Loading...
TC Ord. No. 2010-19 Approving an amendment to the Chateau St.Claire planned united dev, Chateau St Claire Subdiv, removing the requirement prohibiting dogs on the propertyTOWN OF AVON, COLORADO ORDINANCE 10 -19 SERIES of 2010 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PLANNED UNITED DEVELOPMENT, CHATEAU ST CLAIRE SUBDIVISION, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT PROHIBITING DOGS ON THE PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Town of Avon approved a Planned Unit Development ( "PUD ") Amendment, by Ordinance No. 98 -6, Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards for Lots 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision; WHEREAS, in response to a Wildlife Study performed by Western Ecosystems, Inc, dated April 1, 1996, a condition of approval of Ordinance 98 -6 states that "Dogs shall not be permitted on the property "; WHEREAS, Brian Wilson, on behalf of CCS -Land, LLC with the permission of the property owner, Timothy Burton of CSC Land, LLC, has applied for a PUD Amendment to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property, pursuant to Section 17.20.110 of the Avon Municipal Code; WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on October 19, 2010, after posting notice as required by law, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff, considered such information prior to formulating a recommendation, then took action to adopt findings and make a recommendation of approval to the Town Council; WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on November 23`d, 2010, after posting notice as required by law, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff prior to taking any action on the Chateau St. Claire PUD amendment application; WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 17.20.110(h) of the AMC, the Town Council has considered the applicable review criteria; WHEREAS, approval of this Ordinance on first reading is intended only to confirm that the Town Council desires to comply with state law and the AMC by setting a public hearing in order to provide the public an opportunity to present testimony and evidence regarding the application and that approval of this Ordinance on first reading does not constitute a representation that the Town Council, or any member of the Town Council, supports, approves, rejects, or denies the proposed zoning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, the following: Ord No. 10 -19 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD. The Chateau St. Claire PUD, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, is hereby amended to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property. SECTION 2. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Town Council makes the following findings of fact with respect to this PUD Amendment application: 1. The property is not located in important wildlife habitat. 2. The complete prohibition of dogs on the property was not the intended outcome of the Wildlife Biologist's April 1, 1996 wildlife assessment letter. 3. Enforcement of Title 6: Animals, Avon Municipal Code, will adequately address "strict dog control" measures. 4. The PUD Review Criteria (Section 17.20.110 AMC) have been considered with this amendment SECTION 3. CORRECTION OF ERRORS. Town Staff is authorized to correct any typographical, grammatical, cross - reference, or other errors which may be discovered in any documents associated with this Ordinance and documents approved by this Ordinance provided that such corrections do not change the substantive terms and provisions of such documents. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. The Town Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each provision thereof, even though any one of the provisions might be declared unconstitutional or invalid. As used in this Section, the term "provision" means and includes any part, division, subdivision, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase; the term "application" means and includes an application of an ordinance or any part thereof, whether considered or construed alone or together with another ordinance or ordinances, or part thereof, of the Town. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect seven days after public notice following final passage in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Avon Home Rule Charter. SECTION 6. SAFETY CLAUSE. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the Town of Avon, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The Town Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be obtained. Page 2 of 3 Ord No. 10 -19 SECTION 7. PUBLICATION BY POSTING. The Town Clerk is ordered to publish this Ordinance by posting notice of adoption of this Ordinance on final reading by title in at least three public places within the Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk, which notice shall contain a statement that a copy of the ordinance in full is available for public inspection in the office of the Town Clerk during normal business hours. INTRODUCED, APPROVED, PASSED ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED POSTED: the 91h day of November, 2010, and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council on the 23`d day of November, 2010, at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, One e Street, Avon, lorado. &..'ays.pfiof Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor Published by p ste public places in Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk at least se al action by the Town Council. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patty cK y, Town Cler Eric e' , own Attorney INT ED, FINALL ROVED, AND PASSED ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLIS D Y POSTING on the 23`d day of November, 2010. �p�1vN .Fq�o2 S Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor Published b ost n01 �b °. JAI, —enn at least three public laces in Town and posting b title at the Y p g, p p p g Y office of the Town Clerk. Page 3 of 3 Ord No. 10 -19 a P • Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Initials Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager Legal Review: Eric Heil, Town Attorney Approved by: Sally Vecchio, Asst Town Manager, Com Dev From: Matt Pielsticker, Planner II Date: November 18th, 2010 Re: SECOND READING — PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance No. 10 -19, Series of 2010 Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD To Remove the Requirement Prohibiting Dogs on the Property. Summary: The contract owner (CCS -Land, LLC) of the property known as The Gates, has submitted an application to amend the Chateau St. Claire Planned Unit Development (the "PUD ") to remove the requirement that prohibits dogs on the property. Following a public hearing on October 19, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission ( "PZC ") made a unanimous recommendation for approval of the proposed amendment, with the following findings: • 1. The property is not located in important wildlife habitat. 2. The complete prohibition of dogs on the property was not the intended outcome of the Wildlife Biologist's April 1, 1996 wildlife assessment letter. 3. Enforcement of Title 8: Animals, Avon Municipal Code, will adequately address "strict dog control" measures. 4. The PUD Review Criteria (Section 17.20. 110 AMC) have been considered with this amendment." The Council Approved the first reading of Ordinance 10 -19 at the November 9, 2010 regular meeting. Background: As a condition of a 1998 amendment to the PUD, the Town Council prohibited dogs on the property. The condition appears to have been added in response to an interpretation of the1996 Wildlife Study that was prepared for the property by Western Ecosystems (See Exhibit B). Specifically, the study recommended that "strict dog control measures" be implemented on the property. The Colorado Department of Wildlife concurred with the recommendations of the Wildlife Study. In order to clarify the conclusions and recommendations from the Wildlife Study, Biologist, Richard W. Thompson of Western Ecosystems, Inc. provided the Town with a letter dated August 19, 2010, clarifying that a "dog prohibition" was not the intention of his 1996 assessment. The letter goes on to state that dog control measures that prohibit dogs from running at large on the property would be sufficient control so that owners of the property 40 could have dogs without threatening wildlife in the surrounding area. it The Town's policies with regard to dog control are governed by Title 6 of the Avon Muncipal Code: Animals. Pursuant to these regulations, it is the responsibility of dog owners to keep • their pet under control, and to prevent their animal from: 1) Running at large; 2) Becoming a danger to persons or property; 3) Trespassing on the property of another; or 4) Becoming a public nuisance. It is declared to be a public nuisance when a dog owner fails to pick up after his or her dog, or fails to prevent his or her dog from disturbing the peace by barking, yelping, etc. A dog is considered "Running at Large" when it enters the property of another person or when it enters public property and is not under the control of the owner, either by leash, cable or chain not more than ten (10) feet in length (Section 6.04.020). In addition, Section 6.04.140,Threatening of Wildlife and Livestock, states: "it is unlawful to allow a dog to run after, chase, pursue, bite, snap at, worry, attack or otherwise threaten wildlife or livestock, or both. In the event any dog is found to be threatening wildlife, said dog may immediately be destroyed at the discretion of any police officer or the Community Services Officer." The provision goes on to state that the pet may alternatively be impounded, and the owner will be convicted of a violation and required to pay restitution after a mandatory court appearance. Discussion: If this proposed amendment to the PUD is approved, dogs will be permitted on the property in accordance with the Town's animal control regulations described above. Recommendation: • Finding that a dog prohibition was not the intention of the 1996 Wildlife Study, and that the Town's rules and regulations concerning the control of dogs on public and private property are sufficient to address the recommendations of the Wildlife Study, Staff recommends that the Council Approve Ordinance 10 -19 on Second Reading, approving the proposed amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD to allow dogs on the property. Town Manager Comments: Exhibits: A: Ordinance 10 -19 B: Wildlife Letters • Page 2 November 23`d, 2010 Town Council Meeting IF • Exhibit A TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO ORDINANCE 10 -19 SERIES of 2010 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PLANNED UNITED DEVELOPMENT, CHATEAU ST CLAIRE SUBDIVISION, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT PROHIBITING DOGS ON THE PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Town of Avon approved a Planned Unit Development ( "PUD ") Amendment, by Ordinance No. 98 -6, Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards for Lots 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision; WHEREAS, in response to a Wildlife Study performed by Western Ecosystems, Inc, dated April 1, 1996, a condition of approval of Ordinance 98 -6 states that "Dogs shall not be permitted on the property "; WHEREAS, Brian Wilson, on behalf of CCS -Land, LLC with the permission of the property owner, Timothy Burton of CSC Land, LLC, has applied for a PUD Amendment to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property, pursuant to Section 17.20.110 of the Avon Municipal Code; WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing • on October 19, 2010, after posting notice as required by law, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff, considered such information prior to formulating a recommendation, then took action to adopt findings and make a recommendation of approval to the Town Council; WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on November 23`d, 2010, after posting notice as required by law, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff prior to taking any action on the Chateau St. Claire PUD amendment application; WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 17.20.110(h) of the AMC, the Town Council has considered the applicable review criteria; WHEREAS, approval of this Ordinance on first reading is intended only to confirm that the Town Council desires to comply with state law and the AMC by setting a public hearing in order to provide the public an opportunity to present testimony and evidence regarding the application and that approval of this Ordinance on first reading does not constitute a representation that the Town Council, or any member of the Town Council, supports, approves, rejects, or denies the proposed zoning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, the following: • Ord No. 10 -19 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD. The Chateau St. Claire PUD, • Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, is hereby amended to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property. SECTION 2. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Town Council makes the following findings of fact with respect to this PUD Amendment application: 1. The property is not located in important wildlife habitat. 2. The complete prohibition of dogs on the property was not the intended outcome of the Wildlife Biologist's April 1, 1996 wildlife assessment letter. 3. Enforcement of Title 6: Animals, Avon Municipal Code, will adequately address "strict dog control" measures. 4. The PUD Review Criteria (Section 17.20.110 AMC) have been considered with this amendment SECTION 3. CORRECTION OF ERRORS. Town Staff is authorized to correct any typographical, grammatical, cross - reference, or other errors which may be discovered in any documents associated with this Ordinance and documents approved by this Ordinance provided that such corrections do not change the substantive terms and provisions of such documents. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared • to be severable. The Town Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each provision thereof, even though any one of the provisions might be declared unconstitutional or invalid. As used in this Section, the term "provision" means and includes any part, division, subdivision, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase; the term "application" means and includes an application of an ordinance or any part thereof, whether considered or construed alone or together with another ordinance or ordinances, or part thereof, of the Town. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect seven days after public notice following final passage in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Avon Home Rule Charter. SECTION 6. SAFETY CLAUSE. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the Town of Avon, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The Town Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be obtained. SECTION 7. PUBLICATION BY POSTING. The Town Clerk is ordered to publish this Ordinance by posting notice of adoption of this Ordinance on final reading by title in at least three public places within the Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk, which notice shall contain a Page 2 of 3 • Ord No. 10 -19 • • statement that a copy of the ordinance in full is available for public inspection in the office of the Town Clerk during normal business hours. INTRODUCED, APPROVED, PASSED ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED POSTED: the 91h day of November, 2010, and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council on the 23`d day of November, 2010, at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, One Lake Street, Avon, Colorado. Mayor Published by posting in at least three public places in Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk at least seven days prior to final action by the Town Council. ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Eric Heil, Town Attorney INTRODUCED, FINALLY APPROVED, AND PASSED ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY POSTING on the 23`d day of November, 2010. Mayor Published by posting by title in at least three public places in Town and posting by title at the office of the Town Clerk. ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk • Page 3 of 3 Ord No. 10 -19 ............... _._..... . som s ASSOC. EMCC 3t 5286266 Exhibit iB a 04 -01-96 06,34PM FROM WESTUN ECOSYSTEMS Pestern Ecosystems, Sna Ecological Consultants go$ West C&Ich Road, 2oidl er, (3080,302 (303)442 -6144 April 1, 1996 Mr. Steve Isom Isom & Associates P.O. Box 9. Eagle, CO 81631 Re: Wildlife assessment of the Chateau St. Claire development, Dear Steve! A proposal has been submitted to the Town of Avon (Town) to redevelop the Avon School Tract and an adjacent tract to the west. Tha former tract contahm a home converted into an office used by approximately six people. The adjacent tract contains two single family residences and several non - inhabited wooden structures. The proposed Chateau St. Cltrire development would consist of a restaurant and commercial space. Such a proposal requires approval from the Town. Wildlife arc a resource of high public concern and redevelopment, such as that proposed, must consider potential impacts to wildlife and their habitats. Addressed below, at you request, is a wildlife assessment for the proposed redevelopment site. Current Colorado Division of Wildlife DO ( W) Wildlife Resource Information ;System - _ (WRIS) maps were used to identify major wildlife issues on and surrounding the 'subject property, A site survey was conducted on March 29, 1994 to evaluate habitats on and surrounding the Avon School site, which was being rezoned, The survey also included the entire portion of subject parcel that would be disturbed by redevelopment. Mr. Bill Andree (CROW District Wildlife Manager) was contacted during the school site rezoning praoess to obtain the State's concerns associated with the rezoning proposal. This assessment was based on the above and systematic photographs of the development area taken during the 1994 survey. :sOM & Assbu. EMCC 3v. 3286266 P. 03 ~n 04 -01 -96 06:45PM FROM JEST-" N ECOSYSTEMS P01 Mr. Steve Tsom April 1, 1996 Page 2 STUDY AREA The --t 6 acre subject parcel is located along the south side of U.S. Highway 6, approximately 50 yards east of the highway's Interseotiort with the Avon and Village Roads. The site occurs at 7,520 feet, along a north - facing toe slope at the distal terminus of a steep ridga separating the east side of the Beaver Creek Valley from the Eagle River, The Eagle River flows north of Highway 6 and the channel of Beaver Creek occurs along the northwest flank of the property. The development site is relatively flat as a result of its prior development and use as a gravel extraction site, school, residential and office site. Most native habitats in the vicinity of existing structures were disturbed during initial excavation and there has been little recolonization. The exception is a narrow riparian corridor flanking Beaver Creek, dominated by medium -aged to mature narrowleaf cottonwoods and a few conifers. Otherwise, the site is dominated by intraduccd cuItivars (primarily smooth brome and crested wheatgrass) and weedy vegetation (including mullein, sweet clover, thistle, and mustards), Native vegetation south and east of the redevelopment area is a mountain shrub conunur ity, dominated by sarviceberry, with rubber rabbitbrush, some snowberry, bitterbrush, and small aspen clumps, and a relatively vigorous herbaceous understory containing carices, bluegrass, timothy, smooth bronze, yarrow, and penstemon. YQllonla sp. (snail) shells are abundant on the hillside and additionally characterize this community. This shrub community transitions into a Douglas -fir/ Englemann spruce forest with increasing elevation on the ridge. These native habitats would not be disturbed by the proposal. WILDLIFE USE Wildlife use of the property is limited by non - native vegetation, on -site human activity and habitation, and the chronic activity associated with Highway 6 and its intersection with Village and Avon Roads. Wildlife use of the development site is generally confined -10 a low diversity of nongame species. A greater amount of wildlife use occurs along the Beaver Creek riparian corridor (e.g., nesting magpies), along the crook per se, (e.g., fish, beaver), and in the mountain shrub habitat to the south (critical elk habitat). However, the portion of the site proposed for development is not particularly important habitat for any wildlife species or group. The development area does not overlap any wildlife habitats delineated on CDOW WRIS maps (Sept. and Oct. 1995), However, the mountain shrub and other habitats above (south and southeast) of the development area are niapped as elk winter range, winter som & Assi:jc. EMCC 36 ,286266 P.0.4 +o. 04 -01 -96 06:45PM FROM WES " -'N ECOSYSTEMS P02 • Mr. Steve Isom April 1, 1996 Page 3 concentration area, severe winter range, and critical elk habitat. Mr. Bill Andree indicated that these north - facing slopes, immediately south of the parcel, are used by elk primarily during milder winters. March 29 surveys of this area located elk pellets deposited as low as the shoulder of Highway 6 over the relatively mild 1993/94 winter. A, low number of deer pellets, deposited in summer or fall 1993, were also located in this area. Growth forms of serviceberry and bitterbrush shrubs (two key winter browse species) on this hillside suggest only a light level of big game browsing. However, while elk pellets were fairly common in this native community, no elk or deer pellets. were located on the proposed development area, probably because of a lack of forage. Big game use on the adjacent hillside is nocturnal, infrequent, and would be unaffected by the largely diurnal and indoor use that is proposed. While low .numbers of big game may seasonally contour across the hillside south of the property during Ideal movements, the property and the adjacent hillside are outsido of any migratory corridors and production areas. There are no habitats of threatened, endangered, or candidate species on -site or in adjacent • areas that the proposed rezoning and use of the school site would jeopardize. Proposed use of the school site would not result in any water depletions or other effects to the Eagle river, Beaver Creek, or their riparian =nununities. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Chateau St. Clair redevelopment site contains no particularly important wildlife habitat. However, some sensitive wildlife habitats occur adjacent to the development, It. is my understandifig that a minimum 30 foot setback botwoon Beaver Creek and the development area would -be maintained. It is also recommended that all development avoid the continuous Hparian corridor flanking Beaver Creek, composed of cottonwoods, spnire, and lodgepole pine trees. To avoid impacts to big game winter range, development sh uld be kept below the historic jeep trail at the toe o: the hillside. Strict dog control measures should be implemented and enforced to avoid, wildlife harassment and mortality. Property owners should prohibit the development of any; trails in the Beaver Creek riparian corridor or extending into the mountain shrub habitat•'south of the development area. With the above conditions, tho proposed development and subsequent use of the siteshould not result in. any substantive change in the present type or level of wildlife use, As such, there should be no adverse effects to wildlife or their habitats, on or adjacent to the site, resulting from the proposal. Isom & ASSOC. EMCC 3, 3286266 P. 04-01-96 06:45PM FROM WEST," 'N ECOSYSTEMS P03 Mr. Steve Isom April 1, 1996 Page 4 s Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Richard W Thompson Certified Wildlife Biologist Western Ecosystems, Inc. RWT /s STATE OF COLORADO Roy Romer, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DI 'VISION ISION ®F WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER n R JUN 18 1996 Perry D. Olson, Director 606 Broadway COMMUNITY UEVELOPMEN'l Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297 -1192 June 19, 1996 Town of Avon Community Development Department ATTN: Karen Griffith Box 975 Avon, CO. 81620 Dear Karen, o� REFER TO Got'oR9,d • N OF For Wildlife - For People The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) has reviewed the annexation and PUD application for Chateau St. Claire and has the following comments. On 6/14/96 I spoke with Danny Brose at the site and asked him about protecting the riparian area, especially the cottonwood trees. Mr. Brose advised the trees would remain, but pruning was needed to remove dead branches over the deck area for safety reasons. Mr. Brose also stated he would like to sit down with the CDOW to review the tree pruning so as to protect wildlife. No date was set for this meeting at this time. Since there are several differences between the submitted application and recent discussions, the CDOW will comment on the submitted application. If the application is revised the CDOW comments and recommendations that no longer apply can be removed. The CDOW is in agreement with the wildlife report prepared by Rick Thompson. The CDOW also concurs with the conclusion and recommendations in the wildlife report. It is the CDOW understanding that the conclusions and recommendations contained in the wildlife report will become conditions of the annexation and /or PUD permit. If this is not the case please advise as this would change the CDOW's recommendations. There is a conflict in the protection of the 30 foot setback in the wildlife report, the environmental impact report (EIR) hydrologic conditions and the report by Precision Tree Works. The wildlife report states there is an understanding that a minimum 30 foot setback between Beaver Creek and the development area would be maintained. The EIR states the 30 foot setback area from the creek will remain in its natural state. • DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, James S. Lochhead, Executive Director • WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Thomas M. Eve, Chairman • Louis F. Swift, Vice - Chairman . Arnold Salazar, Secretary Jesse Langston Boyd, Jr., Member • Eldon W. Cooper, Member • Rebecca L. Frank, Member William R. Negberg, Member • Mark LeValley, Member • Chateau St. Claire CDOW Andree Page 2 June 19, 1996 These directly conflict with the report by Precision Tree Works which recommends removing 19 Cottonwood trees and removal of native vegetation to be replaced with sod to the stream edge. During a site visit on 6/14/96 I was only able to located 10 of the trees scheduled for removal, other trees had tags but the writing was washed off. Of these 10, 5 were located directly on the bank of Beaver Creek, 3 were located within 25 feet of the bank, and 2 were located within 30 feet of the bank. Removal of these trees would have a negative impact on wildlife use of the riparian area and would negatively impact the aquatic life in Beaver Creek. Further removal of these trees would be in conflict with the submitted EIR and wildlife report. The wildlife report and EIR state there will be a 30 foot setback between Beaver Creek and the development. While a 30 foot setback provides some protection, protection of the riparian and watershed values need additional measures. The current application • shows removal of native riparian vegetation to be replaced with sod right up to the stream edge. In order to protect riparian and watershed values there should be a native riparian buffer between riparian /watershed habitats and development. Best Management Practices (BMP) in riparian buffer areas should include: no soil disturbance; no vegetative disturbance (other than minimal pruning of shrubs and weed control); no lawn mowing or fertilization; no snow storage areas; require storm water detention facilities on site before discharging into waterways. The application shows rip rap along Beaver Creek south of the development but does not provide any discussion on the need or if some is existing and repair is needed. The CDOW has the following recommendations for the Chateau St. Claire application. 1) Maintain a minimum of a 30 foot native riparian buffer zone (stream setback) between development and Beaver Creek that uses best management practices (see above). 2) Recommendations listed in Rick Thompson's wildlife report become a part of the mitigation plan. 0 3) Do not remove the cottonwood trees within the riparian buffer zone (30 foot stream setback). Chateau St. Claire CDOW Andree Page 3 June 19, 1996 4) Pruning trees within the riparian buffer zone (30 foot stream setback) is limited to dead limbs for safety concerns or diseased limbs. Dead limbs that are not a safety concern provide valuable wildlife habitat. 5) All trash cans and /or dumpsters be a proven bear proof design. 6) Silt and sediment fences will be installed at the boundary of development and the 30 foot stream setback. Karen, the CDOW appreciates the opportunity to comments on this project. Please contact me at 926 -4424 if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Bill Andree District Wildlife Manager -Vail 0 C, • • • • Western Ecosystems, Inc. Ecological Consultants 905 West Coach Road, Boulder, Colorado 80302 6144 August 19, 2010 (303) 442- Sally Vecchio, Asst. Town Mgr./ Community Development Dir. Email transmittal Town of Avon One Lake Street P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 (970) 748 -4009, svecchio @avon.org RE: Dog Prohibition at The Gates Residences (formerly Chateau St. Claire) in Avon, CO Dear Sally, I write concerning my report entitled "Wildlife Assessment of the Chateau St. Claire Development" dated April 1, 1996. It has come to my attention that my report may have been used to prohibit dogs entirely from the property (PUD Ordinance 1998 -06). I offer this clarification because a dog prohibition was not my intention. The subject development is not located in important wildlife habitat, although the native habitat to the south is important elk winter range. I mentioned dogs in only one sentence of my report: "Strict dog control measures should be implemented and enforced to avoid wildlife harassment and mortality." This is standard dog control language that I have used for dozens of similar development proposal assessments in Eagle County. I never intended these "strict controls" to include the prohibition of dogs from the property. Indeed, dating back to 1986,1 don't ever recall the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) recommending that dogs be prohibited from residential developments in Eagle County, including those located in important wildlife habitats where stray dogs would create conflicts with wildlife. Instead, the planning jurisdiction, its representatives, the property owner, and the HOA typically develop enforceable covenants so there are no stray dogs originating on the property. Properly controlled dogs are not a threat to wildlife. I believe that with the implementation and enforcement of dog control measures, owners of The Gates Residences could have dogs without threatening wildlife in the surrounding area. Thank you for your time. • Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rick Thompson Richard W. Thompson Certified Wildlife Biologist Western Ecosystems, Inc. RWT /s Cc: J. Schroder, Real Capital Solutions • • P • Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Initials Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager Legal Review: Eric Heil, Town Attorney Approved by: Sally Vecchio, Asst Town Manager, Com Dev From: Matt Pielsticker, Planner II Date: November 3rd, 2010 Re: Ordinance No. 10 -19, Series of 2010 Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD To Remove the Requirement Prohibiting Dogs on the Property. Summary: The contract owner (CCS -Land, LLC) of the property known as The Gates, has submitted an application to amend the Chateau St. Claire Planned Unit Development (the "PUD ") to remove the requirement that prohibits dogs on the property. Following a public hearing on October 19, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission ( "PZC ") made a unanimous recommendation for approval of the proposed amendment, with the following findings: • 1. The property is not located in important wildlife habitat. 2. The complete prohibition of dogs on the property was not the intended outcome of the Wildlife Biologist's April 1, 1996 wildlife assessment letter. 3. Enforcement of Title 8: Animals, Avon Municipal Code, will adequately address "strict dog control" measures. 4. The PUD Review Criteria (Section 17.20.110 AMC) have been considered with this amendment. " Background: As a condition of a 1998 amendment to the PUD, the Town Council prohibited dogs on the property. The condition appears to have been added in response to an interpretation of the1996 Wildlife Study that was prepared for the property by Western Ecosystems (See Exhibit B). Specifically, the study recommended that "strict dog control measures" be implemented on the property. The Colorado Department of Wildlife concurred with the recommendations of the Wildlife Study. In order to clarify the conclusions and recommendations from the Wildlife Study, Biologist, Richard W. Thompson of Western Ecosystems, Inc. provided the Town with a letter dated August 19, 2010, clarifying that a "dog prohibition" was not the intention of his 1996 assessment. The letter goes on to state that dog control measures that prohibit dogs from running at large on the property would be sufficient control so that owners of the property could have dogs without threatening wildlife in the surrounding area. E 0 The Town's policies with regard to dog control are governed by Title 6 of the Avon Muncipal Code: Animals. Pursuant to these regulations, it is the responsibility of dog owners to keep • their pet under control, and to prevent their animal from: 1) Running at large; 2) Becoming a danger to persons or property; 3) Trespassing on the property of another; or 4) Becoming a public nuisance. It is declared to be a public nuisance when a dog owner fails to pick up after his or her dog, or fails to prevent his or her dog from disturbing the peace by barking, yelping, etc. A dog is considered "Running at Large" when it enters the property of another person or when it enters public property and is not under the control of the owner, either by leash, cable or chain not more than ten (10) feet in length (Section 6.04.020). In addition, Section 6.04.140,Threatening of Wildlife and Livestock, states: "it is unlawful to allow a dog to run after, chase, pursue, bite, snap at, worry, attack or otherwise threaten wildlife or livestock, or both. In the event any dog is found to be threatening wildlife, said dog may immediately be destroyed at the discretion of any police officer or the Community Services Officer." The provision goes on to state that the pet may alternatively be impounded, and the owner will be convicted of a violation and required to pay restitution after a mandatory court appearance. Discussion: If this proposed amendment to the PUD is approved, dogs will be permitted on the property in accordance with the Town's animal control regulations described above. Recommendation: • Finding that a dog prohibition was not the intention of the 1996 Wildlife Study, and that the Town's rules and regulations concerning the control of dogs on public and private property are sufficient to address the recommendations of the Wildlife Study, Staff recommends that the Council approve Ordinance 10 -19, approving the proposed amendment to the Chateau St. Claire PUD to allow dogs on the property. Town Manager Comments: Exhibits: A: Ordinance 10 -19 B: Wildlife Letters • Page 2 November 9�h, 2010 Town Council Meeting • Exhibit A TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO ORDINANCE 10 -19 SERIES of 2010 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PLANNED UNITED DEVELOPMENT, CHATEAU ST CLAIRE SUBDIVISION, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT PROHIBITING DOGS ON THE PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Town of Avon approved a Planned Unit Development ( "PUD ") Amendment, by Ordinance No. 98 -6, Amending the Chateau St. Claire PUD Development Plan and Development Standards for Lots 1 and 2, Chateau St. Claire Subdivision; WHEREAS, in response to a Wildlife Study performed by Western Ecosystems, Inc, dated April 1, 1996, a condition of approval of Ordinance 98 -6 states that "Dogs shall not be permitted on the property "; WHEREAS, Brian Wilson, on behalf of CCS -Land, LLC with the permission of the property owner, Timothy Burton of CSC Land, LLC, has applied for a PUD Amendment to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property, pursuant to Section 17.20.110 of the Avon Municipal Code; WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearing • on October 19, 2010, after posting notice as required by law, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff, considered such information prior to formulating a recommendation, then took action to adopt findings and make a recommendation of approval to the Town Council; WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon held a public hearing on November 23`d, 2010, after posting notice as required bylaw, considered all comments, testimony, evidence and staff reports provided by the Town staff prior to taking any action on the Chateau St. Claire PUD amendment application; WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 17.20.110(h) of the AMC, the Town Council has considered the applicable review criteria; WHEREAS, approval of this Ordinance on first reading is intended only to confirm that the Town Council desires to comply with state law and the AMC by setting a public hearing in order to provide the public an opportunity to present testimony and evidence regarding the application and that approval of this Ordinance on first reading does not constitute a representation that the Town Council, or any member of the Town Council, supports, approves, rejects, or denies the proposed zoning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, the following: • Ord No. 10 -19 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO CHATEAU ST. CLAIRE PUD. The Chateau St. Claire PUD, • Chateau St. Claire Subdivision, is hereby amended to remove the requirement prohibiting dogs on the property. SECTION 2. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Town Council makes the following findings of fact with respect to this PUD Amendment application: 1. The property is not located in important wildlife habitat. 2. The complete prohibition of dogs on the property was not the intended outcome of the Wildlife Biologist's April 1, 1996 wildlife assessment letter. 3. Enforcement of Title 6: Animals, Avon Municipal Code, will adequately address "strict dog control" measures. 4. The PUD Review Criteria (Section 17.20.110 AMC) have been considered with this amendment SECTION 3. CORRECTION OF ERRORS. Town Staff is authorized to correct any typographical, grammatical, cross - reference, or other errors which may be discovered in any documents associated with this Ordinance and documents approved by this Ordinance provided that such corrections do not change the substantive terms and provisions of such documents. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared • to be severable. The Town Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each provision thereof, even though any one of the provisions might be declared unconstitutional or invalid. As used in this Section, the term "provision" means and includes any part, division, subdivision, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase; the term "application" means and includes an application of an ordinance or any part thereof, whether considered or construed alone or together with another ordinance or ordinances, or part thereof, of the Town. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect seven days after public notice following final passage in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Avon Home Rule Charter. SECTION 6. SAFETY CLAUSE. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the Town of Avon, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The Town Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be obtained. SECTION 7. PUBLICATION BY POSTING. The Town Clerk is ordered to publish this Ordinance by posting notice of adoption of this Ordinance on final reading by title in at least three public places within the Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk, which notice shall contain a Page 2 of 3 • Ord No. 10 -19 statement that a copy of the ordinance in full is available for public inspection in the office of the • Town Clerk during normal business hours. • INTRODUCED, APPROVED, PASSED ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED POSTED: the 9`h day of November, 2010, and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council on the 23rd day of November, 2010, at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, One Lake Street, Avon, Colorado. Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor Published by posting in at least three public places in Town and posting at the office of the Town Clerk at least seven days prior to final action by the Town Council. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Eric Heil, Town Attorney INTRODUCED, FINALLY APPROVED, AND PASSED ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY POSTING on the 23rd day of November, 2010. Mayor Published by posting by title in at least three public places in Town and posting by title at the office of the Town Clerk. ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk • Page 3 of 3 Ord No. 10 -19 _ ................ ... ......... .... _.. Isom s Assi)C. EMCC 3033286266 Exhibit B Q 04 -01 -96 06,34PYl FROM WESTREN ECOSYSTEM Western Ecosystems, Inc. Ecological Consultdnts 90$ "Pe-st Co "Ch J?od�, �Boulk, (30 80,302 (303)442 -6144 April 1, 1996 Mr. Steve Isom Isom & Associates P.O. Box 9. Eagle, CO 81631 Re: Wildlife assessment of the Chateau St. Claire development. Dear Steve! A proposal has been submitted to the Town of Avon (Town) to redevelop the Avon School Tract and an adjacent tract to the west. The former tract contaim a home converted into an office used by approximately six people, The adjacent tract contains two single family residences and several non - inhabited wooden structures. The proposed Chateau St. Clture development would consist of a restaurant and commercial spaco. Such a proposal requires approval from the Town. Wildlife arc a resource of high public concern and redevelopment, such as that proposed, must consider potential impacts to wildlife and their habitats. Addressed below, at you request, is a wildlife assessment for the proposed redevelopment site. METHODS Currant Colorado Division of Wildlife (SOW) Wildlife Resource Information :System - _ (WRTS) maps were used to identify major wildlife issues on and surrounding the' subject property, A site survey was conducted on March 29, 1994 to evaluate habitats on and surrounding the Avon School site, which was being rezoned, The survey also included the entire portion of subject parcel that would be disturbed by redevelopment. Mr. Bill Andree (CROW District Wildlife Manager) was Wntaeted during the school site rezoning process to obtain the State's concerns associated with the rezoning proposal. This assessment was based on the above and systematic photographs of the development area taken during the 1994 survey. v 04 -01 -96 06 :45PM FROM Mr. Steve Isom April 1, 1996 Page 2 STUDY AREA ISOM & Assoc. JESTr4N ECOSYSTEMS EMCC 3033286266 The t 6 acre subject parcel is located along the south side of U.S. Highway 6, approximately 50 yards east of the highway's 1Aters80tlota with the Avon and Village Roads. The site occurs at 7,520 feet, along a north - facing toe slope at the distal terminus of a steep ridge separating the east side of the Beaver Creek Valley from the Eagle River. The Eagle River flows north of Highway 6 and the channel of Beaver Creek occurs along the northwest flank of the property. The development site is relatively flat as a result of its prior development and use as a gravel extraction site, school, residential and office site. Most native habitats in the vicinity of wdsting structures were disturbed during initial excavation and there has been little recolonization. The exception is a narrow riparian corridor flanking Beaver Creek, dominated by medium-aged to mature narrowleaf cottonwoods and a few conifers. Otherwise, the site is dominated by introduced cuItivars (primarily smooth brome and crested wheatgrass) and weedy vegetation (including mullein, sweet clover, thistle, and mustards). Native vegetation south and east of the redevelopment area is a mountain shrub conununity, dominated by serviceberry, with rubber rabbitbrush, some snowberry, bitterbrush, attd small aspen clumps, and a relatively vigorous herbaceous understory containing carices, bluegrass, timothy, smooth brome, yarrow, and penstemon. Vallonta sp. (snail) shells are abundant on the hillside and additionally characterize this community. This shrub community transitions into a Douglas -fir/ Englemann spruce forest with increasing elevation on the ridge. These native habitats would not be disturbed by the proposal. WILDLIFE USE Wildlife use of the property is limited by non - native vegetation, on -site human activity and habitation, and the chronic activity associated with Highway 6 and its intersection with Village and Avon Roads. Wildlife use of the development site is generally confined -to a low diversity of nongame species. A greater amount of wildlife use occurs along the Beaver Creek riparian corridor (e.g., nesting magpies), along the creek per se, (e.g., fish, beaver), and in the mountain shrub habitat to the south (critical elk habitat). However, the portion of the site proposed for development is not particularly important habitat for any wildlife species or group. The development area does not overlap any wildlife habitats delineated on CDOW WRIS maps (Sept.'and Oct. 1995). However, the mountain shrub and other habitats above (south and southeast) of the development area are mapped as elk winter range, winter P.03 POI Isom & Assbc. 04-01 -96 06:45PM FROM WES'-'N ECOSYSTEMS EMCC 3033286266 P.e4 V� i Mr. Steve Isom April 1, 1996 Page 3 concentration area, severe winter range, and critical elk habitat. Mr. Bill Andree indicated that these north - facing slopes, immediately south of the parcel, are used by elk primarily during milder winters. March 29 surveys of this area located elk pellets deposited as low as the shoulder of Highway 6 over the relatively mild 1993 /94 winter. A low number of deer pallets, deposited in summer or fall 1993, were also located in this area. Growth forms of serviceberry and bitterbrush shrubs (two key winter browse species) on this hillside suggest only a light level of big game browsing. However, while elk pellets were fairly common in this native community, no elk or deer pellets were located on the proposed development area, probably because of a lack of forage. Big game use on the adjacent hillside is nocturnal, infrequent, and would be unaffected by the largely diurnal and indoor use that is proposed. While low .numbers of big game may seasonally contour across the hillside south of the property during local movements, the property and the adjacent hillside are outsides of any migratory corridors and production areas. There are no habitats of threatened, endangered, or candidate species on -site or in adjacent areas that the proposed rezoning and use of the school site would jeopardize. Proposed us$ of the school site would not rescilt in any water depletions or other effects to the Eagle River, Beaver Creek, or their riparian con unities. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Chateau St. Clair redevelopment site contains no particularly important wildlife Habitat. However, some sensitive wildlife habitats occur adjacent to the development, It is my understanding that a minimum 30 foot setback botween Beaver Creek and the development area would be maintained. It is also recommended that all development avoid the continuous riparian corridor flanking Seaver Creek, composed of cottonwoods, spruce, and lodgepole pine trees. To avoid impaets to big game winter range, development should be kept below the historic jeep trail at the toe o; the hillside. Strict dog control measures should be implemented and enforced to avoidvildiife harassment and mortality. Property owners should prohibit the development of atiy.trails in the Beaver Creek riparian corridor or extending into the mountain shrub habitat south of the development area. With the above conditions, tho proposed development and subsequent use of the siisshould not result in any substantive change itl the present type or level of wildlife use. As such, there should be no adverse effects to wildlife or their habitats, on or adjacent to the site, resulting from the proposal. ISOM & RSSOC. EMCC ZOZZ266266 04 -01 -96 06:46PM FROM WEST' 'N ECOSYSTEMS S` Mr. Steve Isom April 1, 1996 Page 4 Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Richard W: Thompson Certified Wildlife Biologist Western Ecosystems, Inc. RWT/s P03 I STATE OF COLORADO Roy Romer, Governor REFER TO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1� • DIVISION OF WILDLIFE guns 181996 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER d Perry D. Olson, Director 606 Broadway COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN I � Denver, Colorado 80216 OF Telephone: (303) 297 -1192 For Wildlife - June 19 , 1996 For People Town of Avon Community Development Department ATTN: Karen Griffith Box 975 Avon, CO. 81620 Dear Karen, The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) has reviewed the annexation and PUD application for Chateau St. Claire and has the following comments. On 6/14/96 I spoke with Danny Brose at the site and asked him about protecting the riparian area, especially the cottonwood trees. Mr. Brose advised the trees would remain, but pruning was needed to remove dead branches over the deck area for safety • reasons. Mr. Brose also stated he would like to sit down with the CDOW to review the tree pruning so as to protect wildlife. No date was set for this meeting at this time. Since there are several differences between the submitted application and recent discussions, the CDOW will comment on the submitted application. If the application is revised the CDOW comments and recommendations that no longer apply can be removed. The CDOW is in agreement with the wildlife report prepared by Rick Thompson. The CDOW also concurs with the conclusion and recommendations in the wildlife report. It is the CDOW understanding that the conclusions and recommendations contained in the wildlife report will become conditions of the annexation and /or PUD permit. If this is not the case please advise as this would change the CDOW's recommendations. There is a conflict in the protection of the 30 foot setback in the wildlife report, the environmental impact report (EIR) hydrologic conditions and the report by Precision Tree Works. The wildlife report states there is an understanding that a minimum 30 foot setback between Beaver Creek and the development area would be maintained. The EIR states the 30 foot setback area from the creek will remain in its natural state. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, James S. Lochhead, Executive Director • WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Thomas M. Eve, Chairman • Louis F. Swift, Vice - Chairman • Arnold Salazar, Secretary Jesse Langston Boyd, Jr., Member • Eldon W. Cooper, Member • Rebecca L. Frank, Member William R. Hegberg, Member • Mark LeValley, Member • Chateau St. Claire CDOW Andree Page 2 June 19, 1996 These directly conflict with the report by Precision Tree Works which recommends removing 19 Cottonwood trees and removal of native vegetation to be replaced with sod to the stream edge. During a site visit on 6/14/96 I was only able to located 10 of the trees scheduled for removal, other trees had tags but the writing was washed off. Of these 10, 5 were located directly on the bank of Beaver Creek, 3 were located within 25 feet of the bank, and 2 were located within 30 feet of the bank. Removal of these trees would have a negative impact on wildlife use of the riparian area and would negatively impact the aquatic life in Beaver Creek. Further removal of these trees would be in conflict with the submitted EIR and wildlife report. The wildlife report and EIR state there will be a 30 foot setback between Beaver Creek and the development. While a 30 foot setback provides some protection, protection of the riparian and watershed values need additional measures. The current application • shows removal of native riparian vegetation to be replaced with sod right up to the stream edge. In order to protect riparian and watershed values there should be a native riparian buffer between riparian /watershed habitats and development. Best Management Practices (BMP) in riparian buffer areas should include: no soil disturbance; no vegetative disturbance (other than minimal pruning of shrubs and weed control); no lawn mowing or fertilization; no snow storage areas; require storm water detention facilities on site before discharging into waterways. The application shows rip rap along Beaver Creek south of the development but does not provide any discussion on the need or if some is existing and repair is needed. The CDOW has the following recommendations for the Chateau St. Claire application. 1) Maintain a minimum of a 30 foot native riparian buffer zone (stream setback) between development and Beaver Creek that uses best management practices (see above). 2) Recommendations listed in Rick Thompson's wildlife report become a part of the mitigation plan. 0 3) Do not remove the cottonwood trees within the riparian buffer zone (30 foot stream setback). Chateau St. Claire Page 3 CDOW Andree June 19, 1996 4) Pruning trees within the riparian buffer zone (30 foot stream setback) is limited to dead limbs for safety concerns or diseased limbs. Dead limbs that are not a safety concern provide valuable wildlife habitat. 5) All trash cans and /or dumpsters be a proven bear proof design. 6) Silt and sediment fences will be installed at the boundary of development and the 30 foot stream setback. Karen, the CDOW appreciates the opportunity to comments on this project. Please contact me at 926 -4424 if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Bill Andree District Wildlife Manager -Vail n is • • Western Ecosystems, Inc. • Ecological Consultants 905 West Coach Road, Boulder, Colorado 80302 (303) 442- 6144 August 19, 2010 Sally Vecchio, Asst. Town Mgr./ Community Development Dir. Email transmittal Town of Avon One Lake Street P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 (970) 748 -4009, svecchio @avon.org RE: Dog Prohibition at The Gates Residences (formerly Chateau St. Claire) in Avon, CO • Dear Sally, I write concerning my report entitled "Wildlife Assessment of the Chateau St. Claire Development" dated April 1, 1996. It has come to my attention that my report may have been used to prohibit dogs entirely from the property (PUD Ordinance 1998 -06). I offer this clarification because a dog prohibition was not my intention. The subject development is not located in important wildlife habitat, although the native habitat to the south is important elk winter range. I mentioned dogs in only one sentence of my report: "Strict dog control measures should be implemented and enforced to avoid wildlife harassment and mortality." This is standard dog control language that I have used for dozens of similar development proposal assessments in Eagle County. I never intended these "strict controls" to include the prohibition of dogs from the property. Indeed, dating back to 1986, I don't ever recall the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) recommending that dogs be prohibited from residential developments in Eagle County, including those located in important wildlife habitats where stray dogs would create conflicts with wildlife. Instead, the planning jurisdiction, its representatives, the property owner, and the HOA typically develop enforceable covenants so there are no stray dogs originating on the property. Properly controlled dogs are not a threat to wildlife. I believe that with the implementation and enforcement of dog control measures, owners of The Gates Residences could have dogs without threatening wildlife in the surrounding area. • Thank you for your time. • Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rick Thompson Richard W. Thompson Certified Wildlife Biologist Western Ecosystems, Inc. RWT /s Cc: J. Schroder, Real Capital Solutions • •