Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 Planning Commission Memos & Minutes January to June, 1977 AGE�DAS Pl ann�ng Comtn�s.i.a� 1977 Janua�y• ��9�7Z LO7S 4,5,fi,7,8 Blk 1 VAIL LIONSHEAD 3rd, resubdivis�ort TRACT C,b:+Lot 8, " " " LDT 9, BLK 1 , POTATO PATCH,-rezone LpT 14, BLK 4, BIGHORN 3rd Addi�ion resub LIONSHEAD THEATER Jar�uary 13,%1977 LOT � , BLK 2;�POTA�'0 PA7'CH rezone and resubdi v�de LOT 9, BL K 2, POTRTO PATCH rezane �.iONSHEAD THEA7�R Jc'�uar�2�9;�T 9J7 L4T 14,:'BLK 4, BIGHORN S�B 3rd (80RWiCK, resub T�1E MA�K - f-inal EIR LOT 9;�8l.K 1,:�POTATO PA�'CH re zone Jarruar � 27.�1977 MARK �ZR �IANOR VAIL setback variance LOT 1 , Bf.K 2, P0�'ATO PATCH 2nd,iresub TIMBER�'AE.LS �ONING Februa�ry.��0, �1_977 LOT �1 , BLKZ, GORE C�EEK, Griffin setback EMPLOYEE NOUSIf�G discuss�vn HAZARD ZON�NG QRDINANCE discussion Februa ���4;,%1977 LTONSH�AD 4th F�� ing, -Se�by/7afe� setback and �arking variance STTE 9;idecrease from 90 to 60 un�ts r 1� '.� � r.. '� . - . PL.ANNIfJG CO�ff�IT5SI0id Agenda _ January E, 197� � � . Resubdivis�on of Lots 9�, 5, 6, 7, & 8, Bloc[c 7 , Vail Lionshead Tt�ird Filing. 2, Resubdivision af a port�on of Tract C and a portion of �.ot 8, B�ock 7 , Vai7 E.ionshead Third �i7ing. 3. Rezoning of Lot 9, Block i , Vail Potato Patch from HDMF to MDNiF 4. Resubdivis�on of [.ot 14, Bloc[c 4, Bighorr� Subdivisian Th�rd Addition. 5, LZonshead Theater � � „� �:y f ' � PLANNING COMMISSIOPd Summary .� Jan�tary 6, 1977 M�MB�RS PRESEiVT: . Dudley Abbott �an Corcoran Ed Drager Pam Garton Bill Han7on Sandy Mi71s Gerry Whi�te RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 4, 5, 6, & 7, BLOCK 1 , 11AIL LIOFdSN�AD TNIRD FILIfJG Attached is the staff inemorandum which describes tl�e above-mentioned resub. �erry White made a motion to approve �he request/qar� Corcoran seconded the riotion. A unanimous vote was recorded in favor o�F the mo��on. , RESUBDIVISIOfJ OF A PORTION OF TRACT C APJQ A PORTIO�! OF LOT 8, BLOCK 7 , VAIL LIO�fSHEAD � TFfTRD FILTPdG This resUb. is re�ated to the Lionshead Theater. By resubdividing this parcel of property, it w�ll carrect a non-con�forminy iot size and con�Figuration,and will create a conforming subdivision. It was noted that �he oniy way �Ch�s resubdiv�sion wi]1 be ap�roved by the owners of the ]and is i-F the L�onshead Theater variance is granted �y the Counc�l . There was a7so discussion about ir�corpora�ing a 20' �edestrian easement througk� �he property. Gerry White made a r�otion to approve the resubdivision avith the incorporation of the 20' pedestr7an easement. Ed Drager secondec� the motion. A 4-1 (Mi17s against� vote was recorded in �'avor o� the mation with Dan Corcoran abstaining. (Bill Han7on had r�ot yet arrived at �he meeting). REZOfVIN� OF LOT 9, BL.00K ] , VAIL POTATO PATCH FROM �{�MF TO �IDNiF Oiana ToughiT� asked �hat this ma�ter be pos�poned until next week. �an Corcoran mad� a mo�ion to postpone discussion; Gerry Wl�ite secanded �he matior�, A unanimous vote was recorded to ta�1e discussian. Ed Drager asked that the staff inves��gate an alternate means of transpart thr.ough the �,ionsr�dge/Sandstone area -- this parce1 of land may be ti�e per�Fect lacation to �Eake some of' the pressure off of Red Sands�one Roac�. _._� ' Planning Commissio� � ' January 6, 1977 � Page Two RES�BDIVTSZON OF L0� i4, BLOCK 4, BIGf��ORN SUBDIVISIO� THIRD ADDTTION. The Pla�ning Cflrnmission .had made a v3sual inspection of this proper�y last week. Applicants would 1�ke �o subdiv9de t�e parcel into 6 dupTex lats with si.zes ranging from 15,5Q0 square fee� to 26,70Q 5quare feet. It was no��d that these lots are designed ta meet the re�uireme�ts of the up-coming 40% s7ope requirements and tha� �he applicants foZ1owed the s�aff request of no more than 4 uni�s per acre density in the resubdivision. Leroy Tobl�r & Tim Garton made th� presentation of the proposed resubd�vision of the Borwick Praperty ( Lat 1�, BZock 4, Bighorn 3rd). The P3anning Commission felt very positively towards the resubdivisian but withheld voting un��� the fo1lowing probiems have been worked out: 7 ) Easement committments �re: water) 2) Low wa�er �ressure �re: f�re protection) 3) Road profi3�s approved by Ken� Rose (re; sectians, cuiverts, cuts & fi17s} 4) The easement across �ot 13 (owned by Bonnie 0'Leary) should be dedicated as a road 5) CATU service 6) Letter from Chen & Associat�s stating that the resub. is in line w�th all geo�og�c concerns 7) How the parking is going to be hand�ed an the site. � LIONSHEA� TNEAT�R -- PARKING VARIANC� This variance is for 11 spaces needed far the proposed retail area located on top of the thea�er. Jeff Selby & Ron Todd gave a historica7 description of the deve1opment of the theater. In doing so they presented a schematic plan showing the developme�t wi�h the �1 spaces needed for the retail area on the site, as well as the�r proposed plan showi�g no parking on the site, Attached is the s�aff inemorandum which aut7ines �h� Com�unity Deve1vpment Department's concerns. It was suggested that the app� icants �nvestigate the addition of a loading dock, and the placement of the cue sta�rway away from the bus s�o�. Dudley Abbatt made a mation to grant �he parking variance for the T�eater; Ed Drager seconded the motian. A 4-2 vo�e was recarded in favor of the motian (Mills & Hanlon opposed & Corcoran abstained}. Milis and �anlon were against the variance beca�se �hey fe1t that at a future time parking will be needed and that the trade outs were nat good enough to �ust�fy the variance (i .e. completion of the mal7 , �andscaping) Arguments for: the theater was a needed th�ng �or Lionshead; completion of �he ma7� was necessary to the economic viabi1ity of the Lionshead area; on-site parking Vras very una�tractive; committing the applicant �o a future need af parking was not feasible or fair especially when looking at the unus�d spaces pr.es��t7y required �� by the Zo�ing Ord�nance -- same sore of leasing agreement should be iooked into. . , , ��MOaA�nur� T0: P7anning Cammiss7on FRONi: Department of Community Development DAT�: January 6, 1977 RE: Resubdivision of E.ots 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8, B�ack � , Vail �.ionshead �'hird Filing. T�e applicant, Kiaser Morcus, is requesting a resubdivision of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8, Block 1 , Vail Lionshead Third Fil�ng. This parceZ of property present7y consists of a portion o� the Mark Property and Vai�l Associates North Day Skier Lot, The applicant would like to trade parcels of property with Uai1 Associates �n arder to mave the present parki�g 7ot further west so that his � new proposed project would �'i� better within"'�he site. Wi�h the trade, 2Q additiona� parlcing spaces would he added, �ut the square fofltag� of the new lot;would remain the same as ��e old��u� �aving a�cif ef�e� con� �g�on. The pepartmen� of Commun�ty Development foresees no difficulties with the pro�osed resubdivision and recommends approval of the re�uest. �,,, � AON/II.00,McLAU4HL,lN WF�IGH�I�'MC�.AUGHL��N C'�EGINEERS � COMPLCTFENGiNEER1f3G�i1:RVIGES . . KEryr�CTH H.WR14HT - IN TNG Sf'�GlA47Y FIEL�S OF J HALF'ORD E,ERICH!iON - - EN�'INEERINCi CONSULTANTg � WAT�R SUPp�,Y A1�[D OfSTRIt3UT1�ON. OOUGLA5T.50V�RN 1L.'!O A�,CpYT STREEY WAT�R AMDSEWAG[TieCRTM�NT . JOHN Y.McIAN� � � SEWAGE COI.LECTION AND R£U5� - GENVER,COLPRApo 80211 . WILL-IAM C.TAG(;ART � IFFOUSTRFAL WASTES ' I�I ,_ - i303) ,�6B-62o1 . STOHM-DitA{NAGE � - . . ' THOMqS W,MORRIS - - FL04O�ONT320L ANO�. f . JIMM1e o,wHITFIHLO - . � pqy�R WATER�ORIEI+ETL'O PFiOJECiS . . ASPEN OFP'{CF_ � BTP.AM60AT OFPIGC D�LLON LAK�C d1�P1[E ' I P.O.BOx �axa - p.o.pox SZ=Q - - � II ASPEN�COLOpA�O f�611 STEAMdOA7 VILLAGE,COLORA00 lR499 Ffi�SCV�COiOHAGO{09�3 � . � . { i` I' January 3, 1�77 Mr. Mike Carlisle, Fire Chie� Tawn of Vai� P.O. Box 100 Vail , Cotorado 8]657 pear Mike: � � We received the drawing of the praposed 6orwick Subdivision �rom yo�a today and we would ] ike ta make some �r�lir�inary comments on behaif o�' the 13ighorn Water District. First, it aPpears that adequate wate�- pressur� cannot now be provided to t1�e subdivis'san and that some means of increasing the. press�re will i be r�eeessary. This cau�d be �ia .a booster pumpir�g statian, intercon- r�ection to higher press�re zone, anc�/or storage abo�e the prnpose� site. Whatever merhod is selected, it m�st provide adequate fire �laws as weli as adequafe domestic service. W� wou�d recommend to the Distirict that the devEioper be respansible for the cost of his share of any facilities necessary to serve t�e site. At this date, with 3 �mited time a�ailable before the January 6th dead- . lin� you mentianed, it is na� possible to determine ei.ther the most feasibl� service �i�e�hoc] nor the Distric�'s policy on service to this pra�erty. We woujd just lik� to indicate that th�re is an unresotved problem at this � ime. We are available to the applican� or his engi- neer to discuss possible salutions. Yours very truly, � WRIGH�'-�c�AUGHLIN ENGINE�RS By , ��� � ^' F'rancis D. Barr'e�t FbB:ms cc: Waiter Kir�h � Jim Collins 7�+2-63 . � �' ;. . •°± ��u�, C����t�c� & C���, �1�t�. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS I � 1740 Williams Street / Den�er, Colorado 80218 / Phone E303] 399-7053 � January 5, 1977 � Mr. James �amon� Planning �irector Town of Vail Bo� ioa Vai1. , CO 8165'1 Re : BTGHORN WATER BTSTRICT Preliminary P1at , Borwick Resubdivision of Bighorn Fi�ing 3 , Approxa.mately 3 Acres Cantaining 6 Duplex Lots Dear Mr. I.amont: The Bighorn Water D�.s�r�ct has been xequested to respond to the availability a£ water for the above-referenced praposed resubdivision. Bi.ghorn Water District has previously indicate�. its abili�y .- �o serve this prop�xty and does reaffirm i�s expectata�on �hat watc�r service wa.I1 be available �a it. Afi. the present time , �rhe Distric� believes its Water Rights option contract with Princevill� Corporat�on provides it w�.th more than adeauate damestic water supplies �o serve the prospective build-out of the Bighorn Water Da.strict. A1so at the presant tame , the Big- horn Water Distric�. has jus� r�cent�.y consummated an intercon- nection wa.�h the Gore Va�.1ey Wa��r District , providing back-up water storage and raw ti+rater supplies in �he event of an emerge�cy need. Finally, the Distra.ct is proceeding, along with �he other water entities in the Gore Va11ey, to research and resolve remain- ing water suppli�s , storage and capital �acilities issues . We expect tha�. wi�hin the year this revised master plan for water facili�ies in tihe Va11ey wi11 be complete and zhe B�ghorn Water District is prepared to engage in eapital cons�ruc�ion which wi11. serve the needs of its constituents. We are aware of the wa�.�r pxessure problems of th�s particular parcel . We believe that supplementary fixe flow pumps and/or sto�r- ag� : on the property will resolve the existing problem. We �ur- thex beli�ve that wathin a year fo3.�.owing th.e comple�ion of the Valley-wa.de watex study that the supplementary water supply pumps or storage wi11 be unn.ecessary, since pr�ssures in the area and/or add�.�ianal storage will be increased so that the property wi11 be c i • r Mr. James Lamon�. � January 5 , 1977 Page 2 ab3.e �Co be served norma3ly and adequately. Should development take pl.ace prior to this time, o� course, such supplementary water flow facilita.es would have to be installed by �he develop- ers of the proper�y. Finally, the T3istrict has an ou�s�anding issue with Mr . Borwick, whic� could affec�. the ability to provide water service . Consequently, unless this issue is resolve�. within 30 days- -this com�itmen� to serve will be wi�hdrawn. We wz�.1 for- mal�.y ratify ox withdraw this commi�men� to you we1.1 befare your �i� considerata.on of a Fa.na1. P1at. if you have any �urther questions, please feel free to con.tact us. Sincere�.y, �` HORN WATER DISTRICT � � � James P. Co�.lins I�yon, Co1.1.�ns �, Co . , Inc. DISTRYCT MANAGER JPC : ah cc : W. Kirch A11 O�her Board Members Thomas T . Grimshaw Fxank Baxret� ICent Rose Terre�l Minger Leroy Toblex, P .E . � .;' ,� ,�, , V M�MORN�DUN! � T0: P�anning Cammission FROM: Department o� Commun�ty Development �ATE: January 6, 1977 RE; Lionshead Theatre Request for Par[cing Variance and Resubdivision of a por�ion of Tract C and a portion of Lot 8, Block 1 , Vaii Lionshead Third �'iling Rich Tofel and Jeff Seiby have app3ied for the subject var�ar�c� in order to a17ow the construction of a 380 seat t�eatre to be to:�ally underground, with a 1ob�y and ap�roxima�e7y 3,300 square �Fee� to retail space located above grade. The site proposed for resubdivision is 11 ,480 square feet. PAR�CIiVG VARIANCE: Required parking is 38 spaces for �he �hea�re � and 11 spaces for the retail space. At the request of th� Plannir�g Commission on preliminary review and Eldon Beck, a1T parking has ueen removed from the site and landscapir�g and pedestrian improve- ments subs��tuted. The variance r�ques� is for 11 parking spaces far the Cammercia� area. The 38 spaces required -�or the theatre are bezng satisfied by a joint-use parking agreement w��h Vail �� Associa�es �r� the north day skier parfcing lat. �rnie Nunn af the Forest Service has stated that he agrees with evening use of the day skier 7ot but wouTd have reserva�ions of use of the theatre were not s�ecifically designated for evening use. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS (SECTiON 19.600} i . The reiationship of the� requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. There are no other pater�tial theatre sites in the Lionshead area which abut t�e ex.i.sting ma1T system and a7so adjacent to the major bus route, The pro�osed site is unique 1n�his respect and forms a necessary completion of the mall sys�em a� th� West end of Lionshead. Ti�e only structure ti�at could b� adversely impacted is Montaneros and their view corridor is to the South; however, the proposed bui]dings ar�e one s�ory in l�e�ght and the projec� is a def�n�te aesthet�c improvement over the �xist�ng use. The lack of parking cou]d create some ,.� , .Lionshead Th�ater 'January 6, 1977 Page Two : � � prablems for �he surround7ng buildings i� theatre patrons drive and at�emp� to park in private lots adjacent �o �he theatre; however, ther� is the large day�skier ]ot dlrect1y r�or�h of the sit� wh�ch is not used at r�ight wi�ach shou1d accommodate auto traffic to �he theatre. Haurs of use of the '�heatre s�ould be strictly contralled sa as not to cr�a�e a conf7�ct wi�h day-skier parking. We don`t feel that we can 7ustify a pai^ki,ng variance �or t1�� addition o�' 3,300 squar� fee� of retail space unless �he applicant can demanstrate that parking can be provided on the site. We then feel we could justify removal of parking for aesthetic re�sons to obtain more landscap�r�g. 7here have been no parking variances granted in the Lionshead area except �hose removed �o allow more landscaping. This could cansti�ute a serious precedent and grant af special privilege unless applicant can meet the cri�eria outlined above, The r�tail space was added at the reques� of £ldon B�ck who analyzed the project from stric�ly a design s�andpoint. 2, The degree to which relief from tf�e strict or 7iteral interpretation and enforcement af a sp�cif�ed regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among s�tes �n the vicinity ar to attain t�e objectives of this ordinance withaut grant o� specia� pr�vilege. Str�ct interpretation of the ordir�ance v�au�d not a��ow the proposed '�e wh�ch leaves the area in an unsi ht7y, muddy mess. A n��tber buildin on �he si 9 9 of �arking variances have I�een gran�ed in l.ionshead (Vail Internat�onai , Sunbird; Montaneros, Lodge at Lionshead) to a17ow for r�ore 7andscaping. In every case, the parking ca�ld be provided but ]andscaping was more desirable in mee�ting the �: goals of the Master PTan. The parking for the �heatre is sim�lar to the CroSSroa�s request for joint-use parking and approval of the agreement would be in keep�ng with treatmen� o�' Crossroads Cinenta as they were not required to provide separate parking for �he thea�re. Ap�roval of the parking variance for the retail space, even though it is extremely desirable as a terminus for the r�a71 and from a des�gn standpoin�, would be a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by ather projects in the area unless the app7icant can demonstrate that. on-site parking can be prov�ded and that the pedestrian mall and more landscaping u�ould be des�rable. When we have comp1eted a camprehensive parking study, variances of this na�ure may well be jt�stifiable. We strangly suppart Eldon's recommendation for �he re��il space and landscaping instead of parking but fee� that the par�cing niust be accommodated in order to avoid the "CCI Syndrome" again. 3. The effect o� the reguest�d variance on 1�ght and air, distribution of population, transpor�at�on and traff�c facilities, publ�c facilities and �tilities, and publzc safety. A positive impact cou�d be created pertaining to distribution of popu1ation. The �ionshead area is in crit�cal ne�d of night-time ac�ivity to draw peaple through the ma�� System ar�d create interest in the area. Transportation could be impacted as we fee7 t�e majarity of theatre-goers w-ill use the b�s sys�em; howev�r, use of pu6lic tra�tspor�ation �s lightest during the house of operatian an� �he proposed �se shou1d not require additional public expenditure, Applicant proposes to provide a waiting station for a bus stop within the project. We foresee no adverse �mpact on the other fac�ors as �he bulk of the proposed use 3s primarily underground. - �, Li onshead Theatre ,]anuary 6, 1977 .•� Pd�� Three !� FTNDINGS: ] . Tha� the granting of the variances wi�l not cons��tute a grant of sp�cial privilege incor�sistent with the 3i��tations on other properties c1assified �n the same district. SEE ITEMS 1 AND 2 UND�R CONSID�RATION OF FACTQR5. Grant of th� theatre parking request is consistent wi�h trea�ment o�F other sites and like facili�ies, W� feel approval of �he parking variance would be grant of speciai privi�eqe and shou�d not be appraved unless �he criteria outlined in Item 2 aboue can be met. 2. Tha� the gran�ing of �he variance will not be detrimental �a �he pub�ic heal��> safety, or welfare, or mater�al3y injurious to properties or i�nprovemen�s in �he vicini�y. We feel the pro�ect would have a ver pos��ive impac� on the neighborhood and wou1d nat be detrimental to any other properties in the vicir�ity. 3� 7hat the variar�ce is warranted for one or mare of the �o110wing reasons: a. The strict or iiteral interpretation and enforcement of the spec�fied regulations wauld resu7� �n practical diff�culty � or unnec�ssary physicai hardship inconsis�ent with the ok�jectives of this ordinance. Se� description of the requested variance -- prac�ical diffic�lty is created by the small lo� size and location of the exis�ing buildings. We do no� feel , how�ver, tha� there is a hardship involved related to the parking for the proposed retail space. b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances ar cond�tions appl�cab�e to the site of �he variance that do not apply generally to other propert7es in �he same zone. There are no other sites in the CC2 area of this size and dimension. The proposed project so7ved a �ong-s�anding problem af a ver�r unsightly gravel parking lot which probably cannot otherwise be resolved without c.ostly litigation. �'he propasal also �rav�des a so�ution to the "end of �he Mall" q��ra���'Y �nd qives much needed life to Lionshead. The Department of Cammunity Developm�nt recommends appraval of the requested joint-use agreement �or parking far the �heatre. We reco�mend denial of the parking variance for the retail space unless the crite�^ia can be met, and propose �hat �he app7icant �nvestigate the passibi7ity a� sharing space with another �" praject which exceeds the parking requiremer�t. . E. � w/ rt �` ~�` � Vail Associates,lnc. � January 4 , 1977 Mr . Je�f Selby Gore Range P�'operties P.O. �ox 1528 Vaa�� , CoZorado 81657 Deax J�ff: This Ie�tter is to con�irm our conversations �he a�her clay wherein Vail Assoca.ates indica�.ed that it had no objec�i.on to the us� o� oux no��h day-skiers parka.ng lot by the g�neral public during evening hou.rs. Our understanding is that �ou contemplate develop�ng a thea�tre at the wes� end of the LionsHead mal.1. which would be onen, only during the evening. We would have no objec�.ion �o the use of the north day-skiers park�.nq l.ot by theatre pa�rons c�uring th� hours o� 6 :00 p.m. and 12 :00 midnight. Such k�ours �aould av'oid a con��ict betw�en the parking requa.ze�nen�.s of yaur patrans and those o� our skiers and still pezmit us to properly plow the 1a-� af�ter midnight. �du should be aware, how�ve�-, that should you plan to offer matinee � showings during the winter manths , there would � ik�ly be a direct conf].ict wi�h the lot ' s intenc��d use to prova.de parking fa� our 5kiers and our employees . By agreement urith the U .S. Forest Service , a � minimum numbex of parking spaces must be available for skier use . Accordingly, in recogni�ion of �his ob]�igation, we wil.7. continue to control the daytime use of the 10�. �n acldi�ion, �here may be �imes when the lot may be closed to the public for cnnstruc�.ion, maint�nance , or o�hez sirni.l.ax reasons , and again, we xeserve th� ric�ht �o close it for such purposcs ��t ou� d�scxctian, although we bclieve tha� th�se occasions wil� be infrequent. By way o� clari�ication, this essential.ly represents our position with xespect to the use of any o� our �ublic lo�.s by non-skiex�s . �7ack Barr, our Mountain S�rvices Man.ager , is direct�y responsible fnr the aclmini- stration of �hese pubiic lots and you shauld contac-L- him if you have any further questions . Sincerely, VAI�, ASSOCTAT�S , TNC. James R. Bartle�tt -FXECU�IV2 Vic� P�esiden� � cc : Jack Barr Town Council Snx 7,Vail,Colorado 81657,303/G76-5601 � , r�' T.<<�.�r. . � PLAfJNIIVG COMI�ISSIOf� --� Agenda ; � January �3, i977 , 1 . Vail Associates, reques� to rezone and resubdivide Lot 1 , 81ock 2, Vai7 Po�ato Patch 2. Rober� Lazier req�est to rezone Lot 9, Block 2, Ua�l Pota�o Patch .from HDMF to MDMF 3. Presentation to the Council Members on the parking variance for Lionshead Theater '. � � - �:.. �, _" PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda � 1ur�ch Meet�ng January 13, 1977 TOPICS FOR DTSCUSSTON 1 ) Request for printed cogy (up-dated} of the �on�ng Ordinance 2) Request for Continual up-da�ing re: litigation 3} General consideration of F{3gh Density Zones 4} EvaTuation of Grow�� Impact Ar�alysis rating sca�e 5) Parking -- a) gene�^al philosophy -w what it is/what it should be b) reai situation -- as i� is/goal c) grounds far variances (is �he ordir�ance realis�ic re parking requiremen�) d) CCI Parking Contract Situation � t � � _ a-� � , PLANNING COMMISSIOIV Summary � , January 13, 1977 �. I�EMBERS PRESEiVT: gudley Abbott Dan Corcoran �d Drager Pam Garton Sandy Mil�s Gerry Whit� V,4IE. ASSOCTAT�S, Request to Rezone and Resubdivide Lo� 1 , BTock 2, Vail Potato Patch Roger Tilfcemeier, from Vail Associates, gave the Planning` Commiss�on some background informa�ion pertaining �o the site in question. 1'heir prapase� plar� �s �a down-zone �he property from MDMF to two family residential, and subdivide �he property into four duplex ]ots and one single �amily lot. At�ached is the staff commen� and recommer�dation wfiich was �or approva7 ,pravided that the road right-of-way prab7er�i be resolved. Diana To�gh�ll d7d raise the issue a�: possible "spot-zaning" per�aining to :the one single-family lot �ocated with�n twa�family 7ots. VA's reasons for havir�g the orte SFR 1ot is that they would like to have 4 good sized dupTex iots and l gaod sized SFR lot rather than � 5 nominal sized lots zoned two family, and ��ere. seems .�Q be a na�ural boundary �et4veen ;the SFR la�: and the adjoining dup1ex lot. if forced to have 5 dup7ex la�s, one piece of ��^operty would have a natural drainage line right in the middle o�F his lot, it was suggested by Cammissioner Abbott �hat some other form of access be i�vestigated o�her than the use of Sandstone Road w�iich is already tao congested ,ar�d becoming a problem. The staff fe1t that th�s was an �tem �hat might be brought up as a separate item on another Planning Commission agenda when the peopl� directly deaiing with this probTem cauld be present. As �here was no further discussion, Gerry Whi�e made a mo�tion �for approval of the rezoning and resubdivisior� of l.ot i , Black 2, Va37 Potato Patch proV�de� tha� Larry Rider review the question of 1 SFR lot v�ithin duplex zoning as "spot-zoning" and �he appropriate action taket�> Dud�ey Rbbott secon�ed the motior�. A 5-4 .vo-�e was recorded in favor of the mo�ion with Dan Corcoran abstaining. PROPOS�D REZONING OF LOT 9, B1..00K 2, VRTL POTATQ PATCH FROM HDMF T� MDMF The appl �car�t, Robert Lazier, requests dawn zoning the above-mentioned property from HDMF to MDMF. F��s pre� iminary plans for the site inc7ude a 90 uni� project with a GRFA af approximately 75,000 square feet. Ron Todd, t.he architect, gave a presentat-ion of their preliminary master plan as well as sir�iiar p�ans locate� on lower dens�ty zone districts. (This was done as a staff request for the Planning Commissions information). Attached on the staff inemorandum is a char� which compares the �roposal with the allowab7e factors in various zone distric�s. � Diana To�ghiii gave the staff presentatian which sumr�arizes the staff inemorandum. She touched upon the fol7awing �ac�ors in re]ation to the project: , . . PTanning Com�iss�o� -2- January 13, 1977 i ) Visual and aesthetic impact; 2� Popu]ation � 3} �arki�g and traffic f7ow 4} Recreational amenities 5� R�Tationsh�p of the undeveZoped sit�s .in �he surrounding area to this project as we1Z as the relationship of the deve7oped sites. It was noted by �he staff that the genera7 neighborhood is of a residentiai nature and wou7d a project af th�s size f�t in? Commissioner Corcoran feit �hat the area is not pr�mari7y a residentiaT area. There are a few single fam�Ty and duplex lot5 nestled in with mu7ti�famiiy dwel�i�gs, i .e. Sandstone Condos. Brooktree, Almond Apts, etc. Co�missioner White felt very favorabie towards the projec� in general . According to the chart, the app7�cant has severely cu� �iis allowed site coverage, a�ded �ore iandscaping, and has cu� down �he height of his buildings. He felt �hat thas pro3ect was def�nitely in kee�ing with Growth Management was was willi�g to vote on ��e praject, Ed Drager, D�diey Abbott and Sandy Milis felt tha� �hey needed more time to think about �he project and to dec�de which 1ower density zone is t�� most approPriate given the exising canditions and charact�r of �he surrounding neighborhood, A 3,3 vot� was recorded in favor of tabling fina� decisian until next week. LIONSHEAD THEATER -- RARKTCdG VARIANCE � The applica�ts gave the same presentation to the Counci7 members present as to �he P1anning Commission last week. The Plan�ing Commission voted 4-2 in in favor of the �ark3ng varia�ce w��h Dan Corcoran abstaining a� their January 6, 1977 meeting. COUNCIL �EMBERS PRESENT: Rod S�ifer 8i71 Wilto John qobson ,�� , �..i:� .r i� . �. M�MOR��a�M � 70: Planning Commission FRQM: Department of Commun�ty Development DAT�: January 13, 1977 RE: Proposed r�zor�ir�g af Lot 9, Block 2, Vai1/Potato Pa�tch f'rom HDMF ta MDMF The applicant, Rabert T. Lazier, has requested a downzoning from }iDMF to MpMF with a total maximum of 90 one- and two-�edroom units and a gross residentia� f7oor area o#' app�^oximate]y 75,000 square feet. The Planning Commission and the sta�Ff have discussed at great length what the prflper zoning shauld be far �he subject property. We have a11 fe�l� that HDMF � was too high i� density. Sirtce there seems to be no consensus, each zone d�strict through reszdent-ial wili be compared for the si�e. (See a�tached chart). There are several important fac�ors which tnust be considered hefore an in�ellegent decision can be made to de�ermine the pro�er zoning for thls ir�portant site. 1 ) Visual and aesthetie impact -- Eldon Seck`s v�sual analysis of the valley flags th�s si�e as on� with a great deal of visual impor�anee due to its location and v�sibility from almost every angle -- It may be �o our advantage to a13ow the additional un�ts and population in order to gair� the covered parking and in turn less total site coverage. 2} Popu�a�ion -- 7he impact af popu1atian on the valley is critical to the proposed growth r�anagemen� pjan. If we assu�ne that all our efforts wi71 1ead us to a popu7at�an in the range of 30,000, HDMF zoning would al�ow approximately 10% of the remaining population in th�s projec�; MDMF' approximately 6% of �he to�a7 ; th� propased prolect approximately 3.6%; LDM�' a�proximately 2,3%; RC approximately 1 .�% and R less than 1%. 3) Relationshi of the use to �he develo ment object�ves of the Town --_ After contro7l�ng the population, our gaal has beer� to concentrate � density near the ped�strair� areas and mass transportation. l��th �he completion o�' the I-70 overpass, the proposed pro�ec� mee�s bath these criter�a. It also has good auto access from the Nort� Frontage Road. < < .s= Lazier -2- January �3 , i977 4) W� must also consider �he e-Ffect upon �raffic, with par�ic�lar reference �o cangestian, au�omotive and pedestr�an safety and convenience, .�. traf-�ic f7ow and control , access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the s�reets and parking areas. 1"he proposed project couTd generate i20 cars. I�' we assume the norma1 average trips per unit per day of 3.7 per unit, �t cou7d increase traffic on �he Frontag� Road hy 333 cars per day. Th�s may not be a vaiid assumptian given the pedestrian over- pass and the prox�mity to mass trans�t. There is adequate snow storage area on the site. Careful attent�on must be given to er�try and exit frflm the Frontage Road. Since the entrance to the Frontage Road is on a fairly streep hill , we would strongiy recommend tha� there be on1y one entry and exit paint rat�er than �he faur ramp sys�em as proposed. 5) Ano�her consideration is �he e�'fect of the proposed pro,ject an 7ight and a�r, dis�ribution of popula�ion, �ransportation fac�3i�ies, util7ties, schools, parks and recreation �aci7ities and other publie facilities and publ�c �Facilities needs. The proposed project could make i� necessary to add an add�tiona7 bus or larger bus to �he � Sandstone route, There should �e little -�mpact on light and air as buildings are �ower than �ast surrounding structures. The requested down-zon�ng has a positive impac� on d�s�ribut�on ofr population as it is significantly iower than �s now permitted. There cou'[d be some 3mpact or� schools if some units ar� long-term, and some impact on water and sewer usage, as weT] as other utilities. Use of solar energy on this south exposure should be carefully considered. Adequate recr�ationa7 fac�lities sl�ould be encouraged on the si�e � �o provide �or the project so as not to create an adverse impact on public recreation fac-ilities. The proposed projec� is direct7y adjacertt to the Sandstone Tot �ot, b) Effect upon the character ofr the area in which the proposed use is to be located mus� be considered, inc7uding the scaZe and bulk of the proposed structures in relation ta surrounding uses. The character of t�e Potato Patch/Sandstone area ha5 c�anged significan�ly since Lot 9 was ariginally zaned HDMF; 9th �iling was down-zoned from MDMF' to R as have twQ ather Potato Pa�ch si�es. �he entire Potato Aatch area was down�zoned approxima�e1y 35% by Vai1 Associa�es at the �ime it was subdiv�ded in 197G, The c�aracter is residential , primarily made up of 3ong-t�rm residents--short-term housing may be in conflict with the �stablished character. 7) We must be extremely carefu1 in eva7uating the impact o�F th� prajec�, both visual1y and physica77y, on the adjoining neighborhood. Speciai care must be �aken that views are not blacked and that any surface park�ng is scre�ned with landscaping to protect views from 9th Filing and upper residential �ots in Po�ato Patc�. S} Another considera�ion is the re1a�ionship of �he proposed project to o�her existing ar potentlal uses and s�ruc�ures i� the vicinity. One o�' the most importan� factors we must realize �s what can be btt-i�t given the exis�ing zoning which would take an absolute minimum . af 45 days to change. There are two remaining MDMF si�es and one HDMF s��e in the vicini�y. ' � 3 - January T3, 7977 , ,.{•. Lazier . , , � hi5 is one of �he most important decisions We, as a s�aff, fee� tha� t ever faced by the P7anning Comm�ssion and feel that any decision reached should be based on the positive and negative 'Factors enumerated, and nat on a staff recommendation. We do, howev�r, fee1 t1�at down-zaning 7s very much ir� order, but it must be decided whicf� lower dens��y zane is most appropriate given the ex�st�ng condi�ions and character of the surraunding neighborhood. • � � r �� � flJ � 41 U! , � .�.�..w � � S- 0 o r ' ,. rS M M d' O r.f> O U.� �O " N 1� CO N O N Q � Q Q" � �cV a O � \ O � • � � � � n � - .,'�'.� �C? � � �� CV � r � �r N �'"� M S. � o� o\° - U 00 � M 61 6� 00 Ln O Lf1 O i ES� tn a.' I� N (� d' N lt� N O N t0 N •r G] C"� L� r r-- r+� "� ''"" 61 N � � N 4- � � � r-� M � � r-� � N N � � N � S. •r •� U o° o° �LA N� p � ,1-> L.t. N � � � � M <�i l0 d' 1 M '� i. OQ S. •� � � N O N r r N V'� N Q � , S J d- �" r- d- M O N QJ N�r- V N � � S„ � � � � � � � O N a' cn � � � i a G- N °r s�. `+- `►" s v ; �n a�i ¢ � b ' ° n ' ,�°-+ a�'i i �ci �� C3' r d- �' 1 M Q 0. I..L CV (n Lx7 � VS o �_ � � p � \ O I 4- O 6; M � t u� �.s� u� O O �Lts U rn i � O ��.. i--� .c. CY � � d" � l0 M � �''� � t� I �7 d � � � � O 1 � N�i' } d' O d- .,\N l� 1 rd D1 r ^ f� M N N � l 7� tL � . 1 r� 7 � ]G 1 � � U 1 � � Q � � , � � *� � � °a .� � N 4- +� {� �"� I .i-� � r�G 4- +E- Ol O �1-� � � Qf �7 4J 41 � •�'r" � N •r U Vi C5' � (11 N S. l!1 S� 1 � f[5 O "� � � N N � U •� O qJ 1 � . � � •r X � L1 9 1 �.. � � � t/� � d� M M Q O CO LCS ln o S, Q7 p'O O 1 OJ � -N 0.� O . 1� M al � N C�f M � O N S. U k� � � QJ ' N CO � r . r-- l0 �1-� O S.. Q.� N i -F3 �r Q O� �' � � cn +` O00 O � 1 � � E S.. 0 M i-� CV N LfT ! � O Qy Z d � �" n Q N � �� 1 V) � �1-�� N 1 I � 1 �l � � � 1 i. S- � � 1 rCF � O a 1 � � 1 t/7 VI C7 ! �F-� � C31 •e-� •r^ S. � � � 'C3 I � C [C F- � 4" N CU � � � �� � � � � � O vl 4- vI 4- 'Sr. � ��� 1- l�l �1 �4 M �O • Q d •r �r C rN-y t7t f..�. V ICT N d' �' '�'� V � � � p � � sL� I UI LS7 CV US ` ` N_ � 4- � X 'r' � l.f) t.C) L[7 O l.f) lf7 LC7 CO 1 [ � i1J .[� � N �M 1 I � LS7 i� N M C!' f� l0 •r•r � Z V1 O� �N �.t� M u7 N � ^ �I-� � f1 •r � r r � Q � d' � O r-N- � �cv � � �'i7 r- N � � � � � r" r' , 4J Ci1� t� � �N +-� � 4-- .� O 4- �i�- O �„� -r O O � � .{s \ ,..j� � r L51 4J rtS \o e O Q1 �C � •r i-� r- O O O N J � �r �. oZS G � E� M r QJ G1 � � �-- O�'i ra +-t -}-' �T F O � � r ttl U Cn..0 C �I 0.. •• � •r f/1 � 'r S^ N t/) 7 3 � Q "a � •r �G•r-- � � � U � � � � � . � � fG .� � 00 �l � 0. N � Q s � � � � � � � .� � � �� � � `� � � "' � � .�, � � � .�- v� . i Q,1 � •r Q .r- r- � O � N UI Q � tlJ X Lr.. X•T •r � r O" � 1n r � r� � � � � tlJ r OJ O O � , (n Q � C�3 � fY] 00 �� Q � U d -K � 'k � �� r . '�.. - tV� RTE� TOQD �ARTIV�RSI-��P A[A 1'W� U / � � . . AROROSED DEU�LOFMENT LOT 9, BLOCK 2, VAIL/POTATp PATCH PR�L.I�IINARY CALCIlLATIONS ,�anuary 12, 1977 PR�L,INiINARY SITE DATA 3'otal Site Area 214,273 S.F. Total Caverage by Build�ngs 6�,400 S.F. :{28%) Resider�tial 26,400 S.F. - (6 @ 44Q0 S.F.) Parlcing S�ruc�ures 24,000 S.�'. -- (2 @ 12,Oa0 S.�'. } Club House 7.,OOQ S.F. l.andscaping an� Open Space 140,000 S.F. �- PRELIMTNARY Bl7I�.DTNG AND UNIT DATR � Tota1 Units - 90 42 one bedrooms @ 680 S.F. = 28,560 G.R.F.A. 12 two bedrooms @ 97a S.F. = 1� ,640 �.R.F.A. 36 two bedroams @ 965 5.�. = 34,740 �.R.�'.A. Total Gross R�sidential F3oor Area 74,940 S.F. {� Total Buildings w�th approximate3y 12,�9.� G.R.F.A./Building. ) PARKIN6 DATA Ta�a1 Par�Ci ng 128 Spaces fi4 covereci fi4 uncovered � CR�SSROADS AT VAfL BOX 11$6 VA�L, COLQRADO 81657 476-5105 , � S � � �. A MEMORANDUM � �p: Planning Commission FROM: Departmen� of Communi�y Development DATE: January 13, 7977 RE: Uail Associates' Request to Rezone and Resubdiv�de Lot 1 , Slock 2, Vai1 Potato Patch �Q� 1 , g1o�k 2, yati� potato Patch conta�ns 8b,454 s�uare feet (6,541 acres) a�d 75 presently zoned Medium De�sity Mu�tiple-Family which wou1d allow 30 dweZlin9 units to be cons�ruc�ed on the site. T�e request for resu�division and rezoning is for five {5) . lots zoned two family res�dentia3 which wou7d allow a maximum of 30 dwell�ng un��s, or a reduction in density of 20 dwelling un�t. The resubdivision and rezon3ng of this site mee�s the specificatians � af the subd�vision and zoning regulations except for �he fo]1owing: � } We have alZowed the right-of-way width of Uiew Drive and Simba Drive to be reduced to 30 feet. It shou�d be �4 feet, but this has been reduced so �hat the raad conforms better to the to�ography af the site. 2} Parts of the road right-of-way lie outside the boundary of the praperty and are awned by the Sun Company an� Joe Staufer. These easements must be acquired and of�ic�al7y dedica�ed �o the Town . The Departmen� of Cammunity Development recomm�nds approval of this rezon�ng a�d resubdivrtsion request. The density reduction �s i� line wit� the presen� ef�art ta reduce densities in the Valley. 7h�s area o� Pota�o Patch is re7atively fla� and can absorb the type of development proposed for the si�e. �� .,.��--r: r . , y 4 w ' MEMOl�ANDUM � TQ: Town Council �ROM: Planning Commiss�on DATE: January 25, 1977 R�.t Rezoning of L.ot 9, Block 2, Vail Pota�o Patch from HDMF to MDMF On �anuary 20, 1977 the �lanning Gommiss�on vated 5--1 in favo�^ of recommending this proPosa1 in accordance with the staff inemorandum and d�ve1opment chart. In general the Planning Commission felt that �h�s request was 1n . keeping with the �up-caming "�raw�h Management" program and �he schematic design of �he proj�ct �Fit we11 wi�hin �he surrounding neighborhood,i .e. Sandstone 70, Srooktree, Almond Apar�ments, e�c,.which 15 a predominate1y mu1t�-fami�y neighborhood with a few residences nestled in. ( 5ee staff inemo �For complete description) � Alternate residential zone dis�ricts were investigated closely in relation �o this project (see chart located in the staff inemo) , and the Planning Comm�ssion felt �hat the applicant had severely cut his a�lowed s�te coverage> added t�ore landscaping, and cut down th� height of his buildings under the al�owable o� MDMF. Ed D�ager made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning wi�h a 90 unit maximum developmen� to be placed on the apProval . Gerry White seconded the mot�on. A 5-� vote was recorded in favor of the propasal . (Sandy Mi�ls was agains� �ecause of �he ad�ed density ar�d �he location of the proposed praject) . � �. ` ' PLANPd�NG CQMMISSION r Agenda , �7anuary 20, 1977 � 1 . RESUBDIVISION OF L07 14, BLOCK 4, BIGHORN SIJBDIVISION THIRD ADDTT�OfV (BORWICK) 2. TH� MARK �- �'IfVAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 3. R�ZONING OF LOT 9, BLOCK 1 , UAIL P07'ATO PATCFi FROM MDM� TO MDi�� (LAZIER} �� �� . ,� PLAiV�[ING COMMISSION i Summary January 20, 1977 M�MBERS PRESEfVT: D�tdiey Abbott Dan Corcoran Ed Drager Fam Garton Sandy Mil�s Gerry White UP�DATE ON COUNCIL ACTIONS �3im Lamont gave a brief up�date of the Council 's actions related to Planning Commission ma�t�rs. ��SUBDIVISIO�! OF LOT lA�, BLOCK 4, BIGNORN SUBDIVISI01� THIRD ADDITION Borwick Diana Toug��ll and t�re applicants, Leroy Tabler and Tim Gartan, gave a brief �{� summary of the proposa7 (reference January 6, 1977 P.C. m�et3ng}. Most of �he probTems men�ioned at the �ast meeting had been taken care of. One of t1�e major qu�stions to be resolved before final p7at appraval is who wi7i be respons7ble to pay for the CATV service? Tim Gar�on is to work that out with Frank Thompson of the Vail CATU. Road ded�cations and pedestrian easemen�s are alsa to be taken care of before final p7at appraval . It was decided by the Planning Comr��ssion (Mills and Drager aga�nst) that the $% land dedicatian was not necessary �n �his case -�- the land tha� wauld be dedicated would be o� no reaT value or benefi� because of the lacatian �o the TOV. 71�e applicant agreed to write covenents and ailow agricultura� zoning to be placed on �hat parce� so that open space would remain. �udley Abbott made a motian to approve �he preliminary resubdivision pTan withaut the land dedication; Gerry Whit� seconded the motion. A 4-2 vote was recorded in favor of the motion (Mills & Drager apposed) . THE MARK --� FIf�AL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT R�PORT John Ryan gave a brief descriptian of �he changes in the Mark's EIR re�ort. �he a�dit�ona� factors �o be considered cons�sted of: i ) Ecanomic Impact 2) Bus Sys�em 3) ne�v sectior� dea7ing wi�h Mitigating Strategies The Plar�n�ng Comm�ssion de�erred fina] action an the report untii next week when they wi31 have had time �o comp�e�e�y rev3ew it. �i � a:�A- �: , : Plann�ng Commission -2- January 24, 1977 y . � ���O�VIf�G OF L4T 9, BLOCK 7 VA�L PpTATO PATCH �ROM HQMF TO MDMF LAZIER As requested by the �lannin� Commission, a� their January 73, 1977 meetir�g, �he appl �can�t, Rob�rt Lazier, returned �o the Plannir�g Commission for a f3na7 vote on his request (reference January ]3, ]977 meeting� . After considerabie d�scussion, Ed prager made a mot�on to approve �he rezoning wi�h a 90 un�� maximum development to be pTaced on t�e property; Gerry White secor�ded the motion. A 5-i vote was recorded in favor af �he �otion (Niills aga�ns�) . As �here was no 'Further business to d�scuss, the meeting was adjaur.ned. , � . ►� , � ` PLAI��VING COMT�IiSSTON ��` Agenda , January 27, 1977 1 , The Mark Environmenta7 Impact S�a�ement -- Final approval 2, Manor Vail -- Request �For setback var�ance on B�i7ding B 3. Resubdivision af La� 1 , Black 2> Vail/Patato Patch 2nd F�ling �inai plat apprava� 4. D�scussion of Timberfal1s zoning -- Ron Riley �- ;�.. , , PLANNTNG COMMTSSION � Summary January 27, 1977 MEMBERS PRESENT; Dudley Abbott Dan Corcoran B�11 Hanlon Ed Drager Sandy Mills Gerry White THE MARK �NVIRONMEN7AL IN{PACT STATEMENT ,- FINAL APPROVAL Th� appl �cant, Kaiser Morcus, had no additionai commen�s to r�ake,so Diana 7augFt�11 autlined the staff inemorandum.to �he A7anning Cammission. Areas that should be noted or iden�ifie� some prob7�m areas were as fol7ows: 1 ) Occupancy data �- s�aff fe3it that �he figures were understated approximately 1i�-12% during the peak t�mes. 2} OverfTow guests --- where wi17 they stay? 3) Employment -, more jobs created but poss�ble 7ack of emp7oyee housing for peop�e employed not at the Mark 4) Recrea�ional A�nenities 5} Energy Consumption --� alternate energy sources should be it�vest3ga�ed and possibly �ncorpora�ed into the design process 6) Sewer Capacity -�-� it was noted that the project wil� E�e completed summer of 1975 ra�h�r than wir�ter of 797� (phase I of the project) -- this should have a benefi��a� effect upon the sewer capaci�y 7) surface runoff 8) fireplac�s -- the �otal project is limited to two f�replaces 9) pedestrian access from the projec� to Lionshead 10) parking 11 } increased bus usag� The Planning Commission fel� tha� the repar� eovered all of the areas that needed � to be discussed and was very cor�plete. The mitigating r�easures must be followed throughou� the p�^ojec� as was out1ined in the Report, �udley Abbo�t made a motion to recomm�nd approval o�f �he report provided that the mitiga�ing m�asures must be fo�1owed �hroughout the project; Gerry White seconded the mot�on, A unanimous vote was recorded in favor of recommending approval of the report. ,; � - . � . , P�anning Commission -2- January 27, 1977 ;� � � MANOR UAIL �- SE7'BACK VARIA{�CE FOR BUILDING S , � ` Dick E1Tas gave a presentation af t�e des7gn af 8uilding B and explai�ed why the proposed variance o�F approx�mately 8 fee� is req�ested. Diana Toughill went through the s�af� memo (attached) and recammende�d approva1 of the req�test, Gerry White made a motion �o approve t�e request; Dudiey Abbott seconded the motion. A unanimous vote was recorded in favor af the request, RESUBDIVISION OF LOT L, BLOCK 2, VAIE./POTA�'0 PATCH 2nd FILI�lG It was noted that t�is plat and resubdivision request has been changed to incorporate 6 dup1ex lots rather than 4 single�family and 1 duplex lot as was originally proposed.* Jim Lamont requested tl�at the applicant obtain a let�er from CA7V stating who is going �o prov�de the service, who vriTl pay for it, when it wil] be put �nto effect before the fina� piat �s brought before the Counci� for action. � * This change was made due to 7ega� imp7icatians of possible "spot-zoning". Ed Drager made a motion to recommend approval. of the requested resubdivision provided that the applicant subm-it a 1etter of committment to revegetate th� � cut areas far the road and to do proper bank recontouring; Gerry White seconded the motion, A 5-0 vote was recorded in favor of the r�otion, �an Corcoran abstained from the vote. DISCUSSIpN OF TIMBERFALLS ZOiVIf�� Ron Riley, representing Timberfails, wou1d li[ce to volunteerily dawn-zone his property provided tha� he get a guarantee -�rom the planning cvmmission or council tha� h9s project would not bet down zon�d agair� when the Growth Manage�rent pragram is put inta effect. I� was note� by the staff & Planning Commiss�on t1�at this kind of comm3ttment can't be made, The ar�as that will prabab7y be down zoned wi�hou� dens�ty transfer wi71 be hazard zoning: mass wasting, avalanche, f7ood pla-�n, rock fail It was sugges�ed that the applicar�t create a special deveiopment dis�rict ; incorporating his existing zoning, �his wouTd aiTow h�s a "cushion"' aga�nst down-zoning, � �- � � � • � M��oRANou� � T0: Plannir�g Commissian FROM: Depar�ment of Community �evelopm�n� DATE: January 2'7, 1977 R�: 7'he Mark Environmental Irr�pact Repart The Department of Commun�ty Development has rev-�ewed �he revised impact statement for the proposed Mark project and have the fo1lowing statements: 1 ) Given occupancy data produced as a part of the Growth Manag�ment Study, �he potent�al peak pop�lation impact could be und�rstated (page 9. ) 2) The estimated overflow guests raises an interesting question -- are there er�ough vacant rooms in the Lionshead area to accommoda�e � the overfiovr? lls�ng the occupancy characteris�ics out7ined on page 9, a to�al of 438 condom�nium units or 875 accommodation units wouid be necessary to �ouse �he guests tha� couid not stay at the Mar�C. �'he gr.eates� overflow is projected in Ju�y. Using current units s�arveyed �n Lionshead (acco�moda�ion for approximately 2,675 people} and occupancy figures far those uni�s (51% �n July) and assumir�g their occupancy wi17 increase at the same rate projected for the Mark, ad�quate accommadations da not presently exist. Approximate7y 200 addi�ional accommadation units or ]00 condominium units would be necessary. With the proposed comp7ex on the Va�l 8 site, there shau�d be enaugh units in Lionshead (page 22}. � 3) Projected employment of 272 persons at fuii capacity creates an add�tional 129 jobs whlch in turn creates the need for additianal empToyee housing units, If we assume that 80% of t}�e emp�oyees reside �r� the Gore Valiey and that each employee unit houses an average of 3 persons, an additional 34 emp�oyee � dwe�ling units (impact r�port estimated 40) would be required, Ka-iser contra7s Fall Line apartments which he uti1ized for employee hous�ng. There are 54 apartments , Mark Environmental Impact Report -2- January ZI , ���� � in the comp1ex or possibly fewer than the add�tional demand created by the project �i,�` (page 24 & 31 ) . The additional residents ge�erated in Eag1e County compounds this. We must also consider �he non-Mark emp7oyees t�at will be d�splaced by �ark employees. 4) I� an analysis of projected revenue to the �own of Vail , one important category has been over loo�ed -- the Recreational Amentities Tax of approximate�y $81 ,OOQ.00 of which approxima�ely $25,000 w�11 be retained by �he Town a�ter appropriate credit for on-site amenities �as been gran�ed. Another major income category is tap fees to �h� Water & Sani�at3on District of in excess of $60,000. No at�empt was made �o estimate increased li���� ine waiting time crea�ed by the Mark (p�fl b�b�Y �� ��possible task as the use charac�er�stics of Lionshead will probab1y change with this h�ing the on�y Gondola) . Sut, if we assume an average lift wai� of 15 minutes, a �9% �ncrease would be no more than a 3 minute • increase which daes not seem significant (page 37). 5) The negative impact of fireplaces has been lessened by l �miting fireplaces �0 2 in publ3c areas (page 40). 6} Energy consu�ption has been addressed, but the repart does not sta�e whether the additional naturaT gas and electricity is avialable to meet the demand. We would agai� strong1y recomme�d that alternative energy sources and conservation techniques be thnroughly investigated �page �1 ). 7) Sewer capacity seems �o be a possible proble� during the 1978 season, but wi17 be reso�ved prior to �he 1979 season. In the meantime, the Town will be p�acing the burden on the Up�er Eag�e Va�ley Sanita�ion System, which they will be equipp�d to handle (page 43). 8) Surface runoff should be provided for as out�ined in the repor� or by an alternate method, This shouZd be a reqUire�ent for approval � of th� E.I.R. (page 44). ` Mark Environmental Impac� Report -3- January 27, 1977 . • , � , . 9) Pedestrian access through Lianshead �o the gondo7a area � must be tharoughly st�died by the Town and Vai1 Associa�es. The Mark pTan must pravide access through the project from the West Parking Lot (page 45) . 10} The F'ores� Serviee is providing a general policy s�atement regarding day-skier parking lot use. There appears �a be no problem in �tilizing the west iot for� overflow parking in the summer months {page 46). If curren� winter parking trends cant�nue, convent�ons during this time shou�d have adequate on-site parking, 11 ) The estimated increase in bus useage generat�d by the project tends to indica�e the necessity of purchasing at least vne additional bus to serve the project, The estimated additional revenue generated annual�y is sufficien� to purchase severa7 new buses each year �page 49 - 52). We strongly recommend that �he Plar�ning Commission review the proposed mitigatior� measures in detail and make recommendations to the Council �o incorporate � the.necessary measures as a part of tt�e �inal approva7 , Our staff specifically recommends adopt�on of a11 the mitigation strategies that app�y to design and iandscaping (page 54) and pedestr�an circulation (page 55) . A spec�fic require�ent for on-si�e emp7oyee parking should be required during winter months (page 57). A7ternatives outl�ned for large groups during winter season should be carefully considered. The Department of Community Development recor�mends approval of the f�nal draft of the Mark Impact S�atement. A1] areas of concern liave been adequately addressed, � f • ` � a . , ' NEEMORANQUM �� T0: Planning Commission FROM: qepartment of Community Deve�opment DAT�: January 27, i977 R�: Manor Vai� Setback Variance Request The applican� �as requested a se��ack variance on the east side of B�ilding B of the Manor Vai� Lodge in order to construc� a single s�ory circulation hal�way addition. The required setback i� 12 feet �0°� inches; the applica�ior� proposed a setback of 2 fee� 6 ir�ches at the eastern corner of the proposed addition. Th� area in violation is a triangle wi�h a base of �1 feet and a h�ight of 24 �Feet. This triangie is shown in red on the enclosed site plan. The reason stated by the applicant for the variance is to improve the . appearance of the finished �roduct by �erm�tted a regu1ar instead of an irregular shape and allow �For improved circulation within the bu�lding. The Depart�nent of Cornmuni�y Development has review�d the criteria and findings provided for in Section 19.600 of t�e Zoning Ordinance and our conciusions are as follows: � ) The relationship of the requested varia�ce to other existing or po�e��ia� uses and s'�ructiari�s in the vicinity. The sma7ler triang1e on the rear side of the building daes not interfere w�th exis�ing or �vtential uses in the vic�nity. Directly behind the rear of the buildir�g is a greenbelt ar�a which extends down to Gore Creek. The location of the variance is more than 100 feet from the Creek. 7he require� s�tbac�C from the center o� Gore Creek is 50 fee�, 2) The degree to whicl� relief from the stric� or literal � interpretation and enforcement o� a specified regulation is necessary �o achieve compatibility and uniformity af treatment ar�ong sit�s in the vi:cinity or ta at�ain the objectives of this ordinance w3�hout grant of special priv�lege. . • Manor Vaii Se�back Variance -2- January 27, 1977 . , � � . . � + J �e�ief from s�rict or l�teral interpretation is beir�g sought � sa �Cha� t�e bui�ding is mare in con�ormar�ce wi�h bulk regulatians and so that th� proposed addi�ion fits in with the shape of the existing struc�ure. The Northwoods project is comparable to the r�quested setback as a part of �he SDD approva7 . 3} �he effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribu�ion a� population, transportation and traffic facili�ies, pubTic �acilities and utilities, and publ�c saf ety. Y�e see no adverse impacts upon these factors 4} Such other factors and criteria as the Cammission deems applicable ta the proposed variance. No additional factors seem �o be pertinent. 7he Department of Community Deve7opment fir�ds t}�at: 1 ) 7he grantir�g of the variance wi11 not cons�itute a grant of specia� privilege ir�consisten� with the limi�at�ons on other praperties classified �n the same district, � See section 2 of the cri�eria and findings. 2) That the granting o�' the variance will not be detrimental to the pu6lic health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious �o propert�es or improvements in the vicinity. No other str�ctures or propert�es are located adjacent ta the pro�osed setback reques�. 3} That the variance is warranted for t}�e fol1owing reason: There are exceptional or ex�raordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the var�ance that do not apply g�nera�ly to other prop�r�ies in the same zone, The area being considered in �he variance request wi11 be a�tached to a bui�ding which pres�ntly has a r�on-conformir�g setback distance. The variance request is warranted due to �he pas� his�ory of �h� building, and due to the fact �hat �t wi17 imprave the use and appearance of �he present site. � The De artment of Corr�munity Deve1opmen� recommends approval of' this variance P as requested. r. � � PLANN�NG COMMISSION � Ag�.nda Febacuary 10, �977 � �., SETBACK VARIANCE, �3.C. GRIFFIN RESIDENCE Lat 11. , Block 2, Go�ce Careek Subdivision 2, Discussion o� Emp�.oyee �iousing 3. Discussion a� Hazard �on�.ng Ordinance � , A P�ANNING. COMMISSxON � Surnmary February 10, 19'77 MEMBERS PRESENT ; Dudl�y Abbott Dan Corcoran Ed Drager Pam Garton Bi7.I Hanlon Sandy Mills Gerry White DISCUSSION OF INTERPRETAT�4N OF SECTION 3. 545 OF TI�E ZONING ORD�NANCE Merv Lapa�n and Dzana Toughill , �oning Adm�nistrator , brough� a disagreement as to �he interpretation o� Section 3, 505 0� �he Zonang Ordinance to the Planning Commission fox �inal dec�.sion, The interpretation of Section 3, �05, Dens�ty D�fin�.tion �or 2-�Family R�sident�al�, is a�sa rclated to Section 1 .600, The Planni.ng Comrnission decided unanimously in favor of� �he Zoning Adm�.ni.stra�or' s int�rpretation. � J.C, GRI�'FTN SETBACK VARIANCE, LOT 11 BLOCK 2 , GORE CREEK SUBDIVISION A�tached is the staff inemorandum �elating to this application. BiJ.I. Hanlon made a mo�ion to recommend approval a� the setback varia�ce as outla.ned in the staf� �nemorandum; Ed Dr�.ger seconded tYie motion . A unanimous vote was recorded �n �avor of the motion, HAZARD ZONING 4RDINANCE AND DISCUBSION OF EMPL4YEE HOUSING These two items were postpaned unt�.l February 17, �.977. , MEMORRN��M • T�: PLRNNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPRRTMENT OF COMMUNiTY DEVELOPM�NT . DRT�: F�BRUARY 10, 1977 RE; R�QUEST FOR S�TBACK VRRIANCE � J . C, GRIFFIN L0� II , BLOCK 2, Gore Creek S�bd3vision The applicant has requested a se�back of 15 feet from the front property line in lieu of �he required 20 fiee� in order �o construc� a single family �esidence, The variance is requested in order �o conform �o the �equired 50 foo� setback requiremen� fror�� GQre Creek and due to the topography of the la�. The Departmen� ofi Community Development has reviewed the crit�ria and findings provided fior in Secfiion 19.600 of the Zoning Ordinance and our conclu- sions are as follows: The relationship of �he reques�ed variance to other existing � or poten#ial uses and strucfiures in �he vicinity. The plans for �he propased struc�ure would have no. adverse impac� on o�her existing or proposed structures in �he area� �here are several o�her lots in the Gore Creek 5�bdivision wh�ch will �equire similar variances in order to p [ace house5 su���cienfily away from Gore Creek, The degree ta which reliefi from the strict or kifi�ral interpr�fiation and enforcement of a specified regula�io� is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity ofi treatmen� among si�es in the vicinity or �o attain t�e abjec�ive5 of this ordinanc� wit�aut gran� of special privileg�, One o# th� objectives of �he Zoning Ordinance is �o protect �he en�ironment and to discourage excessive cu�s or fills. The propase� location of fhe residence is in keeping wit� this objective. Existing houses in the • area which were bui {t pri�r fo zoning are as clos� �o or clos�r �o the front p.roperty lines due �o the same lof con#iguration problems. ��e have not had � any residences constructed along Gore Creek sinc� the insfii�ution of the creek se�back requiremen�. . ' , G;°iffin w February 10, 1977 The effect of the requested variance on ligh� and air, disti�ubtion of populafion, transportat�on and traf#ic facilii'ies, publlC faclli�fes � and uti I �-�ies, and publ ic safie-�y, We do not fioresee any adverse e�fec�s upon �hese #acfors. The propased res3dence is quite small ( �ess ti�an 1 ,000 sq. ft. of site coverage) and a fow � prof i l e. Such o�'her fiac�tors and cr i#er i a as the Comm i ss i ar� deams app I i cab l� t'o the proposed variance, No add i fi i ona 1 faci�ors seems 1�o be per�'i nent. The Deparfinent of Communi-�y �evelopmen�F finds 1'hat: Tha# the granting of the varianc� will not consi�itue a grani' of special privi {ege inconslsten�' wi1-h �he I imi-hations on other proper-hies c k ass i f i ed i n ti�e same d i s�'r i ct, We -Fee1 it is mare impnr�'ant to preserve the Gore Greek stream bank a nd avo i d excess i ve cui's or fi i I l s tF�a n r-ec�u i r�e p rec i se l y 20 f eet o# f ront se�back. The lot topography and location o� stream bnaks dlc�'ates proposed placement of � �'he residence on the site. Considering the very smali size o-F tha propased res i dence, i�' wou I d be nea r I y i mposs i b l e to con5truc�F ar�y�h i ng on the s i�'e without some variance, ei-hher '�rom the front or from `Fh� stream. We do not fee I -hhat �'he gran�t of �'he var i ance wou I d be a grant of spec i a l pr i v i l ege. The Departmen�h of Community Development recommends approval of the requested setback variance, � � F �� PLANNING COMMISSf4N - Rge�da � ��� February !7r 1977 ; � � 1 , Cartwright/M�ieller Subdivision Preliminary Review 2. Selby/Tofel setback variance and/or parking variance- ;� �(.�/�� „��s/��-f�.�� ����'r�,-��' , r �; ;: � ' � ti. PLANNING COMMISSiON � Agenda February 24 , 1977 � l . Selby/To�el -- request for setbaek variance or request for parking vaxiance and setback variance -- Lionshead 4th filing 2. Si.te 9 -- decrease �rom 90 units to 60 units as requested by the developer 3 . Car�wrigY�t/Mue�.ler proposed resubdivision of Lot $, Vail Va.11age J.Oth Fi�ing 4. Pulis property pre�zminary hearing on the possibilty o� a PUD for a porti.on of the Sunburst property and the 14 acres north o� I-70 acxoss from the Go�.� Cour�e � � i �l ,� PLANNYNG COMM�SSION � �UMMARY February 24, 1977 MEMBERS PRES�NT; Ed Drager Dan Carcoran Pam Garton San�y Mxlls Gerry Wh�te SELBY TOFEL �- PARK�NG VAR�ANCE The applicants proposed two options �o. the P�anning Commission. Option A required a setback va�iance on �he nor�h side of the proper�y and a 17 parking space variance. Option B, which would give more landscaping, requixed a 16 parking space vaxianc�. �ef� Selb� gave a brief history of events su�rounding the various variance appXications and the Counc�l reaction . � Ed Drag�r made a motion to grant a 9 feet setback variance; Dan Coxcoran seconded the motion. A unanimous vote was recoxded in favor of �he motion. Ed Drager then made a motion �o recominen d approval of the 16 parking space variance �or the 4,864 square fEe� af cammexcial space with the s�rpulation that $3, 500 p�r space be pu� into a es:crow account 99 similar to the CCI agreement. Pam Garton seconde� the mo�oin. The motion failed on a .2-3 vote . At this t�me Pam Garton suggested a zoning amendment so that the I6 spaces cauld be us�d from th� �andm�rk Pa�king Lot (which is awned by Se1by) on a leas�ng bas�s . �d Drager �ade a motion to approv� that suggestion; Gerry Wh�te s�conded the motian. A 5-0 vote was recorded in �avar of the motio�. Up�ion B was ap�roved. SITE 9 -- D�CREAS� FROM 90 UNITS TO 60 UNTTS AS REQUEST�D BY DEVELOPER T�e developer, Bob Lazier, voluntarily wants �o down-zane the property from 90 uni�s to &0 maximum. This would be a reduction fxam 6 bui�dings on the pr�perty to 4. There would also be a di�ference in 30 sur�ace paxking spaces. It was noted that the majar�ty o� the project would be 2 and 3 bedraam uni�s. Gerry Wh�te made a motion to recommend approval of this request . Dan Corcoran seconded the rnotion. A unanimous vo�e was recorded � i . , _ , . : _. . _ .: ._ . _ _, - , , �. - . � CARTWRIGHT MUELLER --- r�subdivision of their l.o� in the lOth �ilin �� The applicants would �ik� to sui�divide theix lot into 2 single family residenta.al dwelling units, with condztionai uses as s�ipulated in the Zoning Ord�.nance. (This proposa� was di�cusscd at the Feb. 17 meeting wi�h J'ay Peterson rep�°esen�ing the applicants . � Geacxy Whi.te mad� a motion ta recommend approval. o� the subdivisa.an; Er� Drager seconded �he motion, A 4-0 vote was recorded (Dan Corcoran abs�ained. ) JAY & WARREN PULIS -- PRELIMZNARY H�ARING ON THE POS�TBILITY OF THE NORTH 17 ACR�S ADJACE�TT TO SUNBURST AND A PORTION OF THE SUNBURS'F PLACED IN A P.U.D. The applicants would like the �.'7 acres, on the noxth side of I-70 accross �rom the Gol� Course (not within �he Town limits) to be cons�.dered for LDMF zaning with the x�sid�ntial portion of Sunburst property �oned LDMF i� res�dential is not pract�.ca1. The:re woul.d be the possibility o� 30-40 hom�si�es. They then went on to give the current status af the Sunbur.st project . The Owners (FDMI) would like to sell the existing una.�s individualiy , It was n.oted that a ce��if�cate of occupancy � could probably be �.ssued if the area was resubdivYd�d and rezoned with Ghe landscaping requirement campleted. The Sunburs� PUD called for 585 units on a 40 acre parcel. 72 una.ts presently exist with plans a�n the making for 30--40 additiona� homesites . The area north of I-70 at LDMF .�oni�g (12 units per acre) would ga.ve approxima�e�y 150--200 long�te�m housing units , {There e�is�s about 14 buildable ac�es . ) The P�anning Commission did not make any mata.an at th�s time. As �here was no �ur-�her busa.ness to discuss, tk�e meeting was ad�ouarned. � i P>. . . � � .. . f y M1 A ` / MEMORANDU� � TO: PLANNING COMMISSIDN ; FROM: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEV�LOPMENT DATE; F�SRUARY 24, 1977 RE; S�LBY/TOFEL RE�liEST FOR S�TBAGK VAR�ANCE OR R�QU�ST FOR PARKI�G VARIANCE AND S�TBACK VARIANCE LIONSHEAD 4th Fzling Rich Tofel and Je�� Se�by have applied for variances which consider two di��erent proposals . O�e requires a setback variance of 9 ' and a parking variance for �6 spaces for 4 864 s , ft . of commercial � q space; �he second proposal is fox 4, 558 sq, ft . o� commercial space which requires a setback var�ance o� 9 ' and provides 1? undexg�ound parking s�aces , �or a recap o� all issues involved in th�s particular szte and pro�ec�, p�ease see staff inemoranda dated Oc�ober I4, �976 and January 6, �977. Issu� of setback va�iance will not be discussed as � the same factors have been previously covered in the memos. The pri- ma�y issue as we see it is the request �or a parking variance for X7 cars with a reques� �hat it be handled �n a similar way to those granted �n Commexcial Core I . The applicants have stat�d to �he Council that they would be willing to escrow su�f�cient money to cover the $3, 5p0 cost of a pa�king space at �he �ime they rece�ved a Building Permit . CONSiDERATION OF �ACTORS : l. Th� r�lationship of the xequested varianc� �o other ex�sting or potential uses and struetures �n �he vicinity. There are no ather similar sites in the Lionshead area whxch abut the existing ma�1 system and also ar� adjacent to the majox bus xoute. The proposed pxoject forms a necessary comp�et�on �or the west end of the Lio�shead ma�l system. It is very probabXe that Vail Associates � s � . . ��el�y/Tofel . February 24 , 1�977 Page 2 will app�y for a large variance to remode�.: th� Gondola II Buildiz�g if . � this variance is granted, In our J'anuary 6 memo we feJ.� that we could not ,�ustify a variance un].ess t�.e applicant couZd demonstrate tk�at parking could be provided on the site and then removed fflr aesthetic reasons, which �hey ha.ve been able to do. 2. The degree to which relief f�Qm the strict or la.teral. anterpre�ation and enfoxcement of a specified regulation is necessary �o achieve compatibi�.ity ancl uniformity o� treatment among sites �n tize vicinity or to attain the objec�tives o� this ordinance wa.thout grant o� special privi�.ege. A number o� parking variances have been graza�ed in �,ionshead (Vail Internationa�, Sunbird, Montaneros, Loclge at Lions�aead} in ox°der ta allow for more Iandscaping, The mall sys�em would probai�ly work better if there were not the con�l.zct be�ween cars and pedestrians introdtzced and alsa a more attrac-�ive laz�dscaped area could be provided. Many variances have been g�anted in Commercial Core 1 with the pro- viszon tnat �he applicant pay far s,�aces in the Pa,rking Struc�ure. Da�a from recen� parking surveys iridicate that public 3.ots in Lions- � hear are at capacai.ty and that pravate �ots are less than 50% fu1.�. which seems to imply that more pt�blic parking and Iess pxivate parkin are necessary. If we were �o escrow money wh�ch might have 3�een speng an privat� parking which is not being uses and ins�ead apply it to s�ructuri.ng addi�ianal parki.ng in th.e public lots, both public and private needs seem to be best sexved. The fo`llowing is a recap of ', �our days af surveying private and publi.c parking lots : � % Occu�ied � :Occupied Covered Uncavered % YM Cars Hilton 51. 5% 0. 0� 4, 1% Vail Interna�a.anal 59. 1 29. 3 g , � Sunba.rd � 72. 0 �2.5 V. A (Gondola) 66 . 6 66.6 �g, p Lionshead Lodge 66.6 40 15. 7 Treetops 27. 5 27. 7 4. 2 Lz.onshead Centex 4� ,� �7 � �� 5 Lifthouse/Vail 21 71 .7 45. 3 44. 0 Vantage Poin� 50, 0 42 , 3 17, $ Westwind 57. 5 66. 6 28. 2 Landmark 71 . 1 49, 7 2$. 0 Va�.lglo 64 .4 p, p g. � Enzian ��, 5 15, 1 29 . 0 Mon�taneros 92.7 �4. 7 13. 6 � Mark 63. 6 37. 0 13. 4 La.an Square North 33. 3 4�, , � 44. 4 Antlers 43 �2 36.9 4. 0 Lion Square Lodge 81, 8 48 .8 6 . 3 : ;. : ,:, ,: : � � ' �, Se�.by/Tof el - Februaxy 24, I977 • `Page 3 East and North day ska.er parking �.ots - 71.4 � 94, 5% full wz�h 10% to 40% o� the cars with YM plates , d�perzdzng upon �he day and � �he time surveyed. 3. The eff ect of the xequested variance on light and air, dis�ributian of popu�.ation, �ransporta�ian and txaffic faeilities, public facxlit�:es and uti�i��es , anid pubJ�ic safe�y. A Positive a.mpac� could be created perta�nxng ta dis�tx°ibution o� popula�ion, The Lionshead area �.s in cr�.tical need o� addit�onal act�vity to draw people through the mall area. We fOx'GSEE.' no other adverse ampac�t on the other factors as the bulk o� the propased project is quite low and sma�� . FINDINGS ; � . Tha� the granting of the variarices wil�, na� cansa.tu�e a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limita�ions on other properties c�assified �.n the same distra.ct . See Items 1 and 2 uzadex Consideration of �actors. G:rant o� the par��ng variance with a con�tract to �scrow money in lieu af provi.ding the spaces is cansistent with trea�men� of Com�rnerczal Core l . Even though these are two separate .zone districts, their characteris- tics are very simiZar. Criteri.a as outlined �.n January 6 memo has alsa been met. � 2. That the grant�ng of the variances wil�. not be de��i- mental to the pu3�lic hea�th, safety, or -we��ax�e, or materially injura�ous to paroperties or improvements ' in the vicinity, We feel the pxopased px�oject (with parking variance) would • have a very positive impact on the nca.ghborhood and. would not be detrimenta� �o any other properties in �he vzcini�y. 3. That the variance is warranted �or one or .more o� �he following xeasons : a. The s�arict or la,teral interpretation and enfo�^c�-- ment af �he specif�ed regulations would resuZ� in practical di�ficulty or unnec�ssary physica�. hard- ship inconsistent wi�h the objec�ives of �his ordznance. The request for setback var�.ance is n�c�ssitated by the proposed mall through the c�n�er of the project which makes the wes�t end o� Lionshead a more desirable p�ace �or people. � � e ' Selby/To�e1 + . �ebruary 24 � 1977 Page � b � There are exceptiona�. or e�traordinary circum.- � stanees or conditions applicable to �he site of the var�.ance tha� do not apply general�.y to other properties in the same zone. There axe no o-�her si-�es in �he CC2 area o� this s�.ze and dimension . The praposed projec� solves. a long-standing problem o� a very un- signtly gravel parking lot which probably canna� otherwise be re- solved wi-�hout castly �a.gigation. The proposal also provides a solution to the "end a� the Ma11{' quandary and gYVes much needed la.fe to Lionshead. The Depaxtment of Corr�nunity Deve�opment recommend.s approval of -�he rec�u�sted setback variance and �ar the pa�king variance so long as the appli.cant is willing to escarow �unds to cover the $3, 500 per space at the t�me a Building Permi� is g�ranted. � � F . � , . MEMORANDUM � T0: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM ; DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 1977 RE : PROPOSED R�SUBDIV�SION OF LOT 8, VAiL VTLLAG� lOth FILING The applicants , Johann and Ann Mar�.e Ivfuel].er and Willa.am H. and A1ice Cartwra�ght , have reques�ed a resubclivisa.on of �he subject lo� which con�ains 33, 504 square fe�t . A two--�amily residence has been constructed upon �he sit�. The proposed pla� consists o� Lot $--A which con�tains 16,74� sq. ��. and Lot 8-B w�iich contains 16 , 763 sq. ft , The proposed lat J.ine follows the cen-�erline of the exi.sting dupl��, Both lots mcet �he minimum size requirements af the Zoning Ordinance. � The app�.icants have agreed �o pl.ace a restra.ction on the plat which restricts each subdivided lot to no more tha� one sing�e- family residence. The Town has the further protection of the pro- pos�d hazar�' ].egisla�ion wh�ch wouJ.d not a11ow �urther development o� eith�r site. With the restriction placed on the subdivision plat and the control which would exist through the hazard legislati.on, th� Departmen�t of Communi.ty Developm�nt recommends appxoval of the pra- posed resubdivisxon of Lo� S , Va�.l Vi.11age ldth Fi.ling: r� � . � PLANNING COMMISSION ; Agenda Max�ch �0, 1977 ,'; � I. Lapzn Residence Variance from Sec�ion 3 .503 of the Zoning Ordznance Lot 7, Vail Village 2nd Filzng 2. Pierce/Nilsson GRFA Variance Sands�one 70 -- Units 1�D and 15D 3. Benysh Setback and GRFA Vax��ance Uni� 7, Bighorn Terrace 4. Lazier Parkiz�g Variance Lot 9, B1ock 2, Vail/Potata Patch ' 5, Hazard Zon,ing Ordinance formal hearing � � �,'f ' � � �;: ::.: ,y � �.`.� ' � • � M�MORANDUM � T0 : Planning Commiss�on FROM: Department o� Commun�ty Development DATE; March 10, 1977 RE ; B�nysh GRFA and Setback Variance for Bighorn Texxace Una.t #7 The appl�can�s, Kathxpn R, , Ru.th E, and Howard M, Benysh, have appl,ied for a gross resxdentiaX �Ioor area variance of 130 square �eet and a setback variance of $ �eet on the north side of the pro�erty �acing U. S. 6 in oxder to enclose an �xista.ng balcany on the north sa.de of the prope�ty. CONSIDERATIQN OF FACTORS (SECTION I9 .600) ` � 1 . The re�ationsh�p o� the requestec� variance in other existing or po�ential uses and s�xuctures in the vicinity. "The pxo�aosed addition :�s compatible in siz� and styie with s�milar addi�ions in �he area. . , " We foresee no adv�rse impacts on any other bui�dings in the vicini�q. It shou�d be no�ed tha� the proposed addita.on does not encroach on any other e�isting struc�ures and there a�s suffici.ent right-of-way on Higk�way 6 for �he snow s�to.r.age wzth the setback variar�ce. � 2. The degree �o which �relief from the s�xict or literal in�erpretation and enforcemen� of a spec��ied regulation is necessary to achieve compatzbility and uni�ormity nf trcatment among si�es in tk�e vicinity, or to attain �he objcctives o� this oxdinance wi�hout grant o� speczal privilege. The original intent o� the Bighorn Terrace was for secand �amily homes , Over the years it ha� made a �ransition to housi:ng �or pe;rmanent reszdents. It is evid.ent from the floor plan t�at th� units are not suffa.c�c;nt for �.�ng-term housing. The proposed changes are zntended to improve the comrnon living area on1.y and not to increase tl�e bed capacity. Szmiiar additions could be permitted in the nea.ghborhood prov�.ded that �hey do �ot vio.la�e the setback be�ween bui.lding requirements. � In addi�ion, the location of the deck on the south s�.de of the s�ructure improves �ts use�ulness . .,_ , �_ fM " , Berlysh '. ;� "' • Page Two ' � 3. The ��fect o� the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population , transportati.on and tr�,ff�c facil,.i�ies , pub�ic faci�.�ta�s and u�a.lities, and pub�ic safety. The r�quested variazace would have no impact oz� population, transportation, tra��ic o� utilities. FINDTNGS : �. That the granting of the variance wi11 not cons���ute a gran� of special prova��ege inconsistent wi�h the limitations on the other properties c�assified in the same c�istrict . We fee]. that approva� o� �he req�ested vaar.�ances would not be a grant of special pxivil�ge an �he the praposed addition con�orms to s�.milar structures i.n the va.cinity. AlI of the buildings in �he Bighorn Terrac� area were constructed prior to . anne�ation and zoning, az�d most exterior rr�odifica.�a.ons woul�d req�.ire a similar variance. 2. Tha� the granting of the vari,ance will not be detrinnenta� to the public hea��th, safety , or welfare, or materia�.�y injurious �o propertzes or improvements in the v3ci.nitq . � The proposed variance would no-t be detrimen�al to any ather propertzes in the vicinity, due to the distance �rom other existing builda�.ngs and the fac-� that .tne occupancy xate is z�ot increased . 3 . Tha� the vara:ance is warranted �or one or mor� of the fol.lowing reasons ; (b} There are exception,a�. or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to �k�e si�e o� the variance �hat do not apply general�.y �o o�hex properties in the same zone.. "The Declaration of Purposes in the Zoning .Ordinance state; ; "These regulations ax� enacted for the purpose o� promoting '� the health, sa�ety, morals , and. g�neral wel�are o� �he Tawn of Vail , and to promote �the coarda.nated and harmonious developrnent , o� the Town in a manner that wi11 conserve and enhance its natural environznent and its estab�ished character as a r�sort I�` and x�esidential communzty o� high quality. " There i.s a physical hardship created by �he small s�.ze o� the lo� and � �he location of �he exis��.ng house. We feal that appxoval of �he requested variances is cansa,stent with the� objectives o� the ordinance � in tha� th� addition wou�.d give a "higher quality" af living far �ong- �erm resa.dents , The Departmen� o� Community Development recommend.s approval c�f the requested variances. � � �� , a�- , MEMORANDUM � �� � TO: Plann�,ng Comma.ssion FROM: Depaxtment a� Community Developm�nt DATE: March �.0, 1977 RE; Merv Lapin, Variance farom S�c��on 3, 505 0� the Zoning Oxdinance �or Lot 7, Vail Vi�lage Second Filing The applicant , Merv Lapi.n_ , is requesting a variance from Sec�a.on 3. 5p5, Density Contro�., in ordear to construct 2 unconnected ' sing�.e-family uni�s on a lot zoned 2-�aenily xesidentia�. The oxdinance as determined by �he Zoning Adminis�rator and the P�.anning Commission, speaks directly to the fact that �wo structures must i�e connected on a duplex zoned lo� . Curren�lq, th�xe exists �wa separate sing�:e � fami].y residences. The applicant would �.ike to remove �he "3-Pad" structuxe in order to bui�.d a single-fami�y residence that would bc;tter suit his needs �or a pexmanent residence. His basis �or haxdship is the deep, natural drainage ditch that runs throu.gh his propexty which is also used by the Town of Vai� ta dump snow. CONSIDERAT,ION OF FACTORS: 1 . The re�.ationshi of �he r � equ�sted. varz.ance to other existing or po�e�tial uses and structures in the vi.cini�y . The applicant is across �he street f�om the C�inic, and then suarrounded on both sides by dupl�x struc�ures w�.�h a sauthern boundary on Goxe Creek. The pxoposed structure would have no more impact on the surrounding nei.ghborha�d than what present�y e�3sts , 2. The degree to which re�a.�f from the strict ox litera�. interpr��ation and enfoxcem�nt of a specifiecl regulata�on • is necessary to achieve compatiba.��ty a�ad uniformity of treatm�nt amox�g sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectiv�s of th�s ordinance withou� grant af specia� privilege. � Lap�n � Pa�e :.�'wo � Stric� inte�rpre�ation of the ordi.nance could paroduce some �'� environmental problems to both the applicant and the T6wn -- chan�ing the natural path of a drainage area cou�d be very hazardous enviror�menta�l.y. It is �ar this reason we feel �hat granti�g of this vaxiance wou,ld not consta.tu�e specia2 privil.ege. 3, The effect a� the reques�ed variance on light and air, distributiono� populat�on ; transportation and traff�c �acilit�.es, public facilities and utzlities , and public sa�ety . We foresee no adverse effec�s on these factors, FINDINGS: 1. That the granting o� the variance will not cons�itute a grant of spec�a� privilege inconsistent wi�h the limitations on othe� propex�ies in the same dis-�ric-t . O�he� propex�ies in tlae 2--�amily residential dis�rict i�ave complied with this regu]�ation, but to aur know�.edge none have been faced wi.�h �he natura� drainage �xoblem �hat exists here. It should. also be noted �hat the app�.icant is not completely startir�g aver with a new site �1an, He proposes to �emove the one 3-pod structur� and replace xt with a residence approxima�e�.y I. , 500 square feet less �.n gr�a �hat what exists, as w�ll as to let the o�e single fam�.ly ' � residence located on the eastern side o� �he proper�y remain. 2. That the gxanting of the variance will no� be detrimenta]� to the pub�.ic he:alth, safety or wel�are or material.ly injurious to p�operties or �.mprovements in the vica.nity. We �aresee no adve�rse effects in granting o� this variance. 3. Tk1at the variance is warranted f_or one or more of the follow�ng reasans : (a} The stric� or 1i.teral in�erpretation and enfoxcemen� of the speci.faed regulati.ons would resttlt in practical dif�iculty or unnecessary physzcal hardship .inconsis�ent wai.th the obj ectives o� this ordinance. The drainage way �hat runs �hraugh the applican� 's property is mare ].�.ke a smal�, creek in that water is xuning through it at a1]. times o� the year; this, in our view, constitutes a physical har�lship that woul.d be unnecessarily expensive and environmentally u,nsa�e to try and mitigate. With �he appla�can� ' s vo�.untarq red�ctian �.n grfa, th� �act that � two separa�e buildings already exist on the property and the physical hardsha.p created by the draz.nage; tl�e Depar�ment o� Comm�tnity Development recommends approval of the requ�sted var�a.nce. _, . :_. .... ...... . - - -� 't` S , ' , ,` �. � MEMORANDUM . � T0: Planning Commission FROM; Depax�rt�ent of Communi.ty Developmant DATE: March 10, 197'7 RE; Pierce/Nilsson GRFA Variance The applican-�s, William Pierce and Johza Nilsson, are requc�sting a gx�a variance in arder to enclose their respec�ive ba�conies i� the Sands�on.e 70 comp],ex. The enclosures would add 85 square feet to each uni,t; bringing the �otal floor area o� each uni� to 1, 053 square ��et , Currently, �he Sands�one 70/Westview development is over its � gr�a allowance by �3, 988 square feet ; therefore, any addi�ions to �ivi.ng area wou�d require a variance. It shoulc� be noted tha� the proposed additions together wou.ld add less than . 3% to the GR�'A �ar the �otal site. CONSIDERATION OF FACT4RS (SECTxON 19.600) ' 1. The re].ationshzp of the requested variance to othe.� existing or poten��.al uses and structures in the vicinity. The loca�ian of the praposed balcony enclosures face Sandstone Creek on the western side of �he proper�y and will have minimal. �mpact on i.�s neighbors at Breakaway West. During the enclosure process , the balconies will na� be extended, on.ly made more fuctional }�y the enclosure. In �act , enclosing �he balcon�.es wou�.d giv� more �orm and dive�rsificatian to an already unifoarm neighborhaod. We feel that similar additions should be encouraged to make small units more livable and a��ractive �or long-term residents. 2. The degree to wh�.ch relief �rom �he strict or li�eral ' � interpre�ation and en�orcement of a specified regula�ion Zs necessary to achi.eve compat�bility and uniform�ty of �reatrnen� among si�es in the vicinity, or to attain �he obj�ctives o:� this oreiinance without grant of special pxYVilege . �; L+ ��.� . • , � There are 67 un.�ts on 3. 0 acres wa.thin the Sands�one 70/Westview development . The small living space, 968 square feet per unit, makes it very incanvenient for permanen� occupancy. The development did � con�orm to the county regulations wh�n i� was built pxior to annexa�ian, and due �o the existzng amount of grfa, any ad.ditional floor area needed to make �he units more livable wou.�d rec�uire a va�riance. We feel tk�a�t this request is in Zine with �he declaration of purposed s�a�ed in �ne ardinance, and tha.t the granting a� the variance would not be a grant o� speca.al pr�vilege as the nt�mber o� �n�.ts placed on the small sa.te creates a physica�. hardship . It shnuld �e noted tha� the app].ican�s wish to enlarg;e their c�ining room space rather than �a add. more "bed space" . One sueh encl.osure a�.read.y e�ists in that neighborhaod and �t has minimal impact or� the su.rrounding areas. 3. The e�fec� of the requ,�sted vaxiance on light and air, distrib�ztion of population, transpoxtation and txaffic �aci7.�-�ies, public faciliti.es and uti.litieS , and pub�a.c safe�y. We foresee no adverse effects on these �actors . FxNDINGS: I . That the granti.ng of the vara.ance w�.�l nat constitute a grnat of speca.al privilege .inconsistent w�,th the J.imitat�.ons on o�he� propert�es classa.fied in the same dis�rict . '� � See Item 2 undex considcration o� Factors . We �eel that apparoval o� the requested var�.ance would not be a gx�an� af special privilege. Al1 of the bttildings in �he Sandstone 70/Westview area were constructed. pri.or �o annexatian and zaning, �.nd most ex-�erior and in�erior modifica�i.ons would, in our view, not be c�etximerntal.. The wes�ern facade of �he 3�uildings would iae ir�proved as well as mak� them more des�rable for the Zong-term resident. 2. That the gran'ting o� the variance will not be detrimen�al to �he public health, safety, ax welfa�re or matexially injura�ous �o properties or improvements in the vxcini�y. Thc proposed variance would not be detrime�z�al to any other prop�rties in the vicinity , and th� adjoining px�operty owners have vo�ced no objectians to tne requested balcony enc,�osures. 3. That �he variance a.s warranted for ane or more o� the �ollowxng reasons : (a) The strict or li.teral interparetati.on and en�orcement o� the specified regulations wouJ.d resul.t in practical difficu�ty ox .unnecessary physicai hardship �nconszstent wi�h the ob,�ec-tiv�s of �his o�d.inance. � There is a physical hardship c�°eated by the number of units on a smal]. site thus g�ving each unit a very sma11 amount of living space. The applicants want to use th� space a�forded by the balconies on a year-round basis �o increase the size o� the.ir liva.ng and dining area. As noted above, the zncreased gr�a reques�ed by tk�e variance �. � �� . Pierce/Nilsson �_� , •Page� Two , . would add less than . 3% o� the to�al grf a in �he deve�.apmen� as wel1. as making the units (lOD and 15D of Sands�one 70) more livab�e. '' �. Appx�oval of tha.s variance xs cons�stent with th�:�bjectives of the ardinance as s�ated in the declaration.o� pu.rpose �or the zon.zng oxdinancc. The Departmen� o� Community Developm�nt can �oresee no adverse a��ects crea�ed by the proposed variance nor a grant of specaal privilege, We, therefore, recommend approval o� the vaxiance sought . . � � � � . .: PLANNING COMMIS�ION Agenda � March 3, 1977 1. Re'view o� Avalanche Report �or �,pt ].6, Bighorn S�.bdivi.sion for Mr . & Mrs . Hemby 2, P�eliminary discussion of employee housing (American Development Corporata�on) � � . � , PLANNTNG COMMISSZON � SUMMARY . March 3, 1977 MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Corcoaran , Ed Dxager Pam Garton BiIJ. Hanlon Sandy Mi�ls Gerry White OTHERS PRESENT ; Bill Heimbach Rod Slifer Bi�.l Wilto Ri.ch Tafel American Developm�n� Garp. John Ryan LOT 16 AVALANCHE REPORT � Ji,m Lamont gave a bri,e� suenmary o� �he staff r�camm�nda�ion in regaxd to �he avalanche report fa� Lat 16, BigY�orn Subdivis�.or� �or John R and Margery J. H�mby. {attached) . The staff recommends that the Hemby 's be con�ac�ed to get their pexrr�ission to send the repor� to the property owners o� Lots I1 and 13 dne �o the fact that the�.� lo�s are alsa endangered by possibie avalanches . Linda Lovejoy, representing the Hemby' s, s�a�ted that the owner of Lot �l was contacted about possib].e avalanche d�.nger but chose to not respond, ancl. that the H�mby �s did not know of the danger to Lot 13. Gerry White made a motion to approve the repo.rt and th.e approvc of buil.ding on Lot 16, Bighorn Subdivis�.on with the constraints outlined in the �epor� . Dan Corcoran seconded the mation. A unanimous vate was recorded.. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION OF GROWTH MA,NAGEMENT PLANS AND EMPLOYEE HOUSING NEEDS �'im Lamon� noted tha� this por�ion o� �he meeting wouZd be an �nformati.onal sess�.on on lor�g range housing x��eds in rel.a�inn to the Growth Management P�,an. He t�en sited some figures from Jokzn Ryan ' s studies that show�d the need £or long range employe� h,ousing. This was fol.�.ow�d up by a surnmary of the sta�� invest�.gations : a. ,e, h4w many new projects a�e being proposed and the af�ect theq wi1l have on the number of new employee. jo�s created . -- haw will this aff ect �he availabi.J.ity o� hausing? It was " noted that there axe three types of employees and the�r individual needs :� should be s�udied: a.. e. 1) transi�n� ; 2) 1-3 year employee; 3) the . permanent employee. M John Ryan �hen gave a brie� sum►nary o� &�a��rkforces .a�fecting alien� � �or Eagle County in relation to housi.ng: - s econom i. E. min�ng, X1EW ski areas, grawth management controls , county' Y the construction element; th,e area operator, tou�ist spen �n� - things �hat are �eeders �reas�of concernminQre�a�ion�to•employee� �e�� �n�o a discussion about a the pfltential shortage, the nu�nber housing : i . e. �he present shortage, � S Economic base in of jobs being created '.with expansion o� tt�eCdi���x'ing income ].evels , re�a�ion to the availabi�ity of housing , and the question of what kind o� op�ions can we or should we g�.ve people in the choice of housing types? All of this material will be includ�d in Ryan' s final repor� for Eagle County . E MPLOYEE HOIISING PROPOSAL FROM AMERTCAN DEVELOPMENT C�RP. -- P,RELIMINARY Gorcton Mikke].son. gave �o aQea�°we111as who�lieyAare�affiDiatedpwith,�s and what it is try�ng 7�eted and some that He sited some o� �the projects t.hat they have comp axe �n the process of completian. the archi�ect �or American Devel.opment , gave a sch�matic Br�nt Mil�.er, wou�d l�.ke i� to be done in 2 phases overview af their proposal. They have wi�h 200 units on 10�� L�onsridgeharea���I��was notedstha��this area picked out is Block , was e�armarked by Eldan Beck as being one for possibl.e employee housing. �hase x of �he praject would include 96 units on 4' 6roxima�ely�$230. 00 � �or app gp% of the uni�ts wou.ld be l bedrooms renting a�d 40% of the units a montla, not including �urniture or electx���-tY 3x0. 00 unfurnish�d. The would be 2 bedrooms renting �or apAr�����tely $ 1 bedroom units would be appro��mately 560 square feet with the 2 bedroom uni.ts at lan �th�rreason they had�orientatede�he�buildiz�gs e�plain �he floor p � ro ect were �o go ahead, the applic�:nts the way they did, etc. I� �h�� p from Resid�n�tial Cluster to High wau].d have to request an upzoning �a�.�ed farom the Plann�ng Commissi.on Density Mul��p�e Fam�1y . Wha� they was some dixec�tion; is what �hey are p�.anning a viable solu�ion? Should they proceed in the airection they are headed? Commissioner White felt that empl.oyee housing was de�anitely needed, and he fel� comfortable with �he d�rection th�y w�re takin�. Sandy M�Ils questioned the iegal aspects of upzoning this po��ail.°undeveloped in fact the town is consi.dering a ma�or down zoning parcels -- would it be fair? Bil� Heimbach suggested that �he developers, go to the �nedia, -ir� ord�r to get feed back �xam local ci.�izens because they are the ones who wa.11 either make the projec� or break it . He then went into discussion abou-t �ob��mslthey hads�and p�oject that VA propased �or Potato Patch, they p why it was even�ual.ly aban�d��ssioner Corcoranaae].�eth t�thenrents as Counci�.man Heirr�bach. C _ �t �s structure was nat good enough to justify the needed upznning - too comprobable tornsaas1Coxcoxan� available. Cornmissioner �rager � had the same conce With a fairly negativ� feedback from �he Com�missioza on '�his proJect � �he me��ing adjourned. 4 �� ` � ,. MEMORANDUM � T0: Planning Comma�ssion FROM: Department o� Communa.ty Devel.apment DATE: March 3, �977 RE : Avalanche R�port , Lat I6, Ba.ghorn Subcliv�sion John R and Margex�y J. Hemby An avalanche report for the subjec� l.ot prepar�d by Art Mears in.dicates �ha� a portion o� Lot 16 is free from avalanche hazard, but could be subject to power blast. The report recommends s-�ructure p�acemen� on the north side o� the Lot at least 10 me�ers , from the baundary o� the run-ou� zone. The report also recommends . �hat engineering criteria sima.lar to �hat required �.n the Bou7.der area be used to prevent possible w�nd damage which could aresu�� �rom the stagnation pxessure creat�d by the powder blast. The re�or� also r�comumends �hat protection be provided �ar the exi.sting hous�s loca�ed on lo�s ll and 13 of the Bighorn Subdivision. To quote the report "Assuming a use�ul economic liFe o� 40 years fo�c �his bui.l.ding and an avala.nche probability o� 5 pexcent a� a,ts location, there is an $7 percen� chance it will be reached once by an avalanche. �f it is occupied for �0 years by one owner , there is a �0 percent chance it wil�. be reached once during �hat owne�ship. Such risks are unacceptable and it �s recornmended that an avalanche def:cz�se system be designed��.and built to protect this building. " Our staff strongly xecommends that �he Hemby 's be con�tacted � � to ge� their permission to send this px�ation o�' the report to the property ownexs of Lots �I and 13. � :_ �';� �,. �. . , Based on "Avanalche Dynamics of th� Bi:ghorn Path" dated Jantzary 1977 , the Department o� Cnrn�nttr�ity Develnpr►1en� recomr►3ends � approval of building or� Lot 16 , Bigharn Subdi'v�.sion with constra�n�s as out�.ined in the report . � � . I\"�-rw..1� � . . PLANNING COMMISSION : Agenda �� March 24, 1977 l. Ha�ard Zoning Ordinanc� (�ust a rEminder -- this must be �inalized �oday! } 2 . Site 9 --- Lazier review af possible rezona.ng to either Residential C1.uster or 2-Family �esidentia� --- per Council reques� 3 . Vax.l. Ath.let ic Club acquisition of Parcel B � � � � � �: �.� � �dY . � . PLAN�ING COMM�SSION .���nda � Maxch 31 , 3977 � �. � . �< l. Consi.deration o� h4emorandum on Site 9 �o � the Cnuncil ' � �rd�.nance � 2. Final�zation of Ha.lard Zon�.n� � � � i � � � � � • . � DRAPT h9EM0 TO: TowEi Counci� � �� , • FROM: Planring Comrnission DATE: A7arch 30, 1977 ^ RE: R�commendatipn on Sit� 9 Zoning � I'he Pianning Commission wants to reaSfirm its recommendation , o£ agproval of i:he down-zonin� ot Site 9 from FIDIviF to MD1iF (The 60-unit • proposal), w9.th the exception o£ Sandy Mills, who now supports a lower density zon�ng on this site. � Secause of Lhe Council's decision to reconsider �he propo5al, the Planning Commission feels that i:his single issue, i.�. tne appJ.i.cant's request Sor downzoning tEie property from H�1�fI�' to t,_�]PrfF • with a 60-unit maximum on the site shoiFld b� d�cid�d on its: own merit. 1`he consideration of rezoning Site 9 to either 2-�amily resideni;zal or residen�ial, clus�e:* has been f:abled a� this time; l�ow�.ver, the • Planning Commissipn would Iike the Town Council to be aware �hat th�y have dooked Qt vaz�ious zoui.ng and. der�sity a7.teraaLives during Che • mon'ths that tlZey reviewed the proposals fo•r Site 9, and have xeviewed � a residential scheme as recent�y as. 7.ast wc:ek. . Ttze P7anning Commission woul�d like ta rei�erate the background for its recammendation of approval �or the appl.icant's proposa3 , . on Site 9. 1) This site has been the����er of contxoversy fox ouer � ��,��, �`��a ' "�"Wa`� yea�a.n regaxc€ to zts HDMI` zonS:ng.n The Plannzng ComcFtzssion had . recornm�nded to, Council a review o� the site to consider xezona.ng it �T . � to a 7ower density; hotivever, the Council declined to consider rezonzn� � on this single, isolated szte at that tiine. 2) The present app�ican�: came in to voluntaril� req uest ;�� ,.�.� ���If� 1'�"' . ^ erva+-ira ,� l�V1d.X`twtc.�+y t��' '�C( (� (,�v3 f dowr►-zoning o� the site �ram HDr4F, with a maYin�urn of 90 uni�s. ° i At the urging of the Caun�il, the proposal was further reducecl to 64 units, which basa.calJy reducecl the pxoject to LDM�' standards. After � long review and consideration o� the pxoject, tkae Pianning Commission recommeuded approval based on the �ollowirig facts: � , a) that the Tawn Counca�l had declxned to down-zon� . the szt� previously � b) thai the current proposed do�v�--zoning was of such a signii'icant degrec tp bring �:hc; density do�vn to a very comfortable � . i . anci logicaJ. Ievel. � ' . i _ � �., . . . � . ' a) �hat the propos�� seem�d c.onsis-�ent with the schooZ si�e and Sun-Vai.3. prqject to t;he east, and was a logical bu��er zone •. , . • between tihe Frontage Road and the surrounding xesadential and agr�culi;ure zones. d) thaG the current proposal, with just �our H�iildings, would have the least visual and aesthetic impact ota the site and would allow �ox� ma.nima�. dis�rubance i;o ti�e site, as we�l as providing a very ].arge amount of. open space. Both the Town Staff and the • applicant's �rchitect presen�ed some very prelirriinary schemes nf �awex density zones which the Planning Commission felt wou].d have a considerable itnpact because of the greater road cu�s, dxa.veway access, more privacy, mpre buildi.ngs and less ope❑ space. e) tha�: the app]: ant had consistently respo�ided to the concerns of the Pl.anni.ng Commission and Town Counezl and ha�made changes an Lhe proposal ��g33z..- � . � � �- � � u� � � w►. : • • � � � • . . . . . , .� . .• � Aval�.nche, High Hazard Area - shall mean any ar�a impacted by a snow avalanche with impact pressure in excess o� 60U pounds per square fc�o�; and/or return int�xval of less �han ��� , 25 years. Hi�;h hazard avalanche areas shall b� designa�ed by � r¢ avalanche maps prepared for the Town of Vail by Arthur M�ars „�� or by definitive study as prescribed by the 7aning Adminzstrator accordi.ng i;o commanly agreed upon sci.entiiic mei:hod o� ana7.ysis � and caJ.cul�.tion. �S 1 h �"� ���,��`� J� � �� � � Avalanc:�e, h4edium Hazard Area - sha7.1 mean any area impaeted by a snow avalanche with i.mpact pressure less than 60� pounds p�r square foot and a return ini:�rval between 25 and 100 years. ]viedium hazard avalanche areas shalk be desi.gnated i�y avalanche , �. �rnaps prepared far the Town o� Vai1 by Arthur Nfears or by ��� de�initive study as prescribed by tt�e Zoning Admi.nis�;rator. ����� Construci;ion sha13 not be permi�:ted i.n these areas without � definiti.ve studies ou�linin� appropriate defense mea�ures as � grescri.bed by tha 'Loning Administrator. Avalancl�e, Zone o� Influence - sha7l m�an any area in a potenti.aJ avalanche zone wher.� detazled .information is not pr�sently available. These areas are designated by avalanche maps prepared �or the Town of Vail by Arthur h[ears. Con-- . struction shall not be permitted in these areas without further �, ,`, ,� : ��_,t�!tg-:..,;:�.�'i.-�. detailed studies, as prescribed by the Loning Administrator. ,.�r �-.Y_ - ._. . �`lood Plain - shall mean any area subject to �mpaat by 100 year flood as defined by the Gore C.reek Flood Plaira Informati.on r RePort, June 1975, prepared by Hydro Triad, Ltd. , or as ' designated bq defini�ive s udy as grescribed by the Zon�.ng � Admii�istrator. IJ4.✓t_��,st' � R !� � Garage - spa,ce or spaces limi ecl to the housing o� automobiles � " not i.ncluding accessor•y storage a.reas. A garag� parking space � � in a singl�--famzly or two-£ami�y structure shall be limited ; to ara area of ]l feet by 21 �eet per space wi.th c�ach spac� ! l�aving u�iencunb�red egr�ss to tih� exterior. ; i . ' � , ' � , ,: . -2- r ;� � � k3a.pid `dass Wastin , Hi.gh FIazard Elrea - sha11 mean any area sub,�ect to d�bris flo�vs, debris �J.aods,. debr�s avalanches, rock- . ' fall ar rock. avalanches which, because of thei.r probability. � and destruci;ive potential, couJd endanger li�e and property. � - Hz�h hazarc! rapid ma5s wasting areas sf�all be desi�nated by � maps prepared i'or Lhe To�vn of Vail by Art-hur Mears or by � defi.nitive s�udy as prescribed by the Zonin� Administxator accoxdang to commonlyr agreed upon sci.enti.fic methods of analysis and calcu7_ation. R�ic3 �1ass Wastin�; Medium Hazard Area -- shall mean any area suTo- ject to denris flows, de�sris Ploods, debiis avalanc�es, rflck�all . or rock ava].anches where the impac�s are less severe than i.n a �� hi.gh hazard rapid mass wasting axea. Medium hazard rapid j��ass aiasi:i.i3g areas shall be designated by maps prepar�d �or the � Town o# Vai�. by ArtYsur Mears or by definitive study as pres- crxbed by the Zona.ng Admi»isi;rator. Canstraction shall not • be permitted in these areas wi�uout defini.tive s�udies outlining � a.pproprial;e defense measures as prescribed by the �oni.ng Administrator. � ���`-'"�- S� � Th� gradient or configuration of thE undi.sturbed land ' sur�ace prio� to site improvemeilt of a lo�, site, ar parcel � which shall be established by measuring �he maximum number o� f�et in elevation gaineci or los� over each 10 �eet or fractiot� ' �hereof ineasured l�orizontally in any direction b��;weez� opposing _ � 3.oti lines; tl�� xelationstaip of elevation or veri;ical measure-� + ment as divided by the lioxizonl:al measurement sha7.� be exprESSed as a percentil.e as a rneans o� quantify�ng the term s]ope. i € s � I � i � � � � � „ . , ,,._.,___,o_d__..� __..��..�.._.�.M�. . _._v_._ _...,.,._,.. -R....� —�- �W......._......� ��� ; , � �'��,�� . � � r!.J Y 3 � .,, - �� � \.f 1 L., ("� �� � . .� .....__. �--- � _- , i � . ; - �...,.: �_._� 3 �.� � _.. °�'^ • _. ... ..... . . . ... ,t, � . �. . . . .`. ,,,,,��ti,. . . ... .. � F�� . . . � '_J ,�e 7 S ' .... . �� . � - . _. � _. • . _ _ � ___ . .. .. _.__ .. . _.._ ... ._ _._. .... __. . .._......._. r� '_ ' s _�-.-U..�� ��' "' f. .. . . .. .. .. . . . . .. ._ .. -. , . � .. . .. ... . . � � � � ,� ��_.� /��3 }; i. ' _,-�___,.,__.W�� -- -____w,.,"� --�.— � I}i f� " 1.� � �� I � �v t� � ' g--� , ; r�/" ��� ` � I<'_� , � � :� � : � � �� � o , � s ,�, .. � � � __ . � � ; � � _ ---_� -� -�- _... _ . ; ,� �. . _. � �' • .�. a_ _ . � � �i � � _ � 1 _�_�____.�_..._.__�_;.__._�.....___.��_.._..,_.__. _��. --, . �_�_�___._ W..-----��-------------- - , � i ; � ` � � � r k L:> ' �� _ , _. _ _ � _ .. � �; � �� , - i _ � —�— i °� r ♦ ' a � , _ # �� _. : �. , y I i .�... . j ���' ^�� � ./""". _ . �...... i ....�.... _ � y - .:� '�:.. �. ' . � ,_ .. �. _ .. _. .. .. � . _ _ � . ...... . .�._. ,........ __.�.. - �f 5 �:, � ... _ _....... ... ... .. .. . , - � : - � .. , ' . ' � ..._.__._._._._.. . . �� • ._.__..__._.:�. ._._...----'-! --- —' .1....-.._-"_..., .._._.�..__..__..._.......'-'-'. - �---'..__.__. .�__�,._.. -_. ,. a . '-......, _..., ...:.- .... . , f . . � � �� . i �--�— � + '�, . � � �_ r { • � 1 \r' � ' �`� ' y ' � �`1 �. {i �y'.. . ( ' .. �. .�_ _� . _ . e� �'u �.� � �J . � �:�' . ; , . � � � L,� . , , . . ._� .. .a . � ; ;� . �. _, C . . .--- _ - . ,_ r , ; , _ �' `} �� � � '�1 � � '� ��� ! � �,,� ` ,� -j--. i. _. . G � .f_ .__� � s� , ` � � I I S • _....w_____'...._...._._..__....w.._.r. v— ' ...__�, —� �......w..,� ._....___..__. _.,,,__�_,_�— . _._.,... , . i _ _,. . . . , � ' � �-� -- � , � � � ..... .. �. . ' . v'' } . . - 4��� x, �I � �r� _ �n c�\ _� � °L;. S �. � • .. . , . _ . , � � � , ry n � �. ' (^�- `�1 � { � � } C ....� ` ..-� � 1 I � � � � \ � h � . . -� - , `l� � � � .."�" ~ -�-' �.] � � .,y,,, t , � � .... . .. . : . _ _ .. � _ _ ._ . _ �� : - - _ � � � I �. � �� C '� �n .� . . � ��__.-- _____. .,..--------- -- �...� n-T-�,- . . _�. _ :_ . �____. .� . _. __....._ . . __�...���_ ._.... ..., - - _ .. .----� _ _ . � _ � � ` � � . _ � - � � . � _ � � _ _. `" __ �-- ' I . `' 1 � � '� 4 _ I _. _ ......l�.._- --�_. . ..�...-__ O ;- ��'. ..,��� � .A. ,. ..... .. _ ......_.. ._ `S . . ..... , . - ` , � , I O ; � �� 'A �. I l , _ . _._.._ _. .... -'_"'�______' � _ � __ �- - � _. ...� _ � , � +:� _ ._ . . I . � i —� a �`5 �� _ �.._� �-�.-- ; I } -� _ ' �3 a` ._�, _ _ -� : -- ��,�_ . ; - _ _ ���c�-�-�� : __��_...__. _ ; � � � � �- _�_ -, _ _.. ..;I i �,.. . i . �� �� .... ,� .. -...`''Q - !� � ��, �.� } : } � �... - . � ; 1.:3 ,. ._.! .. �r; _ _. � _ ,� �... � :, G � �' � _ . . _ .. ., , , ..�.�e.��..,...._,--;- �,� _�_�__,��...�.�_.�_.._...._... �,f y��_._ �`"' � n-----,6 - ; • ' _ ' _ � _ _ -- _ _ ._ _ . _ � _ . ._ � � . . -.. _.. . ___.. _...__... - _ _..__.. : � � _ _ ...... ..___ .� __.......... _ I . _.. _. ._...... .. .. . . , E � �\ 5 . - .. . _ . _... ..... .. .... .. ... .... .._ ., ..... . _._ ._.. ._. . ._ _ . . . . . ' � . . . . . _. . .. . . _ .. . ..... , _._. .......... . ...._._.._.... .. -,_ ,__.. �. .. ' ' . � �I ,. � -- . - .. . _. . . � . ..._,..._...-.-.... _ .._ ..... ' li � , . i . , � f PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda ', � April 7 , 1977 I . The Mark -- Resubdivis�on of Lots 5 & 6 Vail Lionshead Third Fi]�ing and a Vacation of the VailfLionshead Fi��h Filir�g 2. Vail. Ath�.etic Club -- Pre�iminary Discussion of Bu�.lding Bulk Control Variance �. Apolla Fark -� Preli.minary D�.scussion of �he Addition o� the Poor Richards Building �o the Projec� , �` � `� PLANVING COMMISSXON Summary April 7 , 1977 : i MEMBERS PRESENT: Dudley Abbott Ed Drager Pam Gaxton Bill Hanlon. . Gerry White TH� MARK -- RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 5 & 6 VA�L LIONSHEAD THIRD FILING AND A VACATXON Ok' THE VAIL LTONSHEAD FIFTH FIL�NG Fred Otto, repxesen�ing Kaa.ser Morcus, exp�laa.ned: that i.n the original pl.a� o� the resubdiv�.sion, Mr , Morcus neglec�ed to get the signatures of the individual condominium owners on the plat , By f.ai�.a.ng �o do so , the subdivisian pl.at was invalid. Wha�t they propose to do now �.s cxeat� a resubdivi.sion of Lots 5 & 6 which wi11 e�clude the present Maxk pxoject but wiJ�1 be in keeping with all of the requireme.nts .af the Special. Development District . Planning Comrnission asked that �he s�af� have Larry Rider check on the legal. aspec�s o� this ,� � change to make sure that it will be in. conformity with the requirements of. the SDD. Bill Hanlon made a mot3on to approve the resubdivision of Lots 5 & 6 Vail Lionshead Third Fi.ling and a vacation of the Vaa.l Lzonshead Fi�th Fila.ng subject to the approvaJ. of Larxy Ra.der tlaat �this change wou�d meet all the specifics of the SDD. Gerry White seconded �the motion. A unani.mous vote was recorded. VAIL ATHL�TIC CLUB -- p�dEL�MINARY DISCUSSION OF BUILDING BULK CON�'ROL VARIANCE Tt has been noted that th�.s projec� is in n�ed of a building bulk control variance due to the f act tha� it is approximately 20 ' ove� the allowable. The applican�, Gordan Pierc� , wanted to get a "straw vo�e" ��om the Planning Comm.i.ssion ta see what theix �eelin�s wer� i.n relation to th�s up-coming variance. Jim Lamont read through �he cxi.tera.a and �indings of the �on�ng Ordinance to see i.f the Planning Commission members could �o�esee any di�ficult.ies ari.sing. It was mentioned tha�t the configureation o� this part�cular si�e was difficult and that the proposed s�txu.c�ure b�.ended we1� with the sur�ounding neighboxhood. The Planning Connmissian unanimously �elt � at this time tha� the va�iance would cause no d�fficulties. (Xt was noted that if -�he builcling was made to conform �to th� regulatians, that the swimming pool wou�.d probably have to come out o� the project . } , � APOLLO PARK EXPANSZON � The applicant, CY�uck Ogliby, wanted to get a prel.zminar �eelzn from Y g the Planning Commissa.on as to the viabi�.ity of pu�chasing the "Poor Richards" bui�ding and pJ.acing it on his Apollo Park pxoject . Apo�lo Paxk at this tzme is a l�egal non�-can�orming deveZopmen� zn relation to �;the paxking requzremen�s of the HMDF zone distriet . By placing �his building, approxi�nately 2,400 square feet of additional grfa, on the s.ite, he would need to supply addit�onai parking spac�s which he would like to have above ground. The P,1ann�ng Commi.ssion questioned whetk�ex an altera�ion to a non- con�orming developmen� would necessitate bringing the �ota1 deve�opment in�o conformance. Th�y directed �he staf� . �o find az� answer ta this poa.nt. Before the Planning Commission could ga�ve any inda.cation to Mr . Og1.�.by, tn�y wanted to see the site p�an redrawn to �e�lect how the parking axea currently �xists and how the additional paxking.would �it . into the scheme. E� � � t � ` � MEMORANDUM � T0: Town Counc�� FROM: Plan.ning Commission DA'�E : April. 5, 1977 RE : Recommendation on Site 9 �oning The Planning Comma.ssion wants to reaffirm its recommendation of appxoval of the down-zaning of Site 9 from HDMF to MDMF (Th� 6Q-unit proposal) , wi�h the exception of Sandy Mills, who naw supports a lower density zoning on �his site. Because o� the Council ' s decision to reconsi.der the pro�osal , tk�e Planning Commission #'eels that this single issue, i .e. �he � applicant ' s request for down zoning the propex�ty from HD�F to M➢MF with a 60-unit maximum, should be clecided on its own merit . mine considera�ion of rezoning Site 9 �o ei�her 2-family residential ox resid�ntial cluster has been. tabled at �has time; however, �he Planning Cotnm�ssion would like the Town Counca.�. to be aware that they have looked at various zoning and clensit�r al�ernatives during the months that they reva.ewed the proposal.s �or Site 9 as well as residential schemes as recent�y as March 23rd. Th.e Pl.anni.ng; Commission woul�d like to �eiterate the background for its recommendation of approval for the app�.icant ' s proposal on Site 9 . 1) This site has been the c�nter of controversy for over two years �.n regard to i�s HDMF zoning. Over a year ago, the Plannin� ',��� Commission had recommended to Counc�l a review of the site to consider rezoning a.t to a lower densi�y; howe�ver , �the Council declined �o consider re�on�.ng on what they judged -�a be a single, isol.ated si�e Council -�- �pril 5, 1977 R - , (Site 9) � at that t�me. 2) The pres:ent appXican� came in to voluntarily request down-zoni�g of the site from HDMF , with a maximum of 246 un�ts, to MDMF with a maximum o� 90 units . A� the urging of the Counc�l, the p�oposa� was �urther reduced �0 60 units, wh�ch basically xeduced the pxoject to LDMF standards . A�ter �ong review and con��deration o� the project , the P�ann��g Cornmission recommended approval based on the f ollowing facts: a) that the Town Council had declined to down�zane the si�e pxeviously; �} �hat the current praposed down-zoning was of such a signi��can� degree to br�ng �he density down to a very com�oxtable and logical level. c) that the pxoposal seemed consistent with the � and Sun Vai� project �o the east , and was a �ogical school site buffer zone b�twe�n the Frontage Road an.d the .. surrounding resid�ntial and agra�culture zor�es. d) tha� the current proposal, with jus� four buildings , would have the leas� visua� and aesthetic impact on the site and would all.ow for minimal disturbance to the sa.te, as well as providing a very �arge amount of op�n space. Both the Town Sta�f and �he applican� ' s archa.tect presented some very preliminary schemes of lower densi�y zones �vhich th� Planning Commission �elt wottld have a considerable impact on the si�e because of the excessive road cu�s , driveway access , more prz.vacy , more buildings, and less open space. e) that the applicant has generally responded to the ,° � concerns af the Planning Cornmission and Town Council whieh. has 1. re.s.uZted in changes�lin his original praposal. ' , . , ► Counca.I -3- Apri� 5, 1977 �rt• � (Si�e 9) . - �� ADDENDUM It z� comrnon k nowledge tl�at the purchase of this property by �he present applicant is tzed ta a 60-unit min�mum by the cantrac� with �he se�.ler. Because of thzs sit�.ation we have th�: stron� impression that tha.s site will continue to be the eentex of controversy if the present request is rejected.. � � �� � ,, ,„ ', . PLANNING COMM�SSION �i�enda Apr�.]. .1g, Y977 �: � �. �. Borwick Subdivasion . � 2. Beaver Creek Presenta�ion - Dave Mot� � f 3. Hazaxd Zoning Preparation � ; � 4. Timber Txuck on Red Sandstone Road ; t 5. EIR For Vail Village �nn � , � . ; i � � . � Y � . ', •� . . . . . . ' . . - . . � _ . . . � . . F �� � MINUT�S VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION 14 APRIL 1977 3 : 00 P .M. Pr�sent Chairman Pam Garton, Sandy Mi11s , Dud�ey Abbott, Gerry White , Bill HanZon and Ed Drager 5taf£ present Jim Lamont , J'im ltubin, Kent Rose Rosalie Jeffrey - Recording Secretary BORWICK SUBDTVISIQN Ta.m Gar�on was present fox final plat approval of the r�subdivis�.on of Lot �4 , B1ock 4, Bighorn Subdivision, '�hird Addition, iCent Rose was called an for technical advice concerning the roadway easement, perc�ntage o� ' � grade on MH-6 and dedication o� land. Af�er some dis- cussion, Dudley Abbot� moved to approve the request subject to the changes in items #2 , 3 and 5 af the Staff Memo of 4/14/77 to the Planning Commissa�on, as noted below. Changes : #2 The p�operty in ques�ion is pre.sen�ly deeded to Barwick and th� improvements axe deeded to the water district. Tim Garton a�;re�d to sign a � statement that the �and under the easement will not 3�e bui�� an, and that , if the treatmen�. plant is abandon�c�, the sa.�e is ta be returned to its n.atura�. state, #3 The permanent roadway easement is h�1d by Borwick. The deveZopment requires an �asement through Lot 13, which parcel is owned by Bflnnie 0' Leary. Tim Gar�on stated that he would attempt to obtain a dedication from T9s . 0' Leary. The Planning Commission agreed that if the dedica�ion cannot be obtained, a roadway easeme�t would be su£�icient. #5 Wi�h ragard �o the sewer line for the develop-- ment , a 38 o grade exis�.s in the lirie . KentRose � stated that the VWSD would requ.ire an 18% grade �or �hat dis�ance , since there would be a possibi�.i�y � o� rhe 1�.ne clogg�ng at such a steep grade . Tim Vai1 P1ann�ng Commission � '' Minu�es . �/14/77 • Garto� agreed to redesign the sewer Iine and pu� MH-6 at the corner flf Tract A w�th a 1eng�h of 40' and a �ow�r o grade . This was acceptable fia Rose, representing the VWSD. With regard �o th� bridge on C.olumbine Road, �he Planning Comm�ssion was advised n� a prablen� concernin� brid�e access . (See attached letter : KRR to R.A. Prosence ; 4/5/77) . The motion by Abbott was seconded by Bi11 Hanlon; a1� �resent voted in favor, and the mo�ion carrzed. APPROVED. ( 1 _.�.... Rec r �ng ec , • � . _ , . . _ . ... ., r ..� ._.. � .,- �� � ,� � MEMORADUM T0; Planning Gominission . Developement De artmen� Of Community � FROM: �' 1977 DAT�: April. 14 , Bighorn Sub- RE : Resubdivxsion of Lot 14> 81ock 4, . division Third Addition ����'i'.�'�. - � �. � Lot 14, Black 4, Bighvrn Third Additaon cantains I59 ,865 � square feet {3 .67 acres) a�ow��lPunits�ta bencons��uctec��an res�dential which would al � �h� s��e, ThP request �or resubdivision wo�tld allow a maxi- � mum of �2 units on 6 lots. Th� �o�s have been piot��<4_ tQ be in compl�ance V�i.th �he new hazard zoning men��recommcnds ap- � The Department of Comrnuni�y Develope � praval of the resubdivision with the fall.owing cond�.�ions: � ],) Tract A k�e dedicated to the Town af Va�.l as f � . public open space .— The site of the Booth Creek Wa�ex txeatment- G�'�� � � . 2) plan� be d�dicated to the Town o� Va�l as �c1`'Y� public open pace, i� the �r������� � remnved. L�-G� ���� �i��d � a �asemen� through Lo� 13 be /3) The roadw y a � reeorded on an.d xecorde� at th County � , ���.�� � �-. �. 1�.� the Final Pl�,t (� � � C1 ���� 4) A correction be ma-de a.n the se�re -�h ].in� o� the �egal descri.ption changing �he nttmber 50.00 �ee� to 5$ feet 'J5) The sewer line fa�low th� road be�ween � • MH--6 and MH-7 � € T . �f Y � •. l 1, . . � . . i , � f _ .. �l1 � y l� , . a �� �� - �����10� �v�� box t00 ' office of the towt� manager � vail; coioracio s�s5� Apri.7. 5, �.977 (303] a76-567 3 � . �. Mr� R.A. Prosenc� District �ng�ne�� - � Calorado Depa.rtm�nt o� Hz.ghways � P.O. Box 2�E�7 � '' Grand Junction, Calorado $1501 � � � � z � DEax Dick: � y As .a paxt o� the Intersta�e 7Q projeet, a concretE box cu].vert was constructed �o s�rve as aceess �o a smal�. piec� o� pxa.va,te land tha� was no� con,demned during xight-o�-way acqu�.sition• Th� loca�. road is Co7.wnbi.ne Dri.ve in the Bighorr�. area. � The Town o�t VaiJ. has been main�aining the boX as � P�v���d ��ke roadway sy5�e�n, but nat ��ithaut gxea� di��iculty . � �o enumexate the problems we have had; anticipa.tc� additional concerns , and ask i�5 ,th� Hig�.way Depax�ment can o���r any reli�� in the matter, • PROBLEDSS : . . � I�, � 1) Poor v�sibi�.3.ty; s�.ght distance on north end is not � adequa�e flue to .�Ghe alignment o� �he bo� wx�h the roadway. . 2) Icing condztion; w�.�ex flows into the box and freezes , maki,ng �.t ZIT1pc'1.551.�]�.E due to th.e combinatian o� �.ce and excessive grade. If �wo vehic�es ent�r the box simultaneously , downhill � .veh�.cles cannot s�op without h�tti.nb th� box wa�.ls Qr �he o��her ve�iicle, Snativ plows often ride the walls of the box �vi�h the b].ade b�ca�xse they cannot straignten ou�. Residents af �I�e area park on th� snutkl s�.de o� the box and wa�lk ov'er the Inters�a�e b�cause they cannat d�ive or �valk thro�z�l� the box , 3) IIlowing snow �arms a cornice on the north en,d tha� must be knoc�ed ot� a.nto the raad�vay and p�owed alvay . � � _ Mr. R.A. Pras�nce -2� April 5, 1977 • . .� . } .. . ' '-r . . . , ' FUTURE CONC�RNS; � 3) Actdi�fa�ai �ra�zfc cr eated by the proposed d�ve�opmen�t o# �we�v� addi�zoz�al uni.ts wzll increase the accident pot�nt�ax in the one-lane box. 2) r���1�: w�iking over th� Tntersta�e a�t�r it is open w�.11 pl.ac� themselves in darigerous si,tuations and in�ex��re u�ith traf�ic. 3) Snow p�owzng operations on �he Interstate could poten�ia].�y �oad �he rc��.d on the rz�rth end �� �iie box to �he ex�en#: that the Zocal pio�s could not push thraugh on the ' � uphil� grade, . ; F I feel the Highway Depart�en� has a respons�bzlity �o Yze1p � a7.leviate tYzese prob3ems, A� �his �a�e date i� onZy makes sense ' to �ry to work with wha� we have rather than consa.d�:r major � rev�.szons in the bo�. � - . . � i The axea on the noxth end of th� bax shauld. be regrac��d and shapecl � . to impxove site distance �ax vehicle� enter�.ng or exi�ing the ` box. At �Y�e samc time, the exista.n� cuJ.vert , xelated dra�nagc� � and snow storage areas could be �nereas�d to stop the �low o� � water a.nto �he box, A �aermanent snaw fence migl�t poss�bZy be . ins�al�ed to stop drifting �n�o the area. i � We have documen�ed these conditions on fa.1m and would like �o m�e� wii;h your xepresenta��.v�s to cooperatively solve our problems. Thank you. � ' Sa.ncexely, � � � DEPARTMENT OF ' PUBL�C �YORKS � � � • • `� f ,- � �= � � �, ) � ���� v� ��:�c..� ent R. Ros�, P.E. � D�.r�ctor � KRR/j ek - cc: llir, Tim Garton � � # , , � . . ' �, . � I . . . E. . . I � . � ; � � � . � . � � � � .,. ._. .� . ,. ,:I�, r, ...-.. ' Gj ?�-�" ����"� '� ��� UNI7EU SY14TE5 DEPAR"3'MEIY7 OF AGRICtJLTURE FQREST 5�32VICE ' . ,` � W}il'LE fiIYER NATIdNAL FORE5T : . Minturn, Colorado 81645 �K RErIT REiER YO: � � 2�400 ; April 5, 1977 , Wes� Vail Association Mr. A1 1Neiss I905 West Gare Cre�k Drive • Vai�, Colorado 81657 Deax Mr. Weiss: - • `The Forest Service is �lanning to se11 a ti�nber sale in the Moni.ger . � and Dickson Creek area. The sale wof.�3.d be sold in 1978 and would require that log trucks use the Red Satidstone R�ad. � We would Iike public input concerning the propased timbex sale and the use of the Red Sands�ane Road. The road ar�d its use by heavy �� . truck t�a.ffic may be of concern to some o� your members in the Red Sa�dstone area. We wou�d appreciate y'our passing this an �.o members tha� would care to commen� or have questions� For further information-, pl�ase contact the Holy Cxoss District � of£a.ce in M�.nturn� � _ . . Sincerely, � �� � ; ���. . ' ' � . . . • � . • ERNTE Et. NUNN Aistrict Ranger , � � � � - � ...::t:.;.� , r� ..M l `i :"� ' .�,' . ' (,�� v1�i���� ,�`'�� .'r��!'.1 �Y T'..,�.- �r��',�.,'�V��..�- , 1���r ; ' � - , r� , 7,a rG ���c�� l� �v�� ��.;� , �F v��' �.=��� � �� J�S�V��L �''�"��'�`*�� /r4 �rV �i �1.�,�s.�;,j �f����/��l�l �� (��" ', �/�L� �J�� ���� • f�.����5 o't=- C���.:��fi��i��j ����-�' ��' � ��I�,,ll �� �vUJfi /�.�>tT�..c�rlC x(7� � . - - . , � ��1�� � . _ , . . . . . ,:., . � _ . : . . _ __. . . �.,n„ .�_� . � � _ . �' � '�, , ! �LANNTNG COMMTSSIQN i � AGENDA Apri1 2�, 1977 1 . ) Amendment to the Zoning prdinance in relation to the addition a� a sub-commititee to Design lteview Board ta review signs. �� 2 . ) Re-subdavision o� a portion o� the Sunburst property r to Vail Valley Thircl. Addition 3 . ) Apo110 Park -- Preliminary discussion af the addition of the Poox Richar�s b�ilding to the project . � . ) Vai1 Va.11age �nn - Fhase II - Environmen-�al Impac� Report � � , ; � . ,_ � MINUTES VAII., PLANNING COMMISSION 21 APRIL �977 � 3: Q0 P.M. Present : Gerry White Dudley Abbott Ed Drager Bill Hanlon Sandy Mi11s Absen'� : Chairman Parn Garton S�a�f Present : Jim Lamont Jim Rubin Rasalie Jeffr�y Members of the Commission voted to a�point Ed Drager as Acting Chairman for the meeting due to the absence o� Pam Gar�on. � RESiJBDIVISTON OF SUNBURST PROPERTY - Vai� Valley Third Addi�tion � Warren and Jay Pulis, own�rs of a portion of the Sunburst property known as Vai� Va11ey Third Addi�ion, were pr�sent to make a preliminary presentation to the Planning Comrr►issi.on for develo�men� of the property . Jay Pulis explained the plan � as inc�uding 23 Dupl�x units along the 18th �airway of the golf caurse on 1500 square foot lo�s. '�he land is curren�ly part nf the Sunburs� P.U.D . He noted. that an avalanche area has been designatec� by Hydro Triad, Inc. and �s outl.�.ned on the preliminary plat . Mr. Pulis then commen�ed that the Town wil.l. have to vaca�e the bicycle path wh�.ch is on his propex�y and reloca�� it along Sunburst D�ive. Tt�e Town wi.11 have h�.s coo�aeration in the matter . Ja.�r► Lamont statecl that �he Departm�r�t of Community Development wi11 study �he proposal in dep'th and bra.ng a report to the P1.anning Cotnrnissian concexning the legal status o� the praject as it relates to �the exist�.ng Sunburst P.U .D. With regard to Sunburst Drive as it exis�s, Jay Pulis said that he wi.11. request it be vacated; will then build ano�h�r road and a cu1.-de-sac to the east on the Katsos property . Bi]�l Hanlon cammented tha� he feels there will be an outburst to the �roposal to separate �rom Sunburst and make duplexes, also to suggest a cul--de-sac be p�aced on public proper�y. Warren Pulis nated tha� the purpose of the cul-de-sac is �o give access �o the lake and picnic area only if wan-ted by the Town and VMRD. Ji.m Lamont remarked that Article 13 , which provides for SD#1, o� tlz� Zoning Oxdinance w�.�.J. have to be reviewed and amended. There is also a questi.on concerna.ng access to the land b�tween � the o1.d and the new Katsos parcels , bo�h o� which are naw own�d by the Town. . PC Minutes 4/21/77 . , Page 2 � Mr . Pulis then sta�ed tha� the �and in the high hazard area would be dedicated to the Town of Vail, totaXl�ng approx�mate�y 8% o� the development . Dudley Abbott questioned the passib�lity of building single �amily residences rather than d�plex. �r. Pu1is replied that it would not be ecanomically feasible to do that ; he no�ed that his proposed 42 uni�s represen� a dawnzoning �ro� �he current P.U.D . Sandy Mills ask�d to have the rela��onsh�p between Sunburst and FDM� elarified at the next hearing. Gerry Whitecommented that he feels that the market is SFR. Dudley A�bo�� �hen moved to �able considera�ian of th� re- subd�vision o� Va�l Va1�ey Th�xd �i�ing un�i� May 3, �977 ; Sandy Mills seconded the motion; a1Z present voted in favor; and th� motion carried. TABLED. VA�L VI��AG� ZI�N PHASE I - �. T .P. REPORT �Yilliam Ruoff , arc�ztect representing the project , pres�nted the Fina1 Environmen�a� Impact Report on the entire projec� to the Planning Commission. Jim Lamont cam�z�n�ed �ha� the staf� had reviewed th� report ; he no�ed that qu�stions which the s�aff had have subsequently been addressed and recommended approva� of �he report . Lamont then noted changes as outlined concern�ng . water consumptian, water supply, impact on bus service, economic �mpacts (e. g. emp�oyee increases as r�lated to housing and paxking) . Gerry White moved to accept the �nvironmenta� �mpact Report for the VVI ; Hanlon seconded the motion; all present vot�d in �avor ; and the motion carried. APPROVED. MINUTES o� �/14177 Dudley Ab�ott moved to approve the �/l�/77 Minutes as submitted; Gerry White seconded the motion; a�� present voted in favor ; and the motion carried. APPROVED . APOLLO PARK C�uck Ogilby was present to request that the Poor R�chards building be �emoved to a port�on o� the Apollo Park property. He �s also r��uesting a bui�ding bulk control variance of ten feet and a covered parki�g variance of 75%. A�ter making a study of. the ava�labl� parking on the site, Og�lby reported : Park�ng xequ�rement per ordinance - 117 cars Actual parking/standard sizes - 121 cars Mini lat/standaxd 10� combination - I31 cars Ogilby stated that he would install traf�ic cantrol gates and � issue a card to each p�xmanent res�den� and a sticker to be piaced on �h� w�ndshield. Park�n� 1ot wi11 be divided inta West an� �ast lots. He is t�en w�th�n the requirem�nts o� the zoning ordinance regarding parking. . , PC Minutes 4/2�/77 , ' • Page 3 Concerning tne opera�ian of Poor Richaxds , O�ilby explained ' ` tha� he will rent both double and sing�e rooms on a six month lease basis. Bi11 Hanlon remarked �ha� O�ilby ' s prnposal w�ll canvert green space into units and that controJ.led park�.ng should be requ�.red. Jim Lamon� stated that the Town Counci.l wants a lzc�avy commit- ment to a good landscaping p�.an around the property with berms, and there must be green space within the parking lot . Ogilby to�d the Commission that his arck�i�ect will phatograph and superimpose �he building on the Apo�lo Park site so that heights can be relat�d to the area; redesign of the Poor Richards bui�.ding e�terior wi11 be studied �o include balconies. Ed Drager commented that the pro,�ect could allev�ate emp�oyee hous�.ng probJ.ems, and reminded Ogil.by o� tl�e time �rame re- garding hearings before �he Planning Commission, Design Review Board and the Town Counci� . Ji.m Lamon� suggested that a joint meeting of the Planning Commi.ssion and Town Cauncil be held the �0�.1�owing wc�ek. Sandy Mi�.1s said that she would r�eed to further study parking, si�e, ].ocation, and �hat the project must not be rushed, due �o potential controversy . Ge��y Whi�e remarked tha� the primary Design R�view Board concerns are heights, landscap�ng and bulk. �ONING AMENDM�NT RE : DESiGN REVIEW SOARD � Lamont explained the concept af the ordinance amending the zoning ordinance, te�r�s of appointment and the appeal �rocess . The amendmc�nt would inc�ease the Design Review Board' to seven members, with a three-me�nber �ubcommi-�tee ta review signs. Since the ardinance was not in fina�. form, White moved -�o table i� ; Mi�ls seconded the motion; all present voted a�n favor ; and the motion carried. TABLED. QUALIFICATIONS OF APPLZCANTS TO BOARDS Th� sta�� was da.rected to include qualifications of applicants in pub�.�c notices for vacanci.es on planning commission and desi�n xeview board. TIMBER TRUCKS ON SAIVDSTONE ROAD Dudley Abbott noted his concern regarding the prQposed use of San.dstone Road �or loggi.r�g trucks. His cancern centered on tY�e hazard (primarily due to a b�ind corner and the resi.dential character of the neighborhood) , dust , noise and general nuisance. Lamont was i.nstructed to contact tk�e USFS and request details from Ex�nie Nunn since tne upper part of the road is owned by the Forest Service. He stated �hat he wouXd have the ma��er on the followi,ng week's council work sessaon agenda since the Planning Commission would be mee�a.ng joa�ntly with the Town Counc�l con- �'� cerning Apollo Park and the hazard ordinance. . • PC Minutes 4/21/77 . ' , � Page 4 • IiAZARD ORDINANCE Gerry Wha.te commented on the conservative reac�ion of �he Town Counc�l to the presentation by Art Mears on hazard areas within the Town o� Vail . I� was ha.s fee�.i��g that we sh.auld have adequate legal backup to prove such statements . With regard �o tk�e question of high hazard areas with 40qo slope not be�ng buildable, White remarked -�hat de�ail.s must be de�inite. As �there was no furth�r business , the mee��ng was ad�aurned at 5: 25 P.M. Respect�ully submit�ed, ��a.�,a,�,� � Rosalie Jeffre � Recording Secr�tary -� � AG�NDA FLA�3NINCx COMMrSSION A�RIL 28, 1977 1 . Considera�a.an o� a rec�uest for a �andscaping and parking variance for the Rucksack building. 2 . Consideration of a xequest far a bua.lda�ng bulk contro� variance �o� the Vail Athletzc Club . 3 . Prel�minary discussian concerning the A�o110 Paxl� proposal � . Cor�ideration o� Minutes af Apri� 21 , 1977. � � 141INUTES VAIL PLANNTNG COMI�R3SSION � APRIL 2&, 1977 3 : 00 P.M. Present : Chairnaan Gar�on Absen� : Gerxp ti'Vhi�e Ed Drager Bi11 Hanlon Dudley Abbott Sandy ItZi�.�.s Staff present : Jim Lamont D�ana Tough�.�1 RUCK�ACK - LANDSCAPING AND PARKING VARIANCE Wi�h regard to a rc�qu�st fror� Jeff Sc�lby, represent�ng �he Rucksack, to postpane consideration of his re�uest for a landscaping and parking variance, Dudiey Abbott moved to postpon.e; Ed Daragex seconded the motioz�; all present voted in favor; and the motion carrzed. POSTPONED. VAIL ATHLETIC CLUB - BUILDING BULK C4NTROL VAR�ANCE Gordon Pi.erce was pres�nt and requested that tl�e total r l.ength of the buYlding be allo�ved to extend �0 195 �eet ' � rather than the 175 feet required by the ordi,nance. Ed Drager moved to approve the request according �o �he staff inemorandum; Dudley Abbott seconded the motion; Garton, Drager and Abbott voted in favor; Mills voted against ; the motion carried. APPROVED. Gaardan Pierce also areq�ested an af�set variance if it as needed. Abbott moved to approve the reqtzest if n.ecessary; Dragear seconded the motion; Garton, Dra�er and Abbott vated in favor; Mills voted against ; the motion carried. APPROVED. PRELIMINARY D�SCUSSION - APOLLO PARK PROPOSAL The Planning Cor�m�ssion xequested that th� sta�� do a complete comparison of the pxoposal by Og�.lby wzth the ordinance. They also wanted size standards for mi�x car spaces to be checked with the ar�hi�ectu�al graphic standards. D�STGN REVTEW BOARD AMENDM�NTS Drager moved �o postpone zon�ng am�ndmen�s �or the Design Review Board; Abbot� seconded the motinn ; all voted in favor; ancl the motion carried. i R " k � MINUT�S - APRZL 21� 1977 Tt was decided by the Planning Commission that Minu�es �rom previous meetin�s would be ��ven ta cominissianers . for their review and considered for approva� a� �he followxng mee�ing, As the�e was no �ur�her business, the meeting was adjourned. � � f � � � ' .. -r �-+.-- MEMORANDUM � T0: Planning Cammiss�an FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: April 28, 3977 R�: Uail Club, Variance from Section 7.506 of t�e Zoning Ord�nance far parce7s ir� Tract B, Vai� V�ilage First Filing, Town of llail , Eag�e County Co7orada (Poor Richards/Short Swing) inc�uding adjacent Pa rce1s A, B, C, approximately 26,852 sq. ft. �he applicant, Fitzhug� Scott, is requesting a variance from Section 7.506, Bu�k Control , in order to construct an ath1etic club, hotel and office on his praperty. The ordinance requires tha-� thhe..:length of any building �ace or waTl sha1T be 775 feet and there be an offset of �0 feet in every 70 . feet of wa�� �length. The maximum distance between any two corners a-F a bu�lding at the same elevat�on sha1T be 225 feet. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS: 1 . The reTatianshi� of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures �n the vicinity. The proposed structure is adjacent �a �he Moun�ain Haus, across fram �he Transportation Center and backs up on �he large green be�� to the south. 7'he praposed building wiTl provide a very goad transition of scale and bU]k between the "oversized" Mountain Haus and the "in scale" Vorlaufer. 2. T'he degree to wh�ch rei i e� from the stri ct ar � i tera� i nterpretatT on and enforce�nt of a speci�Fied regu�at�on 3s necessary �o achieve compatibil�ty and uniformity of tr�atment among sites tn the vic�n7ty, or �o atta�n the objectives of this ordinance withou� grant of specia7 privi�ege. Str�ct interpretation of the or�inance could result in an a1ternative design that wouTd be higher and w�der. This 3n turn would diminish �he iarge sunny landscapped frartt yard which is very desirable as a relief from �he deep s�adow created on the north side af the Nfountain Naus. � 3, The effect o� the requested variance on light and air, d�stribution of popu�ation transportation and tra�f�c facilities, pubiic �Fac�lities and uti�Tties, ar�d pub1ic safe�y. We foresee no adverse effects on t�ese factors. Vai7 C�ub . Page Twa �� .., � FiNDTNGS: 1 . That the granting of the var7ance w7T1 not const7tute a grant of special privi1ege incons�s�ent with the limitations on other propert�es in �he sa�ne district. The adjacen� Mountain Haus is approximately the same in length, but w�th a much larger face d�e to the height. The Vail Club bu�lding �as a considerab�y smal�er vertical face d�e to the steep shingled roo�. The Iarge vertica3 offsets �n the roof rr�or� than compensate, visuaily, for the offset and 1ength requirements. 2. That the granting of the variance wi�l not be detrimental to �he pub1�c health, safety or we�fare or ma�er�al�y injur�ous to properties or improvem�nts in tlie vicinity. We foresee no adverse e�F�ects in granting of this varianc�. 3. That t�e variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: (a) �he s�rict or litera� interpretation and enforc�ment of th� specified regu7ations wouTd result in prac�ical di�ficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of �his ord�nance. 7he 1arge module of the handba3l courts, the indoor swimming paol and under- . ground parking as weli as the shape of the praperty have created obvio�as dimens�onal problems; this, in our view, constitutes a physica7 hardship that wou�d be unnecessari�y expensive to accommodate with other salutions and the aesthetic considera�ions in our judgment would suffer. The health club in par�icular wiil greatly suppl�ment and enhance the available ameni�ies in the Town of Uai7 . The massing and arch�tectural concept will also visually and functiana�ly i�nprove and "clean up° a very impo rtan� carner o� the Town,; the Department af Community Development recommends approval of the reques�ed variance. � . , . � . �. � �fr H o G. r rr w r.� a� �� v �u�, e. c, y�ro x�a o� w •n a�o -t nn �rf a�� � rn - a ro w n�C� �. W (Y tr M H- W;1' O O N W N W F'•�. O N W"'I W W O !R O W '1 fi� C�S F' (3 !D r+ O� H ••1-�'itY N ' N fD B 7�'A' n � (7 A+ r+7 O �'•.N fA H r� '4 7r O'7 V� '3 r :� w u� m -.:o- �'�r.y, j,i � r_. . �;5 w .i s;.u. T.-� S :�.;Y si. �� m .^„��• _ `cr 0 m�'r � .�i�m ro �•��M �+� -�r m n ��a' �sx m m tu c�� io •w o m +v" .a ' m � m w w�+ i �a� i r�� ��rn w K w n� m o a n�o a+ �s❑ (D :�P3 M ' N YJ ro an�r!hi aw � �5�nw�+u.Nm no ,r� w �+o��rn »,o �� n n w �o �+ t�rn ' a Nn�o wrom �smm c mov � o <+m ❑ a c �roro�cm c �n K �� •• KrY m m �� i ^�o. i h m ,... o.❑ � e m .1 h o.�y � r-i n ts a . m • '�' ' � P N a c' 'C'G U� n N �0 '-f W Cl'r'. c+ O t+.F�°-1 C.�'Vl t-.O�D Y 6 [n a F� ro N � I-'�� . tl�.H+i-+. w,c A� �D r}P�.Q fl. e+O L7 h f�'C(� N �G R'tJ�+"s r� • r� (0 C] V1 h7 G7 . CO� • tn 5�-1 f7 '! (�' .'T n G {D 3 rr Ut P+ (n W 3 •O 4 O n fr 6 ,T w R.�9 -]'L4 n O GV N ��c7 .n p m �r N s3 ;Y rt r�N r+'i7 r•fn O �7 s N � . 3 7' rt p� tl H �1 L�� "�r' � ^�O D'^ r*„Vi O �'��D � o ��C W tl^G d N:s F+���C ^ R�tD �• r+� p.O� . .. �' � - �i�t �D � 7� �Vl O cn�u N rr h rt rr P+tY�'.. P� P+ R'i '+7 � n ' � � O \ u naaroc w �a ro ,+�.c �.n �: �va �• n� u�donm� .a,o � a�,a w ::ac � � SO G F+�f0 �'7 O Y Vl[ �n.l r1 O O fU f� '<D M O� M'C Y Vl O � O W 3�+� .'3 F+��fG.7' 2 m a c. n .«F ..,m a ^^�b `r u1 a tn o a �'r� c � K m�3 9' r y r• i-� mm w n � m crc m oa- � � �- �+. wn� a�� z N• m � �� �* cn ? c� � ti cs m c+ m a N�K C r ��ti �� m r. m N 7�t" a �n m � [n � pxi N h �s O �'G.7.G r W N �D O 0.+ �F rr CY n � 'C b.ti :�N m r� C �'m N•� w � � . � , o,-, w � m K �, , : �r ., .. _, � .. a, c � ,� r a� o ' Vl c rr � o ul r+w ��� �n cv ti n v�:v w s;'c1 m C t W � U r•O C� . ' :d O # '1; (1 � :r ct Ci t7 N N �•�7' �1 1n r-�C�: 'i � K�'� F� a H � � 4 R a N � Ul f�s+•y C �O N 'S `r H C fD • �-r(D w P.b<U r•O��"rD ru N et �f . O Y�'] N�Y+b P� N ��P'F+. F+.�. F�.'j . ri T1 W M'Y � �U _ ;� C, M cF , ' 'p .'3�+c+ M I C � �-i N < � F��P.C7 U'4 f/l O M Uf CD H fJ N � f4 O M O - P� A F+• C.b"�.N c'GL N a4 � N �➢ �i N C "i � O t+•�r 'i � � � � �i tC 5'n E f) � �•� W'zJ'O �• r c+H x O N rr O V O 'b - 5 � N � n n w.� W t P'�d t fD P� W n w G�' P"1 1� r�F+`C :1 C*1 Ua U. `G ' NPCm �NndY- Fu� fcr�H N W �� 0� ."�M �1 . . � � Y W N N p �'w 7:r'- ' 7 rr � ` 7 N ❑ H.-f r!� �N *3 P,c1 . . !n a r �N C�'� � w?+ r++. C m W � LL O O tla O �9 � � O .6�C � . . IIQ ef W P� 'i rr i-+cF C � N �C�• rt r* 4 A-'O m - p. N.O t7.o'N- �-1.'r'O.� �i�.+.O N Ul '�F' cr O ! w � �'f?• . . C N O'N't7 C � O �*N (n r� r* a'[5 3 �!1• �'�C S�H r�'tl r�1-� � � - b n �2 �E N`c1 rA W:C 'c+tiv a" N �@� m N F��+ d G'D . � , � rt f7 rG 5' r+K �'W m r� � w �-s O � f�rF hi R N� W O x`C � �'N � rr o r'm 7� a m �'dr�N.�+, .-3F+•-�- 5'y�F '[7r...p w. � e+N. � W � rh�-1 n 7' �C Y. H r+ R . O f!i c+ P� �'��+F�(+a r �'a � - �a - � - O V+W .'3' fo aa • m O O a'(n G'N aq C7 E N Fa rt m n...y � .�r ' �C � - . M C N� N C'C7 K- • �+ C a o O.� 5'U% 700 C �� �,Y�u �e �ro �� nwr� a a�+r aa �». w wm so � o m y o m -- e� r�e. • �r � Q r+ �� 3-n m Y � cr o. �* � s e � - �, c -•a s� r. �. r r•;r��. � a x � �+ w, v� � w�r.m� a v n �°^s�; F; m m a .�M•a� m w o.r��o aa ^ �' m m o . � o c R.�'• n �i rn m • m 'G w F+m �-r C '1 r ;� �D - 6 �'1 � trm a womo �r a �ci oo �+ oar sr�c�K nm wm amo o � �nti�c a�ro �+c �r� w ��om rn y �uva wYau, am ff�rayrtY �+ m KxMw � � � � x m H A� Ll. VI `CS O O N•5 F'� C'r CJ O N W� Ci (G 3'C � F'� O "i . � (D",..t M y C r-�N VI �rF tD fD'LS F'�C] � 0 ¢.�+�"i 6' °i ' M . � . RWO r+r-�u� �.r�t ro0 � mHa �Kro fnn � f�. m � G � 'f �0 r�s: � m - m S'�-s O W m '-i �+!n �! M y - O O'N C7 i7i 7� !U ��s N '� c+r t+�rr� Q. N r+�'��t7 U7 �+ � . � ' E �D p U] � cr a� F+ O r� �s ."5"o UI'C�7 A� � S iC O � rt Q. � � �+Rd p'7NR7 a GR ON'tl O'irr� � c+ Q O "� 1F ro ^ L: 'f �F w, a A� S ��9 r-' 'd r� . � E m`a.w H�+o o rr m m � r• a�� r� �. �+ om • - m � o w:s n � ry�rt w o �� N d tb o d N � rt <+ r q' . - p � . � . p. m a�+ m m � • . � N -'Tl s��O V7 �-h',.c.'�A � N �tl = W r+G�F+•x O ��'n n-' C N Vi m C7 Gl 6'A rr w.�-»C7 H Q'� 'C1 k1 � O N �'UI 179 rn tD @ G � 'd � cJ � �+ ��'(D � f� n P� W O S i+� 9 � W C G N N G �'r+W F' S N H ?C) p W W UI r+• C N N•C O P�"! �. '-I, R N �I'd rt Q.G. N r� R,p C P. 'i �+'i P� 3 Q. N • . �9 r�r`f5� �+ 0.c*3-��+(1 C "f �-' C H F� (J rh rt w C G.P�1� �7 2 K rt x t+.N iJ. fU � � G fb ID CY 'C N CL T.' � C' Ct`C (� ti] ct C'C C] h '.Y�''i .K�]Y• f'`C Y-lD 'C fb tD D F�{D P�IL 'rJ �'" � - 49 W O. `C `-�9'd N .+� O �' �c [-5 a G .+ rD N �u rD r+•w C .'�' a ti; m��C'�.'�G m O.F N v � P� N�C1 N O � N a O � " Ul (D�-+=N � C C P B H !0 .'�a s+• -'�r+1-�•1-� .< N•i-+ - F oao �n � rrH ».a,.r�ua ro :7� • � o nm ���cs� r �.wa .`�r m �.Ka mar• <+ h p � n r-C x' � m w� a 3 ��� o �� wr.a N � r�w77. r � �Y.d wrnro m cs �N m m at� wm wr� �GOO�r� � -o �a �+, cmhmm�cm � c� G � o �acr �+c r� � m� bf+ ra F'•N rr�i rt r-�r p � � 4' �'v r+ rm o cn A� N • C O � :� � t�7 o G1 �+m � O N ��"1 O r+.p Ki N :-/ . o u s o.m o ua m � n r N� �r �a r•a � � ti �w;s ❑ .n en r�� + n a- o r a�r , p.cr a � � r.m a. �a om �s omr+ o�� • 'o �+m r�< �, ocno �r oGCr� m � io ro � � p rr �F� '1 P� C A rt� � .��D N 6 O O N • 10�r.',� w- '� t� �-n �S• O a'R � rh d Iv ni—� o�r � � m . < m � � w n � � a < mr a �-oaK 7; o cr � �n mmna .�+o � mo �� � t+r.� r� � mc �n noo n �nao � m o w z no <;� m �+ m m � • u+ � �+� ma+ ws�•c �.mra wac � wmfl.a � r� c�❑ y mawm � v�a,mu�t� frr �r tiv, cG� aar• .�aMrov Kam N �sm .�� a � � o3n ro �sar�o �rro� n vr �w � �p • �nn o.aa7 F� �-cM Kt4a. Kn �rD � rrru '� c� .�' m �: mr� m �a �POHrr- ryrr OR �a'a' P+�N a"d '� N � �R. w.O O'C ' O 'G � � �+. 3� F+f1. � S].�.O.N� N F• N p� r• (D H U! � �+F�a9 rt!n tD c+ (G a N W�P�C O r�ct N Ui N C O `C O rr Q H FL �S.`t'.�..h3 G1 rF iD CJ '-! O d9 � C.`+O O.F.F� N rF rt "i UJ A� N [J R-re W C N ki C � �'C] O �N �'N E P� y xN p • � • � n (J 6n r� rn -� '7'w[�. �'C7�❑ r��i C� E �.�.. H• a�s o �--�a �. a �� w �-r � w a.o ��h M m.• ,., M ., m r-�a. 2� s:Y•Y�n «� a. � a �r•• 9 c O R w 7 Q 'r3 � � � 7'm 0 ri � tU rF t-�r rt?� W ' P7 N N �-' rt W'6 �i 0'4 C Y3 ct 9�'� 9�-r'p n (n ro-� �'d � '1 I 3�'d ct w�n �rs r+ � O �+ . � �fl. �i rv x .+.O O b o �i 'tl�'e+�y � a m • '�1 rD a o O R'n tn �+s� �-n �c3 rr'd m O LL rS r•c �+�3 "d�+O ro t6 C�'cJ F� F�ro C� GG rr H m r ti'e m m �+ N'J�W � F'- O � N L�cF�'S �F'�G, `A rF A�'G '-"1 Sz O n H C'N�'3'tE N W�D � C Q � r5 tD �1 (+'� 9 (n o aa 't r•r�m O O �G O� C='ln r-�o u o �.:+m M O '+•W �+,'i ln'[f rn '6 ?� N . 'Y.� 75' tn P'N��i ��7 D.o � C p<D (8'C rr'i �+r+� G� � tJ."s 'i 6 c� t+�',�'�-I (9 Q.O W . F+� F+•�i rt N�N a. O A�77 '� G b7•' rt C-1 c* Ui- fD N N � x1�D 'd ' " 0.�' �N �-h m fD A� C V1 �+�-' • ' �E � N W a N r � � � m t7 � t9 r hi CL U. F i0 7 • m r N�Q�(n �n'c3 [� - W � G9 N,Pa (n r W U� � n Q 0 vl . m cD • O 7 P� v� !n t"2Y (4 a '�7 �.N (� N��'�� � . e+ t'�� et a+ c�(� G �n c+ r � c ;n � (: N c+N O w� ,�7 r-F+�C1 P��+� o'N a' �+p. �'r 0. N- � ^' � h'�P -� V• :5 :Y 0.��' K � t�1 ' N F-�O h O:r�--�J N� O � >+'Q f'�, rt O �� N O Yi rt rt � '7 H W w A� O h OR 'a W� �N [J • .-� �+�• - � [f r+a ^f p m �-h tr'� v N N O �D n � :� n � b '6 � U� �N cr p'�A> r� A� a � - eh N N n �0 W - K �P - N� r'rh oa 7 e1 O c+ �J � '-f 07 r• .� N er rt w rf^t �-h F'��7 O M N� N 3 4+ N P..� II � � r+i P• a+C O.O-'""-C 1�rF . �r'+•p� �, r+U�'J a U� �l' N :��O tn �C O iD rfi C fU c+,.T N O `3 F'•5' �oNO �. manfr�ort m —, ¢s � r� � ym o �* mo �s �m xp.• o � m w a� - • y o � :s �s �+a a m m a n'�rs � �+w m �+� o �-�, ov • ' �3 O N N � � c*� @-N 6 N � r� N K r+r•rt :7 �'�N b a' am� o o�a y�o�cs '� N �"-rc c ...m o �, .�.•- Bmma�cc w � C � �G O N Q �.C a �D�'• O W % � =�=C 't7 74� G U� � I 1 I r•i-h� D O F � r � ri� � O -�+.� �'1 r+K w�w r�r� 'd �' � . N•p,c+n N cr f.i 'd O �� rt 7 '7'[R rF!D U. � N C� rt W T (D P r+Vi � H . � 'i �'t �--�F+� C'm >i Y �i N N 'd O tD �-+p 0.�-� fC•C O tD �'�U�Y-� R 0 ^' � 10 C Ci Q W N N `�: �Y 1+.H , �UI G� W G �i H•Q�s ti- a M cF N N "S W k P' - � F+•7'.'1-+ r'F'+7 V 'F''.b O n N �: � �J CS N N W A� rt hh'3'fd :S W.N � m P.cp K 9 � r� N�N rt rr r�r�T a r��' 'r3 �r+•, cr H•'1 r�K�D Yi 0"9 � w . � � �tD ^1 UR (� C) n rP c� n ts [� � +n tU � C� f.1. f� S�'c7 �-i � � U� r•O O r P� H r'0. A' F' A� W 'U F N '1 7 P�7J 09 N W �cr rl N h-�(� �� � p r'•W rt P, N rt ct 'i 'i H O w� O W . '-n U7 N • C�'d O N M C9 UA 09 C� D N F+• N M•O /G N �/1 Vf 'T 7 O'6 '9 A' C F'�'6 P� O'd rt r*G.(D 4f J H "+1� .n.'rt r+P.R F'P' O n N R Oq �n(� C.1. C U' p O � tD ;5 h �':i'-N � ': �.l fG �'1 N�p'�D 9'v 'C H �-n H�7 fJ "s+/l O �3 'i 0.n (i O N �D �1 �* O•� 1 '� m R n�-' �n O eD W R.W r+rr �r r�. r-h ri 0 �C - e+N H � �'�C Oo N . . � 7 Sl. q�C . .. � � . ?' ."7 R i Y m N d �• A� aR H, MPt o � �M n - rt s1 . ry � m O O 'r :3 r� P� SS . p O . fl. ^1 �'i R'N-� rn M . . M G � - -. - _. .�•n oa w.�., r� ;� a ma � 4 , • ' � .�, . .�± � �t�r»,�f tn r n �r v,o �i rs.H•.� w,+v�B*a N r � :s ti � �-•,�+� tti va �hf ��+n �+ w �c, �n n�rr c� 'tl'V m o 0 0 � w ��'w c I.• m ❑ � � n m �•�u�•a w o m m � G a•rn o � a a. G m c o a m�. �c m �o w r� y ���s� � w ro � r,. � N m a a a� �m o �3 � N.� u� �m � w ti C w.•.m ��a n � o �m w n aa � w�r� �� . >> �.. (; p� .. N v�s r. ti n,m a .�m, . r., .�« r �� r n m � �•w o+n m � w cr ui m te o� e m *a M ia �u �u w�� y �y cr N,r•a r•r•h i�a�n �* r r-ro m m w ' �- '.3{R Ye H rF n P' �+`G 7] � O'rt '*1 6' �-f c^i ffJ rr Gl rt T� (o O a � � W• r•rt r�rr�'rr N F��-! �'�s W� , 99 !n r• t� lr�t O � �--�N I m N•r+m�6 w m O ry w�4 A�09 64 9a � �7 9 CP N O 3 r+d N � � � r+•L7 C/�� F N P� � 9 l� ti�.M n h tr--rs o m a • s�.c� r+ � N aG ro m h� 0 0' N� y � rt � aowmam � �sm � �� mfi 7+ �-� m P.-sx mooa.c�a o _ rom moo q ' m � ' 'd R 'f tY N F-' Q C < H O � :1 t7.'o C+1 F+t+6'*s! i-n fV �7 �N W tr� t i n •s r�r•v4 �e O E C O 21 O Cf Y�p E H �r+E:O F'•(D Y•F� :r N F W C W� i+N O d �v' R �D O �U9 �'I (D U] F' . . ri$1D h'•N w ro.�.O rt 75 �0 O A� O t'�r•ti rr a 5 w tj C W Fz a rr a�'1 �� -r+ 7 C O tn �9 �b • r et �A . � �O�E [� ��a �d W �+ U! x rr v1 '! O �P.�'rr N �. `• A.r` h�e;99 �N �.� �G a'n c3 V� O rt .c.� �' � � � O�7C tD � N rr H A. t+� C/i d V�Y�• R � M UI C N '� f� � �t (D '7'r•rt O.W C "! N N. . , . n .. n rr n n. - n+a n m i n r+rn ks r .a oo � �o m�n rr r+.rn te m N� � R7aln mtimB �-n0 � OrDr• U n w Urou.. H �F� a'awro 'r3OV� mR 0 "s mo'rm ^t'or•p0 '� \ w c w o n w w �s � m m � �r�- �a m r �s m � - �r - H m o�r�•m a+ s�. m m .-r� N Ko'o�<+nsti naa m y m timn a-�r� �+ x r� axxm� d m r�co a R.n � m �7 �m o m ��*m r� sz �n n.�n n y K n �o K a ,+:r �*t a�o- ��• ❑ m w a. x, w r•n oc a.�+ , m o�ti C N (U N���+ ! • O rt �d r�•O (D � N -• P� 'i ❑ R.C'.*n� w ci '-+ �i V3 �' :C O W W 9 d bl P.�'�; � :s Ci '1 @ R7 m❑ a N}+.�t W�C].tl9 �.D O Q�t H+m A.c+N � W Y•A> � [s m n rr C ,?' a`a a� u� a r o.a.N i �� n G w i��- v r� c �-s �s w a N��m w �r � a �'w . � G LC �•-�"J �6'i�`-m, ,,,. .� . .; ti • :J U. � .. J . iV � m ry m q?�� N �S N� ..,, "f W '^.��`J ��., � . ..G D J s= r � G ew - �C} :,, ' "s � ' G�`: ;;, � a ;5 ct _r^ r; ti,.;r � rt F��~N m '1 fp ❑ C, � (7 O Y a 3 R)O C� `C e+r��a[]r•rl 3 N O tn d 'T' V � O ' . - d'�E P�'t n a" va O t i W 7 �r+O C W M N G� a' O rt 4; O �'S N�rt D �"[7 9R @ 4 -� O � N aC O O O � � ❑ Y. H� ^v'a'n N 01 'Ci L ' F t7 N .� • N � � W ri a i�-A' ts*1 6 M . � M�-r'O .� 0 O �+f� � �� l� P UJ .trs� H (0 W<* W fi TY- c;_3 A.fD �+.'Y Ui (�'6 �-3 w•N i--� ' ' �rc..'�c'T N c+S7. •i R3 O r�C� C' N. Y � .x Ui O Y��� 't7 N G � �r m r�O n� N 'tl . � F� O R' H W�•P+ G H � � � �,3 '4,.,•7� a tn rr'cY O [f1 w.rr r�r vl t,�7�.R1 �.� '�'P+ ' N f [n N�., � w a m �.n�- o,�N� ,.. o, � .� , :h.,v m N.;;, =, � � n m i��� o O o m n ,�ri � � " a+ x'S n � y �+r� �'o o.r v� �s o m tav ��N•n � � t� n m o �oa e.. n.ro :�.� �+m c� ❑ m a a�mso ».�c � . r� � oaotj�»� � �r•,-r�n ❑ rr•r•m m�N•YWO na. z �e �� a'n o r.� a Y � w �m � m � w r�a� w � �o �r•� o rr •o � m N. � � ' O O E n ry r'C. A� 'C C � •� �-'�3+n r� tp < �O w�c� 3 P3 CY�r D r-+tD � C � . r rt N�ti � �-! 8 > O R - 5'f �'A� f7 F°*'�P O O w 7 G❑ 0 'C "'� r O a n p'a'a :s . . R.w• C N C n N�a w �' rp A+ r+�r*aR c'�-{ � N o- C.�a C] C� r•ro O n c+P.s+� P� A�oq w r�(*?' r� b�� O m a s+. N O rr',7 P. ',x1 < O � r.O O O p C� R' r-� ':r rr N K n7mati >non � a .n r�Km mr, ty w ;r�a � �-n� �w �srorr :c a � - � tp o m w a n q3 N-Y� � N �� -� ti]�r� P o rn r� r�n P� �- a'� �n O �n � .+o [r w �n tD�O ❑ n 'O� m fl.P� O K P.h< � r-h P. C �'1 N'� m W O Pv h'- c, �aa� awmtiarr oaw �s n . n � o ��am � aao ��a� � � �•o � somw < � a � n m �o �•h� � � �s ehtn �� Nrnw m ❑ h�rsr. ��00 I m �•a� w m m n N• m.�r m a�m c�.m a'��c�m N� M +n'u n-�s � �r a�'�ov i � �7 m N � a n O O m w�i a m �s ?� m O u+ D <+r-' O'O ���N�O O'�: N r• I� O v n �1 f].a p� � � �ct 1D W . n m :+ rr p r tJ A+ •+�r'o o b N r - �' � E � �'o N >s (R cF(D . td w 9 O`C � � N� � c r- n rr CF4�j M fn O a' p C>N �.n Oa �n O f+• N�O 27 N b • M�O [� C: N F+• [� �+ O M p'� m -❑'C �D � C fG l7 c�R3 UI O C � N.P''C�� o �G r. C7 N O �U1 oq Y rr tG C.'c7 ry a ID 1D 7 1D � O Ul �-h O O � *7 (a R.' N tD W r�e+(D rn i'+ _ 'D O �i O'C fi H F� N D �+W P.�i}� rt N �• rr C i�.A+ r• ti 4� Q. 5'�1+ K fJ. �• w r� 'C O k G �'r+ rt�-1 'i �D fJ O 4� N N !h ��p 'J i➢YJ C7'N t+•N� (D�'i7 cr'z3 • "'C 4�'t7 N't7 � p N R O' p (G "S O. p J O.0.w N P.i� U1 �'! �i � � n U4 B N G7 O �'�' rh� T:N X P' - C> tFr•C �.w(n !D 'O 09 0 Z3 K O N � (➢� • O ?' r•'G'i @ r•O.G W r Y��rt� �i rr N`C c..�y �w 'o �i n N O a O ��.'� N� . H F-' rt ct� P� N R F+• 7 O N Vi O �' '^3 f� A.fD '.V'i 1-+ �Q9 � �7 F�� � W O �'G � N O N �C� • N n N fU "f7 �-+4.ry m O .x1 P.t+.O'� 9a D N � n � amw.u.❑ � w � � rn �nr+Q.cc i .� � �m � � 5 c�. . a .� r m n o a w m-rn r- c r�•r• .� . n a�H rt ��� a w•�r fn A� � M r+ C ts n rr ',�N m P' `C B � �'p• 'r 1 '�7 '3 .'3 � W y ' � . � �E � N . � . �F p4 N M f� _. R. E �� N O ' � � - . . - . . ... . _ � . . .. - ._...... -. . � . . _. ,_.:... .....a:�. . �7$C/� � ]tl W Y C p K C N �-i G] "' K1'd N O r f� rt N i�-n c��F� C N £ti' N , tlQ n (1 N//��� V1 - K w• "'.� �p �CY '� tY K @ m ���e, ��t N � � ' G�.F�� � (1 N N N�[D LI..P+ C� C7 �P.Y r.�p � fn ri r+�• O.E O -" c�r s�.t (p cD;'Y rf N Y�G 7 O . oq c� � h7� oV O G �� rt L7 Umi N Us*+, � L�W iYc�� r•r•N M N f-4 �c � • +h G�rr d�+ � = . .{� ry h��tD N C1 R�+ �i fU N � 1-� r+cr O 1 tV � ' rt 6 � � N� cL fD� � t*] � M 6'[D69 e+N �1 � . y �. ' C w(n 4��>3 a'�- � � � r�r cy+ �.r��� m. o. m �a p�,��a ¢. - .. . y 6' C� O tD O � . w0 Y�'Mrl� � . . . � F N �'�i d','�7 rF � . w a w �a� - - . w M N�r+��w m , m ��� ~��� '� � (A A� 'L3 O O . . . - � � x'A� O �-+� (�i� . e+ R� N ��H m �*"o.mwpw a� cmtiN m ���:�"�' - (p tD Y.�(D �+ awmmm . - w mm�+ a+ y � �+ m �n K m w �+ x�+m �n W �•r�m m o � E �Fr� ro ft� . � N �� �� a . . � � �n�.aa�� � , a � o�n nNo � c.. rr �w *n � .. . . . 4 N ?� �i � mo��,a� m � �m `� a , � . N � • O � C . r a � . ' � t � �' PLAN�dING COMMISSION � AG�I�TDA May 5, 1977 1. Dr. Mizner Residence - Request for varia ce from Section 3. 505 in order to allaw �wo separate uni s on a duple� lo� . 2. Selby/Tofel - Requ�s� for variance for d stance be�ween buildings for �he Lionshead Commercial B ilding. 3. Rucksack - Reque�st �or variance �ox �anc� caping and parking. 4. Amended Pl,a� for Resubdivision a� �rac� , Vail Village llth Filing. 5. A�allo Paxk - Request for variance wa.thd awn. � � , . � t 4�NUTES VA�L PLANNING COMMISS�ON MAY 5, 1977 3: 00 P. M. ��esent: Chairman Gaxtan Absenta Ge�ry T�7hite Ed Drag�r Dua��y Abbptt Bil1. Hanl�n Sandy Mill� Staff present: Diana Toughill Rosalie Jeffrey MIZN�R R�SID�NCE - Bighvrn 5th Add�.tion Dr. and Mrs. Mizne� and aarchitects Wheeler and Piper were present to request a variance �.o allow two separa�te uni�s �o be built on a du�lex 1ot. D�.ana Taughill noted tha� she had received a letter of o�position from a neighbor who had apparently read the n.o-�ica in the newspaper; she _ had been unable �co cantact 'che party by telephone. l�uane � Pzper explained �ha� the reason for the request is �he topographical canfiguratian of the si�e. He showed �hotagranhs and a drawinc� of the propo5ed buildings to the P�.anning Commission. '�oughill. mentioned th.at the �otal site coverage �,rould be 1800 sc�uare feet; the total GRFA tirould be 2481 square feet. Piper commen�.ed that �here are nther residences of this type in th� area, and that the�e woul.d be no r�moval of trees. A discussion en�ued xegarding the possibi.l.i�y of bui�.ding �ut ta the total all.owable GRFA. Abbo-�� wanted ta pu� a condition on �he vara.ance regarding square �ootaqe. Mi].�.s and Gar�.on found the variance acc�p-�able as proposed. Drager commented that �he�e is a ne�d to amend the ordz�- nance concerning duplex zones to disallow each unit to be bui1� any greater than �Oo o� the total. a�lawab�e GR�A. Hanlon moved to approve the vaa�iance reques� according to staff inemo (see attached) ; Mi3.ls secandecl �he motian; a11 vot�d in favor; anc� the mation carried.. APPROV�D. S�LBY-TOFEL - Lion�Head Commercial Building Toughill stated that the app�.ican� had reques��d the ma��.er be �o�tponed. The Town Council had asked tha� �he mal�. area in the center o� the project be wic�ened, and it is � now being worked out by the develaper. Minutes P1ay 5, 7.9 7 7 �age 2 . Han�an moved to pas�pone at the applicant' s request; Drager seconded the motion; a�l vot�d in faVOr; and the ntotion carried. POSTPONED. RUCK5ACK -- Landsca�ing and Park�ng Variance 'i`oughill stated that the applicant had reques�ed �ha� -�he variance reques� be postpaned again. Hanl.on �ov�d to postpone; Drager seconded �he motion, a11 voted in favor; and the motion carried. P08'�POP3ED. Planning Comrnission then requested a Memo ��o�n �he Staff regarding non-con�orming �xses. RESUBDIVTSION OF TRACT E, VAIL VILLAGE lltlz FTLTNG Due to view carridors and the spring runoff, Toughil.7. ex- p�ained that lat l.�.nes on �his trac� had been moved. �h� presented �he amended pla� for the commission' s approval, stating tha� the plat was init�all� approved earlier in the year. There wot�ld be no change in the squa�� footages o� �he 1ots. Drager maved 'to app�ove the a�nended plat; Hanlon seconded the motion; a�1 vo�ed in favor; and the motion ca��ied. AP�ROVED. � REPOR".0 ON APOLLO PARK Tougtzi�l stated �ha-� Chuck Ogilby has wi.thdrawn his reguests for va.riances due to a tirne problenl �'or approvals frorn Planning Commission, Town Council and Design Review Baard. Abbott commented tha� at was �oa bad the project didn't work out because it would have provided much needed employee housing within �lze Town o� Vai1. TOWN COUI�CI�PLANNIP�G COP�I�IISSZON JOINT M�ETING Prapasals to be reviewed join�ly are: 1. �'he S�a {across �rom The Ma�k @ LionsHead) 2. Phase T� Vai�. Villaga Tn�n 3. Vail Run - preliminary proposal for c�mpletian o� development projec� . Minutes May 5, 1977 Page 3 � APPROVAL OF APRIL 21 MI�UTES Correct�ans to the April 21 minu�es includ� the fol�owing: 1. Line 6 - should read 15 �-000 s�uare �oot lots 2 . Pulis dedica�ion of about �Og af deveLopmen�, not 8% 3. Last Line - Apollo Paxk - should refer to number of parking spaces Abbott moved �or approval as cor�eCted; �rage� seconded the �otian; al� voted in �avo�; and th� motio� carr�ed. APpROVED. OTHER �TE�S D�ager suggested tha� if �here are no applicants for the Planni�g Commission vacancy, the posi�ion should b� re-advertised �o include �he qualifica�ions. Chairman Garton noted that there will �oon be a need �o re-appoint a chairman and vice-chairman to �he commission. � As theace was no further business, -�he mee�ing was adjou�ned. � M�MORANDUM • T0: Plannzng Comm�ssion FROM ; Department o� Communi�y Development DATE : May 5, 1977 RE: Dr. George L, Mizner, Variance �rom Section 3. 505 of �he Zoning Ordinance for Lot 17, Block 5, Bighorn Sub� diviszon, 5th Addi�io� Duane Piper, represen�ing Dr. Miznex , is requesting a variance �rom �ectxon 3.505, Density Control, in order to con�truct two sepaxa�e sang�e-family units on a lot zon�d twoR�amily xesidential . The ordinance, a� de�er�ined by the �onzng Admzn�strator and the P�anning Comm�ssion, requires that two units be in a single structure or that �h� units be physically connnected by common wa11s , The praposed project cnmprises a primary residence and a garage wath a simall rental unit ab��e, connected by a walk- . way . The basis �or hardship is �h� �opographical con�iguxataon o� �he site. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS : 1. The relationship of the req�ested variance to other existzng ar potentia� uses and structures �n the vzcinity. The a�plicant is in an area where �her� are a number o� gaxages separated �rom the dwel�i�g un�t (see p�c�ures) . The pxoposed structure would have no more impact than a garage separated from the primary residence. There are several residences cons�ructed in the golf course area with the same type of configuratian which wer� built prior to the e�ist�ng ord�nance. 2. The degree to which re�ief from the strict or li�era� znterpre�ation and enforcemen� of a spec�fied regulation is n�cessary to acheive compatibility and un�formity o� treatment among sites in the vicinity, o� to attain the objectives of t.his oxdinance without grant of special privilege. S�ric� interpretation of the ordinance would destroy a s�gnif�cant • rock outcropping and require cutting of several large trees. The guidelines for thE Design Review �oard specifica�ly states that . � Mizner Page 2 �ve�y e����� s�ould be m�de �o ������v� �ign��sean� �a�ural �oek � autcrnppings and preserve the natu�al vegetatzon. We �eeX that th� possib�e env�ronrnenta� damage which could result from connecting the �wo un��s is justification for separa�ing these units as request�d. We thexefoxe �ee� that granting of this variance is not a gran� o� specia� privilege. 3. The e�fect of t�e re�ues�ed variance on lig�t and air, distribut�on o� pauplation, transportation and �raffic facilities, gublic �acilitzes and utiXities, and publie sa�ety. We �orese� no adverse effects on these �acto�s. The sma1� renta� unit and a primary residence ful�ill the �own goa� af reducing overall population. The �ot cauld sustain a Iarge m�rror im�ge duplex. F�i�llINGS : 1. That the granting o� the variance will not constitute a �rant of spec�al privilege inconsistent wz.th th.e limitations an other propex�a�es in the same district . See I�em 2 under Conszdex�ata.on af Factors. The geologic and topographic consa�deratians dictate placem�nt o� the pxoposed duplex. • 2, That the granting o� the vara.ance wi11 not be detri- menta]. �o �he public health, safety or wel�are or materially injurious to properties or iznp�oveme�ts a�n the vzca.n.a.ty. We foresee no adverse e��ects i.n gxantin.g of this variance. 3. That th� variance is waxxan�ed for one or more of t�ae fol.low�.ng �easons : {a) The s�ric� or literal interpre�ation and en�orcem�nt o� �he specified regulations would r�sult in practical di�ficulty or unnecessar� p�ysical. hardshzp i�.eonsistent with the objectives o� this ardinance. I� the a�pla.cant did connec� �he two dw�llings, the applicant would be forced to increas� the hei�h.t a� �he present tinit 1 and tk�e bulk of the project to such a poin� �hat in oxdex to meet the setback regula�ions the house wou�d probab�y tower over the pres�n�ly �xist�ng trees which in oux view wou�.d be aesthetically unpleasing. �n add�.�i.on to that , zt . would be impo�sible to bring �a d�iveway u.p �hrough the rock lc�dge �o �he garage so that the applicant would tnost �ikely have to have the garage as a separa�� building down below �he house. which would resu�t in pxacta.cal di��icu��y ancl would serve n.o purpose � as the vi.sual impact �vould be the same. Mizner Page 3 � The Department o� Community Development xecamme�ds approval o� �he prQposed variance. � . s� .>.-- :.y. ;f�' . PLANNING COMMISSION AG�NDA � May 12 , 197? �,. Rucksack - Reques� �or pa�king variance for two (2) cars Jeff Selby 2. Vaz]. Village Inn - Phase Y� Prelim�.nary review of proposal Ruoff/Cooney 3. Vai1 Run - Preliminary presentation of master plan for completion o�t pro�ased pxoject IIob Byrd, Cab Childress , Bob Yeagex 4. The Spa - Preliminary presentation o� �rariance rec�uests Torn Bx�nex 5. Lionshead Commercial Buil�ing T Request for distanc� bet�cveen buildings variance Jeff Selby/Ron Todd � � i' ` ..."'1� .�:. . , 4 � �d�NUTES VATL PLANNING COMMISSION �4AY 12, 1977 3 : 00 P.M. Present : Acting Cha�rman Abbott Absez�t : �exry �Ihate �d nragex Pam Garton Bill Hanlon Sandy It4i.11s S�a�� : Diana Toughill Ji.m Rubin Rosalie Jeffrey "�own Council : Rod Slifer Bill Wi�to Also Present : Tom Briner Jack C�rtin Bryan Pendletori Doug P��cLaughlin Leon Deicas Ross Cooney Jef� Selby Cab Chi.1 dress Bob Yea�er Bob Bird � LIONSHEAD COh7r7ERCIAL BUILDING J��f S�lby was present to request a variance for distance bc�wcen builc�in�s . As a result of a request from the Town Counci.l to w�.den �he distance i.n the ma�1 area, Selby stated tkza� �tY:e n�ontaneros �ondaminium Assaca.atz.on :h�.d reviewed t�Ze proposal and it was satis�actory to them. Drager maved to approve the variance as outlinec� in the staff tr�emos of �'ebruax�y 24 and May 12 , 1977; Hanlon seconded the mot�on; all voted in favor; and the motion carried. APPR�VED. kUCI�SACK ADDTTTON Jeff Selby, awner of the Rucksack Bu�.l.d�.n�, xec�uested a parking variance �or �wo cars fox ha.s proposcd adda.t�on o� E�_l0 sc�, ft . o� commerc�.al space. He also presented plans for the addi�ion to the Planning Commission and explained that �.t is his in�en��on to enc�ose the entry on �he north side anc� enlarge ��ae apa�t�nent on the second floor east sic�e. He commented that he needs the variance only far �he com[nexcza�. space. He sta�ed that the �ox�er owner had �eceived approval to pu� up gates on the soutiz side walkway in December 1976, which eliminate� the passageway between the Rucksack and the Ped Lion Buildin�. �t was the consensus of � Minu��s/�.�. � , May 12, 2977 � ,� ` Page 2 , , r � the Plannin Connn7ission to wait for the Town Council ' s ruling g an coxe area parkzng with relation to varianc�s. Hanlon stated tha� he �.s and has always been against granting parking variances. Abbott was concern�d �hat the living space would become cornmercial space in the fu�ure and with the im�act o� pedestrian traf�ic wi.th the elimination of the wa�kway. Doug McLaughlin, lega� caunsel representing twenty condoma.nium owners and eigh� busin�ss in the ll�ill Creek Coux� bu��.�ing, was present and objected to the gran�ing of the variance to allaw the c�osure of the walkway. He stated that it is his Zn�ention to bring a quiet ti�le action against Selby. He also noted tha� he had not been advised o� the development, and tha� he had o�fered to pay �or half of the improvemen,ts alang the walkway to e�iminate �he ice and snow probJ.ems. Jack Curt�.n , Bishop and Company and representing �wo owners o� t�� Mi�l Creek Court Building; objected on behalf of his clien�s. He cotnmented that they had been worki.ng with the Town �o a.t3nprove the cour�yard area to the east o� �he R�cksacl�; said improve- ments to be done du�ing this summer. Belby then remarked �hat his development will not affec� �he Mi1� Cr��k Court area, and that the Red Lion has not objec�ted. • Abbatt �hen noted that due to �he pending parking decisidn by the Tawn Council, citizen objecta.ons anc� the need to fur�he� study the ordinance, the Planning Commissi.on s�ould defer rulzng on the reques� at �his time. Hanlon was of the opinion that the Plannin� Cornmission should vote according to the p�esen�G law. Drager then moved to table considerati.on af the request until A�ay 2.6; Mills seconded the mo�ion; all voted in f avor; and the motion carr�_ed. TABLED. Preliminary plans were then presented for Vail Village Inn Phase IF , Vail �.un and The �pa. As there was no further business the meeti.n� was adjourned. � �-�*` y � r°� f � ,` ' �` . w MEMO�NDUt�2 � � . T0: PLANNTNG CQMMISSION FRO�'�: DEPARTMENT OF CO�MUNTTY i�EVELOPMEN'� DATE: MAY 12, 1977 RE: PARK�NG VARTANCE - RUCKSACK BUILDTNG Jeff Se1by� represen�ing -�he Rucksack Bui].ding , has requested a pax�king vara.ance far two (2} parking spaces zn oxder to allow the addition of app�oxzrna�el.y 61.0 squa�e feet af comme�cial. space and 246 squar� f�c:t of gros� �esidential �1.00r a�ea {2 bedrooms and a bath) to be added to an existing residential dwe�ling unit. The site area is 4 ,242 square faet which permits 3 ,�61 square feet of GRFA. The exis�ing builc�ing contains �, 6�0 sc�uare feet of GRF'A; br- ' ! inging tatal proposed GRE'A to 1,84b square feet. E�isting commercial space consists of 3 ,75I. squar� ��:c�t. CON$IDEI�TTON OF F�CTORS (SECTION 19.640) , l. The relationship o� th� requested variance �o o�her exis�ing or potential usES and structures in the vicinity. The Rucksack BuilcTing is one of a �era buildings a�� -�he CC1 area which is not bua.l.t to the: absol.ut� maximu�n al7.owed und�r -�he current zoning ordi.nance. This bui�ding, .J.ike almost a1I others in Cornmercial Core l, was constructed before the adoption of zon�.ng and therefore, space for parking �ras not provided when the lo�s wer� subdivided and sold. 2. The dega�ee of which re7.ie� �ram �he strict or litaral interpretation and enfo�cement of a specif i�d re:gulation is necessary �a achieve compatibil.ity and u�nifarmity o� tr�a�mexat among sites in the v.icinity, or ta attain the � objectives of this ardinance wi�hou� grant of special �� privilege. � The stated purpase of the CCI zone dis�ric-� is: 11The Commercia� Coxe 1 Di.strict is ix�tended �o provid� sites and to rnaintain the unique character of �he Vail Village comm�rcial area, with its anix�ure df lodges and commercial establishmen�s in a predominan�ly ,° -" - , Rucksack Building - , � May 12 , ti977 A Page Two � ed�strian envi�onment. . .The district �egula�ians pr�scribe site P developmen� standards tha� are in�.end�d ta ensure the nnaix�ten.ance and preservation of the tightly clustered a�xangemen� o� bu�.Zdings fronting an pedes�ra.an ways and pu.bl.ic greenways, and -�o ensure con�inua�ion o� the building scale and axchitectuxal qua�ities that distinguish �he Viilage" . The praposed addi-�ion to the Rucksack building is in keeping with thc: purpose outlined in �he zaning oz�dinance as the ��t�ucture remains in scale �ri�h �he Village, and the architect�ral quality of the structure is improved by the changes. Forci.n.g prov.ision af parking in CC1 is in direct opposi�ion td .th� stat�d purpose o� maintaining a pedestrian area. Re�.aining long term dwelling uni�s in the cor� area and making thein more livable �or long �e�m residents is consistent with the goa].s s�ated for Horizontal Zoning. Approval of �he variance would be in keeping with many athEr parking requests in the area. The request is similar to the Schober Building Addif.ion, the Hill Bui�.ding Addition, the S3.i�er Addi�ion and th� Cov�r�d B�idge Stor� which were al1 variance requests for parking in orde� to expand ex�s-�ing buildings constructed prior -�o zoning. 3. The e�fec� o� thc r�quested variance on Iight and air, ' � distr�,butioxz of population, transpo�-�ation and t�affic facilities, pubiic facilities and uti�.i�ies, and p�xblic safety. The proposed e�pansion of �zses should have little effect on the demand �or parking in the parking structure, ancl the parking structuze has su£tici�nt capacity �.o provide for any additional traffic wh�ch might be genexa-�ed by �he expan�ion. The proposed expansion wi11 n.o� necessitate additional vehicu7.ar acces� into �h� p�d�strian area as delive�y vehicle� are al,ready servicing exis�ing uses and the �ncrease in GRT'A is an adclition to an existing unit. The ma�s transit sys�ern is capable o� . handlin.g any increased demand, if any, generated by �he prnposed expansion. The �ffects of the variance on ad�qua�e light, air, distributian of popula�ian, public facilities and ut�lities and public safety are neg3�igible. The addition does make access from Mil.l Creek Cour� more difficult..as this area has been used for pedestrian access �o Bridge S�. FINDTNGS: ` 1. That the gran.ting of the variance will not cans�itute a grant of special privilege inconsisten� with the �.im.ita�.�.ons � on other prope�ties classif ied in the same dis�.ric-�. 'M Rucksack Building ��'� '�� . ` May 12� 19 7 7 � ` , � � P�ge '�hr�e � We do n.ot feel appraval o� the varia.r�ce wouid be a qran� � � �f special privil.e e as a xoval wou�.d ' � g pP be conszs�ent w�.th previous parking variance requ�s�s, and other izKe expansions in the Core have nqt been x�equired to fuxnish aclditional parking. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimenta� �.o the pub7.ic health, sa��ty, or wel�are, or anaterially injurious to properties or impro�rements in �he vicinity. We �eel �hat denial af the variance would be detra.ment.al to the pub3.ic health, safety. and wel.fare as parking an the si�e would cr�a�te additional vehicular traffic and could bc� hazardaus �o pedestrians using �he area. On site parking cou�.d be injurious to the pedcstri.an area �rom both an aes�hetic an�. safety s�.andpoin�. 3. That the variancc: is warran-�ed for on� o� more of the followzng reasons: (a) The stri.ct or literal interpre�a�ion and enforcement of the speci�ied �egulation woulc� rasult in practical. difficulty o� unnecessary physical hardship incansistent with the objectives of this ordinance. (b) Th� st�ic� or Iiteral interpretatian and enforcement ofi the sp�cified regula��.on wou�d deprive the applicant I� o� privileges enjoyed by �he owners of other praper�ies ' � in the same das�rict. �� I� On the site park�ng in �he CC1 dis��ict would be inc�nsisten� wi�h �hc� desire to pedestrianize the Core and inconsistent with application �o othc�r st�uc�uras in the sar�e district. Th�: Council discussed parking variances and contracts at 'r �he Tuesday wo�k session. Larry Rider explained the legal ramifications of the exi5�ing con�racts to purchase parking in the Transportation Center. �'he Council. has stated �ha� they will consider the entire issue o� parking variances in Com�ne�cial Core ]. at the May Z7 I'� CaunCil. �neeting and wi11 reach a genera�. po�.icy decisiori at tha� � time. Any action on, the subject variance shou�.d be consistent ` with �his important decisian. ,, i ih 'E . . I� � I E w � ' M�MORAi�1DUM • TO: PLANNIP�G COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF CONlP�UNITY DEVELOPMEN'� DATE: MAY 12 , �977 RE : LIONSHEAD COMMERCTAL BUILDING - REQUEST FOR DIS'�'ANCE BETWEi:�N BUTLDINGS VAR�A..'�iCE The Town Council requested Selby/To�'el to restudy �he proposed �ommercial building in an attempt to widen �he ped�strain ease-- ment through the proj�ct. Thi.s reques� necessitated a distance between bui�.dings variance ta acheive the wider pedestrain ma11. �he Department of Community Deveiopment has reviewec3 the reque�t and tind that the criteria and findings are consisten-� with recommendata.ons in memo dated February 24, 1977 re�ating to a setback variance for the sazne project and would therefore recomFnend a�proval o� the subject va�iance in accordance with those criteria and �indings appiicab�.e �o the setback variance. s s ._ ....... . ... .. . __ . . .�.,.,_.�_�._�---._..... . �. � � � � m 1..� � • C T a�V i+ m a ro q��a m� m ?, ��w W�ro u 3 . m„ � s: a M � r: n �: .a c��. c+,a u F+��y rd�K o a� �n Cl • n 0 G� N C� �'J+� O u s+ .c 1: �V a+ u.[: T C C � y� u.c].1 � U 7 l.vt �W N W u ro'U 7 �J �+A - . . u c � u N p - w,a. .a.+ . o u�+ . m r. d �. r+.� 60 �'J U' �7 G� �7 � � N .11t L L�va H ?�. ' N J3 H l+W'tl rf U . � G u � W A C N N Cl 00 u D lr.O.� .'��ri � 00 O d �C 7 � �.1 n m O :J »1 rt M C w i+-.-1 u W . •�-1 1� C 'N.•• N. � � "r �, ., v ".a,'a.� .,c, �n ,a v • u u o �a �+ c+.in y c � a.. a,N u u }:•.+ w a m u w � 7 � �.y O C� m �7 �7 u O 1n 7 U tn re H 7'O a A G dl a7 >.�0 U d W y W �s �il C a�� ^1 r1 G� '�+ O W H U �."O V Vi� p7 C� V L. �'S /7 C I� X F. • E� ?.ts�.1 w o.l] � O � _ . T 4 00�'a . a.+-i �J aa a. N U t� G�.-� ci Vi N V W w U H G N J.0 E G Vl 7 V.�++rl N G �l T V 7 N Q/ �7 .� 1 q W �3 � F+ u al O W N W Ci � ^J a1 . al C. q O r� N.0 N , O G rY �'J �Y V 7 V .{; .w 1. cP�a P � O P H-N u tr . W� O G � N 7. � O V] O O W Ol O fJ�U,.1 aJ H O U !tl �Q � ' � U � W ry-!.: L+ T W •.-1 - :3�w ri � u� C] '�- N N Cb'G P. 'Jl J b O �0 N W 11 LS 1.1 � W ?+ N 'd �F� � 7 �d Li 'L�'13 H U'-I u'O W O itl O . O L. N � ci as .-� u � O 61 N 4+ a � M b a7 U a � . W +I r! u.y N S W . 7 N +1 u V � 1R }+ DO L c-0 .i rt . � N u a1 4r V G L 'n U V: co+-� � W v N O G� s. a�w C w . ❑ e 7 � s. � r u w o . � � v e n� �+ s.,.,�q x o N Cs w u H U u m �+,4. 7 m G�v N 1.- v m H u N�rl 1+ . ' � u vi u in �.! C w tn C O++ �i - P.�'J C O O 0xi LO H y K 'J�f }+ fA�fn O O W'o G V1 �n ul �'J G N (] wi G Sa P C ' 'O �M O t6 iI f6 Yy . G ^G �'1 f�. H N �J O O a�+v1 ^ U J»/ y . � 'tl'.-� 4 N'.< 4 O • r/� � tV 4 r-I C N +�A'O S+ �-' L+ - G N+1 V H 1+ N 't7 6J L C rl N•-1 G�'�7 N.=M V' tO•ri f3 V1 CJ U �A U'O � VI •N-+i ' -.� N E U �rl � ri W ' W � E.-. 7 C 1. :3•.i cJ E a� t4 C._.� G.U r-� ri �.m ai . . p; Li ry al O•.1 vJ r+ la C • N F' JJ ul G 7 .n O.0 �1 7 u ".s +� ' O p �3.-i CO u 'V i� � N O N l+ .�1 T1 d u V L U� GI� N F p C C � 3� 0. u � � . b �.'v U' G . . u ri m U en q N 1 e� 6 v,�, � ,y m w C o v.fl c � H v, C� o tsI� 7 t� F €V.-� u U tl 7.T••+ O �C G ai f.i 3 'J p s+ `� .7 6.' ^� O �9 G a Vf I+ N A n7. L�.S 'p L O . In aJ•.1 �9 al � .-I U H o ro o 7 v•� E: �J �'U'c ^ 7:w 7''i a' 'i � � � w c 's a+ ai aa y v .+ +-i m m m_... ,-� � C a N . [« . C U C U c7 V C) 7 �.0 A 7 u u rl O+i C-0 C O'q N � 1 {L+ . N u O u Cl 7 V N U LQ C 3�.�1 �•.d S� . 7 V G �5•rl.W i+ C VI EC G V G r � Y C+�+ C N R1 L•ri N � W M.0 11 E OO � 1+; ai C ^� I •N � o. u CY,� r. C 1+ rn I � � u 4+ w 3 u u G u.U nl . �. �n .�+vi E C •.� O w � o,� :�7 I � :.+ :n c cJ vr I cd o.V t+ 7 N N � � a � u.C o _c'� m+ s^S�C E I 1. C � �� v W i � C•N o s1't7'O � H rl O G VI 3 U a.��p }+ C H I 3 N F+ V u.o V: I Sa W R7 N� �T , � .-I la Z7 •.i ? - ••V U 7 O ^]' fn I G.G [J. � 1 N V1 u C N L� iL _ ' •rl Ci rl 1 i+ CI N O �'3 CI � �.�1 C Lb 1�v CNJ w� � �n L C7 I 'r] .o o � C1 I 7 0•ri u p c1 F u f]t�.�1 U C N W H ?��ri � 1 't} F+ t!� N [� Z I 1�'O'O I l! +� U . H �4 (7 �H 4 41 '� V c3.--I,='^� F+ 3 V` O u ,T H � u C O C'. O Vl 'O d u V �i W [ u1 r+ � E I ,C C iy^ ��A I 7.0 O O W.� � CJ •N :J U 1 � �J 'v1 7 k � f Ur N :1 C +� � - [� � N E ,� u T 1 .e s+w w v O I ��+•N E � a7 O � N,��e� �w v'b s�.i Z N 1 C V �I L �7't7 C ! n J� G 3 O G. W f .-I.� G T7 4] W 1 fn.0 u F Ol.G ' � H k1 1 U u el Q.N G I �n � -/-. ! .0 j' 1+ N•�'1•r� 7. I 3 U CU Vl �A'O � � O i C A�J � Gi � ��.'e j i o �J.�. O t n •.i +�a N o o. N �N�.Gi� aCEI . +-� Ui +-� U U k L ^J o: � V I O R. ! r eJ cn 4+ N E ! ++ C M � 1. I N W v Y m� 1 I N O v �h N F. . . _ p. y: � ri r� G .'� i W 4+ O V:'LI �A .Z. f N � Q1 V ',� 1 C1 U W O N N �6 :G :J 1 N •�+ ^ O � O 1 O•�+ +� O I . �+•H 7 O I +a G .F 'N �� .. ' 0. I ++ N +� N t+•�+ U I M ++ C �J T Z 1 � ^�+ z F •ti �a � 7 T C 8 i uc� o ..� 3 wroc� �� � �,m v i u, am .Aa d � Q ly u •.+ O i OC R u E•N o .i u � � L o d 4 •� V s.� e', o0 � 7. O I eJ y c'� • '[7 0 1 � •'1 c1 �1'Cl o I � t6 o F+ � o k �C'l: C �G S1 C 01 � ' O r[ 1 � t • U �C c� i ',�+ � .'s U N �'S I 47"�•.� r;•N v I l+ �tl� O •N p �Z . / U V i. G 7 C O • I E'C• O "J� m U • k W O �- � . . � O ` M �wi O G O V O 1 4+ Gl� F�W M p � '� C T • O�4 O � b H H � ' N I i+.�• �H�•.i N 1 O L n.Vi S. N 1 • ctl G 'V al �J N i 'd N Q7 O GJ O ! 11 u A +�'+' CA I W V; � U U 1 H 7 � GD U i Qs N S+R! 1�.U w iJ M Z. 1 C v, � ��C c6 M ;� I G•N V m Z i •���,v= G C ^' I tn r+ G m N C G 4+ ++ . � q t � o S� o I o.-r.c af cl O I a+'O r� t� O ! 7.0 'O ctl o ttl N . - H ! N � V O U M I V d L L f+ N I �7 U ^ 'O C. � I � N '� � v v � H ! m ^J w F I 1 �d �`J ^• F � ad.i W-tl"U-I��C U f aY �.Ni O a�.�'C C v�g . U i M'tl I N tn,-� U 1 C u +.+ U W G v al o u iS W O �rs O+i O m W 1 •�w �X 7 � W .c w.0 N•.+ 5a o.c+� m � � m s.ro u N m �n � z m ., v, ., � v, i �n m m �.c� n sn � �+ o u am a e u� i , � � . . ,,., � . � . , � � � . � a • N 0. � � ' �. F ' ,S • 1 „� ' > ' i M . . - .. , . � a � ' . . � r::- ,:. ,.,__:. ..,.-. ,. -�:,:: ° . - E } � A � � . . N A Y 4J Q� G� - Hp Lai J7 'U C w c�'. L F: u .0 O Sa`tl <S-' . . . . . . e� y °� �u u a.•,. �.�.,' u o a :� u a � m µ � � � � a n v u N E a oo m �c u c f. .�, t,p o� w s o o �H-n�+M . . � . � . . ! p a � ro A � �H � w,�U n:�c o n „ -u 3 . � - - . . � Y.4�'O u Cl ..1'D U��r-1 G ' . � ti u � .ni 7�o -� ��°n a� n= m a o � a u m �v en ro .a l+ u�.k U C � � OC U K 4 _I :! N'p � � H . M ��M v � CI 7 U L:V N C U 'W � P G •J }H g O O N • �' y� �w fJ U N O ~ a�i � D N {? . y, `i u~ a udi C� v. F+ O P F, t7 C C . . W F� 'U � vl U � � ���� a� T O Gxi H M O ly.G 0.N V � ' • � - _ O M tl "1 �W W ry u CL U " �i. . e] f. 6 CA a� G O Y C Ls.G �3 8 � O 4 cJ b � 1� CA�u� . � � I a o C: re 1. a��.w 7.N�.-� � V u 'fJ a G '+i T � � ' F L r� V Ci p tn� �1 'O Y. ti U •rl�.E A C � . � O P.E L� � = N G 7 ^ �7 U U � N a „L O � . C . 4� � , � . , r .; .. N'c1�r+ . .. ri O M f7 Q�� �V, ..Gi l+ y'�� '1� C..Vf 4 �J V. 1..a �w.c u ,- u �. . _ � �� O � � � w 1 � •.,..+� h :n L H U D.-t o O 7 , . . � V 9 V C G C J ^ `"c 3.. J T O O � � 7� �, 4 ' . GU aJ G M CG 7 U G-~i'.-! V; u��.d N VI .�1•N'G U G N 6 . O �J O N 7 P3 P C: G L Ci�ri r+'9 N t9 C G.•: C J'� O f1 b' ^ U :l i"Wy :J u M L r O O U O7 V � . . O J N r~'„ G C C N F. C L+� .~S G ^J Y ' VJ V �w L w ' l . "E" u wa °= u^ on o9a o.� o �� � . . m ' 'd d C U 7 t!% y _ ri t-0��.0 u� p C7 r.�.l � . ri _ O p u u C 7 C'� •.� r3 U Vi S7 E u Vt ^J i+ I F u i.K w m F+ � +L�+ 3 u J v° m .O y ro u�Vi �n . . . s r Y+ 7�O 5+'o :J H H Y�F �-'- V� 4� fJ O O Ni -W O O D U rl Y F1 V 1� 1� �G•.i L+ u . - . . - - . U O !J ^M 4 •� O.7 R C.0 •A V: ^� s� G! . U'�'� F+ L. F � C rn c� O G c] V �. � a w� �� . . .. p � L u a� . . . . 33 C W L V C7 G `V Jf �V G-.�i v�l C �u f�i +� Q '1 C GI �� ' � � i al �� y w W O "J r3 !A Y H CI O`M L O �1-i ��'G 1.J� N � ' H G n N C7� 4 Z F .i c 'f� C� J .�. O'G �7 f�-i 7�.+ . . t,r :J O 7 ^ G a O O � � d in?�.�i G T � I E� 1•..� � .� v; L � u .�.GF.G N y L a+ U J F 4 W C-I � ; i0'��'��• �+U V 7••�� V1- O L l� N . . � . - . S+ C.•J, ai N C O.L G j� 7�.4a y i�+ � 1 C 3 n�u T H W C c0 w o rl u O � l V�: u� v�i � u ^ s �: u CI.-a O � � r O�.i k CL.+ '7•.� u c W 1 I G J tE J � r.� c �+ 0. . � G.i G 3 G O c4 I C•�•�.-�i y u � !�-I � O '<7 ++ �7 A� ' .J q.0 'G U ` 9.CO � •--I �n L � p} • , ' . . . �fi..N ~ T T.-t C O 1 � V } „�y..ni [ �H V O 7 O U �7 V��C P'Q . . . �tµ n.-a+�i�r G � � �C..l :.i � J •.1 y J �'% � U . . � bO O+�i-.�r inw � 1 u V� �u G� u Elro C�G ��? � . � , . . V..i•ri al.6 O }+ N 8 Cl }+'d '�] H �S L 1�F H '! .C . . � C W M a�a :5 U :J � I U� O 'J S�.I�.u1 V �^� U ~ U ��.�1�.i H.-I'd � - _ t+ 3 u.y 7 S� � 3 u u F+ A,�-1 � i�i�p � 7 [-0 U � L�`1 U 0.cl C 7 i�.� G F+ u+-� � Vi c3 N Y�..0 � - , � ' C P.G.N V V'6 V1 � � u�r+p U O,VI T O N 3 � N CL N O N W . � • , ^� � N N CI'G � � N V'd u �W y'O P f+ �71 N C 1� . a�l H O '� , p'b � d O ' 1! p 7r�.U ' . - N }+ N G m G E m u N � m o0.� ,G-i � ii u � 1+ c7 . a' u C ou `0 w . u �a,� .� �o C � � �A� I . w 'O a � � O L I t 7 4� .4�1 1 6 . N G C J V Y L W � rf� N M C U U7 'L7� ��� C W i.l,� � . U 1� 1'} T a0 '6 N C w N L L V1 01 07 C � 5C �l � tS C� N � � � . H dl rl O ..� m a c r. �.+ v v n �� x � s+ ,. ., o m a � y �+�1 O V �a^i � H -.I d M 1�6 O N L H ~�.Ci H � u CJ N � - G D a.r, ., e�i U A i, cLi�.Li T U e��+ O T u•� L�C � "�C � A o d�r�i o.�-1 N . o w,a � s. v.c ��m u .. o �a .,-a m .i CJ V +� J: CO�l: U G tJ �+ �l �.-I.-I.0 Q' O S1 al 't0 C N � . . � 1+ u f+ CC `t �C N W N�� . [-ya � ..�s J � N tE. � � i+�r.� N � � S+ s�i u . 7�-� �4.0�u 3 Su-i F�+ rf� ~ 4i i�L'G �r�l U ro . � w� �. Z � 4 C' ?.^i C�~.. �..1.O=rs O CL C O C 'L 'V � E�� �.0 rGi O L� � y W 00 . . _�. � w s�r�1 rH C J: 7 1Q-i�-OI .-� V G••-I 7 A .i a G -.i a>>L `G � a � � 'C S,'N J O 7 U C F+ J m N w : ! u c�J G rl � .�-� U 4a ro'O �w N w� ' ^y u s A u L L �. a-.V G +� C N �m C M 7� U '��. (y .. C O O ti O O V.�'+"'� G D O G G`.� w.O y CL 1 F �N'CI C L ~ V N al G O� u 4: u'r[l� .-1 [� � O O 1�9 N . �: � � M•L� w' C :J C• 1. C: C] .'ni.� aF C� 00 G C �J N u fJ � C G N U� � . �,+ ya . �F � ' d � $ � p N �w r ..'SS r •.i U .+y O�� � � O G f7 M L � 'tl O W . .. . . 0.F .-r�i C1 G U 'O �J Ci U •1, cy J:'O V O CS i+'6 J CA N N 'V .�7 CJ tE P. �J U Ls y w H 1.� .0 L N N^J n V G� 'a N L+ F W P.N � � � H I � G ^ .] 3 1-i Jl�.1 GG V.� Cl M L O'C � aJ 3 " H G M I .O � . N ' F u J -.V.e CJ V C U� :1 4.ro L V V � N'O'II w rO-I�.UI 7 Y C w !s aJ N Fe O � . s ,.�', °»'�i c�'i ^ u > N � c r, � x I .c v,.ro O u t o�u v,o � ,.s H � n,u r h � � ri u l� } 3 C O V H �7� :7 41 0� Y 3 �: 7 CS �A 3 1� 0.T EO^NJ H fl' � �� . - a Q (1 V C aJ u N 1+ N. N f�.1 W PL'� y .-1 C i+ (1 N � W Y V: L 'JI U '9 If. V. U N L O a� 0. aJ f1 U L :J W Gl N�.i R L ��� M d� N .v, a o•� a v:v w � o . k w I n �v� c� .u.+ �«+ u. s. o u e c� G e � u c c� y +� �o ❑ ''s �u ai . a i �-+ ��v,.. c r� ca t r,w u u .w r. � u•r a,w�v � E m.�i d u � v E �n - r, u�o C.� u:u E a.^� u v F v m a w F t.�.+ C O L G U O V O U CI CJ �'J u CJ X F+ �"� � � N G�y Vi H N O u . � � aU�+'d v L O x O GC~ > � u U O�'.' ? CD Y h+ >a >M�'7 01 � a' ! ca � C L ' J ..i�i i,� 4i r1 . Gd 1 C f+ 1� �� '� W O Vg: vN �+' U � . r_t`r+H n� G TJ � ^J C • � w V C O ,C O m� � . . N � U� O �. y, .� G a �+ c� � �7 G a Cl E. C z7 N U i U i+ 7 H N G"�w O N .�i�aaJ O G Cl " � i+ U U t7� 1a ti+ N `U l' N N C7 I u GI • W ! I •1 M U C u W y O 4 N ly N V J� O 'O N C f1 I �tl '� u 1+ !n [W i l � 1 6�3 U n O Cl �n .� 4+ C ' � ti a�i �t.-� a� C N � ? C ^�.l� F+ � E- 7 O 5 � U ! ( ' C :J+r G U C� VI O ;J �� y o .a xi t+ O O '3 V LL] I u W 4+ C '�, I G 7"'� i.� '~-' � P. r1 4 N Y 1� O� u V.0 va !+ G f7 - 1` N O 7�G_.-� N Y �+• � U 1 y U � � � � V� y y �w V J O�'tl"'i T N r�v W � ',1 N f3 H � a r4 L G' � Q 1 N ' V }+H H I N G'++ u O . 11 .k !J F C�r-� W i+ 'C . p � C O 4�.�i � Y 7� O 3 n � O�r� � y N'tl N O G'V'C) ?+.�� �{fs�+� I w CJ N ill 41 7. i 7'A �+� U � � U w�i'O N fA� Gl 'V� C�aJ w V: U w L w-V � fl CI G fJ w Ol 6� G Ld� G V u 7 ' CI Uf � V 1 �6 T Ib W � . O, Ilf N+a 00 )r l= 00'O r: G C c:1�'c7 � ' L fi F= G ? C-S1 V le.0 V w O � tn al o �N [n k G � R O�F C 7 'J C :l c O O C u U.-��� :l � Gl F:J O 1tl � l� :0 U n N C: � � . � y G �� � � b�y�j , .y �,.i al w,..v u u++..� oo w ,. r. o �+-f+ � � .:i,+ �' �y � i' o w p � y o . �y 7 � U..a�o..1 l. a�M u Sy W� V U.y.-�•.� d u! V N C N .7+rt� . p C N �+�.N O 7 7•-� 7 U >' ••� � �'J 7 a - �'J 7 'U 7 I a� U N N P � � . b CJ ra A ri 1� O'••a O N.�'tl•�r l�rl LL> N f. � +J V C�i•tl r,7 L W N O N N� �O N Ul JC N P � r' •w� . . V� •y W (L!� Fui A P.'C� �9 p VI �U� M U:N M'O H �tl N N O P w'a w vl O' �7 �1 +���p g U �i S+ i?. Q . �� p N � � . N O - G N I C N�3�1 0� � � _ . uro o'v�° '� x G N 4! G�.f ! o N+w.0� 7. N fa-i v�A u Qi . N c1 � p O 1<b m Sa O q�'t7 q u O -� � u O � G u � V V . � �W N V h'I {a �� F � _ � � C, � � S J N V T o�0 Si u U �-~i 7 fJ N H F - C [e. D y�;..1' W . � W u U N d'� . N . 7 M o...Gl n. 1wi1 6 ll+� � h . , � y{ Vl'O h U '�l . ' � � ' . � . ,.,;�t �°° ' PLANN�NG COMMISSIQN , AGEN�A � May 12, 1977 l. Ru.cksack - Request �or parking variance �or two (2) cars Jeff Selby 2 , Vail Village Inn - Phase II Preliminary xc�view of proposal Ruo�f/Cooney 3. Vail Rur� - Prela.mi.nary presentation of rr�aste� pl.an far compl�tion o� propased pro,�ect }3ob By:rd, Cab Childress, Bob Yeagex 4. The Spa - Pr�liminary paresentation of variance requests Tom Briner 5. Lionsheac� Commercial Building � Request for d�.s-�ance between buildings variance Jeff Selby/Ron Todd � � � �J t � , ,�T , . ., ` � rdINUTES VA�L PLAPdNING COMMISSION �4�AY 12, 1977 3 : 00 P.M. �aresent : Acting Chairman Abbo�t Ab�ent : �erxy White Ed llrager Pam Gar�on Bi11. Hanlon Sandy Mi11s Staff : Dxana Tough�ll Jim Rub�.n Rosal�e J'effrey Town Council : Rod Slifer Bili Wilto Also Presen� : Tom Bxiner Jack Curtin Brqan Pendle�on Doug �,4c�,a�zghlin Leon Deica,s Ross Cooney Je�� Selby Cab Childress Bob Yea�er Bob Sa.xd � LIONSHEAD COMPdEE�CIAL �IIxLDING Je�f Selby was present to req,�zest a �vara.ance �or dis�ance between bui.l.dings . As a result of a request �rom the Town Council to wid�n the distance in the mall area, Selby s�a�ed that �re ",4ontaneros Condomin�.um Associa.�ion h�,d r�viewed the proposal and �.t was satisfacto�y ta them, Dra�er maved to approve the variance as outlined in the staff inemos of February 2� and i�ay x2, 1977; �Ianlon seconded the motion ; all voted in favor; and the mation carried. APPR�VED. uUCKSACK ADD�TxON �'eff Selby, owner of the Rucksack Buildin�, rec�uested a park�.ng variance for two cars. for his proposed addit�on �� °�10- sc�. �� . fl�' commercial space. I�� also presented plans for the addition to the Planning Com�nission an:d exp�.a�ned that it is his intention to enclose the entry on the north side and enlarge �he apa��men� on the second floor east sid�. He commented that he needs tk�e varianc� only �or th� commercial space. He stated that the �ormer owne� had received approval to put up �ate� on the sauti�z s�.de walkway in December �976, which elimina�ed the passagewap be�tw�en the Rucksack and the P�ed L�on Bui�din�. It was the consensus o� � Minutes��.�. � May 12, 1977 , . �' .� � Pa�e 2 . r . � ommi sion to wait for the Town Counc�l ' s rulin the Plannxng C s g on core area parking with relatian �o variances. Hanlon sta�ed �hat h� is and has always been against granting parking variances. Abbott was concerned �hat the living space wauld become commerc�al s�ace in the �uture and w�.�h the impact of pedestri,an traf�ic with the elimin.a�aon of the walkway. Doug McLaughlin, legal counsel xepxesenting twenty condominium owners and eight business in the Mill Creek Caurt build�n�, was present and objected ta the �ranting o� the va�iance to allow the closure of the wa�kway. He stated that it is his a�ntention to bring a quie� �it�.e action against 5elby. He also na�ed �that he had not been advised o� the development , and that he laad o��ered to p.ay for half of the zmpacavements. along the walkwa�r �o ela�minate the ice a.nd snow problems. �ack Cuactin , Bishop and Com�any and xepresenting tv�io owners o� the Mill Cx�eek Court Building; abjec�ed on behalf of his clien�s. He commented that they had been warka.ng with the Town �a imparove the caur�yard area to the east o� th� Rucksack; said improve- ments to be do�ze dtt�ing tl�is surnrner. SeJ.by then remarked that his deve].opment will not affect the Mi11 Creek Court area, and that �he Re� Lion has rrQt objected. � Abbott then noted tha� due to the pending parkin�; decision by the Town Council. , citizen objections and the need to �urther study �he ordinance, -�he Plan�ai.rag �o�nmissi4n should de�er ruling on �h� xequest at this time. Hanlon was o� the opin�.on that the Planning Commission should vo�e accarding to �he present law. Drager thex� moved to tabie cons�.deration of the request unt�.I May 26; Mi]��s secanded the nnotion ; all vot�d in favor; and the motian caxr�_ed. TABLED. Preliminary pl.ans were then presented for Vail Village �nn Phase II , Vai1 �,un and The Spa. As there was no further business the meet�.ng was adjourned. � , '�•'� �' �.r .,, ; � . . !� , �s . � r MEMORANDU�T � � T0: PLANNING COMMISSION FROJ'�f: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY F]EVELOPMENT DATE: MAY 12, 1977 RE: PARK�NG VARIANCE - RUC�SACK BUILDING Je�� Selby, repre�enting the Rucksack Building , has requested a parking variance for two (2) parking spaaes in order to allow �he addi.ti.on, o� approxi�r►atel.y 610 square fee� af comme�cial. space and 246 square feet o� gross �esidential fl.00� a��a (2 b�drooms and a ba�h) �o be added �.a an existing residen�.ia1 dwellin.g unit. The site area is 4 , 202 sq�are fee� which perFnits 3 ,3G1 square fee� of GR�'A. The exa.sting building cantains 1,60D scx�are feet of GR�'A; br- ',� ! inginc� �o�a1 proposed GRF'A to 1,846 square feet. E�isting commercial space consists of 3 , 751 square feet. CONS�DERATION 0�` �'�CTOR5 {SECT�ON 19. 600) 1. The relationship of the req�e��ed variance to other existing ox potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The Rucksack Building is one of a f�w buildings in the CC1 area wha:ch is n:ot bua.�t ta the absol.ute maximum allowed undex the current zoning arda.nance. This building, �ike almost alI o�hers in Commercial Core 1, was cons�ruc�ed be�ore the adoption af zoning and therefare, space for park.i:ng was not provided when -�he lo�s were subdivided and sold. 2. The d�gre� of wh.ich �elie� from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcernen� of a specif�ed regulatian a.s a�ecessary to achieve compa�ibili�y and unifnrmity of tr�a-�me�:t among sites in th� �r�cinity, or to attain the ob�ec�ives of this ordin.ance witho�ut grant af sp�cial. privilege. , � '�he sta�ed purpose of �he CCZ zon� distrzct is: °'The Commercial Core I Dis�.rict is intended �o pravide sites an.a to main�ain the unique character of �he Vai]. Vi1.l.age commercial area, with its mixtur� o� ladges and comtnercial establishments in a predominan�ly f .- • • Rucksack Bui�din,g � , � May 12 , 1977 . Pag� Twa � edestx�ian environment. . .The di5trict regula�ions prescribe site P deve�.o�ment standards that are intencle�to ensure �he main�enance and p�eservation a� the tightly clus�ered arrangemen�t of buildings �ronting an pedestrian ways and ptiblic green�aays, and to ensure continuation of the building sca1� and archit�c�u�a�. qual.i�ies -�hat dis�inguish �he Village" . The proposed addition �o -�he Rucksack building is in keeping with the purpose outlined in the zoning ordinance as the structure remains in scal.e with the Village, and the archi�ect�ral quality of the s�Eructure is imprvved by the changes. Farcing provision o� parking in CC1 is in direct opposition td the stated purpose of maintaining a pedes�rian area. R�taining long �erm dwelling units in the co�e ar�a and ma3cing �hem more I.ivable for 1.ong -�erm residents is consis��n� with th� goals sta�ed for Horizon�al. Z�ning. Approval of �.he variance would be in keepzng with many oth�:r parking reques�s in the area. The request is simi�ar to the Schober Bui�ding Addi�ian, the Hi].1. Building Addition, �he 5lifer Addition and the Covered Bxidge Store which were al� vara,ance reques�s for parking in order -�o e�pand existin.� buiiclings cons�tructed pri,ar ta zaning. 3 . The effect of the requested variance on light and air, ', � d�st�ibu�ion o� popul.a�ion, �ranspo��ation and traff ic �acil.ities, public facilities and utilitie�, and pub�.ic safefi.y. Tha proposed expan5ian ofi uses should have Zittle effect on the demand �or parking i.n. the parking struc�uxe, ar�d the parking s�ruc�ure has sufficient capac�.ty to provide £or any additiona�. �.raffic which might be generated by the expans�.on. The p�oposed expansion wi11 no� neaessi�ate addi�iona�. vehicular access into the pedestrian axea as dela�very v�:ha.c�.es are al.ready se�vicing e�isting uses and the increase in GRT'A is an addition to an existing un.it. The mass transit sys�ern is capabl.e of handlin.g any increased demand, if any, gen�rat�d by the p�opos�d expansion. The ,�fects of tha variance on adequa�e light, air, distr�bution of popul.a-�ion, pub�.ic �acilities and u�.ilities and public sa�e�y are neg�.igible. The addition does make access from Mill Creek Cour�. more di�ficult .as this area has been used for peclest�ian dCC�.'S5 �o Bridg� St. F�NDTNGS : 1. That -�he gran�ing a� the vax�i.ance will no�. canstitute a grant of special privi�.ege incax�sis�ent wi.th the 1a.�itations on other properties c�assi�ied in �he same dis�rict. . ` Rucksack Building �� ��' � � May �2, 1977 � � � ` . � � P�.ge Three � � W� do not f��1 approval of the var�ance wouid be a gran�t �of special privilege as approval. would be consistent wi�h previous �a�king variance �equests, and other like expansions a�n the Gore have not been required to furnish addi�ional parking. 2 . That th� granting o� the variance will nat be detrimental tn �he publ.ic health, sa�ety, or welfare, or ma�e�ially injurious to properti�s or imp�avements in the v]..cinity. We feel -�hat denial af �he variance v�auld be detrimen-tal to the public health, safe�y and wel�are as �arking on �he site would cr�ate addi�ianal vehicular t�a��ie and could be hazardaus to pedestrian.s using the area. On si-�e park.ing couZd be injurious to �he pedES-�rian area from both an aes�hetic and safety s�andpoint. 3 . That the variance is warranted for an.� o� mo�e of the fallowing �easons: ` (a) The s�rict or li�eral interpreta�tion and enfarcemen� af the specifa.ed regulation wauld result in practical difficulty or unneces5ary physical hardship inconsistent Ih with -�he objec��ves of �his ardinance. (b) The s-�ric� or literal in�erpreta�ion and enfo�cemen�. of the sp�ci�ied regulati.on would d�p�ivc thc� applicant � o� privilege� enjoyed by the owners of other proPerties in �he same distxict. On �he site parking in the CC1 distric-� would be inconsis�en.t with the desire to pedestrianize the Core and incansi.stent w�ith applicat�.on to other structures in the same distric�. The Council d�,scussed parking variances and cantracts at the Tuesday wark sessaon. Larry Rider exp7.ained �he legal rami�'.ications of the existing contracts to purchasc� parking in the Transpar�ation Center. The Council has stated that they wi11. consider the entire issue of parking variances in Commercial. Coxe l at the May �7 CoUncil mee�ing and wiZl reach a general policy decisian a� �hat �.ime. Any action on -�he subject variance shou.ld ba consis�en� wi�h this importan� dec�sion. � f MEMORANDUM � T0: PLAtdNT��G COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT 0�' COMMUNTTY DEVELOPM�NT DA�'E: MAY 12 , 1977 RE; L��NSHEAD C�MMERCIAL BUILDING - REQUEST FOR DISTANCE BETWE�N BUILDINGS VARIA�'�10E The Town Cot�ncil reques-ted Selby/Tofel ta res�udy the p�'oposed commercial building in an atf.empt to widen the �edestrain ease- ment �.hrough the project. This request necessitated a distance between builaings variance to acheive the widex pedestrain mal�. The Depa�tment of Community Development has reviewed th�: request and find that the criteria and �indings a.re consis�ent with recomntendations in memo dated February 24, 3.977 relating to a se�back variance for �he same projec� and would therefore recammend. approva� o� the subject �rariance in acco�dance with thos� criteria and finda,ngs applicable to the setback variance. i i [�::-0..��� - <o.a�„ -------. . � '� � , ' . � � G] 3�r7 N n '{J }�u'9 N N Cl H S.^'[� ill d 'h i H M'1d U '3 W�.. �0 w f: C1 . .w � L' O t: .[: Gi+v N w u J1•ry ry•a� O o� N U.-t G O J N N � �J w O aJ N •'� N V W.4 T C d ' 7� .N�r1 u U 7'�'1 F+M G U W N ro ro � �3 V� - . . c �7 w u w.a .n.a o u.� m r. m �� ea a v ro � m � a m m u a,,,..� s. a+n-+ Nwro.� u � ' G a+ > W.O C � Ul U 00 u O��A.a ?•.i t� 06 0 d �9 7 � - .r�i+ . A O J +1 .F+� M W L •.a L� C� 'H-�^. N� � , N�-` N u 'q • � � O N 'v • - L�U O �0 N P.�1 . . . {A L � a 0..-1 ?i 1+ U N �.1 i:•'i Ui G� N U VI U V 7 � SM w � VJ�F �'J V O N � U N� k 9'U N A o � � � 0.� V �Vi t � C V t. r5 N G..a� I+.�1S� Q.� CI 9.L+• 0..p � O ,7 L� . O tA��O w 0..-� Gl u u N V U G�rl U m 1� U 6i U !+ C u V L � G.V1 7 V M .-1 N C V1 >.V 9 b�� N � I d w r1 C �. 4! O N m N 8 M `U d al C: �7 O rl G L N � O G.� ev c! V T � �r. � .w 4a CR F+�.p .� O G u s� 1-r . fd O C w E �h T p N O O '�+ d O G L. +�� D U �� � � C J G " +i r: L+ ' rl � � :S�'x r� "3 . ••.• u C1 p QI ��p d t� 'Jl L N D N 41 L+ H L: 41 � w vi 1� H 'C � E 7� IJ 'L7'17 H u�-i tl'O W O f0 O . � � W ��.4i r� u.�-� N.n 'W . 7 N C o N N L+ 0 7 M 'u N O O . M 1J V L', f7 L+ C-0� tA rF rl ' [�. u N N V G r �.i U V. CO�n C J'd �5 D CJ u !+ W W ['.w H C C 7 V •+ S+ U C N J C� . p (y Q1 C Oy rl L�M�p t O ' Vi G il u F+ U � N �9 N,}� 7 � N 1�. C'c7 N �a t+ VI rl N Sa rl N . ' a� l7 �+ W -•i C'r. N C O+� a� c4 ' O.�J G O L O p % CI N 1+ al C! tA r�Vi H O'+.v CI m vr G7 ¢� G N . 7 N en t+ � uf 1� �O O +i C sa.a G �D 7� O �S u �G N ti +, o o ++ cr c� �-i v . � a ro.�i �, a,: u °' o . m � �v u r+ c .c d u.a �a.s+ E r+ . - G u ti V H F� N 'c7 Ol Y G� r--� N�-I r''G lR��-I C� Itl•ri N _ . vi r�.-i c� m u ro c o�...-.+ M a u•.+ m � v ,.�, .-�w .� . G1 � E.. 7 C i: 7•.i U E s� LA C._.� C.U � r-t d C! C1 . m' i+•.� aJ O•.1 aJ ++ ta G • U! G a� lq G 7 +��O x �G 7 � '3 � ' � O (J.H C-0 u 'U u u R3 O N 4 rl'd N i•i V L V+/ N•A � N� A F C � H 0. u � b T'O.4' �'J +' 'N V1 U N q W I � V � �q-+ � q N w� p 'G.a C > H Vi .0 O - � W a � 1+-� �v s.i c� o ].>,� o m c� m �i 3 m F s+ m a a ❑ o a u � m w m a os u -- �v s�. o . m ,.,•.. � m .a � U F+ o'a o y m•.� E; rJ �'c7 v. u ?�,w a+a a+ �� � M V] U W C :3 L� a� ^'9 .a +i G1 N v .i C G G 5tl . � w ^ .C :J G U �7 a+ U 'V 7 u.�p � u t� r-1 O�.1 c-0 C O'V N ! . a� N O 1� CJ 7'O N V tA � 3•.i C•.i 7w � U G N•.�1 N y� C Vl rl.`C V C .0 � 1+ C�.1 C Ul �6 Fr•r1 V1 7 W w1 .II 1/ � UD � 1+: u C U I �� U P. a+ CJ++ H � 1� � I 7 �J U a+ W 3 u il E s� V 01 � -. � H�.1 � •.+ O N y O' '-+� 1 N U :n C V VY ' tV O.U F� 7 v � . � E••�.� O ^.-< M x"y�c E 1 k � G d.= N 1�3 I � C•N o t3 v v . � ++w O C N 3 U ��q u S+ G I 7 cJ 1� W u a rr. I f.w u a�. '�. , - rl A'O ? n u V 7 O :7 �!1 f � W C C1 � I W N 4 F' L 4� LL . y '.,r{. � �j�� N VI G.1] c7 I �M CG rF I }+ V' v! O �3 G3 � . G] O � G u�p U W•.i N Vi V F 'O A D � C'1 I 7 O•�-1 tJ � p U u O A�.i 1'J C Y3 u� S+�•'1 u 5 t 'O la �h u v3 N 1 i.�'O'6 1 H u U H L� q N.t V N � V V .=•� ! c+ O +� 'T I 4 F O � O fA ' 'O 0. al U 6 Y W 1 . N,N u �_ � I � G P,y N � I �.� O Q Cl*� :� •.1 J CJ � 41 CJ � 1 N V� p l/ L, U U C �.-i O ' � U '7 7r E u V ! 1 Y }+W w 'V O 1 •.I•.i ^c u Q] O I +,'ri� W 'Y N +�' . . S� [n I c U G� 4. q'L] C I. n G 3 O G 0. ! .-1.� G'tl 41 fs. I V;w L.G Q�.G I M W I U al 'U C'+'� 1 N �S '�-� I .n a�+ ^ ai•n�.1 Z 1 3 U oD Vf m'O �' V] T LL+ P. Kr 7 I Cl O � Gl.0 O ! �7 N A '-0 O i H :1 G S� 6Y . ' d p I G� �5 U H I u a+ N l.i V U i u � r; � U F O F+ �h�r-1 7 C� . O W I •r+ CI N F+ N F 1 +I t M � 1 1 M W G � v.= I 1 N O 'V N N 1y . . c.: 1 �•� � z 1 m F� a �:'d � :r l N o � +� u Z [ m u w o.i m N � � :� I �: �•+M O - G I tl aa a� O 1 . 1+++ � O 1 ai G �C rl �ri . � p 0. 1 ++ N L 4.+• U /- +�i u C p] T ,'Z 1 W ^�! 7. i •� �y � `.� �' U I C1 G�''} O ..+ 1 S+ N cJ �.a I. T aJ v. I N C N� A G N p I S. u •�+ o I OC a+� �r� 0 1 .�i u G 31 G] O o I •N u ++ E � � 7. O f � � E 'd o 1 C •� 'W �'b o I � � D H �2 O I N v � �1 li C d . � � ' O H 1 N y L ���J n C N 1 'r+ � � U N c'1 I ��7•r� m+i �T 3 N ttl� O •r1 P � iZ . � 4 U N. F A F. O • I E'd•n O "J l3 • I W. v1 U. I W O C N � . ' . p 1 k+ �M O C O c7 O 1 4+ W� s+W r� O I � G 5, • O I O •rl �6 W s. G N I i`.-I•n..t.•r< N I O.0 [a.w t+ N I ��6 N U N CI N i 't1 N GI O N O � 1 ti u� V u u hA I w rr, � CJ V � I N � E�� cA U � 1 N �n k'c7 1.r U V< u rl � 7-� 1 C N f7 U�C N G � 1 G•ri V M Z M•.� G G 1 ']�-1 G rJ �6 C G W u . u 7 o s+-� O 1 0.-1 F in al O I s� .9 +a � C� 1 7 u � Q u a�i N , . H 1 N y U O +� H I V� � � w H I - N V .0'O G ✓� 1 . . ��. H I m Ci ai �n F I I ro N F E ul N u.-i-� F I m�9 al rl k !+�.-I , ; � ' V I �ri^O Vl N+4 U 1 � 1+ 3.� V I u W'tl•rl•.i'�] [� 1 V1 �.i 6 �+'�7 G N � - � rwjl � .�.i � N'��1 u s�. N Vi f 2 61 u v� u N Vi k rn N ro 3 p O Cn I F O ax+ P.L�0 D G u H . . • � • : � , . 1 . ' , N � H . } . , ry • +r1 � � . . � W � W , �� � , � . 1 ,� M � W i ' �. » . : . ' � m� u w d m � U d m a m d v -m � � � p u•o"�u x ' . - . O 7 G G u N w i U �i'.�+ .x�i O F�u..g+ e+ 7 �i m u � - � � � . - � � N G N � .t� w W V a wC . . NF.'q u C M u LI� O *'� i� Y O O cJ ��'u Yi.4i � ' C ENi 4+ N �7 � O h� 0 .: V �G w C H A . .. � � � eJ yr o U ? � s�v .� a.a C O e7 u .U 3 . . •.{'tl N ri G V, u'V N •�'S Y Cl'b O U"�O T U �l .-1 � dl � � u � ,h Y ,o .,a J✓,n h= u � o u � n u�o v.b .a 1+ �M N�w tA L' J M CC pC V.^t O .1 .J N't3 N 7 C 90 h fl �7 3 N •A p . "', y � O H • F. y d O V � C 1'J ,W V L '�V N O G. - . � � �J N O 1� '� u L+ W u t� o P F E7 . � . W d v u O? F'.-� t� �M G � 0. 0 �' cod � m Ja J �pN� ., >.EO' mN ourwdu � • pC� N d V �' �-� j p�. O C vl M � L w1 N p t'1 E � O O U N 7 N 00�u'r� . . G s.++ V �J ++ Nw >.c�,.4 U u �u d�r�i�� � . . . u o Q'��..0 e w.a m c�°i ai r�i w m . . � . .� � � ,�^,G , � H v � G r. � n i as� . , . � '� °'+ `= ,� o r;� �,u• w rf R7»� p � r� u. . U V� C } O V O V u�^. a� 4 �'J V C�.�I t+ ? U . . � �'.....1 u 6 1 l. s+ U O.i 9 O � � L C a� O C C C J " F H J 9+O O .o••� P.w S�-4+ � . O O 1 ^'� � U N � C. u O S+.. C 'u ro.a Vl tll H'.1'd 4+ �.Vl G CS L C C' 7 V �a � r .. C 1+ u�n r1^O N N C _ � . � G ^ G J".�7 N U t7 C' w u J U :J � fa..^. � O O U 61 u O 3 N N • p Y .i Y. +a i . . M O C V tl G p L H U 4 T� 7 P T � N U N w•��W . F pp' v� rJ ,. ,q c a o.-� O � O.� O rF M ey r.`� L +� �: G � O v rJ !> m rS ~ - b 'V C CJ 7 - . tG.:.M a+il'O N u N ^+� � G �+ E.-Jii w �v�i f� �� 3 u � �.O O N C A � N� ._N o � . . i . �1 4' L r• "" L u � J�rS r',•.. �J U � . � �,p y � � �c-�-°< � u j �o �;°,.J�a��5 u i= U � � . LI r7�r�l L J^y 1. }� LO+ F •^r�i�...a 0.> G G.G '+7 U � d , .. fj u �y Y a,� 3 G ;n U O F. :J '1. �. � �"'� u �7 . iJ C.i ii V U C G �A OV �v-�i v�t C V 'V L �. N G e _ . . O e7 W q L y �' H �'J 4+ . G O V v1 � � U �� . } w a� L �'O �rl U O� G �rs p r N n y O ^. • .�.a L F3 ' . �"" u "'° � s�+� � o v q s`�. '� s`�. � '� G �w "� u z 1 c .. �S � . . - � V.-I u 4 .. J ..�.'7 u .�i JI u ^+ � a'�' �X�u . +11 A y-I V w H � �� -i U % w H l+ 'A �/ � G :J C 4 .�.� G C I �O' �� T`� S+ G V'�� V: 0 � S+ N ' � � . f� f �a N C O�"r � 7 � O r.� y N H 1 O � �u � 3i N CJ G tA w O•.� ai O . � U',°'.✓ U W V] I U •- y �f.u U.a O e1 r O•.{ }+ , F.�i r1� 3 G 9 a I c M J �� o� G u n c. r a+ �27.o�c1 - I �rl � u 1+ � . � a L o] N • '� fi ^� � I P 1 � a.i J� ,p �.'r�.+ S+ N W O c, u c1 y ' y yI T L.i G O � � ��.. G �� u o > o u y a v P�a - �' w ..�-i+i r C � j IC•.1 J � J • 7 J u•rl 'U o . � C � G t3� ^ a�+ rj' ..U U� u V� F'tl� % S V O O O�.-I•.1 N W N I � y _ U 1+'O 'J1 H G7 i�i Y.--I � 'S�.C V'N'� ��^ � z � � - , � � Co Vt N �7 rl N O F 7'C `J J r5 U L rJ SJ +i N 7G �'3 �7 N 31 rl . G�'-1 1l ^ V :J f-I I U O 3 U'1 7 S+il �.0 ��r�i L M ~.�1 r4 4 �S3 E 7 CA CJ ' C! "J 6 1� �.� N :3 u-�i F� VI � N S�.0 � . .. . . C A.G N U U'tl Ul I �i+•N A U P�N ?+O N S H d P.N O m W • • ' q y d L� ?'O A� � � � � td tC . � W O • u v yry'u a�o >, v u m a � u u N � E t9 V M C O N �6 . � N 06 ri T� U a� N N r� . w � 00 b • L G ri - � � N �' H A� . W Y'O� L G CJ P'W L 61 G .M SIS U O'r� �. �ri� �y� � ro �� f�l 1.� �7 ?� � '17 u E O O N . . y v� CJ N G u C U �,�y u � G O � �ri P0.U�� c1 '-` C S-' o v � ro � Zy w F� �. u � rb ' .C� . .M»t U � � ��6 N O O 6•1, � r Tl A-�, �•.1 T V H � N � T��ri O'0 7 V' 'O C .Gt O N N �b L+ � . rJ t� VI 'O G ri• � a.+ Sa O'.0 C �O � y �a� . F1 U � Cd L CO�t6�"J ��7. E t9 "lJ � C�-i ri.�. O' O M N N� M`4 N d , . c n "3.- v �i o O E �G a- � 3 � fi u.w,c7 ��,i U ro � y . fA 1 0 7 cJ Y+ y � f. � y N 4+ s.�.+ . L+ C,w iw b' „N+ tA a3 C V+ ��. "J N $ i L'G ;� w� J L-.�i ^�V C O �O W G U CJ N E�F G '.i O L .VI^-Gi L � 7 k . �1� g w.-� '1: 7 L W rl u C�.+ 7 A ._t � C a� •ra u X ,F G] I 'G.0 +x J O 7 U G 4+ :1 m r � U q CJ rl y+�i V w r�'d N M 'J . . ^� y��� U.fl p La G .^.. V C C � k N F � ._ C O O�.-� O o v L,�� � o o c c� ���� w O � s� G T- 'J L L U � u G O� �; y � O y^I ry � la C�G I � O O m p i� . �y ] "��L � T C � � �� �•�.-�� N C U C C C u VI O V �' r 'c N 'U A . , �-+ � 5a � . ..v�.•.. c�:.j Q.+ � a : o c� �s w Y °' .� a � � � y � u c; u •1, r3 J:'t7 3 :.+ O U a+'d F. �O � Cl�.1 � y . `U GD V: N `U '�W P.N y�i H O Il p�.GI u �.0 'L J� 1+'� �V G M'� U: l+ � N � U G � . C � L '11� C) V; C.!M .� O'O L N � ���.C-I V W H � � � ? . � = G L J �-VI U Ci C U-f� �.� l� V V � Q1�^J w rl�N �.Y �S W F+ �.i N F+ O �J N CI � . T O :J E � V 'J N 7 L' H ,• L iC l �t V v O U k n' 7+ u1 O V �O D� r n G 1 u �'u � 3 F o u �+ L� n w a a 3 ; > a� .b 3 e� s� N m a . ,.� � 1. a T ov d g 7 1 yy 1.� Y: L L u V J (f. V'� G ul F O u G`. iU. J: S�+� cL"� W .-1 C� 4+ - L O•.7 47 � N I 3 p..� a �n u �n�a M �. o a u y � u w m.y,. a r+ a m � . . I G+a r+ u.-� V F. O aC C ^1 J �J w'��i C 7 �CI•.Ca N W N US N I W I � C t7� J'�S-' C t3 Cn� r.w ' . C�H N N � �u � _ OC I W, � H :+ J+ � al'C C.-I If iA E h�7. G N F.'V "'�ti7 H � . � N � N ' _ � ,� 11 p u t+•.-� C O �7 G U O U O U N cl �'S a+ C/ X Y� �.�1 i�i O N tMj i v b u u � :. k u J Z � u u o w � �u N�sa y o �� c� q d I 1 O's7 O O Ci F. V O N u � C7 C • '.�7 1 m C C I-I y M ~ y 0 Xj 4 L G O U: N N a1 l�H f'J H [L� G'l7 M U �'O 0. 1� N � 4/ O � � V]'O ' u � ., c v 7 � ,�3 n m�t � q v m a, u � N u N U N 7 u N I E u�.�. �a •� .�-i�i O G u G ,. - u H N c3.C' N ln 0 I u ..�a dl . W . � f l•.� O N • J; G �7 I .rl � O W r J U C�G �� V V M y y �N� G CJ 09� al n N � I{ U M �7 l a N U � •C V H u) VI . H = � 3 � j H u � G G� U Vi O J W 7 L .n r1 tl U � ] G G i i U W 1 �"+ � U@ "'3 � # G 7+i "� , . C�. �7 1. .� •-1 N O.0 � M S� C r.�i�ri O O 3 W N S' � � V�•�i u N N O U H G ~ny u O N O �T G�r-1 N.Y. Ff•.i �f C � U � N Z 7..�1 H � N C W u O . � aJ L1 V �y � � N f! .li CL� G�'d�� � �w J O T'O�-1 T h w Sr M 'J�U F+ E.� I 7'�'� + O W Fi fJ N 7 Ci O Vf.a r��.i t5 3 C'C O uf N'[3 N O G. ^'7i 14 C� � � n v7 N Vi N 7 �' V � � l� �M %+O � O :J M �J 'V'O T. � W � p G G D 1+"4 .y �0�7 . JI C L: C'J tl V1 �l "J :7 U N N � C! N � U M T fC N � U U•ra J rl N C•tf r C G [L.'9 t�'" N V l� ! F E � C:1� V H.C :1.� O H N Ol O �N N �r i S O W LY f �j 7 L � N.� r � N �y V� y Sn�'O V 4 M t L 60 i' :1 ..J� u 1� O i.�-S+ V 1-� ~ � 7 Y.M � .T. ! u C N � • 'l• S+ +s'V V l� �J� tJ U•n.a•n 0. N V N F UI M rt N � m� � ° o 0 o ro•y o � 7 " U 7 'U � ! N V r�r+ O n q ri,p y r�1 1=. u'~ O w.�-+v•• }.� cJ Jl 1a F+ c� 7 P'O G u w 1. N U i6 � „�� N� N A � G O � - - . . Vi .v O as U' 3 l.M 7'O � 1.i C L U W N O.� �y... � N u.G ~ . VI 1w.i1 0.'[).A N.� N �V 1� N V] H'V 4+ �a N O A W'L7 W N N� 0 U N Is IL � . I d py �ro W ' N C a!�i: N N ' . ^ l G d v r� 'T. �{ O.-E w.0 O '!. 7 �� ��' � N � . y O O N'V N U H � r'�IroJ N H . u N G W v ~ � N l..L' W } .1 G �l 4+.G � N�: � w . . }s �d > :F �1 N 1� C [L O u N V 7+ � Ci l� u al c: a� N . 7 H W..l1 n. N P N � } . N . . �/ •L H O'N y N'O [5.U � . . � - � . ' ' . .y+' �: �. � , �K' . . . I II' PLANNING COMMISSION � AG�NDA May 19, 1977 1. Vail Village inn Phase II - Approval �equired by Special Development Distr�.ct Bill. Ruof� '� � � �: �. r , � 1"IINUTES . VA�L �LANN�NG COMMISS�ON. �9 r�AY �9 7 7 3:40 P. M. . Present: Gartan � Absent: Drager �lhite Hanlori Mil.l.s Abbott Todd, new member Staff: Toughi].1 � . 3eEfrey VA�L V�LLAGE TNN PHASE IT Bil.l. Ruoff, archi�ec� for the project, was pre5ent arid reviewed �he prel,iminary pres�ntat�on sr►ade at the previous week's meeting• He con�irmed �he project's conformi�y to �he �equirement5 of :the Sp�cia7. D�ve3.oprnent Di.�trict. Toughil.l agr�ed that the proj�ct complies with deve].opment standards as �Equired i.n the SDD. She noted that there w�.1.1 be a parking problez�►. with a shQr�age of spaces to occur during on� phase o� the dev��.oPm�nt Plan, Taughi].1 then presented a S�a�f Memo (5/19/77 see at�ached) � outl.ining �urther �equirements �o be compli�d with and ref�x�ed to Sectian �.3. 3U3-6 (#1) of the Zoning Ordinance which must be conformed wi�h in this develapment. ' Ruoff no�ed that aonst�uction, of Phase TT is to commence August 29► 1977 . He then read a letter from �he Town' s ' consul�ant, Eldon Beck, of Roystan, Hanamo�o, B�c.k & Abey, c o n c e r n a.n g t h e p l a nned deve�.opm�nt {Se� l.etter attached. ) . �Vith re�ard ta parking, Ruof� stated �hat at the compl:�tion o�c PhaSe II parking wi1.�. be insuffa.cient, but with the con��ruc�a.on of Phase �I� parking wili be mo�re than adequate. ' Phase IIT wi.11 cantai.n 60� of �h.e tatal pa�king. The in- sufficiency wi.1.1 occur du�ing the 78-79 season► and �2r. � Staufer will have controlled parking �o al.leviate p�ob�:ems. Toughil.l then pxesented a Memo concerning parking statis�ics far the p�oject. Chairman Gar�on commerited that Mr. S�aufer has excellen� s�atistics regarding his actual pax'king� versus his `on�Paper' �eQuired p.arkiing, and that at the �ime of the initcial study a� the SDD he was aske� to p].an �ox. maximum parking. She also �ta�nd nhumbers��:n�the1parking�lotpa�.I.�s been aware o� �he use a along, and Mr. .Stau�er has cooperated in this r�gard� � ` +� , � . • 19 May 1�!�i Page 2 � white commen�ed �hat there is cur�entTy insuf��.cient parking. Garton repli�d tha� that is the reason that �here must b� a stipula�ion concex�ning �an�rolled parking for �he 77-78 . sea�on. _ Tot�ghi.17. in�or.med the aom�mission that although it was not � � men�.ioned in the M�nno .there should be restrictions con- ` cexnin� a con�:truc�ion entrance and s�orage o� cbnstx�uction ` � mate�ia�s and the parka.ng of canstruction vehic�es. She � a�.so saa,d that at �he May 12 meet'ing, the Planning Comm�.ssion • asked �or a r�solution regarding commexcial space as related �E �o Pubiia Accqmmodation Units, and that the caznmercial ; - must no� exceed 20$ GRFA of th� enta.re project. The Tawn, Cauncil would have to pass the resoluti.on a,�d Dudley Abbott ' ; wants the d�tails regardinq parking contro�s� tiec� down in the Planning Commission approval.. � Ron Todd then moved �o approve the propvsed Phas� �I td, inciuc1e the conditions a�.n the Sta�� Memo p�.us ' the � following s�ipulations: � �.. The usage of the parka�ng lot is to be ao��►�nt�a, ;, ; � 2. A1]. con�truction ac�ivity £or Phase �I �vill take p3.ace ir� the nor�heast corner o� the pr�per�y- The con�tr�ction ing��ss and egr�ss wiL�,i be along the nor�heast side of the building. Ca�istruction activi�y and s�orage i� to be concentra�ed on the east side of Phase �L and nowhere can �.� come . within 30 feet of East Meadow Ma11. 3. Cons�ru�tion storage i� not to be all.awed on �he southwest parking lat. _ Whi.te seconded the motion; al.� px�ese�t: vdted �.n favor; �- and the motion carri.ed. APPROVED. � As ther� was �io further business, the meeting�. was ad�ou r �ed. . � ;s . , . . . Z . . . - �. . ... _ ..' . . . - . . . . ... .,{ . . ' _i - � - ' . . . ' . _ . . . . . . . ' . ..� .. . . ' �.. . . � . ' � . ' . . . . � - . . . ' .� �. � . . �. � - . . . . � � . � . . i� � � . . ' . � �. . . . . . . . t. . ' . . � � . . . - . . . .. .! ,. , .. . . .. . /� . � �� - . ' ' ' ... � . � . .� � � ' � a. - - . . .' _' . ' ... � - . MEMORANDUM -. � T0: PLANNIiVG COMMISSTON FROM: DEPARTMENT OF COMIIRUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE : MAY 19, �977 RE; VAIL VILLAG� INN PHASE IZ The Departm�nt of Community Development lzas reviewecl the proposed plan,s .�or Phase I� of the Vail Village Inn Special Develop- men� District , The proposed building is in conformance with alI regulations o� the Spec�al Development District Zone. Phase II will contain 7, 918 square feet o� corru�ercial space, 2 , 9�.7 sq. �t , o� GRFA i n three dwel.�i.n g units, and 1, 60Q sq, ft , of storage which becomes art of �the p under round arkin when Pha g P � se Z�� is bui1� . There is one problem associated with Phase iI wh�.ch is not addressed in the SpeczaZ Development District �xdinance, bu� was discussed at tl�e time approval was gzve� for the SDD. Parking wi�.� be approxima�ely 50 spaces too few untzl Pliase T�I be�ins . Ou,r sta�f suggests two conditions �or approval o� Phase II : � 1 . That the parking be controlled e�.ther with a gate or by a park�.ng attendant so that the available parking will be uscd only by gues�s and c�stomers of the comp�.ex. The avaa.lable par1�- a.ng will also have to accornrnodate construction vehi.cles and matearials , and tlais use shouxd be closeiy supervised. 2. In �he event that Phase IIY is not constxucted within a two yc�ar period from the completion of Phase II , tha� the Planna.ng Cornmission and Town Council review the park�ng which exis�s (approxi- mately �.14 spaces) and de�ermine i�' that number is adequate. If the Planning Commission and Coun.c�l determine that parkzng a.s not adequate, an alternative plan to provide the required parking be submi�ted. 3, During this int�xvening time, Vail Viilage Inn should documen� parking usage in as mucn as practical. This wa�l.l assist in setti.ng a reasonable parkimg xequiremen� �'or the balance of the pxaject or document the actual need in the even� that the p�oject do�s not proce�d, We would strong�.y recommend the approval of Pha�e IT of the Vaa.l Vil].age Inn, � � •• � , ' M 1+.-� U .T7 � T u tl f. v. d M U'tl N . N T H tll A L � . V• �9 u l. �L �i I/ l: D l: �: Gi�+ V+ J1.)rJ�. p � u w r, O � a � �J w M u � s-f: � n a u.� T P G �L J r� . N ' 7"1 N 10 k1 N.u 'U'V :l H A . � C Il u u.4' 4s,A �0.N O 4�.a N rt N rti fS � N u V rJ G rl S 7 N N u e1.+ T N J„y }.w'b M J - .. u,n� ,�• 00 O a N � ° w a .��i'"� .'�. '^ s�. c.. w« u n i� r. -�.G H [! .ir. ki� ro .yar o v� .,.� . uuoroaa�n V1 H G � t1•• T N V I1•�+ Vi G N V N U N 9 . C . � . . � O u N 1' ri V O N � V vl N l. �'q N�t C W rJ T N V N r3 y� f: J G f: �r1 0.fi O l� V 0.'C u N.G � G 4 r7 �/1 C+i S� }� Y. rl N T N•.1 W ..d 7 O .'X +� O GO!l'c5 Q.++ U N i.1 CI V N F L ri V Vf Qi U CI U N � r u u,C � G- � � � V'�+ .-� N C N T V ? �7 d �4 y 1 n w r.s � � ,+ r� o m w -m G u u u m r. r] o�.+ a.� u Q G rl C] J V � � V . C .V� 1+ tC ['- � b F' u 4 u F. K O C w G � 7. O N� O � Gi O�� �7 ,M. ,N 0 4 M,� �6 � G :J C " i �' � u N � � �F v w M L: 1� � ..�i t� N�'O i' F 7� u 'U t H u V W O N O +-1 4 � C O N rJ 1.. D 7 rl G N O O O 1+ �+ 7 �7 U .r� N V f! �'1 '3+ �J� GO .i *'� F+ u 6� 4� V C�� 'J J d+'� C J 'tt M � C1 . L U W G W - F+ [:_- ^ 7 fJ wl H U � N �!,] (! rJ u r U u r1 �7 C O . N Ca u F+ 1� V 4� CS N,5� 7 N L+ C'V �9 Y }+ V1.-i u !�H {a � - • N N W N C N � � Q Y� U l7 p.fJ G 'O O _ p SC `4 fA u N C! N+t N L - O u.V C� VI m YI C7 C N � - y PJ Ul Ir `.r. t� . ro. o � . '+ D O A a� "7 7+1 V.O '6� � . � w .� l7 0. 1+ N . - �v 1. ol w O • in 7 �9 u C U a,.n t/ 7+ Ei 1a � G u.+ G.�a 1+ N '� U N C r+ �.-1 -'iT . N 4/ V �7'N � , y 11 H :J N U V G Vl rl M H 7 V• �'1 E: U -�V '� "F {.. . �_ J C r � �� � G • N c� t�i� G 7 .r. O.C' d � a�.i u o"� "u.. y m°u�'v � u u o �n s� � �-+ro n u u.`r, o•, �u w 0.V [. O T'O �� U H � N V N �S tll - I� N U F 'G� ^3 � N w C O 'V A L' ] 1d Vi G L O � L-1:a 7 w C �v.+ i, :] O >,>+'�+ y r�c� Gs L 3 N � 1s �D � ,aw c o n a h r. w.n r, . ^ �o u o a �„ m a � c�s-. o v o a u.., � � u v ro 'J T`W a M N ''+ W f/1 !.i W C ! 4J �.l��[f H � +-1 W CJ CI� .�-1 C � F.' �6 .C :J C u �7 u U U '] 1-i=1� � u N N C` ' f-0 C O'O N � � � . V 1! J 1� U 3 V N V C4 C �•r+ G•.! t� 7 V G �7 N N F� C TA 4'C V.G S.' - f+ C•.+ C 1� N S.i•N tA 7 � W +-1.0 l� � L4 � {�: H G :J I �-a � 0. ' 3� U�n l+ ['. }+ N 1 7 J U N W 3 Ll �J E N U d . = M yy � O ^ O Vi ? O••r '..7 1 �A :1 N C ^ tn 1 rJ O U 4+ } N �C .• ,.a �« E. � y, � :, o_ � w � .+ c r� o d�a v u�n� uc r. � s. �� Na v, i uv. mm >, .��v° � � '� i � � u � a n u� � �c c a � m w :. q N s+ a ' . � „ •.� G r+ 1 7. u m o p a � � . o w F c u-o c�i w� r r, n c� i �v v o.a .c� i � c��+ u A u „ a�;,� v vwH .,•� � z i roHVI ., ^ � i ,�vv i Hu � H L C3 i�N 4 G 7 :l U�.�'�E I C1 O s� 5i He. I U G O C b � U A aJ V E L U I Ci J 7 � F+ L� I N ;� C � ai N CG I 4 ll G �� a ei p - . V 7 ^ fa W W V d 1 M v� [ V y d I U�ri � W T�J y S� E L �}'J G 1 w a G 3 O G. L,. 1 •-�.-. G�C J 0. 1 �:.-i+s J t . � M W � [� u V :� � � m r: 7 1 A u 4 N+'1•.; 7 1 S V LO N tb'd y � u ^.w [a. ^ G 7 1 . ^� O ^���= O I n •� u.p A O t L+ 7 C.O W p � C_ q V 1 +' N tl U � +� ^J r: U { O 1+ N r1 �' Cd O G. I N U N 3+ � F I ^'� � �: 7 1 I N�s+ C � v= I ! v O Yf N N 4+ . _ ' G. �: 1 M'� C � 1 m Fa O �V m . 'l. I N O Cr u � z [ u G w C 1�-1 7�-�! � :J 1 U. ^ 6 C 1 O•L O I �+'� � O r� � . p S„ I �N y u u 1+•�. U t .a C c� �. :� 1 h ..a :� ' C�C} .O C N � U V C� O .i i 7+ �'J U �A >.U v. � N Q � Fs U �.i O 1 LG F a.� �ai O � N al � C1 u O O •r�':! L C 00 . . w m L'C b r �-+ �3 O F. Z Q � SC ti C rJ 1+ � U ' O � � .� u � U -C N E � E 7 U N c+i t �^]•N �c.i � ! s. rJ� O '.i? � .`li k H V��.r C � C O • I E'Q'n O J? • 4 V1 IA . � w O C J� 9 , . P J•.i O c J C, d 1 l+ 'J ri Y.'.+ri O f 3 � 7� • O ( O •rl � L+ N ['. . � (V � SJ Y�.�I•.<.,y.+-� N I O S: C.u, L N I •C: CI W N :J fV 1 'O N C7 O N O 7+U p u ai tL 1 W V, ^.- "1 U � �"� .� �� �L U 1 01 N N's] I.i U W L Y1 � �w Vl y U � �C � 'G 1 G•r+ U .� J1 �2 I •.3•H :J y G " 1 +�1�.i O N q G C w L p ` 7 O i++'� 4 ! O ri... CJ.U O I t�J . � U 1 7� ^J �3 O b �0 _ . H I V7 5+ V O i+ H ] V A l-i � H H I N U ^'17 .. N +/ G U 4� 3l ' [-i � y e) u u N F* 1 1 L � ^w H a U V r+-�+ N � N 7 d � ! 7++a _ U H'3 1 N V:'.� U C u U I +�+u+'a'�"'�'ti U I C1 M D +�'O G N a ry.� � ,C � G) 9i O U Y. L'1 �` O U: O 4i O N !+1 1 •r+W C:.G a 7+ W I W.0 L vA N O X H . � N H d 4+'O +� 1+ N y .'L C] JJ V1 J-� N in 1 h CI M11 �A O N { C� D N G.W O � L.-1 . � . . .. � . . ' . ' . • - s . � ' 1 � ' � ' � W � . ' / d � � �. � .. � . - . - � � _ � � ' - . � . k P� � �� � . ' � �. . . � � . . . Y7 ' r1 • O . p . . . . ' . . � . a . � � . � � 1 ' T ' N Ir v N'; d � � . . - W 1 Y Y� Q� 4) N d M , � � � �l.C.� �J H a �� �M . � . � • • y V r� U}:� y�„..� :J..� r� O r "� u a+ � . U 7 L �' µ N C 45 N �3 W W U •f+ „y. C V .♦ u ,c �' L'vd � w � �..no; �. ti a ° Ci,ai...i ' . � e4a� n rs ° �� � �v u h-�+r . �b m.a C y � - . � . . ' o.. a-o � „ o z� . o . ... o �, .a o a k ; C,� ~ti f�i CJ j r.G 7 y O }.F� w U N i=U C . . . • . . ' f! tL :� N .n �Zj v'O "I. �..� N �w ' ��I [C 4 V f u EC � :J N'O� v ,q - . � M tb�^a U q u J�t' c: li 1' C u 5 w � r � ~ . � � � � N � ~ u y V W V J 41 O u u O H Fl � . � .l V.i 4 N y v �'� f: % u.-�i C V � o , R o �,� � a el V4 L� G 7 91 'V � N rf N.xr N T O U N LI {L W . . _ 'l d�al � r W C N.a ❑ L � 7+ h • � H n o O u G ti' � �0. O N r� V O u Fr',� T 3-r�� U U 'd O'�./r�l p F� . . V x Q �ll� N u ; � N �p L u O o C'�'G� � . p .. � C 7 � U . W r. a � �L . C H p-d 17 -la,O C".J- a�i " u a� 1.,J'O � C •.1 L Y v � . . � M,�,� ^j 4��' u�. _ y, l� . U �W O O y . � c u � � C V a � �'���f ~ � 1 �,o O A �.w 1� w . . � w Y+V � � ..�aw.� V. Nb.+ u W 7 6u a� � � .a �n Y .H�v ro Un h G G U � C ' 3 V � a � r. _. C 5+ �� h G W O O � - 1 r r O r G N � r1 C � � � y � O O u U V �;; � "y',� • � �,� �, �s c m y m V p,w � � ao .�i O r: U C G � 4 U ?� ^ �� 5• � C� N O r+ O � � �.., rr �n a v _ ,�.= o . .. A ,..� ., � . , ,p 'j� u 7 q G •-' ^ � = Y O'O 'i �C'1 '�J !� M y� - . L L.-1 4 N'� � ��•3 U O G J � G U U r , � ' ' . � � �p N VI N ' � � �.0 l !u .- � _ L. J'O ;�"�� N F '� � U . .. J.0 �' G `J O� .d O .^. u O F.� aJ T7 V L u r7'+i �. . ' � c a'- n u r: � u y y a L c�- }�o � i c ti°. c c I N � •°+ •",w��� . . - . N �� p � U li ti ��-1�n C.V 4 F d H C V �� � . . , N C �u U U rl v '� '>�'"...+ O '>J J •11 M.�-i G O H . . , . , � � ^ 'y' N L '� y 'J n N 1^+ �'d :l yJ ^ iJ � . . . CC_ E lr+, '!, . U G �'�` ,J'� � � [; M � � L � ' .,y.+ a A W �� 4 I C�.a c �"a � y ?.r o� o.o b ^� O �J . . x0 5 �� s L � N L y Y a�i u A.�-e � ra w�i Y i �.. � r � ^,� u 7..,..�i v: O � _w y . . . � y c S, .,c--i �"_ c H c.v, u � C O.e A � -� C 3 tpw o•n �� p u E H . ^ C1�-.� L p � I GG! � J' U u .l�N C� � r �y C,u . , � cn I .: :.0'i A s', C C�+ v y 3 .'s O dC � CQ�r+•.+ C.Z. V '1 Ft'+ �� '� U1 t�i�f]A W ' . �r � �a � 0 1 G 3 r �..�,C.�i s. U a ai u �7 N .. t�+vi u ?�,>..a � o 11 v ..�..�. G E� u O � � � U.,.,ny�'� p . _ ' . . y � .r~-��.1 Y. C C' 1 �'�4 � '� G ^J !+ 'O G'G� fxJ C�1 G V . . . r.-i!. N � u G n U C +i C� � J �.1 A � O O O�.+•-� N W 1{ N � G !1 1i'G-'l� j J . al u.-1 � M � . . � j U) N C�^'; O � i j� i :J ^ u L L1 4 Y. r! <7 l� 'y . . �' ry� � � �--�..a r•+'v,i �..If-�i�-I u � V � H f � C �] t'.-1 7 4 � �.�-. •r� :J ��.d . . _ . . . S. 3 �' 4+ �p F 7 GO U 1 GI G „U 7 7 u G N s�+.�1 u U1 C3 N 1�.0 7 . . � ` �u p i! W N T G N Y �+ y W�6 O b W U L 7 O C U • . , . ' (� p,�., N U U'O N ' ' F • • � .� . • � . � ,. e . . . . ' � . � � � � � �� � � ai u Ts w u � , rJ w G N �bFd� . 'O � o.b Q a p� � . .+ }! O . ' `✓. F O L � � � � . � . �� � � �N. � N n0� ro C vVi W �A� s+ C r-4 y p.;I ��y+ � N N U H N �� N M C V b 'd.0 ..�j y~i� C D�'y . ,. s+ � � .d t] • L C aa N U d b J O � 3�.^+ E ' � F . � G �W V M ,r�j �l 4 U D �.1 F u�1� U V C y '� u � U l� �.Y •ly . rt , •.+ p rl 9 '� F.wu+ O ".� ?=i � u� � � rn O �,%�� o'b ] a�o � � � O v r� � �� � � y C:f L .V V '� U"a Tf� w u1 E O�.-�f..�t '�V'� o J� �'�7� T u �N 7 ��� . ..+ ^J J •t [� g q 'A L y� C d d J 4� Li 1+ t.L �t�'.' "J�`� 'a r7 O O F F S.y,� � H �..�i GM1 l7 C l+ �M V� .�a m . . V7 1 O � r1 � y... � l.r'� iV 'A'y' 1'r � . H 1 C b � � � .N a.=� C "L p ��..C. ��w y G+�-�i i>>C � �-rUi-r�.L ro y H I � � uN 7. 1 N'� �.-+ ;j � 7 V . . Y �U ' J 0 3 U �y`, J T ~w .^. I d � H �-.�i N w r7^O �3^'� �W r-1 � . ��S I b 4 i. c �y.t,-i J o o c a y s m•�'o p p u u G V Y: V � .� U A A � �:r L o..a C O ! �. i .-i r y r: F �� � d1 �'n C T�- ^.1 j u r1 .� C �,� .a C O e, u 7 1. " :6 .. � ' r� [ ..�e L •.Vi T � J 'L .�'. �'..�...J+ N G � ^'� � ^ '" � i U O U �3++ 11� N O y � '[3 D � _ . . � H. C � & ^ � Q K � V M ' � 3 � �u �..a �C n 'f,� `� w J~ � O tJ u'O � t'J+v. N CJ j �� p 7 �1 H � A ~ � u ., r.L ^ 1-^J ..T C �� +v�i r O y a� a�i � � � ,C+ u w w - ui LY 67 ..�Fj L � � f O G �� • w 4� �� V � x . M �.» v�'7:[ r W 1. .m N v p . a+ 4� C7 � � VI ' V L u ..Vr 7 L C __� M G 4+ V V . =�y�w G� N O U M 1+ r � ^ C 0.M n A � �y � 3 G o � u .�.�i; u r rx• � 3 r a r, 6 f' N u o.�e?H a .i+� a o � ''� � � o � � "� v. •r. � r c oLr_ y " �� � � :.� cou-a� a .vc � b a.�r. F Vl 1 � O.a� t1 ..� M �.-i ^� � L y GC L'. C: C C �l C 7 V..�i N w Y. N' W. � N M N N �L U � � i � G� L'-� '�j'O � G i r N^J C .+ 1 u E � 4 O V U U r1 � U % 1�+ � 1 .I C t0 �.�i 1a O � I � ' �� J ? 'r. Y+ J .+ J 1 -� V �ro O y ;. V ~ C' � 0 o i.< eJ G • w 1� u� G G M - . . ^ � I N Y+ � � � �U f. �u u a � 0 � u 7� U u'd ,�; p�C O ct > U f u A G,t3 �:'O N V � . . r 1. u1 M U ^� G .7- "-r ^ :.� f s. 't7 �7 u G � :� �. s c . ac i � � o ��.w:;:+ G � c m 7 y :9 u :�i r� u N p � y � d ta � � • - y _ u w n !.c rl ! i aa ..� d • v � . + e v r u u ,.+ s� w V. 4.+ N N � � y ^ ;J � C u � U �V �"y�,� y U � U 7 F H i.+ G� G S G V� V 41 � 4.w � J C 'S � � y N A � ;: � 3 c � � " „ n ° � n �.��. w w o -� �+ . a n� m Y o o �� � c� � +' . s � �� � i ��-, u y `� h ef ` gUC7 � '�uv �' .l8inti%Hr�.W .�`'. i:7u� � nF'•Ar � � � � u7VV . j 3~ p W� . � i r�5 V �`' V .1( �J.O A-G '" O N �b N D C. �J A F�] w r1 ul N Lf Q . � [] - w i � 1� 7� D 'Jr �`: .J. 17 J O� J m.L J �7 U N N 1 V y Q V t0>..� � % V � G C O �.-i N ~ �u U L 4 w Ilr M� • u C C: G�N u .. C C! u H � 4: :J O ^ N � .Gi M Q � i �,.. . C •- • �' � � ,. � ' �: f u `- ` � � � L. 5w F' C«�� O 9 ~ u L.F 3 '� 7 4 G �w C 'U N V; G V C C t:1.V C � �� .. V 4�J1 S: �y � y y�� .. ,{3 'U � : N 7,+w GO s' (' °e�7 ,C Iti � c�" j .� � i. O s. N N N N� w y�,..�N �� v a p O 4f r0+� o . s; � O n -� J '- 7� 'l V "v � �' V Vi 1. Y c: 'J � C N '1.,.w � 1.,N p�7 � �i V..0 C1 A � r O � � , � � • ~ . yi.� U G^V W (� 1C U.r� 3 ir �C N.�-' .�.� eGi � h;9� n.is N i .'�i H V[n 1L.'�O fu+ A.i vf O?'�''V G' Q . .� � � N N � �p . w N y 7r A .v C> vl �+ .•w rti. ^ 'l. [: a d y N V C• Y] �3 � � , b fY N V�. a � n 1`l ' . � C� � �j K N U H 1' 4i �'� . . N v1 n y F v � V . 1-� �'re 7.i ln f• � t�,q 4�� f j � - L7 v O � G u � n y M N 11 k � H�j 'y � . . . � �'�-. � u m ..X � vi . 1 N�a.la n vr • _ • H �I 4 V l�.t u N �� o� . . , N y q M V a � , � . � . �� � � . ' . * �� .. . . . , ... . " � � � .. -,.._N-..'....._. . . � -�-. � � .. � . - .. � ..� . � -..�- .. . . . .' " i . ! -�.�,.-. ------- — -_---- -_..__ _ ._.�_..�.�.�.� ----_ _ �_.. �' , �: • �i4yS�:0i1 � . . , �anamoto - �3�ck & � Abey I � Agril 25, �.977 I _� k Mx. Pass Cooney • Cooney Wadman Da3.tan � 1737 3.Sth S�re�t Boulder, Ca�.orado 803�2 M�. Wi11.a.am J. Ruaff, AIA • praw�r 2178 . . Vail., Colorado 81657 �e; Vai1 Villag� Tnn . Phase 2 �]ear Koss and 13i�.1: Thank you very much �or sending drawings, s].ides and the black and whits pha�ographs. I continue �o be impr�ssed w��h the project and the em��gence of a con�emporary village with a strong histnric f�a��ar. It's ve�y difficu].t to create something tY:a�. fits well in ei�.he� the 3.7th or 20th century, but a.t seams to be ha�pening. My camments are vEry tew £or overall i� fe�ls good: � � 1. The basE of unit H �eels abrup�. � cannot �e�d we1.]. where �he lower flaor windows are. Zt seems �ha� this is an importan-� facade and shou].d be quite operz - �he view in and out can be � qreat. ' tiaw about pulling �he steps ou� and run them along �he south �ace? This migh� relieve the abruptness and creats a rzicez plaza space. . 2. The buildings al1 seem a l�it bulkie� than �.he origina]. model (Drawing/Model "I]", dated Apri.�. 6,7, 197b) � azld the c�ntral � plaza space a bi� tighter. . You might 1001� a�. tha� space ve�y careful�y, and consi:der widening it by abau�..�' . Pl.ease check sun angles, ��Y �� determine where a few key tx�es mic�h� he placed and judge i�s � sca1.� with a�.l ingredients p�esent. The slight s�ep back of �.he second story ir► some p].aces does help. � i,andscape Architccts: Principals: Assc�c;iascs: 225 Mi]]cr Avenuc I.,anil�'lunning � � l2ohcrt 12��yston�A5LA H:truld N.Kul,�ryust�i ASLA Mill V,allcy Url�an i�csign AtiA H:!]l:kF310[U fLSLA RUI�Cf1�',E;aitcr�nn f�SLA C.oli(urnia 9d441 #'�irR�'I:uE�in�; ' E�Ido�i k3�ek AS�A George W.Uirvin ASi.A Q t5:183�7906 �,nvirunEUCntal Pl.inning Kazuo Ahcy ASi.A RuE}crt S.Se��a ASLA I.uais G.Allcy AlA • ��i�rici.i C.irlislc ASLA � � . . . , � , Fi . ,, , . ; . . Mr. Ross Coaney � . ''_ � . Mr. William ,7. Ruoff -- 2 - Ap�iX 25, 1977 � � -� 3. Many windows a� the �.ower ].eve1 will o�en the space greatly. '� Tha� is hard �o read from the pho�ographs. Any baZconies ar dormers a� the second ].evel to ch�.ng� scale? That is a�I. T� £eels very good and I xecommend that the Besign Review Board, Planni.ng Comtnissia� and Tawn Council all give their respective stamps of appx'ova�.. TY:e Phase Two i5 cons�ster�t wi�.h ine grevious sgecial Development Distric� a�a�provals. ; Hest of Iuck. Than3cs for keeping me pos�ed. I have no schedu3.� �a appeax in Vaii, but wi1.1 le� you knaw if p].ans change: ; �i erely t S N� , FiANAMOT�J, CK ABEY . j. �{ f � � . � don Bec bh CC: Mr. James Lamont � � Ms. Diana Toughil�. Nl�. ,7nsef S�auf�er � � . ♦ ' . ` .� ' - � . � . . . � MEMORAi�IDUM ; � TO: �LA�dNII�G COMivl�SSION ' FROM: DEPARTMEI`IT 0�' CO:�'I��iTNITY D��'ELOPtiiENT � � DAT�: MAX �2 , 1977 , RE: LIQNSHEAD C4M1�lERC�Ai� BUILDING — REQUEST FOFt DISTANCE � BETW�LN� BUILD�NGS VARIAI�TCE � ; The Town Council requested Selby/TofEl to res�udy the prapased carr�mercia�. bui.l.ciing in an a�ttempt �o widen �he pedes�rain ease- � ment tl�rough the project. This reqtzest necessita�ed a distance ' between buildir�gs varianc� ta acheive the wider pedestrain maii. The Depa��men� of Communa.ty Deve�opm�nt has reviewed the request and find �hat the criteria and findi�gs are consisten� wz�h recommendation� in memo dated February Z4, 1977 re�ating to a setback variance �or �he sa�ne projec� and would �here�ax�e recommend. approval of �he subjec� va�iance �n accordance wi�h those cri�eria and finda.ngs applicable to the se�back varianc�. i. €. _ £ � , ! � ' � �[ E � - . � ; , l .��' .�. 1 MINUTES VAIL PLANN�NG COMMISSI4N May 2�, 1977 PR�SENT: Abbott ABSENx : Hanlon Drager Mi1�s Garton Todd Whi.te STAFF : Toughill Jef f rey '�k THE SPA -- REQUEST FOR BUILDING BLiLK CONTROL VARIANCES AND SETBACK VARZANCE Peopl:e present representing The ��a were: L. Deicas , owner; T. Sriner , architect ; B. Pendleton, attorney: �om Sriner outlined the d�tai.ls o� the pro�ect spcci�y�.ng that it would con�ain 56 condominium units in addit�on to a health c1ub . It was noteol that the builc�i.ng would be owner occupied approximatEly 3--6 weeks a year wi.th no rentals . Dudley Ab�ott �e�t that the proposed fireplaces were not real.istic from �� the standpoint of �he pressing a3r qua�ity problem. He th�n asked � about �he d�cisions r�ached by the Growth Mana�m�nt ._comm�ttee in rel.ation to �he �easibi.3.ity of this project An environmental impact repoxt was requested of the owner . The variances �equested are as follows :. 345 �eet cliagonal , the ordinance allows 225' maximum; and 10 foot setback line, the ordinance ' requires 25' rr3inimurr�. Ed Drager was concerned with the length o� the building facing The Mark. Other than tha� he liked �he project. Gerry White would l.�ke to see �he building set baek moxe tha�a it is, and he �vould prefer nat to see such a long walJ. . He would like to see some altexnative pxoposals for �he project , Ron Todd �elt that the design was good and had no prolo�em wi.th the bul.k control variance or setback vaxiance par�iculax7y s�.nce �he se�back area �n question is p�destrian. A� thi.s poi�t a � favorable l�tter was submi�ted �rom Eldon Beck, RHB&A consul.�ant, critiquing the project . Pam Gar�on liked the approach to the si�e and project but she wanted to be sure that there w�re good, solid reasons fo� the vaxiances. It was stat�d that a solid ra�ionale was needed be�ore the Commission could recommend approval. o� th� builda.ng wails wi�hout the required offsets on the diagonal. Tom Briner felt tha� the basis �or hardship was the �arge scale of The Mark pxoject which does no� allaw for a view corridar ; the topography; the shape o� the site and its relationship to the adjoining - � buil�dings . z� was noted that the Planning Commxssion has granted ' J variances on these reasons before . � . , �t' �� I-� was a�.so noted that �f the patio was r�moved, a 3esser se�back vaa^iance ~ wi11 be nceded. BiTILDING BULK VARIANCE Ed Drager made a mot�on to approve the 120 foot diagonal; Ron Todd seconded �he mo�ion based on the s�a,�f inemorandu�n and �ldon Beck' s recommenda�tion. A unanimous vote was recorded, APPROVED Ror� Todd made a motion to approve the maximum wall length variance of 55 fee� . subject to the provisians of the staff inemorandum. Gerry Whit� seconded the ma�ion, A 3/2 vote was recorded. APPROVED On the questian o� wa�.l lengtla with no of��e�s, Pa,m Garton requested tha� if the varzance was approved tha� it b� bu�1t according to Eldon Beck' s recominenda�zons and tha� it be sent to Design Review Board to solve the paroblem, Ron Tadd made a mota.on wi.th a directive to DRB �o cons,ider E1don Beck 's recomr�enda�ions �or approval of the var�ance mentioned a�bove, Dudley Abbott seconded the mo�ian, {it was noted -that he was not strictly tzed to Beck' s recommendatxons} . A 4:1 vote was recorded •xn favor of the motion. APPROVED. SETBACK VARIANC� -- 3.0 fee� at the stair �ower and three feet at each of the othex two building points. Ron Todd made a mation f'or approval o� the setback variance; Ed Dxager seconded the moti.on. A 4 :i vote was r�corcled. APPR4VED PULIS RESUBDIVISION AND RELONING AND VARIANCE Dudley Abbot� made a motion to �able aiscussion a� the applican� 's request ; Ed Drager secanded �the mo�ion , TABLED RUCKSAC BUILDING PARKING VARI.ANC� This variance reques� is �or two parking. spaces so that tYie applicant , Jeff Se7.by, can expand the builda.ng. Tt was noted that �he gates between the Rucksac Bui].ding and the Red Lion were approved by the DRB on a ternporary basis, T�e staf� has taken nQ position :on the variance rec�uest . Je�f Selby reqtxested that they be treated as aI1 other parka�ng variances have been �reatec� and granted in CCI , Ed Drager asked wheth�r �he applicant would be wi�ling to si�n a paarking contract ; Selby answered a�firmat�.vely and said that he woulc� honor it, Doug McLaugh�.a.n protes�ed the applicatzon sta�ing that hardshi.p must be shown in order to gxant a variance. Ron Todd, on the question o� hardship, agreed tha� the s�oxe does not �unction well but the owner knew that when he purchas�d �.t , Gerry White could see no hardship sznce economics are no� to be considexed by P1,anning Commission. He was aJ.so concerned about the possib�e blockage o� the pedestrian way between the Rucksac and the Red. Lion. Ed Drag�r cou�d see no hardskzip and he wants the Tawn Council to make a decision on the whoJ.e . question of parka.ng variances and contracts , Dud�ey Abbatt fel� that the applicant can use his property wi�hin the limits o� the Zoning Ord�nance. H� feels a.� the vaariance is granted then the P�anning Comrnis.szon wauld be pu� in jeopardy. He can see no �ustzfxcation, Pam Garton sees a • uniqueness o� CCT z.n relation to pedes��rianization and the TOV' s efforts ; , , �1�; :� � y to discou�age paarking in Town. She is apen to the parking variances bu� does not want the variance tied down to a contrac� . Gerry White thinks �hat two cars couXd be put on the si-te, so is against the variance. Jef� Selby said tha� he cou�.d upgrade the building to an addi.tzonal ; 1�9 square �ee�t W1tYlOLl� benefi� of tk�e parking v�.riance. Doug McLaughl.in, as an interested party, fe�.t �hat �he�°e was no basis f or haxdship, the aesthe�ics of the addition would be unpleasing; and th.e additian would cause hardship �o people who use �he walkwa�. He stated that he was w�l�ing to pay �ar 2 0� the upkeep of �the wa�kway. A q�estion o� t�tle to the praperty was raised in r�lat�o n to the walkway . Pam Gax�on then ent�red in�to the record Iet�ers of opposition. {Dan Telleen, Jack Cu.rta�n, Tim Gax�ton, Grego��r Keltehne�r, Cindy Sexton, Bill Mc��.hanie, Mark You�g) Dudley A�bo�t made a motion to deny the application; Gerxy White seconded. A 4: 1 vote was recorded in favor af the motion . DISAPPROVED (Garton against ) CYRANO' S PARKING VARIANCE Ed Drager made a motion ta postpone discussion at the reque�st o� the applicant ; Dudley Abbott seconded the mo�ion , TABLED ,_ ` Ed Drager and Pam Garton s�ated that they wanted �o fo�cwaxd on to .the , Town Counc�.l a requ�st to consider parka.ng exemp�ions in CC� . It was their feeling that parking is wxong;ly bei.ng used as a tool �o k�ep au� expazasi.on. -,. ` 'a ' J .'.� ' . � �_ M�EMORANDUM � T0: PLANNING COMM7SSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF C�MMUNITY DEVELOPM�NT RE ; TH� SPA - REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM BULK CONTROL STANDARDS AND �ETBACK REQUTREM�NTS DATE : May 24, �977 Tom Bxiner, r�;present�.ng Urida, N. V. has applied for seve�ral vari-- ances in oxder to allow the cans�ructa.an of 57 conclominium una.ts in a single bua.l.ding ra�her than �n severa� s�parate bu.ildings , The si�e is a portion o� Lo� ]., Block 2, Vail. Lionshead Filing 3 , con- sisting of 142 , 742 sq. ft . which wou].d a11ow 92 units and a GRFA o� approximately 5�, 000 sq. �t . The: proposal is at �he maximum GRFA but wc.11 undex the allowable un�ts , thus laaveing a positive aff�ct upon the peak population possible. The requirement in the HDMF zone is a ma�imum of 225 ' di.agonal , a maximum wall leng�h of 17�' and �a mi.nimum wall o��set of � ' for each 7 ' of building length for ea.ch wa�1 in exc�ss of ?0 ' in length. The developer proposes a maximum diagonal of �45' , a maximum wal.]. � Ieng�h of approxitnately 2$0' and three wa�J.s which do not meet the offset requirements . The Iongest wal.�. with no of�set is 1.60 ' . The setback requirement zs 25' and th� closest point on the south side is appraximately �.0' . CONSIDERATTON OF FACTORS FOR THE VARIANCES (Section 19,600) 1 , The arel.ationship o� th� requested variance to other exis�ing : ar potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The proposed structuace is c�irectly acxoss the stree� from the proposed Mark which is a v�ry large struc�ure. The �roject , as proposed is a.n keeping with the architectural charact�r a� �he Mark and smaller. buildings �cvould be dwar�ed by tkae impflsing Mark structu.rc�. We do feel, however, that �h� �ong unbroken wa11s cauld be o�fset Somewha� to �elieve the flat expanse, especially towaxd the Enzian. The req,ues�ed setback variance is in kecping w�th the zero setback included i.n the Maxk Special D�velopmen� �istrict < The proposed building 1.oca�.ion{ does cre�.te special problerns in th� area wY�ere the Mark is an the property l�ne and. the proposed Spa is withzn ]�0 ' of the propert�r 1ine, A v�ry naar�ow space (approximately 45 ' ) is created that must be considexed. We would recotnmend that this sect�.on of L,ionshead Circle be p�;destrianized in ord�r to al�eviate the con�la�ct between the pedestxi.an and auto in. this narrow space. The narrow ' � area could �hen be landscaped xn such a way that a '"�.7�h Street" cavern is not created. . . � The �pa , Page 2 2, The degree �o which re�ie� from the st�°ict .or litera�. interpre- k :� tation and enforcemen� af a specif�,ed regulation is necessary ta achieve compa��bility and una.formi�y o� . treattnen� among sites i.n the vicinity or to a�tain the objectives of this or- dina�ace withou� grant o� special privilege. Strict intex�preta�ion of the ordinance wottld reqttire at least three separa�e, oar perhaps four, structur�s on the si.te which would greatly dirna.n,ish the amou.nt o� gr�en space and possible recreational amen�.�ies on the sa.te. The site is also peculia� in �hat �.t is a difficult one topographica��y. The "ha.�l" is a man-made one which apparen�ly resul�ed from the construc�a,on. of Highway 6. The proposed plan recogni�es the exis�i.ng topography and dea].s with in an imagznative way arather than flat�enxng the enta.re site. A�ain; �he bulk and mass of the proposed Mark shaul.d be consic�ered �n approving a building size criteria for this si.�e. 3. The effect o� the requarested vaxiance an light and air, distra- bution o� population, transpor�ation and txa��ic facixities , public facilities, and utilities , and public sa�ety. We see no advers�: impacts on the above factors . The prapased us� of the buildin� represents a decrease in populata.on which xs in li.n,e with p�o�osed growth manage�nent program and has a positive impact on di.s�ribution of poupla��on in �erms of avernight gu�sts. The pxojec� is proposed for the use o� the owners only, and is nat proposed for short-teacm rental. The project is on a major bus line and will have , � some impact on the bus sys�em, howev.er, much less impact than a short- term, maximum number of �nits pxoj�ct which could have be�n bui�t on the site. A major plus a.s that a17. au�o' access to �he site is from the Frontage road which �nables a major portion of the landscaped area �o be adjacent to p�destrian access from the West day skiex parking ].ot . As the pxoject is on the bus 1ine, there should be 7.ittle i,mpact on traffic and parki.ng requirements in other parts o� Town. FTNDINGS: 1 , That the gxantin� of tl�e variance will not const.itute a grant o� special pri.vilege inconsa.sten� wath the li.mitations on other pxaperties c�.assifi�d in th� same district . See Items 1 and 2 und:er Consideration of Factars . 2. That the granting o� the var�.ance wil.l not be detrimental to the public hcalth, sa�e�Gy, or wel�a�e, or mate�°ially an�urious �o properties or impxovements in tk�e vicinity. We feel the pxoject would have a very pasitive im��c� on the � neighborhood, bo�h on the basis af design and landscaping qual.ity, and would no� be .detrimental to any other propeart�.es i.n �he vicin�.�y . 3. That the variance is warranted �or one or more o� the �ollowing �easons: � a. xhe strict or literal interpre-�ation and en.forcement of the specifi�d xegula�ions would result in practi.caJ� dif�i.culty or unnecessary physi.cal harship inconsistent i � ' • '' The Spa � ' ° ,Page '3 wa.th the objectives of this ordinance. � The proposed structure has the appearance of several s�ructu.res rather than one very large one, and is in keeping wi.th oth�r projects, both co�pleted and proposed, in the neighborhood. b. There are exceptiona�. or ex�raord�.naxy c�.�cumstances or condita�ons applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally �o other proper�i�s in the same zone. See items � and 2 under consideration of factors . The Depa�tment of Communitp Development would strongly recom[nend that the Planning Cornmissa,on revi.ew �he bui.lding bulk control standards to determine �f they are valid. We would point out tha� only one building since the 1973 adoption of tY�e orc�inance h.as been built wi.-�hout a variance from these s-tanolards. We would also point out than sevexal projects either approved or under con- struction, are in varia�ian frorn these standards . Possib7.y the best example of a vexy good building that does not meet t.h�se standards is the Vail Village Inn r.edevelopment .' It inay be in �h� best inte�cests of good design to remove the bulk cont�^ol standards, and usc� them merexy as gu�delines in r�viewang individual projects. The Department of Community Deve�.opment recommends approval of the requested variances with special attentian to paints raised by both the s�aff and Eldon Beck in achieving the intent of the ordinance. � � � � � � ;; i ui I i .� . � � ' Royston Hanamoto Beck & ', • Abey May 20, 1977 Ms. �iana Toughi7l Town of Vail P. 0. Box 100 Uai7 , Colorado 8i657 ��: Vaii Spa Condominium Dear Diana: On Thursday, May 19, 1977, I met with Tam Sriner and Leon Diecas in ir�y office to review �he proposed design o� the Vai7 Spa Condom�nium. Overall , I found the project to be well conce�ved and in most cases in conformance with Town design criteria. Nly co�nents are as follows: 1. Tl�e placement of buiTdi�g mass on the site is good and the three resul�ing apen spaces are we1T located and �. �n relat�an to adjacent stre�ts and to the Enzian. The oniy ��gh� relationship is the southeast wa11 line front�ng on Wes� Lionshead Circ�e. The space between �he proposed project and the proposed ex- pans�on of the Mark wili be t�ght. At this 1aca�ion, �he builciing a�pears to extend into ti�e setback at one corner by on7y twa feet. This is nat a significant prab�em. We discussed the one , apparent option of b�ailding �his wing to the narth e�ge of the property on top o� the garage, i'his would transfer bulk from within the site to the outer edge with significant detrimer�ta7 visuaT effec� on the spac�s as se�n from the Tnterstate. In r�y op�n�on the p�an proposed is t�e best of the two optians in terms of community impac�. 2. The height and bulk of the bui�ding �ave � imi�ed impac� on existing impartant sight lines. It was represented that the heigh� of the building conforms to ordinance. � l.ands�cape Architects: Principals: Associates: 225 Millar Avenue l.�nd planning Robert Royston EASLA f�arold N.Kobayashi ASLA Mill Valley Urban Design Asa Hanamoto ASLA Robert T,Batterton ASLA California 94441 Park Planning Eldon Beck ASLA George W.Girvin ASt,A 415 383-7900 Environmental Planning Kazuo Abey AS1.A Roberf S.Sena ASLA Louis G.Alley AIA Patricia Carlisle ASLA ��•-. � . , ` • Ms. D�ana Tough�ll -2- NEay 20, 1977 3. The �ong wa71s do exc�ed ordinance requirements. However, because of the building shape and �h� break up of facade 6y s�airways, I recommend that a var�ance by gran�ed. Qne condi�ian should �e assigned, and that would be �he re- quirement that 15 to 20 ma�ure con�f�rs (3Q' - 35` in height) be ciustered �n three or four Toca�ions aTong �he long walls. Plar�� r�aterials can achieve almost the same effect as an archi�ectur�al setbac�C. Zk�e candi tion shoul d f�r�her state tha� these trees are "architectural features" and tha� �hey must be weT7 ma7ntained and replaced promptly in case of �oss. {The Ownc:r and Architect agreed to this conditian. ) q�. A req�est was �nade to study �he interior r�g�t ang]e wall in��rsect�ono(the two tennis court spaces}. A notch or an angle or some other saiutivn to create shadow and a better cannection wo�ld alTeviat� a potentia3 v3sual problem. 5. The amaunt of park�ng �s de��cient by 13 spaces. 106 covered spaces wi�l be provided in comparison with 119 required. In my opinion, 13 surfac� stalls at the� north s�de of the bu�lding result in 7oss of critica1 landscape space and �orce � a poor serv7ce area access dest�n. Approxir�ately six �a ei�h� surface spaces work fair7y we11 . I suggest that �h� ap�rovals be worded requ�r�ng confor�iance with the ord�nance within a pertod of two years after f�ll operation af the project and then only if a par[c�ng de�Fic�ency is apparent. 6. The service area and �uggage pickup ar�a is not we7� solved and c{oes not have the quality of the rest o� the project. Mr. Briner agreed to s�udy this area further. 7. The site plar� and landscape p1an req�ires fur�her design and must show access �o tenr�is cour�s, �xterior terraces and kiosks, ear�h form, and a more detailed plartting plan. It was suggested thdt the west tertnis co�rt be depressed by approxi�nately four feet and that mounding on �he southwes� perimeter wauld da much ta lower apparent bui] ding he�ght. Also, matur� tree planting a7ong West Lionshead CircTe (east of the pedestrian access to VaiT Spa) would soften the building rela�ionsh�p with the �lark. It is apparent that West �.ionshead Circle is very �mpor�ant to the visua7 image of Lionshead and improved landscape south of the Enz�an Condominiums, in concert with new landscape by the Vaii Spa, is esser�tial . The Town and th� Enzian shou7d bo�h participate in environmenta] impravement. � a�. � , �• �{.!' � .. � � � Ms. Diana Toughill -3- May 20, 1977 � 8. Ttte need far a quality bus waiting shel �er and terrace or� West Lionsh�ad �ircTe was d-iscussed. Mr. Diecas may be willing to participate in the �evelopr�ent o� s�tc� a facilTty. 9. A winter t�me �ennis b�abble was discussed. A single cour� bubb1 e on �f�e east courts woul� be be�ter thar� a doubl e bubble. Conclus9ons: I recommend that requested varianees be granted, but including �he condit�ons described in this letter. There shou�d be further detai7ed review of the site and landscape p7an with an agre�ment to plar�t �a�erial s�ze and quar�tities. As any bu-ilding reaches maximur� size and, �n fact, exceeds the maximum, it becomes ex�remely impor�ant that extra care be g�ven to proportion, scale, materials , and color. The ski11 of �he Architect becames very important and �he To�vn shou1d con��nue to require careful design d3a�ogue. I believe tha� this �ro,�ect is we11 co�ceived and patent3ally car� be one of the rnos� attractive in Lionshead (in part because of space for s�rong tree plantzng) . This apin�on is being �xpressed as a concern for both the Vail 5pa and for any fu�Cure political actions on the Mark. ` � Please feel free �o ca17 me if I have missed at�y af your concerns. Wi�l� best wishes. S�ncerel Y� ROY , HRNAMOTO, SEC & BEY � El Beck th cc: Mr. Stan �ernstein Mr. Jar�es F. Lamont �Ir. '�orrt Bri ner Mr. John Dobsan � .Q f ` ° ' ''� � Pierce Briner & Fltzhugh Scott Inc. Arch itectu re Ptanning May 24, �977 P.O.Box 2299 VBiI,Colorado 8i657 303 476-3038 �r. Jim Lamont, Direc�ar Depart�nen'� of Communi ty Devel opment Box lOd . Vail , Colorado 81657 Dear Jim: With reference to your �e�ter af March 2S, �977, regarding �he pro�osed Vai3 Spa Development, I've taken note af your concerns and ha�e attempted �ere �o give some answer to the items spec- ified. I don't consider this ietter an Environmenta1 Tmpact Study but hope that it fulfills your own requirements for infor- mation concern�ng these relationships, Should �Further documen- tation be necessary, I, thro�gh r�y consu1tants cou�d, I'm sure, more accurately, i.,e. , with numbers, references, etc. , describe �he specific impact af this proposed project. ' � ' of ro'ect to ro osed Marlc deve�op�ent . . • #� Rela��onsh�p p 3 P p Adjacent construction is genera3ly large in scale. The propased MarK addi�ion zs also �arge. The Vail Spa will no� have a raof �ine a�ove t�e Enzian Lodge or �he Mark I. View corridors have no� been interfered with. Views toward �he village `and/or to the moun�ain remain apen and perhaps enhanced with development on that particu�ar piece of land. "Mass" wi71 be broken up by the staggered, non-symrnetric, sawtaoth p1an. The �uilding is composed of three w�ngs arran�ed to farrti three courts, which w�th significant planting will offer a foreground to break up building sur- faces behind. The f1.at roo�, beYng "crenelated" by pent- houses ar�d so�ar collectors, wi�� not have a horizontal , straight proflle to persons a� ground level . Cansiderable attention has been given �o �he visua� effect of th7s project �rom various viewpozr�ts .�ncluding Red Sandstone Road, tl�e fron- tage roads, ar�d the pedes�rian approaehes along �[est Lionshead Circle. 5fcetches ar�e available to �ndicate the project' s "fit" in�o its se�ting. The interes� �n facade �enerally obtained by offsets will instead be developed �hroug� pattern- ing of windows and doar opening� and locatian of wood and/o�^ � . ` Mr, Jim Lamont Page 7wo , � � stucco panels with re��ef being given by projecting bay wi r�dows at stai rways ar�d occas�onal balconi es rece5sed into the building's form. Addi�ianal carrmentary is available in Eldon Beck's letter of May 20, 1977, to Diana. #10 Re1ati4nsh^�p . .. �to existing s�wer and wa�er ., . surface . drainage �rom parking areas. Using the Colarado Ue t. of liea��h Desi n Re Uiremen�s and the Colorada Plumbin Code as a guide and assuming fu�l occupancy of the living units, restaurant and health club fac�l�ties, we have approxi�ated the follawing sewer and water demands: Sewer � 24210 ga7. per day 1�ater - 28500 gal . per day with peak AM ar�d PM requirements of 18U ga�. per minute Neith�r the wa�er or sewer loads account for the probab�:� . use of water-saving water closets. W�th regard to surface drainage af �arking areas , the prA�ect, to r�eet parking requir�ments, proposes �6 sUrface parking spaces. (It is t�e sugges�ion of Eldon Beck that these spaces be hel d i n abeyance un��1 the fu1:1 req�i reinent i s justified. } Parking, service apron, and approach driveways amount to approximate�y 9700 sg. ft. of paved area. We do no� feel �hat th� area invalved or the amount of use, particularly the parkin� spaces, justifies special mea�s for detention of si7t and oil droppin9s• F # �2 Relationshlp of praject tfl . . . population increases . . . r�ountai n capaci ty . . . 7owr� of Vaa 1 revenues . .. Aside �rom a mar�ager's unit, it is not expected that this �roject will add to the Vai1 permanent popul�tion. it is . projected that the condominiums wi11 be sold to fam�lies � interested in visiting Vail during the summer season as well as the winter. Av�rage length of stay may be two-three weeks. When nat occupied by the owmers, the units wi�l not be rented o�t -- pr�ser�� arch�tectural plans do not allow far the spl i t�i ng off of bedroor�s for rer�tal pu�poses. The health facilities are considered primarily as an amenjty �o the condominium awners. However, a limited number of � � , ;� �. . , � � • � f�r. J�m L.aroor�t Pag� Thr�e f � � membersh�ps may be affered ta �oca3s -- no competition is envisioned w�th the propose� Vail Health C1ub. The resta�ran� wi11 have a seating capacity of s�xty persons and will offer two evening sittings, lunch, and poss�bly breakfast �or the occupants of the Spa. , 1"hough figures have no�t been formulated, it is presumed that . revenue to �he town t�raugh the development of �he llail Spa , wi1Z be in excess o�F �he cos�s to the town's provision af pot�ce ar�d fire protectian as well as other municipal cos�s including sI�uttle bus service. Utility casts very likely w�l� be borne by �ap fees. Saurces of revenue to the town wiZl �nclude: 7. Building permits :_ 2. Amer�ities tax 3. Sates tax accrued �hrough Spa residen-�s spending in �ionshead and Va�l 4. Town of Vai1 share of rea7 estate taxes based upon approxi mate �narket va7�es o� $1 fi0,000.OQ per uni t � . * #14 Re7ationship to pedestr�an, mass transit, vehicular c�r- culation . . . transit system service levels. � Vehicular �ra�Ffic genera�ed by the Vail Spa would not occur on �test Lionshead Circle t�us a�lawing that street ta become pedes�rianized. Aceess to patron's, owner's, an� service vehicles would be from �he Sou�h Frontage Raad -- over 400 �ee� east of �he intersec�ion w�th Wes� L��nshead Circle: A propasal to t�e 7own of Vai� will be made �o share tf�e cost of a she�tered bus stop a7ang with the Mark. This could �� loca�ed on, or pvssibiy across, West .Lionshead Circie convenient . to the pedestriar� entrances to both the Vaii Spa and the Mark ad�f ti on. John Ryan has calculated that for every visi�o� in Vail , there are generated i.65 bus trips*. This figure daes r�ot reflect ti�e i nc�dence o�f use duri ng peak AM and PM per�ods or cans4 d- erat�on of prox�mity of loading point to destination. Assuming �Full occupancy of the Uail Spa to be approximate'ly 204 persar�s; at �.65 trips per person, the increased ser�ice level woui� be 3�9 passenger �rips per day. Tn light of this project's con- ver��ence to the Gondola �no less than �he Mark's) , 1� is probab�e that this figure �is substantially higher �han what it actual7y wou�d b�. �� * Mark Environmental Impact Study, Page 50 � ,. ! ,'�, • . ., . - Mr. Jim La�nt Page Four � . Re: Energy conserva��an . .. water cons�rvatian -- the deve�oper is desirous of constructing an energy efficient project and techn�ques to �hat end �nclUde: 1 . Use of double g7axed windows 2. Provision of solar ca�lectors for the domestjc ho� water requirements 3. Probably elec�ric h�at 4. To the extent possible, exhausting building heat � through �he parking structure • 5. Minim9zing bui�ding projectlons (balconies) to red�ce ir�su7ating/infii�ration prablems 6. Location of sidewa�ks and terraces on south and southwest side of building 1. Research into efficient f�replaces (57') 8. Use of water-saving water closets Finaliy, Jjm, I again recognize that this is not an Environmental Impac� Study. However, I hope yau and your staff wi11 agree that those concerns you �ave on the impact of this project on the town can be met in a pasit�ve way and that benefits .to �he towr�, while not without some expense, stil� j�stify the deve�opment of th�s praject. � Sincerely, � � Thomas A. Briner TAB:Iw . ✓ cc. Diana Toughill , Town af Va�l Brian Pendeltan, Denver � .. °� . PLANNXNG COMMISSION �.genda June 2 , 1977 � � �escn�ation of the �ropased plans �or 1. Sunburst px'el.iminaxYro erty the balance of the � � 2. Hn7.y Cxoss Elec�a:'ic conda�t�,onal use permi-� 3 . Colorada Mountai.n Col.lege conditional use permi.t �, Town. of Vai1 and Paxking Lots rezon.ing of Ka-�sos Pxoper�y 5. Appx'aval o� minutes May 5 , 12 , 19, 197'7 6. Discussion of appointment o� Chairperson and Vic�--Chairperson and Design Review Boaxd membe�' 7, Discussion o� recomcnendatians to Council regarding the parking situat�on 8, Discussion. o� County Plarzning Wnrkshops i �� �LANNING COMMTS�ION Minut�s June 2, I977 . . PR�SENT: Abbot� ABSENT; Mills Dragex Gartan STAFF : Toughi�l HanZon Kxamer Todd Whi.te SUNBURST PROPOERTY �- PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED PLANS �'OR THE PORTION OWNED BY FDI�I Blair Ammons and Rob O'�onn�Il were present for thc� discussion. There is app.roximately 40 acres �.n the to-�a� approved PUD for �unburst . The Pu�.is ' own a por�ion of it and FDMI owns the bua.lc��ng and 11 acres o� propoerty contiguous to the build�ng. Present7�y �here is no forma]� zoning for the open �and , Zt was noted that FDMI has been worka.ng with the R�creation District and the Pu1is Family to work out some o� the exist�ng, contxactual problems surrounding the Sunburst projec�, i . e, sewer line location, road rights-of-way and alignment, parking, �.andscaping, and bus service, as well as Urarking wi�h the Town of Vail s�a�f , On the ques�ion of park�.ng and car location, Dudley Abbott felt tha� the Recreation Distri.ct ought ta take another look at using the existing underground paxking spaces (�43} loca�ed ' � und�r the exis�ing building which would be more aesthetically pleasing �than reloca�ing the pa�king above ground as they have reques�ed be done, The problem of �.oa�ng so arises from �he question o� distance and conveni.ence for the gol�ers in relation �o the clubhause, greens, e�c . Pam Gartan felt that i� the Commission �eJ.t strong�y on this paint that they should send a memorandum to the Recreation District about it becau.se i.t was not a pxoblem for Planning Co�nmission to woxk out due to the � or3g�na]. parki.ng con�ract and negotiations between Sunburst and the Rec District . � I Buxlding A, wh�ch presently exists, consists o� 7�. condomimium units � with 54 lock o�� units in additzon to commercial space which brings th� '� total bu�lding to approximately 89,76�. square fee� o� net floor area. FDM� E would l.zke �o have the bua.�:ding zoned a special dc�velopment district with I the remainder o� the �.and, approxxma�ely 9 .acres , zoned residentia� c7�uster. They proposed �o have a density of 6 units pear acre which would bring the densi��y to abt 50-54 units. I� was noted that FMDI does not want to be i.n�rolved in the development proc�ss , They want to iron aut the pxoblerns , get �he Iand zoned, and sell it as a package. If necessary tlaey would be involved in the sale process of the existing condominiums in Bu�lda�ng A, b,ut would px�fer to sell it in to�al. When asked about any addit�.onal recreational amenities being placed on �he project, Blair Ammons commented �hat FDM1 had no plans �to add any more than what a�ready exis�ts. � . Page 2 �n the preliminary concept that was outlined above, Ed Drage� �elt � that the build�ng was a real�ty and was always going to be there and there was �ot much to be done about a� , He �e�t that Residen�ial Cluster zoning �or the othex portion of the pxoperty was good. Dudley Abbott �elt com�ortable with resid�ntzal cluster for the vacant ground bu� had some cance�ns about how �he proper�y and respectzve zoning would relate �o the Pu1is ' p��ns �ar their proper�y. It was noted by staff tha� this proposa� �s identical . to what the Pulis ' propose for their prop�rty except fa� �he. di��erence in hous�ng types. �n general Dud�ey Abbot� had no problems with the concept . Gerry Whi�e �e�t that �he plan was a substant�aZ �own zoning, whicli was very acceptable, and �hat the SDD zoning �or Building A was a good sol�tion to the prablem. Ron Todd thought EDMI ' s plan was a good solution but he wanted it no�ed that some of �h� open space that was re�uired by �he orig�naX SDD will naw be taken up by deve�opment as shown by the preliminary ca�cep� . Bill Hanlon sugges�ed tha� wh�n �he app�xcant appears fo� �inal review of the pro�osal that he draw up a s�te plan using exzsting houses to show how the duplexe�, might relate to one another -- whethe� th�y be mirror images or primary and secondary units. �ay Pulis s.tated tnat on their s.ubdiv�sxon, they were plannin� to have r�s�rictive covenants o� the allowable size for the second units but at this �ime did not have any size break�owns. The Pulis £amily was in agreem�nt wit� FDhiT ' s p�ans. The app�zcant was directed to wo�k out the various p�ablems surrounding the project befoxe coming back to the P�anning Co�mission, who found �he genexal concept of the plan agreeable. � HOLY CROSS �� C4ND�TIONAL USE PER�TT Holy Cross Electric �s applyi�g for a Cond�tianal Use Permi� in oraer ta a�low erection of a gas pump and �uried tanli on their site west of the Va�� Associates Shop. Th� pt�mp wouid service five vehicles. The tank would be a,2, 000 gallan capacity with the dimensio�s o� the pump bezng 5z' X IZ' . The pump would be th� only visab�e por�io� af the operat�on. Dud�ey A�bott made a motion for approval based upon the criteria and findings a� the staff rnemorandum; Ron Todd seconded the motion . A unanimous vote was recorded. APPROVED COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLL�G� -- CONDZTIONAL .USE PERMIT This is an application for a t�mporary conditional use permit in order to allow erection of their summer t�nt to be used from �une 13 �o August 19th. The proposed locatxan �s northwest of the A-Frame and is presently zoned agricu�tural , B��1 Hanlon made a mot�on �or approval based upon the criteria and �indings o� the staff inemorandum; Gerry White seconded the motion. A unanimons vo�e was recorded, APPROVED. • Page 3 TOWN OF VAIL REZONTNG OF KAT�OS PROPERTY ANn PARKING LOTS � The Town would like ta rezone the 150 acres o� pxoper�y laca�ed directly east o� the go�f course fxo� tile existing LDMF �oning to Greenbelt and Na�ural Open Space Dzstxict in addition to xezoning : the two publie parking lots owned by Vail Assoc�ates located in Vail Lionshead Firs� �iling and the pub�ic. parking lot west of the Mark located in Vail Lions�ead Third Filing fram �he e�isting HDMF zone and CC2 zone d�stricts �o a Parking Distr�ct . Bill Hanlon made a mation far approval ; Ed Dragex seconded the motzon. A unanimous vote was xecorded, APPROV�D. It was noted that a conditianal use permit would be needed if some time �n th� fu�ure the Katsos property was developed as a recx�a�ional use. APPROVAL OF MINIITES -- MAY 5, I2, �9, Z977 Ed Drager made a mot�on to approve the amended May 5 minu�es ; Dudley Abbatt seconded the mo�xon. A 5-0 vote was recorded. Todd abstainea. Ed Drager mad� a motion to approve the May I2 minutes ; Dud�ey Abbott seconded �he mot�on. A 3-0 vote was recorded. Gartan, Todd, & White abstained. Gerry White made a mot�on to approve the May 19 minu�es; Ron Todd seconded the motion. A 3-0 vo�e was recorded. Hanlon , Abbott , � and Drager abstained. DxSCUSSZON AND APPOINTMENT OF C�AIRPERSON �ND VICE-CHAIRP�RSON AND D�SIGN REVI�W B4ARD MEMBER In response the the Council ' s question of wh•o should appain� the P�anning Com�mission officers, either the Council or the �lanning Commissior,; z� was a g�neral conce:�:sus of the Commission �ha� they appoint their own office�� fox a 6 month term. Tt was fe�� tha� �ne Planning Commission shou�d appoin� a member each week to attend the Counci� work sessions and to attend the Counci� meetings so that they cou�d be on hand �o make th�ir own presenta��ons. Dudley Ab�ott made a motion to appaint Ed Dra�er a� Chairman and G�rry White as Vice�Chairman; Bill �ianlon seconded the mot�on. A 4-0 vo�e was �ecorded. (Drager and Whi�e absta�ned} , It was decided to wa�t un�il Sandy Mills returned next week be�ore appointing the rota�ing Design Review Board member. DZSCUSSION OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL REGARD3NG PARKZNG SITUATION I� was �elt that CCI shou�d be kep� pedestrian and that pa�king should be d�scouraged. It was the Planning Carnm�sszon ' s feel�ng �ha� paxking was wrong�y being used as a tool to keep out expansion. Their question was whether or not �he contracts were valid. Bill Hanlon �elt tha� � i� we did away wi�h the parking requirement that every porch and pat�a would be enclosed in order �o give the b�siness ' moxe commercial space and as he could see it parking was the o�ly hand�e to con�rol this. The balconies and .patzos are what makes CCI wark in te�ms of commercia�ism. Page 4 Gar�on agreed but felt that the parking requirement was th.e wrong way to go about controlling it . She �elt that there was some other way within the �oning ��dznance ta contral it : Dzana Toughill � ��� suggested an amendment to the Ordinance that would �equire all increases or conversions wi�hin CCI , CC2 and the surrounding areas to be regulated by a conditiona� use pexmx� . T�at way each addition or conversion cou�d be consid��ed on its own merit . Ron Todd quest�oned whe�her or not we could cantrol add�tions and conversio�s wi�h the landscapang requaxement . Dud�ey Abbott felt the answer to the prablem was �n two pa�ts: l, create a parking dis�rict that wou�d incl�de CC� & CC2 (both areas should be consadered equal�y) , and the District would �ave a dol�ar amount for �embership . Each variance tha� has be�n or will be g�anted wi�X requare money to b� pu� into the D�str�ct . 2 . He felt that the variances that were granted pose a problem that has no� been addresse�. The �act �hat some of the contracts ar� not en�orceable make a11 of the variances gxanted invalid a�d the Council should act accordingly in respect to the parking district and rnaking some o� the o1d var�ances, which are inval�d, j�stifiable under the pa�king d�strict . He �elt that most people would pay up. Ed Dragex fe�t that �andatory deconve�si�n could be used as a means to make those who wex� na� willing to join the dis�ric� pay up ox suffer the consequ�nces. Daana Toughill fe�t that �he question of mandatory deconv�rsion was ane which th� Counc�l should decide. � The P�ann�ng Commission asked th� staff to work on the "candi��onal use zdea" and try to come �p wi�h cons�stent regulatians �hat were equitable and benefic�a� to the community for CC� , CC2, and the immediate surround�ng areas . It was felt the P�anning Commission should pr�sent to the Council a �ew positive ideas for which th�y couZd accept, modify, or disregard. D�SCUSSI�N OF COUNTY PLANNING WORKSHOPS Diana Toughi�l gav� a summary of the planning workshops that were being held in EagXe. As there was no �urther business to discuss, �h� meeting was adjourned. � � ��� � � ..'� F'��`����)-����$.���.g�°�3. Jun� 1g 1977 Mr. Jay Pulis Vail Valley, Ync. 3841 South Magno�i� Way �enver, CO 80237 i��ar Mr. P�t)is: You have requested an additional cla$sificat�an �f tP� ru�ot�t areas defined for the wet spring avalanches bey�nd �h�t ces�t��r�e� in t�e r�port "Ciubhous� Gulch Avala�c4��, lfail , Colarado" April 1�77 �r�d th� �ubsequent letter to you of �ay 24, 1977. 'This a�i��t�c�n�i ���ss�- fi�ation �s whether t�e wet spring avatanches sho�ld b� cla�s��i�d �� � high or rnpderate hazard. Based u�n the fioa�in� and damaning ciensitiea �nc� vel��i�ie� for these w�t snow avalanch�s, th� run�ut 13mits as defined vril� r��� ex�er��nc� � the b00 pounds per square foot pressu�e which is us�d ir� �t�� Vatl ���a�°d regulat�nns for th� pressur� demarcation b�tweer� high �nd mo�erate h���r°ds. The r�curr�nce interval for many �f th�se t�e� ava�anches �s m� th� �rd�r of 5 to 10 years b�at r�a�t sliding un�For9nly to the run€�u� l�mits ��f�n�de For the purposes of �nur ��ann�ng for the preliminary p��t �c��rri�tal > I would recomner�d tha� yau consider th� defined iimit� of th� wet spr�r�g avalanches as the moderate hazard cias�ification a►��i that a s�cond�ry class�- f�cation line be used in tl�e plat process iocated 3Q ���°� (^°1� �et�r�) uphill �south) of the indica�ed runout lir�i� lir�� as �he rlem�r��a�io� b��w��r� rr�oderate and high hazar� because o� �h� frequency of o�ci�rr�r�c�. �'his wo�atd b� ir� accardance with the hazard vrdinance definitior� �s adt�in��tered by Yai] , a�thfl�gh rigoraus demarcation o� the wet sp�°�ng av�1anches ��t tY�e hazard cat�gories d�velop�d pri�narily �for the r�a�c�r sli�e paths �ay be �verusing the metho��logy due to the inaccuracies �f fr°eq�ency d�t�a�m�r��ti��. If I �an be o� fur�her a�sistar�ce ar �f quest7ons arise or� �his asp�ctA pleas� cantact r�e< � Sir�c�r�ly, YDRO-TRiA�, L�D. � � � Rpnald L. �alley, P.E. � �r�s�dent Rl.H/j h CC: Tri-Consultar�ts, inc. , �,"J. A.91SSI�;�;11�� .. ; - i MEMORANDUM � '�0: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM ; D�PARTMENT OF COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT �ATE : JUNE 2, �.977 RE: HOLY CROSS �LECTRIC REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL US� PERMIT TO INSTALL GAS PUMP AND UNDERGR�UND TANK IN HEAVY SERVICE DISTRICT Holy Cross Electric has applied for a Cond�tional Use Permit in oxd�r to al�ow ex�ction o� a gas pump �.nd buric�d tank on their sa�te west of the Vail Associates Shap. The pump would sexve four service vehicles . Upon review o� Sectian 18. 60d "Cr�.teria and �'indings", the Department of Community Deve].opmen� recomrnends approval o� �he Condita.onal Use Permit based upon �he �ollawing factors : � l. Relationship an.d �mpact of the use an development objec�ives of the Town. 2. E��ect of the use on light and ai�, distributi.on af popul.a�tion, transportation �ac�.l.i�ies , utili�ies , schools , parks and recreat�on facilities, and other public �acilities and public facilities needs , 3. E�fect upon tra��ic, with particular refexence to con- gestion� automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience , traffic flow and control, access, maneuvearability , and remova]. of snow from �he street and parking areas . The pxopased use has little or no impact on the develop- ment objectives o� �he Town or on ti�� other factors. 4. E�fect upon the character o� the area in which the pxoposed use is to 1oe located. , . in relation to surround- ing us�s . We �oxse� no negative impact on the cha�cacter of the a�ea or on the scale or bulk o� surrounding uses, The site �s surrounded with o�her heavy servic�s uses--V, A, shop to the east and the � Texaco station to the West . The px�oposed storage �anks are located we1.l away from Sandstone Creek and should no� create , .� �Holy Cross E��c�ric '� June 2, 1.977 1►' , � an environmen�al problem. 5. Such other �actors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the pxoposed use. The Fir� Department should rev�ew tY�e proposal from a fire. and sa�e�y s�andpo�n�. 6. No environmental im�ac� report is required. The Department of Cammunity Development recommends that �the Condata.ona�. Use Pexmit be appraved based or� th� �ollow- ing �indings: 1. That the proposed �oca��on o� the use is in accord with the purpases of -this ordinance and the �urposes o� the da.stri.ct �.n which the s�,te is �ocated. 2. Tha� �la� proposed 1�ocatian of the use. and the conditions , undex wha.ch a.t woul.d be opexated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, sa�ety, or welfare, or materially injurious to propex�ies or improvcmen�s in �he vicinity. � 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions o� this ordinance . � , ,t� • • • � MEMORANDUM � TO: Planning Commission FROM : Department af Community Development DAT�: June 2, 1977 RE : Colorado Mountain College Rec�uest for Condi.ta.onal i7se permit for Summer Tent Coloxado Moun�ain College has made application for a �0 ' X 60 ' green and white striped �ent to be erected in the A-Frame parking lo� . The proposed ��nt i.s far use as �ummer Vail Ar� Work Slaop space to be used fram June 13 ta August 19th. The �ropased location �s northwest of the A-Frame and is zaned agra.cultural. Upon revi.ew of Sec�ion 18. 600 "Crit�ria and Findings" , the • Department of Communi�y Development xecommends approval o� the C�nditional Use Permit based upon �he follow�ng fac�ors : ' l. Relationshxp and impact of the use on development objectives o� the Town. One of the �rimary goa�.s of the Town has been _to expand � th� available cultural and educational opportunit�.es�.�, the Community. The proposed terit furthers thi� objective. 2, The ef�ect of the use on light ,and air, distxa.bution of population, transpor�ation �aca�lities , utili�a.es , schools , parks and recreation facil.ities , and ather public faca.�.ities and public �acilities needs. As ther� is a grea� deal of publ�c parking, whi�h is not used in th� summex, directl.y adjacent to the proposed tent , parking should nat pose a problem. The site is also on a bus � route and should not adversely impact the transportata.on : s�stem '. Impacts on other factors a�e positive. 3. Effect upon tra�'fa�c, with particular reference to ec����s�t�o�:� . automative and pedestxian sa�ety and convenience, traffic flow and con�ral , access, maneuverab�.Iity , and removal o� � snow from the street and parking ar�as. k . Colorado Mounta�n College ,;"'� Page Two � , . � The effect on traffi:c sho�ld be posa.tive as the smal]. amount of p aarking which has been av-ailable near the A-Fx�ame � has been a �rem�:ndous contral problem. 4, �;�fect upon the character of �he area irz wha:ch the propased use is to be located. . . in relation to su�rrounding uses. The applicant feels �hat the �ent w�.11 enhar�ce the quality a� Site 24 by elii'ninating the parking by �h� A-Frame and will, also serve as a barrier �or constxucta.on undexway at the Lodge at Lionshead. We do not �eei �ha-� any negativ� a.mpacts on the character of the area or on �he scale or. bul�k of the surrounding uses �s c�reated by the tent , 5. Such. o�her factars and critex�ia as the Comm�.ssion deems applicable tti the proposed use. No other �actors sY�ould bE considered, 6, No environmcnta,l �mpact repor� is required. The Depar�ment of Community Development recommends that the Conditional Use Permit be approved based on the �ollowing � � f in.dings : � 7�. Tha-� �he praposed location o� the use is in accord with the pux�pas�s af this ordi.nance and the purposes o� the district in which the szte is 1.aca�ed. 2 , That th� proposEd location of �he use and the conditions under which it would be aperated or main�ained wi].l not be detximental to the public health, sa�ety , or wel�are or ma�crial.ly injurious to properties or improvemen�s in the vicinity. 3. That �1ne propased use wi.11 camply with each of the appl�.cabl.e prova�sions of this orda.nance . � � :�-' � • � � � �, ' . PUBLIC NOTICE a'` � �:�: � NOTICE IS HER�SY GTVEN THAT the Town af Vail intends ta rezone the paxcel �f �.and known as �h� Katsos prope�rty con�a.st- � ing a� appxoximate3.y 350 acres lacated direc�tly east o� �he �oZf" . € . a course from the exis��ng Low Density �Mu��iple Family zone distx�.c� ; � � to Greenbelt and Na�ural 4pen Space District. � NOTTCk� IS FURTHER G�VEN THAT the Town of Vail. intends �F ta re�one �he two public parka.ng lots owned by Vail Associates � located a�z� Vail La.onshead Firs� Filing and ��e public .parkin� lo� west of the Mark located ir� Vail. Lionsh�ad Third Fila.ng �rom �. �he existz.ng Hi.gh Density Mu�tiple Family and Commercial Coxe 2 ; zone da�stricts �a Parking Dis�rict. � App�.icata.on has been filed pursuant ta Section 21 . 500 0� �he Zaning Oxdinance, Ordinance No. $, Seri�s of 1973, as aznended. ' � A Publ.ic Hearing wi11 be held on June 2; 1977 be�ore �he Town �� Vail Planning Cam�nissi.on �_n accord with� Section 2�.. �00 a� the �Zonin� Ordinan.ce. Said hear�ng will lae he�.d at 3: �0, p.m. in . the Vail Municipa� Buil.din� . TOWN 0�' VA�L , D�PARThi�NT OF C�MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . Diana S . Toughzll �aning Admin�stra�ar Published in th� Vai.� Trail May 13, 1977 �` . PLANNING COMMISSZON ' � AGENDA June 9, 1977 l . Vail Valley Medical Center - Prelim�nary Rev�ew Chuck Tubbs and Da�e Watson • 2 . Pu�is Resubdivision, Rezoning, Ava�anche Repox� and Variance � for two lots with no �rontage - Va�l Valley 3rd Filing. Waxren and Jay Pu1is 3. Design Review Board Zoning Amendment 4. Bob Voliter - Request for setback var�ance Mo�ion to pos�pone un�i1 June 16, 1977 5: Cy�ano' s Reques� for parking variance for two cars Ross Davis, Jr, 6. Discussian o� P�anning Commission projects • � PLANNING GOMMiSSION inutes une 9, 1977 MEMBERS PR�S�NT: STAFF PRESENT: Dudley Abbott Toughil� �d Drager Kramer Pam Gar�on Bi�� Hanlon Sandy Mil�s � Ran Todd Gerry White VAIL VALLEY MEDTCAL CENTER -- PRE��MINARY REVIEW OF PROPOSED ADD�TION Chuck Tubbs , of the VVMC, gave a b�ie� �escxiption o� the various approvals needed before the addition could take plao.�, �ncluding Sta�e County, and Town, Th�y need and want �o of�er more servzces to th� residents af Eagle County, as well as visitoxs, and M�. Tubbs wen� �nto a d�scription of what is existing at the VVMC and what is proposed in addition �o the proposed �oca�ion of the new services. He also outlined the �raposed parking layout and tra�fic patterns. The n�w services , are for �he mos� part , for the conven��nce o� the out patients and they will be �Xexible, if the need arises , to expand the hospital bed base. � D�a�a Tougill noted tha� on �une 30, �977 the VVMC wi�l be coming before the P�anning Commissian to ask �or a Condi�ional Use Pexmit to allow a hospital add�tion in a Medium D�nsity zone and �he variances ne�ded are: 1) Wal� �e��th -� requixed 125' -W proposed �28 ' 2) WaI1 offsets �W required � ' per 5 ' -- proposed 128 ' wi�h no o��se�s 3) Wall d�agnol -W 164' �- proposed 300' * 4) determination of the parking need because the. Zoning Ordinance does not directly deal wath parking �o� hospitals. On �he parking requi�ement , Da1e Watson noted that the majorzty o� hospitals require one parking spac� per hospi�al b�d in addition to one space per e�p�oyee on e�ch sh�ft . The VVMC proposed to have �5 par�ing spaces with �he abi�ity to expand into the parking area pxes�n�ly being �` used in the winter by the skating r�nk i� the need arises . I�; The pxoposed t�me fra�e �or ca�pletion, as noted by Chuck Tubbs , ` w��l be hard to determine. They had planned to bei�g this summer, but due to some unfareseen de�ays they prapose in-house remode�ing in either �ebruary or Maren and once that is completed they will begin wi�h the exterior modifications, Once they are "out of the graund" , canstruction wi�l probably take one year . ` � * It was no�ed tha� a variance will be needed to a11ow uncovered � parking in a Medium Densi�y Zone. Pag� 2 CYR�NO' S PARKING VARTANCE � Ross Davis, representing Cyxanos, at this time did not want to proceed with �he variance application but wanted a "straw vote" of the Planning Commissionls �eelings an this application . It was noted that the applica��on would be tabled until the eminent changes in �he parking requiremen�s fa� CCI a�e dec�ded �pon. The applicants would �ike ta add 14 feet to the exis�ing .bar area and this addition in GRFA would require �wo moxe parking spaces . The addition consists of approxima�ely 320 square feet of additiona� GRFA. Basically they are exchanging or trading existing exter�or spac� for inte�ior space which would be used for wai�ing area and more bar s�ace. It was noted that the bu�lding is pxesen�ly a non�conform�ng building from the standpoi.nt of parking and that the ��.oposed addition would not make th� build�ng any �o�e non-con�orming exc�pt �xom a parking aspect . Dud�ey Abbott expressed concern about the number o� var�ances tha� this restaurant had been granted as well as asked �or �n the past . BiI� Han�on echoed t�at concexn. The Planning Commission did no� want to give any co�nmitm�nt of t�eir �eelings on this var�ance du� to the ins�ability o� the total parking situatzon in CCx , bu� the applicant pressed �or i� : No o�fic�al vote was xecoxded �ut in�general discussion it appeared tha� Ron Todd was for the var�ance, Sandy Mills had no s�rong fee�ing e�the� way , and � �he remainder of �he Comm�ss�on was agains� granting o� the vaxiance. Bill Hanlon made a �ot�on �o postpone act�on on th�s variance for an indefinate time at the request o� the applicant ; Gerry White seconded the motion. A Unanimous vote was recarded, TABLED Y. 0. GIIRTZ -- PU�H CART STAND An item not on the agenda, Ross Davis , r�presenting the applicant wan.ted to get a read�ng ��om the Plannang Commission as to how they f elt abou� a mobile frozen yogert cart in Lionsa�es.anVa�l�Associates, at the atheltic f ield duxing soccex and rugby g owners o� the Mall , have given their permission and a�� of the health questions have been worked out . It was noted that the Zoning Ordxnance is completely s�len� ab.out vend�ng operations on pxivate land. There are regulations aga�nst vend�ng operations an public str�ets and there is alsa a regulation agains� having a business not located wi�hin a structure. Gerry White questioned the administxa�ion o� such an opera�ion and �elt that i� could become an over commerc�alization wi�hin a sma11 community. Ron Todd also questioned the administration aspect b�t �elt �hat the idea had merit and it would add chero�tope�atxonawould Garton felt that a controlled amount of ��is typ � add a great deal to the axea. Dudley Abbott liked the idea and Sand� Mi�1s question�d how �he cart would get from Lionshead to the tennis courts and saccer field. She also was woxried abaut the possiblity of a precedent setting actian -� where do we dxaw �he line on who can vend their wears and who can not . Page 3 Bill Hanlon felt i� was a good idea as long as it didn 't hurt the other businesses in the area and if �he people in Lxonshead wan�ed it �hen we should �et them go ahead. . Ed Drager f elt that def�nate plans and more detailed in�ormation was needed be�ore �he Planning Commission cou�d come to a vote. , i:e. trash pick up, type of vehicle, a Zetter !. of endorsement .from �he Lionshead businessman 's assac�ation, etc. Dudley Abbott made a mo�ion to pns�pane consideration of th�s � request �or :one week until moxe informa�ion could be submitted; Gerry White seconded the motion. A unanimous vo�e w�s recorded. TABLED PULI� RESUBDIVISION, R��ONING, AVALANCHE R�PORT AND VARIANCE -- VAIL VALL�Y 3rd On tne avalanche report, a letter from Hydro�Triad dated J�.ne 7, 1977, was submitted as an art�endr►�ent to the original avalanche x�epor� for the area �i�n question, With this amendment the staff xecommended approval . � Gerry White made a mot�o.n �o approve ��e avalanche report as amended b� the June 7, 1.977 letter for Vaii Va1�.ey Third Filing; Dudley Abbott seconded the motion. A unanimous vate was recorded. APPROVED On the proposed resubdivis�:on, i� was noted that al� o� the l.ots axe above 15, 000 square fee� of buildabl� area. The average lo� size is 17,421 square �eet . The applicants are going to �'en:thus�.asticaliy consider" protective covenants res�ricting the size al�otrrient for �he second unit within duplex�es.. They are aware of what has happened �rom an a�s�hetic standpoint with r�tirror image duplexes : A pedestrian easement has been gxanted in order �or people to get from the bike path �nd sma7.]. parking area �o th� picnic axea near the 1.ake on �h� goxf ourse. The bike path generally follows the �asement and they would like to vacate it and have �he bikers u.se the existing Sunburs� Drive �or a short way. It was noted that one veary small por�ion af the bike pa�h, that the applicants wou�d like to have vacated, has �.ever worked proper�y and the staff recomtnends tha� it be removed at the developers e�pense. This seemed to be agreea}�le wzth the deve].opers . Dudley Abbott fel� uncomfortable with �ne lack of single �aznily lots and how this proposal will fit with FDrdI ' s pxoposal of RC on �Y�e remaining por�ion of the Sunburst propearty. Diana Toughil.l noted tha� gzven �he togopraphy there is a natural break betw�en. the area be�.ng proposed �or residential clust�r and the area being pxoposed two--family residential so tha� the projects will not interfer with each othe�. Abbott felt very strongly tha� the applicants dev�lop a .strict protective cavenant to discourage large mirror image duplexes. Bi11 Hanlon voiced an objection to the variance f or two Iots wi.th no �rnntage (Lots 16 & 17 as shown on the plat ) because he thinks a better so].u�ion would be p�.acemen� o� a cu1.-de-�sac in order to smooth o�zt �h� txa�fic f�ow, paxka.ng situation, and fzxe safety . Both Ron Todd and Gexry White think that the solu�ion as shown on the p1a� :i.s the superxox due ; to aesthetic �reasons. It was noted that th� F�ire Department has not reviewed the plat as ye�t and any approvals o� the variance wi��. have to be subject to �heir appraval o� �he plan. On the R�subdivision of �he Sunburst proper�y, staff recommends approval subject to �he Fire Department ' s review and approva� . Dudley �bott made a mo�a.on to approve the resubdivi.s�on with �he conda.tions not�d y s�a��; Gerry Whi�e s�conded the mo�ion , A unan�.mous vote was xecorded. APPROVED. , Page 4 On the re�4ning from High Den�ity Multi-Fam��y to two family resid�ntia�, with a rezon�ng o� Tract A to g�een belt and open space � �and a rezoning af Tract B to public use district , Pam Garton made a motion �o recommend the rezoning noted above; Ron Todd secanded �he motip�. A unan�mous vote was reco�ded. APPROVED On the varia�ce for two lots with no �ron�age, Gerry White made a mo�ion for appxoval; Ron Todd seconded the motion. A 5-2 vote was xecarded in �avor of the motion, Bi11 Hanlon was .against for the reasons s�ated abo�e. APPROVED. �apd� ����s was a�so against the vo�e, DES�GN REVIEW BOARD ZONING AMENDMENT Due to the changes made by sta�� and the Design Rev�ew Board, the Planning Commission wanted to table consid�ration o� the matter un�il the changes had been i�coxporated. Dudley Abbott �ade a motzon for po�tponement for not more than two weeks , Gerry Wh�te seconded the mation. A unanimous vote was recorded, TASLED BOB VOLITER REQUEST F4R SETBACK VAR7ANCE \ Due to the inaction of the applicant to ��ubmit the necessar� information, sta�f requested a pos�ponement o� the application. Ron Tadd made a motion for tabling �h� application; Gerry White seconded the motion. A unanimous vote w�s recorded. TABLED. ISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMM�SSI4NS PROJECTS As noted by Chairman, Ed Drag�x, items 1-4, and 6 on �he. attached 1.ist take �ap priority. It was dec�ded to set up subcommittees o define the pxob�em and come up with positive solutions. Th� sub- omm�ttees were also requested to submit all ideas, gaod or bad, within �he r �ort so tha� at a later date one could txanscend th�ir tra�n o� though�. ,� Dud�ey Abbot� and Pam Ga�ton were assigned ta Task 1. Gerry Wha�te and Bil� .Hanlon were assigned to Task 2. Ron Todd and Sandy Mills were assigned to Task 3. Ron Todd and �d Dragex were assigned to Task 4, Ed Drager, Pam Garton, and Gerry White werc assa:gned �to Task 6. It was. noted that a staff ine�nber wauld also be assigned to each sub--committee to ass�.st . SELECTION OF A DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBER Ron Todd was selected to be th� Planning Com�aission ' s represen�ative to the Design Review Board for the nex� •�ix rrionths. As th�re was no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjouxned. � PROPOSED PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECTS �une 9, X977 � 1 . Parking � CCl and CCs and ot�er commercial areas a. Parking D�str�ct - Rider prepar�ng �egal memo review�ng stat�tes b. Zoning Amendmen�s/enabling leg�slation 2. Add�tions in CCl and CC2 a. Conditionax use criteria b. Zoning amendments 3. Building bulk control a. R�search building types and signs b. 2oning amendments 4. Subdivision Regulations a. Redraf� to reflec� hazard amendments b. Redraf� to re�lec� zoning standards 5. Landscaping ordinance a. Include cxeek bank requiremen�s b. Include paving s�andards �or exis��ng drives and paxkinb lots . 6. G�nera� zoning amendments - Growth management 7. Ve�ding and s�reet and mall activiti�s • 8. West Vaii annexation 9. Mall act 10. Land acquisition pragram - es�ablish priorities 1�. Mini special development districts or PUD legislat�on 12. Cap�tal xmprovments - estab�is� priorities �3. Solar/energy/conservation Iegislation I�, Economic diversification �5. Hous�ng � PLANNTNG COMMISS�ON Agenda � June 16, 1g77 l. D�scussion of work programs and genera� busin�ss 12 : �5 ---_.�� a• se� priorities b. assign subcommittees c. Cauncil representa�ive �or the June 21. meeting and worksession 2 . Gxow�h Managemen� Sub-Cornmittee presentat.ion I ;30 Bob Byrd, Dick Gus�afson , �7im Morter 3. The Spa -- reconsideration of' the wa�l length variance at the 2 ;�� request of the Council 4. Studzo in, the Rockies -- request �or joint-use paxking 3 ;pp 5. Suni�uxs� -�. discussion of contxactuxal agreements � ; 30 First o� Denver Mortgage Investors 6, Elias Residence � ;�� gross res�dentiaZ flaor area variance 7, Bob VoZi�er .�- r�quest for setback variance 4 : 30 -.�� 8. Approva� of min,utes for May 26 and June 2 5: 00 '� ___---�________ - Reminder: llth Fi�ing Plat mus� be signed! a) Zoning Amendmen� for Design Review Board � ; �p b} Discuss.ion of Design Reva.ew Board memorandum re : paving problem � , 5: �.Of? � PLANNING COMMTSSION Minutes � June �6 , 1977 MEMBERS PRESENTt ABS�NT: Dudley Abbo�� Ron To�d Ed Drager Pam Gar�on ST�FF ; BiI� Hanlon Sandy Mills Diana Toughill Gerry White Jo Kramer GR�OWTH MANAGEMENT SIIB�COMM�TT�E PRESENTATION Jim Mortex, Bob Byrd, and Dick Gustafson wexe in a�tendance for the pxesenta�ion. A copy of �heir report was handed out to �he Plann�ng Commission and a g�ne�al discussion followed. Ed Drager asked ��at the Planning Commissioners �eview the report in detail during the week and give their questions, axeas of concern and or recommendations ta the staff so that a list ca� be compiled. It was noted that �he Planning Cotnmission shou�d give their recornmenda�ian to �he �ub-Commi��ee by June 30t� . �o �hat the �ackag� can proceed to Cauncil , �SYMPOSIUM It was suggested �hat i� the Planning Commissioners had a �op�.c br an area of concern t�ey would like �o have discussed at the Symposium, that a decision be made and �.�s� o�' poss,ible speakers be given to Co1�.een Kline zn the very near fu�ure, The Commission �elt that a specif�c topic would be the mast beneficia� to �hem; ia.�. r having a major company lzke Ral.ston/ Purina,who developed Keystane, come to ta�:k abou� their vzews and �indi,ngs on planned development , Ec� Drager. asked th�.� the Commission �hink about �what �hey wot�ld li�e to hear and report back to him ASAP, � STUDTO ZN THE ROCKZES --- JOTNT USE PARKING REQUEST Th�.s is a request �ox� 37 parking spaces to be lacated zn the Narth Daq Skier Parking Lot fram the hours af 6 ;PM to Midnight . A letter affirming Vail Assoc�ates ' approval is attached. Th� applicants , as noted by Jim Jacobsan, would �.a�ke to put a concert hall/audio visual anc� souncl studzo in the basement porta�on of the new �cl�y/To�e1 Building in Lionshead. In order to da this they need permission �o Iocate thezr required parking on someone e�.s�s property, Attached �s a complete description o� the applican�s '. pxoposa]. , It was not�d tha� Selby/Tofel have nothing to do with �his request ; they are just suppling the building. John Perkins, from Mor�er/Todd, ran thraugh the pxoposed plan �or �he space, At�ached a�s a reduced copy of the J.ayout , � Jim Jacobson stated that �he concert hal� wi.1.1 not be used as a pu�blic commercial. use be�ore 6 PM, If other town organizations , txnd�r special circums�ances, needed to use the space before 6 PM �he applicants wouJ.d E [ { Page 2 • b� amenable to work sotnething ou� , Jacobson stated �hat tl�ey were wa�lling to ;sign a con�ract binding �hem to the fac� that �he parking would b� used an�y after 6 PM. Sandy Mi�.ls fe].� tha� a problem exists and that this proposaZ is along the same Iines as the Lionshead Theater request . �kze fe1.t tl�at we may nat have a parking pro�lem now, but in five years the pro'b�ern may becom� appaxent , She questioned �he use 4� the Nor-�h Day Skier Parking Lot once the school r�ym and pedestrian ovexpass axe �inished, Jacobso:n ar.gued that this �equest was no-� lik� the theater beca�.se o� the fact tha� it �.s a totally new sex�vice to Vai1 and the entzr� area . It was poi.nted out that tnis service could be a good promota.on deal for the Vail area especially during the o��-season, They propose �a :have big name .arti.sts came and record during the day and then at nzght give �. series o� concerts �or the community, �Yhen r�fer�:ng to th� sta�f inemorandum which stated that this request is simi].ar to the on.e granted Crossroa�.s Cinema, S�ndy Mills �elt �h�.� this request was very di��erent due �o the fact that Crossroads already owned the park�ng �ot �hey reqeusted to use for joznt-use whereas the applicants did no� , Gerxy White fe�,� very corri�ort.able with the proposal. He felt that it sa�isfied a community �eed and -wouZd not �b�:come a px�ce�eTnt ` se��ang action for the north day�skier lot �.ue to the �act that both �ail 1-�ssocia�es and the Fore:st Serva.ce�closely monitox the area, ~�—�—� — � Dudley Abbott felt very ositi.ve�_ -�owards the _idea of �th� concert ha11 and audio vi.sual studio but did. na� want �o commit to the joint-use parking - r�quest due -�o the irstabilz�tp of the tatal pa�king situa�ion in CCI and CC2. He wan�ted to wait untiJ. it was solved becau.se �his joint use request if granted might become, at a later date, a problem. In. gc:neral. , he fe].t tha� the paroposa]. would be a gx�ea�t asset to the Vail community and was in favor of what they waz�ted to do. � Ed Drager �e:lt �hat the reques� �it into Sec�tion 14. 500 of the Zoning Ordinance which deals with joint use paxking anol co�,1.d be justified under such, He was in favor of the idea an.d it pu� to gaod use parki.ng spaces tha� are not presen�ly being used, Gerry Whxte made a motion to grant �he jo�.nt use parking requ.est accarding to �h� sta�f inemoran�.um; P�,m Garton seconded the motion. A 3-3 vote was recox�ded, (HanZon, Mills and Abi�ot� agai.ns�} SUNBURST (FDMI ) D.ISCUSS�ON OF CON'�RACTURAL AGREEMENTS Warren Pu1is, B1air Ammons. , Bob O°Donnell. and Ted Kindel,, representing �he Rec, Board, were all present for the discussxon, D�.ana Toughill noted �hat the staff had worked ou� the ma,�ority a� contrac�ura�. proi�lems with FDMI anct the Rec. Board sur�ounding the Sunburs� Property, �ob 0'Donnell wen� through the various planna�ng step� that Zead to ' �DMI 's r►�aster plan for the parking area, They want to remove the 90 s aces presently located under Build�ng A and relocate them with the 60 spaces used by the Go1f Course Clubhouse on land tYxat is own�:d by FDMI , Page 3 It was no�ed �hat �n �he par�ing plan a bus �urna�ound would also be supplied �n addition to the I50 spaces . Ted Kindel , r�presen��ng , � �he Rec. Boa�d, was very much in favor of the proposed plan, They felt that the parking p�a� now brings the gal� course parking area in �ine wi�h the fz�st class golf course, Diana Toughill wen� through the staf� memorandum g�v�ng a br�e�. descriptxon of its impact (a�tached) . I� was noted that FDMI would like to r�ceive a cre�it �owards their rec. �ee on Bu��dzng A because of �he �wo acres o� �and they are providing fax the Gol� Course parking. Dudley Ab�ott made a motion to approve the xesu�ts o� the negotiations between the staff and FDMI ; Ge�ry White seconded the mot�on . A unanimous vote was recorde�, APPROVED. ELZAS SETBACK VARTANC� ', This app�ication was tabled fo� reconsaderation due to misin�ormation on the staff inemorandum. I� Dud].ey Abbott made a motion �o table �he application; Gerry White seconded �he moti.on, A unanimous vote was recorded. TA�LED. VOLIT�R SETBACK VARIANCE The appiican� p�roposes �o build a garage onto his residcnce, See s�a�f inemoxandum for camplete descripta.on . Gerry Whi�e made a motion to approve the request; Pam Garton seconded �the rno��an, A 5-� vote was xecorded in favor of the mntion . Mi��s agairtst because she felt tha� there was not enotzgh information to make a conclusive dc�cision, APPROVED , Y.O. GURT� Ross Davis, representing the applican�, submitted a de�ai�ed plan of th� cart . T� was noted that the caxt would be used on�.y at the Gold Pea� area. The PZanning Cornmissian �e�t comfortab.le with �he reques� as long as the permit was a temporary one �or the 1977 season on1y; it was subject to an agreemen� or con�ract drawn up by Larxy Rider, Ross Davis, and John Foo��, the app�.icant ; and that Bi11 Wri,gh� and the Rec. Board's approva�. be sought . Gexry Whi�� made a mo�xon to approve the request sttbject to the i��ms aut��ned above and subject �o the coz�ditions set �orth on the submitted p1an; Dud2ey Abbott seconded the motion. A unanimous vote was recarded, APPROVED, � MEMORA�DUM � � TO Planning Co�u�.is�ion �'ROM Depar-��nent of Community Development DATE June �6 , 1977 RE Elias GRFA Variance (Vai1 �lalley �'�rst Filing Block 3 , Lo� 12 ) The appl.ican-t , J.R. E�ias , is requesting a GRFA va�yance to co�vert a garage and a laund�y room into -�wo b�drooms and a recreational xoom. �'here �s also a new addition af approxima.te�.y 30 sq. ft . , which is to be a raindow seat for one of the bedrooms . The conversion a.nd addition would add approximately 760 sq. ��t . o.� GR�'A �o the unit. The curr�nt GRFA of the existing duplex is �456 sq. ft. ; the allowable is 50I2 sq, ft. The present duplex is approx�.mately 1444 sq. f-t. , over what is perrni-�ted. `�he proposec�. add.ition o� the 760 sq. ft. woul.d resul-� in the GRFA exceeding the requirement by 2204 sq. f-�. � CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS (SECTION I9 . 600) 1. xhe relatzonship o� the reques�ed va�iance �o othex* existin� or potentia� uses and s�ructures in t.he vicin�ty. The requested variance would make on�y a mino� modifi.catiort to th� Exterior a� the e�isting structure, bu-� would eliminate a covered parking space. This wouZd incx��as� �the number of cars parked outside the unit which could have a nega�ive a.r�pact on the area. A3so, pro-�ert�ve covenants for Vail Valley First Filing require garages. 2 . The deg�ee to which relief from the stric� or literal in�erpretation and en�orcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibi:lity and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vici�ity, or �o attain the abjectives of this ordinance wi-�hout gran.t of special privilege. Due �o �the g�eat exten-t that thi.s variance will exceed the �RFA requirement, we do f�el -that this wou�d be a grant of a special �rivilege . The addi-�ional 760 sq. �t . wou�.d resul.t in the GRFA exceeding what is allowed by almost 500 . � Page 2 � Memorandum Planning Cornmission Elias GRFA Variance 3 . The effect of the reques�ed varianc� on li�ht and air, dis�ribufi�o� o� population, ��anspor.tation and tra��ic facilities , public faci�ities and ut�l�ties. We forasee na adverse effects on fihese �actors . FINDZNGS 1. 2ha� the granf ing of the variance will consti�u�e a gran� of special privilege ineonsiste�t with the limi�a��ons . on othe� properties classified �n �he sa.me dystr�c�. See Item 2 . , under Consideration of Factors . There have been no other G��A variancES g�an�e.d in this area. 2 . That �he ��anting af the variance cau�d be detrimeizt��. �o the public hea�th, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to proper�aes or improvements i� thE vicinity. See �tem 1 under Consideratian of Facfiors . Garages a�e no� on�y for the p�otection of cars ; they are alsa � to decrease the v�si�ility of cars in residential neighboxhoods . 3 . That the va�iance is no� warran�ed for the fo�lowing �easons : (c) �he 5trict or li�eral interpretation and enf orc�men� of the spec��ied regulations wauld not deprive fihe applicant o� privileges enjoyed �y the awners of o�her p�opertzes in the same District. S�ruc�ures in the r�s���ntial neighb.orhoo� are genera��y in campliance with the GR�A requiremenfi of �he Zoning Ordinance. This house as it presen�ly ex�s�s is well aver this requirement. W�, �herefore, feel that a �urther variance is not warranted and would not depriva �he applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in his Distr�ct. The Depa�tment of Community Developm�n� recommends denial of the variance sough� far the reasons s�a�ed above . i MEMORANDUM � T0: Planning Commi.ssion FROM; D�partment o� Community Developm�nt DATE: June 16, 1977 RE ; Rober� Volitex -- Request �or Setback Var�.ance Lot 2, B�.ock Z, Gore Cr��k Subdivision The applic�an� has requested a setback o� 4 �eet from the side pxoperty 1�nc� in lieu o� the required 13 feet �n order to constrttct a single car gax�age addatian to the exxst�ng house . The Department of Community Development has �eviewed the cri�eri.a and. �i.ndings porvided for in Section 19.600 of the Zaning Ordinance and our canclusions are as �allows : � The relationship of the xequested uariance ta othex existing or potenti.al uses and s�ructures in �hE vici�ity , The plans for the proposed s�ructur� would have no advers� i.mpact on other e�isting or proposed stxuctures in the area. There are several other lo�s in the Gore Creek Subdivision which are presently non--conforming in the same vane, The degree to which re�i.e� from the strict or litera7. intear- pretation and enforcement of a specified regulati.on is necessary �o achieve cornpatibility and uniformity a� treatment among sites in the vicinity or to at�ain the objectives of this orda.nance wa.thou� grant of special pri�rilege, Due �a the configuxation o� the lot an:d �he placement o� tk�e exi.sting house on it , the proposed loca��.on o� the garage is .the anly viable one. I� is close to the xoad, so that a minir►aal amo�ant of asphalt will be rec�uired; x� is �ar enaugh away �rom the creek, � so �hat i� is environmental�.y sa�e; and it daes not infringe upon the righ�s of other p�opc�rty owners . As stated above, �he�'e �.re many residences that were const�ucted without regard to setback � requirements. We fee� �hat the propased lacation o� the gaxage is in ke�p�ng with the objectxves of the Ordinance in- so are as compat�biiity and uniformity of �reatment among sites in the vicinity. The ef�ect of the requested variance on light and air , distribution o� population, transportation and traffic fac�l�ties , public �aciZities and utilities , and public safety . We do not �oresee any adverse e��ects upon these �actors. The proposed garage �ronts on Kel-Gar Lane, There is an eight �oot right�of-waY fxom the proper�y line to the pavement ; with this in mind we can �oresee no interference with public sa�e�y o� �ransportatian �f the setback variance is granted. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems appl�cable to �he praposed �ariance, No addit�onal fac�ars seem to be pert�nen� , � The Department of Community Deve�opment finds that : �he strict or ��t�ral interpretation and en�orcement of the spec�fied rEgulation would result in practical di�ficulty or unnecessary physical hardship anconsistent with the objectives of this ordinance . Due to �he configuration of the 1ot , it wou�d be impnssib�e for �he app�icant ta construc� a garag� on this site W1th�U� some variance, either from the e�ase��ent. .or f:rom �the oth�r: prope��y l���s . We do not �eel that the g��nt of the variance wou�d be a gran� o� special p�i�vilege. The Department of Corcununity Development recommends approval o� �he requested setback variance. � MEMORANDUM � , T0: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Deve�opment DATE: June 16, 19'77 RE : Sunburst -- Review and Recommenda�ions Regard�ng �he Contractural Agreements At the direction of the Planning Commission, the Department of Comrritxni.ty Develapment staff inet with Blair Ammons and Bob d',Donnel� , who represent First of Denver Mortgage Investors , ta attempt to resolve the vara.ous contracts which are a part of t�ie Sunburs� Special Development D3strict . The �oJ.lowing are our recommendations : � FDMx WSLL BE REQUIRED TO LANDSCAPE TH� EXISTING BUTLDFNG. 1) A nerv landscaping plan must be su�ma.tted for Bui�ding A and -time commitments shou�.d bc agreed upan . P�.ans must be sub�n�tted to �,nclicate comp�etion o� exteriox o� Bua�lding A, 2) A reso.lut�on of the Rec. Distxic� 's contract which involveS praviding a par�ing lot �or the Golf Course and a raad realignment and concurrent land txades. As of Wednesday , June �.5, the Rec. ten�ative , �oa�cd gave their/approval o� the �roposed pax�kizag and road plan. 3) Wi�h resolution of (2) , a survey must b� prepared both as a preliminary plat and to calculate ac�r�s to be traded. 4) The requi.x�ement for a pri,vate transportation system, shauld be eliminated, 5) Oper� space being dedicated with Vail Val�.ey Third Filing' wauld satis�y the $% dedication requ�remen� for both subdivisions (11,4 acres) . � Sunburs� 6} P�atted Road should be vacated and a new r�ght�of�way � with a minimum width of 40' be dedicated from Va�l Va�Iey 2nd �iling ta Va�l Valley 3rd Filing, The impxovement and realignment of this road is to be at the expense of FDMI . 7} Unde�ground paxking in the build�ng contains rnare than the xequired n�mb�r o� parking spaces , FMDI agrees as lo�g as it �s in a �osition o� control �he use o� addi�ional pa�king, They will encourage the d�veiaper af additional land to locate the existing overflow parking under �he/building, S} FDMI wi11 be required to pave th� Fire Lane. 9) FDMI should have the abil�ty ta relocate the ex�sting recrea��onal amenities and where apprapriate remove the existing �acil�ties and replace the �aci�ities that FDMT and the Town might �ind mo�e appropxiate , � 10) The Town of Vai� s�aff recommends �hat landscaping mo�ey on Building A ,�� spent by FDM�/be applied to the Rec �ee due to �he Town af VaiT . �1) A new drainage plan mus� be submit�ed which re�l�cts the revised build�ng plans , 12) FMDZ should not be required to build a new ?Qridge. 13) The Depar�ment of Community Deve�opment sta�� recommends that FDMI not be required �o submit a le��er o� cr�dit or bond guaran�eeing the construction o� amenities; however, FDMI should be required �o restrict by covenant cer�ain �ypes o� recreational amen�t�es as a condit�on of building permi� a�proval of future build�ng. 1�) �DMI should no� be requir�d to provide, build, or pass on �o an eventual land developer the requ�rement for on-site employee housing � units . Sunburs� Page � Z5} FDMI w�ll �e rC�c��uixed to have the Fire Depaxtmen� prepare � a Fxxe Saf�ty Report on the existing build.ing. �'DM� will a�.so be requ�.ared to have the building inspected by the Town Build.ing O#fxciaZ, 16) The Town should, not require the realignrnen� o� uti�.ities as both new subdivisions wark with the uta.�ities as they presently ex�s�. ' 17� FDM� has request�d and the Depa�tment of Community 'f Develo�ment agrees that the cos� of the paxking lot fo� the Golf Course shou�d b� credited to xec �ee and that the area owned by FDMI be a�.lowed �or density cal.cul.ations, � � - - AGENDA _,. `� PLANNTNG COMMISSION ! �� �une 23, �977 Z; 00 Discusszon o� proposed Town of Vai�. Pub��c Works facility Terry Mi.ngex, Allan Gerstenbergex 3 : Q0 Pxeliminary consideration o� Condi�ional Use Permit �or Vail Ins�itute Tent 3: 15 Request for vacation of property line between lots A-$ and A-9, Lions�idge Subdivision, Filing No, 1 Harold Engstrom, 3; 35 J, R. E1.i.as - Request for Gross Residential F�oor Area Variance 4t00 Mike Palmer - Request ta rezone the Corn�ce Bui�ding fror� High Density Multip�.e Family to Commercial Core 1 , �;45 Approva�. of minutes of June 1& meeting and appoin�ment o£ representative �o June 28 Council work session, , 5t00 Zon�ng annendment relatin� to Des�.gn Re�iew Baard � �-- . ��' `y y � / � � � R' , t PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY t June 23 , 1977 � MEMBERS PRESENT : MEMBERS ABSENT: Abbott , Dra�ger Garton Todd FIanlon - late Mzlls STAFF PRESENT ; Toughill WY�ite Kramer DISCUSSION �F PROPOSED TQWN OF 'VAIL PUBLIC WORKS FACTLZTY T�rrq Minger gave a brief descrzption of the Town's criteria for selection of �he proposed public works facility��� a.ncluding .locatian, ca.st p�r, acreage, u�ility location and cost , and how i� wa.11 reiat� as a "good neighbar" , He we�a�i.through each of the �our major con�enders (Pu1is , Selby/Tofel',r E1mor�, and Mc1�il:xs't�-r) and stated that the Town was leaning �oward the Pu1is si�e even thaugh it was a � very visable site. Ge�ry Wh�te mentioned �he New Electric bui.�ding and land as weZl as the site east of tk�e Mountaa�n B�ll building as �. possible alternatives , Kent Rose spoke to the disadvan�ages of both of those sites . APPROVAL OF MTNUT�S Jun,e 2 & 9, 1977 -- Dudley Ab3�ott made a motion �o app�ove; Pam Garton seconded the motion, A unanimous vote was recorded. APPROVED June 16 , 197? ,..- Dudley Abbott made a motion to approve; Pam Garton seconded the motion . A unanamous vo�e was recoxded. APPROVED VAIL INSTITUTE TENT --- CONDITIO�TAL USE PERMIT -�. PREL�MINARY R�VIEW It was noted that the Tent needs to be erected by July 3 and the formal hearing for the tent is not until July 7, The Vail Inst�.tu�e would like a preliminary approval from the Planning Comrtfission at thi.s time. Patn Garton made a motion for preliminary approval ; Sandy Ma.]�]s seconded �he motion, A unanimous vote �va� recorded, APPROVED PRELIMINARILY J,R. ELIAS -- GRFA VARIANC� Attached is the sta�� memorandum giving a connp�ete descrzption dfi the request and reasons �oar the request . It was noted that the p�ob�em that accured las� week was due �o the figures be�ng based on f�.00r area ratio ra�her than on grfa making the house much bigg�r than reality , Those �igures have been corrected, � .>� e The house, as it presently exists, is a legal non-conform�ng use due to th� �act that is was built under the old zoning ordinance gr�a � calculations , Pam Garton felt that this request , if gran�ed, wou�d be a grant of special privilege without any strong technical rEasons far hardship, and that a negative precede�t would be set in this neighborhood if the requestw.�x� granted, �his was the genera� fee�in� o� the whole Planning Ca�uniss�on, Pam Garton made a motion to dxsapprove �he xequest ; Dudley Abbott secanded �he mot�on, A unanimous vote was recor�ed. DISAPPR4VED, Requ�st �ox vacation of property l�ne between Lots A-$ & A-9, Lionsr�dge Subd�visxon F�1ing No, 1 The appl�cant , Deane Knox as represen�ed by Hal Engstrom, would �ike to join prope�ti�s with Leo Payne in order to ha�e a c�us��r housing development consisting of eight duple��s and ane trip�ex. The vacation is needed b�cause unde� the present plan , one o� the dup�exes would rest right on the prope�ty �in�, I� the vaca.tion was not gxanted th� applicants wou�d loose only one unit ; Diana Toughil� felt �hat the trade off o� one add�tional unit was worth i� due to the pro�o�ed cohe�zve development plan, D, Abbatt made a motion for approval ; Garton seconded the motian� A unanimous vate was recardedr APPROVED �CORNIC� BUILDiNG REQUEST TO REZONE FROM HDM�' TQ CCI St was no�ed by M3ke Pa�mer, the appl�cant , that the primary reason � for the request was ��nancialt The Planm�ng Comtnission felt �hat th�re was no justification for the xezoning because �he Cornice Bui�ding was not contiguous to CC� and the pedestrian area, It was surrounded by PA and HDMF zon�ng, Tf this request was gran�ed, the �ss�e of spot zoning would become appa�ent with no logical xeason. Bill Hanlon felt that i� this bu��ding was comia�ercial pedestrian tra�fic would be �ncreased on an already bad corner and could develop into a safety hazard, The applicant fel� that with the parking structure and the proximi�y o� the B1ue Cow that the Corn�ce Building �ent itself to a cornmercial use. Dud3ey Abbo�� felt that the horizon�al zoning ordxnance in CCT might be more xestrictive to the applicant �han his present HDMF zoning, Du� �o the fact that the Planning Commission could find no just�fication for the rezoning, Pam Garton made a motion �o deny the request ; Sandy Mi11s secanded the motxon; A unanimous vote was recorded. DISAPPROVED. As there was no further bu.siness ta discuss , the meeting was adjaurned. �� MEMORANDUM . T0: P].anning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE; June 23 , 1977 RE; �lias GRFA Variance Va31 Valley First Fi�.�ng, B�ock ,3, Lot 12 The applican� , J.R. Elias, is requesting a GRFA variance to conver� a garage and a lau�dry room into a recrea�ional room. Tl�ere is also a new addit�6n of approximately 30 square feet which is to be a window seat for one o� the bedrooms. The conversion and additian wauld add approximately 330 square feet o� GRFA �o the unit , The current GRFA o� the �xa�sting dup�ex �.s 4, 863 square feet ; the allowable is g, 255 square feet , The present dup].ex is approxiznateJ.y 60$ square feet over what �.s permitted. The proposed addition o� the 330 square �eet �vould result in the GRFA exceeding the requzrement � by 938 square feet. CONSrDERATION OF FACTORS {SECTTON I9,60d) 1 . The relationsha.p of the requested variance to other exista.ng or potential uses and structures �n �k�e v�ca.n�ty, The requested variance wou.ld make only a minor modification to �he exterior o� the existing structure , It would, however, make this unit i.nconsistent wi�h ather una.ts in the r�eighbor�ng area bq allowa.ng a greater amount of GRFA �han �.s perm�ttecl by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The degree to which relie� from the strict or l.i�exal interpreta�ian and enfarc�m�nt o� a specif�.ed regulatian is necessary to ach�eve compatibility and ttna.formity of trcatmen� among sites in the vicini.ty, or to a�tai.n the objectives of this ord�.nance without �xan� of special privilege. Due to the ex�ent that this variance will exceed the GR�'A requireraaen� � we do feel that this wou].d be a gra��t o� special privi�ege, The additional 330 squarc� feet wauld resul� in the GRFA exceeding wha� is a1low�d by almos� 20%w . �l�as Variance -2- June 23, �977 �� 3, The ef�ect of the requested varianc� on light and air, � dis�r�but�on of population, �ransportation and traffic facilities, public f acz��ties and utili�ies�� We �oresee na adverse effects on ��es� �actors. FINDTNGS : I. That t�e granting o� the varzance will cons�itute a grant a� special privi�ege inconsist�nt with the limitations on other prapert�es classified in �he same distric� . See Item 2 . , under Consideration o� Factors , There have been no flther GRFA variances granted in this area, 2. That the granting of the varianee could b� det��mental to the publxc health� safety , ox welf are or materially injurious �a properties ar improvemerits in �he vicini�y. See I�em �. , under Consid�ratia.n af Faetors� Granting o� th�s variance could se� a negative precedent by al�owing excess�v��y large houses to be built or a��owing additions on hauses which alr�ady exceed or are very close �o the GRFA requireme�t �f the Zoning Ordinance. Many o� �he structures in �he Vail Valley �ubdivision are at or ov�r �he maximum gr�a and have similar garages. SeveraZ of the units have two or three car garages , �hac� i� converted, would add � substan�ial density to the neighborhood. 3 . That the vax�anc� is warranted �or the follow�ng reasons : (c) the strict or Iiteral interpretat�on and en�orcement of the sp�cified regulation wou�d not deprive t�e applicant o� privileges enjoyed by the owners of ather properties in the same district . Structures in �he residenta.al neighbornood are general�y in compliance with the GRk'A requirement of �he Zonin� Ordinance. This house as it presentxy exists is over this requxrement , We, there�oxe, feel that a further variance is not warran�ed and would not deprive the ap�licant o� pxivileges enjoyed by owners of o�her properti.es in this distarict . The Departmen� of Community Devel.opment stx�ongly recomm�nds denial of �he variance sought for the reasons stated above. �r� a1�Q feel �ha� there has been no haxdsh�p shot�n ir�. th.e xeq,uest , ' � MEMORANDUM � TO: Plannxng Commission FROM : Department of Co�nmunity Development DATE: June 23, 1977 , RE; Ja�es M, Pa�mer Request for Rezoning o� the Cornice BuiLding �rom KDMF to CCI The staf� �as reviewed the request fox rezoning �n accdrd wi�h �he Zon�ng Ordinance and have the foXlowing comments: The applicant has xeques�e� that �he Cornice Bu��ding be rezoned ��am the �xisting HDMF tQ CCI , The bu�lding consis�s o� seven dwe�ling units and one real estate off ice. FACTORS : R�lati4nship and impact of th� use on . de�e�opmen� objec�ives • o� the Town. The purposes �or the HDMF zone d�stric� states "Certain non-residential uses are permitted as conditiona� uses which relate �o the nature af Va�� as 'a winter ana summer rec�ea�ion and vaca�ion communi�y, whe�e permit�ed ar� �ntended to blend harmoniously with th� residen��al charac�er of the distric� . " We do not �eel that a �otally commexcial building is harmon�ous with the residential character o� the area, The Cornzce prov�des af�ordable employee hous�ng near the core a�ea and remova� of thzs rare type of housxng un�t does not seem campatib�e with �the Tawn 's desire to keep a balance of housing (pa�ticularly �ong-��rm employee units) and commercial space. We feel �hat is is impexative that the comrnercia� area be lim�ted to the CCI area and not a�lowed to spread into the areas which are primaxily �esidential �n nature. Ef�ect o� the proposed rezoning on �ight and air � dist�zbution o� popu�a�ion, �ransportation �acilitxes , and othe� pub�ic facilities and publ�c facil�ties needs. The primary concernis one o� distribut�on o� popuTation. We believe �hat a �ong��erm residen�s should be encouraged i� the area. Fur�her , since there axe no parking spaces on the site, there cou�d be a greater impact on �he �ransportation c�nter , Conversion to commercial of the approximately 3 , 00Q square feet wou�d require a parking var�ance of four cars (the di�ference between the xequixemen� � �or �esidential and cotnm.ercial) , ' Cornice ' Page 2 � � Effec� upon traffic, with particular �e��rence to conges�ion, automotive and pedestr�an sa�ety an� convenience, traf�ic flow and con�rol, acc�ss , maneuverabzl�ty, and removal o� snow fram � th� streets and parking areas , � A commercial space could contr�but� additional tra��ic in an �� already congested area ��hexe no onWs�te parking is ava��able. We �eel that cus�omers will doub�e park along �he roadway whxch would crea�e an unsafe traf�ic condition, and make snow plowing a prob��m, Effect upon the charactEr of the area in which the pxoposed use is �o be located; �ncluding the scale and bulk af th� pxoposed use in re�ation �o suxrounding uses. We feel �ha� passible us�s would have a negat�ve impac.t an �he res�dent�aZ charac�er of th� neighbarhood. T�e surraunding uses (Apol�o Park, Texas Townhauses , Vorlau�ex , Gxey & Whites , Vai� C�ub) are all pr�marily residential in character. The only commercial building in the area is the B�u� Caw, a non-confoxm�ng use , Such other f ac�ors and crz�er�a as the Commission deems applicable to t�e proposed �se , Appxicant stated a� �he time the condit�onal use permit fo� �he real estate af�ice was gran�ed that he intended to do a great deal of landscaping and general �ehabzlitation an the s��e and the buzlding; to date, substantial landscap�ng has no� been completed. We fe�Z this is an important site visua�ly and should be given a • genera� f ace-lif�ing, The Department of Community Deve�opm�nt makes . the faXlowing findings : That the proposed rszoning is not �n accord with the purpos�s of the zaning ordi�ance, We do no� f�eX that a commercial building is in keeping with t�e inten� o� the ar��nance nor in accord wi�h the reszdential character of the neighborhood. That the pxoposed rezoning would be detr�menta� to the publ�c heal�h, sa�ety, and we��axe, and wou�d be material�y injurious to properties or irnprovemen�s in the vici���y. The probable traffic prob�ems which could .be created by �he proposed commercia� bui�ding where no on-site parking �s available, could be de�rimental to �he publ�c safety, and detrimental �o �he �esidential character of the neighborhaod, The request is no� in conformance wxth the zoning ord�nance as the pro�ab�e convexsion to cammerc�al would require a parking vax�ance �or a minimum o� four cars , Requests for rezon�ng have been the subject of many court decisions zn Colorado and in other sta�es as well � G�neral�y, the Colorado courts �ave xuled that an applicant mus� prave one of � two reasons for rezoning, one that the original zoning was a mis- �ake, or two that thexe has been a subs.tantial change �n the neigh- borhood, The Department o� Cammunity Developm�nt strongly recommends Cornic� Page 3 denia� o� the requested re�on�ng as the ap��icant has shown neithex an incorrec� axiginal 2oning, o� � signi��cant change �n th� �2�gh� borhaod, (Moore vs , �he Ci�y o� Bou�der , Rooseve�t vs , C�ty o� � Englewood, Kizer vs , Beck) , Each o� these cases �s similar to the rezoning requested b� the Carnice xn that they wexe requests for rezoning �xam r�sxdential �o conarnercial or �rom lower zone distxicts to "higher and better uses" . In each case , the caurts found in �avor o� the mun�c�pality denia� af the �equest . i • � � i � � if � � PLANNING COMMISSTON Agenda June 30; 1977 'i � , 3 :04 I , Fzrst o� Denver Mortgage Znv�s�ors and Pulis ' request to rezon� the �unburst Property 3 �30 2. Vail Vallc�r MedicaX Center bua.ld�ng bulk control varainces and conditional use permit to al�ow a hospita]. addition and a variance request �rom �he covered parking regulations , vacation of property line b�tween Lots E & F Vail Village Secand �"iling 4 :OQ 3. Zoning Amendments re1a��.ng to Design Review Boarc� 4 ; 30 4, Approval. o� June 23, 1977 Minutes and Council representativ� �ox �Tuly 5th Council M�e�ing (work session and nigh� meeting} � :� , _ f' .. _� �°5� T 1 1 � • MINEJTES PLA�INING CONih1ISSI0N TOWN OF VAIL 30 JUNE 1977 3:00 P.P'l• Members Present: Members Absent: Chairman Drager Todd D. Abbo'tt Hanl on P. Gar�on Mills . G. White Staff Present; Lamont F'DMI PUL�S RE UEST TO REZdN� SUNBURST PROPERTY The �irst rezoning wi71 vacate SDp#1 and create S�D#8 for the existing Building A on i .3 acres. Garton moved to ap�rove the request according �o the Staff Memorandum of 6/3fl/77; Abbo�� seconded the motion; �he vote was unartimous �n favor; APP�OVED. The second rezoning concerns the remaining 1Z .3"�acres now owned by FDMI . Th�re will be a 54 un7�t and density maximum on the parcel . Abbott �noved � to approve the rezoning with the condition that a nota�ion regarding max�mum uni�s and density be on the final plat and deed restr-�ctions; Whi�e seconded the mot3on; the vote was unanimous for approval ; APPROV�D. The third rezoning is for the remaining 5 acres owned by the Pu�is ' . Gartan moved to approve with the condi�ion �hat there be an 18 unit and density �naxirrEUm notation an the final plat and deed res�riction; Abbot� seconded �he mo�ion; the vote was unanimous in favor; APPROV�Q. � 7he �Fourth item was the submission of the f�nal p1at for a minor re- subdivision approval so �ha� the Sunburst property may be divjded by Pulis and FDMI. White move� to approve the resubdivision; Abbott seconded t�e mot�on; �Che vvte was ur�animous in favor; APPROV�D. VAIL VALLEY M�I}ICAL CEIVTER Chuck Tubbs and Daie l�atson made a presentation regarding the proposed expansian af the Vai1 Val�ey M�dical Center. Several requests for var3anceswere also made. �. � ' Minutes/2 ' ., ` . 30 June 1977 � Bui1ding Bulk Co_n_trol M Wa�l Len tl� - Garton maved to apprave the proposed waT7 leng�l� of 128 ft. ; White secanded t4�e motion; the vote was unanimous in favor; APPROVED. Diagonal - White moved to approve the proposed 300 f't. diaganal ; A�bott seconded the motion; the vote was unan�mous in favor, APPROVED. Offset - Whi�e moved to approve th� request to e7iminate the offse� requ�rement; Garton seconded the mo�ian; the vo�e was unanir�ous in favor; APPRQVED. Conditiona1 Use Permi� With regard �o the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a hospital in an MDMF zone, l�lhite moved to apprave; Garton seconded the motion; the vote was unanimous in �'avor; AFPROVED. Parkin Variance 4�ith regard to the VVMC request to have no cover�d parking, Garton moved to approve; Abbo�t seconded the motian; the vo�e was unanimous . �n favor; APP�OVED. A second motion was made to set the num�er of spaces�required for �he project as it has not been designated in the zoning ordinance. After some discussion, l�lhi�e moved to set the required parking at 101 uncavered spaces with the fo17owing cond�tions: {1 ) the wester7y portian of -�he site be subject to si�te cleanup and revege�ation p1ar�; and (2) the Planning Commiss�on would re�ain a continuing right to monitor parking needs with the righ� at a future date to require parking an the westerly lot if deemed necessary. Garton seconded the rrro�tion; the vote was unanimaus in favor; APPR�VED. Vacation o� �ot L�ne Vai1 Val�ey MEdical Center awns Lot E and t�as an agreement to purchase Lo� F. The request wou7d a�lo4v for the treatment of Lats � and F as one site, upon purchase of' the �and. Abbatt r�oved ta approve; Garton seconded the mo�ion; �he vo�e was unan��ous in favar; APPROVED. Ci�ucic Tubbs requested a copy of the �9inutes of this meetinc� for his reference. Chairman Drager asked that the Planning Co�nmission be notified when the Design Rev�ew Board reviews the project so that PC members might � at�end. �` . � . Minutes/3 ; " 30 June 1977 � ZONIIVG AMENDM�I�TS TO SI�N COD� These zoning amendments wou�d create a Sign Sub-Cammittee as recommended by the Design Review Board. Certain revisions have been �ade to the draf� a� ��e Town Counci1 's request. �im Lamont presented the Commission with copies of the proposed amendments. Chairman Drager comment�d tha� violators of the Sign Code should b� dea�t with more strictly and noted that the DRS can sti17 over�urn decisions of �he Sub-Committee. Whi�e moved to approve the proposed amendments; Gartor� seconded �he mo�ion; th� vote was unanimous in favor; APPROVED. MINUT�S OF 6�2�7 After reviewing the preceding week's Mir�utes, Abbott moved to approve them; White seconded the motion; the vote was unanimous in favor, with Drager abstaining due to his absence at �hat meeting; APPROVED. The P1anning Cammission �hen requested to meet with the planning attorney, Kirk Wickersham, at his conveni�nce. As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned. � � , ..�, � eHAPT�R ].8, 52 - SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT D�STRZCT 8 � FD11�II � SECT.i�N �8. 52 . 010 PURPOSES , � Special Deve�opment Distric�t 8 is establ.ished to ensure comprehensive deve].opment and use o� an area i.n a manner that wi�l be harmona.ous with the genera]. charact�r af the Town , provide adequate open space and recx�ational ame�i�a.es, and promote the o�jecta.ves of the �oning Ordinance. The development is xega�ded as complementary to the Town by the Tnwn Counca.l and the Plann�ng Commission , and there are sign.ificant aspects of the special. development which cannot be sata.s�ied throu�h �e imposition o� standard di�stxicts on �he area, SECTTON 18,52,020 SP�CTAL D�VELOPMENT DISTRICT 8 ESTABLISHED Special Deve].opment District 8 is established for the development of mul�i-fami2y dwelling and commercia�. enterpr�se on a parcel. of 7.and compris�.ng 1. 3 acres in the formerly created SDI area o� the Town ; Special Developmen� District 8 and said � , 3 acres i.s referred tn as "SDD8" The existing building consisting of 7]. dwelling txni�s contains approx�-. mately 85,000 square feet o� gxoss residential. f�oor area and approxi- tnately 5, 250 square fee� of commercial space� and ]43 underground park�.ng spaces , sha11 be inc�uded in SDDS SDD$ is more particu].arly described as follows ! (legal description} � �ECTION 18 , 52, 03Q PER�42ITT�D USES Tn SDD8 (e��sting building and recreational. facilities) , the following uses shallbepermitted : (A) Multiple f amily residential dwelli�gs (B) Accessory retail and resta.urant and service establishments not occupying more �han 5'y�250 squaxe feet including the �Eolxowing : Apparel s�ores Art supply stores and galleries Book stores Camera s�o�es and �ho�ographic stttdias Candy stores Chinaware and glassware s�ores Specialty food stores Floris�s Gift stores Hobby stores Jewelry s�ores Leather goads s�o�es Liquo� stores � Newsstands and tobacco s�ares Sporting goods stores Stationery stores Toy stores Variety stores Barbex stores Beauty shops Travel. and ticket agencies '��-.: � Delicatessens with �ood serv�ce "� . �, ��.'- t 'Cocktai-Z�.].oun�es';' t avexns and bars . ;. ...._. , ' . . _ . �4__'"' __ } . .,..�. ...�. .� . . Co�fee shops . .�_. --,..�_.-:--->. --- _ . ,-- _ �__.�, � ,�,�: Fountains and sandwich shops Restaurants {C} The �easing or selling o� e�cess park�.ng spaces a.n order to attempt ta accommodate automabiles generated by development on adjoining p�operty , � � ,: {D) Add���onal businesses or services determined to b� sim��ar � � . to permi��ed uses in accord w�th the provis�ons of Sectio� of this ordznance. SECTION �8 ,52, 040 CONDITIONAL USES � � In SD8 �he fo�law�ng conditional uses shall be permitted subject to �he issuance of a Cond��ional Us� Permit in accord wi�h the provisions o� Article 18 60 hereof : (A) Public utili�y and public service uses; (B) Public buildings , grounds and �acilities; (C) Pu�lic or prxvate schools; (D) Public park and recreational f aci���xes; (E) Meet�ng rooms , SECTION �$. 52 ,050 ACCESSORY U�ES � In SD8 the followin� accessary uses shall be per�itted: (A) zndoor and ou�door recreational facili�ies , including but not limited to, swimming pools�; tenn�s cour�s {B) Home occupations, subject ta issuance of a home occupation permi� in accord with the provis�ons o� Sec��on� hereo� , � (C) Other uses customarily inc�den�al and accessor� to � pexmitted or conditiona� uses and n�cessary �ox the operation thereo� , SECTION 1$, 52 , 060 D�V�LOPME�T STANDARDS G�neral Density P�an o� SD$, �xisting Build�ng Maximum gross residential f loor area (square fe�t) 85T000 Maximum number of dwelling units 71 Maximum grass commexcial floor area (squax� feet) 5 ,250 Underground park�ng spaces 143 SECTZON 19, 52 . 070 RECREATIONAL AMEN�TTES The Deve�oper sha�� pravade a parcel o� �an� o� approxi�ately 2 acres from land adjacent �o SD$, presen��y owned by it and not necessax�ly contxguaus to the SDS, wh�ch parcel shall b� used �or re- creatianal amenities to be provid�d by Dev�loper , and determined joint�y by the Dev��oper o� the SD8 and the developer of the said adjacent land subjec� to approval by the Town, The owners of dwe�ling un�ts located within the SD$ shall be �ntitled to use such amenities pursuant to � the rules and reg�lat�ons of the �omeowners ' assoc�ation .governing the xecxeational am�nitzes parcel of which aX1 ow�ers a� dwelling units in .. SD8 and an s��d adjacent land are m�mbers. -,,_:� _ % � MEMORANDUM � TQ � P].annang Co�m3ssion FROM: Design Review Board DAT.E : June 30 , 1977 R� : FDMI and Pttlis Rec�uest to Reaone and Resubda.va.d.e �he remaindex� of the Sunburst Property Th�re are three separate rezonings and one resubdivision to be considered, On J'un� 9, 1977 the eastexn porta�.on of the origir�al. Sunbuxst propex��y was approved. by tYze Planning Commission as Vai1 Va1�ey Th:ird �'iZing. The first rezoning is the creation o� Specia� Deve�.opmen� Dis�rict 8 (s�� attached SDD ordinancE} for the existing bu.�l.ding an 1. 3 acres . Using an HDMF zane (previous zoning � on property} there would need to be 3�; 2 acres o� land �o.r �he existing building, �� is au� �ecommenda��.on �ha� by al�owing . the bu�.lding �o be plac�d on ? , 3 acres would perm�t greatex f�exib�.li.�y for �he placement of �he new buildi�ng and provision of recreational �enities . The difference between 3. 2 and l, 3 wa�l1 not be used for additional density calculations , The second rezonzng zs on �he remaa.ning 1Q, 1 acres now owncd by FDMI , At the request o� the Counci� , the proposed zone : �or the 1.0, �. acre i.s LDMF, but wa.th a 54 unit maximum to be noted on the final plat and in the deed restrictions , The xeason for LDMF instead a� RC is to al�ow fox grea�er d�sa.gn flexibility in �he subsequent cons�ruction to gzve a better ma��ing relationship, AXong wi�h �his rezoning are the following conditions concearn�ng parking for �he Go1f Course Clubhouse ; 1 ) The Town o� Vail will purchase one acre from FDMI at approxiam�ely $2 , 00 per square foot , 2) FDMI will pay entire recreational fee o� approxir►�ately $67,000, 3) The Town of Vai1 wi11 bui]d the parking lot , The third rezoning is on approximately �our acares wha.ch is owned by the Pulises, The proposed zone �or this four acres is residential cluster. �`� The �our�h ��em �o be considered is the submission of the �inal p�at for a minor resubda.vision appraval . This is necessary �or the proposed division of �he Sunburst property by th� Pulises ancl FDMI , �. MEMORANDUI4'I � T0: Plann�.ng Commissa.on FROM Department o� Communi�y Development DAT�� June 30 , 1977 R� : Vail Va�.ley Medical Center Request for Thxee Building Bulk Control Variances A Parking Vari.ance , a Conditxonal CTse Perma.t and a Vacation o� of the property lin� between Lots E and F, Vax1 Village 2nd Filing for cons�ruction of an additional 8 , 700 sq, ft, to the exa.s�ing VVMC (A) BUILDTNG BULK CONTROL VARIANC�S (SECT�ON 18, 18 . 1Q0} The Va�l Valley Medical Center is reques�ing three building bulk control 'variances: niaximum wall length, bui�ding diag�.nfll , � and building offsets . � PERMITT�D PROPOSED � Wa11 Length 125 ' 128 ' Da.aga,nol 1�0 ' 300 ' Offset 1 ' /5 ' over 50 ' 128 ' w/no offset CONSIDERATION 0�' FACTORS FOR THE VARxANCES (S�CTION 18 .62 .060) The proposed additi.on a.s in an MDMF zone with �he Pro�essional Bu�.lding on one side and the Hiltan Inn on the oth�r , Due to the hi�h intensity use of these buildings and the already high intensity use of the m�dica� center, �he proposed addition should create no additz.onal adverse impacts on thi.s area. The degree to which relief �acom the stric� ox literal interpre-- tat�.on and �nforcemen� of a specified xeguJ.ation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uni�orrnity o� treatment among sa�tes in th� vicinity ox to attain the objectives o� this or.- dinance without grant of special. p�'ivilege . The Va�.1 Va11.ey Medical. Center is a unique en�ity in Vail , , The reason for the bulk control variance request is to permit mare effica.ent utilization o� space within the hospital complex. � We, therefore, do not feel. that these requ�sts would be g�'ants of spec.i:al pxivilege . >.:. �.. . ,.. �.. ::..: - - ��,' , The ef�ect of the �equested variances on 1igh� and aix , distri- � bution o� populat�an, transportation and traffic facilzties, pub�ic �acil�ties, and ut�liti�s .' and public sa�e�y . We see no advexse impacts on the above factors . The proposed addition should not have any negative impacts on surrounding property owners or uses. FINDINGS : Tha� the grant�ng of the vaxiance w��l not constitut� a grant of special provil��e inconsistent with the 1�mitations on othex proper�ies classi�ied in �he same dis�rict � See Items � and 2 under Conside�ation af Fac�ors , That the granting of �he variance will not be detrimental �o the publ�c health, safetq , or wel�are , or mater�al�y injurxous to prope�ties or impravements in the v�cinity . See Ttem 3 under Cons�deration o� Fac�ars , That the variance is warranted �ar on� or maxe o� the fol�owing reasons ; b} There are except�onax or extraordinaxy circumstances or . condi�ions appl�cab�e to the site o� the var�ance that do not app�y generally to othe� propertieS in the same zone, See Item 2 under Cons�dexatian o� Factoxs The Department of Community DeveXopment recommends approval o� the requested variances to a11ow for the most e�fici�nt operation o� the new addition to the Vail Val�ey Medical Center, CONDITIONAL �.SE PERMIT�.(SECTION 18e�8,030(b) In an MDMF zane , one of the accepted conditional uses is for "Hospita�s Medical and Dental Clinics and Medical Centers" , The proposed addition to the exis�ing medical center fits wi�hin �his category, Up�n review of SectDevelo*men0��ecommendsaappaoval�ofg�he t�e Department of Communi�y p �actors : Condi�iona� Use Permit based upon the fol�owing Relat�onship and impact of the us� on developmen� abjectives of the Town, � One of �he primary goals of the Tawn is to provide the best health serv�ces poss�ble �o both the visitors and permanent population, The proposed e�pans�an of the medical center would work towards t�is objec��ve � �: ; .< _.. :�.v... �,. a...:.. P� .: -, fi -- - - ._ . _ . ����. y. �, z . _: _, . �:. -.; : - . . :. �.. :. � , The effect of the us� on light and air, dastr�bu�ion or � population, transportat�on �acilities, utilities , schools , parks and �ecreation facilities and other public �aczlztzes and publ�c facilities n��ds , The proposed additio� shou�d have no adverse effects o� �he items Xisted above . Eff�et upon tra��ic with particulax xef�rence ta congestion , automotive and pedestrian safety and conven�ence; tra��ic flow and control, acc�ss, ma�euverab���ty , and removal of snow from the street and parking areas, Along with the propased add�tion �s a relocation o� �h� main ent�ance o� the hospital to the west of �he existing building , Th� parking �o� on the south side of the existing building (a�ong j�est Meadow Drive) wil� b� removed, T�is will �urther separate the cars using the medica� facility �rom nearby resiaences . It will also a�low for better circula��on �n and around the Medical Center. ���ect upon th� character o� the area in which the proposed us� is �o be �ocated, , , in relation to surrounding uses: The two buildYng located adjacen� �o �he Medical Center are the Professional Building and the Hilton Inn , On the south sade of the ��edica� Cen�er axe a �ew scattered residences The � addzt�on to the existing Medical Center s�ould ha�e no signi�icant e�fect on these uses . Such o�h�r factors and cr�teria as the Commission deems app�icable to the proposed use, No o�her �actors shou�d be cons�dered. No environmental impact repo�� zs requ�red. The Department af Community Deve�opment recornmends tha� the Candit�ona� IIse Permit be approved based an the following findings , 1 , That the p�oposed location of �he use is in accord with the purpose� of this ordinance and the purpose�� o� the district in which the site is �ocated. 2. Tha� �he proposed location of the use and the conditians under which �� wauld be operated or maintained will not be detxzmental to �he public health, safety , or welfare . or materia��y znjuraous to properties or �mprovements in �he vicinity , 3 , That the p�op:o,s�d ; use wa�� co�ply with each o� th� applicable provisions of this ordinance. � � �� _ _ -.f �� b. ��.� �..� _ , , � �:��, �,��;RKZ'I��: V�'R��NCE (�S�ECTION 1,8��,�8�40� .Tza a MDMF zone, 50% of the xequired paxkin� spaces mus�. be covexed, The Vai1 Val],ey Medical Center prapased 138 parking spaces in its new p1an� with none of thea� covered. The actural number o� parking spae�s required by the �aning ordir�ance is not specif�ed �or this project, The proposed number of spaces does conform with na�i.onal standard for this type a� facility , CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS (SECTION 18,62 , 060) The rela�ionship of the x�equested variance ta oth�r existing or poten.tial uses and s�truc-�ures �n the vicinity , The new park�ng lo� is a relocatio of an ex�.sting parking 1ot and there�ore should create no new adverse i�npacts on surxounding structures or uses. The removal �f �he parking space alo�g Wes�t Meadow Drive should have a positive impac�c on residences a.n that area, Tk�e degree o� which rc:lie� fram the strict ox litex�al interpretation and enforcemc:n.t o� a speci�ied regulation is necessary �o achieve compatibili�ty and uni�oxmity o� treatment among si.�es in �he v�cinity , or �o attain the abject�.ves o� this ardinance without gran� of special pr�.v�.lege, � Since an e�a.sting uncovexed parking lo� is being moved to another �ocation, w e do no�t feel that it sho�xld be necessary to cover 50% a� the new lat , The new parking arrangement wi11 also provicle bet�er access to the si�e, The e�fec� o� thc requ�sted variance on light and air, distribu�ion of populat�on��f transpor�atior� and tr�.ffic faca.xities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety , . We see no adverse impact on the above �actors , � � - � --�::� -Y.o b � � � . ! 1 FINDIN�S : � That the gxanting af the variance w��1 not constitute a grant of special privi�ege �nconsistent with �he limitatzons on other prapert�es classified in the. same d�strict . See Item 2 undex Consideration o� Factors That the granting of the va�iance w�lz no� be detrimental to �he public health, safety , or wel�are, or ma�erial�y injurious ta pxopexties or improvements in th� vicinity , See I�em � under Consideration of �acto�s That the var�ance is war�anted �or one or more af the following xeasons; (a) The strict or literal interpretatian and enforcement of the speci�ied regulation would result in practical d�fficu�ty or unnecessary physical hardship incons�stent with the objec�ives af this ordinance, Since the parking lot is being relocated'+' it wou�d �e a haxdship to requ�re the applicant to cover the new lot whereas the previous 1ot was nat covered, � The D�partment of Community Deve�Qpment recommen�s app�oval of �ne parking variance. VACATTON OF L�T LTNE BETWE�N LOTS E & F VAIL V�LLAGE 2n� FILING The Va�� Va��ey Med�cal Ce�ter pres�ntly owns Lot E and has an agreement to purchase Lot F, Th� request wou�d a�1ow for �he treatment of Lots E & F as ane s�te, once�.�.e ..�and has been purchased. �he Department o� Comtnunity Development recornmends approval o� this xequest �o permi� de�elopment o� the expanded medica� center on both 1ots. �_ _.: _.�.. . :,,� � .;�, � s� �� � , �. , , . . _ . , . , .� �- . , , ,. _ �„� , .,, � � _ .�.,_ , ,.. - �_. . r - l. „ ., The Department o� Cnmmunity Development recommends approval � of the three �'ezonings and �he one resubda.vision in the manner described i.n tha�s memorandum � � . .��;� �.. - ..� �-���' - '