Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-11-07 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Sessionavailable. When calculating the required parking staff and the applicant were conservative in estimating what percentage of retail and restaurant spaces will become areas not assessed parking. An analysis will need to be run as each tenant goes in for building permit and as tenants change out in the future. The applicant can return before the Commission at a later date if additional surplus parking is created based on tenant make-up to amend the conditional use permit. Staff recommends that the developer be permitted to establish a 103 parking space private club. The applicant has proposed a five berth loading and deliveryfacilitywhich is the maximum required forthis project. The proposed facilitywill be accessed offof the Frontage Road and made available to neighboring properties as well for their loading and delivery needs. The proposed loading and delivery facility is entirely enclosed and large vehicles can make all turning movements inside the structure. The applicant and the staff agree that the location, configuration, and public use of the loading facility are a public benefit to the Town as it reduces conflicts with pedestrians, reduces impacts due to being enclosed, and its availability to the public for use. Staff recommends that through the Developer Improvement Agreement the developer enter into an agreement with the Town to include the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system for the Town of Vail. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion: D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy guidelines during the review process for the establishment of a special development district. Staff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant to the review of this proposal: = 1.0 General Growth/Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment,.maintaining a balance between residential, commercial. and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2.0 Skier/Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town 26 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1989 7:30 p.m. SECOND REVISED AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Mike Rose 2. Consent Agenda A. Approval of October 3 and 17, 1989 Meetings Minutes B. Appointment of a Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Member 3. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, second reading, an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1989 tax year and payable in the 1990 fiscal year. 4. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of Town of Vail, Colorado sales tax revenue bonds, Series 1989 and the construction, improvement and acquisition of a public parking facility and other appurtenances incidental thereto; providing the form, terms and conditions of the bonds, the manner and terms of issuance, the manner of execution, the method of payment and the security therefor; pledging a portion of the sales tax proceeds of the Town for the payment of said bonds; providing certain covenants and other details and making other provisions concernig the bonds and the designated sales tax revenues; ratifying action previously taken and appertaining thereto; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith. 5. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance establishing a program of investments to provide for the payment of the Town's outstanding general obligation refunding bonds, series 1985, on December 1, 1995 and in connection therewith providing for periodic investments of moneys to provide for such payment; providing other details in connection therewith; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith. 6o Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, second reading, are ordinance amending Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14 Series of 1987 to provide for the amendment of density of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6. 7. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 17 to add Chapter 17.25 dealing with single family subdivisions; amending Section 17.08.210 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 8. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.24.020 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by adding "Commercial Ski Storage" as a permitted use in basement or garden levels within structures in the Commercial Core I Zone District. 9. Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.20 Local Licensing Authority of 'the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Colorado to add an application fee for temporary liquor license under the Colorado Liquor Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 10. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending certain sections of Chapter 16.22 so that Chapter 16.22 regulates signs in the Arterial Business District Zone District of the Town of Vail (ABD) as well as the Commercial Core III Zone District (CC3). 11. Gart Brothers Sign Variance Request, West Vail Mall, 2171 North Frontage Road CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 12. Adjournment ORDINANCE NO. 24 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8 OF ORDINANCE NO. 14 SERIES OF 1987 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF DENSITY OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated develpment of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No. 6 provided in Section 1.4 that the Town Council reserve the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail. C. In 1985, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1985 providing certain amendments to the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. D. In 1987, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 providing certain amendments to the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. E. Application has been made to the Town. of Vail to modify and amend Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 which relates to the allowed density of the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. F. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes. G. The Vail Town Council considers that the amendments provide a more unified and aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety, welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. Section 2. A. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The gross residential floor area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 125,500 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and Phase V of Special Development District No. 6. ~~ ~~a~ ~~~ B. Section 11 of Ordinance 14, Series of 1987 is hereby amended by the addition of subsection 9 which shall read as follows: 9. Condominium unit 30 of the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums shall be subject to the restrictions of Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and re- enacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS day of 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 23 Series of 1989 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE: ADOPTING A BUDGET AND FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE COSTS, EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, FOR ITS FISCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990, AND PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF TOWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 1989 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE IN THE 1990 FISCAL YEAR. WHEREAS, in accordance with Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long-range capital program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities for the 1990 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the proposed Town budget and capital program was published on the 6th day of October, 1989, more than seven days prior to the hearing held on the 17th day of October, 1989 pursuant to Section 9.5 of the Charter; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for the .1990 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget, and to provide for the levy, assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1989 year and payable in the 1990 fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, f.or the enactment hereof have been fulfilled. 2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year beginning on the first day of January, 1990, and ending on the 31st day of December, 1990° FUND AMOUNT General Fund $11,466,411 Capital Projects Fund 6,449,020 Conservation Trust Fund 7,000 Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,139,721 Heavy Equipment Fund 1,436,529 Debt Service Fund 3,506,058 Special Parking Assessment Fund 275,000 Health Insurance Fund 630,000 Lionshead Mall Assessment District 158,026 West Vail Assessment District 8,800 Vail Marketing Fund 571.000 Total: 26,647,565 Less Interfund Transferso <6,178,258> Total Budget $20,469,307 -1- 3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan for the 1990 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by reference herein and made part hereof, and copies of said public records shall be made available to the public in the Municipal Building of the Town. 4. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses of the Town of Vail, Colorado during its 1989 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property tax of 6.43 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $283,275,390 for the 1989 tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of $1,821,461 said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, and directs Revised Statutes (1873 as amended) and as otherwise required by law. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect five days after publication following the final passage hereof. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL THIS 17th day of October , 1989, and a public hearing on this Ordinance shall be held at a regular meeting for the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado on the 17th day of October , 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1989 7:30 p.m. REVISED AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Mike Rose 2. Consent Agenda A. Approval of October 3 and 17, 1989 Meetings Minutes B. Appointment of a Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Member 3. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, second reading, an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1989 tax year and payable in the 1990 fiscal year. 4. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of Town of Vail, Colorado sales tax revenue bonds, Series 1989 and the construction, improvement and acquisition of a public parking facility and other appurtenances incidental thereto; providing the form, terms and conditions of the bonds, the manner and terms of issuance, the manner of execution, the method of payment and the security therefor; pledging a portion of the sales tax proceeds of the Town for the payment of said bonds; providing certain covenants and other details and making other provisions concernig the bonds and the designated sales tax revenues; ratifying action previously taken and appertaining thereto; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith. 5. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14 Series of 1987 to provide for the amendment of density of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6. 6. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 17 to add Chapter 17.25 dealing with single family subdivisions; amending Section 17.08.210 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 7. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.24.020 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by adding "Commercial Ski Storage" as a permitted use in basement or garden levels within structures in the Commercial Core I Zone District. 8. Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.20 Local Licensing Authority of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Colorado to add an application fee for temporary liquor license under the Colorado Liquor Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 9. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending certain sections of Chapter 16.22 so that Chapter 16.22 regulates signs in the Arterial Business District Zone District of the Town of Vail (ABD) as well as the Commercial Core III Zone District (CC3). 10. Gart Brothers Sign Variance Request, West Vail Mall, 2171 North Frontage Road CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 11. Adjournment ORDINANCE N0.- 25 - Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 TO ADD CHAPTER 17.25 DEALING WITH SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS; AMENDING SECTION 17.08.210 TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail believes that establishing a new category of subdivision called single family subdivision will promote the health, safety, and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Town of Vail, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has recommended the creation of a new form of subdivision called single family subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 17.08.210 Subdivision is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph F to read as follows: 17.08.210 SUBDIVISION F. "Single Family Subdivision" means a subdivision of an existing lot, which is recognized by the Town of Vail as a legally subdivided lot, and which shall contain single family or primary/secondary detached dwelling units. Each such dwelling unit shall be separated from any other dwelling unit by space on all sides. For zoning purposes, the lots created by a single family subdivision shall be treated as one lot. Section 2. Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 17.25 Single Family Subdivisions to read as follows: 17.25.010 Single Family Subdivisions - Required Approval A single family subdivision shall only be permitted on property that is recognized by the Town of Vail as a legally subdivided lot. No single family subdivision shall be approved unless the lots to be contained within the subdivision have foundations constructed thereon at the time of the submittal. 17.25.030 Single Family Subdivisions - Submittal Requirements A. Two mylar copies of the subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. The plat shall include a site map as required by Section 17.22.030. The plat must contain the following statement: "For zoning purposes, the lots created by this subdivision-are to be-treated-as one lot with no more than two dwelling units allowed on the combined area of the two lots." The statement shall be modified to indicate the number of units and parcels proposed. B. A copy of declarations and/or covenants relating to the subdivision which shall assure the maintenance of any common areas which may be created. The covenants shall run with the land and shall be in a form suitable for recordation with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. 17.25.040 Guarantee for Completion and Maintenance of Improvements The requirement for the guarantee for completion and maintenance of improvements shall comply with Section 17.16.250. 17.25.050 Single Family Subdivisions - Procedure The single family subdivision procedure shall be as set forth in 17.22.050 of this title with the additional requirement of an improvement location certificate. 17.25.080 Criteria for Review The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the subdivision complies with the zoning ordinance with respect to building location and other aspects of the structure and grounds, with the original plans as approved by the Design Review Board of the Town and the accurateness and integrity of the survey data found on the plat. 17.25.100 Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Decision The Zoning Administrator's decision may be appealed to the PEC in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 18.66.030 of the Vail Municipal Code. 17.25.110 Filing and Recording The Department of Community Development will record the plat and any related covenants with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. Fees for recording shall be paid by the applicant. The Community Development Department will retain one mylar copy of the plat for their records and will record the remaining mylar copy. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. -2- e Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of , 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of . 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -3- 1 1 - E=y -. - _: •-, t•1 ~=i M 1 -- - ~ _ k:: I F[ ~_ H F-a E F_ t•1 t=i i=i F' E F' _ F ~ .- o - riRAF'T 11/06; 89 STATE OF COLOR~4DQ ) COL?~V'I'X Gr E~i~Llr ) SS. TOV`JRl Q~ VAIL ~ The ?'own Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, .^zet in regular se;sian, ih `.'.l. coni'orn°!it~r with the T bw~l Charter and the applicable laws, rules and regulations cf th4 Taµ~, at the ~%ai? ~r~~:r~icipai P3uilding, Fail, C-ol~~;ado, the regular muting place thereof, on Tuesday; the ~ih day of November, 198, at the hour cf 7:30 p.m. The following were found to be presznt, con3tit~ting a quorum: l~iayor: Kent R. Rose Maya; Pro Tern: John C. Slevin CouncilmPmbers: l/ric Affelde Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Thomas Steinberg C`iail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Absent: There al3o were present: T~~vvn Manager: Rondall `l. Phillips Town Attorney: Lawrence :~. Eskwith Iairector of Adminis- trative Sery-ices: Charles Mick Town Clerk: Pam )3randmeyer Thereupon, the feilowing proceedings, among others, were had and taken. The presiding ofGccr introduced the following Ordia~ance, which was then read ley title, sufficient copies of the ful! Ordinance having previously been made available to the Town Council and to the public: -1- 1 1 - 4=y r. -- _ =~ r•1 ~_~ Y-a 1 ~_ _ ~ F=~ I F' ~_ H F-a E ~: ~•1 ~_~ ~_~ ~: E F' _ t=~ ORL7INANCE NO. 3 0 SERIES OF 1989 A'~T (JRDINA~'VCE ESTABLI5HIN~ A PRdGRAIv( C?F ?NVEST;4gEN'TS Tp PRdVIDE Ft~}R TI-IE PAYI4gENT OF i~FE TC~~Viti"S OUTSTANDING GENERAL QI3I.IGATIdi~' REFUNL)ING 1~Q1<+DS, SERIES 19$5, dN DECEiviFiER 1, 1995 A:`~D IN CONiv'ECTION THEREj1V?TI-I PR~VIUI?~'G FdR PERICBIC I'vVES T ~1ENTS dF l4idNEYS TD PRt7VIDE F(.~R SUCH PAYh4E;vrT; PROVIDI?~tCx dTHER DETAILS IN CONIvECTIOiv TI-iEREWITH; A1siD REPEA.LIIVG ALL C}RDINr~NCES IN CONFLI~"I' HEREt~tTH. WHEREr''~.S, the Town of Vail, Colorado (the "Tos;'n"} has heretafore issued its Ccn~~rai C)6ligatian Refurxding Bonds, Series 19$5, dated as of November 15, 19$5 in tl~e or;~inat a~~;gregate principal amount of $21,71~,~ (the "1985 Bonds"); and ti~HEREAS, the I985 Bonds maturing on and after De~emher 1, 1490, are subaect to redemption ; ror to maturity, at the option of the Town, in whop or in part, un De;.ember 1, 1995 (the "Redemption Bate"} upon payment of par and acc;uPd interest, without redemption premium (the "Redemption Price"); and 4VHE:4EA.S, pursuant to the Ordinance authoriairig the issuance of the 19t>5 Bonds (the "1985 Ordinance"), the Town has agreed to pledge and set aside one-half of t.h:. To~,m's four percent sales tax (the "Pledged Saps Tax") to pay the principal of and interest ~n the 19$5 Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Town desires to issue its Sales Tax Rzvenue D~nds, Se: yes 1984, in the principal amount o[' ~S,ut~,QCtO (the "1989 Bonds") and to pledge the Pledged Sales Tax and certain other res~cnues t~~ the payment of the 19$9 fonds; and -2- 1 1 - c-1 r. - _: •=. r.t i=~ ha 1 :_ ~. -_ F=:= I ~' ~_ H t-a E ~[ C•1 ~_~ i=i ~' E r=' .. _ -fir ~~'HEREAS, in order to obtain municipal bond insurance and therefore achieve more favc~rat~le interest rates ~~n the 1959 Bonds, it is necessary for the Town to establish a program (the "Program") For the annual investment of Pledged Sales Tax and other legally available revenues of the Tow. n (except for g~nerel ad valorem property taxes} in crd~:r to :-rave s«fticipnt funds r_~n hard as nt the Redemption i7ate to gay the Redemption PPi4e of the 1985 Bonds; tiC~t~, THEREFORE, BE IT ORJAIP~IEL7 $Y THE TOV6~N C.OU~`CIi Ot= THiG TOV~1 OF ti'P~IL, COLURAD O: Section 1. Definiti~~ns. unless otherta-use defined in this Ordinance, ;errrts used in this Ordinance shall have eha meanings specified in Ordinance No. ~4, Series of 19$9 (the "1919 Bond Ordinance"). Section 2. Ratifecatic~n. X11 actions heretofore taken (not inconsistent v.~th :ize pro`~isior~s of this Ordinance) by the Town Council and other officers of the Torun i establis,~ing ti3e ProJrarn are ratif!ed, approved and canfirme~. ~eCti;)n 3. .~-uthcr'24t'on of Prc~~ram. The Program is hereby atithoriaed for the, purpose of providing far the redemption of the 1985 finds on the Redemption Date, except as hereinafter set forth. Secti:,n 4. Pled~~~. of Revenues. The Town hereby pledges to invest t'r~e following amounts on the following; dates solely tram the Pledged Sales Tax or such tithe; revenues of the Town as may be legally available (except for general ad valorem propertty taxes): o3e 1 ], - 4yi rr. - _ '=~ 1.1 °_~ F~ 1 - ~ _ k:: I F: ~= H t'a E R hY °~~ ~-~ F: E F' t- Investment Amount ~~ The pledge of such revenues shall not constitute an indet~tedness or a debt within the meaning aC any applica6lc charter, constitutional or statutory provision ar limitation, nor shall such pledge be consi:lered to be or held to ~ a general obligation of the Town. Thf~ revenues so pledged shall be invested by the To~,am, pursuant to an investment contract oetweer~, the Town and ~ ,dated as of l~ecetrber 1, 1989 ([ne "Investment Contract'°). Section 5.~ F.edem~rion cif I98S Bonds. Th.e Tos~rn Council has eluted and does hereby declare its intent to exercise on behalf of and in the name of the Town its option. to redeem can the redemption date all of the 1945 Fonds maturing on and after F3ecemb4r ?, 195. The Tovs~n is hereby obligated to exercise such option, unless on or before Octob.r i, 1995, the Town Finance Director delivers a certificate to the Bond Insurer tl1at the Pledged I~event±es for the t~•elve calendar months imme~liateiy preceding the delivery of the certificate equal ar exceed 1.i0°c of the i~fa~dmum Annual Debt Service it~uirement. In the event such certifcate is delivered, the 'Town shall redeem the 1985 Bonds only if authoria°d by resolutior. of the 'T'own Council. Section 6. ~ele~d Powers. The officers of the Town be, and they hereby dre, ar.athari~ed and directed to take all action necessary cr appropriate to effectuate the provisions of this Ordinance. The form, terms and pco~~isions of the Investment Agreement is app: awed, snd the 'd'own shall outer into and perform its tbligations under the Investment ~rer_meilt i;~ -4- 1 1 - ti-y r. - _: •~ r•1 ~-~ h-a 1 '_ - ~ r. F ~ I F' ~_ H F a E ~: t•l ~_~ ~=i F' E F• - substantially the form of such document presented to the Town C-auncil at this meeting, ;;ith only uch charges therein as are required by the circumstances and are not inconsiste.^.t herev,~th; and the Pvlayor and T%~wn Clerls are hereby authorized and directed to execute arn; deliver the ;nvestr,~ent ~greeme:nt as regained hereby. Section ?. 5everability. If any one or mere sections, Sentences, clauses or parts of tftis Ordinance shall far any reason be held invalid, such judgment shall not affect, irnp~~ir, or in.jalidate the remaining provisions of this Ordinance, but shall be confined in its operation tc the. specific sections, sentences, clcjuses ar parts of this Ordinance so held unconstitutional cr in;valid, and. the inapplicability and invalidity of any section, sentence, clause or past of this Ordinance in any one :.r t-aare instances shalt not affect or prejudic: in any way t,2.°. applicability and va?idity of this Grdinance in any other instances. Section 8, Repe:ilc}r. ,~;1 i::ylaws, orders, resa(utions and ordinances, or par*~s thereof, inconsistent her~•ith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistence;. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylav~•, order, resolution or ordinance, or Fart thereof, heretofore repealed. Section. 9. Naticc to Bond Insurer. Any certificate herein required to be give:, tc, Land Insurer shall be iri ~,•t-iting and sent by registered at certified mail to Bond Insurer, -~- - - , _ that band Insurer shall notify the Tawn of in writir:,g. ar to such other address Section 10. Dis~osi_tic~n of, Ordinance.. This Ordinance, as adopted by the ~.allriCil, shall be numin:.red and. recorded by the Town Clerk in the ofpcial recar&S of the Town. The adoptiot. and publication shall he authenticated by the signatures of the i~iayor, and Tcwn Clerk, and by the certificate of publicatior_. -5- 1 1 - ~=t r. - c: •_+ hl ~~+ F~ 1 :_ _ ter'. F=~ I ~~ +_ N ra ~ ~~ r•~ +-+ ~_+ F' E F' _ i=~ Section Z1. Effective rJ• t .This ordinar:ce shall be in fvl! force and effect ~ de days t~fter its piaallit~;~ic~ra upon final passage as provided in Section 4,9 of the Charter. INTRODLTCED, READ AI~iD SET r~R PIJ~LIC ITEARII~G THIS day of 189. ADC~r 1'~D P.ND APPROVED THIS day of I9~9. Mayor Town of Vail, Colorado (SEAL} Attest; Town Clerk Tam of Vail, Colorado -6~ 1 1 - ~=t r. - _: •~ r•y ~J N 1 :- _ ~ 7 t:: I ~: ~_ I--I h-a E ~: r•1 ~_~ t=i ~' E r• ~ s_• •- It was thereupon mooed by Cauncilmember a<<d seconded by Councilmcmber that the foregoing Ordinance read by title at this meeting be approy~ed on first reading, that the Ordinance he considered at a publi4 hearing and then considered for Gn~ll passage, all at the regular meeting of the Town Coun:.il to be held at the Vail Municipal $uilding, Vail, Colorado on _, 1589, at the hour of _.m., and that a notice of public hearing and the ordinance in the for rn rwquired by the Cl.arter be published at least seven days prior to the public hearing in a newspaper of general clrculatlon In the Town, The question being upon the adoption of such motion, the roil was called with the following result: 'T'hose Voting Yes: Those Voting No: Those Absent: At least a majority o: the membership of the entire Town Council having voted in favor cf such motion, the presiding officer thereupon declared the motion carried. T'nereupc~n, the Council considered other business and took other action not concerning the 1989 fonds. -7- 1 I - 4=t r. - ._: •~ r•1 i_~ Y-a 1 :_ _ ~ i t=:: I ~: ~= H h-~ E ~: ~•1 ~=i i=i F: E ~' _ ~_i '_ ~ Thereafter, there being no further business td came before the Meeting, on motion duty made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned. Ivf a}'or Town of Vail, Coiorada (SEAL) Attest: Town Clerk Town of Vail, Colorado -~- 1 1 - 43 r. - ? '~ Y•7 i=~ ha 1 :_ _ ~ c F _: I R ,_ H N E F: C•1 ~_~ L, F: E F• _ 1 ~_, STATE GF CGLGRADO ) ~GUI~ITY GF EAGLF ) SS. 70WN Q~F VA.II, ) I, Pamela Br3ndn~eyer, duly appointed Clerk of the Tawn of Vail (the "To~ti~n"l, I=uale C~unt~y~, C'c(oradc, do hereby certify that the foregoing pages numbered 1 throt:gh S, incl;asive, constitute a true. and correct copy of the record of proceedings of the Town C•:auncil of the 'I'owa, taken at a regular meeting thereof, held at the Vail R/Tunicipal Building, in Vail, Col{,radc>, the regular meetinfi place of the Council, on Tuesday, November 7, 1989, insofar a4 sdid rroceedings relate to the introduction and passage on first reading of an ordinanc;. therein set forth, conccining the saie and issuance of sales tax revenue bonds of the Tawr:. I further certify that attached hereto is an affidavit of publication of the notice of public hearing and r~rdinance as passed an first reading by the Town Council at raid meeting; and that the mayor and other members of the Town Council were preset:t et the meeting and ths; members of the Council voted as in the minutes set forth. P.'.' t~s~ITNESS yVHEREGF, I have hereunto set my hand and the syal of the Tav~i of Vail, C~olarada, this day of 19gg, (SEAL) Town Clerk -9- 1 1 w- ~~ t=. - _ _ t•7 ~_~ N 1 '_ _ ~ _ F=:. I F' i= H F-1 E F' h1 ~_~ ~_~ F: E F• _ ]. t (Attach Affidavit of Publication of ?v'atice of Public Dearing and Ordinance At Least 7 Days Before Finat Adoptiorj -la VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1989 7:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Mike Rose 2. Consent Agenda A. Approval of October 3 and 17, 1989 Meetings Minutes B. Appointment of a Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Member 3. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, first reading, sales tax revenue bonds 4. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, second reading, an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990, and providing for the levy asse ssment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1989 tax year and payable in the 1990 fiscal year. 5. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14 Series of 1987 to provide for the amendment of density of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6. 6. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 17 to add Chapter 17.25 dealing with single family subdivisions; amending Section 17.08.210 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 7. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.24.020 o~f the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by adding "Commercial Ski Storage" as a permitted use in basement or garden levels within structures in the Commercial Core I Zone District. 8. Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.20 Local Licensing Authority of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, Colorado to add an application fee for temporary liquor license under the Colorado Liquor Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 9. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending certain sections of Chapter 16.22 so that Chapter 16.22 regulates signs in the Arterial Business District Zone District of the Town of Vail (ABD) as well as the Commercial Core III Zone District (CC3). 10. Gart Brothers Sign Variance Request, West Vail Mall, 2171 North Frontage Road CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 11. Adjournment .~' .1 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1989 7:30 p.m. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 7:35 Pam Brandmeyer 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Mike Rose 2. Consent Agenda A. Approval of October 3 and 17, 1989 Meetings Minutes B. Appointment of a Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Member Action Requested of Council: Appoint one member to the Liquor Authority. Background Rationale: Steve Simonett's term is expiring. He is the only person applying for the opening. Staff Recommendation: Appoint Steve Simonett to the Local Liquor Authority Board for a term of two years. 7:40 Ron Phillips Charlie Wick Steve Barwick 3. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, first reading, sales tax revenue bonds Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: First reading of the bond ordinance per previous discussion with the Council. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, on first reading. 8:00 Steve Barwick 4. Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, second reading, approving the budget Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, on second reading. Background Rationale: This is the annual budget authorization and appropriation ordinance for fiscal year 1990. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, on second reading. 8:10 Peter Patten 5. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, first reading, amending SDD No. 6 converting Condominium Unit #30 from commercial to residential Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: The applicant tabled this request on October 17. The proposal has been revised as per the enclosed memo dated 11/2/89. Staff has completed additional research as found in the same memo. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, on first reading. .ci ~. 8:30 6. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Mike Mollica Title 17 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: The PEC, at their September 26, 1989 public hearing, unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the zoning code. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, on first reading. 8:45 7. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Mike Mollica Section 18.24.020 by adding "Commercial Ski Storage." Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: The PEC, at their September 26, 1989 public hearing, unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the zoning code. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, on first reading. 9:00 8. Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Pam Brandmeyer Chapter 2.20 by adding an application fee for temporary liquor licenses Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: In the last legislative session, Senate Bill No. 113 :~~as approved allowing an application fee for temporary liquor licenses. This is to be used specifically for expired liquor licenses, and allows that a temporary permit be issued for a $250.00 fee, for a 90 day period of time, once a COMPLETE new application packet has been submitted to the Local Licensing Authority. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, on first reading. This will dispense with the "inconvenience" a licensee causes himself/herself should he/she not renew a liquor license in a timely manner. 9:10 9. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Mike Mollica Chapter 16.22 regulating signs in the ABD and CC3 zone district Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, on first reading. Background Rationale: The PEC, at their September 26, 1989 public hearing, unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the zoning code. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, on first reading. 9:25 10. Gart Brothers Sign Variance Request, West Vail Mall, 2171 Kristan Pritz North Frontage Road (Applicant: Gart Brothers) Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny the variance request. Background Rationale: The DRB reviewed the variance on October 18, 1989. They voted 5-0 to approve the request. The motion was made by Kathy Warren, and seconded by Jamie McCluskie. The DRB also approved the design of the sign by -2- a vote of 4-1. The approved design specifies the use of white letters. Staff Recommendation: Approve the variance request. 9:45 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 10:00 11. Adjournment -3- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 3, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney The first order of business were Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Larry Eskwith and Donald Gallegos. Ron Phillips gave background information on Donald, a Heavy Equipment Operator II with the Town of Vail., and this was followed by comments from Pete Burnett. Kent Rose gave a brief description of Larry's work background with the Town of Uail, and presented an award to Larry. The second item of business on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the September 5 and 19, 1989, rrieetings. Merv Lapin moved to accept the minutes as presented, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Mike Cacioppo asked for more specific wording in two paragraphs of the September 5 minutes. Merv included the additional language in the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The third item was Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989, approving the 1989-90 proposed parking policies. Eric Affeldt commented that due to the phone calls he had received from business people in the community (and thanks for the input), the good fortune of excess revenue over the budget this year, the housing shortage, the public's feeling, etc., he was making a motion to deny the resolution and leave all rates at their current status. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. Merv Lapin and Eric Affeldt asked Stan Berryman about parking coupon utilization, to which Stan responded that 37 percent of parking overall in both structures was free parking, and 12 to 13 percent was coupons. He stated 36 percent of parking in the Village structure was free parking by locals, and 40 percent in the Lionshead structure. The majority of the free parking fell within one to one and a half hours. Mike Cacioppo remarked he was originally the only one against the increases. CollEen McCarthy added that losing the rental car storage parking would help, that she did not see this as a political issue, and thanked the Council for their decision. Tom Steinberg asked the audience how many would use the Ford Park free parking, to which there was a small showing of hands. There was then some discussion by the public and Council regarding the possibilities at Ford and Donovan Parks and bus service expansion. Eric Affeldt noted the list of the Parking and Transportation Task Force members attached to the resolution, and suggested people call them and tell them their concerns, as they are the ones advising the Council on these issues. Mayor Rose and Stan Berryman talked about the next Parking and Transportation Task Force meeting, which would be held within the next two weeks in the afternoon. Stan would take names of interested people and get phone numbers, so he could notify them when the meeting would be held. Mike Cacioppo announced to the audience that a School Board issue would coming up next. There was then discussion regarding lighting from Apollo Park to Ford Park for safety reasons. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item four was a consent agenda for the following items: A. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. B. Appointment of Betty Neal as a Local Liquor Authority Board Member. There was no discussion by Council or the public. A motion to approve the consent agenda was made by Mike Cacioppo and seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. At this time, Pete Burnett thanked the Council for allowing him the opportunity to go to Russia and see how their municipal public works crews worked. He appreciated it very much, and would be leaving Saturday. The next order of business was Resolution No. 60, Series of 1989, supporting the School District bond election. Patricia Conran, the Eagle County School District Supervisor, explained what the bond issue would cover, gave the reasoning behind it, and gave additional background information. She also urged residents to register to vote; the deadline was October 13, 1989. She noted there would be a presentation Wednesday, October 18, at this end of the valley at Battle Mountain High School, at 7:30 p.m. She then answered questions of Council. Dan Corcoran requested Council's active support and to pass the resolution, and gave a little more background information. After some discussion by Council, Mike Cacioppo commented he felt the Task Force had not considered the dangers, because of the superfund clean up across the street, at Minturn Middle School. He read from recent reports by the State Health Department, and remarked the School Board had not made very good decisions regarding safety, and felt the first building to go up should be the Avon Middle School and then decide priorities of other needs. Dan Corcoran responded the School Board was not ignoring the problems at Minturn Middle School, and felt the community needed more schools in the area. Ron Phillips added he has two children in Minturn Middle School, and he and Tom Steinberg gave additional information on the health issues at the school. Patricia Conran stated the reports were correct, that the trigger levels were due to slope work, and they were continuing to monitor. The School Board was spending 57 thousand dollars to study the SUH system, their attorney was filing demands, and the EPA would reimburse them for all monies spent. She also noted that body monitors had been turned into a science project on three teachers and three students. The superfund clean up was scheduled for two years; the School Board added a third year just in case. The new school could not be built and opened before that. Eric Affeldt stated these were not issues the Council could dictate to the School Board, and felt the Council should focus on the improvements set in the resolution. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the resolution, which was seconded by Tom Steinberg. Jay Peterson commented he felt it best to separate the resolution issues from the Minturn Middle School health issues. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. Dan Corcoran thanked the Council for passing the resolution. Under Citizen Participation, Robert Peters remarked he felt the public should say no to Vail Associates to expand the mountain facilities until the Town of Vail and Town of Avon, and the surrounding communities have a handle on parking, housing, and other employee problems. He stated he would speak to everyone on the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District Board and the Parking and Transportation Task Force for alternatives for the parking problems and parking at Donovan Park. He then discussed bike paths problems. There was some discussion by Council regarding the Vail Transportation Cente r ..r.enovation and the closing off of the west end of the structure by Crossroads. Ron Phillips explained the plans, and stated he .planned to answer all the letters the Town had received regarding the expansion. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 17, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 17, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg Eric Affeldt Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, first reading, adopting a 1990 budget and financial plan. Mayor Rose read the full title. Steve Barwick noted the changes Council had made at the work session that day, then briefly explained what the new budget would include, gave background information on fund balances, and what the figures would cover. Mayor Rose stated the budget was the result of a series of budget work sessions over the last couple of months. There were no comments from the public. Mike Cacioppo remarked he would vote against the ordinance because he did not believe the Community Development Department needed an increase in staff (it should be getting smaller, not larger), he was disappointed there was no West Vail fire station or television translators included in the budget, did not agree with a five percent increase for the Town Manager's position, did not agree with the large increase for the Marketing Board budget, or the $35,000 funding to Bravo! Colorado. Merv Lapin had some questions regard the actual projected and the proposed budgets, to which Steve Barwick responded. Merv Lapin stated he was not happy regarding the insurance coverage premium, but that everything was a compromise situation with a $20 million budget. Tom Steinberg commented the number of employees had remained relatively static the last four years while services had been expanded and upgraded. He believed the Town should hire more employees and take care of them, or the Town would pay. Ron Phillips gave additional information on insurance costs. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance as amended, with Tom Steinberg seconding. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1 ,' with Mike Cacioppo opposing. John Slevin thanked the staff for their time and effort on this major project. The second item was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Special Development District No. 6. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Peter Patten reviewed the staff memo to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated September 26, 1989, and explained the request. He gave background information and reviewed the SDD design criteria. Peter then stated the staff recommended approval with two conditions: 1. That SDD No. 6 be amended by adding a total of 3,927 square feet to the existing allowance of 120,600 square feet. The 3,927 square foot figure is the existing square footage of condominium unit #30. The staff feels that the existing square footage is sufficient for a successful conversion from retail to residential and that the request for an additional 1,787 square feet which may be added to unit #30 in the future, is extraneous and above and beyond what is required for this conversion. 2. That this unit be use restricted, according to Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. Peter stated the PEC denied the request by a 4-3 vote, so the ordinance was coming to the Council without a PEC recommendation. He also had additional language he requested be added. Merv Lapin questioned the logic behind the recommendation, to which Peter responded. Peggy Osterfoss, of the PEC, gave further information regarding the request and the PEC's evolvement to the denial decision. After some discussion by Council, Peter Jamar, representing the applicant, BSC of Vail, Colorado, Inc., explained why the applicant was making the request and why they were asking the Council for approval of the ordinance. There was then some discussion by Council regarding parking spaces for the condominium, and total build-out for the Vail Village Plaza. It was decided that if the space was converted, it would not change any requirements for the Vail Village Plaza. Merv Lapin stated he was against increased GRFA over the limit; there was much discussion by Council regarding GRFA. Peter Jamar requested the item be tabled for a few weeks so he and Peter Patten could do some more research, the Council could go on a site visit to the area, and they could discuss at a work session. Councilmembers then explained questions and problems they had with the request. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to table the ordinance for three weeks to the next evening meeting, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next item was Resolution No. 61, Series of 1989, endorsing and supporting My Choice ... Drug Free Colorado red ribbon campaign. Marka Moser thanked the Council for the support they had provided already. She then briefly reviewed the planned events for the next week, October 22-29, 1989. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by John Slevin. Merv Lapin and Mayor Rose then thanked Marka for taking this project as far as she had. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The fourth order of business was the appeal of a Design Review Board decision denying a sign for Nick's, 228 Bridge Street. Kristan Pritz stated that on September 16, 1989, the DRB had a tie vote on this item, which results in recommending denial. She passed around a photograph of the proposed location, then reviewed a summary of the DRB's comments. There was .discussion by Council regarding no prohibition of neon signs, and others located in town. Peggy Osterfoss commented if Council did not want neon in the Village, they need to instruct staff to head that way; she was empathetic, but the decision was up to the Council. Michael Staughton, the applicant, gave additional information regarding the proposed sign. After more discussion by Council, Michael gave further reasons why he felt they should approve the sign, why it was appropriate, and should be granted. Jo Brown questioned how the Town had kept most neon out of the Village up to now, to which Councilmembers responded, "design guidelines." Michael Staughton requested the item be tabled until the next evening meeting, so he could bring more pictures and information to Council. The Council asked that Michael present information on neon at a work session before the sign was reviewed for approval. John Slevin then made a motion to table the item until the next evening meeting, and Gail Wahrlich- Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0-1, with Tom Steinberg abstaining. The next item was the appointment of five regular municipal election judges for the November 21, 1989 election. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the five proposed judges, which Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. There was no Citizen Participation. Mike Cacioppo announced the results of an October 11, 1989 Health Department memorandum air monitor results at the Minturn Middle School. He remarked the report scared him. Larry Eskwith gave a brief attorney's report to Council. He stated he had received notice the Tenth Court of Appeals supported the Town of Vail in the Defalco vs. Town of Vail case. He noted this case had been handled by the Town's insurance attorneys. He then gave background information on the Williams vs. the Town and Chester and Chester vs. the Town lawsuits, and chronologically reviewed what had happened to date. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- Rowe of uai 75 south frontage road vall, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 ottice of the town manager T0: VAIL TOWN COU FROM: PAM BRANDMEY DATE: 31OCT89 RE: APPOINTMENT TO LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY VAIL1989 Steve Simonett is reapplying for a two-year appointment to the Local Licensing Authority for the Town of Vail, originally having been appointed in November of 1983. Steve has served as Chairman of the Authority since February of 1988. His attendance record is as follows: PRESENT ABSENT November-December 1987 2 O January-December 1988 17 3 January-October 1989 11 1 R~ceu~'r-~- ro ~ ~ ~ •8 9 Sionett- Realty, Inc. l T ~ Val1 10W2"1 ~ -0LLr1~`=:i_ _ ~ -, _ _~ttecit' Qti: ~ arr~ ~r,=~rr_lr~,~T°Y' ~~ar F'arn: r. ~~ t-~r 1. H r`ir jr'r' ~ ,' ~ C 1+ T P r - _i - 7 1 i :' ' ~" ry_ati~ 1. ior.n i,~J- l~wi.t CC.iii:C•i1 i r;l~ _i.,=~1=°t~ ~„_. C:V~t~T-.:ll°- ~_c_~ another term, as a mernl~,er of the Town. of Vail. Local I,irauor ~~iC:~iLS i,ir?' AtzthC,rzi',Y ~ ~.rni.~lCl ~r very r,~t~~~~.v to ap~ar before tree Cot_;tZCil if necessary, ~1 =~'l ~T ~ TT 1 TT fc~r a21 interview. T would a1sG be ~~:_~~p,; ~~o ~i_ist rel,, or. , ~.~tzr r .Y,i '}',' lP ~ __ Tr ~},_f ~ r it •~ :-rti ; E_'.'..i?_~'r ~ ~'~r~~i ~_ 1!;~ i i ~~~ !..i ~~ C ~ ~ : f ~.~ E~_~<~rd, if the Cn~_,ncil so desires. Lw` t L~lc`1-- ~ t)Y' VC)ilLL, C:•jYl~,~_::uF_'~i .`_1uC:C'E',~.`_7. Ster~her.i W. Sirr~Gnett Real Estate Sales and Management P.O. Box 3459 ®Vail, CO 81658 • 303/476-0277• ORDINANCE NO. 23 Series of 1989 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCEe ADOPTING A BUDGET AND FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE COSTS, EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, FOR ITS FISCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990, AND PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF TOWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 1989 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE IN THE 1990 FISCAL YEAR. .WHEREAS, in accordance with Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long-range capital program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities for the 1990 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the proposed Town budget and capital program was published on the 6th day of October, 1989, more than seven days prior to the hearing held on the 17th day of October, 1989 pursuant to -Section 9.5 of the Charter; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for the 1990 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget, and to provide for the levy, assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1989 year and payable in the 1990 fisr_al year. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, thato 1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Co.lorado,.for.the enactment hereof have been fu1_filled. 2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado,. for its fiscal year beginning on the first day of January, 1990, and ending on the 31st day of December, 1990° FUND AMOUNT General Fund $11,466,411 Capital Projects Fund 6,449,020 Conservation Trust Fund 7,000 Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,139,721 Heavy Equipment Fund 1,436,529 Debt Service Fund 3,506,058 Special Parking Assessment Fund 275,000 Health Insurance Fund 630,000 Lionshead Mall Assessment District 158,026 West Vail Assessment District 8,800 Vail Marketing Fund 571,000 Total: 26,647,565 Less Interfund Transferee <6,178,258> Total Budget $20,469,307 -1- 3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan for the 1990 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by reference herein and made part hereof, and copies of said public records shall be made available to the public in the Municipal Building of the Town. 4. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses of the Town of Vail, Colorado during its 1989 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property tax of 6.693 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $272,300,370 for the 1989 tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of $1,822,432 said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, and directs Revised Statutes (1873 as amended) and as otherwise required by law. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect five days after publication following the final passage hereof. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL THIS 17th day of October , 1989, and a public hearing on this Ordinance shall be held at a regular meeting for the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado on the 17th day of October , 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 2, 1989 SUBJECT: Amendment to Special Development District No. 6 to convert unit 30 in Phase I from commercial to residential The Council considered Ordinance No. 24 of 1989 at their October 17th meeting. The ordinance allows for condominium unit 30 in Phase I of the Vail Village Inn Special Development District to be utilized as residential. The space has housed commercial uses since it was constructed. At the October 17th meeting, the Council raised a number of concerns regarding the proposal, many of which related to questions on the specific zoning of SDD 6. The applicant has amended his application to request only the conversion of the existing floor area representing 3,921 square feet. They have also agreed to provide three parking spaces for the residential condominium. These will be required to be located under ground within SDD 6. Also, changes to the ordinance reflecting the new square footage and other minor changes have been made to sections 2A & B (the revised ordinance is attached for your consideration November 7th of first reading. We have completed some research regarding the history and background of SDD 6 as it relates to residential and commercial square footages. There have been a variety of proposals and ordinances amending the original 1976 Special Development District. Because all of the revisions to the original ordinance have dealt with Phases 3, 4, and 5, Phases 1 and 2 have never received much attention with regard to maximum ceilings for commercial and residential square footages. Phases 1 and 2 have always been treated in these ordinances as existing buildings with the drawings that we have on file being the development plan. The only specific commercial square footage maximum for SDD 6 relates to the approved development plan of the unbuilt phases having approximately 16,000 square feet of commercial. An agreement regarding parking for Phases 1 and 2, as it relates to the remaining SDD, was found in the files and is relevant to this proposal. When Phase 1 and 2 were sold separately in 1984 the Town required the attached agreement to essentially provide that the unbuilt parking for these phases would be handled in Phases 4 and 5. In other words, in approving the subdivision of the original Phases 1 and 2 in 1984, we required that parking for all phases of the eventual SDD build-out be addressed. This agreement specifically requires the owner of Phases 4 and 5 to provide for the parking needs of Phases 1 and 2 while allowing for a fee to be charged for the use of such required parking spaces (see page 2, #2 of the attached agreement). The staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989. With the applicant agreeing to convert only the existing square footage it brings the proposal more in line with our original staff recommendation (see attached September 26, 1989 PEC memo, condition #1). While we see no actual positive benefits of this particular proposal, we also find that it would not be to the detriment of SDD 6 or the surrounding neighborhood. We remind the Council that the PEC denied this application by a vote of 4-3 at their first meeting in October, 1989. ORDINANCE NO. 24 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8 OF ORDINANCE NO. 14 SERIES OF 1987 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF DENSITY OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Legeslative Intent A. In 1976, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated develpment of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No. 6 provided in~Section 14 that the Town Council reserve the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause throught the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail. C. In 1985, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1985 providing certain amendments to the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. D. In 1987, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 providing certain amendments to the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. E. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and amend Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 which relates to the allowed density of the development plan for Special Development District No. 6. F. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes. G. The Vail Town Council considers that the amendments provide a more unified and aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety, welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. Section 2. A. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The gross residential floor area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 124,527 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and Phase V of Special Development District No. 6. 3,927 square feet of GRFA shall be allocated to unit 30 of the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums only. B. Section 11 of Ordinance 14, Series of 1987 is hereby amended by the addition of subsection 9 which shall read as follows: 9. Condominium unit 30 of the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums shall be subject to the restrictions of Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations if utilized for residential purposes. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and re- enacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS day of 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of , 1989. ATTEST: Kent R. Rose, Mayor Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ATTEST: this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk . ~e .A 1 s TO: Planning and Environmental Commies FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 26, 1989 SUBJECTe A request to amend Special Development District No. 6 in order to amend the total gross residential floor area that is permitted to be constructed within the district. Applicants BSC of Vail, Colorado, Incorporated I. PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST The applicant, BSC of Vail, Colorado, requests an amendment to Special Development District No. 6 in order to amend the total gross residential floor area that is permitted to be constructed 1n t trict. SDD No. 6 currently allows the total GRFA of 120,600 guars feet to be constructed within the district, all of ' is either constructed or proposed to be constructed within future phases of the development. The app request in this amendment is to allow an addit' al 5,714 guars feet of GRFA to be added to SDD No. 6. This endment wo ld allow the applicant to convert existing commercia ce, which is primarily second and third floor, to residential use. The applicant's reason for the request is the questionable viability of second and third floor retail space. The subject space referred to is unit #30 of the Vail Village Plaza Condominiums. Unit #30 is comprised of two units previously numbered 30 and 32 and now combined into one unit. These units were previously designated within the condominium declaration as office or commercial use and the space is currently occupied by the Goods Retail Clothing Store. The owners of this space have received the necessary approvals from the other owners within the building to amend the declaration in order to allow the use of the space for dwelling and lodging purposes. If this proposed amendment is approved, the total GRFA permitted within SDD No. 6 would be 126,314 square feet. This proposal does not change the existing requirement that a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA be devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and Phase V of SDD No. 6. The 5,417 square feet that is being requested includes the existing square footage of condominium unit #30, as well as an allowance for square footage that could potentially be added in the condominium unit #30 space, without changing the exterior of the building. This space could be added by building lofts and infilling areas that are open to a two story space. II. COMPARISON OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE UNDERLYING ZONE DISTRICT For Special Development District Noe"6', the Public Accommodation District is the underlying zone district. Public Accommodation zoning would allow approximately 120,000 square feet of GRFA on this site. l ~• T III. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGN CRITERIA It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards or to demonstrate that one or more of them are not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. A. DESIGN COMPATIBILITY AND SENSITIVITY TO THE IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES RELATIVE TO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, SCALE, BULK, BUILDING HEIGHT, BUFFER ZONES, IDENTITY, CHARACTER, VISUAL INTEGRITY AND ORIENTATION. There are very limited design issues related to this proposal. By changing the use of the existing Goods retail store to residential, there is virtually no elimination of first floor retail space. The staircase that accesses this space does contain a display window. The applicant ha.s proposed to maintain this display window and allow it to be used by the adjacent retail space, now occupied by Vail Village Inn Sports. Although the entry may be changed as part of a future proposal to remodel the condominium space, it is assumed that any design issues can be reviewed and dealt with by the Design Review Board regarding changes to the street level. If this conversion were proposed but unbuilt in would be a minor design Exactly what that impac positive or negative is proposal. to utilize some of the GRFA that is SDD No. 6, it is possible that there impact on those future phases. t would be and whether it would be impossible to determine through this B. USES, ACTIVITY AND DENSITY WHICH PROVIDE A COMPATIBLE,. EFFICIENT AND WORKABLE RELATIONSHIP WITH SURROUNDING USES AND ACTIVITY. SDD No. 6 provides a mix of uses which is efficient and workable with the surrounding area. SDD No. 6 contains retail stores, restaurants, condominium units, as well as short term accommodation units. It is a goal of the Department of Community Development and is stated in the Land Use Plan as well as the Vail Village Master Plan, that one way to strengthen and continue the existing Village Core is to encourage both high quality retail and a short term bed base. While we are somewhat disappointed to see this retail space eliminated, we understand the difficulties in supporting second and third floor retail within .this part of the Village. We do feel that the proposed dwelling unit should be utilized primarily for tourist-oriented accommodations and, thus, should be restricted according to ~~ Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. _ ~-i~e a` C. COMPLIANCE WITH PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 18.52. Parking and loading standards for residential use are significantly lower than for a retail store of this size. Parking for this retail space has been accommodated within the parking requirements for SDD No.6 and the staff sees no problem with the parking and loading requirements with the respect to this application. D. CONFORMITY WITH APPLICABLE ELEMENTS OF THE VAIL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, TOWN POLICIES AND URBAN DESIGN PLANS. The following sections of the Town of Vail Land Use Plan relate to this proposals Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. Village Core/Lionshead 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. E. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF NATURAL AND/OR GEOLOGIC HAZARDS THAT AFFECT THE PROPERTY UPON WHICH THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS PROPOSED. No hazards are present or effect this property. F. SITE PLAN, BUILDING DESIGN AND LOCATION, AND OPEN SPACE PROVISIONS DESIGNED TO PRODUCE A FUNCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESPONSIVE AND SENSITIVE TO NATURAL FEATURES, VEGETATION AND OVERALL AESTHETIC QUALITY OF THE COMMUNITY. The staff's opinion is that there is very little impact upon this proposal. There is very little physical change that would occur in a conversion of this space from retail to residential. G. A CIRCULATION SYSTEM DESIGNED,FOR.BOTH VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS ADDRESSING ON .AND OFF SITE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION. The existing circulation system which accesses this particular condominium unit will remain essentially the same, although it is possible that a remodel may occur and will give phis area a more residential feel. We believe any issues that may be raised by this future remodel may be addressed by the Design Review Board. ~~ `'i H. FUNCTIONAL AND AESTHETIC LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE IN ORDER TO OPTIMIZE AND IMPROVE NATURAL FEATURES, RECREATION, VIEWS AND FUNCTIONS. There is no landscaping or open space proposed for this development, nor does the staff feel that is appropriate to request any. I. PHASING PLAN OR SUBDIVISION PLAN THAT WILL MAINTAIN A WORKABLE, FUNCTIONAL AND EFFICIENT RELATIONSHIP THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. We do not feel that this criteria is applicable to this application. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The staff has waived the requirement for an environmental impact report on this proposal. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommendation for this request is for approval with the following two conditions: 1. That Special Development District No. 6 be amended by adding a total of 3,927 square eet he existing allowance of 120,600 square feet. e 3,927 quare foot figure is the " existing square footage ominium unit #30. The staff feels that the existing square footage is sufficient for a successful conversion fr to residential and that the request for an addition 1 1,787 square feet which may be added to unit #30 in the e, is extraneous and above and beyond what is required for this conversion. 2. That this unit be use restricted, according to Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. ° ~ C MEMORANDUM April 18, 1984 T0: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a request for minor subdivision of Lot 0, Block 5-D of Vail Village First Filing. Applicants: Vail Village Inn, Inc. and JAMM Ltd. THE REQUEST Requested is a minor subdivision for Lot 0 of Block 5-D of Vail Village First Filing. The request is to take the existing Phases I and II which contain approximately ~ •3,315 square feet of residential use and four units and 22,601 .square feet of commercial use. Phases I and II would contain approxi- mately 28,780 square feet of land. The Phases are part of the Vail Village Inn Special Development District #6. The purpose of the request is to subdivide off these two phases so they can be sold. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the minor subdivision request. Conditions of approval are noted below: 1. That a revocable right of way permit be applied for, reviewed, and if there are no problems, approved before signing of the plat. Part of the Alpenrose outside deck is on East Meadow Drive. 2. That a parking agreement be reviewed and approved by the Town Attorney re ar ~ n arks n or bases and I I w~ t i n e ec~ a ~-opr~ren~- District. The agreemen sou state t at required parking for aces I and II' will be provided within Special Development District #6 acceptable to the Town of Vail. Also, that owners and tenants of space within Phases I and II and users o t e us~nesses or e rest en ~a units can use the parking spaces posse yon a c ar4e basis . 3. The cross easements for use by owners-and pedestrians must be provided to insure the entire SDD function as one project. This should be reviewed and approved .by the To~vn Attorney. NOTE: Phases I and II have been constructed as to plans approved by the Town of Vail under Special Development District #6, and there is no additional gross residential floor area or commercial space remaining. ~ ~ l ~,t.~ , ~ DECLARATION CONCERNING PARKING WITHIN SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6 THIS DECLARATION is made and entered into this 6th day of July, 1984 by VAIL VILLAGE INN, INC., a Colorado Corporation, and JAMM, LTD., a Partnership (together hereinafter referred to as "Declarant") WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976 established Special Development District 6 ("SDb") pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for the purpose of ensuring the unified and coordinated development and use of that site within the Town of Vail being a part of Lot 0, Block 5-D of Vail Village First Filing, which is commonly known as the Vail Village Inn; and WHEREAS, said ordinance treats the entire property as a whole in regard to the parking requirements of SD6; and WHEREAS,.the above mentioned ordinance establishing SD6 recognizes and anticipates that the development of SD6 will be done in phases; and WHEREAS, Declarant has requested for a minor subdivision of a part of Lot First Filing, which property constitutes district, to subdivide said pro erty so II ("Parcel I") of the Vail Villa e Inn s t f approval of the Town of Vail 0, Block 5-D of Vail Village the SD6 zone or development that the existing Phases I and epara e rom the remainder of the propertyloanent wou e egal y WHEREAS, the proposed development plan as referred to in said ordinance has contemplated that all parking required for the development of SD6 be contained within the phases of Vail Village Inn denominated as Phase III, Phase IV and Phase V; and WHEREAS, the existing propert com risin Phases I and TI of the Vail Village Inn, when considered as a serarate rroterty, oes not ~r~viae separately for parking for owners, tenants and users of the business and residential units within said Phases I and II of the Vail Vi age nn; an WHEREAS, Phase III of the Vail Village Inn development within SD6 has been previously subdivided and which phase provides partially for the parking requirements within SD6; and WHEREAS, Declarant is presently.-the owner of all property comprising the existing Phases I, II, IV and V of the Vail Village Inn (SD6) development; and WHEREAS, the. Declarant desires to clarify and give noti<~e to present and future owners of parcels of property within SD6 concerning parking obligations and rights within said district. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows: 1. Declarant as the present owner of that portion of the ~ ~ ~~ a ~ ~ ~° ,< described property which-comprises.~Phases.IV..and V -("Parcel II") of the Vail Village Inn development plan for SD6, acknowledges and agrees that any additional parking re uired to satisf the overall parking requirement for.. the SD6 district. under the development plan must e rr~c-lzzde in t e development elan of Phases Iv any v n t P a, Village. Irmo ~ - : -_:. _ _ ~ -.:. ,_ .. _ .. .. _.. 20 In accordance with the agreement that such additional parking. as may bey-required .pursuant: to: Paragraph..l-:_aboye will provide for. the: parking. for..Phases:..I and,_I~e.,:.owners,:of property within Phases I-and:II and users of the businesses or the residential units within Phases:.I .an ._ . s all .have- a. rig o use: such parkin spaces provided on.those. erm an con it~.ons as are reasonably established by t e s~wner.:or. owners of Phases IV, and V which use shall not unreasonably discriminate against Phases I and II inclt~d ~ ithout s eci is limitationa._.the right to:.charge a: fee: for, the use of such par i'ng space-or spaceso ~_:....-- :. :_--:::: 3o.:.The provisions of. this. Declaration shall be deemed real covenants, shall::run..with the. land, and shall benefit and burden the respective parcels described herein, ~4-0..::.The provisions of: this. Declaration shall b_ e binding upon the Declara~t;~ its.. successors., ass.i.gns_ and transfereeso. :-~ _ _ . _ 5 0 ~.. The.. provisions of this Declaration ~shall~ not be amended without: the prior wzitten_ consent of..the_ Town. of Vail, a municipal corporation, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. ,IN..W.ITNESS WHEREOF,.this agreement.i_s signed this 6th day of July.o:..19840 :.:.:-_ _:.-.--_.~ _.__ -._.._.. _ . _ -__._ . _. _ .. . VAIL VILLAGE INN, INC<, a --- -- _ -. .. _. _ :._ . _ Colorado. Corporation ... _ gy o . _.. JAMM, LTDo, a partnership By: Jo`~;'ef Sta~ferl General Partner 2 ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ i. 4" STATE-OF ~D~U/'CZCCC) .. ~: . _., - _. SS-: :. .: '=-- - . COUNTYYOF COQ ~ ) _ . i - - _ _.. _ Subscribed- and sworn to' before me IN THE COUNTY STATE OF ~ ~a this ~' day of 1~~ ~, 1984 Tnc.~ a ~;o~nra~n !'nr~nrat;nn, ~~ Josef Staufer, i OF C CLG~~. by Vai~'1 Village Inn, its President. .y•_comm ssion expires:. ~_~_~,q. ,,pp~~ _ °;`~l;~trie•ss:m~i_.hand and official seal- _ /l..lL~~r ft~/a ~ . ~_P~ FE.~ `;.'j~r ~' - ': ` :_. ~_ - ~ . - ~ Rhonda L. Pettit Notary - . _ ~;.3,. :r~- _ ~ .._ _. _ .. - - - Address .. ~Sseal)-.-_ . .- :.:. _ .... - .:....:- :. CSZ Eox 374->t257 JacLrabbit ;~.~.; ~:~ F ~. ~ _ Edvrards, CC 81632 STATE OF Colorado) ....: c:_.: c... ~.. _. ... _. COUNTY=OF Ean'le~ .) ;; .': .:._.:. Subscribed and sworn=to before-me IN-THE COUNTY OF~~a~ie STATE:~OF. Coloradp this. ~~thday: of J~al~~ , 1984 by JAi~•:, LD. , a nartnershin, by Josef Staufer, general Partner Myo~:~oamm~.Ssion:~expires:-- 3-7-88 n ~ _ ,;,~1'ib~eas:.ni~i; hand and'-official .seal ~ t,~iCC~_cL l.. I~ ~'~.;-J~ =~%':." Notary nhonda L. t-ettit ,'~ ~•-: ,T~ ~,•~~-., ;~ l; =- .-_:. ~~:.-..:.. _.... - Address . Fox 374-;257 Jac: _ --, ..ti~_, ' , -. CSZ Ed~.vards, CC 81'032 TO: Town Council and Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 12, 1989 SUBJECT: A proposal to amend the Town of Vail subdivision regulations The staff is proposing an amendment to the Town's subdivision regulations, which if approved, would add a new chapter entitled "Single Family Subdivisions.°° The purpose of this proposal is to allow single family and primary/secondary dwellings to be subdivided into parcels which are less than the required minimum lot size. However, the overall gross area of the project must still meet the lot size requirement. This process would be used for properties that are zoned for more than two units and would allow for separate ownership of the one or two unit structures. All development standards for the zone district would still be met. This proposed subdivision process would allow projects to be subdivided without the current requirement of changing the zoning on the parcel to SDD in order to avoid the minimum lot size requirement. One example of where this has recently occurred is 1°The Victorians." In that case, the zoning was required to be changed to SDD so that the small lots could be individually sold even when the project's gross area met the development standard for minimum lot size. The proposed single family subdivision process is intended to avoid unnecessary zone changes. ~+ ORDINANCE NO. 25 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 TO ADD CHAPTER 17.25 DEALING WITH SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS; AMENDING SECTION 17.08.210 TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail believes that establishing a new category of subdivision called single family subdivision will promote the health, safety, and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Town of Vail, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has recommended the creation of a new form of subdivision called single family subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 17.08.210 Subdivision is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph F to read as follows: 17.08.210 SUBDIVISION F. "Single Family Subdivision" means a subdivision of an existing lot which has previously been approved as either a major or minor subdivision which shall contain single family or primary/secondary detached dwelling units. Each such dwelling unit shall be separated from any other dwelling unit by space on all sides. For zoning purposes, the lots created by a single family subdivision shall be treated as one lot. Section 2. Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 17.25 Single Family Subdivisions to read as follows: 17.25.010 Single Family Subdivisions - Required Approval A single family subdivision shall only be permitted on property that is recognized by the Town of Vail as a legally subdivided lot. No single family subdivision shall be approved unless the lots to be contained within the subdivision have foundations constructed thereon at the time of the submittal. 17.25.030 Single Family Subdivisions - Submittal Requirements A. Two mylar copies of the subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. The plat shall include a site map as required by Section 17.22.030. The plat must contain the following statement: "For zoning .. ~ ,~.. purposes, the lots created by this subdivision are to be treated as one lot with no more than two dwelling units allowed on the combined area of the two lots." The statement shall be modified to indicate the number of units and parcels proposed. B. A copy of declarations and/or covenants relating to the subdivision which shall assure the maintenance of any common areas which may be created. The covenants shall run with the land and shall be in a form suitable for recordation with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. 17.25.040 Guarantee for Completion and Maintenance of Improvements The requirement for the guarantee for completion and maintenance of improvements shall comply with Section 17.16.250. 17.25.050 Single Family Subdivisions - Procedure The single family subdivision procedure shall be as set forth in 17.22.050 of this title with the additional requirement of an improvement location certificate. 17.25.080 Criteria for Review The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the subdivision complies with the zoning ordinance with respect to building location and other aspects of the structure and grounds, with the original plans as approved by the Design Review Board of the Town and the accurateness and integrity of the survey data found on the plat. 17.25.100 Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Decision The Zoning Administrator's decision may be appealed to the PEC in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 18.66.030 of the Vail Municipal Code. 17.25.110 Filing and Recording The Department of Community Development will record the plat and any related covenants with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. Fees for recording shall be paid by the applicant. The Community Development Department will retain one mylar copy of the plat for their records and will record the remaining mylar copy. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. -2- l' ~ ~ Section 4. - The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any pr ovision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND. APPROVED ON FIRS T READING this day of , 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of ~__ _, 1989, at 7:30 p.m, in the Council C hambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of lggg, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this ~ day of ~ lggg, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -3- TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROMe Community Development Department DATE: September 26, 1989 SUBJECT: A request for an amendment to the Commercial Core I zone district to include commercial ski storage as a permitted use under Section 18.24.020 B-2. I. THE REQUEST There are several ski and boot locker rental facilities within the Commercial Core I Zone District. One facility is located in the basement of the Golden Peak House, one in the basement of the Hill Building, and one in the basement of the Wall Street Building. These uses have been approved and are allowed as an accessory to a ski shop and as a personal service business at basement or garden level. Last year, in November of 1988, the staff denied an application for a commercial ski storage operation on street level on Bridge Street. This decision was appealed to the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Planning and Environmental Commission upheld the staff interpretation that this was not an allowable use on a street level. This year, we have had several similar requests and feel that it would be appropriate to amend the Zoning Code to clarify this situation for the benefit of both the Town of Vail staff and for the public. Commercial ski storage is certainly a guest service and a use that we wish to encourage within the Core areas. At the same time, we feel it is important to recognize the balance of the horizontal zoning controls in Vail Village. Office space and personal service uses do not provide the dynamic retail store fronts that we feel is important to the character of the Village and Lionshead area. It has been the staff opinion that the permitted and conditional uses for first floor or street level of the Commercial Core I do not allow this specific type of use. However, we would propose to add "Commercial Ski Storage" in Section 18.24.020 B2. Adding the specific use of commercial ski storage to the permitted uses of basement and garden level in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II clarifies the staff's interpretation that this a personal service use and is allowed in basement level and is not permitted as a first floor or street level use. M II. EVALUATION OF THIS REQUEST A. Suitability of Existing Zoning The staff feels that the existing zoning for Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II is suitable, appropriate, and is functioning very well as it currently exists. We view this change as a minor clarification to this zone district. We feel that by clearly stating that commercial ski storage is a personal service use, and an allowable use in Section 18.24.020 B-2 Basement Level, we will eliminate some of the questions that have occured regarding commercial ski storage. We feel this clarification maintains the intent and balance of the horizontal zoning that is in place. in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. B. Is the amendment proposal presenting a convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal objectives? The staff's opinion is that this amendment is a clarification of an issue regarding the Commercial Care I and Commercial Core II zone districts and is in harmony with the general intent of the Commercial Core I zone district as well as the objectives of the Town of Vail. C. Applicable Policies from Vail's Comprehensive Plan There are none. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommendation for this request is for approval. We feel that this use fits in with the personal service uses and while commercial ski storage is a necessary, important use in the Vail Village and in Lionshead area, we feel it is important to clarify that it should be permitted on basement or second floor levels only. Commercial ski storage as a street level use does not present the dynamic retail store fronts that our horizontal zoning strives to accomplish. ORDINANCE N0. 26 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.24.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL BY ADDING "COMMERCIAL SKI STORAGE" AS A PERMITTED USE IN BASEMENT OR GARDEN LEVELS WITHIN STRUCTURES IN THE COMMERCIAL CORE I ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the Town Council is of the belief that ski storage is an acceptable use in basement or garden levels within a structure in the Commercial Core I Zone District; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission has recommended that commercial ski storage be permitted as a permitted use in basement or garden levels within a structure in the Commercial Core I Zone District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 18.24.020 B(2) is hereby amended by the addition of "Commercial Ski Storage". Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and .proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty .imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of , 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- ORDINANCE N0. 27 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2.20 LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO TO ADD AN APPLICATION FEE FOR TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSE UNDER THE COLORADO LIQUOR CODE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Colorado has passed a statute authorizing the issuance by Local Licensing Authorities of temporary licenses to licensees whose license has expired and has not been renewed; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to set a fee to be paid for the issuance of such license. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 2.20.110 Application Fees is hereby amended by the addition of Section F to read as follows: 2.20.110 APPLICATION FEES F. Temporary licenses - $250 Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this __ __ day of . 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- .., ~, _ . ~ PROPOSED SIGN CODE CHANGES 9/26/89 Purpose: The purpose of this proposed sign code change is to allow signs within the Arterial Business District zone district. The proposal is to include the Arterial Business District (ABD) within the existing Commercial Core 3 sign code classification. The current ABD zone district is not included in any sign category. Proposed change: Add Arterial Business District (ABD) to the following sections of Chapter 16.22 (Sign Categories for CC3 Zone District), of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, to achieve the purpose stated above (the underlined sections are the proposed changes): ----------------------------------------------------------------- 16.22 SIGN CATEGORIES FOR CC3 AND ABD ZONE DISTRICTS 16.22.010 Designated A. This chapter concerns those types of permanent and temporary signs requiring a sign application permit under the provisions of this title for property within the CC3 and ABD zone districts. B. The following is a listing of sign categories permitted in CC3 and ABD under the provisions of this title: C. A business or organization within Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District is permitted the following number of signs provided that the provisions of each category are met: 16.22.015 Building Identification Signs C. Height; wall-mounted building identification sians< no part of the sign shall extend above twenty-five feet from existing grade or the plate line of a building, whichever is more restrictive; freestanding building identification signs° no part of the sians shall extend above eight feet from existing grade; 16.22.100 Sign Program I. (1) At the time that any sign on a building located within Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District is removed, changed or altered in any way, a sign program for that particular building must be submitted to design review board and approved prior to the erection of any new sign on the building. ~~ _:. ~ (4) In the case where a building located within Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District has a business frontage which is not adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads, but has calculable frontage which is located along a pedestrian way at the end of a building adjacent to the interior of Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District and has direct access or display area along that pedestrian way, the provisions applicable shall be the same as for a business fronting on an arcade, subject to the approval of the design review board. (4,b) This provision is not applicable to businesses with frontage adjacent to exterior boundaries of Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District other than the North ,and South Frontage Roads. 16.22.110 Temporary site development signs. A. Purpose, to indicate or identify a development of real property under construction in CC3 or ABD; 16.22.120 Traffic control signs for private property. Traffic control signs for CC3 or ABD shall be regulated as follows: 16.22.140 Wall signs-Individual business within a multi- tenant building. E. Location, parallel to the exterior wall of the individual business or organization, adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads, subject to the approval of the design review board; (H,3). An individual business with no calculable frontage along the North or South Frontage Roads or with a basement or second floor entrance may have one sign with a maximum area of five square feet in a location approved by the design review board or designated in a specific sign program for the building in which the business or organization is located. 16.22.150 Wall signs-Joint directory signs for a multi- tenant building. E. Location, parallel to the exterior wall adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads, subject to the approval of the design review board; ~ -'~.. ORDINANCE N0. 28 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 16.22 SO THAT CHAPTER 16.22 REGULATES SIGNS IN THE ARTERIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE DISTRICT OF THE TOWN OF VAIL (ABD) AS WELL AS THE COMMERCIAL CORE III ZONE DISTRICT (CC3). WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail wishes to provide sign categories for the Arterial Business Zone District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. The title of Chapter 16.22 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read Sign Categories for CC3 Zone District and ABD Zone Districts. Section 2. Section 16.22.010 designated is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.010 A. This chapter concerns those types of permanent and temporary signs requiring a sign application permit under the provisions of this title for property within the CC3 and ABD zone districts. This chapter further includes the purpose of each sign type, size, height, number, location, design, and landscaping requirements, and special provisions for each type of sign. B. The following is a listing of sign categories permitted in the CC3 and ABD under the provisions of this title: 1. Building identification signs; 2. Display boxes; 3. Flags, pennants, banners, and bunting; 4. Murals and supergraphics; 5. Political signs; 6. Projecting and hanging signs, arcades; 7. Projecting and hanging signs, individual businesses within a multi-tenant building; 8. Projecting and hanging signs, joint directory signs for a multi-tenant building; 9. Sign programs; 10. Public information signs; 11. Temporary site development signs; ~~ j 12. Traffic control signs for private property; 13. Wall signs, arcade; 14. Wall signs, individual businesses within a multi-tenant building; 15. Wall signs, joint directory signs for a multi-tenant building; 16. Wall signs, single business use; 17. Window signs. C. A business or organization within CC3 and/or ABD is permitted the following number of signs provided the provisions of each category are met: 1. An individual business with a multi-tenant building may have the following signs: a. A display box; b. A projecting and hanging sign or a wall-mounted sign; c. Traffic control signs; d. Window signs; e. Other temporary signs as permitted in the provisions of this Code; f. Space within a joint directory sign for the building. 2. An individual business which is~the sole occupant within a building may have the following signs: a. A display box; b. A wall sign or a free standing sign; c. Traffic control signs; d. Window signs; e. Other temporary signs as permitted in the provisions of this Code; D. Following in Section 16.22.020 through 16.22.160 is a listing by sign types of the requirements under this Section. Section 3. Section 16.22.015 Building Identification Signs, paragraph C, is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.015 BUILDING IDENTIFICATION SIGNS C. Height; wall-mounted building identification signs: No part of the sign shall extend above twenty-five (25) feet from existing grade or the plate line of a building, whichever is less; Free standing building identification signs: -2- ,~ No part of the sign shall extend above eight (8) feet from existing grade; Section 4. Section 16.22.100 Sign Program, paragraph I(1), is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.100 SIGN PROGRAM I. 1. At the time that any sign on a building located within Commercial Core III or Arterial Business District is removed, changed, or altered in any way, a sign program for that particular building must be submitted to Design Review Board and approved prior to the erection of any new sign on the building. Section 5. Section 16.22.100 I(4) is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.100 I. 4. In the case where a building located .within CC3 or ABD has a business frontage which is not adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads, but has calculable frontage which is located along a pedestrian way at the end of a building adjacent to the interior of CC3 or ABD and has direct access or display area along that pedestrian way, the provisions applicable shall be the same as for a business fronting on an arcade, subject to the approval of the Design Review Board. Section 6. Section 16.22.100 I(4)(b) is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.100 I. 4. b. This provision is not applicable to businesses with frontage adjacent to exterior boundaries of CC3 or ABD other than the North and South Frontage Roads. Section 7. Section 16.22.110, paragraph A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.110 A. Purpose, to indicate or identify a development of real property under construction in CC3 or ABD. Section 8. Section 16.22.120 is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.120 TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY Traffic control signs for CC3 or ABD shall be regulated as follows: A. Purpose, to relieve vehicular and pedestrian traffic congestion and promote the safe and expedient flow and parking of traffic on private property; -3- B. Size, all vehicular traffic control signs shall not exceed one square foot, except multi-purpose signs, which shall not exceed four square feet. A11 pedestrian traffic control signs shall not exceed one square foot, except multi-purpose signs, which shall not exceed four square feet, subject to the approval of the design review board; C. Height, no part of the sign shall extend above six feet from existing grade; D. Number, subject to the approval of the design review board; E. Location shall be determined by design review board, with a letter of approval from the town engineer for any sign placed adjacent to a public street or way; F. Design, subject to the approval of the design review board; G. Lighting, indirect, at the discretion of the design review board; H. Landscaping at discretion of design review board; I. Special provisions shall be as follows: 1. May be either free-standing or wall-mounted, with same size requirements; 2. No individual sign will be approved unless it conforms to an overall sign program for the entire building, submitted by the applicant; 3. No sign shall contain any advertising, but may identify the owner by name; 4. If a "no parking" sign (as furnished by the town) is used, there may be no other sign for the same purpose. Section 9. Section 16.22.140, paragraph E, shall be amended as follows: 16.22.140 E. Location, parallel to the exterior wall of the individual business or organization, adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads, subject to the approval of the Design Review Board; Section 16.22.140, paragraph H(3), is here amended to read as follows: 16.22.140 H. 3. An individual business with no calculable frontage along the North or South Frontage Roads, or with a basement or second floor entrance, may have one (1) sign with a maximum area of five (5) square feet in a location approved by the -4- r ~, Design Review Board or designated in a specific sign program for the building in which the business or organization is located. ~artinn 11 Section 16.22.150, paragraph E, is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.22.150 E. Location, parallel to the exterior wall adjacent to the North or South Frontage Roads subject to the approval of the Design Review Board. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Sartinn 13 The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Cortinn la The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk ent R. Rose, Mayor 1989. -5- . , =; INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of . 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -6- r .t. TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 18, 1989 SUBJECT: Sign Variance Request for Gart Brothers Sporting Goods Store located in the West Vail Mall, 2171 North Frontage Road West. Applicant: Gart Brothers A. THE REQUEST Gart Brothers will be opening a Vail store in the former Bill Bullocks and Kowloon Restaurant spaces in the West Vail Mall. The Gart Brothers' proposal entails a 30 square foot projecting sign that reads "cart Brothers." Individual white pan channel letters will be mounted on a metal frame approximately 27 feet high on the West Vail Mall. The second sign will read "skis, sports, cameras" and total 13 square feet. The letters are 11 inches high and are made of black plastic. The location of this wall sign is to the left and below the "cart Brothers "' sign at a height of approximately 24 feet above grade. The total square footage for this proposal is 43 square feet. The number of signs is 2 and the maximum height is 27 feet above grade. In conjunction with the signage proposal, three new flag poles will be located on top of the building fascia. The flags will be from various countries. The entry column adjacent to the Gart Brothers' store that is now pink will be painted with 2 foot horizontal black and white stripes. The Bullocks store had a total of 58 square feet of signage that included a 38 square foot wall sign on the south elevation (Frontage Road side) and 20 square feet sign on the west elevation, (Inn at West Vail side). Kowloon had a sign of 19 square feet. The Gart Brothers' proposal decreases the numbers of signs by one, reduces the square footage by approximately 34 square feet, and increases the height for one sign by approximately 5 feet. B. VARIANCES REQUESTED This request requires the following variances: 1. Size 16.22.070 B. Size. Projecting/Hanging Sign Size...Combined maximum area for more than one sign shall not exceed 20 square feet. 16.22.140 B. Size. Wall signs. Size, maximum area shall not exceed twenty square feet. ~.. The projecting sign is 30 square feet and exceeds the allowable size of 20 square feet by 10 square feet. The variance is for the extra 10 square feet, plus the 13 square feet for the wall sign. The total variance in respect to size is 23 square feet. 2. Height 16.22.070 C. Height. Projecting/Hanging Signs Height, minimum clearance of eight feet to bottom of sign above pedestrian ways and minimum clearance of fifteen feet to bottom of sign above vehicular ways. No part of the sign shall extend above fifteen feet from existing grade. The projecting sign exceeds the height limit of 15 feet. The variance request is for 12 feet. 3. Number 16.22.070 D. Number. Projecting/Hanging Signs Number, one sign. 16.22.140 D. Number. Wall Signs Number, .one sign. Only one sign is allowed per business. A variance for one additional sign is requested. II. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the Board acts on a variance application, the applicant must prove physical hardship and the Board must find that, A. There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land, buildings, topography, vegetation, sign structures or other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent right-of-way which would substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in Question; rovided, however, that such special circumstances or conditions are unique to the particular business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw attention and do not apply generally to all businesses or enterprises. Staff Response According to the strict interpretation of the Vail sign code, Gart Brothers would be allowed one 20 square foot projecting sign 15 feet above grade. A wall sign could be 25 feet high. The previous anchor had a total of 58 square feet displayed on two signs at a slightly lower height than what is being proposed here. Kowloon had 19 square feet of signage. The staff believes that the Gart Brothers' proposal is a reasonable proposal and presents a significant reduction in the previous signage displayed for the tenant in this location. The location of the Gart Brothers' signage while requiring a height variance, is somewhat driven by the design of the building. If the sign was mounted directly onto the wall, it would fall into a different category of the sign code and be allowed to be displayed at a height of 25 feet. Because it is mounted on the metal frame, it must be categorized as a projecting and hanging sign with a height limit of 15 feet. We feel that the decision to use a projecting sign instead of a wall sign should not negatively impact the applicant's ability to place his sign on the facade of their business. The projecting sign will not have significant negative impacts due to its height and will not draw undue attention to itself. It should be noted that in most cases, the sign code allows for two signs per business if the business is located adjacent to two major pedestrian ways. Gart Brothers has two frontages on pedestrian ways. Gart Brothers is also taking over the Kowloon Restaurant space which results in another 19 square foot reduction in building signage. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant or anyone In privy to the applicant. Staff Response° The staff does not believe that this criteria is applicable to the request. The building location already exists and they are merely utilizing existing retail space. C. That the harmony w materiall ,.: rantin th the detri. of the variance will be in general urpose of this title and will not be ntal to the persons residing or 1n the vicinity, to adjacent propert or to the public welfare in general. Staff Response° to the neic working hborhood The staff believes that this request meets the general intent of the sign code and is in harmony with the sign code, specifically due to the reduction in total signage compared to the previous situation. We do not feel that the variances requested will be detrimental to any persons residing or working in the vicinity or will be detrimental to adjacent property. The proposal presents a 34 foot reduction in signage from the previous tenant signs. The proposal displays the name of the store and the type of business in a direct and reasonable manner. D. The variance applied for does not depart from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify the applicant's business or use Staff Response• As stated above, we feel that this request does meet the general intent of the sign code and presents the name of the store and the type of business in a clear and concise manner that is consistent with other actions that relate to the sign code in the Commercial Core III area. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance. We feel that the height of the proposed projecting sign is in harmony with the intent of the sign code and the size and design of both signs do not call undue attention to the business. In addition, the applicant is substantially reducing the amount of signage in comparison to the two previous tenants. ... .. i. ,r~yi'y ruin: .. !i•. ~t.v, ~. ,; U+I:fn.~,y.~l' 4' .. :~~~ ,.it ,r ~ ~ >. ~ 1 ~\ ~ oa, Aas 0~1~~~100 it i~l l~ S 1 G N ~ G ~. AN ~ G ~ ~ O ~ `~ ~ L_ ~ V r~~(" I O ~ - -- -- - ~ -roYPa.. o~ o~ s~~.,~c- ~. ~ ~ ~. ter. - ~„e.L~ ~~- ,~ = 1 ~ pn MEMORANDUM T0: Town Councilmembers FROM: Mayor Kent Rose DATE: October 31, 1989 SUBJECT: Employee Evaluations I would like to request those who have not already done so, to please submit their evaluations for the Town Manager, Town Attorney, and Town Municipal Judge at the November 7 Work Session. /bsc r~ w Town of Vail, KZYR, Vail Daily, and Vail Valley Community Television Present: 1989 CANDIDATES WEEK Featuring Candidates for the November 21, 1989 Vail Town Council Elec~ion FRIDAY -- NOVEMBER 10TH: For Candidates Only What: Vail Valley Community Television taping of Candidate Highlights Program Where: Vail Town Council Chambers When: 1:00 to 4:00 PM (15 minute slots; call to reserve time) Contact: Caroline Fisher, Town of Vail Public Relations Officer (479-2115) MONDAY -- NOVEMBER 13th: What: Vail Daily Candidates Debate / Where: Manor Vail Lodge When: 7:00 PM Contact: Ed Swartley or John Calhoun, Vail Daily (476-0555) What: Vail Valley Community Television Broadcast - Candidate Highlights Program (taped on Nov. 10th) Where: Television Channel 23 When: 7:00 PM TUESDAY -- NOVEMBER 14TH° What: Vail Valley Community Television Broadcast - Vail Daily Candidates Debate Where: Television Channel 23 When: 7:00 PM WEDNESDAY -- NOVEMBER 15TH: What: Meet the Candidates Breakfast Where: Vail Town Council Chambers When: 7:00 AM to 10:00 AM Contact: Caroline Fisher, Town of Vail Public Relations Officer (479-2115) What: Vail Valley Community Television Broadcast - Candidates Breakfast Highlights Where: Television Channel 23 When: 7.:00 PM THURSDAY -- NOVEMBER 16TH FRIDAY -- NOVEMBER 17TH AND MONDAY -- NOVEMBER 20TH° What: Vail Valley Community Television Broadcast - Candidate Highlights Program (taped on Nov. 10th) Where: Television Channel 23 When: 7:00 PM Serving Eagle County T'uesciay through Sunciny Volume IX, Number 264' October 26,1989 ~ly9 ~, ®~ ®~®~° ~i ales ee 9 The Vail Daily is joining forces with KZYR-FM and the Town of Vail to create "Candidates Week," from Nov. 13-1g. During the week. the three will promote a variety of activities to help voters become informed on is- sues and personalities involved in municipal elections Nov. 21, ac- cording to Jim Pavelich, publisher of the Daily. The week will focus on the 13 candidates vying for four vac^-~ries on the Vail Town Cot,,.,;il. Candidates Week gets under way Monday evening with a public debate sponsored by the newspaper. It is the fifth election in which the Daily has produced the debate, 'Pavelich said. All 13 council candidates will be invited to participate in an open- question format. Members of the community, as well as local journalists, will be invited to sub- mit questions to be put to the can- didates for aone-minute response. The debate will begin at 7 p.m.. on Nov. 13, at the Manor Vail Lodge. On Wednesday, the Town of Vail is conducting a "Meet the Can- didates Breakfast" at Town Hall. Tony Mauro, news anchor for KZYR will conduct a live remote show from the Council Chambers. ~.: Community residents are invited to the continental breakfast to meet informally with candidates and other town officials, including Mayor Kent Rose. In addition, area schools are being contacted so that students can be on hand fora first- hand civics lesson, according to Caroline Fisher, duector of public relations for the town. Employees of the Daily, KZYR Friday is the deadline for voters and the Town of Vail will be highly to register for the municipal elec- visible in the community during the lion. week, encouraging participation in the election process. '.`Obviously, we feel ie is a tremendous opportunity to join with KZYR and the Town of Vail in promoting. involvement in the democratic system;' Pavelich said. , "As highly visible participants in the community, we have to try to encourage citizens to be informed voters, and [o encourage the voters to more actively participate in the electoral process." • ~, . .~ ,., ~ MEMORANDUM T0: Vail Town Co cil FROM: Ron Phillip DATE: November 2, 1989 SUBJECT: Proposals for Town of Vail Owned Facilities by UMRD Please find attached a memorandum to me from Pat Dodson concerning actions and proposals for Town owned land and facilities. The memo dated October 26 was in response to a discussion I had with Pat about the back supports in the ice arena and the proposed ice skating surface on the golf course driving range. I suggested that before making decisions to make improvements on Town owned facilities and changing uses on Town owned property, it might be appropriate to inform the Council of the plans and receive the Council's concurrence before proceeding. The back supports in the bleacher area of the ice arena are very nice and are a wonderful addition. The liquor license for the golf course was discussed at the last work session with the Council by Rick Sackbauer of Satch's Restaurant. The ice skating surface on the golf course driving range is to be installed by approximately December 1. The notice to property owners concerning the proposed executive course on Tract A of Vail Village Filing 13 is self-explanatory. I will assume that the Town Council gives permission for the items listed in Pat's October 26 memo unless the Council brings these up and wants further discussion. Obviously, the liquor license issue has to meet the conditions the Council placed on it last week. I am hoping that in response to my memo to Pat concerning the executive golf course, that the VMRD will schedule a discussion with the Council before the December 13 public meeting. RVP/bsc cc: Charlie Wick Peter Patten Larry Eskwith ., , ~ , TOo RON PHILLIPS .,-~ FROM : PAT DODSON i ~ i ; DATE: OCTOBER 26, 1989 SUBJECT: CHANGES THAT MAY AFFECT OUR CONTRACT WITH THE TOV 1. Dobson Ice Arena. Through recent negotiations with the World Wide Church of God and their need for back supports in the bleacher area, VMRD has allowed the WWCG to install detachable backs to the bleacher seats. If the Town has no objections VMRD will pursue the purchase and permanent installation of these seat backs. 2. Liquor License for entire Golf Course. Satch°s restaurant has requested licensing the entire golf course allowing people to have alcoholic beverages on sleigh rides in the winter and sell alcohol in the summer. They are currently going through the liquor licensing process. The District has approved their request for this license. 3. Natural ice skating surface on the golf course driving range. VMRD has approved spending $25,000 towards the installation of a 200° x 85'natural ice surface. This recreation amenity would include: -lights -sound -dasher boards - behind goals only -rental skates Activities that would be scheduled are: -public skating -hockey -figure skating -speed skating This ice surface should be ready by December 1 through February 28. 1989. If there are any concerns on any of these matters, please let me know ASAP. Your sincere help and cooperation is appreciated. -~ MEMORANDUM T0: Pat Dodson FROM: Ron Phillip DATE: November 2, 1989 SUBJECT: Proposal for Executive Golf Course on Tract A of the Vail Village Thirteenth Filing I received a copy of your notice to property owners yesterday concerning the proposed executive course as noted above. I appreciate receiving a copy of the notice, but would suggest that it might be appropriate to discuss the proposal with the Vail Town Council as owners of the property before the public meeting is held. It seems that some discussion of the proposal and the decision making process you intend to use would be appropriate with the Town Council. I will be happy to schedule the discussion item for a work session prior to December 13, if you so desire. This probably would have been appropriate to discuss with t:he Town Council/VMRD Coordination Committee as well, before going public. RVP/bsc cc: Vail Town Council ro '~ ~~ ~EC'U NOV - 1 X89 292 ares4 meadowr drive ~ vail, Colorado 81657 © 303/479-2279 October 30, 1989 To: The Property Owners in the 3rd, 11th, 12th, and 13th filings of Vail, Colorado Dear Resident: The Vail Metropolitan Recreation District is pursuing the possible development of a 9 hole, par 3 golf course on the property adjacent to Bald Mountain Road. This letter will serve as notification of a public hearing on the project, to be held at the VMRD Board meeting scheduled for December 13, 1989, at 6:00 pm. in the Town Council Chambers. The reason for this meeting is to obtain input prior to the District spending any dollars on this project. No decision will be made until after this meeting. We are anxious to hear your comments and concerns in reference to the development of this area. Sincerely, Patrick J. Dodson Director, VMRD PJ D/ mhv TRANSCRIPT REGARDING MORTER ARCHITECTS AND THE VISITORS CENTER VAIL TOWN COUNCIL ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING WORK SESSION NOVEMBER 24, 1987 Merv: Ok. So, the, alright. So, in other words, in theory, if we wanted to go back, and, and we didn't want to approve Morter, we could pick another architect, in the same way that if we didn't like the site, we could go back and pick another site. Peter: That's correct. Because there, of course, all the task forces that are appointed by Council are, make recommendations to the Council, and the Council makes the final decisions. Merv: You know, a couple of comments. And I ... number one, in general, when we select this task force and they make a recommendation, I'd sure like to weigh that very heavily just like anything coming out of the Planning Commission or Design Review, because I don't want to reinvent the wheel and and go through every sort of detail that they went through in order to come up with a decision, because I don't think that's necessarily our job. But I'm not real comfortable with a member of the, that was on that committee, now also being someone that is before us as the winner of the competition. I mean, it seems to me, there's a little bit of conflict of interest and a little, little bit of not being as clean as Caesar's wife. And I just don't, you know, I, I, I'm willing to say, what's happened in the past has happened in the past. But I think that anyone that serves on a task force or serves on the Design, you know, any sort of committee like that, needs to be cleaner than Caesar's wife, and, in fact, by the very fact that they are serving on that committee, they, they should not be allowed to be involved in a process in which they could get monetary gain from the Town. John: Merv, ... Merv: And I, and in no way do I mean this to reflect on Jim. John: I'll just comment because I was on the architectural selection committee, is it, it, it was uncomfortable to have Jim there because the first person that I told we selected Jim said, "Oh, well that was obvious it was going to be Morten " You know, because he was on the original committee, and my recommendation today was going to be, that if we do these things in the future, that that not happen. If we select a, an architect to be a consultant, he'd have to understand right up front that if, if it ever goes out to bid, he won't be able to bid on it. And maybe it has to be an out-of-town architect that we select as a consultant. And the process for picking Jim, quite frankly, was very difficult, and it was, it was a horse race between Jim and Snowdon Hopkins and, it, it was a difficult process, and the, the final selection was, was done I think in as fair a way as you can select an architect, but there, it still is that problem. Merv: I understand that. John: Right. Merv: And, and once again, I'm not suggesting we go back and revisit the decision. I'm just talking about going forward. I certainly would feel very uncomfortable that the way ... John: I understand what you're saying. Peter: Merv, Jim was not actually a member of the task force that was appointed by Council. He was se lected as a architectural consultant, so he didn't have a vote in, in the decisions that the task force made. I still respect you, what your comments are, but ... Merv: And you, and you understand exactly where I'm coming from, I'm sure. Peter: Yes. Kent: What's your pleasure then? You want to table the whole thing until we have a goal setting session? Merv: I think Eric's got a very good point. And once again, I'd like to, you know, remind you of where are we going to put it, and what the Highway -2- wants to do with our four-way and with the interchange. I think it tends to play with each other, plus Jim Slevin's, I'm sorry John Slevin's comment that a different generation site comment, I think it's quite appropro. Eric: Kent, I don't have any problem approving Morter Architects as the architect far the project. I agree with John's comment that I would much prefer to see anyone who's placed in a capacity of advising the Town on a project know up front that they are, at that point, removed from the bidding process for the project. What`s done is done. I would like to see that happen in the future, but I would be happy to make a motion that we approve Morter Architects as the architects on the, on the project, and, if a motion is necessary, and then recommend that we defer any further action until after we've had our goal setting session. Merv: Does anyone have any reason why we should not? Anyone in the audience or does staff have any reason why we should not go along with the motion, or go forward with the motion at this point? Is there any negatives to doing that at this point? Peter: I, for~one, respect the Council's feeling to, to look at the overall picture, and regroup and come back and, but we'd like to address the Visitors Center within a timely manner, and not within two months time, yes or no, so that ... John: Is it, is it, I guess the question is, is, is it the cart before the horse with saying Jim should be the one, but we're going to relook at the whole subject? Larry: No. ... for years in legal issues, but I think if you don't know if you're going to go forward with the Visitors Center, I mean, I ... Eric: Well, I guess the ... Ron: Well, I think the question would be, if I understand what you were saying Eric, is that if the decision is made to continue development, developing plans of a Visitors Center, that Morter would be the architect at that -3- point. My question was going to be, if the Council selects an architect at this point, is that then a selection, and everything else is held in abeyance, there's no design work on schematic designs or anything until the final decision's made on whether or not to proceed. Eric: I would say that's true. Merv: I agree with that, and I think the idea of setting a date certain by which we will make that decision is a good idea, so that we're held to some sort of schedule, too. Gail: I think it's the intent of the Council, too, to get together and do a retreat goal setting session just as fast as we possibly can, and so hopefully, we, you know, aren't losing more than a week or two weeks in getting back to you. Three weeks. Peter: I have one question I can ask ... earlier. I get a lot of concern about the site, and wondering if you would like the original Visitors Center Task Force, if you get the feeling that there should more work done on that. Would you like us to go back assuming that what is now proposed for the ramp is in place, and take another look at that? Eric: I, per se, have a real concern, Peter, as John has already brought up the fact that we're potentially exacerbating an existing parking problem in the Village structure, and if ~~!e do run people through the four-way and then run them back out to go back to Lionshead, which would seem to be a strong possibility, is that the best course of action? I'm in agreement with everyone who said that, after looking at the, the schematic, that the Village structure is the right place. But as I said in that public meeting on the highway issue, I still think there are some unanswered questions as to how we're going to solve the problems on the South Frontage Road. And this would, in my opinion, compound those problems. John: Yes. Well, one more thing that, that might, might have affected the decision is the Congress Hall. There was some optimism that the Congress Hall would pass, it was going to be in Lionshead, and you put the Visitors -4- Center over in the Village, and you can respond to that maybe as a task force member. I don't know if that had a lot to do with the decision or not, but it, maybe they need to go back to the drawing board one more time and make darn sure it's the right spot. Jim: It, it did have bearing on the decision, I wouldn't call it major bearing. I, I, if we had known that the Congress Hall wasn't going to happen, that I think the task force probably still would have landed on the ... John: I think that's what I'd like to know, you know, that they ... Eric: And I think, too, Jim, your comment that the intent is to do more in summer than in winter is probably true, but the fact is, we have at least as many automobiles, I think this is true, in the wintertime as we do in the summertime, looking for places to go, and we have certainly more visitors, and, so I, I wouldn't want to assume that we're going to have only the need for twenty spaces for short term parking at the Visitors Center in the wintertime and a hundred spaces in the summertime. And I would want something more solid than what I've been presented as to what the top deck of the structure becomes Visitors Center only, and everything else becomes two hours or more, some comments along those lines. Gail: I think when Tom was talking about the linking of projects, maybe this is one element of that link, and that is the interfacing of the, of the four-way stop, and on, there are there, I want to talk about the four-way stop. I think we, we as a group need to figure out whether we go forward as originally intended or, or choose to reevaluate that. So. There are some conflicts, there's no doubt about that. Although I think, Wendy, it was very helpful, and, and before we would ultimately decide to, to pull you into Lionshead, we'd have your task force to reiterate some of your ideas as to why you thought the Village made better sense. Because I was not predisposed to it at the Village initially, and you gave some good comments regarding that. Kent: Shall we delay the whole matter, then, until, Steve. -5- Steve: Kent, can I suggest or ask if, permission to have you consider separating the car traffic business center from pedestrians? John mentioned that the problems might happen all in, in one place. I'd like to suggest that you separate that, maybe make use of this strategic location ... vehicles, and, and scale down the million and a half dollar Visitors Center, maybe adding this building, or use this building and relocate the Administration offices, and then do something that, on a smaller scale, say the Ski Museum, that, they're going to have parking directions to, any of them to the parking structure in the Village. Peter: I can answer that. We looked at this site. This is one of the three main sites that were evaluated. This site, we weren't really considering this space ..., we were looking at actually at the east of the parking lot here. We felt that that site was too small, that that site was acceptable, but it could easily present some congestion as a movement, some ... movement problems out here, too, because of the proximity of the four-way, but the main reason that that was drawn out, was because you would have to get back into your car and definitely go drive somewhere else in the car before you could really get into the Village, whereas the other sites that we looked at were pedestrian acceptable, assuming that a parking space was available at that point. Then you could leave your car there and you're immediately down into the pedestrian areas. Steve: Well, it was mentioned by John, if the parking structure in the Village is full, what then? I would think that if people coming off, it's easier to turn right, is it not, at the four-way, a smoother transition, you get into this phase, and then it's a smooth transition going right again, to the right of the structure, which is I gather the first place, essential, too, if at all possible. And then the pedestrians do something that is even more successful tp ... the structure. And use this space, build on this site. Tom: What about the Post Office site? Peter: Well, we didn't consider that specific site. We were really looking at ... -6- Tom: I know, you're looking ... Peter: What now is available. Tom: But was, was the Post Office considered at all, since it will be vacant, what, in a year, year and a half? Eric: How long is the lease now, Ron? Ron: The lease is three years, ti^.ith two years guaranteed. They are proceeding on design now, for the new one, it's just kind of, nobody knows how long it's going to take. Peter: That was, that was a big consideration, is that we didn't have that site, plus again the pedestrian ... Tom: Yes. Merv: So, so the Post Office is 1991 when they're out, or 1990? Steve: They have to pay up for two years. They have the right to be in there for two years. Merv: But at what point do we have .the right to evict them? Ron: Three years. Merv: 1991. Spring, summer, fall? Ron: It's on November 30th or something like that. John: But, it sounds like they're going ahead with construction this summer, though. I mean, they're going through a design process right now for the Lionsridge parcel. -7- Tom: And is there any reason that the VRA office functioning staff has to be in that same spot? Obviously, they want to get out of the basement of the parking structure, but for the most of their function, they're not publicly oriented, is there any reason that they can't go into the Post Office site and they have two bigger facilities, one in each parking structure, I mean, have all these alternatives been looked at? I don't know. Jim: The particular scenario, and, and I guess there's an infinite number of those, was, was it looked at. The Post Office site was looked at, and it had a lot of the downfalls that this site out here had. But, yes, it was examined. The idea of VRA being separate from the Visitors Center was discussed at great length, and really hampers the functions to have them in. a different location than the Visitors Center. Kent: There was also some discussion about whether the people that deal with the public in VRA should be in one location and then the rest of VRA be in another location. There was some discussion about that also. Jim: Yes. There was discussion on that, that just doesn't work for VRA, both of the functions need access to common functions that ... Peter: Many of their functions are interdependent and need some type of physical proximity to be able to interact in an efficient manner ... Jim: About four hours. Peter: That was looked at. Jim: Yes. About four hours of staff, with each of the Department Heads of URA, so, yeah, that's been examined rather extensively. Gail: I think, one thing that's probably ... a little bit about VRA, because I asked a similar question in this group business, and selling group business, I thought that most of that was done away from Vail, and there's a conference facility or something on the very top or on bottom, or whatever, and I was really questioning whether that was necessary. I guess -8- one thing that was enlightening to me is, in fact, how many CO, CEO's seemingly they are bringing to Vail and need a good environment in which to close the deal. That was something that was real enlightening to me. Peter: They, David Kanally made a comment that they do go out to make those initial contacts, and most of those are made away from town, some are made impromptu in town as well, but that the vast majority of them come to Vail before they make that decision to bring their group here, whatever they're signing them for, and so that there's an appearance or a visit to Vail that's very important to the entire, a critical portion actually, of the entire selling process that would take place here, and that was part of the reason for the, the way we had it, whether the conference or meeting roam on the highest level of the Center, the way it was conceptualized. Tom, your question, just, it, it really made a lot of sense after we`ve looked at splitting thern off completely, or splitting some of the functions. Really, what this building serves as, is the central reservation, THE central reservation location for the Town of Vail, so it really made, we assume that the VRA will continue to go in that, to, to function as that central reservationist, that they'd be in the building. Jim: But, Peter, let me point out that this, this workshop process we're talking about will, one of the reasons we do it is to encourage the public to be a part of the design process, and that, that's one reason we're anxious to get the process rolling, so that we could get the public input in the right setting instead of a Council work session, where we have all the things there that, you know, so the thing really can be examined fully and, and that we want the public to come and participate in that and bring their ideas. That's the whole idea of the workshop, is to get not only Council input, steering committee input, the info from the Police Department about security, and the Fire Department about access, and Public Works, and Design Review Board, and Planning Commission, but get the public input on what this thing should be. This is about as public a building we're going to have, I think. So, you know, that"s why we're anxious to get this workshop process started, instead of sitting here and second guessing, ;you know, in a Council work session, let us get the hell to work and, and, ,you know, get the public involved and get it done properly. -g- Eric: Kent, I would agree with Jim's comments, and I certainly am not qualified, I don't think any of us are, to redesign the project, or to design it in the first place, today, and I would reiterate my suggestion that we appoint Morter Architects, because I don't think we're going to accomplish anything by reinventing that wheel, and if the Council decides that this is the bottom priority, then Jim just got kissed by his sister, and that's the way it is. But in the meantime, let's make that appointment, and move on to our priorities. Kent: Ok. John: I'll second that. Kent: Any further discussion? No response. Kent: I think the motion's been made, then, that we appoint Jim Morter as architect for the Visitors Center and that we will forego any of the other decisions until after we've at least had our goal setting session, which we'll set later today. Any further discussion? No response. Kent: All those, then, in favor of the motion signify by saying yes. All responded yes. Kent: Opposed? No response. Kent: Mayor votes yes. Passes unanimously. Can we take about a five minute break, Ron, before we get on to some other things? Thanks. -10- TnDT/` WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP rcTTn~ic FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 11/2/89 8/1 BANNERS IN THE VILLAGE (request: Slevin) 8/1 STREET ENTERTAINMENT 8/8 UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FOR ARTERIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 8/8 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION (request: Lapin) 8/15 UVCWD/TOV LAND CONTRACT 8/15 POINT OF SALES TAX COLLECTION (request: Lapin) 8/15 NO SMOKING ORDINANCE/RESTAURANTS 8/25 CASCADE VILLAGE LIGHT 8/25 VAIL VILLAGE INN TRIANGLE 8/29 VTRC HANDRAILS (request: Slevin) PETER: Arrange location and placement of permanent banner poles at any location other than Pepi's. PAM: No more rock 'n roll. Perhaps no more jazz? KRISTAN: Provide costs to individuals to convert to underground. Provide firm number for TOV's portion by budget time. Inventory all above- ground wiring. LARRY: Proceeding w/legal requirements for annexation. RON: Contract in final stages of negotiation. CHARLIE/STEVE B.: Schedule discussion. RON/SUSAN: Schedule for 11/14/89 WS. Organize study group to examine voluntary options. STAN: Light missing at the intersection of West- haven and South Frontage Road. PETER: Landscaping inappropriate. STAN: John and Ron feel they are in terrible shape, Handrails are going to be treated or in some way fixed before winter. Have asked Ampersand for design for Lionshead east entry. Will explore with Ampersand alternative banner pole locations in Village. Peter to check with Ampersand on status of request. Review meeting held September 20. Business survey being developed. Will be ready 10/31 for distribution. Received letter from New Electric detailing costs for each property. Community Development will write letters to property owners for their response. Council will discuss in November. Annexation map is being produced. Annexation should be completed by Jan. 1st so Intermountain can be included in our census count. Susan has completed research and submitted updated plats to Dan Corcoran. Larry and Jim Collins are working on contract. Discussion with Council was held. Further research per Merv. Group to include Safeway and other retail outlets in their scrutiny. All parties are in agreement. If the weather holds, the work will be in 1989, otherwise, it will be done in early 1990. Joe Staufer has agreed to concrete triangle this fall. Work is in process. Cost estimates received. Replacements ordered. Will be installed before winter. 9/5 DOG CONTROL (request: Steinberg) I DICK/PETER/STAN: Better signage required., i The signs are ordered. The bus stop signs will be put up in 1989, the others will be put up next year. ,,, ~.., TOPIC 9/5 RUDER-REINEKE BUSINESS LICENSE (request: Cacioppo) 9/5 CALL UP PROCEDURE FOR PEC AND DRB DECISIONS (request: Steinberg) 9/19 TREE CUTTING ON STREAMTRACT (request: Steinberg) 10/17 VVCWD LETTER (request: Lapin) 10/17 VUF FINANCIAL REPORT 10/24 TRANSCRIPT OF 11/24/87 WS WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP IIESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 11/2/89 PETER/DANI: Are they operating illegally in East Vail? LARRY: Work out wording to disallow the call up procedure for PEC and DRB decisions to be allowed without consensus. PETER/KEN: Sonnenalp and Village Center cutting down trees on streamtract adjacent to their property. RON: Write letter regarding NWCCOG contribution of $8,400 for legal support of water quantity/ quality program: RON: Request financial report from VVF. RON/PAM/BRENDA: What was the exact motion for selection of Visitors Center architect? As pertains to Jim Morter. Community Development determined his office is grand- fathered, and a letter stating CD's position will be written by the end of next week. Resolution is being developed. The initial research is completed. This item will be discussed at Interdepartmental Monday, 10/30. Letter is written. Written. Transcript will be prepared by week of 11/6. 10/24 COLORADO SKI MUSEUM RON/CHARLIE: Explore various options available regarding funding, etc. Meet with them and Kent in next 2-3 weeks. ~,. laws of uai ~~ 75 sou4h fron4age road vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2105 o4fice of flown manager October 26, 1989 Mr. Walter Fox Town of Red Cliff P. 0. Box 109 Red Cliff, Colorado 81649 Dear Walter: Thank you for your request for funds for cost sharing in a planning program for the Town of Red Cliff. The Vail Town Council has discussed your request and feels that significant contributions have been made on your behalf including the Town of Vail Public Works crew efforts this fall and the contributions made to the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. The Council feels these COG contributions assist the small communities in our area much more than it does the Town of Vail. We encourage you to use the Council of Governments staff resources in your planning efforts. Members of the Vail Town staff will be glad to sit down with you to discuss further staff needs, and become more familiar with staffing programs and planning efforts you are discussing. Perhaps after we better understand what the Town of Red Cliff is attempting to achieve and what other resources are available through the state and the county, we can more easily define what the Town of Vail's proper role should be. Sinc e y, Rondall U.- Philli s Town Manager RUP/bsc cc: Vail Town Council Eagle County Commissioners NWCCOG OCT 3 0 X89 STATE OF COLORADO C®L®RADO DEPARTMENT OF PiEALTI-I 4210 East 11th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 Phone (303) 320-8333 A"`;vi')li%?j'T'tiiij~!~ :i ?. (, ;`.~ j #: .;`- .. ~ '..lfi76 °... J:F+i t.~. f!rl; i-'~:J'~';~'}1,iT+- }•:~:~;1F~ "ir -~ "irk-~: -c 'ry-~r-•~.I'itt;- .~ ,~ Roy Romer . .~' !:: t.7,::t-rrt,r~r ~,(. , :j cif-t<1 - .~! }~: (;'j' , ~: t %. ".' f' i : 7. 3" i`~'t ;;-i i `- r-~ Y' ~ r; r. >r' C, <, • ;, ! t' ~:; Thuma> n1. Vernon, M.U. - - - '~ Executive Directur ~~• f r.+.I ? ~~t,,,~ t,ry j c. ~ `"LiI7i31t~.,-~~~ U? t ,)f• ~. ] T' 1))O;1 J. i-n~"' "l; (~.-~t.'- rcl i ~ ---'-(' ----- t"iE_' 'VE'"! r r-~ i 1-.i~^,ri~.l .: ] r ?rp`) l ~ OI^:' O~7E'I'cTEc:i i-+\' Ti'iE' ~t:cz"P ,_ , .['~ . ~7t"c'~1C• r,~r t r!r T f;!' x, ~;C 1 F, ^ i r~ , =n -r ~ c~ '•7::. I`'i~~;t17T"?l i~;l.(nl.F? (`~'i]?.:L~Y'?-~ ~``: ~C^....iP:' ~ }-, C;~,. z~ L+1, r~ ca. 1-, 4 ~ t,, i. r~ ~;:; Ph C; d hs L~t~ G~ As ?'•' , <n,p~l ua/m-3 10 uaim-3 <0 . O1 vc. /m-3 1C7/~F~jgcr ~'SP 7 ua;"m-3 56 uc%;n-~ - rn <0. 1 t~crlm- ~ <0. 1 uc7:'rn-,? <i~ . ] ttc; %m- =: r~ <(l. 0~ L1 C?/m-:3 <C1 . 0]. L?('r/m-~ <(l . C)?. t1C? %~?P.-~~• '(;: ire.%s?c+ 7•c,~~ P ~, c~ ~~ ~: <0.0.1 tlairt-:? T!~c~ ~~r ;nonatoT•.ina c7~7t2 for Or.tokrer 7 c in frc]nt of t};~ N~intttrn l~iidc9,e ~cror..ra e^a.i.l.l 1?e inc.~udecl ir! the ne::t week]y u.rc;~te. Tt?e nnt-~tt;o?', iJ f' .'!t!- _~ E?t~?](~.. fOr )??i. r'r'n('rr~a?(!~, ~1 (_'T C~,)~:+J. f lr t_ tf.']~ fc 1T ~ C':CUCI ?~<.7?7 f~Cil'~c, .)~ U;]e 7r~ 11,t,nenth (; ii ,OOC?,0700} c.~f e c?r~m. F'or ~,d.cli~'.ion~:~ .infctrm~~t.ion,, t,~F,?~'~' ooI)tcr..t' Drlr pr(.r..=7rt-in.? {E,lj-f>~a~R) or Miji.F !scNvrt; {3_i1-484`,). .,. iuWO 0 75 south 4rontage road sail, Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2158 department of public works/transportation MEMORANDUM T0: Ron Phillips FROM: Skip Gordon DATE: November 1, 1989 RE: 1989 Ridership Compared to 1988 ,h, V1.19~9 Below are the statistics showing total ridership for 1989 compared to that of 1988 for the month of OCTOBER. INTOWN EAST VAIL WEST VAIL 1988 39,348 1,944 3,104 1989 57,500 1,797 3,110 Difference 18,152 147 6 46~ UP 8~ DOWN .1~ UP Grand Total - Intown, E. Vail, W. Vail & Sandstone -1988 Grand Total - Intown, E. Vail, W. Vail & Sandstone -1989 Difference SG/slh cc: Stan Berryman Charlie Wick Caroline Fisher SANDSTONE 619 438 181 29~ DOWN 45,015 62,845 17,830 40~ UP