability of water. The sewage treatment is not difficult to accomplish on site. Mr. Merry has challenged them to come back with other possible solutions. Commissioner Fisher wondered about the green building commitment. Mr. Braun stated that they would be looking at full systems and using procedures that make sense environmentally. He will have more detail at preliminary plan. There are four or five different architectural firms involved. Commissioner Fisher wondered about the phasing approach. She wondered if they wish to open in 2010. Ms. Johnson indicated that they would like to open for the 2010 summer season. Mr. Braun indicated that the full build out date has yet to be determined. They will have to wait to know more about fundraising efforts. Commissioner Fisher wondered about the costs to the children. Ms. Johnson indicated that transportation to and from the airports would be provided, but airfare to the airports had not yet been decided. 38 01108/08 Chairman Menconi spoke about the criteria that must be considered in considering a PUD. He believes that the camp is great community benefit for kids with life threatening illnesses. He believes it will be a first class development. He is in favor of the file, as he believes it has community benefit and is consistent with the future land use plan. He believes that condition number should be removed. He cares that there is a demonstrative effort between the owner and the neighbors. He commends the hard work and effort of the community to address this special need. Commissioner Fisher stated that she hoped the wildlife condition would address fencing and walk ways to allow for migration issues during the winter season. She wants to be sure that all of the necessary conversations are being had with the Department of Wildlife. She spoke about the bridge. She is aware that the bridge replacement is planned, and agrees that a two-way bridge with a pedestrian provision is important. She hopes that the applicant will help the road and bridge department design an adequate structure. Commissioner Runyon reiterated that he would not oppose the file - he believes it is needed and important facility. He continues to be concerned with the heat at that location. He does not believe that this approval will promote further second home expansion. The fact that it will be operational on a limited basis is important. He agrees with Commissioner Fisher about the fencing and wildlife corridor considerations. Commissioner Fisher moved to approve File No. PDS-00053 OK Corral Camp, incorporating the staff's findings and with the seven (7) conditions proposed by staff and the planning commission. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: 1. Except as otherwise modified by this development permit, all material representations made by the Applicant in this application and in public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 2. All issues within the letter from the Housing Director dated December 11,2007 must be resolved prior to preliminary plan. 3. All issues within the comments from the County Engineering department must be resolved prior to preliminary plan. 4. All issues within the comments from the State Geological Survey must be resolved prior to preliminary plan. S. All issues within the comments from the County Environmental Health department must be resolved prior to preliminary plan. 6. All issues within the comments from the Western Eagle County Ambulance District must be resolved prior to preliminary plan. 7. To work with the DOW for an agreement to mitigate wildlife impacts, prior to Preliminary Plan submittal ZS-00156 Salt CreeklFrost Creek PUD. Equestrian Facilitv Lisa de Graaf, Planning Department NOTE: ACTION: Tabled from 7/31/07, 9/4/07, 10130107, & 12/18/07 The purpose of this Special Use Permit is to construct an equestrian facility and support structures. LOCATION: Situated on either side of Brush Creek Road, approximately 6 miles southeast of the town of Eagle. FILE NO./PROCESS: PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: OWNER: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: ZS-001561 Special Use Permit Salt Creek PUD Equestrian Facility Brush Creek Road & Old Salt Creek Kummer Development Same Bruce Gray 39 01/08/08 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY: The Salt Creek parcel encompasses 520 acres, about six (6) miles southeast of the Town of Eagle. The original Frost & Salt Creek PUD approved 21 single family lots for this parcel but was amended to relocate 20 of them to the Frost Creek parcel to allow for an equestrian facility on the Salt Creek Parcel. The Adams Rib Frost & Salt Creek PUD Development Guide, approved in 2005 (PDA-00056), a Special Use Permit process is required prior to the implementation of an equestrian facility. As an amenity to Adam's Rib Ranch, the equestrian facility may be open to the public for boarding and training in room provides. Operations will include boarding, grazing for horses, training, and other activities associated with ranching. The facility will board and pasture up to 30 horses. New infrastructure and buildings include a new entrance road (Adam's Rib Ranch Road) that will provide access to the arenas and houses. Structures associated with the facility are an indoor arena and stables, an outdoor arena, two (2) employee bunkhouses, a ranch manager residence and one (1) single family parcel that does allow for a accessory dwelling unit if desired. B. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: There were outstanding issues with this proposal, specifically the water use and agreement with the Town of Eagle. An EQR Table is attached and shows the use of water for the current proposal uses a total of 5.70 EQR's out of an allowable 6.0. Most of the issues that were discussed at the previous planning commission hearing (October 30,2007) were addressed in a response letter from Fred Kummer dated November 1,2007 (attached). Please see the following "new" attachments in this staff report, as they relate to the former outstanding issues: . Email from Jill Carlson dated September 19,2007 and the email response from Bruce Gray dated September 28, 2007 . Letter from Greater Eagle Fire District dated October 3, 2007 . The Salt Creek EQR Table . Letter from William Powell dated October 9, 2007 with regards to the water service agreement and ability to provide the equestrian facility with water . Updated letter from the CDOW dated August 7, 2007 SITE DATA: Surrounding Land Uses I Zoning: North: Vacant Resource Residential Resource Agricultural Residential South: Vacant Resource Residential East: Vacant Resourcelbackcountry Residential ARJAL VacantIPasture Resource PUD N/A Vacant/agricultural 520.3 Square feet: lJsabll' Open Space: Acres: 472.8 176.4 Percentage: 91% Percentage: 34% 40 01/08/08 ISDS C. CHRONOLOGYIBACKGROUND: . 2003 - ZC-00059 and PDSP-00016 Zone Change and combined Sketch 1 Preliminary Plan approval was granted for the still in effect Adam's Rib Frost Creek and Salt Creek Planned Unit Development. . 2003 - 1041-00044, granted to extend water line . 2004 -1014-00057, Amendment to the 1041 above . 2005 - PDA-00056, Amendment to the Frost & Salt Creek PUD to move residential lots . 2007 - ZS -00156, Special Use Permit to allow for equestrian facility D. PLANNING COMMISSION DELmERATION SUMMARY & MOTION: The Eagle County Planning Commission heard this file on December 19,2007. There was an extensive discussion with the applicants' representative, Bruce Gray and there were four (4) people who spoke at the public comment portion of the meeting. Their concerns include: . Impacts to wildlife and to 'sensitive' riparian areas . EVLT asked if the applicant would respond to their request of offering the subject parcel for a Conservation Easement. The applicant has not responded . Employee housing; why not use existing option at Adam's Rib headquarters rather than building new structures at the Salt Creek parcel; the proposed housing was not the intention of the previous PUD approval . The facility as a whole is too large to justify housing just thirty (30) horses In the deliberation from the Planning Commissioners', many items of concern were mentioned; they include: . The current proposal does not keep with the original intent of the Resolution that was approved; all Adam's Rib employees should be housed at Frost Creek or the Headquarter locations. At the very least only the few employees for the equestrian faculty should be housed at the Salt Creek parcel, this does not include golf related employees · Do not agree with trip estimates that were provided; believe they will be higher . No public benefit · The applicant is resisting the CDOW recommendations, which is not considered a good idea . Architectural drawings were asked of the applicant and were not provided · It was asked of the applicant to move the trail out of the riparian area in Lot 1 (the single family lot); the applicant responded that this would encroach on the privacy of the residence and declined to move the trail . The new proposed road location and intent negatively impacts the riparian area and is not necessary due to potential access from Old Salt Creek Road The Plannine Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of file ZS-00156 2. STAFF REPORT A. NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5-250 Special Use Permits 41 01/08/08 Section Purpose: Standards: Special Uses are those uses that are not necessarily compatible with the other uses allowed in a zone district, but which may be determined compatible with the other uses allowed in the zone district based upon individual review of their location, design, configuration, density and intensity of use, and the imposition of appropriate conditions to ensure the compatibility of the use at a particular location with surrounding land uses. All Special Uses shall meet the standards set forth in this Section. Section 5-250.B. The issuance of a Special Use Permit shall be dependent upon findings that there is competent evidence that the proposed use as conditioned, fully complies with all the standards of this Section, this Division, this Article, and these Land Use Regulations. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Board of County Commissioners may attach any conditions deemed appropriate to ensure compliance with the following standards, including conformity to a specific site plan, requirements to improve public facilities necessary to serve the Special Use, and limitations on the operating characteristics of the use, or the location or duration of the Special Use Permit STANDARD: Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-250.B.l] The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the FLUM of the Comprehensive Plan, including standardsfor building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. EAGLE COUNTY COMWREHENSnffl PLAN Exceeds Reconunendations Incorporates Majority of RecommendationS Does Not Incorporate Recommendations Not Applicable 8 a E ~ > o o '5 ~ u > ~ t:l o '" .- ~ e ~ o = !::: 0 o '" ~~ till !::: 'r;; = o ::I: e '" .a 8 o .- l~ .s a '" -0 a ....:l ~ .~ ."l:: '" 5 ~ "S 5 e ~...~ ..... '<a E;= wO' x x '" ~ o .... l) g t;j '" ~~ '" ~8 := ~ -0 0 == tn ~~ x I Eagle Area Communitv Plan Xl x x X2 X3 x I I I Xl- Although this proposed development does not provide housing opportunities for the general public; it does provide housing for employees of the equestrian facility and/or Adam's Rib Ranch. X2- The original approval of the Frost & Salt Creek PUD, wildlife protection and mitigation was addressed by means of the creation and approval of the Adam's Rib Frost and Salt Creek PUD Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan. within the PUD Guide. This document must be followed with regards to this proposaL X3- Concerns regarding grazing rotation will be addressed in the conditions. EAGLEAREACO~PLAN ~ N Vi ol) .~ i ~..:= oU udC! Exceeds Recommendation dC! ~ ~ 5 Q..... oot;j !::: e ~ 0 8~ dC! gj '5~ ~. ~ o ...: 0;;.._ .'" '" ~~ .... 5 .~ e EQ. 0.2 = ~ o ~ ~c:l !::: dC! .S! .~..~ .sa = '" .g! Ufo-< ~ ~tIIl 'E .~ ~s <::t: 42 01/08/08 Incorporates Majority X X Xl X X X of Recommendations Does Not Incorporate Recommendations Not Applicable < . X1- The applicant must follow the Adam's Rib Frost and Salt Creek PUD Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, within the PUD Guide. EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN X X x X x X x ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Compatibility. [Section 5-250.B.2] The proposed Special Use shall be appropriatefor its proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. Resource X South: Vacant Resource Residential Agricultural X Residential East: Vacant Resource/ X backcoun West: Residential ARlAL Vacanti Resource X Pasture The Salt Creek parcel is surrounded primarily by agricultural and rural residential land use. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Zone District Standards. [Section 5-250.B.3] The proposed Special Use shall comply with the standards of the zone district in which it is located and any standards applicable to the particular use, as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Apylicable to Particular Residential. Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3-330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and Industrial Uses. Section 3-310. V. There are no specific standards for an equestrian facility, however this use is allowed with standards in the Frost & Salt Creek PUD Guide I I EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS 43 01/08/08 ~ MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Design Minimizes Adverse Impact [Section 5-250.B.4] The design of the proposed Special Use shall minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on adjacent lands; furthermore, the proposed Special Use shall avoid significant adverse impact on surrounding lands regarding trash, traffic, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, noise, glare, and vibration, and shall not create a nuisance. . 1 6 ". 0 GJ t' bObO -a 8 0 s:: .5 ~ .! '';:: a ~ ~ .~ .::: ~ -g 0 ~ ~ B.~ "0 -0 '0 .0' 0 G :> ~.~ ~ ~ en Q t:l. ~ 0 Z Exceeds ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR X X X X X X X X X Requirements Does Not Satisfy ECLUR Requirements Not Applicable ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. [Section 5-250.B.5] The proposed Special Use shall minimize environmental impacts and shall not cause significant deterioration of water and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resources. GJ ~ 1: '" j GJ ~.....~ 1 ~ ~ .. .. rA'-o e 0 o e i~ .... -0 ~ '0 -g-> ~ GJ .- s:: ~a .. 0 i:Q~ .' Exceeds ECLUR Requirements SatiSfies ECtUR Requirement X X X X Xl X X DoesN()t Satisfy ECLUR Requirement N()t Applicable Xl - A manure management plan will be addressed in the conditions. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS ] The proposed Special Use shall be adequately served by public facilities and services, including roads, pedestrian paths, potable water and wastewater facilities, parks, schools, police and fire protection, and emergency medical services. 44 01/08/08 e 5 ~ i~~ ~v.l x Xl - Water restrictions, with regards to development will be addressed in the conditions. Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4-1) X Landscaoing and Illumination Standards (Division 4-2) X Sign Regulations (Division 4-3) X Wildlife Protection (Section 4-410) 1 X Geologic Hazards (Section 4-420) X Wildfire Protection (Section 4-430) X Wood Burning Controls (Section 4-440) X Ridgeline Protection (Section 4-450) X X X X X X X X X X Environmental Impact Report (Section 4-460) Commercial and Industrial Perfonnance Standards (Division 4-5) Noise and Vibration (Section 4-520) Smoke and Particulates (Section 4-530) Heat, Glare, Radiation and Electrical Interference (Section 4-540) Storage of Hazardous and Non-hazardous Materials (Section 4-550) Water Quality Standards (Section 4-560) Roadway Standards (Section 4-620) Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4-630) Irrigation System Standards (Section 4-640) 2,3 45 01/08/08 X Drainage Standards (Section 4-650) X Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4-660) X Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4-670) X Water Supply Standards (Section 4-680) 5 X Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4-690) X Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4-7) ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Other Provisions. [Section 5-250.B.8] The proposed Special Use shall comply with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development characteristics. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS C. REFERRAL RESPONSES: Eagle County Engineering Department - Please refer to attachment dated June 26, 2007. 1. The applicant has been in talks with Tom Wagenlander of the Greater Eagle Fire Protection District and is awaiting a letter with conditional approval. Please provide the Engineering Department a copy of Tom's letter. 2. The applicant still has not shown the alignment or design for the access to the Indoor Arena/Stable and Bunk Houses. In order to minimize site disturbance, these structures are best served by one road with driveways splitting off to reach each structure. The Engineering Department can work with the applicant to determine a road design that will best serve these structures. 3. The limits of the pasture areas are still a concern. The applicant has explained that the perimeter of the pastures will mi.nimize the impact on wetlands. Using the mapping that has been performed by the applicant, it would be simple to fence the pasture areas to be outside of known wetlands. This is related to a recommendation in the Environmental Impact Report that grazing be limited when soils are wet (this extends beyond wetlands to consider times of rain or high water). Perhaps this concern could be addressed as a condition of approval for this application. 4. The Environmental Impact Report, prepared by Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC, recommends that grazing in the riparian corridor be avoided. The fencing of the pastures needs to minimize the impacts on the riparian corridor as well. 5. The applicant has committed to not providing any direct access between the Stable and the Outdoor Arena to protect Salt Creek. This should be included as a condition of approval for this application. If this should change in the future, a non-vehicular bridge for the crossing of Salt Creek may be considered. 6. As mentioned in the Environmental Impact Report, manure management is an important aspect of the environmental protection of this site. Prior to the commencement of operations, a management plan shall be developed to adhere to Division 4-5, Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards, as well as the expectations of the Eagle County Environmental Health Department. A copy of this plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department. 7. The applicant has explained that the shallow utilities will cross Brush Creek and Salt Creek at the bridge or culvert location respectively, but this is not reflected completely in the plans, leaving the option for other crossings. We expect that these utility crossings - including but not limited to proposed natural gas, cable, 46 01/08/08 telephone, and electricity - will be made with the road crossings of both creeks. This will minimize damage to the sensitive wetland areas around Salt Creek and Brush Creek. Unless completely impractical, this should be a condition of approval for this application. 8. The water system has been designed and illustrated on the plans, but there is no commitment or discussion for water service in the application. Who is providing the potable water service for the site? 9. There is no explanation for disposal of wastewater from any of the proposed facilities on site. The original PUD included an ISDS study for individual residences spread out on multiple acre lots. While the current proposal decreases the overall density on the site, the impact in the area of the bunk houses will be much greater than what was anticipated with the original study. A new wastewater study is needed to assess the impacts and viability of the current proposal. 10. To provide dual access to the site as well as access to the proposed trail head, Old Salt Creek Road shall be improved and maintained. Should this application receive approval, the Engineering Department will work with the applicant to determine how to best address the improvements and maintenance of Old Salt Creek Road. 11. Prior to any site disturbance, all necessary permits shall be acquired, including a Colorado Discharge Permit, Army Corps permit for disturbance of wetlands, County Grading Permit if not an SIA and any other applicable permits. Items one through nine (1-9) must be addressed for the review of this application. Items ten and eleven (10 . & 11) are not required at this time and can be addressed should this project move forward. Eagle County Environmental Health - Please refer to attachment dated June 27, 2007. o To assure this property is included into the Master Association in order to make sure the ISDS systems are of the same technology and the responsibility for installation, maintenance and repair remains with them. o To assure that this property is governed by the Water Quality Monitoring and Mitigation Plan that was developed for Frost Creek - some slight amendment may need to occur to this plan to include this parcel. o To assure the stream and wetlands are effectively protected from agricultural uses as there currently appears to be no plans to fence off riparian areas and in order to get to the riding area from the barn, it appears that a stream crossing is necessary. o Along the same line, road crossings should minimize riparian and wetland impacts. o The same environmental controls placed on Frost Creek are carried forward to the Salt Creek parcel. ECO Trails- Please refer to attachment dated June 25, 2007. I. The trail alignment seems to go through directly through some riparian area. In the text they say the alignment was "approved by ECO Trails". We discussed in a conceptual sense and they asked that they be allowed to come back later with details. Now is detail time. The trail should travel on the outskirts of that area and avoid taking out any riparian. Here, unlike in other places, it's flat and they that that design option and are not hemmed in by road, highway, steep slopes, etc. It seems that fit could be made in the field since it is just a portion of the length, if engineering will accept that option. 2. Will (or is) the road connection from Brush Creek to the trail now paved, I can't recall. Should be paved so that travel encouraged from Brush Creek Road to trail. 3. Directional signs to the trail from Brush Creek Road should be installed by developer. 4. Safety signage and pavement markings should be installed on southern end where trail meets Brush Creek Road 5. All standards of Chapter 4, Regional Trails Plan apply 6. Trail maintenance not by County, can be handled in same manner as Frost Creek (by developer) but needs to noted as public trail in PUD guide and plat. 7. What is time line on this construction? 8. Trailhead to Trail Gulch should be improved at same time as rest of property NWCCOG - Please refer to attachment dated June 13, 2007. My review was focused on water quality protection, and I have a couple general comments. 47 01/08/08 1. A manure management plan is mentioned on page 22, under Tab 4 information. This would be a good idea from a water quality standpoint if animals are stabled and not kept out to pasture. 2. Overall, there should be little risk of sediment and stormwater impacts from construction activities. However, if the total disturbed area, including any phasing, is greater than 1 acre the developer needs to obtain a stormwater discharge permit from CDPHE. It appears that the residential facilities and indoor arenas alone will be over an acre. A stormwater discharge permit will require the development of a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP will require more detail on erosion and stormwater control than is provided in the erosion plans in Tab 7, pages 5-9. The link below outlines CDPHE's requirements. Eagle County may want a condition of approval that the applicant obtain and comply with the CDPHE permit. That would enable to County to enforce the SWMP requirements, given that the State is unlikely to inspect the site, but will help minimize duplication of requirements. State of Colorado Engineer - Please refer to attachment dated June 13,2007. Water use estimates were not provided - No letter of commitment was provided from the Town of Eagle. Pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), a municipality or quasi-municipality is required to file a report with the county and the State Engineer documenting the amount of water which can be supplied to the proposed development without causing injury to existing water rights. A report of this nature was not included. See the Guidelines for Subdivision Water Supply Plan Reports (online at www.water.state.co.us/pubs/policies/memo subdivisions.pdt) for the necessary information. State of Colorado Geological Survey - Please refer to attachment dated June 25, 2007 Karen Berr's and my previous referral response letters discussed numerous development constraints, including slope instability, surface flooding, shallow groundwater, collapsible soils, rockfall and debris flow hazards, and erosion and sediment control issues. All of these concerns remain valid for the site, but I agree with HP Geotech's conclusion (page 5) that most of the property is suitable for the proposed recreational development. HP Geotech's Geologic Site Assessment contains a good description of existing conditions and potential development constraints, including moisture-sensitive (collapsible and/or settlement-prone) soils, sinkholes, flood-prone areas, debris flow hazards, and potential slope instability. I agree that additional, site-specific evaluation and mitigation will be needed to reduce potential risks associated with these hazards. In addition, I have one specific recommendation: Proposed indoor arena. According to available geologic hazard mapping, the proposed indoor arena and common bunkhouse are located within a mapped debris fan area. Potential concerns include: surface and subsurface drainage, frequency and control of mudflows and debris flows, and hydrocompaction. The proposed indoor arena appears to be located directly within the mouth of the Trail Gulch drainage, and appears to be at high risk of debris flow damage at its current proposed location, especially in the event of a wildfire. If this structure cannot be constructed elsewhere on the property, we would like to review the applicant's site specific hazard evaluation, analysis, mitigation design, and construction drawings for the proposed indoor arena, when available, to verify that the potential debris flow hazard has been mitigated. CDOT - Please refer to attachment dated June 6, 2007 I have reviewed the Adam Rib PUD. It did have an traffic study (LSC dated November 20, 2006). Based upon the TIS, it doesn't look like the development will increase traffic by more than 20% at an of the access points onto SH 6. However, I do not know if the traffic distribution was agreed upon by local government, but I feel it will more than likely not effect any SH 6 intersections by more than 20%. Therefore, it doesn't appear to need an access permit; however, Eagle County is the issuing authority. CDOW - Please refer to attachment dated June 29, 2007. This project is located in wildlife habitat that is designated deer and elk wither range in addition to being an area that bald eagles use for resting and hunting. The area also encompasses wetlands and riparian area 48 01108/08 habitat types. This habitat type supports a greater diversity and number of wildlife species than any other habitat type found in Colorado. The data that this proposal is using to describe the existing conditions is based upon "a compilation of field work done at the site from 1993 to 1996, with follow up visits in 1997 though mid 2002; and the Natural Diversity Information System website." That means that current conditions are being based on data that is five years old. Within that five year time frame there has been continuous development surrounding the project site which has affected movement patterns and patterns of use by wildlife within the area. Some of the new development includes the continued build out of Cordillera, the development of Eagle Ranch, and the construction phase for the Frost Creek PUD and golf courses. All of these changes have altered wildlife use within the area and on the Salt Creek property. Generally, the assessment that both deer and elk use the native hillsides parallels Ito the valley floor is correct and these hillsides and low bench area are recommended to be left in a native vegetative state. The deer and elk use the hillside for feeding, resting and thermal cover but the project needs to be designed with fences that do not impede or restrict the movement of wildlife across and through the property. These hillsides also are areas that produce large mast crops, berries and acorns that black bears will use and seek out. The protection and enhancement of the existing riparian/wetland area will provide for a diversity of wildlife species including birds, small mammals, reptiles and amphibians. The existing fishery would also benefit from this type of management. The only impacts to the bald eagles mentioned in the proposal were that the "only potential food sources for bald eagles on the site would be fish or waterfowl neither of which is abundant on the site." The Division of Wildlife witnessed this particular area being used' a pair of bald eagles feeding in the field, on two separate occasions during the winter of 2007. This may not seem significant but does demonstrate that the property does receive use from this species. This special use permit application bases its wildlife impacts on the fact that this project plan is better than the original plan with 21 residences. However, this plan will also have an effect on wildlife whether less the original plan or not there is no designated mitigation for that loss described further than to say that "impacts on the available acreage are relatively small." Implementing the following recommendations would reduce the impacts to wildlife from this project: . Fences constructed on the property should not exceed 42 inches in height with a 16 inch space between the ground and the first wire or board and a space of 12 inches between the top two wires or boards to insure the unrestricted movement of wildlife across and through the property. The exceptions would be fencing for the specific purpose of excluding wildlife from stored agricultural forage and privacy fencing directly adjacent to and limited to an area of 5000 sq.ft next to the one 38 acre residence. . All structures, arenas, boarding stalls and saddling area need to be located at the recommended Eagle County riparian set backs of 75 feet. Riparian/designated wetland area should be fenced and protected from livestock use. . Development near a wetland or riparian site should establish a buffer zone to ensure that construction and development impacts do not degrade the site. During all construction activities silt fencing should be placed to guarantee no disturbance occurs. . A minimum 75 ft. set back from the high water mark of any stream plus any additional riparian habitat should be maintained. . Spanning structures should be constructed for any crossing structures planned for wetlands, riparian or waterway. . If development is unavoidable in wetlands or riparian areas construction should be restricted to the time period of August 1 to September 30. . Vegetation on the proposed site should be maintained at present levels within the NRCS guideline. . Outside storage of trash should only be allowed when in bear-proof receptacles or structures. . Compost piles should be prohibited unless stored in a bear-proof receptacle. . There should be no dumps or disposal of refuse within the development unless at a centralized bear- proof trash compactor or bear-proof trash storage facility. . Pet food should not be left outside since it can be an attractant to black bears. Seasonal use restrictions for sensitive habitats may be necessary but are dependent upon the design of the development. The use of important seasonal habitats by humans can create a negative impact to wildlife. 49 01/08/08 Areas that may require seasonal closures to human activity include wither range, migration corridors, production area, nesting areas or other critical habitats. The Division would also point out that active signage and enforcement of these closures is critical and must be assumed by the HOA. . Winter range closures should be closed to human activity from December 1 until April 30. . Riparian and wetland areas should be closed to human activity from March 1 to July 1 for the breeding, nesting and rearing of the wildlife species associated with this habitat. The Division suggests that the number of acres of wildlife habitat impacted by this project be determined and then various mitigation alternatives could be reviewed. While the preferred method would be to provide mitigation for the impacted acres on site, there are alternatives which the Division is available to discuss with Eagle County and the developer if desired. Colorado State Forest Service - Please refer to attachment dated July 10,2007. On June 18th I visited the Salt Creek site of the Adam's Rib PUD and Equestrian Facility south of Eagle CO. The overall fire hazard is low. This is given that the development is restricted to the flat pasture land on the west side of the parcel. Any development in the pinyon pineljuniper on the steep slopes on the east side of the parcel would significantly increase the wildfire hazard. This low rating is also based on the availability of water from Brush Creek and Salt Creek. Placing fire hydrants within 1000 feet throughout the development will also help to mitigate fire hazard. The addition of Adam's Rib Ranch Road adds an additional ingresslegress which helps mitigate wildfire hazards by aiding in evacuation should a wildfire occur. Primary roads should be wide enough to allow access for fire suppression equipment and personnel, 22024 feet wide minimum. The use of Class A rated roofmg material and noncombustible siding/decks on all structures will also contribute to this low rating. I would recommend moving several of the bunk houses and the common buck house on the east side of the development further away from the slope. This would allow for maximum defensible space between the bunk houses and the pinion pine/juniper fuel type which is extremely prone to wildfire. Town of Eagle - Please refer to attachment dated August 1, 2007. . As you are aware the Town has a First Amendment to Water Services Agreement for water service to the Frost Creek/Salt Creek PUD. In this agreement the Town will provide water to one (1) single family ranch house on a residential lot, one (I) detached Accessory Dwelling Unit and an equestrian center and related shooting sport facilities. The current proposal with the three (3) bunkhouses and ranch manager residence is in excess of the agreement between the Town and Kummer Development. In order, for water to be provided to the special use it will be required that the current Water Services Agreement. The next Town Trustees meeting is Tuesday, August 14th. As an aside, Kummer Development did represent to the Town during negotiations ofthe First Amendment to Water Services Agreement that the proposed single family dwelling was to be the Ranch Manager residence. . The application proposes the ADU to be located on a separate parcel from the sign family residence. Under this design the ADU or "Ranch Manager Residence" is not an ADU. It is not accessory or integral to the single family residence as required by the PUD. Furthermore, the ADU proposed is 3,500. The maximum size ofan ADU in the PUD is 1,000 square feet. Lastly, it is on a separate parcel that is conveyable separate and apart from the single family structure. . According to the PUD the intent for both the equestrian center use and single family residence was to preserve the ranching characteristics of the land. For example, the design or layout of uses would be similar that of a traditional ranch headquarters where both working and living occurred in a concentrated area. A good example would be the Adams Rib Ranch headquarters just south of this proposal off of Brush Creek Road. The current design is opposite with uses spread over a large area and separate by large distances. Also, the PUD states that Salt Creek will be developed in manner 50 01/08/08 that favors open space and natural resources. To that end, all improvements, roads, trails, buildings should be located not to impact natural resources (creeks, floodplains, wetlands and riparian areas). . Equally important to site design are the architectural plans for all proposed buildings. The application provides only a rendering of one of the propose bunkhouses. It should be required that all architectural plans be provided and that the design ofthe structures that has a style representative of traditional western Colorado ranches. Architecture plays an important role in helping this project achieve the intent of the PUD for the Salt Creek development. . Grazing limitation and standards should be required to prevent overgrazing of pasture lands and grazing taking place in the most sensitive areas of the site, such as the wetlands and riparian areas. . The application seems to be outside of the established PUD criteria for both the single family and equestrian facility uses. If the Applicant desires to continue with this application the County should require both a PUD amendment and special use permit review. Specifically, the proposed bunkhouses and ranch manager residence are the uses and structures that do not meet the adopted and approved PUD guidelines. . Resolution No. 2005-016 of the Board of County Commission required certain conditions to be met by Kummer Development as part of their PUD approval. One of the conditions is important to the Town of Eagle, as follows: . Prior to final plat approval, the applicant should agree to participate in the funding of a traffic signal at the intersection of Brush Creek RoadlBull Pasture Road and Capitol Street. The Town requests that the County amend this condition to allow for this funding to be directed to a traffic signal at an intersection as determined by the Town of Eagle. For example, Frost Creek and Salt Creek traffic can and will use the streets within the Eagle Ranch neighborhood. This condition will lead to traffic signals being warranted in this area of Town long before one is ever needed at the Brush Creek RoadlBull Pasture Road and Capitol Street intersection. This condition should be met and agreement in place prior to any approval of this special use application. . Location and design of the Trail Gulch trailhead needs to be included with this special use application and constructed at the same time as the Salt Creek trail. . This application has been submitted at an opportune time for a dialogue to be opened regarding land conservation in the Brush Creek Valley. Conserving natural resources and rural character is a major goal of the adopted Eagle Area Community Plan (the "EACP") and it appears that this same goal will exist as the update of the EACP is finalized in the fall of this year. Furthermore, current development applications, which include this application and Upper and Lower Ranch pose a major challenge toward protecting important natural resources and rural character in the Brush Creek Valley. To that end, the County should take the lead in coordinating a major land conservation effort for the Brush Creek Valley. It could be a project that benefits both the private and public interests. On the public side, approximately 2,000+ acres could be conserved as open space, protecting both natural resources and rural character. The private side (i.e., Kummer Development) could be granted a density transfer of Upper and Lower Ranch units to Frost Creek to further support this major golf course community and to the JHY Parcel or Haymeadow Parcel to support community workforce housing efforts. The Town understands that this is much beyond the scope of review for a special use, however, all players are at the table with this application and it seems that timing, community and political values are aligning to make this far fetched idea a reality. In addition to these responses, we also received letters from Charles P. Ridgeway - please see letter attached dated June 29th, 2007 and an email from Ted & Lori Seipel dated August 15,2007. 51 01/08/08 Additional Referral Agencies - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no response received as of this writing: . Eagle County: Attorney's Office; Animal Services; Road and Bridge Department; Sheriff's Office; Historical Society; school district . Federal: BLM; Army Corps of Engineers . Service District: Century Tel; KN Energy; Holy Cross Electric; Ambulance District . BOA: Eagle Ranch Town of Eagle - Please refer to letter dated October 9, 2007. The First Amendment to the Water Service Agreement - Frost Creek Property, dated August 24, 2004, between the Town of Eagle and the Kummer Development Corporation allows for up to 6EQR of water sue on the Salt Creek property. The current plans for the Salt Creek have buildings that will use 5.7 EQR of the 6.0 allowed. The Town believes the current PUD application to be in conformance with the aforementioned agreement. State of Colorado Geological Survey - Please refer to email dated September 19, 2007 The Indoor Arena and Stable building has been moved outside of the mapped debris flow hazard area, and the common bunkhouse has been deleted. This satisfies the debris flow concerns presented in CGS's letter dated June 25, 2007. However, I noticed that basements are planned for the Ranch Manager's Residence and the two Bunkhouses. Based on HP Geotech's borings, the close proximity of Salt Creek, and the presence of wetlands in the area, groundwater should be expected to occur, at least seasonally, at very shallow depths beneath the site. Since fmished floor elevations must be maintained at least 3 to 4 feet above maximum anticipated groundwater levels, full-depth basements may not be feasible and should not be considered unless more detailed information is obtained about seasonal depths to groundwater. Foundation perimeter drains will probably be needed to prevent excessive wetting of collapsible soils surrounding foundation elements. Greater Eagle Fire Protection - Please refer to letter dated October 3, 2007 REF: The Salt Creek/Frost Creek PUD, Equestrian Facility and surrounding structures. WE accept this PUD with the following points. 1. All buildings in this new PUS need to be spinklered. See previous letter dated August 11, 2007. If and agreeable site is located for a fire station, we would be willing to re-evaluate the need for the buildings (other than the equestrian center) to be sprinklered. 2. Provide fire hydrants with a minimum flow of 1500 gpm at each end of the indoor arena. (These hydrants are currently shown on the Salt Creek PUD engineering drawings). They need to be diagonal from each other. 3. An all weather drivable surface area around the indoor arena that allows emergency vehicle access to all sides of the arena. Currently, the plan shows a driveway around the arena as requested. Actual dimension will be addressed during the building plan review. 4. Turning radii appear to meet Greater Eagle Fire Protection District's vehicle requirements. A minimum of 20 feet road width will be required on dead-end roads up to 500 feet long and 26 feet road width up to 750 feet long. Once a more detail construction plan is submitted we can better determine road requirements. 5. Bridges will have to meet the minimum weight requirements ofGVW 75,500 Ibs and/or GA WR weights of27,000 Ibs. 6. As discussed with Adam's Rib, Old Salt Creek Road from its intersection with Salt Creek Road to the Trail Gulch trailhead will be improved. This will also provide secondary access to the facility. C. SUMMARY: 52 01/08/08 The proposed equestrian facility is generally in compliance with the Adam's Rib Frost & Salt Creek PUD Guide. It is consistent with surrounding uses in the area. D. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S OPTIONS: 1. Approve the Salt Creek equestrian facility SUP request without conditions if it is determined that the petition will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the proposed use is attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 2. Deny the Salt Creek equestrian facility SUP request if it is determined that the petition will adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and/or the proposed use is not attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is not in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). 3. Table the Salt Creek equestrian facility SUP request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the Salt Creek equestrian facility SUP request with conditions andlor performance standards if it is determined that certain conditions and/or performance standards are necessary to ensure public, health, safety, and welfare and/or enhances the attunement of the use with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan (and/or other applicable master plans). SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: 1. The ownerlapplicant must comply with the Adam's Rib Frost and Salt Creek PUD Wildlife Mitie:ation and Enhancement Plan, within the PUD Guide, and/or the suggestions in the CDOW letter dated August 7,2007, whichever is more restrictive. 2. A manure management plan will be in place and shall adhere to Division 4-5, Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards, and be approved by Eagle County prior to grading permit issuance. 3. For riparian protection, grazing shall be limited when soils are wet and grazing rotation annually must be implemented to reduce degradation to the pasture land, enforced by the Adam's Rib Frost and Salt Creek PUD Wildlife Mitie:ation and Enhancement Plan 4. All six (6) points in the letter dated October 3, 2007 from the Greater Eagle Fire Protection District shall be considered conditions and shall be implemented prior to issuance of either the building permit or grading permit, whichever comes first. 5. No development or structures shall be erected on the Salt Creek parcel beyond the scope of work proposed within this Special Use Permit without prior approval from the Town of Eagle and Eagle County Community Development department. This includes any development that requires potable water. 6. If the EQR's differ from what has been provided by the applicant ("Salt Creek EQR;s") an amendment to the Water Agreement with the Town of Eagle must occur. 53 01/08/08 7. Except as otherwise modified by this development permit, all material representations made by the Applicant in this application and in public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 8. Trail alignment needs to be moved completely out of riparian area - subject to County Staff approval prior to grading permit. 9. A Trail Easement to connect between Old Salt Creek Road and the existing approved trail on the Salt Creek parcel must be in place prior to the grading permit issuance. DISCUSSION: Ms. De Graaf presented the request. This request will allow for an equestrian facility and supporting structures on the Salt Creek parcel. The Salt Creek pareel encompasses 520 acres. The PUD was approved in 2005 but a special use permit process is required prior to the implementation of an equestrian facility. With that approval, 21 single-family lots on the parcel were approved. However, it was amended to relocate 20 lots to the Frost Creek Parcel. This application includes a new entrance road, indoor arena, stables, two employee bunkhouses, and ranch manager residence. There were several issues related to this request. The EQR Table shows 5.7 EQRs out of an allowable 6.0. The Planning Commission heard from four people at their hearing related to this request. The majority of concerns had to do with impact to wildlife and sensitive riparian area. She highlighted the planning commission's concerns in the staff report. The commission did not believe there was any public benefit, nor did they agree with the trip estimates. She has recently been made aware of other concerns. The Planning commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of this request. She showed maps of the site plan including locations of the proposed development and riparian areas. She reviewed the conditions as presented in the staff report. Bruce Gray spoke to the board. He stated that this is 520 acres east of Brush Creek Road south of Eagle. This area includes a much larger area than they intend to develop. They believe the facility will compliment and preserve the surrounding area in the Brush Creek valley. They are only proposing development of 12 acres. The property includes a 38-acre parcel, which will have a one-acre building envelope. The center will be an amenity to the Adam's Mountain Country Club. It will be open to the public when available. They anticipate four full time employees. The facility includes the public trailhead and a public bike path, which runs the length of the property. They intend to continue using the advanced septic system that they are using on other areas of the property. They feel that the property is in tune with the adjacent properties. The roadways and structures are only those required to maintain a safe facility. Boots Ferguson with Holland and Hart spoke. The PUD guide articulates that this special use permit application is filed and they are seeking an authorization of the site-specific location for the buildings and facilities. The PUD guide also states that no further conditions are necessary in finalizing the boundaries of this parcel. The original PUD guide and original wildlife mitigation enhancement plan covered this parcel. They wish to address the staff conditions. He spoke about condition 2 and stated that this condition was satisfactory. Condition number 3 with respect to grazing for riparian protection is satisfactory. Condition 4 had been satisfied. Condition number 5,6, and 7 are acceptable. Condition number 8 suggests that the location of the bike path be moved towards the building envelope. They asked forreconsideration of this condition. The alignment was approved by ECO trails. They cannot locate the path outside of the riparian and not touch the wetlands. Condition number 9 is also acceptable. With respect to the first condition that addresses the suggestions of the Department of Wildlife is not acceptable. They believe it is inappropriate to have additional conditions for the DOW and most conditions are already been imposed. They would like three of the 13 conditions be revised. The first revision is related to the timing of construction being limited. They suggest that that limitation be imposed after the initial construction. Second, they believe that requiring winter range to be closed from December 1 through April 30 is too long. They believe that April 1 is more reasonable. The last condition they want amended is the condition that riparian and wetland areas should be closed from March 1 through July 1. There are five irrigation ditches on the property. These ditches need to be operated to irrigate the land and they will not be able to do so if this area is closed for the suggested period of time. Fred Kummer, president ofHBE and applicant spoke. He believes they have thoughtfully developed the area and are good stewards of the property. Chairman Menconi opened public comment. 54 01/08/08 Chris Adams, adjoining property owner to the west spoke. Adams Rib made a deal to put more units in Frost Creek. The extra employee housing was not in the plan. The bargain did not include another home or employee housing units. This deal was made due to the impact on the wildlife and the wetlands. He believes that if this is approved, they should scale down the arena to 30 horses, and making the facility available "as available" does not connote great availability. He wondered how many special events might be conducted. If this facility is just for the golf course owners it doesn't need a grand entrance. He doesn't believe the road needs to go across where planned. They don't want another house on the corner at Bruce Creek. Perhaps the number of people who can be at the equestrian center should be limited. The Club House at the golf course is enormous. He believes this will open the door for further requests outside of the agreement. Rosie Shearwood spoke as an adjacent property owner. She is unemployable. She knows Chairman Menconi struggled with the decision to approve Frost Creek. She believes that when the 20 homes were moved out of Salt Creek it changed Chairman Menconi's position. This facility was referred to as a barn with some grounds. This proposal is not the same as was indicated at original application. She doesn't believe comparing the bike path with the golf course path is a good comparison.. She suggests that if Mr. Kummer feels the need for employee housing it should be put in town to limit the family trips up and down Brush Creek Road. She asks that the original deal be adhered to. Bob McKenzie, Bruce Creek resident spoke. He is a partner of a communication tower company. He is opposed to the expansion on the Salt Creek Parcel and believes it is a gross overuse. He agrees with the points of the previous speakers. He wonders why the Town's concerns and Planning Commission's concerns are being smoothed away. Whether the center is available for public use ignores the basic problem - it's is too big and too spread out. They hoped this area would be unused open space. The same holds true for the employee housing. Previous plans included employee housing being closer to Eagle. He doesn't understand why he wouldn't want to have the people who support the facility being housed in the facility. He thinks the easiest way to resolve these issues is to not try to negotiate, but to deny the permit. Joe Zupancic, owner of property at the old Salt Creek Road spoke. He is concerned about maintenance of the old Salt Creek Road because it used to be a nightmare to maintain - it was abandoned for a reason. He knows it is a beautiful wetland with unbelievable wildlife. He likes to see the open space and wonders if it is permanent. He agrees with all the previous comments. He would like to see architectural drawings of the building itself. He is also concerned with the facility being public. Charles Ridgway adjacent property owner north of the proposal spoke. He is most concerned with the old Salt Creek Road, which is entirely on his property. He has worked on an agreement with the county to grant an easement for the bike path. He is afraid that the applicant is going to need to use the old Salt Creek Road to build the facility. Mr. Gray responded to Mr. Ridgway's concern. He showed the access of the driveway, which encircles the arena. Mike Dumolt, adjacent owner spoke. He is concerned with the size of the arena and lack of architectural detail for the building. Anyone who has ever been above Diamond S in the afternoon knows that the roof produces an additional sun effect. He is concerned about the roof reflection into adjacent homes. He is also concerned about employee housing. Typically, employees are housed inside the barn for equestrian facilities. The addition of bunkhouses doesn't make sense. He also opposes the road. Cindy Cohagen, adjacent property owner spoke. She echoes previously stated concerns. She opposes opening the riding arena to the public related to special events due to traffic, parking, public utilities etc. In the future, the whole arena area is problematic. She believes it either needs to be private or include consideration of the public needs associated with a public facility. She is concerned about the single-family residence that is now included with this dwelling unit. She wonders why the parcel needs to be 38 acres in size. It is prime migration area for elk and deer. She has seen blue Heron in the area. She is concerned about fencing of this property. She proposes a smaller parcel including a reasonable building envelope. The Riparian area is her most significant concern. She proposes that the owner put a conservation easement on the entire property and make it publicly available open space. She suggests leaving the parcel as it is today as it is currently a treasure. Steve Clements spoke as an adjacent homeowner. He stated that the new driveway would be about 350 feet away from his driveway. He is relatively new to the area, as a three-year owner. They bought their property with the understanding that this facility would not be where it is currently being proposed. He suggests something of a reasonable scale. 55 01/08/08 Chairman Menconi closed public comment. Mr. Kummer stated that he hopes the answers they have already given have responded to all of the issues related to the road, wetlands, and other areas. They feel they have been agreeable to all requests. The arena is really more of an indoor than an outdoor corral. As far as increases in traffic are concerned, they are extremely sensitive to the area down to the fence that was installed along the path. In each instance, he believes they have been sensitive. Mr. Ferguson responded to the comments received. Many ofthe uses questioned as being previously approved have been previously approved and are allowed under the PUD guide. The job is to decide whether the request is consistent with the existing PUD guide. They are trying to consider concerns of the neighbors. They don't believe that non-facility location conditions are appropriately imposed, but they will accept these conditions. Chairman Menconi asked Ms. DeGraaf about the minutes of the PUD amendment related to this facility. He wondered if she listened to the tapes. Ms. De Graaf stated that she had not read the minutes or listened to the taped minutes. Chairman Menconi recalls that the original PUD included the home sites being relocated across the street.. They had site visits and it was a deliberate process. There was a bettering of the project due to the riparian area. He stated that typically in a PUD there is a condition that all representations made in a hearing are part of the PUD. Rosie Shearwood stated today that there was a representation to the type of facility that would be built. Mr. Morris stated that this type of representation would need to be adhered to. Chairman Menconi requested more information. He wants to understand the representations that were made with respect to facilities and roads. Mr. Ferguson stated that he did not review the tapes or the minutes of previous PUD or amended PUD hearings. Chairman Menconi questioned the size and type of the facilities represented in the original hearings. Ms. De Graaf read the defmition of equestrian facilities in the PUD guide. These facilities can include corrals, barns etc. associated with a quality equestrian and ranching center. Chairman Menconi wondered the purpose of a special use in this particular file inside of a PUD. Mr. Morris suggested that Chairman Menconi refer to the staff report section 2 to understand why to approve a special use. There may be things involved in the representations that do not appear in the defmition of purpose. This does include such things as density and intensity of use. The questions raised by the public are appropriate. He suggests that if further information is required the hearing should be delayed. Chairman Menconi stated that he is very concerned about the original representations made during the two previous hearings. Mr. Ferguson disagreed with the county attorney as far as the interpretation of the scope of this hearing. He agrees that understanding the representations is important. However, he believes that the PUD guide, which was approved, governs the scope of the review. This does not resolve the issue of representations previously made. Chairman Menconi wondered what would be the purpose of having a condition that all representations made during a hearing would be adhered to. Mr. Ferguson believes the purpose ofthe review is meaningful in several areas - to make sure the applicant has proposed site locations consistent with the PUD guide and the other governing documents and enhancement plan. Another part of the review is to make sure the facilities proposed are consistent with the zoning uses described and defined in the PUD guide. There is a zoning document in place, which governs this inquiry. He believes the board has discretion to determine whether the facilities are within those included within the approved uses. Chairman Menconi stated that the heart of the matter is whether there is some delineation of criteria and an overlapping condition. He wonders what the purpose was when they put together the PUD. He wants to be able to do due diligence. He requests a tabling for greater investigation. Commissioner Runyon agreed about the tabling recommendation to clarify what the governing document is. He understands that when the deal was made to transfer all of the lots to Frost Creek there was an understanding of a future equestrian center and a single-family lot. He argues that this plan is not specific enough as to size or design ofthe facility. He thinks these are legitimate concerns. He urges that the majority ofthe 472 acres be placed into a conservation easement. He agrees with making the parcel with the single-family lot smaller ifthe surrounding area is open space. Mr. Ferguson stated that there is not an issue with deed restricting the open space that is not intended to be developed. 56 01/08/08 Commissioner Runyon requested a site visit to get a better feel for this decision. Commissioner Fisher has had the opportunity to sit through meetings but still needs more time to review the information of prior meetings with staff. She did not see enough specificity to feel a comfort level without knowing the background. She spoke about the bike path alignment. The alignment was not approved formally by EeO trails in reality - she wonders who is accurate. Ms. De Graaf stated that the condition of the bike path is still there because staffhas not conceded that the alignment is not acceptable. Commissioner Fisher indicated that this would need to be resolved. She suggested that it would be everyone's best interest that the applicant requests a tabling so the board can do the due diligence. She believes it would be inadvisable to do otherwise. She also requested that Mr. Kummer's representatives review previous minutes related to this situation as well. Chairman Menconi wondered if the DOW would be able to come back with further requirements than what was originally proposed at the original approval. Mr. Ferguson indicated that all but three of the DOW's conditions were acceptable. He believes these three should be tweaked to make sense to the goal of protecting the riparian and wildlife areas. Chairman Menconi requested that moving forward the board be provided with clarification as to facilitylfacilities and number of buildings. He would also like clarification on whether the road was originally in place. Mr. Morris stated that the public concerns should also be addressed. Mr. Kummer stated that he would like to plead that they are trying to get going from a construction platform. Commissioner Fisher moved to table File No. ZS-00156 Salt CreekIFrost Creek PUD, Equestrian Facility with the consent of the applicant until February 12,2008. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. LUR-0079 Road Impact Fees Greg Schroeder, Engineering Department ACTION: The purpose of this Land Use Amendment by Eagle County is to amend the Land Use Regulations to ECLUR Section 4-710, Road Impact Fees LOCATION: All of Eagle County FILE NO./PROCESS: PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: OWNER: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: LUR-0079 1 Road Impact Fees Amendment to Chapter 2: Article 4, Division 4-7, Road Impact Fees, Section 4-710. Not Applicable Not Applicable Eagle County Staff Attes . There being no further business o . ... Chairman 57 01/08/08