Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.01112012 PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Plaza One Meeting Room WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2012 -12:00 NOON Additions/Deletions to Agenda Public Comment, Commissioner Comments CONSENT ACTIONS 1. Resolution Appointing Commissioner Chair and Vice - Chair, Representatives to Various Boards, Committees and Authorities, Susan Murphy 2. Minutes of Work Session of 12/06/2011, 12/13/11, 12/20/11 Special Meeting of 12/13/2011, and Regular Meeting of 12/21/2011 3. Resolution Appointing Bobbie Burkley as Joint Alternate on the Housing Authority Citizen Board, Charlotte Anderson CONSENT ACTIONS- 1st Readings, Set for Public Hearing on January 25 4. Ordinance Authorizing the Trail License Agreement with the Meadowood Metropolitan District, Barb D'Autrechy CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING, 2 " Reading 5. Ordinance Prohibiting the Consumption of Alcohol on Unlicensed Public Premises for the Duration of the 2012 Winter X- Games, John Ely 6. Ordinance Authorizing the Board to Enter into a Lease Agreement with the Bureau of Land Management for the Crown Mountain Communication Site, Jodi Smith 7. Resolution Authorizing Pitkin County to Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with Eagle County for the 2011 -2014 Season of Snow Removal in the Frying Pan Valley, Melissa Sever 8. Resolution Establishing the Formula for Distribution of the Municipal Share of County Sales Tax Revenue for the Year 2012 as required by Resolution 78 -121, Susan Atwood 9. Resolution Providing Supplemental Appropriations to the 2011 Budget (August through November) John Redmond and Susan Atwood LAND USE PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Barta Parcel Subdivision/PUD Conceptual Submission, Activity Envelope Review, GMQS Exemptions, and Major Plat Amendment, 1 Reading, (Continued from 12/21/11, )PH (PN 6/12/11), S. Wolff 2. Barta Parcel PUD Rezoning, 1 Reading, (Continued from 12/21/11), PH (PN 6/12/11), S. Wolff 3. Flying Dog Ranch West Inc Designation to Historic Register & Historic Incentives, GMQS Exemption for Change in Use, Special Review Amendment, PH (PN 12/8/11), S. Wolff BOCC OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURN APPROVED BY BOCC ON _ 2 o I �-- MINUTES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 NOTE: For all staff memorandums and associated documents, including additional exhibits submitted to the record, refer to the BOCC PACKET FOR JANUARY 11, 2012. CALL TO ORDER: Chairwoman Rachel Richards called the Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting to order at 12:00 PM. COUNTY COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Rachel Richards, George Newman, Jack Hatfield, Michael Owsley and Rob Ittner COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: County Manager Jon Peacock informed the board that staff will be adding a letter to the BOCC Open Discussion portion of today's agenda for a motion to sign. The letter is to the BLM on SG Interests' Proposal to Unitize Lake Ridge Unit; 3180 (CO -922). PUBLIC COMMENT: Dan Kitchen approached the board to talk to them about fireworks and the effects on human, wildlife and domestic pet populations. He spoke about how sensitive wildlife and domestic pets are to those fireworks. He also questioned whether fireworks and the equipment used to ignite and propel them were biodegradable. He asked if the board could look into banning fireworks, limiting them to a few choice locations such as Aspen Mountain. NOTE: The board gave staff direction on this item at the end of today's meeting under the BOCC Open Discussion portion of the agenda. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commissioner Hatfield wished everyone Happy New Year. Commissioner Newman announced that January was National Radon Action Month. He said that it's an opportunity offered by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County to give away free Radon Kits for citizens for Radon levels in their homes. It is the leading cause of cancer in non - smokers and the second leading cause of cancer to smokers. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 He encouraged everyone to take advantage of this offer and go to City Hall's 2nd floor if you are a resident of the City and the 3rd floor of City Hall if you are a Pitkin County resident. The board congratulated and thanked outgoing Chairwoman Rachel Richards for her service as Chairwoman of the BOCC for 2011. Chairwoman Richards thanked the board and said that it is always a great experience and it's always a challenge. She said that she had a great board to work with and she appreciated everyone's patience and indulgence and gentle corrections, as required from time to time. She added that it has also been great to work with our new Manager Jon Peacock. And of course, our staff, Lyndee and Jeanette who help keep track when we've not closed a meeting or opened a meeting or need to make special motions and keeping us all on track. Chairwoman Richards joined Commissioner Hatfield in wishing all a Happy New Year and to looking forward to better times ahead as a country. She also said that she did want to emphasize that the Bureau of Land Management Resource Plan comments are due from our citizens on January 17, 2012. She thanked staff for working so hard on this As is customary for Chairwoman Richards, she asked for a moment of silence for a prayer of peace that the current positive turnaround will continue for all involved in these conflicts and that 2012 is one of those years we can really be thankful for. CONSENT ACTIONS: READING ON RESOLUTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER CHAIR AND VICE - CHAIR, REPRESENTATIVES TO VARIOUS BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND AUTHORITIES — MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: SUSAN MURPHY, EXECUTIVE OFFICE MANAGER Chairwoman Richards informed the public that this is the meeting traditionally when they change the Chair and make their appointments to various boards throughout the year. She wants everyone to know of the additional work that the Commissioners do outside of this room. Following are those appointments: Chair Michael Owsley Vice -Chair Jack Hatfield Aspen Chamber Resort Association Michael Owsley Alternate Rob Ittner Colorado Counties Public Lands Rachel Richards, Alternate Jack Hatfield Agriculture, Wildlife, Rural Affairs Jack Hatfield, Alternate Rachel Richards Land Use and Natural Resources Jack Hatfield, Alternate Rachel Richards Health & Human Services Rachel Richards, Alternate Jack Hatfield BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 Health & Human Services Proxy Nan Sundeen Proxy for all other Committees Jon Peacock Tourism and Resorts Rachel Richards, Alternate Jack Hatfield General Government Jack Hatfield, Alternate Rachel Richards Taxation and Finance Jack Hatfield, Alternate Rachel Richards Transportation & Telecommunications Rachel Richards, Alternate Jack Hatfield Legislative Committee Jack Hatfield Colorado River Water Conservation District John Ely Community Office for Resource Efficiency George Newman Alternate Rob Ittner Northwest Co Council of Governments Rob Ittner Alternate George Newman NWCCOG Water Quality /Quantity Rachel Richards Alternate George Newman RFTA Board of Directors Michael Owsley Alternate George Newman Ruedi Water & Power Authority Michael Owsley Alternate Rachel Richards Rural Resort Region Rob Ittner Alternate George Newman RRR Workforce Investment Board Rob Ittner RRR Workforce Development Board Rob Ittner and Nan Sundeen Other Appointments (not required by resolution, ordinance or intergovernmental agreement) BLM Liaison George Newman Colorado River Round Table Basin Rachel Richards Alternate George Newman Nordic Council George Newman Water Liaison Rachel Richards West Elk Loop Scenic Byway Committee George Newman Intermountain TPR George Newman MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' WORK SESSION MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 6, 2011, DECEMBER 13, 2011 AND DECEMBER 20, 2011; SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 2011; AND REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 21, 2011 — MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: LYNDEE R. DEAN /JEANETTE JONES, CLERKS TO THE BOCC READING ON RESOLUTION APPOINTING BOBBIE BURKLEY AS JOINT ALTERNATE TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY CITIZEN BOARD — MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: CHARLOTTE ANDERSON, EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT Commissioner Hatfield moved to approve the Consent Actions portion of the agenda as presented. Commissioner Newman seconded the motion. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 Commissioner Hatfield thanked Bobbie Burkley for applying for this seat. He said that she interviewed really well and will make a great addition bringing not only intellect, but community experience along with her professional background. Chairwoman Richards called the motion. Motion passed 5 to 0. AT THIS TIME, OUTGOING CHAIRWOMAN RICHARDS TURNED THE MEETING OVER TO INCOMING CHAIRMAN MICHAEL M. OWSLEY. THE VICE - CHAIRMAN FOR 2012 WILL BE JACK HATFIELD. As his first official act, incoming Chairman Michael M. Owsley presented outgoing Chairwoman Rachel Richards with a beautiful plaque along with the staffs' and Commissioners' appreciation. CONSENT ACTIONS -1 READING, SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 25: FIRST READING ON ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING TRAIL LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH MEADOWOOD METROPOLITAN DISTRICT — MOTION TO APPROVE ON FIRST READING AND SET SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 25, 2012 STAFF: BARB D'AUTRECHY, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS Gary Tennenbaum, Open Space Trail and Stewardship Manager, was asked to give a short presentation on this item outlined in Barb D'Autrechy's Agenda Item Summary. Commissioner Newman thanked the Meadowood Home Owners' Association for continuing to support and to allow Nordic skiing on that property. It's a great asset and he thanks them for their continued support. Commissioner Richards added that Noah Hoffman, now an adult, grew up with the cross country facilities and training programs that were here through the Aspen Valley Ski and Snowboard Club. She said that he recently notched his first 1st place win in a major competition on the East Coast. It does more than create recreation for us, she added. It's an opportunity to enrich the lives of our young people Commissioner Hatfield moved to approve the Ordinance Authorizing the Trail License Agreement with the Meadowood Metropolitan District on first reading and set second reading and public hearing to January 25, 2012. Commissioner Ittner seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to 0. CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS, 2 READINGS: SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL ON UNLICENSED PUBLIC PREMISES FOR THE DURATION OF THE 2012 WINTER X -GAMES — MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND READING BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 RON RYAN, DEPUTY SHERIFF; JOHN ELY, COUNTY ATTORNEY SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ACTING THROUGH THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT) FOR THE CROWN MOUNTAIN SITE — MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND READING STAFF: JODI SMITH, FACILITIES MANAGER SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PITKIN COUNTY TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH EAGLE COUNTY FOR THE 2012 -2014 SEASON OF SNOW REMOVAL IN THE FRYING PAN VALLEY — MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND READING STAFF: MELISSA SEVER, PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATOR SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE FORMULA FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL SHARE OF COUNTY SALES TAX REVENUE FOR THE YEAR 2012 AS REQUIRED BY RESOLUTION 78 -121 — MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND READING STAFF: JOHN REDMOND AND SUSAN ATWOOD, FINANCE DEPARTMENT SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE 2011 BUDGET (August through November) — MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND READING STAFF: JOHN REDMOND AND SUSAN ATWOOD, FINANCE DEPARTMENT Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment on these five items. There being none, he closed the public hearing and brought the matter back to the board. As the board had no wish to pull any of these items and had no further questions, the following motion was made. Commissioner Richards moved to approve the Consent Public Hearings, second readings items 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Commissioner Ittner seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to 0. LAND USE CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS: CONTINUED FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE REZONING THE BARTA PARCEL WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) DESIGNATION AS AN OVERLAY TO THE AR -10 ZONING MOTION TO CONTINUE FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 25, 2012, WITH STAFF AND APPLICANT DIRECTION STAFF: SUZANNE WOLFF, SENIOR PLANNER BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 5 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 AND CONTINUED FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE BARTA PARCEL SUBDIVISION /PUD CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION, ACTIVITY ENVELOPE REVIEW, AND SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR A MAJOR PLAT AMENDMENT TO THE ROARING FORK MEADOWS SUBDIVISION /PUD — MOTION TO CONTINUE FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 25, 2012, WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF AND APPLICANT STAFF: SUZANNE WOLFF, SENIOR PLANNER AND CONTINUED ONE READING ON RESOLUTION GRANTING 2010 RURAL AREA RESIDENTIAL GMQS ALLOTMENTS FOR NEW LOTS /PARCELS — MOTION TO CONTINUE READING TO JANUARY 25, 2012 STAFF: SUZANNE WOLFF, SENIOR PLANNER APPLICANT: Roaring Fork Meadows, LLC APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Conceptual Submission approval to subdivide the Barta Parcel into two lots and to rezone the parcel with a PUD designation; to amend the Roaring Fork Meadows Subdivision /PUD (f /k /a Morrow/Wingo Junction Ranch Subdivision /PUD) to include the two new Tots (as Lots 6 & 7); to establish activity envelopes on the new Tots; and to obtain growth management exemptions for the fathering parcel (Lot 6) and the barn square footage. The Applicant requested a growth management allotment of 8,250 square feet for a single family residence on a new lot (Lot 7). The Planning Commission scored the application on November 9, 2010. The application exceeded the threshold to obtain the requested allotment. The Planning Commission considered the application on November 9, 2010 and April 19, 2011, and recommended approval by a vote of 4 -0. The BOCC continued the first reading of the Rezoning Ordinance, the first reading of the Subdivision /PUD Resolution and the Resolution granting a GMQS allotment on October 26 to allow the applicant and staff to respond to issues raised by Jennifer Long at the October 26, 2011 BOCC meeting. Ms. Wolff gave her presentation by updating the board on this item and refreshing the property overview by use of a large colored map. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 6 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 She then went over all the outstanding issues as shown on pages 2 through 7 of staff's memorandum showing staff's position on each issue. The titles of said issues are shown as follows: ➢ LOT AREA/HIGH WATER LINE Commissioner Hatfield had questions about Jonathan Lowsky's findings regarding the high water line before May when the high water mark was a month later. He questions very much the findings of Jonathan Lowsky done before May, because this report is dated at this time when the high water mark was over a month later. So, he's just not convinced that the bottom line that we have 70 acres. It's about 2/3 of an acre that there seems to be some leeway and certainly the applicant can provide the facts here according to Mr. Lowsky's information. So, for me this is still an outstanding issue and I'm not in agreement with staff's recommendation. And, though I understand the quality veg - - excuse me - - aquatic vegetation and drift and, you know, Jonathan's analysis. I mean you get a good analysis; it's just premature, very much premature for me. DIRECTION TO APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES — At this time, Chairman Owsley asked that Mr. Lowsky be present at the next meeting, or continued meeting, on this item to discuss his findings in person. NOTE: Mitch Haas responded that if not at the next meeting, at least by second reading. Commissioner Hatfield had taken pictures himself of high water on June 25, 2011 and submitted them to staff as part of the record. Copies of his pictures are attached to this packet material as additional exhibits. Discussion ensued on the high water mark issue with comments given by Commissioner Ittner and Commissioner Richards. Ms. Wolff read the County Code's definition of high water which states, in the case of a creek, stream or river, the water line at the point of change from aquatic to terrestrial vegetation or the high water line of stream discharge with an average recurrence interval of 10 years. DIRECTION TO STAFF AND /OR APPLICANT - Commissioner Richards would like to know the high water date over the last 10 years on the Roaring Fork. She thinks there should be some gauging somewhere. And, how often in the past 10 years have we had that kind of occurrence. The lower area near the river has been altered, she said, with the previous owner who had wanted to try and create a channel so she doesn't want to confuse the two. But, she said she thinks we need to look at that and try and get more data might be appropriate. NOTE: Commissioner Hatfield added that on page 7 of Jennifer Long's submitted comments, she talks of data from the Colorado Division of Water Resources web site. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 7 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 He thought perhaps data could be obtained from this office /website to reinforce what the board is thinking or questioning further. Ms. Wolff stated that staff's position is that what we're looking at is where there's a change from aquatic vegetation to terrestrial vegetation which would have occurred, obviously, over a period of time by being saturated with water. Chairman Owsley said that the issue is whether or not the board accepts the definition of high water mark. Ms. Wolff continued her list of issues, with staff's positions shown in her memorandum: ➢ 1982 BARTA FAMILY SUB FURTHER SUBDIVISION PROHIBITION The background documents requested by the board previously are attached to staff's memorandum. Commissioner Hatfield disclosed that he spoke to County Attorney John Ely just to clarify what it means when there's a statement about no further subdivision. And, during the course of the conversation, the end result, of course, is to reinforce what he already knew. The applicant has the right to apply for an amendment and the board has the ability to agree or not. That's our discretion. But for him, the original board put that in the previous approval for a reason and it shouldn't be taken lightly. He would like the applicant's representative to tell the board what the public benefit is on this application. ➢ IRRIGATED LANDS FOR FOOD OR CROP PRODUCTION With the long version in staff's memorandum, Ms. Wolff gave the shorter version. She said that the applicant is required as part of previous approvals to revegetate the southern portion of Common Parcel 1. The quote is to preserve the historically irrigated areas. That was the language in those approvals. That may not be food or crop production necessarily, but clearly intended to be revegetated and maintained as a green open space if nothing else. But, staff is not requiring them to grow hay there, but they are being required to grow something other than weed or dirt which is there now. FOR CONSIDERATION BY APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES — Commissioner Richards asked if this were to go forward in some format, would a smaller house size than is being proposed create a different level of standards that it needs to meet. For example, rather than 2 ten -acre Tots, could there be 2 eight -acre lots and then have homes that could not go to the 5750 standard. ➢ MAJOR PLAT AMENDMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 ➢ COMMON PARCEL TWO Staff's recommendations to the board are shown on page 7 of the memorandum. Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning LLC and Scott Russell were present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Haas gave his presentation to the board based upon his December 28, 2011 memorandum in staffs packet material where he responds to the list of various issues. During a high water mark discussion, Mr. Haas said that since this rule has been adopted in 2006, several properties have gone through review with a high water line and as far as he can tell, none have had 10 years worth of data to go along with their high water line mapping and yet the County has consistently accepted the mapping as done.. He doesn't know that from 2006 to now this precedent suddenly changes now because one neighbor's convinced that something's different. Or that there's water gauge the State maintains on this property. There isn't, he said. So we don't have the data available, the State doesn't have the data available for this property for 10 years. So, it seems logical to him to follow the same methodology that the County has, time and time again, accepted since the advent of this regulation. Regarding public benefits, Mr. Haas said that he has quite a few public benefits in this proposal. He said that they went through Growth Management. You don't score, he said, above threshold in Growth Management without public benefit. Without this proposal, no, the water rights do not have to be tied to this property alone and can be sold for use elsewhere. Without this approval, they do not have to switch from inefficient flood irrigation to timed and zoned controlled irrigation to conserve water. They do not have to return water to the streams the way they said they would. They do not have to convey the excellent public benefit of improved health and safety to all the residents of the Hoagland Ranch Subdivision by improving their access for fire and parking and making it so a fire truck can get to them in case of an emergency. They do not, he continued, have to convey the benefit of once preserving land that had been used for agricultural also saying we will put in an agricultural preservation easement so that it continues to be used and irrigated. Mr. Haas said that there's nothing in the Code about continuing to irrigate agricultural lands once you preserve it. You just have to preserve it. It can turn brown and be brown field from then after, but they have committed to doing more than that. While addressing irrigated lands for food or crop production, Mr. Haas submitted the following two map copies. One is an unrecorded map of Conceptual Subdivision, PUD Plan and Activity Envelope of Lots 6 and 7 of the Roaring Fork Meadows Sub /PUD /. The second map is an unrecorded copy of historically irrigated acreage exhibit map of Lots 6 and 7 of the Roaring Fork Meadows Sub /PUD. These exhibits are attached to the staff packet material. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 9 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 Mr. Haas stated that they've decided they don't want to keep squabbling over what they did and didn't have to do under the old approvals and what is and isn't irrigated. He used the two submitted maps to show that they are making the envelopes significantly smaller and returning area to irrigation. He said that they've recalculated and very conservatively had the surveyor map out areas that were historically irrigated. All they've excluded is where the house is and that little fenced area around it. They've excluded that from what's been irrigated and so they're not arguing over this strip anymore. They've excluded the developed area only, the area of the ditch itself because the ditch is not irrigated and then the area that everyone has agreed to in this corner. The result is that they've come up with 8.32 acres of historically irrigated acreage out of the 10 acres on the Barta Parcel. If you say we have to preserve 95% of that area that means 7.9 acres of the 10 need to be preserved for agricultural use. They've shrunken their Activity Envelopes plus Access Envelopes to an area of 2.1 acres total. In other words, 10 minus 2.1 leaves 7.9 outside the Activity Envelopes and Access Envelopes. They will take all of those 7.9 acres and add them to the Agricultural Preservation Easement for the entire Roaring Fork Meadows PUD. So, not only are we taking them and leaving them out of the envelopes, but we're going to make them part of an Agricultural Preservation Easement which insures they will continue to be agricultural lands not just preserved land. At the end of the day, he stated, they are satisfying the 95% requirement on the Barta Parcel, and going above and beyond by making that acreage, the 7.9, part of an Agricultural Preservation Easement. Ms. Wolff put the maps on the overhead projector and Mr. Haas further explained and showed the board and the public his reductions. Mr. Haas said that to the extent that they are off by a decimal place here or there, they will fine tune that and make sure it is exactly right, if not exceeding the 95% before they would come in for a Detailed Final Review. The intention is that we make sure, he said for the record, that we satisfy, if not exceed, the 95% requirement. A question from Commissioner Owsley to Mr. Haas was turned over to Scott Russell. Commissioner Owsley asked if the applicant would be comfortable with eliminating any kind of recreational fishing structure on that property totally. Mr. Russell said that he would have to ask the owner as that has not been brought up. Mr. Russell said that he has spoken to the owner about the practicality of a shelter if you're fishing and it's raining. It would be out of the floodplain and out of the setback and out of sight. DIRECTION TO APPLICANT — Would they be comfortable with eliminating any kind of recreational fishing structure on that property totally. Commissioner Owsley would like specifics on this at a subsequent meeting. FURTHER DIRECTION TO APPLICATION AND STAFF: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 10 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 A Commissioner Newman — he said that 8250 is not compatible with that neighborhood. Would applicant consider 5750 for that one house? A Commissioner Hatfield — on the amount of acreage relative to the lot area. He said that staffs memo says 70.395 and Mr. Haas has represented that it's 70.66. He would like this clarified. Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment. Jennifer Long, a neighbor addressed Mr. Haas' December 28, 2011 memo and her discussion with Suzanne Wolff on January 3, 2012. It was her most recent take on lot area, Ag easements and Sub /Plat Amendment business based on the latest information she's received from Mr. Haas and Ms. Wolff. The remainder of the document points out her concerns, objections and disputes with various portions of this requested approval. A copy of her comments and concerns is attached to this meeting packet as a submitted exhibit. Joan Mecseri lives in Samuelson Subdivision. She said that she is on the other side of all these compilation of figures as she is primarily concerned with protecting her well. She read into the record some information she got from the Internet. She asked the following questions: A If someone wanted to put the entire 8250 square foot house above ground, could they get that change from the Lot 7 or Lot 6? A Are TDRs still required to increase the square footage there? ➢ She stated that Mr. Haas has a way of throwing out figures that are not consistent. Greg Long resides in Samuelson Subdivision. He does engineering work and has worked in the valley for about 40 years. He said that he believes the water source that we have here is mainly due to a shelf which is somewhere at 30 feet or so. He said that it takes 3 -5 years or so of flood irrigation to go and saturate the soil and then it goes down here where he gets his water from. It's his belief that going with a different type of watering system which is more efficient, that ground water source will evaporate in 4 or 5 years or so and will become more difficult for us to be able to receive the quantity of water to support the number of houses they have where he is. He thinks there should be some more thought put into water preservation, not only here, but the residents that live downstream. Chairman Owsley closed the public hearing. Each Commissioner gave their concerns, their support and their direction to staff and applicant for next reading: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 11 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 ❖ Commissioner Richards — She would like to continue the first reading and have the following items clarified and possibly get some items off the table: • To define /limit the size of the recreational amenity — eliminate entirely as Chairman Owsley suggested or if it's something that's defined reasonably then I'm open to looking at it. • Would support smaller house size on the first Barta approval which is the existing approval • Would rather see the PUD process than the Major Plat Amendment. • Wants to see total land preservation percentages of the total newly proposed 76 acres. • Channels built by previous owner Morrow ought to be filled in — would like some investigation as to what really should happen there by staff • Suzanne Wolff to fully review the numbers and the ultimate proposal that has just been submitted by Mr. Haas in terms of how to get to the 95% irrigated acreage. • She accepts staff's definition for the high water mark • To the extent that after these calculations are made, about the 95% acreage, if there's further reduction needed in a lot activity envelope to accomplish this standard, she would strongly suggest that it come off the new lot which is most impactful as opposed to the original activity envelope of the Barta Parcel. ❖ Commissioner Hatfield's directions to applicant and staff: • Exhibit 6 of staff's exhibits is from the DOW and says based on final application so he's looking into the future. He would like DOW or Division of Parks and Wildlife comments relative to this. And, in conjunction with this, get answers about dogs. What is distance from Parcel 7 to toe of the slope which they have articulated is where the habitat is. • Is supportive of reduced square footage. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 12 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 DIRECTION TO STAFF — NOT RELATIVE TO THIS APPLICATION: Regarding the high water issue, Commissioner Hatfield would like to have a discussion in the near future and touch base on this as he said he believes that the Code Standard that we have put in the 2006 Code is not realistic. Ten years as an average — there's just not a lot of data there and this application shows us that. Commissioner Ittner's directions to staff and applicant: • Regarding the recreational structure (fishing shed) — what is the smallest acceptable size from the applicant. • Supports restricting house size to 5750 — get owner's response • His numbers still don't totally add up with regard to the 95% in terms of envelope area; what you've excluded from first map has been kind of added back in. He wants to see how that map adds up and what areas are excluded. • Regarding the high water mark — Given the fact that we don't have 10 years of strong data to know exactly what that is, he sees no other way to do it than what Jonathan Lowsky has explained (on paper). Commissioner Owsley's directions to staff and applicant: ✓ He said it appears that we will be continuing the first reading. He said that this hinges on the decision of the calculation. It hinges on tying down the methodology for the high water mark calculation. This is why he asked that Jonathan Lowsky be present at some point for the expert testimony. ✓ It also hinges on the size of the various structures and houses and accessory structures. These are all important points that need to be clarified. Scott Russell Questions to Board for Clarification: • Regarding the fishing shelter — Commissioner Newman had suggested moving it. Mr. Russell said that they might be able to support that request putting it closer to the river. He asked if he could get more specific feedback from each Commissioner. NOTE: Chairman Owsley responded to Mr. Russell by saying that he's going to have to ask the owner a number of questions and come back with that feedback. He is not going to give Mr. Russell five different opinions. Chairman Owsley said that the trend is small and lower down. The board would also like to have Jonathan Lowsky weigh in on the location when he appears before the board on this application. Commissioner Hatfield moved to continue the first reading and public hearing to January 25, 2012. Commissioner Richards seconded the motion and noted that she will not be present at the January 25 meeting. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 13 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE HISTORIC NORTH CABIN ON THE FLYING DOG WEST RANCH INC. PROPERTY TO THE PITKIN COUNTY HISTORICAL REGISTER AND GRANTING INCENTIVES FOR THE DESIGNATIO; LISTING OTHER HISTORIC RESOURCES TO THE PITKIN COUNTY HISTORIC INVENTORY; GRANTING A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR A CHANGE IN USE; AND APPROVING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIAL REVIEW USE PERMIT — MOTION TO APPROVE, AS AMENDED AND STIPULATED STAFF: SUZANNE WOLFF, SENIOR PLANNER APPLICANT: Flying Dog West Ranch, Inc. (Richard & Lydia McIntyre) APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting the following approvals: • Designate the "north cabin" to the Historic Register; • GMQS Exemption to change the use of two guest ranch cabins (north and south cabins) to residential use; • Amend BOCC Resolution No. 101.2005 to eliminate the approval for two guest ranch cabins; and • Obtain incentives for the historic designation, including an additional 2,500 square feet of residential floor area to expand the residences, and permission to have three principal dwelling units on one property. Ms. Wolff's presentation begins with an overview of a large colored map, a smaller version of which is on page 1 of her staff memorandum. She then went over the background and existing conditions, and the applicant's request for designation to the Historic Register and grants of Incentives. She also went over Suzannah Reid's memorandum dated December 30, 2011 regarding the historic designation and historic register. Ms. Reid was unable to make today's meeting. Commissioner Richards has concerns about the board looking at these incentives because they will go on the Inventory List, but that's a meaningless list in her mind. There's no protection whatsoever If they were to be demolished it would really detract from what you have put on the Register and what you've given incentives for. She asked how the board could craft this to say that there is an interrelationship between these buildings, even though one is on the Inventory and one is on the Register. She said that the Inventory property would not have to re- develop as per any of the historic guidelines overview. NOTE: Ms. Wolff added that the Handbook does speak to adding a totally new structure on a property with an historic resource. It actually does have BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 14 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 guidelines as to how it is addressed such as is it appropriate or is it properly acknowledged in historic resources Further discussion ensued on this issue. Glenn Horn and Richard McIntyre began their presentation with Mr. Horn's presentation going first based upon his meeting packet. Mr. Horn began the presentation based upon his October 28, 2011 packet material. The reason for the request is so the entire McIntyre family can live in this family compound. Mr. Horn said they were not prepared to ask for designation of the main house due to the expense that would be involved to move the main elements of the main house that are not historic. Mr. McIntyre asked the board for the following approvals: ➢ He had Suzannah Reid come look at this cabin over the years. He asked if it would be possible to register it historic and would it be possible to ever put an addition on this cabin. He said that he was able to take a lower window, and if he built a breezeway some 30 feet from the existing log cabin he could put a separate addition onto this log cabin: same elevation, roof lines, the addition wouldn't be seen from the highway. ➢ He said that he knows where he wants to see the square footage go. The wood log cabin is actually 1320 square feet. He is asking for 1000 square feet added to the cabin as Ms. Reid suggested. ➢ The other 1500 square feet: his daughter wants to live in the south cabin which is 2400 square feet. She has 1 grandson and another on the way. She needs a little more room. The main house doesn't need any more square footage. NOTE: Mr. McIntyre said that the main house doesn't need any more square footage. Mr. Horn added that the main house has 3,036 square feet. Mr. McIntyre said that he could restrict the 2500 square feet to go in the south cabin and the north cabin and thus there would be no 1500 square feet or 3,000 square feet on an already existing 3,000 square foot house. He would be more than willing to do that. Commissioner Hatfield's asked what happens if the house is sold. On behalf of the board, Commissioner Richards wanted to acknowledge the contribution the Mclntyres have made to the rural character and historic preservation by that AVLT Conservation Easement. Commissioner Richards said that she wants to make sure that the relationship of the compound, the headquarters parcel and even the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 15 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 elements that are not historically designated will be considered with any re- development plan or site plan so that they are copasetic. Mr. McIntyre said that the two other buildings Ms. Reid would like to put on the Inventory and eventually register are the following: One is a log garage and the other is a 1940's milk barn that wants to fall down real bad but he's been told it won't. Ms. Reid wants him to register those two buildings as they are. He would like to work with Ms. Reid and take the historic part of the house, there have been some additions, minor square footage after 1914, and say if there is every any change to this house it cannot be to the historic core of the house. He thinks that's great. • Commissioner Richards said that it might not be within our Code. Ms. Wolff said that she thinks his suggestion could be included in the Covenants. Glenn Horn said that he's been taking notes and thinks he can move this along by summarizing what we've heard. Then, he continued, Ms. Wolff can revise the Resolution for review by the Chairman of the Board. He said that he's heard today that: ✓ Applicant has agreed that additional square footage has been proposed. 2500 square feet would be located in the North Cabin Historic Structure in compliance with direction from Suzannah Reid and also the handbook. It would be reviewed by the staff (S. Reid) before any improvements were made. And, the same would go for the 1500 square foot addition to the south cabin and, although that's not historic it would be reviewed for its consistency and compatibility with the other structures in the headquarters parcel. That should be reflected in the Resolution of Approval and then memorialized in the Historic Covenant of the North Cabin and will also address the headquarters parcel in general. ✓ If there is renovation in the main house, there will be a clause in the Historic Covenant that will make every effort to preserve the core of the main house so it's distinguished from the rest of the main house. And, consistent and compatible with the other buildings in the headquarters parcel. ✓ Then, we would have an overall statement in that Covenant talking about how you need to look at the headquarters parcel in its entirety when we're making any BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 16 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 improvements at all to any building so that we don't compromise the historic nature of the structures in that parcel. Suzanne Wolff responded to a question from Commissioner Hatfield regarding what other buildings were going to be put on the Inventory or Register. She answered that it would be the North Cabin, the log barn and the milk barn that would go on the Register. The main house would go on the Inventory. The Covenant will address all of those things and assure that any re- development or additional development within that headquarters parcel, which is where any development is limited to, would have a review pursuant to the handbook to ensure that it is compatible with those historic resources. Commissioner Ittner stated that, for the protection of the applicant, he would be happy to say that those square footages added to the North Cabin and the South Cabin could vary by 15% or something. He said if Mr. McIntyre wants 1,050 feet on one instead of 1,000 feet it gives him a little leeway. Commissioner Richards made the following wording suggestion: the Historic core of the main House may not be demolished should there be a renovation of the house. She said that she thinks the words "may not be demolished" need to be incorporated. Commissioner Hatfield added that as Mr. McIntyre just said and represented, even if that remodel occurs, etc. it wouldn't exceed the 3,036 or whatever the actual figure was. Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment. There being none, he closed the public hearing and brought the matter back to the board for a motion. Commissioner Richards moved to approve Resolution of the Flying Dog Ranch West, Incorporated designation to the Historic Register and Historic Incentives; GMQS Exemption For Change in Use; Special Review Amendments; and with the Amendments and Stipulations that have occurred at the table today. Commissioner Newman seconded the motion. NOTE: Chair will review that document as produced by Community Development. Motion passed 5 to 0. BOCC OPEN DISCUSSION: The board and Mr. Peacock discussed the public comments from Dan Kitchen at the beginning of today's meeting. He was asking for a ban on fireworks on private land to avoid stress on wildlife and domestic pets. He also spoke of possible pollutants from the fireworks themselves and their propellants. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 17 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 DIRECTION TO STAFF - Commissioner Hatfield would like some feedback from the DOW (Department of Wildlife) on consequences to wildlife due to fireworks as well as their take on pollutants. Mr. Peacock addressed the Pitkin County Noise Ordinance. He said that we probably need to look at how we are integrating our Environmental Health Department into the fireworks permitting process or enforcement events. He said we can come back and look at this and see if we want to revise it or work with the Fire District to revise that permitting process. Chairman Owsley had looked up fireworks online and said that potassium perchlorate is one of the elements in fireworks which are an oxidizer. It has been detected in 11 states' drinking supplies including 3 public water supply wells. He added that nearby firework displays were considered the source of the contamination. This would include the containers that the fireworks are in and the propellants used to launch them. DIRECTION TO STAFF — Chairman Owsley wants a thorough review of this by staff. Mr. Peacock and the Commissioners then discussed future meeting schedules and other items of interest to the board. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Ittner moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 4.25 PM. Commissioner Newman seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to 0. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 18 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 411. Ittik . z41,,Z] Lyle ' . l can o t - Board of ou ty Commissioners / // 1 j/ Jea �-tte Jones CI =I to the Board of o unty Commissioners IN ati Michael M. wsley Chair of the Board of County Commissioners g \bocc \m inutes\2012 \reg \01112012 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 19 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2012