Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutboccminreg01242007 PITKIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Plaza One Meeting Room WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2007 12:00 NOON ADDITIONSIDELETIONS TO AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS CONSENT ACTIONS 1. Minutes of 12/5/06, 12/12/06, 12/19/06 Work Session and 1/1 0107 Regular Meeting CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING BOCC Convenes as Board of Health 2. Resolution Approving the Community Service Block Grant, Susan Berdahl BOCC Adjourns as Board ojHealth 3. 2nd Reading, Resolution Amending the Budget Adoption And Appropriation Resolution for the 2007 General Fund Budget, Debe Nelson 4. 3rd Reading, Resolution Providing Supplemental Appropriations to the 2006 Budget, Debc Nelson LAND USE CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS I. Lazy Glen Home Owners Association Major Plat Amendment, Site Selection for an Activity of Loca1/State Interest, 1041 Hazard Review, (To be continued indefinitely at request of Applicant), PH (PN 8/27106). M. Kraemer 2. 9425 Real Estate LLC (Polsky) Appeal of Hearing Officer Decision, (Continued to 2/28/07 at request of Applicant), PH (PN 12/07/06), E. Louthis LAND USE ACTIONS 3. Benson Takings Hearing, M. Kraemer BOCC OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURN Note: There was an executive session held during the Benson Takings Hearing. APPROVED FEBRUARY 14, 2007 MINUTES PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 NOTE: For all staff memorandums and associated documents, including additional exhibits submitted to the record, refer to the BOCC PACKET FOR JANUARY 24,2007. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Michael M. Owsley opened the regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners at 12:01 PM. COUNTY COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Michael Owsley, Patti Kay-Clapper, Dorothea Farris, Jack Hatfield and Rachel Richards. COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENT: Ray Pojman read a statement into the record regarding his request for an investigation against Commissioner Dorothea Farris and Dale Will, Director of Pitkin County Open Space and Trails with regard to the Crystal River Caucus and the Property Owners' Association of the Crystal River Country Estates. Said statement can be located at the end of today's meeting packet. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commissioner Kay-Clapper asked everyone to enjoy the upcoming X-Games and the art display at the bottom of Little Nell. Commissioner Richards also addressed the X-Games reminding everyone to use RFTA as there is no parking at Buttermilk. She also thanked the voters who put her in this County Commissioner seat. Commissioner Hatfield encouraged everyone to attend the Entrance to Aspen public meeting on January 31, 2007. He also stated that he and Commissioner Farris have started attending the Colorado Counties, Inc. (CCI) meetings in BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 Denver twice a month representing the County relative to public lands, general government, transportation, agriculture, and land use issues. Commissioner Farris said that one of the topics of the Crystal Valley Caucus meeting (which has been cancelled) was to be a wildlife report. The report, however, has not been released and is not ready for release. She said it is hard to review a study for a meeting if you don't have access to the study. She also made some comments about the trail up the Crystal and some history that has not been covered in some of the newspapers. Chairman Owsley commented on the unexpected public comment given by Mr. Pojman by saying that this is what living in a free society is all about. He said that the facts are that newspapers have the right to be wrong, the Commissioners have the right to not be entirely on point, and the public has the right to be not quite right or right and those are the landscape of a free society. CONSENT ACTIONS: MINUTES OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER WORK SESSION MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 05,2006. DECEMBER 12. 2006 AND DECEMBER 19.2006 AND REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 10, 2007- MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: L YNDEE R. DEAN, CLERK TO THE BOARD Commissioner Farris moved to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. Motion passed 4 to 0 with Commissioner Richards abstaining as she was not in attendance for the 2007 meeting and not yet a Commissioner for the 2006 meetings. CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE 2007-2008 COMMUNITY SERVICE BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: SUSAN BERDAHL AND NAN SUNDEEN - HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Commissioner Hatfield moved that the Board of County Commissioners convene as the Board of Health. Commissioner Richards seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment. There being none he closed the public hearing and brought the matter back to the board. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24. 2007 Commissioner Hatfield moved to approve the Resolution approving the 2007-2008 Community Service Block Grant application. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. Commissioner Kay-Clapper commended the involvement that The Right Door (Brad Osborn) has taken in the community in the last couple of years. Chairman Owsley called the question. Motion to approve passed 5 to o. Commissioner Kay-Clapper moved to adjourn as the Board of Health and reconvene the regular meeting as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to o. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2007 BUDGET ADOPTION AND APPROPRIATION FOR THE GENERAL FUND FOR PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: DEBE NELSON. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE THIRD READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE 2006 BUDGET - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF: DEBE NELSON, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment on these two Resolutions. There being none, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Farris moved to approve both Resolutions. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. LAND USE CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS: LAZY GLEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION MAJOR PLAT AMENDMENT. SITE SELECTION FOR AN ACTIVITY OF LOCAL/STATE INTEREST. 1041 HAZARD REVIEW - MOTION TO CONTINUE INDEFINITELY AT THE REQUEST OF APPLICANT STAFF: MIKE KRAEMER. PLANNER 9425 REAL ESTATE LLC (POLSKY) APPEAL OF HEARING OFFICER DECISION - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO FEBRUARY 28.2007 AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT STAFF: EZRA LOUTHIS. COUNTY PLANNER Chairman Owsley opened the hearing to public comment. There being none, he closed the public hearing. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 Commissioner Hatfield moved to continue the Lazy Glen Homeowners Association Major Plat Amendment, Site Selection for an Activity of Local/State Interest, 1041 Hazard Review indefinitely at the request of the applicant and continue the 9425 Real Estate LLC (Polsky) appeal of Hearing Officer decision to February 28, 2007 at the request of the applicant. Commissioner Farris seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. Commissioner Hatfield asked why the indefinite continuation for the Lazy Glen application? Lance Clarke, Assistant Director of Community Development, explained the indefinite continuation of the Lazy Glen Homeowners application. He said that the primary issues that the board asked the applicant to revisit were the fire issues and to get with the Basalt Fire Department regarding the hydrants and the pond. The applicants do indeed have some issues and do not want to come back before the board until they have been resolved. LAND USE ACTIONS: BENSON 1041 HAZARD REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR A CDU- TAKINGS DETERMINATION - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A DATE NOT YET DETERMINED STAFF: MIKE KRAEMER, COUNTY PLANNER . Applicants: Jim and Martha Benson · Applicant's Representative: Glenn Horn · Summary Of Request: The applicant requested a hearing as a result of the Hearing Officer's denial of the Benson 1041 Hazard Review to establish a building envelope to develop a single family residence and Special Review for a CDU on November 21,2006. The applicant contends that the denial leaves the property without a reasonable economic use. The majority of the building envelope, as well as the entire lot, contains slopes in excess of 30%. However, there is an area on the site that contains slopes less than 45% where a residence could possibly be constructed. Staff recommended that the Hearing Officer approve this location as an appropriate site for the residence. The applicant was unwilling to accept this proposal to alter the building envelope resulting in denial of the application. The parcel is also subject to ridgeline review. It is unknown at this time if the future residence will obstruct a ridgeline. Mike Kraemer proceeded with his presentation as outlined in his memorandum to the board. Commissioner Farris asked what the size is of the area - - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 RECULAR MEETlNC JANUARY 24, 2007 Mr. Horn responded by saying that the buildable area within the setbacks is between 1500 and 2000 square feet. He defined buildable area, at the request of Commissioner Hatfield, as the area that is between 30 and 45, the area outside the setbacks and then he took in to consideration the need for a septic system and holding tank and toe setbacks that are required from the holding tank and the drain field from the house. And, when you calculate all that, he concluded, you end up with approximately 1500-2000 square feet of area in which you could place a house. Commissioner Richards asked for further clarification on that being the footprint size and so a two-story structure could be between 3000 and 4000 square feet which would be the recommended allowed use in that area. Mr. Horn said that is correct. He said that would be the footprint of the potential home. Mr. Clarke added that a single family home is the primary allowed use in that area. Mr. Horn gave his short presentation. He said that he was of the understanding that the purpose of today's meeting was to determine whether or not the actions of the Hearing Officer would represent a taking and that there would be no permitted development on the site. Then there would be a taking remediation hearing where they would discuss what would be the appropriate level and location of development on this site. He said that they would ask that the board find that there has been a taking given the denial by the Hearing Officer and that the board schedule a taking remediation hearing. And, that at that hearing the board consider the applicants' proposal for what should be developed on that site and also the recommendations of staff as to what should be developed there. They would then be prepared to discuss the merits of the site in terms of slopes, septic system, neighbor comments, Brush Creek Homeowners comments and comments from the fire department and also take into consideration physical things such as the accessibility of the building to the road. Mr. Horn said that he would be happy to comment on questions from the board now, but he thinks the appropriate time would be at the remediation hearing not at the hearing today. Commissioner Richards asked Mr. Horn why the board should find a taking when there has been an identified building site where a structure could be built? Mr. Horn responded by saying that they were prepared to make a presentation to the Hearing Officer along the lines of his comments above and that the site recommended by staff was unacceptable to the applicant. He said that the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 5 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 Hearing Officer stated that it was his view that if the recommendations of staff were not acceptable and it wasn't a proposal that the applicant had then he would not consider it at that time and would just deny the application. Mr. Horn said they felt that if the application was denied then there was no reasonable economic use of the land. So, they've never made a presentation of the facts that he just summarized and would like to make to the BOCC. Commissioner Richards asked staff if they felt that this is a reasonable building envelope and that a single-family home could be accomplished in the area pointed out to the applicant. Mr. Kraemer said that if she is talking about the one that staff proposed the answer is yes, although he doesn't know how large a house. Commissioner Hatfield asked for some feedback on the ridgeline issue. Mr. Kraemer said that in the pre-app meeting with Alice Davis of DavislHorn, the applicants' representatives, ridgeline review wasn't requested at this time. Therefore, a building envelope can't be identified, however prior to submitting for a building permit ridgeline review would have to be conducted. Mr. Horn said that they have erected story poles on the site that are there now. They will evaluate what the effects are, if any, on the ridgeline and then invite County staff to come and look at them so they will have that missing piece of information with respect to siting this house. One thing that Mr. Horn wanted to mention was that they understand that the board could concur with the staff with the footprint that they've identified through the process of analysis that would be the resulting footprint if they avoided slopes that are greater than 30% but less than 45%. He said that they want to be able to present their reasons why that would be unacceptable in writing and also verbally at the hearing. Commissioner Kay-Clapper said that she thought that this wasn't a taking just because the applicant doesn't agree with where the building envelope should be. If there's an area within the property that can accommodate development, then it's not a taking. She doesn't understand why this is a taking. Lance Clarke explained further. He said that was staff's position in recommending a building envelope that they felt was buildable and useable for some undetermined size of house. The Hearing Officer determined that he did not have the authority to unilaterally take the building envelope as presented by staff and that his only option was to approve or deny the envelope proposed by the applicant. And, since it did included significant amounts of slopes greater than 45% he was bound to deny it. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 6 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 Mr. Horn said that they did not have a chance at the Hearing Officer's meeting to present their reasons why it was not buildable to build where staff proposed. Commissioner Hatfield wanted to disclose, just for the sake of being open, his decades-long friendship with Jim and Martha Benson, the applicants. He added that there is, however, no conflict of interest relationship. Commissioner Hatfield was interesting in having an Executive Session. Commissioner Farris moved to enter Executive Session at 12:49 PM. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. Upon returning to the meeting room, Commissioner Farris moved to adjourn from Executive Session and reconvene their regular meeting. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. Commissioner Farris said that the question before the board is whether or not there has been a taking. As we review this, she said, in her mind there are options available that would indicate the value of that property has not been taken away. Therefore, Commissioner Farris moved to deny that a taking has occurred. Commissioner Kay-Clapper seconded the motion. NOTE: THIS MOTION WAS TABLED TO A MEETING DATE NOT YET DETERMINED DUE TO A MOTION TO CONTINUE MADE BY COMMISSIONER HATFIELD LATER IN THIS MEETING. Commissioner Richards wanted to state for the record that she received a telephone call from Grafton Smith with a message to call him back. She did return the call before she read the packet and realized that he was somehow involved in this application but they did not speak or connect. Secondly, Commissioner Richards wanted to put on the record that staff has testified that there is a reasonable, recommended building envelope on this lot and because of that she would concur with Commissioner Farris' comments. Mr. Horn said that based upon the determination there is no use of the property. The only way to determine if there was use of the property would be if there were a hearing in front of either the Hearing Officer or the BOCC about whether or not the area in which the staff says there could be development could be developed. He added that staff has not done any analysis other than slope as to whether or not that site can be developed. He stated that if the board is going to take the action of denying a taking, he wants them to consider where the applicant goes next and also he would like BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 7 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24. 2007 them to consider continuing their actions so that the applicant has a chance to get legal counsel. Commissioner Hatfield asked Mr. Horn why he didn't ask for a continuation during the Hearing Officer review after hearing staff's presentation. Mr. Horn answered by saying that the Hearing Officer said he couldn't consider any presentation about development on slopes over 45%. Further discussion ensued on process and procedure. Based upon a clarification question from Commissioner Hatfield, Mr. Ely said that the taking determination process does not allow for an amendment to an original application. What the board is doing is evaluating the action of the Hearing Officer not as to whether or not the Hearing Officer was inappropriate in his finding or not, but whether or not the action as required by the language of the Code precipitated a taking of the property and the owners' property rights. If continued and the board explores with the applicants and staff in greater detail the potential for development on the site as a whole and the board then determines there has been a taking, the board can then address the issue of remediation. If the board then, at the conclusion of that process, determines that a taking has not occurred then the applicant would be in the same position they would be today if that determination were made and that would be to go back to the Hearing Officer with a renewed application. Commissioner Hatfield moved to continue this item and bring it back to the BOCC. Commissioner Richards seconded the motion. NOTE: PRIOR MOTION TO DENY THE TAKING IS TABLED TO A CONTINUED MEETING DATE NOT YET DETERMINED. Lance Clarke reminded the board that there is a requirement in the Code that the board make a finding on a taking within 15 days. If there is a continuance, he asked if the applicants would waive that requirement. Glenn Horn responded on behalf of the applicants by saying "we would waive that". He also stated that the Benson's will be out of town several times in the next few months. He therefore asked that any continuance be set to a meeting date when the Bensons will be able to attend. Commissioner Hatfield said that if the continuation motion passes, he wants to make sure that staff has the ability to investigate the whole property to see if a taking has occurred therefore we would still be under the auspices of a taking request. It was clarified that both staff and applicant will work on this. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2007 Mr. Horn said that what they will do is analyze development of the site in the area proposed by staff and demonstrate to the board why that is not possible. And, they will certainly share that with Lance Clarke and Mike Kraemer and also they will be doing story poles so that they have complete information at the continued hearing. Chairman Owsley called the motion to continue to a date not yet determined. Motion passed 3 to 2 with Commissioners Owsley, Hatfield and Richards voting yea and Commissioners Farris and Kay-Clapper voting nay. BOCC OPEN DISCUSSION: The board had open discussions with County Manager, Hilary Fletcher. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kay-Clapper moved to adjourn the meeting at 1 :19 PM. Commissioner Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to O. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 9 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24. 2007 Respectfully submitted, /' I ./ /J' Lynde R. Dean , Clerk 0 he Board of County Commissioners Jea'he e Jones Cler to the Board of C nty Commissioners 1 (f !tiiiL\t t Michael M. wsley Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners -''''<-~._.::::::.-~- - ~,.,....~~ ---=:;:;--- . ~ John Ely County Attorney The above signed attorney, representing the Board and being present at the executive session, attests that the subject of the unrecorded portions of the session constituted confidential attorney-client communication. glbocclm i nutes\200 710 1242007 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 10 REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24. 2007