Loading...
Minutes 02/17/09 PUBLIC HEARING February 17, 2009 Present: Sara Fisher Peter Runyon Jon Stavney Keith Montag Bryan Treu Robert Morris Teak Simonton Kathy Scriver Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Acting 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: Executive Session There was none. Consent Agenda Chairman Fisher stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of bill paying for the week of February 16, 2009 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative B. Approval of payroll for February 26,2009 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative c. Approval of the minutes of the Eagle County Board of Commissioners Meetings for January 13 and January 20, 2009 Teak Simonton, Clerk & Recorder D. Agreement between Eagle County and Carr Pro Rodeo Inc. for stock contractor services Brad Higgins, Fair & Rodeo E. Amendment Agreement between Eagle County, Colorado and William and Mary Stephens for disassembly and removal of Gypsum 4-H Barn County Attorney's Office Representative F. Resolution 2009-012 for the Denial of the Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan for the Coleman Ranch Subdivision Planned Unit Development (Eagle County File No. PDS-00057} Bob Narracci, Community Development G. Beaver Creek Subdivision, Fourth Filing Lot 16, Tract J Block 2; (Eagle County File No. (AFP-2081) The intent of this Amended Final Plat is to reconfigure the Building Envelope for Lot 16. The Building Envelope adjustment is intended to provide the owner with storage of outdoor items Bob Narracci, Community Development H. Homestead Valley Lot 4 Filling 3; (Eagle County File No. 5MB-2146), The intent ofthis Minor Type B Subdivision is to subdivide lot 4 of the Homestead Valley into 7 individual home sites and common space Sean Hanagan, Community Development 1 02/17/09 Chairman Fisher asked the Attorney's Office ifthere were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Bryan Treu, County Attorney stated that there were no concerns or changes. Commissioner Runyon moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A-H. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Public Input Chairman Fisher opened and closed Public Input, as there was none. Economic Stimulus Projects Update Tom Johnson, Public Works Mr. Johnson highlighted the proposed "A" list projects. He stated that there were still a lot of things to be determined. Most principals were ready to commit funds within 120 days and most would be available for obligation through September 2010. Grants based on current formulas would be awarded within 30 days and completed grants would be awarded within 90 days. He believed a strong effort would be required once more information was available. Chairman Fisher wondered what the best way to provide information to the public would be. Mr. Johnson stated that there needed to be transparency and agencies would have to provide a web site that posted grant information; these web sites would also need to be updated and linked to recovery.gov. Commissioner Runyon asked about an airport item that was listed on both the "B" and "C" list. Mr. Johnson stated that the item should have been on the "B" list however, he expressed concern with meeting the time restraints. He did not expect to get to any of the projects listed in either the "B" or "C" list. He spoke about the detention facility addition and the importance of the expansion because the projections were that the current facility once finished would fill quickly. Commissioner Stavney stated that he believed it was important to note in the cover letter the number of ICE prisoners carried. He believed it was a major factor in the increased demand for jail space. Mr. Johnson responded that the 800 Mhz system was included on the list because it was a Federally mandated unfunded program. Commissioner Stavney stated that he looked forward to being updated on the nuances ofthe project and felt the project needed to move forward quickly. Mr. Johnson spoke about the solar projects at the justice center and the Miller Ranch community center and stated that renewables were a huge part of the stimulus package. He spoke about his desire for fuel cell vehicles and fueling systems. He spoke about replacing the larger vehicles in motor pool with 4 larger Hybrids. Other items included, recycling materials recovery facility, Stratton Flats, Red Cliff collection system and treatment plant, weatherization assistance to Red Cliff residences, Eagle HHS clinic, medical clinic transport, assisted living facility in Eagle, Edwards interchange, 3-island bridge, and the airport interchange. Chairman Fisher expressed her strong support for the Eagle HHS Clinic and assisted living facility in Eagle. Commissioner Runyon wondered about the funding for the bridge replacements. Mr. Johnson stated that there was a discretionary budget for grants for local and state governments or transit agencies and there was a chance that bridge replacements could be included. Keith Montag asked if any of the smaller cost projects on the "B" and "C" lists should be reconsidered and replace higher cost items on the "A" list because ofthe price tag or timing. Mr. Johnson stated that all the solar and energy efficiency items could be designed and implemented quickly. He believed it was hard to guess how the money would be distributed this early on. Chairman Fisher thanked Mr. Johnson for his efforts. Mr. Johnson stated that he would begin working on the letters. Commissioner Runyon wondered if there would be any money for the Gypsum airport interchange in the future. 2 02/17/09 Mr. Johnson stated that other than the 1.5 billion that was discretionary, he wasn't sure at this time. Abatement Hearings Assessor/County Attorney Office Representative Chairman Fisher stated that the petitioner for Eagle Ranch Village, LLC Schedule No. R059970 had withdrawn the file from consideration. Chairman Fisher stated that the petitioner for Vail Plaza Development LLC Revocable Trust c/o Duff and Phelps schedule no.R056306 had requested a continuance. Commissioner Runyon moved that the petition of Vail Plaza Development LLC Revocable Trust c/o Duff and Phelps for abatement /refund oftaxes for schedule no.R056306 be continued for 60 days with a new hearing to be scheduled on April 21, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stavney moved that the Petitions for Abatement/Refund of Taxes for the following individuals and Schedule Numbers be approved for the tax years, in the amounts, and for the reasons as set forth in the Assessor's recommendation sheets, such recommendations being incorporated into this hearing by reference: Petitioner Randall & Cathy Weisenburger Golfstream Realty LLC, c/o Roger Pack M&A Investments, LLC, Black Stamp, Inc. & Annie Enterprises McCoy Springs LLC Ross W. Manire Nelson N. Stone Gypsum Gateway L TD Schedule No. R0045061 R042l92 R020751 R055967 R045084 RO 11687 R044484 Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Fisher stated that next item on the list was a partial approval for petitioner Lazier Tivoli LLC, c/o Duff and Phelps schedule number R008874. Bruce Cartwright of Duff & Phelps spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He stated that the facility was a limited service hotel with no restaurant, spa, or pool. He spoke about the petitioners concerns with the county's ADR "average daily room rate" and believed that the number should have been adjusted for 287 days of operation. The property operating at 287 days a year had a 56% occupancy. The total revenues used by the county were 4.22l million dollars versus 3.089 million dollars as presented by the petitioner. The petitioner had argued his point with the assessor and things had come to a standstill. The petitioner believed his numbers were supported and documented by third party evidence and the county was using data that was not supportable. Mark Chapin, County Assessor spoke. He stated that the property was very complex. He believed that the petitioner's presentation was crazy. He stated that there were basic differences of opinions with regards to the estimated value. He believed that this case and the Christiania case should be remanded to the Board of Assessment Appeals who had the tools to listen to both arguments. Commissioner Stavney asked Christina Hooper to explain the meaning of a partial approval. Ms. Hooper stated that the partial approval was recommended by the Assessor's Office because they had recommended a change in value. The board also had the option of sending the parties back to work things out among themselves. She stated that the Board of Assessment Appeals would allow the numbers to be reviewed with a finer microscope. Mr. Chapin recommended approval as submitted and believed this would give the petitioner the opportunity to go on to the Board of Assessment Appeals and appeal at that level. 3 02/17/09 Chairman Fisher asked Mr. Cartwright if there was any potential in continuing this conversation with staff as requested by the petitioner. Mr. Cartwright stated that the owner was not trying to under-utilize the property for a tax break. The petitioner believed he had support for the numbers and only ask that the county show support for their numbers. There was $300,000 at stake and the petitioner wished to resolve the matter as quickly as possible. Chairman Fisher asked Mr. Chapin about the data. Mr. Chapin stated that the data was confidential. His job was to value property and the cost of this property was right in line with the value they had assigned. He believed his office had exhausted every avenue with Duff and Phelps that he felt was appropriate. Chairman Fisher wondered about the partial abatement. Mr. Chapin stated that there was not a significant change in the total value. However, the allocation value was adjusted. He presented the assessor's recommendation for the tax years 2006, 2007 and 2008. Chairman Fisher wondered how much money would be refunded with a partial approval. Mr. Chapin stated that the abatement refund amount for 2006 would be $75,000, for 2007, $21,000 and for 2008, $21,295.88. Commissioner Runyon believed that a partial approval was appropriate and would allow either option. Commissioner Runyon moved that upon consideration of the evidence and arguments presented, I conclude that the weight of the evidence supports the Assessor's recommended value for this property. Therefore, it was moved that the petition of Lazier Tivoli, LLC c/o Duff and Phelps abatement/refund of taxes for schedule No. R008874 be partially approved in the amounts and for the reasons set forth in the Assessor's recommendation for the tax year(s) 2006, 2007, and 2008. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Mr. Cartwright presented information referencing services provided by Christiania at Vail Hotel. He stated that the hotel was a limited service hotel built in 1962 and had 22 rooms with 2 privately owned separately assessed condominium units. The petitioner believed that the county used a different subset of data for this property. He compared their numbers and the numbers presented by the Assessor's Office. The petitioner did not believe the Assessor's Office was receptive to the difference in numbers. Mr. Chapin stated that he believed the Board of Assessment Appeals was best suited for this type of hearing. His office tried to be reasonable and equitable in the market place. Chairman Fisher asked about the differences presented by the petitioner. Mr. Chapin stated that he believed the petitioner was wrong and hoped that the board would deny the abatement. Commissioner Stavney moved that the Petitions for Abatement/refund of Taxes for the following individuals and Schedule Numbers be Denied for the tax years and for the reasons as set forth in the Assessor's recommendation sheets, such recommendations being incorporated into this hearing by reference: Petitioner Christiania at Vail, c/o Duff and Phelps Schedule No. R039995 Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Runyon stated that he shared the frustration of the board and believed that it was more appropriate that a more educated board made the final decision. 4 02/17/09 Planning Files PDA-2112 Two Rivers PUD Amendment Bob Narracci, Planning Department ACTION: The purpose ofthis PUD Amendment is to locate a new Gypsum Fire Protection District emergency response station and regional fire training center on Parcel 'A' of the Two Rivers Planned Unit Development. The Two Rivers PUD currently allows a fire station facility to be located on Parcel 'F' of the Two Rivers Estates Subdivision. Parcels 'A' and 'F' were platted as part of the Two Rivers Estates Subdivision. This PUD Amendment recognizes the changed use of Parcel 'A' and 'F'. FILE NO./PROCESS: LOCATION: PDA-2l12 / PUD Amendment North side ofInterstate-70 and U.S. Highway 6 and west of the Colorado River Road in Dotsero. Dotsero Realty Partners, LLLP Gypsum Fire Protection District Knight Planning Services / Jena Skinner-Markowitz OWNER: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: This Planned Unit Development Amendment application proposes to allow the Gypsum Fire Protection District (FPD) to construct a new fire and emergency response station and regional fire fighting training facility on Parcel A of the Two Rivers Estates subdivision. The Two Rivers Estates Subdivision is governed by the Two Rivers Planned Unit Development (PUD). Under the current Two Rivers PUD, Parcel A is designated for dedication to the RE-50J School District for use as a future school site. Parcel F of the Two Rivers Estates subdivision is designated as a site for a Gypsum FPD fire station facility. Parcel A is 4.507-acres in area and Parcel F (Gypsum FPD's current site) is l.l acres in area. Since the original approval of the Two Rivers PUD and Two Rivers Estates final plat, the RE-50J School District has deemed Parcel A unsuitable for the construction of a new school and has agreed to allow the Gypsum FPD to utilize the site. Companion to this proposed amendment of the Two Rivers PUD is a statutorily required location and extent application and a new Final Plat. The intent of the Final Plat is to re-designate Parcel A as Parcel M and Parcel F as Parcel B-2, as well as, to subdivide the private open space parcel Parcel E located adjacent to and directly north of Parcel A (Parcel M). The Gypsum FPD's intent is to utilize the steep hillside (Parcel E-l) adjacent to Parcel A (Parcel M) for wildland fire training purposes. Currently, Parcel A (Parcel M) contains miscellaneous storage for the Gypsum FPD and Colorado Mountain College (CMC) as well as a structure fire training tower erected by CMC. The intent is that the tower will serve the training needs of all regional fire protection providers. Parcel F (Parcel B-2) is currently being utilized for recreational vehicle storage for the residents of Two Rivers. B. CHRONOLOGY: October 5, 1998: The Two Rivers Planned Unit Development was approved by the BoCC. September 18, 2000: The Two Rivers PUD Amendment No. 1 was approved by the BoCC. April 23, 2002: The Two Rivers Estates Final Plat and Two Rivers Village Final Plat was approved by the BoCC. 5 02/17/09 Aprill5,2003: The Two Rivers PUD Amendment No.2 was approved by the BoCC. May 13, 2003: An Amended Final Plat for Two Rivers Village was approved by the BoCC December 29, 2009: Application received by Eagle County for this proposed Two Rivers PUD Amendment No.3, as well as, the companion Location & Extent and Final Plat applications. C. SITE DATA: Surrounding LandiUses / Zoning: ii ...... ;ji~J~:i"J //i;j North: Private Open Space Two Rivers 'PUD' South: Interstate 70 right-of-way Two Rivers and Two Rivers Village 'PUD' Recreational Vehicle Two Rivers East: Storage for Two Rivers 'PUD' Residents West: Bureau of Land ' Resource Management Preservati on' ....... //C:./i.;:. ....../ Existing Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD)* Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Current Development: Miscellaneous Storage and CMC Fire Fighting Training Tower Facility Relatively level site with earthen berm adjacent to U.S. Highway 6. The Site Conditions: site is what remains from 1-70 construction and the soil borrow pit used to raise the Two Rivers Village development out of the Colorado River 100- year floodplain. Total Land Area: Acres: 4.507-acres Square feet: 196,324.92 sq. ft. Total Open Space Acres: N/A Percentage: N/A Usable Open Space: Acres; N/A Percentage: N/A Water: Public: Two Rivers Metro Private: N/A District Sewer: Public: Two Rivers Metro Private: N/A District Actess: Via u.s. Highway 6 D. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION SUMMARY & MOTION: At the February 4,2009 hearing, the Eagle County Planning Commission unanimously approved the companion Location & Extent application and recommended approval of this PUD Amendment. The Planning Commissioners requested additional information from the applicant concerning the intended use of the steep adjacent hillside (Parcel E-l). The applicant indicated that exact plans for the use of Parcel E-1 have not yet been determined and committed to reviewing any future uses with the Eagle County Planning Commission through a subsequent Location & Extent application. The Planning Commission also inquired about the RE-50J School District's decision to not utilize Parcel A (Parcel M) for a future school site. The School District determined that the subject property is unsuitable as a school site due to potential instability of the steep adjacent hillside. 6 02/17/09 Ultimately, the Planning Commission determined that Parcel A is a suitable location for a fire station and fire fighters' training facility. 2. STAFF REPORT A. NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5-240 Sketch Plan for PUD Section Purpose: F or 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. 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. If 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 PUD. The title to all land that is part of the PUD is not owned or controlled by one (1) person; the written consent of the owner of the lands that will be subject to the conditions and standards of the PUD, as amended, has been provided. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X 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 effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these use designations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3f, Variations Authorized. 7 02/17/09 The proposed addition of a regional fire fighters training facility does represent an expansion of the 'fire station' use recognized in the existing Two Rivers PUD. Under the County's standard zone district, a regional fire fighters training facility would require special use permit review and approval. As proposed, ifthis PUD Amendment is approved, the regional training facility will become a use-by-right. ~ 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", for the zone district designation in effect for the property at the time of the application for PUD. Variations of these dimensional limitations may only be authorized pursuant to Section 5-240 F.3j, Variations Authorized. provided variations shall leave adequate distance between buildings for necessary access and fire protection, and ensure proper ventilation, light, air and snowmelt between buildings. The Dimensional Limitations set forth in the current Two Rivers PUD will not change as a result of this PUD Amendment proposal. Conformance with PUD Intent ofPUD/Use ofPUD Zoning: Intent Yes Necessary for integration of mixed uses; Yes To allow for greater variety in the type, design, and layout of buildings; To promote a more efficient land use pattern including an opportunity for public Yes transportation and for safe, efficient, compact street and utility networks that lower development and maintenance costs and conserve energy; Yes To increase open space; Yes The property is constrained- use of conventional standards limits quality design; Yes To increase compatibility with neighboring developments; Other STANDARD: 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: No variations will be required as a result of this proposed PUD Amendment. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Off-Street Parking and Loading. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (4)] - Offstreet parking and loading provided in the PUD shall comply with the standards of Article 4, Division 1, Off-Street Parkiml 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. 8 02/17/09 The minimum standards for off-street parking and loading as delineated in the current Two Rivers PUD Guide will not change as a result of this PUD Amendment proposal. ~ 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. Variations from these standards may be authorized where the applicant demonstrates that the proposed landscaping provides sufficient buffering of uses from each other (both within the PUD and between the PUD and surrounding uses) to minimize noise, glare and other adverse impacts, creates attractive streetscapes and parking areas and is consistent with the character of the area. Other than xeriscaping the existing earthen berm adjacent and parallel to US Highway 6 on Parcel A (Parcel M), landscaping within Two Rivers will otherwise not be altered as a result of this PUD Amendment proposal. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS 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., Sif!1ls Allowed in a Planned Unit Development (P UD) , 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. Signage provisions as delineated within the current Two Rivers PUD Guide will not be changed as a result of this PUD Amendment proposal. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS 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. x x x x x x 9 02/17/09 Not ApplicablelNo ECLUR Requirements Does Not Satisfy ECLUR R uirements DeviationIVIS Requested --~-~-~~~ In proximity to schools, police & fire protection, & emergency medical services No Development within the Two Rivers PUD is already served with Adequate Facilities for potable water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, electrical supply, fire protection and roads. Water and Sewer lines must be extended into Parcel A (Parcel M) from the adjacent US Highway 6 right-of-way. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS 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, Improvements Standards. Provided, however, the development may deviate from the County's road standards, so the development achieves greater efficiency of infrastructure design and installation through clustered or compact forms of development or achieves greater sensitivity to environmental impacts, when the following minimum design principles are followed: (a) Safe, Efficient Access. The circulation system is designed to provide safe, convenient access to all areas of the proposed development using the minimum practical roadway length. Access shall be by a public right-of-way, private vehicular or pedestrian way or a commonly owned easement. No roadway alignment, either horizontal or vertical, shall be allowed that compromises one (1) or more of the minimum design standards of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) for that functional classification of roadway. (b) Internal Pathways. Internal pathways shall be provided to form a logical, safe and convenient system for pedestrian access to dwelling units and common areas, with appropriate linkages off- site. (c) Emergency Vehicles. Roadways shall be designed to permit access by emergency vehicles to all lots or units. An access easement shall be granted for emergency vehicles and utility vehicles, as applicable, to use private roadways in the development for the purpose of providing emergency services and for installation, maintenance and repair of utilities. (d) Principal Access Points. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to provide for smooth traffic flow, minimizing hazards to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Where a PUD abuts a major collector, arterial road or highway, direct access to such road or highway from individual lots, units or buildings shall not be permitted. Minor roads within the PUD shall not be directly connected with roads outside of the PUD, unless the County determines such connections are necessary to maintain the County's road network. (e) Snow Storage. Adequate areas shall be provided to store snow removed from the internal street network and from off-street parking areas. Safe, Efficient Internal Emergency Pritl<;ipl\l Access Pathways Vehicles Access Pts ~~.,!,,.~.".a5" Exceeds ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR Requirements X X X X X 10 02/17/09 The Improvements standards governing how Two Rivers has developed since its inception will not be altered as a result of this PUD Amendment proposal. The Gypsum Fire Protection District must secure a State Highway Access Permit to access Parcel A (Parcel M) off of US Highway 6. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses. [Section 5-240.F.3.e (9)] - The development proposed for the PUD shall be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. Compatibility of the Two Rivers PUD with all existing and allowed adjacent land uses should not be adversely affected by this proposal to re-designate the use of Parcel A (Parcel M) from 'school site' to 'fire station and fire training facility' or re-designating the use of Parcel F (Parcel B-2) from 'fire station and all related uses' to 'storage site' for recreational vehicles owned by residents of Two Rivers. Additional detail regarding the extent of fire fighter training use proposed on the steep hillside (Parcel E-1) must be provided to determine compatibility with existing and allowed uses within the Two Rivers PUD. ~ 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 FLUM Designation Xl X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X X Below are the Recommended Strategies intended to accomplish each of the stated Comprehensive Plan Policies: 11 02/17/09 Xl: Develooment · "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to preserve the natural beauty and environmental integrity of Eagle County". · "Work to identify and preserve quality of life characteristics like outstanding recreational facilities, open space, clean air and water, uncrowded roads, quiet neighborhoods, unique cultural events and quality services ". · "Incorporate population and job growth data compiled by the State Demographer into development decisions and long range planning objectives". · "Promote compact, mixed-use development within or adjacent to existing community centers". · "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to improve social equity". · "Ensure that all plans for development recognize the need to maintain a healthy economy". · "Intersperse parks and properly scaled public spaces within and throughout areas of higher-density development". · "Consistently apply and enforce Eagle County Land Use Regulation development standards". · "Analyze development applicationsfor conformance to the County's Future Land Use Map". · "Continue to allow variations from underlying zoning standards to be obtained through a Planned Unit Development but require clustering within the PUD to the benefit of the surrounding community". · "Require new commercial development to provide workforce housing or to provide land for workforce housing'~ · "Design and locate development to minimize and / or mitigate identified impacts". The subject property is relatively level with an earthen berm adjacent and parallel to U.S. Highway 6, which largely screens on-site activities from 1-70 and Two Rivers Village. The site is what remains from the soil borrow pit used to raise the Two Rivers Village development out of the Colorado River 100-year floodplain. The adjacent hillside to the north of the subject property is in the same condition today that it was when the floodplain alteration was completed. The cut slope is highly visible and for the most part not vegetated. Pursuant to the Colorado Geological Survey response, stability of this hillside must be established, avoided and mitigated, as necessary to ensure that the subject property below is safe for development. Further information regarding the anticipated extent of fire training activities on the steep slope must be provided, including: a site specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report detailing how the site will be utilized and altered from its current condition and whether or not use of the adjacent hillside entails burning natural and/or introduced vegetation, as well as, revegetation. The reports must also address any geologic hazards or constraints present in the proposed building location and set forth recommendations for mitigation. Prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit on the site the county and Colorado Geological Survey will review and approve the reports. X2: Housinf! · "Affordable workforce housing should be located near job centers". · "Provide incentives to developers who develop workforce housing". · "Continue to require a Local Resident Housing Plan for all new development applications as required by the Local Resident Housing Guidelines". · "Mandate that attainable workforce housing be considered part of the required infrastructure for all new development applications". · "Continue to utilize Inclusionary Housing and Employee Housing Linkage as defined in the Local Resident Housing Guidelines in the review of development applications". On call residence quarters will be constructed as part of the Gypsum FPD station. The fire district personnel consist of both employees and volunteers; most of who already dwell in the vicinity. X3: Infrastructure and Services · "Locate new development in areas served by adequate roads and paths, and within reasonable distance to a mass transit hub". 12 02/17/09 . "Assure that road and trail improvements are completed concurrent to the completion of new development". Ensure appropriate transportation considerations are included in subdivision improvement agreements". "Work with mass transit providers to expand service". Encourage transit oriented development". "Promote pedestrian malls and provide adequate parking on the perimeter of shopping areas to encourage walking". "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". "Within towns and community centers, retrofit public roads with parallel pedestrian routes and marked street crossings". "Design streetscapes to include pedestrian friendly amenities like window spaces, store fronts, landscaping, plaza areas, marked cross walks and traffic speed controls". "Promote the use of Planned Unit Developments to increase flexibility in planning and design ". "Promote live-work arrangements where appropriate". "Encourage an appropriate mix of retail and office locations in new neighborhoods to reduce reliance on personal cars". "Evaluate all development proposals using Eagle County Land Use Regulation Road Standards". "Assure adequate access for emergency responders". "Require demonstration that all new developments will be adequately served by emergency and community services". "Encourage new commercial development to provide childcare as an amenity". "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". "Require the installation of water and sewer service infrastructure concurrent to development". "Require detailed transportation analysis at the preliminary approval". "Provide a diversity of housing choices and prices throughout the entire county". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104l Permit evaluation and approval for the fire station facility occurred concurrent with the Two Rivers PUD Preliminary Plan. No major offsite improvements are proposed. The Colorado Department of Transportation has requested that the applicant provide a traffic study to review impacts of the site prior to granting a State Highway Access Permit. X4: Water Resources · "Require developers to demonstrate that a legal and physical water supply exists for their development". · "Use a standard of extended drought conditions to determine the viability of the physical water supply proposed for a new development". · "Utilize current water quantity information in all development applications and planning reviews". · "Protect source water areas and reduce the potential for source water contamination". "Use pervious surfaces instead ofimpermeable surfaces when possible" · "Ensure that development does not adversely affect the recharge of groundwater resources". · "Encourage the use of water efficient landscape materials and landscape irrigation methods". · "Evaluate efficiencies of non-potable water usage for golf courses and other landscaped areas". · "Implement water reuse and recycling systems". · "Support the implementation of voluntary and mandatory water conservation measures". · "Require the demonstration of the availability of real (wet) water supply at Sketch Plan stage of development application ". · "Participate in water quality monitoring efforts". · "Follow the recommendations of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Regional 208 Water Quality Management Plan". · "Follow the recommendations of the Eagle River Watershed Plan". · "Promote the appropriate best management practices for the control of storm water runoff and work to identifY and treat other non-point sources of pollution". · "Require an effective water quality management plan be implemented with new development". . 13 02/17/09 . "Adhere to established Land Use Regulations and implement appropriate water quality best management practices (BMP's) on all development proposals". "Require buffer areas of natural vegetation between new developments and created or natural drainage ways ". "Minimize the extent of impervious surfaces within new developments and encourage the use of pervious paving systems". . . The subject property will be served by the Two Rivers Metropolitan District prior to building permit issuance. The earthen berm adjacent to U.S. Highway 6 will be landscaped with 'Firewise' and low water consumptive plant materials to serve as a demonstration to the public of xeric landscape principles. The fire station will incorporate the use of low flow shower heads and fixtures and otherwise comply with the ECO Build requirements. Impervious surfaces will be minimized. Best Management Practices relative to grading activity and storm water management are required with all final construction documents and plans and must be implemented on the site. X5: Wildlife Resources · "Support projects intent on removing or minimizing man-made barriers to wildlife migration". · Develop and implement projects that enhance existing wildlife habitat". · "Prevent contaminants from entering local streams and rivers". · "Direct development away from areas of critical wildlife habitat". · "Implement and enforce referral recommendations of local wildlife officials". · "Consider the impacts of each new development proposal in context with other existing or potential developments ". · "Encourage high-density development within existing community centers". · "Minimize site disturbance during construction". · "If ornamental landscape plants are used, encourage species that are unpalatable to wildlife". · "Require wildlife-proofrefuse containers for all new and existing subdivisions". The subject property is no longer viable wildlife habitat. All proposed fire station and training facility activities are proposed to occur on previously disturbed land. Best Management Practices will ensure that contaminants do not enter the river. X6: Sensitive Lands · "Require the evaluation of all geologic hazards and constraints as related to new land use". · "Minimize alteration of the natural landform by new development improvements to the greatest extent possible". · "A void the aggravation or acceleration of existing potential hazards through land form or vegetation modification '~ · Continue to refer all development plans to the Colorado Geological Survey for comment". · "Require the incorporation of all recommendations of CGS and other hazards experts into development plans ". · "Consider the cumulative impact of in crem ental development on landscapes that include visual, historic, and archeological value during the decision making process". · "Determine the features that make a particular open space parcel valuable given its intended use as open space and ensure that these features are preserved". Pursuant to the Colorado Geological Survey response, stability of this hillside must be established, avoided and mitigated, as necessary to ensure that the subject property below is safe for development. Further information regarding the anticipated extent of fire training activities on the steep slope must be provided, including: a site specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report detailing how the site will be l4 02/17/09 utilized and altered from its current condition and whether or not use of the adjacent hillside entails burning natural and/or introduced vegetation, as well as, revegetation. The reports must also address any geologic hazards or constraints present in the proposed building location and set forth recommendations for mitigation. Prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit on the site the county and Colorado Geological Survey will review and approve the reports. X7: Environmental Oualitv · "Assure access to multi-modal transportation options for all residents, second home owners and visitors". · "Provide affordable housing opportunities in close proximity to job centers to reduce personal vehicle trips". · "Focus development within towns and communities to reduce the need for daily commuting". · "Set limits for construction site disturbance, require temporary revegetation of stockpiles and permanent revegetation of all disturbed areas once final grades have been established". · "Require periodic watering and track-out control devices at all construction site access points". · "Utilize motion detectors to minimize the duration of security lighting': · "Ensure that noise levels are safe for residents, visitors and employees". · "Include an analysis of potential noise when making the finding of compatibility with surrounding uses for all new development proposals". · "Promote transit-oriented development, and encourage plans that minimize reliance on personal motorized vehicles". · "Design communities in a way that reduces fossil fuel consumption for heating or cooling". · Implement energy efficiency guidelines. · Implement energy saving techniques. Impacts associated with a fire station facility relative to nearby residential development were evaluated with the original Two Rivers Planned Unit Development approval; the use of Parcel A by the Gypsum FPD should not alter these impacts. X8: Future Land Use MaD DesiJInation The FLUM of the Eagle County Community Plan identifies the subject property as a "Community Center". "Community Centers are places where mixes of residential and non-residential activities appropriate to serve the Community Center and surrounding rural areas take place. Community facilities, such as schools and fire stations, are appropriately located within Community Centers as are community-oriented facilities". EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN Water Quantity Water Quality Wildlife Recreation Land Use Conformance X X X X X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not Applicable The use of Best Management Practices for storm water management and protection of the Colorado River are mandatory . EAGLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN 15 02/17/09 Land Use Open Space Unique Char. Visual Development Hazards Wildlife Cooperation Provision Preservation Quality Patterns Conformance X Non Conformance Mixed Conformance Not x x x x x x Applicable The subject property is not located in an area identified as a "unique landform". Overall, the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and ancillary documents. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 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. This finding is not applicable. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS 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 PUD shall comply with the following common recreation and open space standards. (a) Minimum Area. It is recommended that a minimum of 25% of the total PUD area shall be devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or quasi-public. In addition, the PUD shall provide a minimum of ten (10) acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for everyone 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, 16 02/17/09 that are preserved as open space shall count towards this minimum standard, even when they are not usable by or accessible to the residents of the PUD. All other open space lands shall be conveniently accessible from all occupied structures within the PUD. (d) Improvements Required. All common open space and recreational facilities shall be shown on the Preliminary Plan for PUD and shall be constructed and fully improved according to the development schedule established for each development phase of the PUD. (e) Continuing Use and Maintenance. All privately owned common open space shall continue to conform to its intended use, as specified on the Preliminary Plan for PUD. To ensure that all the common open space identified in the PUD will be used as common open space, restrictions and/or covenants shall be placed in each deed to ensure their maintenance and to prohibit the division of any common open space. (/) Organization. If common open space is proposed to be maintained through an association or nonprofit corporation, such organization shall manage all common open space and recreational and cultural facilities that are not dedicated to the public, and shall provide for the maintenance, administration and operation of such land and any other land within the PUD not publicly owned, and secure adequate liability insurance on the land. The association or nonprofit corporation shall be established prior to the sale of any lots or units within the PUD. Membership in the association or nonprofit corporation shall be mandatory for all landowners within the PUD. This proposed amendment to the Two Rivers PUD will not alter the total amount of common recreation area and open space within the PUD. Over 25% of the total PUD area is devoted to open air recreation or other usable open space, public or private and the PUD does provide a minimum of ten acres of common recreation and usable open space lands for every 1,000 persons who are residents of the PUD. This PUD Amendment does propose to allow fire fighting training activities to occur on the Parcel E (Parcel E-1) open space. This site is steep, in excess of a 30% slope and currently serves as privately owned, passive open space. The steep hillside is the cut-slope remaining from the removal of soil/aggregate used to raise the Two Rivers Village development out of the Colorado River 100-year floodplain. ~ 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. .5 .~....ts 5.~ <1) S.gt!:l go (/) :E ~ ~~~~ 0<.9::1:: 0/) .5 e ~~ -gg o $:\ f:=:8 <1) g .5.- "i)v 0/)<1) :SE CZ::t:l... I~ ~C2 .g ~ ~! x x x x x x Natural Resource Protections will not be altered as a result of this proposed PUD Amendment. 17 02/17/09 Pursuant to the Colorado Geological Survey response, stability of this hillside must be established, avoided and mitigated, as necessary to ensure that the subject property below is safe for development. Further information regarding the anticipated extent of fire training activities on the steep slope must be provided, including: a site specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report detailing how the site will be utilized and altered from its current condition and whether or not use of the adjacent hillside entails burning natural and/or introduced vegetation, as well as, revegetation. The reports must also address any geologic hazards or constraints present in the proposed building location and set forth recommendations for mitigation. Prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit on the site the county and Colorado Geological Survey will review and approve the reports. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-280.B.3.e. Standards for the review of a Sketch and Preliminary Plan for a Subdivision: STANDARD: Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (1)] - The propose_d subdivision shall be consistent with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and the FLUM of the Comprehensive Plan. Overall, the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and ancillary documents. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Consistent with Land Use Regulations. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (2)] - The proposed subdivision shall comply with all of the standards of this Section and all other provisions of these Land Use Regulations, including, but not limited to, the applicable standards of Article 3, Zone Districts. and Article 4, Site Development Standards. '" 1:$ 'C ~ a o s:: o N ~ ~ OIls:: :s fj .5 0 ~ 0.';:; o8~ t.l- 5 '" ~~ '" t<l ..", '0 ] t.l._ ~ o,c ;> ~ t.l s:: "1:$ '" .- '" g u /Zl .- 'Os ~~Sj ~..:.: i.a 5b t<l~oj 0'00. o~ ,.J:::: 00 ZO::Q::/Zl u.s,s/Zl x x x x x x g 0. ,s Exceeds ECLUR Requirements Satisfies ECLUR Requirements Not Applicable/No ECLUR Requirements Does Not SatisfY ECLUR Re uirements Deviations Requested x x The existing Two Rivers PUD complies with all applicable standards and provisions ofthe Land Use Regulations utilized by Eagle County during the initial evaluation and approval of the Two Rivers PUD in 1998 and subsequent amendments. This proposal to amend the Two Rivers PUD will not alter Consistency with the Land Use Regulations. l8 02/17/09 ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Spatial PaUern Shall Be Efficient. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (3)] - The proposed subdivision shall be located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development. (a) Utility and Road Extensions. Proposed utility extensions shall be consistent with the utility's service plan or shall require prior County approval of an amendment to the service plan. Proposed road extensions shall be consistent with the Earlie County Road Capital Improvements Plan. (b) Serve Ultimate Population. Utility lines shall be sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade under-sized lines. (c) Coordinate Utility Extensions. Generally, utility extensions shall only be allowed when the entire range of necessary facilities can be provided, rather than incrementally extending a single service into an otherwise un-served area. No inefficiencies have been identified with respect to this proposal. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Suitability for Development. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (4)] -The property proposed to be subdivided shall be suitable for development, considering its topography, environmental resources and natural or man-made hazards that may affect the potential development of the property, and existing and probable future public improvements to the area. The Board of County Commissioners in 1998 determined that the subject property was suitable for development. Pursuant to the Colorado Geological Survey response, stability of this hillside must be established, avoided and mitigated, as necessary to ensure that the subject property below is safe for development. Further information regarding the anticipated extent of fire training activities on the steep slope must be provided, including: a site specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report detailing how the site will be utilized and altered from its current condition and whether or not use of the adjacent hillside entails burning natural and/or introduced vegetation, as well as, revegetation. The reports must also address any geologic hazards or constraints present in the proposed building location and set forth recommendations for mitigation. Prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit on the site the county and Colorado Geological Survey will review and approve the reports. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS STANDARD: Compatible with Surrounding Uses. [Section 5-280.B.3.e (5)] - The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 19 02/17/09 Compatibility of the Two Rivers PUD with all existing and allowed adjacent land uses should not be adversely affected by this proposal to re-designate the use of Parcel A (Parcel M) from 'school site' to 'fire station and fire training facility' or re-designating the use of Parcel F (Parcel B-2) from 'fire station and all related uses' to 'storage site' for recreational vehicles owned by residents of Two Rivers. Additional detail regarding the extent of fire fighter training use proposed on the steep hillside (Parcel E-1) must be provided to determine compatibility with existing and allowed uses within the Two Rivers PUD. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL FINDINGS: Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.2.a.(8) Initiation: Applicant shall submit the following: A Proposed PUD guide settingforth the proposed land use restrictions. This requirement has been satisfied. ~ EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations Section 5-240.F.3.m Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD: STANDARD: Amendment to Preliminary Plan for PUD [Section 5-240.F.3.m] -No substantial modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the plan shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provision of Section 24-67- l04(1)(e) Colorado Revised Statutes that: (1) Modification. The modification, removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development; (2) Adjacent Properties. The PUD Amendment does not effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the Planned Unit Development or public interest; (3) Benefit. The PUD Amendment is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. In addition to the above requirements a Preliminary Plan for PUD may be amended, extended, varied or altered only pursuant to the standards and procedures established for its original approval. (1) The modification, removal or release of the provisions of the existing Two Rivers PUD Guide is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Planned Unit Development; (2) The proposed PUD Amendment will not effect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment ofland abutting upon or across a street from the Two Rivers Planned Unit Development or public interest; (3) This proposed PUD Amendment, if approved, will not confer a special benefit upon any one person but rather, may confer a uniform special benefit upon all owners of property located within the Two Rivers Planned Unit Development. D EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS 20 02/17/09 ~ MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS B. REFERRAL RESPONSES: Eagle County Engineering Department: Please refer to the attached Engineering Department memorandum dated January 26,2009. These comments are incorporated as conditions of approval. Eagle County Environmental Health Department: Please refer to the attached Environmental Health Department memorandum dated January l4, 2009. These comments are incorporated as conditions of approval. Town of Gypsum: Please refer to the attached e-mail from Lana Gallegos, Town Planner dated January 7, 2009. The Town did not offer any official comments. Eagle River Fire Protection District: Please refer to the attached ERFPD memorandum dated January 26, 2009. The ERFPD has no concerns with the proposal to allow the Gypsum FPD to construct a fire station as proposed with this application. The ERFPD states that it, among other county emergency agencies and the Colorado Mountain College, had agreed to hire a consultant to identify agency needs and suitable site locations for a regional training facility. To date, several agencies, including ERFPD, have contributed funds to pay for this study. Thus far, no study has been performed or recommendations made. The ERFPD is committed to the originally agreed upon process and has not been a partner in the new training tower or any plans to expand that facility. Greater Eagle Fire Protection District: Please refer to the attached Greater Eagle FPD memorandum received by Community Development on January 22,2009. The Greater Eagle FPD response likewise notes the formation of a committee and hiring of a consultant to site a regional fire fighting training facility in Eagle County. The Greater Eagle FPD is supportive of the work that has been done thus far by the Gypsum FPD and Colorado Mountain College to secure the subject property and to construct the already existing fire training tower. Colorado Geological Survey: Please refer to the attached letter dated January 21,2009. The CGS response identifies a variety of site geology and geologic hazards and the need for the applicant to prepare a site-specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report and debris flow hazard mitigation techniques. CGS wants to review the geologic / geotechnical information when submitted by the applicant. These comments are incorporated as conditions of approval. Colorado Department of Transportation: Please refer to the attached e-mail from Daniel Roussin dated January 25,2009. CDOT offers no comment regarding the location and extent or PUD Amendment. The response does indicate that the Gypsum FPD will need to obtain a State Highway Access Permit to access Parcel A off of u.s. Highway 6. As part of the access permit application, CDOT will require a traffic study to review the impacts of the site. These comments are incorporated as conditions of approval. Note: Referrals were also sent with no response received to the Eagle County Attorney, Eagle County Assessor, ECO Trails, ECO Transit, Eagle County Housing Department, Eagle County Road & Bridge Department, RE-50J School District, Eagle County Sheriff's Office, Eagle County Weed & Pest, Eagle County Wildfire Mitigation Specialist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Natural Resource Conservation District, WECAD, ECAD, Basalt & Rural FPD, Town of Vail Fire Department, Holy Cross Electric, Two Rivers Metro District, Centurytel, Colorado Historical Society, Eagle County Historical Society, Two Rivers Village HOA, Two Rivers Estates HOA. C. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: 2l 02/17/09 The applicant must address, to the Planning Commission's and Board of County Commissioner's satisfaction, the extent of wildland fire fighter training use on the steep, privately owned, open space. The applicant has indicated that specific plans have not been determined as yet and has committed to processing a future Location & Extent application. The Eagle County Planning Commission and staff will have the opportunity to review and approve the extent of training activities on Parcel E-1 prior to any such use of the property. Pursuant to the Colorado Geological Survey response, stability of this hillside must be established, avoided and mitigated, as necessary to ensure that the subject property below is safe for development. Further information regarding the anticipated extent of fire training activities on the steep slope must be provided, including: a site specific geologic hazard and geotechnical report detailing how the site will be utilized and altered from its current condition and whether or not use of the adjacent hillside entails burning natural and/or introduced vegetation, as well as, revegetation. The reports must also address any geologic hazards or constraints present in the proposed building location and set forth recommendations for mitigation. Prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit on the site the county and Colorado Geological Survey will review and approve the reports. D. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OPTIONS: 1. Approve the PUD Amendment 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 PUD Amendment 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 Amendment if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the PUD Amendment with conditions and/or 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: l) 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 comments set forth in the Engineering Department memorandum dated January 26, 2009 must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Eagle County Engineer prior to site disturbance. 3) All comments set forth in the Environmental Health Department memorandum dated January 14,2009 must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Director of Environmental Health prior to site disturbance. 22 02/17/09 4) The applicant and the Eagle River Fire Protection District should collaborate regarding the regional training facility. Reference the memorandum from Chief Charles Moore dated January 26,2009. 5) All comments set forth in the Colorado Geological Survey response dated January 21,2009 must be addressed to the satisfaction of Colorado Geological Survey and Eagle County prior to the issuance of either a grading permit or building permit for a fire station facility and/or alteration ofthe adjacent hillside (Parcel E-1). 6) Pursuant to the Colorado Department of Transportation e-mail dated January 25,2009, the applicant must secure a State Highway Access Permit to access Parcel A (Parcel M) off of US Highway 6. 7) Detailed information regarding the intended use of steep hillside (Parcel E-1) must be provided to the county prior to issuance of either a grading permit or building permit for a fire station facility and/or alteration of (Parcel E-1). DISCUSSION: Mr. Narracci presented the applicant's request. The proposal would amend the Two Rivers PUD to relocate the previously designated fire station site and re-designate the use of Parcel F to allow recreational vehicle storage for the residents. The PUD amendment also proposes the use of open space parcel. He presented the Planning Commission responses and the board's options. Ultimately, the Planning Commission determined that Parcel A was a suitable location for a fire station and fire fighter's training facility. He indicated that the proposal was consistent with the recommendations of the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the Planning Commission committed the applicant to additional review and therefore condition number 7 was no longer necessary. Jena Skinner-Markowitz, Knight Planning was present on behalf of the applicant. She explained the parcel sizes and the designated uses. She presented a slide that illustrated the proposed parcel re-allocation. The applicant believed that they met all the requirements and the PUD was minor in scope. Commissioner Stavney asked if the applicant had any issues with the proposed conditions 1-7. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that the applicant had no issues or concerns. Chairman Fisher asked about the proposed training facility plan. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that a training facility currently existed in Edwards at CMC. A plan had yet to be determined. They would provide a type of living document in the future, to be held at an administrative level and changed with the needs of the fire districts. Chief Dave Vroman from the Gypsum fire Protection District stated that they currently operated on the same parcel through a lease with the applicant. They simply needed a transfer of title so they could proceed with their plan to facilitate training. Chairman Fisher asked if there would be opportunities for dormitory housing. Chief Vroman stated that fire station proposed for the site would have bunkrooms and they had started to explore the dorm facility concept. Chairman Fisher believed that the storage yard area was somewhat of an eyesore. She would like the applicant to look through design lenses to make sure what was constructed there would have a long-term appeal. Commissioner Runyon wondered if the applicant was requesting a doubling of the storage yard capability. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that there was no further expansion. Commissioner Runyon asked how it related to the Fire District. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that it was a joint application, the developer of Two Rivers and the Gypsum Fire Department. It was at the request of the developer to have a storage site available for the residents of Two Rivers Village. Commissioner Runyon suggested that a visual barrier fence be put up along the interstate. Mr. Skinner-Markowitz stated that there was currently some fence. Ken Kriz, ofDotsero Realty Partners, LLC stated that there would be fencing and designated parking. The property would be used by residents only and not for commercial operations. Commissioner Runyon asked Mr. Narracci ifhe had any concerns. Mr. Narracci stated that his only concern was for the unstable slope of the hillside. The applicant had satisfied that concern by agreeing to come back for additional review. 23 02/1 7/09 Mr. Kriz stated that there were certain portions that were unstable. Commissioner Runyon asked about the expansion of the training facility and wondered if the CMC facility would be moved. Chief Vroman stated that they were not going to move the CMC building. All the other fire districts in the county and region are their partners. This is a work in process and it would belong to the group once the deal was finalized. Commissioner Runyon stated that he understood the need for the facility. He asked if there were any safety issues or concerns with having a training facility so close to the interstate. Chief Vroman stated that this was a unique site with a smoke dispersal pattern found nowhere else in the county. There would not be an inversion on anyone. He believed that there could be a partnership with CDOT to use their message boards. Commissioner Stavney applauded the applicants for working together to find the best uses for the spaces. The board works hard with PUD's in defining everything at the beginning and sometimes the best uses evolve. Terrell Knight spoke. He spoke about the Stevens property. He stated that Mr. Stevens was fully aware of this proposal and had no objections. Chairman Fisher opened and closed public comment, as there was none. Commissioner Runyon spoke about the visual barrier and indicated that he'd like to see wood fencing. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that a wood fence could be costly to maintain. She believed that a commercial chain link fence with plastic weaving would be more appropriate. Chief Vroman wondered ifCDOT would require wildlife fencing in some areas. Ms. Skinner-Markowitz stated that the storage site had not been served with public water. She believed that given the topography a chain link fence with woven plastic would be a detriment to the hillside behind it. Chairman Fisher wondered it the board could reserve the right to come back and revisit the fencing. Mr. Morris stated that this could become problematic down the road. He would like to work with Mr. Narracci to figure out a statement for the resolution regarding the matter. Commissioner Stavney proposed that the applicant work with planning staff on a mutually acceptable screening of the vehicles storage area. Commissioner Stavney moved to approve file no. PDA-2ll2 Two Rivers PUD amendment based on the staff findings and adding condition 8 to work with staff on a mutually acceptable screening of the vehicles storage area. Commissioner Runyon seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. ecoBuild update Adam Palmer, Community Development Recorded Attest: meeting was adjourned until February 24,2009. ~ sto-Q &~ Chairman 24 02/17/09