Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/23/12Present: Peter Runyon Jon Stavney Sara Fisher Keith Montag Beth Ayres- Oliver Kathy Scriver PUBLIC HEARING October 23, 2012 Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Manager Assistant County Attorney Deputy Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing, the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Attorney Update (recorded) Bryan Treu, County Attorney A. Open Session B. Executive Session 1. Legal advice concerning questions raised during the first hearing 2. on an application for a special use permit and a request for a variance from improvement standards (El Capitan Cabin) 3. Legal advice concerning Eagle Valley Land Exchange Agreement Chairman Runyon spoke about the commitment by the county to give the Rocky Mountain Science Center a total of $200,000 for renewable components of the campus. This was the final check. Adam Palmer expressed his honor in presenting a check for $75,000 to Markian Feuschak from the Rocky Mountain Science Center. Mr. Feuschak thanked Eagle County for their support and welcomed everyone to visit the science center. The ECO build fund had been instrumental in completing the project. Consent Agenda A. B. C. E. Chairman Runyon stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of October 22, 2012 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative Approval of Payroll for November 1, 2012 (subject to review by the Finance Director) Finance Department Representative Eagle County System of Care for Youth Grant Acceptance Holly Kasper Branch, Health & Human Services Annual Emergency Management Program Grant Agreement Barry Smith, Emergency Management Worksite Wellness Services Agreement between Eagle County and Healthbreak, Inc. Lisa Ponder, Human Resources 10/23/2012 F. Resolution 2012 -108 Supporting the State Highway 82 / El Jebel Grant Agreement between Colorado Department of Transportation and Eagle County for Right of Way, Design and Construction Greg Schroeder, Engineering G. State Highway 82 / El Jebel Grant Agreement between Colorado Department of Transportation and Eagle County for Right of Way, Design and Construction Greg Schroeder, Engineering H. Amended Final Plat /Cordillera Subdivision, Filing No. 17 Block 2, Lots 15 & 16. The intent of this Amended Final Plat is to amend the property line between Lots 15 & 16, and to amend each building envelope. (Eagle County File No. AFP -3873) Sean Hanagan, Planning Commissioner Stavney moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items A -H. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Citizen Input Chairman Runyon opened and closed citizen Input, as there was none. Board of County Commissioners will set the Public BoCC Hearing Date for the Cordillera Valley Club Metropolitan District Service Plan Amendment, with the Public Hearing to be Conducted on November 13, 2012 (Eagle County File No. SD- 3996) Scot Hunn, Community Development Commissioner Fisher moved to set the public hearing date for the Cordillera Valley Club Metropolitan District service Plan amendment to November 13, 2012. Commissioner Stavney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Planning Files ZS -3495, VIS 3534 El Capitan Cabin Kris Valdez, Planning Department Eva Wilson, Engineering Department Greg and Melanie Dennis, Applicants NOTE: Tabled from 10/3/12 ACTION: The purpose of this Special Use Permit is to request a Resort Recreational Facility, consisting of one, 8- person cabin, on an 11.7 acre privately owned property accessed via Forest Service Road 731. A Variance to Improvement Standards is necessary as part of the Special Use Permit request. LOCATION: 1200 Forest Service Road 731 2 10/23/2012 REFERENCE: Staff Report in 10103112 meeting minutes MEMORANDUM To: Eagle County Board of County Commissioners From: Kris Valdez, Planner III Community Development Department Date: October 23, 2012 RE: Update — El Capitan Cabin The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on El Capitan Cabin Special Use Permit (Eagle County File No. ZS- 3495). At the October 2, 2012, hearing, the Board requested a site visit for the El Capitan Cabin. Commissioner Stavney visited the site by himself on October 5, 2012. Commissioner Fisher and Commission Runyon visited the site on October 10, 2012, along with County staff, United States Forest Service, 10"' Mountain Division Hut Executive Director, the applicant and adjacent property owners. The site visit on October 10th consisted of showing the location of the proposed summer /winter parking areas, the existing home on the property, and the proposed location of the cabin. The group also visited the adjacent hut, Vane's Cabin, which is already part of the 101h Mountain Division Hut System. The discussion was, limited to orientation and site clarification questions. DISCUSSION: Ms. Valdez presented several letters to the board she had received since submission of her backup last Wednesday. Chairman Runyon spoke about the site visit. He asked Ms. Valdez to give a brief update on the application. Ms. Valdez summarized the request. The applicant was requesting a special use permit and a road variance. The special use permit would allow for a cabin that would be incorporated into the 10th Mountain Division but system. Currently on the property was a single - family dwelling with sheds and small out buildings. The but would be open in the summer from July l St to September 30th and in the winter from December 15th to April 1St. The applicant had requested that they be able to use the but outside of those time periods for person use. Since the site visit, the wildfire mitigation had been completed. The project was compatible with the design standards except for the variance for dual access. The applicant would maintain the property as it was off the grid. She presented some of the benefits and disadvantages. Educational information would be provided to all users. She provided photos of the existing cabin and sheds, the footprint of the proposed hut, and winter and summer parking areas. She spoke about some of the concerns raised by the adjacent property owners. She explained that if any portion of the special use permit were to be violated, the permit could be revoked. The property would remain "Resource Zoning ". Commissioner Fisher spoke about the site visit. She believed the trip was valuable and everyone stayed on point. Ms. Valdez stated that public comment had not been closed at the last hearing and the applicant bad a short statement. Melanie Dennis, the applicant, thanked the board, county staff and members of the community for their time. While it was difficult to pursue this venture with some opposition, there were many people in support. If approved, they would continue to work with the neighborhood on any outstanding issues. They made compromises and changes to their business plan based upon their input. Their intent was to be an asset to their community. They would be active managers of their business. They believed that their proposal was in line with the county's vision and was in high demand. She hoped the board would give them a chance to bring this proposal to Eagle County. 10/23/2012 Greg Dennis stated that not only was the proposed project a vision of environmental stewardship and sharing this special place with others, it was an economic necessity. Recently they chose to move their family to Minturn due to the difficulty of raising a family on Tennessee Pass. As their children started participating in sports and other afterschool activities, the driving proved to be too much. They did not want to sell their property but did not have the resources to own a second home and leave it vacant, so chose to rent it. Someday they saw themselves returning to Tennessee Pass. They estimated that the gross revenue of this project would be about $40,000 per year. The revenue would help them make ends meet and maintain their connection to this special place they hoped to share with those that were not as lucky to live there. Commissioner Stavney spoke about his visit to the property and asked about the confusing signage. It seemed to him that a lot of community work had been done to obfuscate how people might get around. He wondered why 731 was not used to access Vance's Cabin. Ms. Valdez stated that Vance's Cabin was accessed off Ski Cooper. Commissioner Fisher stated that people that were renting Vance's Cabin through the 10th Mountain Hut System were coming in on foot from Ski Cooper. Mr. Dennis stated that 731 was the access to Vance's Cabin in the summer months and was open for commercial use as well. Chairman Runyon opened public comment. He asked that there not be questions directed at the applicant. He asked the people that spoke at the last hearing to speak only if they had something to add. Marjorie Westermann explained that she did not live on 731 but owned 45 acres on 731. She believed that most of the support for the special use permit was outside of the neighborhood. Families that lived on 731 were thriving. She hoped that the Dennis's would not have to sell their property but also hoped that they would not sell out the neighborhood. The owner of Vance's Cabin quickly responded to the neighborhood's concern to increased traffic on 731 and rerouted the but access. The summer dates of Vance's Cabin were extremely limited. If the board were to approve this proposal, she believed that the dates should be consistent with Vance's Cabin. She presented a letter from Peter and Margo Darby, owners of 350 Forest Service Road 731. She read the Darby's letter into the record, which expressed concern for lack of secondary egress and neighborhood safety. Chairman Runyon stated that letter had already been received and reviewed by the board. Ms. Westermann requested that if approved, the board include a condition that there be a biannual written review from the neighborhood and the Dennis's. Bruce Cavan, West Vail resident spoke. He had lived in Eagle County and Pitkin County since the 70s. He believed that the public should have the ability to access these areas. This was a small project. He believed that but users were sensitive to the environment. It seemed silly to him that everyone had been spending so much time on an emotionally based issue. He believed that 731 was a public road, and this was a legal project and he did not see any reason why this project should not move forward. He encouraged the board to approve the project. Everyone in the community would benefit from the proposal. Sue Nikoli, Eagle resident spoke. She was close friends with the Dennis's and had spent a lot of time with them at their home on 731. She believed that Greg and Melanie Dennis were incredibly responsible, respected, and hardworking people. Their home was a stunning work of architecture and beauty. They were skilled craftsmen and both had an eye for design that compliments the natural world. They had been good neighbors and good stewards of the land. She spoke about the difficulty booking a backcountry ski but with a family. Having experienced 731 at all different times of the year and all different times of the day, she did not believe it was a very busy road. She and her husband, Markian Feuschak gave their unconditional support to the project. David Faulkinberg thanked the board for all their input. He believed that approving a new cabin would double the density. The project was too much for the area. Ms. Westerman stated that they were not trying to confuse people with the road signage just be helpful. Tanya Miller, Wildridge resident spoke. She lived in the neighborhood from 2002- 2012. She believed there was a need for these types of recreational experiences. She believed that there was a way to work together if the needs of the neighborhood were properly addressed. Chairman Runyon closed public comment. Chairman Runyon asked about the latitudes within the regulations to condition a review after 3 years. 4 10/23/2012 Ms. Valdez stated that the applicant had 3 years in which to implement the project. If the file were to be approved today with conditions, they had 3 years to build the cabin. If the cabin was not built within those 3 years, the approval would expire. One of the concerns raised by an adjacent property owner during the Planning Commission hearing was that the applicant would rent it out outside the specific dates. There was no other licensing process moving forward but any violations would trigger a review. Eva Wilson stated that in the past they had conditioned other files with an administrative review on traffic and traffic control. The review would be triggered by complaints and/or traffic accidents. Commissioner Fisher stated that the variance being requested went hand in hand with the special use permit. The next home would also require the county's review. Ms. Wilson confirmed that every building permit required review by the engineering department for access. Commissioner Stavney stated that he had trouble with the need for this community to have variance on these standards. He believed that everyone that lived in the area understood the remoteness of it. Chairman Runyon agreed with Commissioner Stavney and stated that the property was subdivided before there were land use regulations. Secondary access was not considered. At some point, the community would have to acknowledge the road issues. Commissioner Fisher thought that the proposal would change the use to commercial rather than the traditional residential use. She believed that over time, as more people took up residency there, the road issues would need to be addressed. She did not support the proposal. She appreciated the applicant's intent but believed it was not responsible development. She would be voting against the variance. Commissioner Stavney stated that compatibility was the real question at hand for the special use permit. Chairman Runyon found himself torn. Commissioner Stavney did not have a problem use but was not comfortable with the variance. He thought parameters could be set on the special use permit. Part of the advantage was that the parking would be at the existing home but the parking was in the middle of the neighborhood and would affect a lot of people. Chairman Runyon understood the applicant's motivation, but understood the neighborhood's expectation. There were compelling arguments on both sides. He apologized to the Dennis's but felt that he needed to side with the neighborhood. Commissioner Fisher asked if there was any value to the applicant withdrawing their application and working with the neighborhood. Chairman Runyon stated that the compatibility standard had not been met. Mr. Dennis stated that they would like to withdraw their application for the special use permit. Commissioner Fisher encouraged the Dennis's to work with their neighbors. ZS -3854 Stone Yard Distillery Scot Hunn, Planning Department Jim Benson, Applicant Max Vogelman, Applicant ACTION: The purpose of this Special Use Permit is for a Spirits distillery within the Dotsero Ranch residential, commercial and industrial PUD. LOCATION: Dotsero Ranch Planned Unit Development, Lot 1 ( Dotsero area east of the lava flow and south of U.S. Highway 6). OWNER: Kurt Vogelman, Dotsero Ranch PUD APPLICANT: Kurt Vogelman, Dotsero Ranch PUD REPRESENTATIVE: Jim Benson and Max Vogelman STAFF PLANNER: Scot Hunn, AICP STAFF ENGINEER: Ben Gerdes L SUMMARY OF REOUEST: 10/23/2012 The Applicant requests review of a Special Use permit for the operation of a "Micro - Distillery" manufacturing use within an existing building on Lot 1 of the Dotsero Ranch (Vogelman) Planned Unit Development (PUD), located in Dotsero, Colorado. Pursuant to Section 5 -250.E — Effect of Issuance of Special Use Permit, Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Special Use permits are valid for three (3) years until the approved use is implemented. If the approved use is not implemented within the three year time period, the permit expires. Upon implementation of the approved use within the three year time period, Special Use permits remain valid in- perpetuity, unless an expiration date or exception has been placed upon the permit by the Board of County Commissioners. II. BACKGROUND: The Dotsero Ranch PUD was originally approved in February, 1999. The PUD includes Lots 1 -5; Lots 1, 2 and 3 are approved for commercial and light industrial uses, where stone yards, lumber yards and retail sales of such products are "uses by right ". Lots 4 and 5 are approved for residential uses. The PUD Guide contemplates uses such as "Equipment Rental ", "Wood or Lumber Processing" and "Manufacturing/Assembly" on Lots 1 -3 as special uses. According to the Dotsero Ranch PUD Guide document, "The purpose of The Dotsero Ranch Planned Unit Development Guide is to ensure the orderly, compatible and attractive development of this 35 acre property in Dotsero. The northwesterly portion of the property is designed to accommodate commercial /industrial operations related to construction trades /artisans. The easterly and southerly portion of the property is planned for low density rural residential development. " Current use of the PUD includes the Vogelman stone yard operation and sales, log assembly, and storage. The Applicant proposes to locate a spirits distillery to produce hand crafted rum and other spirits products on Lot 1, within an existing 1,600 square foot structure. All operations will occur indoors, with the exception of storage of materials and equipment within wind and water tight shipping containers behind the building. The site has been used for the Vogelman stone yard operations since the inception of the PUD. Access is provided by two previously approved access points along U.S. Highway 6, and there is ample room on Lot 1 for maneuverability of vehicles, loading and unloading, and parking for proposed patrons of the distillery (see attached Site Plan by Applicant). At this time, the Applicant does not propose to serve patrons at the distillery, however; the application does state that a tasting room is planned for the future where patrons would be able to sample products at no charge. The Applicant estimates daily activity of two employees (the two owners of the business) will generate 4 -6 vehicle trips per day. Deliveries for the business are expected weekly. Activities such as a future tasting room are estimated to increase vehicle trips by ten vehicle trips per day. There is an existing CDOT access permit for two entrances to the site. Potable water is provided by existing wells on site, and the Applicant plans to work with the Eagle County Environmental Health Department and a qualified wastewater engineer to complete designs for any future Individual Septic Disposal System requirements. III. SITE DATA: Future Land Use Map The project site is located just east of the I -70 interchange at Dotsero, on the historic "Vesuveus Placer" lava flow. The property is bordered on the south by public lands (Bureau of Land Management) zoned Resource Preservation (RP); to the north by the Interstate -70 corridor; to the west by vacant property zoned Resource (R) and; to the east by public lands (Bureau of Land Management) zoned Resource Preservation (RP). 6 10/23/2012 The PUD is identified on the County's adopted Future Land Use Map as being within the "Existing Approved Development ". The Comprehensive Plan states: "Included in this designation are those lands that are outside approved area community plans that have been previously approved for more intensive use through the County subdivision or PUD process. That process, and the subsequent approval for the development by the Board of County Commissioners, has determined a density and /or land use that is appropriate to the site, and it is expected by this Plan that those uses and densities will continue in a similar fashion and character for the foreseeable future. " Surrounding Zoning: �...,,., rX ,.... - 2 g 5_ North: . Interstate 70 Resource Federal South: Public Land Resource /Resource BLM Protection _ East: Vacant Resource /Resource BLM Protection _ West: Vacant Resource Private Dotsero Ranch PUD _ N/A no change requested) _ Commercial and Industrial — stoneyard operations; log assembly; outbuildings; water rtv� and wastewater systems. _ t`�►ilid+�st; Over -lot gradin and disturbance; com acted lava and road base. 35 (PUD) at 1,524,600 (PUD) 11.3 (Lot 1) 491,928 (Lot 1) Total, ll N/A _ 'ter: Public: , N/A ")"r1vI Well N/A `l'ta`vt:. Septic 5.' U.S. Highway 6 IV. REFERRAL RESPONSES: Referral copies of this application were sent to thirteen (13) agencies for review on July 24, 2012. The following section references the comments of all agencies that submitted an official referral response to Eagle County prior to the date of this report: Eagle County Engineering — The Eagle County Engineering Department had no comment during the referral period but did confirm an existing access permit from the Colorado Department of Transportation. Eagle County Environmental Health — Please refer to attached email correspondence from Ray 1A.terry with regard to potable water supply. Town of Gypsum — Please refer to attached referral response letter dated August 15, 2012. See condition(s): 2 NO REFERRAL RESPONSE - This proposal was referred to the following agencies with no written response received as of this writing: Eagle County: Assessor's Office; Attorney's Office; Wildfire Mitigation Specialist. Colorado State: CDOT; CDOW; Division of Water Resources; Geological Survey; Health Department (Water Quality Control); Water Conservation Board. Service Districts: Gypsum Fire Protection District. 7 10/23/2012 V. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION The Eagle County Planning Commission held a hearing to consider this Special Use Permit request on September 19, 2012. At their meeting, the Commission voted unanimously to approve the request, with eleven (11) conditions. During the hearing, the Commission members generally discussed the following issues: Landscaping Commission members inquired about the proposed site plan, as well as the Applicant's plans for landscaping around the existing building to be used for the distillery. After reading staff's memo, and a letter from the Town of Basalt which, in part, touched on the lack of landscaping on Lot 1, the Planning Commission discussed the landscaping standards originally specified for the PUD. In essence, the Planning Commission was concerned that, for whatever reason, it appeared that required landscaping on Lot 1 had not been completed after the PUD was approved, or had not been maintained. And, regardless of the current state of landscaping, the Commission members felt there was room for improvement with regard to providing more vegetation, xeriscaping and screening around the building and along the U.S. Highway 6 corridor to improve the overall appearance of the property. Any new Landscape Plan should be provided to staff no later than upon the Applicant's application for a building or other permit to occupy the existing building on Lot 1. Site Plan and Wayfinding Citing concerns about the continued stone yard storage operations on Lot 1 and in proximity to the distillery use, one Commission member suggested that the Applicant provide a new site plan and other details showing how the distillery operations would be kept separate from other, light- industrial operations on the site. Specifically, the member suggested the use of split rail fencing and wayfinding signage to direct patrons and employees of the distillery safely around the site, and to minimize any conflicts between uses. This plan will work in conjunction with any new Landscape Plan provided and should be provided to staff no later than upon the Applicant's application for a building or other permit to occupy the existing building on Lot 1. Screening The Planning Commission discussed outdoor storage and screening. The result of that discussion is a condition of approval to provide additional screening by fence (wooden fences were discussed), stone walls and/or vegetative screens. Such details can be provided on any new Site and/or Landscaping Plans provided to staff. Tasting Room In the application, the Applicant makes mention of a tasting room, where patrons will be able to sample the distillery's products. The application states that the Applicant has no immediate plans to open a tasting room; however, the Applicant does intend, long -term, for such use to be part of the business operations. Therefore, the Planning Commission suggested that it be made clear that this Special Use Request includes any future tasting room operations. Eva Wilson, Eagle County Engineer, stated at the hearing that any expansion proposed for a tasting room in the future may trigger additional review with regard to existing CDOT access permits. Inspection of Property The Commission members discussed the time limit on special use requests and stated a preference to ensure that, prior to full vesting of this permit, the Applicant be required to demonstrate compliance with all suggested conditions of approval. The Commission members suggested that there be a final inspection at the end of the third year of distillery operations. Staff has crafted a condition (No. 10) in this spirit, with particular regard paid to allowing staff to work with the applicant on a yearly basis (rather than waiting until the end of the third year) to verify or achieve full compliance. This way, if the Applicant has demonstrated full compliance at the end of year one of operations, staff will be able to essentially sign -off on the permit, at which time the permit will be fully vested and there will be no need to perform additional inspections. Of course, any release or sign -off by staff will not absolve the Applicant from complying, on an ongoing basis, with all other applicable regulations and codes. VI. SUMMARY ANALYSIS: 10/23/2012 The proposed special use to allow for manufacturing within an existing building on Lot 1 is clearly in keeping with the original intent and operations of the PUD and provides an opportunity for the property owner (Vogelman) and the Applicant to better utilize existing infrastructure and improvements on the site. Further, the proposal is in conformance with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan. Overall, staff believes the proposed distillery use will have minimal, if any, detrimental impacts on adjacent properties, whether by noise, odor, dust or light. Further, the site is already heavily disturbed and has been used for over a decade for light- industrial operations, as contemplated and approved within the Dotsero Ranch PUD. Existing access points on U.S. Highway 6 should not be adversely impacted (nor should vehicle trips per day increase dramatically over what exists today) as a result of employee vehicular trips and/or deliveries to /from the site. With regard to site development standards, and in deference to comments submitted to the County by the Town of Gypsum, staff believes there are general improvements (cleaning -up of the stone yard storage surrounding the building, providing plans for wayfinding and/or the creation of xeriscape landscaping surrounding the building) that can be made to the site which will enhance the overall appearance of the building and of Lot 1. Further, the Planning Commission felt strongly that such improvements (landscaping) which were originally contemplated and/or required during original PUD approval should be completed before any new uses are approved on Lot 1. The Applicant has provided adequate evidence that the use can be served with adequate water and wastewater services. With the exception of comments by the Eagle County Environmental Health Department with regard to ensuring state -side approval of drinking water to be used in production (see attached email correspondence from Ray Merry, Director of Environmental Health), staff has identified no further issues or areas of non - conformance requiring additional analysis or dictating conditions of approval. Of course, the Applicant will be required to obtain all necessary permits for building, electrical and/or plumbing type improvements. Likewise, while no exterior lighting or signage is proposed at this time, the Applicant will be required to comply with all applicable standards of the ECLURs and the Planning Commission did recommend a condition of approval, requiring a lighting plan be provide for review. VII. SUGGESTED FINDINGS: Staff suggests the application meets the following findings necessary for the approval of any Special Use: (1) Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Special Use IS in substantial conformance with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan, Area Community Plans and any applicable ancillary County adopted documents pertaining to natural resource protection, affordable housing, or infrastructure management. (am 11108105) (am. 05108112) (2) Compatibility. The Special Use IS generally compatible with the existing and currently permissible future uses of adjacent land and other substantially impacted land, services, or infrastructure improvements. (am. 05108112) (3) Zone District Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES 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 Applicable to Particular Residential, Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3 -330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and _Industrial Uses. (4) Design Minimizes Adverse Impact. The design of the proposed Special Use IS reasonably avoid adverse impacts, including visual impacts of the proposed use on adjacent lands including trash, traffic, service delivery, parking and loading, odors, noise, glare, and vibration, or otherwise create a nuisance. (am. 05108112) 9 10/23/2012 (5) Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. The proposed Special Use DOES minimize environmental impacts and DOES NOT cause significant deterioration of water and air resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resources. (6) Impact on Public Facilities. The proposed Special Use WILL 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. (7) Site Development Standards. The proposed Special Use DOES or can be made to comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards. (8) Other Provisions. The proposed Special Use DOES comply with all standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout, and general development characteristics. VIII. EAGLE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OPTIONS: 1. Approve the [ZS -3854] 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 [ZS -3854] 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 [ZS -3854] request if additional information is required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff. 4. Approve the [ZS -3854] request 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). IX. 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. The Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan for the area surrounding the distillery on Lot 1 to Eagle County prior to or concurrent with the submittal of any building, electrical, plumbing or miscellaneous permit, showing, at a minimum, how the property immediately surrounding the existing building will be treated with xeriscaping including, but not limited to, decorative rock and other means by which to delineate parking and landscape areas, as well as public spaces and entrances. 3. The Applicant is required to provide at least one bear proof trash container for the disposal of food wastes associated with the distillery operations on Lot 1. 10 10/23/2012 4. Any additions to the existing building to be used for production of distilled spirits, or any new buildings that may be proposed in the future as part of any expansion of this special use for manufacturing of distilled spirits, shall be stained or painted to match other out - buildings on Lot 1. 5. The Applicant shall provide screening around all outdoor storage areas and containers directly associated with the Distillery use; such screening may include, but not be limited to, vegetative screening, fencing and/or stone walls that match or complement building materials and colors. 6. The Applicant shall provide Eagle County staff with a letter from the Gypsum Fire Protection District with regard to fire protection and water supply prior to occupancy of the building. 7. The Applicant shall provide Eagle County staff with a lighting plan for the existing building, any outdoor uses (storage, etc) and any security lighting. The Applicant shall provide Eagle County staff with a final, detailed Site Plan showing: a. Landscaping, with particular details for those areas surrounding the existing building where xeriscape and hardscape improvements are to be made and maintained; b. Wayfrnding improvements, including but not limited to, fencing (split rail fences to direct patrons to driving lanes, walkways and parking areas), and signage. The Applicant shall provide Eagle County staff with a final, detailed Landscape Plan demonstrating conformance with the standards prescribed in the Dotsero Ranch PUD Guide. 10. This Special Use Permit for a distillery operation within an existing building located on Lot 1, Dotsero Ranch PUD will be inspected yearly by County staff for the first three (3) years of operation, which time period shall commence on the date upon which a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the existing building on Lot 1. Such inspection(s) shall be performed for the purpose of ensuring compliance with, and/or satisfaction of all applicable conditions of approval. At the end of said three (3) year time period, or sooner if the Applicant is judged by County staff to have satisfied all applicable conditions, the Special Use shall either be considered fully vested, or the County staff shall provide the Applicant written notification of any and all outstanding issues of conformance with conditions of approval, as well as specific timeframes and remedies stated for completion. The Applicant shall be afforded the process and timeframes outlined in the ECLURs in which to address such issues satisfactorily. 11. Any future tasting room uses on Lot 1, Dotsero Ranch PUD, shall comply fully with any and all conditions and standards related to the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) access permit for Dotsero Ranch PUD. APPENDIX A NECESSARY FINDINGS: PROCESS INTENT ECLUR Section: 5 -250 Special Use Permits Section Purpose: 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. Standards: Section 5- 250.13. The issuance of a Special Use Permit shall be dependent upon findings that there is competent evidence that the proposed use as conditioned, 11 10/23/2012 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.1 ] 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 FL UM of the Comprehensive Plan, including standards for building and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS F.AGi,F. COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (1) To the extent the proposed special use will diversify the local economy, policies and recommendations are being supported. (2) Although no formal referral response was received by staff from the Colorado Division of Wildlife, staff is of the understanding that the CDOW has no issues with the proposed special use. The CDOW did recommend that all refuse and waste be stored in bear -proof containers, such as the proposed shipping containers which are air and water tight. STANDARD: Compatibility. [Section 5- 250.B.2] The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses. 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 Applicable to Particular Residential. Agricultural and Resource Uses and Section 3 -330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and Industrial Uses. 12 10/23/2012 EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUMSTANDARDS 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUMSTANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS (1) The application states that all materials and equipment will be stored in air and water -tight shipping containers; staff suggests the Applicant be required to provide bear proof trash containers for the site as well to insure all waste (spent grains) from the distilling process be disposed of properly. 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUMSTANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 13 10/23/2012 Rxceects ECLU, R' Req�ire�nents a%stes' Fit X' x x x x x x Ftegairements" Does NO "Satisfy ECLUR Requiretn�ts N6t AppiicabW X X (1) The application states that all materials and equipment will be stored in air and water -tight shipping containers; staff suggests the Applicant be required to provide bear proof trash containers for the site as well to insure all waste (spent grains) from the distilling process be disposed of properly. 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUMSTANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 13 10/23/2012 Jot Applicable I X I I X (1) See comments regarding wildlife (bear) proof trash containers for the site. (2) Existing buildings on Lot 1 have generally been stained and earth tone (brown) color to ensure consistency in visual appearance. Any additions to the existing building to be used for production of distilled spirits, or any new buildings that may be proposed in the future as part of any expansion of the special use for manufacturing of distilled spirits, should be stained or painted to match other out- buildings on Lot 1. Further, any new lighting and/or signage proposed for the site will be required to comply with the standards of the ECLURs. STANDARD: Impact on Public Facilities. [Section 5- 250.B.6] The proposed Special Use Permit 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. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS (1) The Applicant has met several times with Eagle County staff to discuss wastewater handling on the site. The Applicant has retained the services of a wastewater engineering company and will continue to work with the Eagle County Environmental Health Department for any and all required design and permitting for any new or expanded Individual Septic Disposal System (ISDS) required for the distillery uses and waste disposal. (2) The Applicant has discussed plans for the distillery with representatives from the Gypsum Fire Protection District; staff understands that the Applicant and District will continue to communicate regarding any and all fire code and suppression requirements for the building. STANDARD: Site Development Standards. [Section 5- 250.B.71 The proposed Special Use shall comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards. EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS 14 10/23/2012 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. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hunn presented the request. The applicants were requesting a special use permit for a micro- distillery for spirits within a 1,600 sq. ft. existing building. Outside storage containers would be used to store supplies. The site was currently used for stone yard operations. The proposal was consistent with the comprehensive plan and appropriate for the proposed location. The PUD guide required a minimum of 5' landscaping around the front of buildings and parking lot. The proposed use was in keeping with the intent and nature of the Dotsero Ranch PUD 15 10/23/2012 4 6 i r i t y�g n♦ �(i'tyyy : f py` ��+"{t �J pnybyj i i 1 t h X Off - Street Parking and Loading Standards (Division 4 -1) X Landscaping and Illumination Standards (Division 4 -2) 4 • Sign Regulations (Division 4 -3) X Wildlife Protection (Section 4410) 3 • Geologic Hazards (Section 4 -420) • Hillside Development (Section 4 -425) X Wildfire Protection (Section 4 -430) • Wood Burning Controls (Section 4 -440) • Ridgeline Protection (Section 4 -450) • Environmental Impact Report (Section 4 -460) X Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards (Division 4 -5) X Noise and Vibration (Section 4 -520) X Smoke and Particulates (Section 4 -530) X Heat, Glare, Radiation and Electrical Interference (Section 4 -540) X Storage of Hazardous and Non - hazardous Materials (Section 4 -550) X Water Quality Standards (Section 4 -560) X Roadway Standards (Section 4 -620) • Sidewalk and Trail Standards (Section 4 -630) • Irrigation System Standards (Section 4 -640) • Drainage Standards (Section 4 -650) • Grading and Erosion Control Standards (Section 4 -660) X Utility and Lighting Standards (Section 4 -670) X Water Supply Standards (Section 4 -680) X Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards (Section 4 -690) • Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards (Division 4 -7) 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. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hunn presented the request. The applicants were requesting a special use permit for a micro- distillery for spirits within a 1,600 sq. ft. existing building. Outside storage containers would be used to store supplies. The site was currently used for stone yard operations. The proposal was consistent with the comprehensive plan and appropriate for the proposed location. The PUD guide required a minimum of 5' landscaping around the front of buildings and parking lot. The proposed use was in keeping with the intent and nature of the Dotsero Ranch PUD 15 10/23/2012 and would have minimal impacts on adjacent properties. The site could be adequately served by water and wastewater facilities and the applicant had coordinated with the Eagle County Building Division and Gypsum Fire Protection District. He presented the findings and options. There were 10 proposed conditions. The applicant had responded to the Planning Commission's concerns. The applicants, Jim Benson and Max Vogelman were present. Chairman Runyon asked if expansion was a use -by- right. Mr. Hunn stated that expansion was a use by right and thought it made sense to set a limit. Mr. Benson stated that the PUD allowed up to 30,000 sq. ft. of commercial space on lot 1. He had no concerns with the conditions presented in the staff report. Mr. Hunn stated that the existing access permit allows for up to 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial. Ben Gerdes, County Engineer stated that the current CDOT access did not include a tasting room. If the applicant were proposing a tasting room, a traffic study would be required. Mr. Benson stated that this had not been mentioned since the process begun in June. Commissioner Stavney asked if the tasting room would be coupled with retail sales. Mr. Benson stated that this was the case. Commissioner Fisher stated that the activities listed in the staff report indicated that a small tasting room was included. There were also two entrances to the site. Mr. Gerdes stated that the only access permit was the main entrance and not the access through the adjacent lot. Mr. Benson stated that they were proposing to make the east end accessible to the public when they opened the tasting room. Mr. Gerdes stated that the question was how much traffic the permit allowed. He believed the tasting room came later and approval by CDOT may be required. Commissioner Stavney stated that staff needed to figure out if the use triggered a new access permit or if the existing special use permit covered this use. Commissioner Fisher believed that there needed to be further dialog between staff and the applicant. Mr. Gerdes believed there needed to be a mechanism that would require the applicant to come back and amend the permit at a certain expansion level. Chairman Runyon was comfortable with the suggestion. Commissioner Stavney wanted to enable the applicant to begin their business. He believed it would be some time before there was an issue that pushed the previous access point. Chairman Runyon asked staff to look into signage that complied with the PUD guidelines. Mr. Benson requested an approval with conditions to allow them move forward. Chairman Runyon asked the applicants if they would be comfortable with a condition that would allow the project to be review if the square footage exceeded 5,000 sq. feet. Mr. Benson agreed to the condition. Commissioner Stavney asked that condition 6 include Gypsum Fire Protection District. In addition, condition 7 should include language that addressed down cast lighting. Commissioner Fisher stated that inside lighting should be considered as well. Commissioner Stavney stated that if staff was comfortable he was comfortable making a motion that would direct staff to work with the applicant on acceptable language. Commissioner Fisher asked the applicant if they had talked to the town of Gypsum. Mr. Benson stated that he spoke to someone about vegetation. Mr. Hunn noted that condition 9 should be deleted. Commissioner Stavney moved to approve file no. ZS -3854, Special Use Permit for Stone Yard Distillery noting this discussion and everything in the file. Amending the suggested conditions and directing staff to come up with language acceptable to the applicant and in the resolution. Tightening the language in condition 6 with regard to fire, night sky lighting in condition 7, and deletion of condition 9. He also asked staff to craft a condition that addressed the access permit threshold issue. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 16 10/23/2012 Executive Session — Castle Peak Senior Care Negotiations (recorded) Jill Klosterman, Housing Manager Update (recorded) Keith Montag, County Manager 1. Communications Update 2. Information Sharing 3. Meetings Attended / Future Meetings 4. Discussion Items There being no further business before the Board the 4 Al Attest: Clerk to the Board �t meeting was adj 17 10/23/2012 Chairman until _Qctober 30, 2012.