Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission Study Session 1999-04-14BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - Study Session April 14,1999 Commission:Chair Wendell Amos, Commissioners William Baird, Joyce Kitchen, Cheiie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, Al Sager and Dominick Taddonio Attending: Commissioners Amos, Baird, Kitchen, Pohl, Sager and Taddonio Absent: Commissioner Pettyjohn TAC Members: Larry Gamble, Helen Hondius, Roger Thorp and Bill Van Horn Attending: Gamble and Hondius Absent: Members Thorp and Van Horn Also Attending Town: County: Resources: Trustee Liaison Baudek, Town Attorney White, Director Stamey, and Recording Secretary Wheatley Commissioner Jim Disney, Chief Planner Russell Legg Dan Speedlin, Rick Spowart Chair Amos called the Study Session to order at 11:10 a.m. Chair Amos introduced Dan Speedlin and requested his comments on landscaping in Chapter 7. In regards to the replacement requirement for trees, he commented that the larger the tree, the slower the growth during its recovery period. He suggested doing an evaluation on a tree that’s being removed to detemnine its value, which would include the type and condition of the tree as well as the height. It might be more appropriate then to replace with like value, i.e. three smaller trees for one large tree removed. He noted that the value determination could be made from the book Valuation of Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plants, prepared by the International Society of Arboriculture. Other comments: Conifers are hardier than the deciduous, and they tend to screen more of the view. He agreed that the plastic sheeting requirement should be removed. Native seedlings take two years to become established. It was agreed that the developer should be given the option of following the current replacement guideline, or having an appraisal done and replacing the removed vegetation with equivalent value. Chair Amos introduced Rick Spowart of the Colorado DOW and requested his comments regarding the Wildlife Habitat Protection requirements of Chapter 7. He noted that he had mapped the critical wildlife areas in the Estes Valley, but essentially the entire valley is an important wildlife habitat. Mitigation requirements might be setbacks, limited percentage of area to be developed, cluster developments, fertilization of vegetation and small as possible construction footprints. It is preferable to keep developments out of the meadows and leave as open space for the wildlife. As far as threatened or endangered species, there is only the Peregrine Falcon and the Greenback Cutthroat Trout; however, the Big Horn Sheep is very sensitive. The herd up Fall River Road has suffered in the last few years from loss of habitat and disease. Staff commented that there are proposed setbacks from rivers and wetlands, wildlife habitat and fencing limitations, and exterior lighting limitations. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - April 14,1999 Study Session Page 2 Each mitigation plan should be site specific. The Level 1/Level 2 regulation is too laborious. Real problem is how to address the cumulative effect. The example of Tract 69, Fall River Estates reflects a good technique of howto preserve sheep habitat by using a cluster development next to the road and creating a large consen/ation easement of the rest. Still have some problems where sheep must cross the road to get to the river. Russ Legg commented that the County code did away with the Level 1/Level 2 and tried to simplify the code. They have proposed five steps in buffering in their System for Conservation Planning (SCOPE). This avoids involving the DOW in the building permit process. The important wildlife areas in the valley are calving/lambing/fawning areas, raptor next site (i.e., Crocker Ranch), riparian areas, open feeding areas and wetlands. The wetlands still need to be mapped. Staff will revise the wildlife section, based on the proposed County regulation and today’s input. EVDC REVIEW CHAPTER 7 Page 55 Line 34 - Change “match color” to “unobtrusive.” Manufactured home is different from a mobile home and can be placed on any lot as long as it meets the Town’s building code requirements. Page 61 Revise the table to indicate an equal number of female toilets and male toilets. Page 63 Line 15 - Change “4 square inches” to “4 inches square.” Line 22 - Adjust the towed vehicle width to the maximum allowed on the highway. CHAPTER 8 Chapter 8 consists of the current Town and County sign codes with no revisions. CHAPTER 9 PUD-R is accomplished by using clustering, so reference to PUD-R was deleted. Page 2 Line 9 — change “Board of Trustees or board of County Commissioners” to “Decision- Making Body.” CHAPTER 10 Pages Line 29 - Change “should” to “shall.” Line 45 - Plans for Remainder Parcels - remainder parcels must still meet minimum lot requirements. Line 46 - Change “must” to “shall.” BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Page 3Estes Valley Planning Commission - April 14,1999 Study Session Page 4 Line 1 - Change “must” to “shall.” Add Item 7. ”Reserved Strips Prohibited. All rights-of-way shall be platted to the property line.” Pages Line 12-14 - Light & Power determines street lighting. Arterial streets currently do not have pedestrian/bike transportation requirements, but they are proposed in the new code. Line 37 - Correct typo “or” to “of.” Pages Line 18 - Place period after “condominium)” and delete rest of the sentence. Page 9 Line 46 - change EVPC to Town. Page 10 Line 21 - Change time for completion to 2 years. Chapter 12 will be reviewed by the County and Town Attorneys and will be rewritten to be as effective as possible within the legal limitations. Chapter 13, Definitions, will be reviewed individually and comments noted. CHAPTER 11 Discussion was held on affordable housing. The code provides for one component to assist with the provision of below market housing. The code is only one part of several methods, including tax breaks and subsidies, that need to be addressed overall, for affordable housing to be accomplished. Line 4 - Change to read “help accomplish high-priority planning goals.” Page 3 Omit note in middle of page. Page 7 Line 18 - Delete Item 3. Delete Section F, but rewrite F.1. Next meeting is scheduled for May 5, 1999, 3:30 to 8:30 p.m. Discussion will include the Zoning Map and the public process. Chair Amos adjourned the Study Session at 1:20 p.m. Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Sectary