The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPEC130012 Town Council Public Hearing Memorandums March through November 2013 �8�� ^ �+!'�c..r E �j.,.c'S►� " ��ou�, —� ��X.� �-�.oT `��`�'� L.<.��a�� -- �cr�T�x�•�- �,�,�.,,s,�-.. �, �..��-n.n MEMORANDUM z �� ' �'�- �`�'��,,f . To: Vail Town Council . ��E�� CR�6;,Q,��, Matt Mire, Town Attorney ��tQ'� '" �'�� From: George Ruther, Community Development Director Date: March 5, 2013 C�� d�=- Subject: Ford Park Phase II Improvements—Process Options � ��,�� /�, a�:, `._. 4 There have been a number of questions circulating regarding e Ford Park Management Plan and the proposed Ford Park Phase II Improveme ts. The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to the questions in writing wit hopes of clarifying some of the issues. Three options for addressing any concerns e also provided for the Town Council's consideration. Master Planning Back�round �5��'�� ,s o �t.��5 , The Ford Park Management Plan was adopted by the Vail Town Council in 1997. More recently, however, the Management Plan was amended by t e Town Council in April of 2012. The expressed purpose of the amendment w "to reflect new ideas .� im rovements lanned or the Park. Plans to make i rovements to the Park were initiated when Vail voters a roved undin b re-all catin a ortion o Convention Center Funds to Ford Park." Similar to other mast plans adopted by the Town, the Management Plan establishes the overall policy obje tive for the use of Ford Park and provides recommended strategies for implementatio to ensure that the policy objective is achieved. .� �.� �1t�..�S n�� . �.�Z Like all master planning documents, the Ford Park Managem nt Plan is an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. As such, it is an advisory document to be used to articulate the Town's expectations and guide future decision making. The Plan can be a regulatory when it is referenced in the Town's zoning regulations. When considering an application for development in Ford Park, the final decision-makers (Town Council, PEC, DRB) shall make a finding that the proposal is in compliance with the recommendations of the Management Plan prior to granting an approval. C�— c..}� �.�'S - 1��'�z_...' The Ford Park Management Plan can be amended from time time. C iteria and findings have been established for the consideration of a m ter 1 e nt. The criteria and findings include: • The plan was adopted in error. • Conditions have changed since the adoption of the plan. • How would an addition, deletion, or change to the plan e 'n concert wit lan in general? . �`��' �� o1,�c., oa � t�= w�,�r�ctio�. March 1,2013 Town o ommunity Development V�� •� • A master plan amendment can be initiated by the private sector, the Community Deve�opment Department or a Town board (Town Council, PEC, etc.) Ford Park Mana�ement Plan Recommendations The following section of the memorandum highlights applicable text and diagrams from the Management Plan. These highlights are provided for informational purposes. "The Ford Park Management Plan contains eight sections. Sections 1 - 4 introduce the plan: An executive summary, a history and time line of Ford Park, a description of the management plan process, and a statement of purpose of the management plan. Section 5 is the heart of the management plan: a set of six management goals with accompanying objectives, action steps, and policy statements to provide a framework for future management decisions. Section 6 contains illustrative, conceptual plans and written descriptions which support the various action steps." "A proposal by the Alpine Garden Foundation to construct an educational center within the garden area was a significant impetus to the creation of this document. However, several other formal and informal development expansion proposals and numerous unresolved park management issues also existed." "To that end, this Plan, serving as an amendment to the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan, was intended to guide the outcome of future development and improvement proposals through the implementation of six major goals: 1. Preservation and protection 2. Reduction of vehicular intrusions 3. Reduction of conflicts between venues 4. Resolution of parking and Frontage Road access problems 5. Improvement of pedestrian circulation 6. Delineation of financial responsibilities" "The most recent motivation for initiating improvements to Ford Park evolved from discussions of how to utilize the Town's Conference Center funding. In the Fall of 2011 Vail voters approved the re-allocation of the $9-plus million Conference Center Funds by an 87 percent margin. As endorsed by the voters, a portion of these funds was to provide funding for improvements to Ford Park, specifically improvements to the Ford Amphitheater, the Alpine Gardens, park-wide pedestrian flow, as well as expansion of the athletic fields and restroom improvements at the Ford Park athletic complex." "A proposal by the Alpine Garden Foundation to construct an Educational Center with the final phase of the garden was controversial. Opposition to the expanded use of the garden and the 'interior of park was a significant impetus to the creation of the 1997 Management Plan. In response to that opposition,the Vail Alpine Garden Foundation modified the proposal to locate the Educational Center near the athletic field parking lot March 1,2013 Town of Vail Community Development V V V��i ' ' .n10'Ry '� ��-• �� :«;ti o� - �; '.a— � � � : � i�' i�� i 7 '= , - _ .� + ° �— """° ' w Iw So�nd 6vNe� "� �:.e.,�„� � � �P,�� :' a' �=:.:;u:�:��: �.«.x. � improve�i tawn � �e�, �-.�._, l�. etlp,�...�.�� .,�'ak', " � � !, �: Betty Ford � ine j� �� , G��ns � � " _ �,�► �r—„ In,pid-ved � / �y ' �' � � o Gerald R. Ford� Res}� Amphitfieafer °� ,! �� _ f. � ' - ` /� P ' ;� �� ` � ,�e _ !�r�, �� _ �- ` • � ,��/ � � 1/ Sacial: ' ♦ � !' .i wouityard . •� � !�� ;h t ,< . " _._--�-"� -��♦ �• i� . � Service lruck �� +�. F...r � ' �.....:..'. : '�. � /'. ium A�o�nd , _ .....'�. _ �� ,.+r" �4 /�� _ -� ,= �`� I., _ . �y ;< - ....,,�,. ,- � ./� M,�s r. ., v ' . '`' . . � . r r The Alpine Gardens are a major summer attraction and the following improvements are contemplated for this facility: North Entry A more formally defined entry to the Gardens from the upper bench, along with improved pedestrian corridors are planned. Garden Expansion Area Expansion to the gardens is planned along Gore Creek, in an area east of the old school house. BFAG Education Center Located proximate to the Gardens on the lower bench, the Education Center is envisioned to house administrative offices, a greenhouse and a multi-use space for a variety of functions. The building is planned to be two levels (one story with a lower walkout level) with a building footprint of approximately 1500 SF. The BFAG building is envisioned to be west of the old school house. The location is preferred for two reasons—to preserve the Children's Garden(located just east of the old ' school, and to not"crowd"the entry to the Amphitheater. Site design of the building � should give consideration to the following: • The building should be "low profile" and not dominate the immediate area. M h 1 2 1 Town of Vail Communi Develo ment I! arc , 0 3 ty p I • The design of the building should be sensitive to its close proximity to the old school house and should create unified compound of structures. • While the old school house and the Education Center will be two separate buildings, landscape features, patios, etc. should be used to "link"the two buildings, • Consideration should be given to creating a new entry to the gardens that is adjacent to the new building, • The specimen spruce tree should be maintained, • The degree to which the building extends to the west should be minimized in order to maintain the existing open space and views to Gore Creek from Betty Ford Way. The location of this building is appropriate given its proximity and relationship to the Gardens. However, measures will need to be implemented that will minimize vehicle trips to the building and how winter access is provided. Ford Park Phase II Improvements—Process Options There are three options for the review of the current Ford Park Phase II Improvements application. The options include: 1. Continue forward with the recommendations of the Ford Park Management Plan and take no action. (no policy concerns/no implementation concerns) 2. Withdraw the Owner's consent to proceed through the planning process prior to PEC public hearing on March l lth and direct staff to initiated amendments to the master plan. (policy concerns) 3. Call up/appeal the final decision of the PEC on the development application after the public hearing on March 11`". (implementation concerns) In order to determine which of these options is most appropriate it is important to understand which concerns exist, if any, and why they are of concern. If the concerns are focused on policy type of issues, (ie, no more development in Ford Park, RETT funds were used to purchase the park land and should not support private uses, vehicles use within the park should be limited, open space is most valued, etc.) then Option#2 should be pursued. By contrast, if the concerns are focused on issues of implementation (ie, the proposed building is too tall, the pedestrian pathway creates conflicts with the varying users, too many trees are being removed, the roof pitches of the restroom building are too steep, etc.) then Option #3 should be pursued. If there is uncertainty whether any concerns exist at all, then Option#1 should be pursued at this time. March 1,2013 Town of Vail Community Development I